On 2002.06.17 21:26 Rox de Gabba wrote:
Well, if you look at it from the practical point of view... screaming
and
complainting has never done any good... at leat with computer systems
it
hasn't. Suing... well, have you ever heared of anyone get a penny off
M$ for
the bilions lost on their
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
Klaus Imgrund writes:
a. complain to and scream at
People frequently complain and scream at this mailing list.
With far more helpful responses that any you'll get from most
commercial operations.
--
Grant Edwards grante
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is that
the customer wants somebody he can:
a. complain to and scream at and
While I try to keep the screaming to a minimum, I do sometimes
complain (and on a particulary bad day even whine) on
On 18 Jun 2002 15:01:22 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards) wrote:
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is
that the customer wants somebody he can:
a. complain to and scream at and
While I try to keep the screaming to
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
I want you see tell a CEO of a company:
Well Sir we have a little IT problem.
There are 3000 people sitting in front of a black screen and our
customers can't reach us.
Oh, and by the way 50 of our planes are going to crash in about 1 hour.
But don't
Think we have a slight misunderstanding here.
I don't have a CEO and I don't like servicecontracts. I advise my own
customers not to make one with me because it isn't worth the money (talk
about shooting yourself in the foot).
But this is the way people do think and have to think today - something
If you're running a server than has to have five nines up-time,
then you'd better pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60
minutes from when the phone rings.
Umm... 5 9's = ~5 min/year, so they had better be there a lot faster
than 60 minutes. The way to achieve 5 9's is not via an
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
If you're running a server than has to have five nines up-time,
then you'd better pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60
minutes from when the phone rings.
Umm... 5 9's = ~5 min/year, so they had better be there a lot faster
than 60 minutes.
If
On 18 Jun 2002, Grant Edwards wrote:
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
then go ahead and get a service contract. If you're running a
server than has to have five nines up-time, then you'd better
pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60 minutes from when
the phone rings.
And we're
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
I think there's also some psychological thing that goes on here. People
think that with the help desk, they'll get an answer within a certain
time, while nobody guatrantees that they'll get an answer on a mailing
list.
IMO there's more
On Sunday 16 June 2002 04:40 pm, Ivo Wever wrote:
[snip]
I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
doesn't explain why professionals use it. I question the claim that Red
Hat provides better
ben wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
[snip]
I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
doesn't explain why professionals use it. I question the claim that Red
Hat provides better support (average
On Monday 17 June 2002 12:27 am, Andrew Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
I think there's also some psychological thing that goes on here. People
think that with the help desk, they'll get an answer within a certain
time, while nobody guatrantees that
you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
the world to
make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
above. go directly to
jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
attempt to collect
anything at all. bye-bye.
Well, there is a valid point in
On Monday 17 June 2002 02:26 am, Jan Johansson wrote:
you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
the world to
make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
above. go directly to
jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
attempt to collect
hi ya
you ( the company ) can get support contracts for any linux
flavor one just has to understand what is covered
and what is not and what the turn around time is
for any incidents and how much the company gets dinged..
- both ml and paid support has its benefits...
if there's
so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
linux distro
means more to you than actually securing the system?
Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
_legally binding_ support contract is simply not allowed on any production /
mission
On 2002.06.17 05:26 Jan Johansson wrote:
you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
the world to
make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
above. go directly to
jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
attempt to collect
anything at all.
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 05:19, Andrew Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 11:27, ben wrote:
On Monday 17 June 2002 12:27 am, Andrew Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
[snip]
No intention of retracting it. But I will expand: The above was in
no-way meant
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:44:53AM +0200, Jan Johansson wrote:
so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
linux distro
means more to you than actually securing the system?
Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
_legally binding_
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:44:53AM +0200, Jan Johansson wrote:
so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
linux distro
means more to you than actually securing the system?
Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
_legally binding_
Klaus Imgrund wrote:
Well,
I am an IT - dummy but I did deal with technical service for 15 years.
