On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 01:28:41PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Joel> It would also presumably allow you to add a filter such as
> Joel> "don't display any bug with a dependa
ss problem description). If not, something like this could have *very*
far-reaching impacts; if one turned on checksumming (available for UDP
packets natively, or one could do it in the protocol) to avoid bitrot, this
opens up a huge path t
this up, but it does seem like it could be used to resolve
a couple of different types of problem. (It also allows yet another way to
avoid BTS tenn
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 08:50:48PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > The 'slander', if such it is (and I, obviously, don't consider it such)
> > is against the named set of churches, and those that follow their d
man - Linux gets Lovelace!)
Debian Mach, of course, must be reserved for a FreeBSD-on-Mach port :)
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 09:48:31AM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Russell Coker wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except
> > >
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 05:21:23AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > &g
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 12:52:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Baker) wrote on 17.12.03 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Since you have no idea *what* civil rights I'm claiming are denied, your
> > claim that I'm just imagining this d
ecause it wasn't considered to be
worth having the argument over, and we were still using quite a lot of GNU
stuff, so figured it wasn't unreasonable to give them due credit (and that
if RMS objected, saying it wasn't "the Gnu system
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:30:57PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:15, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Anglican church is, in fact, the most likely among anyone except the
> > UUs to (eventually) decide that it's OK, for the same reaso
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that I've hallucinated the
> > stated positions of the Catholic, Luthern, Episopalian, Bapt
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:25:11PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or
> > beliefs of someone you don't agree with are sufficient to condemn them to
> >
y person who supports, directly
or indirectly, any sect of Christianity which I am aware of, all of whom
advocate divine justice, and most of which also advocate the continued
denial of civil rights as well.
It's certainly easy to *feel* like folks might
t for membership in a given group is not the same
as making assertions about that group (for example, it applies equally to
entities who are *not* part of that group, but exhibit the same behavior).
--
Joel Baker <[EMA
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:22:07PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 02:04:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > the fact that "the original guys said it's a daemon, explicitly not a
> > > Christian demon" and here's you're saying "y
ves
a huge amount of (very valuble) context to the history behind some major
plot points in the main series. Like why Roke has the strictures it does
about the gender of students, and what they're allowed to do.
Oh, and it wraps up some loose ends, too. Like the Master Summoner.
And no, those a
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:21:24AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:41:12AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >
> > "The Christian concept of a demon is a corruption (as it were) of the Greek
> > concept of daemon"
>
> Basically, no argume
ous Harry Potter reference, but "fear of a
> name increases fear for the thing itself." ;-p
>
> IOW, lighten up, people. Otherwise, we'll be referring to Debian
> GNU/That Which Shall Not Be Named...
Hey, we already covered L
ough of the right letters to do
the first-letter trick, at least once per.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,''
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:53:18AM -0800, Nunya wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:31:17AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >
> > Somehow, I don't think Branden will mind being told his dislike of
> > "parochial religious fundamentalists" is showing. I suspect he&
in
general, seem to vary widely.
> Face it dude, you're hatred and unfairness towards one specific group of
> people is shining through. I don't think this project is so enlightened
> after all.
Somehow, I don't think Branden will min
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 11:10:24AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Actually, given that I'm a long-time and deep-seated Tolkien geek, I rather
> > like the notion of
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:54:15AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 06:00:21PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Even so, I'm amenable to anyone who can come up with names which are less
> > loaded to random fu
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:59:46AM +, Will Newton wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 Dec 2003 01:44, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > Appropriate? As much as any of the Valar would be; he's certainly on the
> > list. But since we know of at least 4 active ports, one name isn't goin
of which is correct :-)
>
> Really? What makes a pronounciation incorrect? The pronounciation of
> the project initiator, the context, etc... ?
I'd have to say that the person who made up the term gets to decide how it
should be pronounced. Shades of the Linux pron
accurate description than the general view of it among Christians.
It isn't precisely sympathetic to the fallen, but it ascribes the flaw of
of overwhelming pride to both sides...
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 10:40:11PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> >> Branden's second proposal of using something from Pratchett did have a
> >>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 03:09:07PM -0500, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 12:19:10PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >
> > Having cheated and grabbed an online resource for it from Google, the
> > following possibilities show up (my apologies for the lack of accent
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:15:04AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:01:49AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>
> > Of course, I don't really think we should merit religious nonsense with
> > the honour of giving name to the products of Debian labour any
That's not the way it works; "Sid" is not "Sarge+1" but the never-to-be-
> released development version. Think of it as "version infinity".
