Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: cl-asdf
Version : unversioned, cvs distribution
Upstream Author : Dan Barlow & Contributors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/cclan
* License : BSD-l
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Previously Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > Hi, What are the currently valid distribution to which we can make
> > uploads to?
>
> I think the list currently is:
>
> unstable experimental stable-proposed-updates stable-security
> testing-proposed-update
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:34:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Langasek) wrote on 16.08.02 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > From the heated discussion I've just had on IRC, I've gathered the
> > following:
> > * It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship,
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
>
> > John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The
> > > restriction
> > > is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are
> My concern is that locally compiled apps built against C++ libraries
> other than libstdc++ will silently stop working on upgrade. This is
> certainly not the most important issue facing us in the transition, but
> so far it seems to me that people are regarding it as so *un*important
> that it'
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess) wrote on 30.07.02 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't think it offers much if anything over special-purpose staging
> areas as is being used for perl 5.8 right now.
It seems to me staging areas could solve a lot of these difficulties, yes.
I'm not clear on the curren
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Langasek) wrote on 16.08.02 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> From the heated discussion I've just had on IRC, I've gathered the
> following:
>
> * It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship, upstream
> has already transitioned to using the GCC 3.2 ABI, theref
kleptog@svana.org (Martijn van Oosterhout) wrote on 01.08.02 in <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>:
> No reason, however in the docs there is an example line to put in apt.conf
Which docs?
What line?
> to automatically generate md5sum files for every package that doesn't
> contain them.
>
> So after you do a
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:54:03PM -0700, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joseph> Well there's the proprietary JDK, but it already uses a
> Joseph> -compat package library.
>
> Eh? Are you refering to java plugins for mozilla et al, or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The restriction
> > is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are author.
>
> There are two ways to be the owner of a copyr
> "Joseph" == Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joseph> Well there's the proprietary JDK, but it already uses a
Joseph> -compat package library.
Eh? Are you refering to java plugins for mozilla et al, or any actual
JDK?
--
Stephen
To Republicans, limited government means no
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The restriction
> is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are author.
There are two ways to be the owner of a copyright. First, you can buy
it from someone else (or otherwise g
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson) writes:
> Generally speaking, Debian packages aren't relocatable anyway. Many of
> them (unavoidably) end up with paths compiled into binaries.
We may have to deal with this for things like allowing ia32 binaries to run
on ia64 systems... though so far, all of the
debian-devel:您好!
老板理财：是一款特别为中小企业设计的理财软件，它的功能范围包括货品管理、资金管理、债权债务管
理，并配备有功能完整、全面的经营报告系统，它的功能覆盖了中小型企业财务管理的方方面面，是一款非常
实用的软件。
Office2000财务系统：采用微软Office2000内置开发语言开发，包括帐务报表等部分，可以自动生成现金
流量表。
请到 http://www.iboss2000.com 免费下载！
致
礼!
2002-08-18
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:53:22PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The majority of such packages links to libstdc++ only, so there may be
> > no need for action at all.
>
> Do we have non-free C++ packages that we have to worry about? My
> comments were more directed at unpackaged software that
severity 156227 grave
thanks
Hi Christopher,
please explain why you think that it's not RC that packages depending
libvorbis0 no longer run when upgrading libvorbis0 (the problem is similar
to the recent libc6 <-> db breakage that will be fixed by a dependency of
libc6 on libdb1-compat)?
Your lo
Have You got your own computer and internet connection ?
Why don't You use this for earn the money ?
You must not buy, sell or click in some links! This way is so simply!
Please, leave your name and mail in link :
http://www.notterhrbiz.i8.com
and we will contact You and meet You with this reall
>
> If temporary breakage of some applications is acceptable, you can
> spread this over a couple of days, by tsorting the 1000 packages.
>
or do a staging in experimental or somewhere else. Upload everything there,
let people look at it for a day or two then move it over.
This staging could a
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >At some point in the future, we will change gcc-defaults to make
> >gcc-3.2 the default on all architectures. At that time, you should
> >remove the setting of CXX and the e
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> In Jeff's plan: All C++ packages will be uploaded via NMUs. The
> package maintainer can upload their packages afterwards if they have
> to make other corrections.