What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is that
the customer wants somebody he can:
a. complain to and scream at and
b. sue for damages
Try that with a mailing list
I
Klaus Imgrund writes:
a. complain to and scream at
People frequently complain and scream at this mailing list.
b. sue for damages
You might want to read the fine print in that service contract.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Thursday 06 June 2002 11:35 am, Ivo Wever wrote:
[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
competition.
If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
internet connection of a small group of people for three hours a day,
then why is anyone
Glen Lee Edwards wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
internet connection of a small group of people for three hours a day,
then why is anyone using them and using them in a commercial
environment at that?
Ivo, there is no such thing as
I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
doesn't explain why professionals use it.
I can think of some reasons...
- Even being professionals, they want everything to be detected and
Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
...
Windows may be not behave decently at all, but it sells as it is, and
it's not only marketing. I can see some of the reasons:
1 - They do invest in their product, but thy'll target the users and do
whatever they want.The UI, for example, that most hackers
I use apt-get on my Red Hat servers that need auto updating. I dont trust
RH Network. It has broken at least a dozen servers that I know of, none
of them are mine of course. You can get a really great implimentation of
apt-get for Red Hat at http://www.freshrpms.net.
--
Arthur H. Johnson II
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 09:26:54AM -0400, Arthur H. Johnson II wrote:
|
| I use apt-get on my Red Hat servers that need auto updating.
How much memory do they have? How long does an 'apt-get anything' take
to run, compared to debian with equivalent hardware? (not including
any network
On Thu 06 Jun 02 15:45, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:48:15PM -0600, user list wrote:
[snip]
| The reasons I like [debian] are:
| 1. apt-get
[snip]
| I'll note in passing that the first reason has lost some edge now
| that RH 7.3 comes with apt-get and that
Tom Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 0, Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would define a major change to be something like the jump to gcc-3.1
or a libc6 version change, ie. something the affects nearly everything
in the archive. I wouldn't consider a library that affects 3 or 4
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 02:07:12PM +0100, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote (slightly
reformatted):
Sam wrote:
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 23:55:31 -0500
Glen Lee Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is apt-get on RH 7.3 actually usable?
Red Hat isn't likely to seriously support apt-get. They're pushing
up2date, which updates your computer for you. It's free for the first
computer you sign up for, but
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 12:12:11AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
That doesn't explain why other dists are used in production environments. It
doesn't explain why RedHat has such a huge market share. Or am I really
overestimating the capabilities of the majority of the admins?
Probably. More
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:18:01AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
Probably. More significant though, is marketing. Most of us here agree
that Windows isn't the best OS around, but it's got the largest userbase
because of marketing and because it's what comes preinstalled on most PCs.
Marketing
Oleg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 01:57 pm, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable, yet modern
(compared to Potato)?
I think it's because they don't have a zero-bugs release policy like
Debian. The base system is
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
So my motivation for working on free software (it pleases me,
and provides me with a stable box I can use) is condescending?
I am glad that your motivation is to create a stable box you can use ...
because so I can participate in this effort
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Thank you. It is messages like this that make me continue to
put in the time and effort for Debian.
Well here's another one.
I've been using Debian for a long time on all the systems where the
choice has been mine.
Sure it is sometimes
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
So my motivation for working on free software (it pleases me,
and provides me with a stable box I can use) is condescending?
I am glad that your motivation is to create a stable box you can use ...
because so I can participate in this effort
Someone wrote:
perhaps Debian is no longer useful to most of us.
Two years ago I set up a small network of Debian machines for graduate
students and faculty members in my department. There are six machines
in the network and a lot of people depend on them. This effort cost my
university
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 10:23:56PM -0700, Terry wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Thank you. It is messages like this that make me continue to
put in the time and effort for Debian.
Well here's another one.
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
If the people in effective control of Debian's
direction no longer have this ability, then
perhaps Debian is no longer useful to most
of us.
Debian is no longer useful to us when they no longer put out a product
that we can use. That is hardly the case.