"And Beyond!"
Sorry, it had to be said. I'll go back in my hole now.
--
Joel Baker &l
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 08:57:45AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:02:54 -0700, Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Oddly enough, most FreeBSD sysadmins don't appear to mind doing things much
> >more invasive than a dist-upgrade, every six m
ybe Debian GNU/Pesetas, Debian GNU/Zloty, and Debian GNU/Yen?! All
> hail capitalism! This would be quite fitting right now, since most of
> the western world is celebrating capitalism's supremacy next week (of
> course, some celebrate it rel
idea? (One that may
take some practice to achieve, sure, and not one I expect us to hit next
release, though I'd be happy to get it below the steadily expanding history
of Debian - and the current RM's goals appear to be a strong step in that
dire
gt; > In any event, for any name that doesn't raise trademark issues (and
> > thus potentially jeopardize the entire project), I'd say
> > the choice remains up to those who are actually doing the
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 01:07:15AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:55:30PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > >
> > > Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to coope
like that.
One should never name the Lady.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 05:55:30PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 09:05:39AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > Remember, these machines are, behind the archives, perhaps the most
> > implicity trusted machines in the entire project. Compromise the archive
ce with the topic tends to indicate that the
same folks who care are very likely to consider there mere *concept* of
a 'daemon' to be anathema, evil, fou
ave it for the really egregious times. So far, the entire recovery
has been suprisingly *well* communicated, compared to a lot of points in
Debian's history.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ If you're being impatient about resolving this, please see the bottom ]
[ of the email for an imporant bit of information... ]
[ snip ]
On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 04:27:27PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Joel
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 07:24:29PM +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> I removed a lot of CC's, since this comment isn't relevant to the rest
> of the discussion, really...
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:39:47PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> [snip]
> > I explained that &q
.]
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 11:54:09AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> [I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.]
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 04:39:47PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > On December 2nd, I was contacted by Luke Mewburn, on behalf of The NetBSD
> > Foundation, asking
ndation, and it's representatives,
have been both cordial and productive, to date, and that I feel their
request is born largely of having seen an example which they preferred,
rather than any antipathy towards the Debian project
ot like:
clone XX
severity -1 important
retitle -1 Causes massive failures on package foo
assign -1 bar
(The key trick is the cloning; it keeps the bugs tied in a way that makes
the relationship clear, keeps the discussion history available, and still
allows the bugs to be seen accu
ource-*' will be Arch: all, even if the package
one uses to build them (the equivalent of kernel-package, also a candidate
for renaming if it comes to pass) is arch-specific.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PRO
unity
to say "I don't agree, here's why:" in an equally polite manner. He's
been known to change his mind, when presented with suitable evidence
or persuasive argument, but his job as ftpmaster is, in large part, to
do exactly what he did - reject package uploa
ng-checklist.txt.gz; all sorts of
spiffy goodness.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
do what you do want, for a very reasonable price, some
of which are unlikely to ever be blocked by any local ISP you may conne
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 06:51:01PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Joel Baker writes:
> > I'm going to gloss over the utter mistake of your first statement
>
> I am on a dialup with a "dynamic" IP number: I am allowed to borrow a
> number from my ISP at need. There
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 04:26:35PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Joel Baker writes:
> > I'm sorry, but your individual desire to be able to send mail from
> > anywhere on the planet, claiming to be anyone on the planet...
>
> What makes you think I want to claim to be &
large number of
anti-spam lists, since there is a very high correlation between having it
open, and origionating large amounts of spam. Nearly 100%, in fact. If
lacking a domain-authorized
aid, I'm betting that none of them will gain much steam
until the ASRG renders a decision. So we'll just have to see what comes out
of it.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#x27;. If switching from -O2 to -O0 fixes a problem,
that is almost indisputable a bug (usually in the toolchain), and there
should be human intervention if for no other reason than ensuring the
toolchain packages get the bug filed against them so that we can improve
them.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROT
5) currently return
> wrong result in my script.
Presumably you mean other than `dpkg --compare-versions`?
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,'
the situation by way of providing a better
answer.