All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000 p
On Friday 16 August 2002 15:51, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
> uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
> hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
> I'm entirely fallible and I don
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:37:41PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: iftop
> Version : 0.4
> Upstream Author : Paul Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>
> * URL
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:27:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Steve Langasek writes:
> > > * In these cases, having a package whose soname is compatible with the
> > > rest of the world is considered more important than provi
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Jeff Bailey planned to put these libraries in /usr/lib/gcc-2.95 (like
> > in the libc5/6 transition) and rename the packages containing the 2.95
> > libraries.
>
> How would this work? Would those using gcc-2.95 software have to set an
> rpath or $L
>
> If upstream aren't inclined to change their Linux soname for the new gcc,
> though, not changing our soname but doing the upgrade anyway seems the
> best option.
>
even if some are willing not all will be. Then we have to worry about dead
upstreams too. It seems like changing the sonames t
close 156956
thanks
* Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:37:41PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > Package: wnpp
> > Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
> > Severity: wishlist
> > [...]
> Package: iftop
> Status: install ok installed
ARGH, my fault... I only lo
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> Not necessarily: you can write wrapper scripts around the executable
> which automatically set LD_LIBRARY_PATH, then invoke the original
> binary. That has worked very well in the past.
> If you mean that the manual intervention
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000 packages
> currently in the archive. 10%. Per architecture. Is Jeff really going
> to bNMU all of these packages on the same day for all architectures?
I think this is the plan. You'll
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: iftop
Version : 0.4
Upstream Author : Paul Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Lightfoot <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/iftop/
* License : GPL
Descript
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I sincerely hope that g++ 3.2 applications will be allowed to coexist on
> the system with g++ 2.95.x applications.
I don't think this will happen, atleast not for shared libraries. Any
scheme that tries to solve this problem will be horribly complex
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is a proposal. You will be notified when this is a real plan
I think Jeff Bailey's plan is entirely different, and I like his plan
more. Here are the differences.
> * If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
>
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > * In these cases, having a package whose soname is compatible with the
> > rest of the world is considered more important than providing
> > compatibility for binaries locally compiled by our users agai
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:51:34PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> * If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
>the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb -> libdb4.0++c.deb. This
>is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
>
Steve Langasek writes:
> * It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship, upstream
> has already transitioned to using the GCC 3.2 ABI, therefore our
> current packages are already binary-incompatible with the rest of the
> world. (ok)
right. One reason for the 3.2 release was
"Sean 'Shaleh' Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
> why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
> situation??
Err, weren't we able to do that because we moved all the libc5 libs to
another directory?
Mike.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
> why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
> situation??
Because doing so would require changing the soname. Which is possible,
but w
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Selecting previously deselected package zinf.
> > dpkg: considering removing freeamp in favour of zinf ...
> > dpkg: yes, will remove freeamp in favour of zinf.
> > (Reading database ... 101551 files and directories currently installed.)
> > Unpacking zin
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
>
> why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
> situation??
i explained this elsewhere...
Why don't we put the libs in a differen
> * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g situation??
Steve,
There shouldn't be huge issues in the gcc 2.95.4 to gcc 3.2 transition.
Currently the only two major ones I know if are...
1) Rebuilding glibc with gcc 3.2 *may* require an arch to add a libgcc-compat
section to provide libgcc symbols, now .hidden in gcc 3.2's libgcc_s.so,
with lo
On 16 Aug 2002, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I finished a first version of my ZINF packages (ZINF is not FreeA*p).
>
> They seem to reproducibly cause a dpkg degfault on my machine when
> doing the following:
>
> ~# apt-get install freeamp freeamp-extras libfreeamp-esound
> ~# dpkg -i --auto-
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 04:06:56PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
> So it will be impossible to have both the old and new library packages
> on the system simultaneously. That's broke
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 03:17:21AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Peter Hicks wrote:
> > well, I would hate to dissuade you from packaging the linux-wlan
> > drivers, but I have no trouble using prism2, orinoco, or cisco aironet
> > cards with the stock debian 2.4.18 kernel. Both my lucent card and my
>
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> > * If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
> >the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb -> libdb4.0++c.deb. This
> >is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
> >of libraries.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:47:07PM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> [for debian-gcc people: please Cc: to me because I am not subscribed]
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:51:34 +0100,
> Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * If your package contains no C++, do nothing. One fine day,
> >
Previously Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> 1. Does a C (not C++) library compiled with gcc 2.95 work with
>a C++ program compiled with gcc 3.2?
Yes
> 2. Does this mean I must not use gcc 3.2 before it becomes gcc-defaults?
>There may be a case where gcc 3.2 offers better optimization.
Yes.