To save the Debian Attack Team
Sam wrote:
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in Australia who
get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are members of the Rural
Peninsula Disability Support group - they are provided computers and pay
I'm not advocating FreeBSD. In fact, I tried it a couple of times, ran it for
a week or two and hated it for a variety of reasons. Debian is the only
OS/Distribution that I ever liked (which is no surprise, of course)
I just wanted to say that maybe changes to stable should be more
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
Debian is run by a few hundred programmers who do this for fun.
Not profit. Because we do this for fun we choose where to spend our
time. For some people the mips architecture and the required
hacking is fun. Others are constrained by
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
Sam wrote:
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in
Australia who get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are
members of the Rural Peninsula Disability Support group - they are
provided computers
Ivo Wever [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Completely unrelated to the current topic, could you lobby your email
vendor to support RFC2822 already? Tell them to read 3.6.4 and fix it
already. Eudora's broken references headers have been annoying the
crap out of me for years, and they've had over a
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote (slightly
reformatted):
Sam wrote:
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in
Australia who get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are
members
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
At the last meeting of the Linux Workshop Cologne, we had more Debian
than other users, although some people from this list claim
Debian to be
delayed. Seemingly there are more important things than just being
up-to-date with the latest
On Thu, 2002-06-06 at 05:37, Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
involving elderly disabled people, to support Debian. I guess we
should rethink Debian if it turned out some neo-nazi group used our
software on their servers?
Godwin's Law; end of
Ivo Wever writes:
Sam wrote:
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in Australia who
get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are members of the Rural
I'm sorry, but this argument isn't valid as a defense for
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:06:17PM -0700, Jim McCloskey wrote:
The graduate students and faculty members who use these machines day
in day out couldn't give a flying fuck, for the most part, whether
they run `stable', `testing', or `unstable'. They don't know, and they
have no reason to care,
you wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
involving elderly disabled people, to support Debian. I guess we
should rethink Debian if it turned out some neo-nazi group used our
software on their servers?
Godwin's Law; end of thread please?
Oh sorry about that, I should have written
Glen wrote:
Ivo, you're totally missing the point here.
Yes, you are right. I shouldn't have let my personal crusade against
arguments from emotion enter this thread.
[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
competition.
If the other dists are so terrible that
Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree. I think stable should be able to get more fixes and updates
than just security fixes. It's well known that much of the software in
stable is quite buggy and years behind the upstream source (Mozilla M18,
for example) but cannot be fixed until a
Em Qui, 2002-06-06 às 13:35, Ivo Wever escreveu:
Glen wrote:
Ivo, you're totally missing the point here.
Yes, you are right. I shouldn't have let my personal crusade against
arguments from emotion enter this thread.
[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:35:28 +0200
Ivo Wever [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glen wrote:
[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
competition.
If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
internet connection of a small group of people for three
After all the postings that I've read...
What I can advice all to do is:
Lets give a route to this abandoned ship!
Lets stop the talking and start with some
action... I don't beleive we can gather
every Debian user and ask for his or her opinion...
If we send the image of a desorganized
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:51:04PM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
This came up on debian-devel not too long ago. Someone proposed a
point release to woody that would have gcc-3.1, GNOME 2.0, new KDE,
and no major changes to the distribution -- even though this would
require recompiling everything
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Ivo Wever wrote:
If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the internet
connection of a small group of people for three hours a day, then why is
anyone using them and using them in a commercial environment at that?
Fwiw, as well as a Debian developer,
Hi,
I just thought I'd add my $.02, or what ever is the appropriate monetary
conversion, in this inevitable discussion.
First, I am a user. I write in fortran by choice, c and c++, in the past
when I was teaching, by necessity. I am not a systems programmer so my
contribution to Debian would,
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:48:15PM -0600, user list wrote:
[snip]
| The reasons I like [debian] are:
| 1. apt-get
[snip]
| I'll note in passing that the first reason has lost some edge now that
| RH 7.3 comes with apt-get and that there are ports to older RH releases.
[snip]
Is apt-get on RH 7.3
David Z Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I agree. I think stable should be able to get more fixes and updates
than just security fixes. It's well known that much of the software in
stable is quite buggy and years behind the upstream source (Mozilla M18,
you wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
internet
connection of a small group of people for three hours a day, then why is
anyone using them and using them in a commercial environment at that?