(I am, however, reminded that it's probably a good idea to go codify
some things in the proposed mini-policy for Net
es us to consider
rewriting it all, anyway...)
Though getting Python to have an easier Build-Depend chain would be nice
for porters, if we ever do support it as an o
aits with pthread_join() for
>cancellation. But a thread waiting on pthread_cond_timedwait() doesn`t
>cancel and so pthread_join() doesn`t return.
Further discussion probably isn't on-topic for debian-devel, however,
unless you're talking about building a Debian
be modified / recompiled in anyway?
>
> What are the benifits of one over the other?
New POSIX Threads Library, or somesuch.
As for benefits... try "real POSIX threading", "doesn't choke and die on
large numbers of threads", and "brings Linux remotely close to m
> Perhaps once the Debian/*BSD have stabilized and reach a greater level
> of usability, we can ask these questions again later...
Join us over on debian-bsd@lists.debian.org; we're discussing many of them
now (or,
suffice means Linux
only for legacy support reasons", but I don't expect it to happen anytime
soon. :)
--
Joel Baker
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 07:37:12PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Joel Baker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > This argument would carry more weight with me if it were possible to either
> > A) test the upload *completely* before making it (IE, catch all possible
> > FTBFS bugs
s, either, and
so the NMUs just won't happen at all. And perhaps that's fine and we should
just remove the packages - but if that's the case, why are we bothering to
h
orts; this bug has been claimed for
some time (I've been waiting on getting someone from the mips folks to get
in touch about testing it on that platform, for the *other* RC bug, before
uploading the fix).
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,'
easing during them; though the Debian Christmas Release would be mildly
entertaining :)
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
unced a
release target for 2.0 yet).
Off to hunt some RC bugs, now... (yeah, yeah, I should have been doing
this all along, but frankly, porting work took priority when there was no
release goal :)
--
Joe
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 09:16:03AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 10:38:10PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> >
> > If they get hit by a bus, reassigned by their job to Outer Mongolia, or
> > just plain get bored with doing it, we lose that benefit entirely
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 05:59:52PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 10:32:07AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > > * want to contribute something to a project they respect
> > > > * want to help out Debian users
> > > > * w
n exchange). At this point, however, there is very little reason for
self-interest to drive such things; the amount of code available is so vast
that nearly anything you want can be found, cobbled together, or otherwise
made with little effort. The only real exception
s so that the
netbsd-libc and netbsd-kernel-source-* packages will be free and clear*
Only 10,000 files now... (hey, it *was* 15,000).
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpue2Q7xC6Kw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 08:05:01AM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> Hi, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > Diesel locomotives are a giant diesel generator hooked up to electric
> > traction motors, running through the switchbox at something like 600v
> > (I haven't read the sp
), and
you'll be fine. :)
There's a reason they call popping the coupling seals on that line (the
fail-safe (full stop) airbrake line) completely (rather than bleeding the
air off) 'dynamiting'...
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpRKx4EOtwNp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
the answer
cache - you can look at the existing state and find out what you need to
know (or, presumably, override it).
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpHUUfcNpVft.pgp
Description: PGP signature
t a 'joke', or what.
(No, this isn't intended as "how to get around doing an ITP", but rather,
as an alternative which assumes you can convince someone that the script
is, in fact, useful enough to put into an existing package to which it
might be applicable.)
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpUFz9MND4T9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
types or versions that don't support that, or people who
actually want /tmp when they explicitly request it, even if TMPDIR=~/tmp is
fine most of the time.
I can't think of a better way to get admins to simply turn it off
completely than to make it completely override /tmp and have n
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-09
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: debpool
* Version: 0.1.0
Upstream Author: Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL: N/A
License: BSD
Description: pool-based DEB package archiver
DebPool is a pool-based DEB package archiver de
at
> long before NetBSD has a port to it. I also recall seeing that people
> are in the process of porting both FreeBSD and NetBSD to S/390.
Not to mention a (reasonably close to?) working amd64 port (recently
renamed).
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpllBGNSltA2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
nux would
probably be "bleeding edge above most").
Sort of like Debian's release schedule is "when it's ready", and for the
same reasons.
Their -current is more or less like our unstable ("It may break, but people
always scream at us when it does so for a
t probably isn't worthy of it's own package, and having multiple MTAs (or
MUAs) provide it makes little sense, really... perhaps it belongs in one of
the "general utility" packages?