Wicher
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:51:34PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This is a proposal. You will be notified when this is a real plan
>Why don't we just change the sonames?
>Because upstream chooses the soname to match their API. If we change
>the soname then we render ourselves binary
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
So it will be impossible to have both the old and new library packages
on the system simultaneously. That's broken.
>Why don't we just change the sonames?
>
>Because upstream choos
[for debian-gcc people: please Cc: to me because I am not subscribed]
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:51:34 +0100,
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * If your package contains no C++, do nothing. One fine day,
>gcc-defaults will be changed to gcc-3.2 and you'll start using GCC
>
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: nttcp
Version : 1.47
Upstream Author : Elmar Bartel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.leo.org/~elmar/nttcp/
* License : Original (non-free)
Description : New test TCP p
I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
I'm entirely fallible and I don't pretend to understand all the issues
involved with doing t
> "Simon" == Simon Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon> On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:44:30PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann
Simon> wrote:
>> If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
>> packages, assuming this is a local problem.
Simon> You most certainly
> "Martin" == Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> * Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-16 13:44]:
>> If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
>> packages, assuming this is a local problem.
Martin> How did you test the packages w
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:44:30PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
> packages, assuming this is a local problem.
You most certainly want to test this in a chroot environment.
May I suggest using debootstrap or pbuilder to do th
* Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-16 13:44]:
> If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
> packages, assuming this is a local problem.
How did you test the packages when you cannot even install them?
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 03:34:32PM -0700, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> You will need xfs-xtt to view this font properly.
This is plain wrong. Since XFree86 4.0 we don't need xfs-xtt to use a
True-Type font.
Please don't put this sentence in your description.
Christophe
--
Christophe Barbé <[EM
Hi!
I finished a first version of my ZINF packages (ZINF is not FreeA*p).
They seem to reproducibly cause a dpkg degfault on my machine when
doing the following:
~# apt-get install freeamp freeamp-extras libfreeamp-esound
~# dpkg -i --auto-deconfigure zinf_2.2.0-1_i386.deb
zinf-extras_2.2.0-1_i
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 12:44:13PM +0100, Björn Johansson wrote:
> I want to know where I can get KDE packages for my Debian system.
> I'm currently running Debian2.2r5. This is quite important since
> I really lack a good mail client, I miss Kmail! :(
If you upgraded your Debian system to 3.0, yo
Previously Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Hi, What are the currently valid distribution to which we can make
> uploads to?
I think the list currently is:
unstable experimental stable-proposed-updates stable-security
testing-proposed-updates testing-security test
Some combinations of those are possi
Hi!
I want to know where I can get KDE packages for my Debian system.
I'm currently running Debian2.2r5. This is quite important since
I really lack a good mail client, I miss Kmail! :(
Kind regards Björn Johansson
sorry,
hatte dir die falsche adresse
geschoickt
die richtige ist: http://biggimaus.5xx.net
Birgit
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ps: hast du schon die neuen bilder auf meiner
homepage gesehen?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kalle Valo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Daniel Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > waring about the modules, but then postrm failed and the package
> > remained in half-installed state, no chance to change that. How can i
> > fix up this mess?
unsubscribe
> On Aug 14, Laura Creighton wrote:
> > The new Python Business Forum (www.python-in-business.com) is
>
> what is this? The link is dead. Is this the former PSA?
No. My brain was tired -- it was python-in-business.org. Apologies.
We are new. We are a Business Non-Profit Society 'to organise
Daniel Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> waring about the modules, but then postrm failed and the package
> remained in half-installed state, no chance to change that. How can i
> fix up this mess?
It's a small typo in postrm, which can be fixed manually. See bugs
#156579 and #156853.
PS. I h
On 15 Aug 2002, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I am planning Debconf 3 to be held in Oslo, from Friday July 18th to
> Sunday July 20th.
Great!
I guess this would not conflict with LSM (Bordeaux) or LinuxTag (Karlsruhe)
because this is traditionally earlier (even if there are no dates fixed).
> Joeyh he
Could whoever is responsible for that upload please set their name as
uploader/builder next time. They also might want to actually sign the
package as well as upload to auric rather than pandora.
TIA.
- Forwarded message from Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Debian Installer
Just an idea. Now that woody is stable. I see references to potato being
called "oldstable". For instance in the changelogs for potato security
updates, the dist is oldstable-security. Looks kind of ugly to me.
Perhaps a better name might be "legacy". Anyone agree? I'm not aware of
how big a ch
68 matches
Mail list logo