[Personal story about liking several
Em Qua, 2002-06-05 às 18:41, Brooks R. Robinson escreveu:
| Uh huh. And get cracked tomorrow because security updates are *not*
| being made for woody at this time. There is a list of approximately a
| dozen *known* security problems with woody that will be dealt with
| *later*. Updates are
On 0, Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Z Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
(There's also the problem that each of the developers has their own
personal pet packages that they'd really like to make the point
release, but it can't happen for everyone's packages, and someone
| With hindsight, it's clear that trying to
| support too many architectures was a mistake.
| Of course, everybody makes mistakes. It is truly
| said that he who never made a mistake, never
| made anything.
Is it a mistake to try and reach every insert target here everywhere? If
so, then the
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 04:41:20AM -0700, Nick Jacobs wrote:
A few days ago, David Wright posted a message to this list,
questioning the wisdom of Debian's decision to target 11
architectures. He pointed out (with supporting references) that this
decision has contributed to a long delay in
At 2002-06-05T11:41:20Z, Nick Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But what separates the doers from the wannabes is the ability to admit a
mistake, change direction, and move on.
So, who made a mistake? The maintainers who've stated that they *will*
treat all platforms equally simply do *not*
With hindsight, it's clear that trying to
support too many architectures was a mistake.
Of course, everybody makes mistakes. It is truly
said that he who never made a mistake, never
made anything.
But what separates the doers from the wannabes
is the ability to admit a mistake, change
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 09:25 am, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
1. Woody is frozen.
2. It is unlikely that any new packages are going in, assumption based
upon point 1.
3. Security is not in place to handle Woody.
4. A security issue would more than likely be a release critical bug.
5.
On 2002.06.05 09:32 Colin Watson wrote:
I hope you don't find this comment abusive. It's worth remembering
that
many developers are feeling under quite a lot of pressure right now,
because a large percentage of the more vocal users sometimes seem to
be
engaging in a trash-the-developers
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:25:22AM -0500, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
Are you really named Brooks Robinson or is that a nom du net?
[snip]
| not need me. And I need a stable release
| with the 2.4 kernel.
[another snip]
My conclusion is that Woody is effectively released already.
So,
Nick == Nick Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nick A few days ago, David Wright posted a message to this list,
Nick questioning the wisdom of Debian's decision to target 11
Nick architectures. He pointed out (with supporting references) that
Nick this decision has contributed to a long delay
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 04:41:20AM -0700, Nick Jacobs wrote:
The main result was that a small number of
Debian insiders posted abusive comments
in response to David's perfectly reasonable
message.
Maybe I've just been around the 'net too long and been too hardened
by it, but I haven't seen
Em Qua, 2002-06-05 às 08:41, Nick Jacobs escreveu:
A few days ago, David Wright posted a message to this
list, questioning the wisdom of Debian's decision
to target 11 architectures. He pointed out (with
supporting references) that this decision has
contributed to a long delay in releasing
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:02:02AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote:
On 2002.06.05 09:32 Colin Watson wrote:
I hope you don't find this comment abusive. It's worth remembering
that many developers are feeling under quite a lot of pressure right
now, because a large percentage of the more vocal
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 09:37 am, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
Debian is run by a few hundred programmers who do this for fun. Not
profit. Because we do this for fun we choose where to spend our time.
For some people the mips architecture and the required hacking is
fun. Others are
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:30:39PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:25:22AM -0500, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
[snip]
| not need me. And I need a stable release
| with the 2.4 kernel.
[another snip]
My conclusion is that Woody is effectively released already.
So,
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, Woody changed to a 2.4 kernel? At last report it was still using
2.2x.
Woody has 2.4 kernels, just defaults to a 2.2 kernel.
--
Alan Shutko [EMAIL PROTECTED] - In a variety of flavors!
Got a dictionary? I want to know the meaning of life.
--
To
On 05 Jun 2002, Carl Fink wrote:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:25:22AM -0500, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
Are you really named Brooks Robinson or is that a nom du net?