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpEAWccWVLSz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
d-kernel-*, I'll speak up:
I'm trying very hard to arrange that we don't repeat the misfeatures of
this particular past. This is, granted, far easier than for Linux, since
there isn't really a concept of a 'separate arch repository' to be out of
sync, on NetBSD.
(No, t
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 09:35:41AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > larger sense, is whether there is a way to have the translations available
> > in some easily selectable format.
> I think the i18ned fortune makes this simple.
Tha
on such
archs, until some useful solution is found, so it probably doesn't matter
all that much (won't keep it out of testing or any other such evilness,
etc...)
Failing that, it's on my TODO list for netbsd-libc, but rather behind a
number of other things like backporting so
On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 11:38:32PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > What I was wondering is whether there is a way to do translations of
> > the fortune data, without having to have 'fortunes-debian-hints-'
> > packages.
ith it).
What I was wondering is whether there is a way to do translations of
the fortune data, without having to have 'fortunes-debian-hints-'
packages. Granted, I probably won't be able to do much useful about
translating them, myself, but I'd like to at least know if it's d
rimary author since well before the project existed, and
I will never, ever try to package it again as long as she's the primary
author...
(In other words, I'm vouching to anyone who wonders that the code is enough
to drive anyone seriously insane, and making it sane is no easy task.)
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgps8O3JmKrpW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
a small fs on
> /run (although I hope it's not in the root directory)?
I think all of the BSDs currently in porting support some concept that
is functionally equivalent to a ramdisk. Can't say anything useful about
the Hurd.
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpzUc7Rh08Jq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ct debian-devel@lists.debian.org if you have questions
> > N: about this.
>
> Just ignore it or add a override.
Any reason not to Build-Depend: chrpath, and do 'chrpath --delete' on
the result?
--
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpoDdFlmOlfG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
is was a
long way off, and not terribly high on most priority lists.
--
*******
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
pgpBLKkdFPmTn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ally, is the
case if it's an in-domain indirection).
And, by the way, that *is* one of the uses of a CNAME. To allow things such
as service names (www, ftp, etc) to point to a single IP, which might have
one of those names, or something else, as it's formal name.
--
*
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 07:05:31AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * "Joel Baker"
>
> | > (I can think of one trivial example--devfs makes it really easy to tell
> | > which disks are available to the partitioning program. Can you describe
> | > a simple method
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:54:29PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:07:51PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >In the origional message, I merely pointed out that keeping such things
> >properly encapsulated is crucial, if you EVER want to be able to run on any
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 06:37:50PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:26:16PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >I must admit to some confusion, here. Should I take this as implying that
> >there is no particular intent to try to make Debian-Installer play nicely
>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 05:58:06PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:20:40PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >In practice, I find that once such assumptions creep in, it can be very,
> >very hard to remove them without yanking out a lot of entrails to go with.
&g
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:03:12AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> >Certainly it will have a hard time working on any of the BSDs anytime soon,
> >if it relies on devfs more than trivially; they have no concept of it,
of our cause to RULE THE
WORLD!
Er, wait. Did I say that in my out-loud voice? Damn. Now I'll have to feed
you all to the sharks with lasers on their heads.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administ
s on the BSDs, at least
not on NetBSD and not that I *know* of on FreeBSD).
--
*******
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
pgpE93tR8aVd0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 07:41:42PM +0100, Carlos Sousa wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 12:24:51 -0600
> "Joel Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think that declaring something which complies with RFC
> > 2821/2822(the core SMTP-based email RFCs) is
do more research into the standards before making such a claim next
time. Though it's "free" status may be in question, the doc-rfc package
remains available to Debian. Well, the split version of it does, anyway.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:20:54PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > You know, I keep hearing this. Does this mean we should ditch the entirety
> > of GCC's manuals, even old ones which weren't under the F
endancy for heimdal when
> building kerberos4tkth from non-us/testing.
>
> Is this possible?
>
> Any comments?
A pox on circular build-depends (says one of the new-port builders). The
best way to resolve such things, without resorting to trying to trick the
autobuilders, is to try
h
means that for their intent, documentation != software, and thus, Debian
should respect that and not publish it, since it's not software at all?
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.co
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