[snip]
| not need me. And I need a stable release
| with the 2.4 kernel.
[another snip]
My conclusion is that Woody
Oleg == Oleg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oleg How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable,
Oleg yet modern (compared to Potato)?
Perhaps number of packages has something to do with this? How
does testing compare to freebsd in terms of security and stability?
(I do not
Ian == Ian D Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Speaking only for myself, it was the condescending tone adopted
Ian by one of the developers (don't remember the fellow's name; he
Ian was the one ranting about about his $250,00/hr fee) more than
Ian the actual content that I found
Oleg writes:
How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable, yet modern
(compared to Potato)?
Mostly by being much, much smaller.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable, yet modern
(compared to Potato)?
I think it's because they don't have a zero-bugs release policy like
Debian. The base system is stable. The stuff in the ports tree is not, from
my experience. I once decided to install gdm on a
It's not really at all clear that this was where the mistake lay.
I never thought I would be advocating more management, but here goes...
Debian, as another poster pointed out, has grown from ~50 to ~2000
developers. And those developers, being geeks rather than suits,
respond to problems by
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:49:54PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Oleg == Oleg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oleg How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable,
Oleg yet modern (compared to Potato)?
Perhaps number of packages has something to do with this? How
does
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:18:29AM -0700, David Wright wrote:
in the interest of Debian getting to
know the needs of its customers (a phrase calculated to annoy Manoj :-),
what are the percentage users of potato, woody, and sid? I assume this
could be estimated from average daily activity for
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 08:25:22AM -0500, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
My conclusion is that Woody is effectively released already. A large number
of people have been running on Woody for quite some time. It's as stable as
it's going to get. Just do an apt-get dist upgrade and get it over with
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 13:47:27 -0500
Dave Sherohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:18:29AM -0700, David Wright wrote:
in the interest of Debian getting to
know the needs of its customers (a phrase calculated to annoy Manoj
:-), what are the percentage users of potato,
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:30:12AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Well, this is only partially true. All architectuures for
Woody are ready. They are not delaying the release. What is not ready
is the ability to support security for woody and potato for even the
architectures that we
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:47:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Ian == Ian D Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Speaking only for myself, it was the condescending tone adopted
Ian by one of the developers (don't remember the fellow's name; he
Ian was the one ranting about about his
On 2002.06.05 13:47 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Ian == Ian D Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Speaking only for myself, it was the condescending tone adopted
Ian by one of the developers (don't remember the fellow's name; he
Ian was the one ranting about about his $250,00/hr fee) more than
Noah == Noah Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Noah The 11 architecures *are* what's holding up the release. The
Noah whole reason the security team needs the new build
Noah infrastructure is that it's not a reasonable expectation for
Noah them to be able to manually build updated packages
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:47:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Indeed, the security team indicated that potato support would
have to be dropped summarily when woody was released _unless_ changes
were made (or a decision would have to be made to only support some
arches, but not
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 06:43:57PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote:
Surely you can use any kernel you like. I've been using 2.4.18 since it
came out and will upgrade to 2.4.19 as soon as it's released.
I'm using 2.4.18 myself, but that isn't relevant to the original
poster's request for a stable
John == John Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John I certainly appreciate the multiple architecture support of Debian. I
John have it installed on a powerpc, m68k, and x86 box. I initially
John installed it on my m68k box, since Debian was the only distribution
John that supported it.
Ian == Ian D Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian But to answer your question, there are several projects I have
Ian an interest in. I have even started writing code for eventual
Ian contribution to one of them. You, or anybody else for that
Ian matter, are perfectly welcome to provide
David == David Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's not really at all clear that this was where the mistake lay.
David I never thought I would be advocating more management, but here goes...
David Debian, as another poster pointed out, has grown from ~50 to
David ~2000 developers. And
I doubt that this would be a useful metric, given that people
tracking less-stable versions are likely to be updating more
frequently.
It is possible to count unique IPs, rather than bytes. Another poster
pointed out the problem of local archives, but there is no reason to
assume that stable
1 - 100 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
