Re: So, what's up with the XFree86 4.0 .debs?
On 13-Mar-00, 16:55 (CST), Alex Yukhimets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I often find myself in the position when I use X libraries (Xt mostly) built by myself with some changes to allow debugging of my Xt widgets. I install new libs and headers in another directory and -I/this/new/dir and -L/that/new/dir allows for compilation and linkage with new version. If libs are in /usr/lib and headers in /usr/include (default locations) then this would not work. Why not? Have you read the compiler/linker docs? Adding -I/some/dir/inc and -L/some/dir/lib causes those directories to be searched *before* the default directories. I don't have an opinion about where the X stuff should go, but the above argument is completely bogus FUD. Steve -- Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)
important bug - war (openldapd #57469)
Hello All,
details at:
http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/57/57469.html
I submitted this bug report and labelled at is important, since it
prevented me from installing other packages (unless I put it on
hold). I have since heard other people on debian-devel say that such a
bug should be grave.
The maintainer of the bug report said it was fixed, and closed
it. Fair enough, however, the problem was still there. I sent a note to
the maintainer saying as much, but this was ignored.
I reopened the bug report, telling the maintainer that the problem has
not been fixed, and he (perhaps he didn't read my message, not sure)
immediately closed it again. He said it was fixed ages ago. Obviously
this is not the case...
Then again, the perl code looks OK to me, so I am not sure what the
problem is (if I run it manually it works, if I run it via apt-get
preconfiguration it doesn't work).
$done = 0;
while (! $done) {
my $isdefault = fget ('openldapd/db_directory', 'isdefault');
my @ret = input ('low', 'openldapd/db_directory');
break if $ret[0] == 30;
go;
for some reason, that break statement is not working, hence it
enters an infinite loop. Please see the bug report for details.
This is for the latest version, openldapd_1%3a1.2.9-3_i386.deb
(perhaps the maintainer wrongly assumed that I was not using the
latest version, if he was unsure, he should really ask me though,
instead of blindly closing the bug report. Or perhaps the Australian
mirror is old and out-of-date, in which case I apologise).
This isn't meant to flame the maintainer in anyway (hence my reason
for not mentioning his name), but I think this is an important bug
that deserves to be fixed. As I am not getting anywhere via the BTS,
perhaps this message will help.
I strongly suspect that problem is that the break cannot exit from the
while loop. As a test example:
perl -e 'while (1) { print hi\n; break; }'
this never exits the loop. Then again does break even exist in perl??
I think the fix is to replace break with last. Not tested.
sidenote:
[510] [lyell:bmay] ~ perl -e 'use strict; while (1) { print hi\n; break; }'
Bareword break not allowed while strict subs in use at -e line 1.
Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
Personally, I use use strict; in all programs I write.
--
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 01:31:41PM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote: Paul M Sargent [EMAIL PROTECTED]: OK, Here's a question then. If Woody is unstable, which kernel is it running? Woody should be running 2.3 or pre-2.4. That should have been among the first things to change. I don't think so. People who are interested in debugging the kernel can install 2.3 themselves; people who are only interested in debugging Mozilla (say) don't want to have new kernel releases trashing their discs every few days. right .. and I'm testing the new kernel at this time i'm writing a short (simple) parser for traslate old isapnp to the kernel interface. This is very simple task but other can be done by developer (and i'm not such one), and no tested by user (at least if they don't need new drivers). However it's a good idea to point that new kernel exists and, soon or late, it has to be supported -- Daniele Cruciani [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check my GPG sign at ..??..
Re: So, what's up with the XFree86 4.0 .debs?
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote: Why not? Have you read the compiler/linker docs? Adding -I/some/dir/inc and -L/some/dir/lib causes those directories to be searched *before* the default directories. I don't have an opinion about where the X stuff should go, but the above argument is completely bogus FUD. For ages now all my X stuff certainly has not used any -I and -L directives on debian, the headers/libs are already in the standard locations! Jason
Re: important bug - war (openldapd #57469)
Brian May wrote:
I strongly suspect that problem is that the break cannot exit from the
while loop. As a test example:
perl -e 'while (1) { print hi\n; break; }'
this never exits the loop. Then again does break even exist in perl??
I think the fix is to replace break with last. Not tested.
Yes, of course it is. To illistrate:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~perl -e 'there_is_no_perl_command_with_this_name'
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~perl -we 'there_is_no_perl_command_with_this_name'
Useless use of a constant in void context at -e line 1.
This is why you should always use -w.
'last' is the correct command.
--
see shy jo
realplayer installer and frozen
The realplayer installer package in potato is broken and useless because Real has, in their infinite wisdom, removed version 6.x of the program from their download sites now that they have a beta of 7.0. (Bug #60323.) So the installer can't install anything. The package either needs to be pulled from potato, or the new package in woody that can handle realplayer 7.0 needs to be substituted in its place. The changes to the actual debian package were minor; the changes between real 6.x and 7.0 are anyone's guess and who knows what has broken. So, Dark, what should I do? -- see shy jo
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
We are all using potato, but we are shipping slink, keep that in mind. This is *wrong* as is wrong the claim that slink is useless. The vast majority of the machines I manage are slinks. You, but most of us are using potato in production systems. Slink is a year old. It was released 1999-03-09.
Re: realplayer installer and frozen
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 05:47:41PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: The realplayer installer package in potato is broken and useless because Real has, in their infinite wisdom, removed version 6.x of the program from their download sites now that they have a beta of 7.0. (Bug #60323.) So the installer can't install anything. The package either needs to be pulled from potato, or the new package in woody that can handle realplayer 7.0 needs to be substituted in its place. The changes to the actual debian package were minor; the changes between real 6.x and 7.0 are anyone's guess and who knows what has broken. So, Dark, what should I do? Let's boycott the fuckers! Drop the package and swear to never support Real until they discard their patents and free their software! G! P! L! G! P! L! CHAGE! -- G. Branden Robinson|I just wanted to see what it looked like Debian GNU/Linux |in a spotlight. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Jim Morrison roger.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | pgpdyGC19dC46.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 14 days till bug horizon
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: Package: sawmill (debian/main). Maintainer: Mikolaj J. Habryn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 59760 sawmill: Sawmill fails to load -- missing file /usr/lib/rep/0.11/i686-pc-linux-gnu/timers.so This is filed against version 0.25-1. The version in potato is 0.20.1-2.1, which I am using on several machines quite happily. I use essentially all of gnome with it except session management... and see none of the symptoms described. I assume this means this is a bug against woody, not potato, and that this bug should not affect the release of sawmill with potato? Bdale
Re: 14 days till bug horizon
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: Package: pilot-manager (debian/main). Maintainer: Darren Stalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] 59202 pilot-manager: Method GetRecord missing in SyncPlan The pilot-manager package is quite useful even if SyncPlan doesn't work, which I can neither confirm nor deny. If there's a problem and it can be fixed, great, but don't remove this from potato just for this! It really isn't release-critical in that sense. Bdale
Re: important bug - war (openldapd #57469)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 11:21:58AM +1100, Brian May wrote: Hello All, details at: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/db/57/57469.html I submitted this bug report and labelled at is important, since it prevented me from installing other packages (unless I put it on hold). I have since heard other people on debian-devel say that such a bug should be grave. Would be nice if you had included all of this useful info in your bug report. However, when you filed the bug, you had a version older than the one that I uploaded to (attemp to) fix the bug. It was pretty safe for me to assume that you were not using the latest one, and thus the bug report was irrelevant. Next time please email me with correct version numbers and explain things a little better, other than just it still doesn't work. I've never been able to reproduce this, on any of the 4 machines that I am running the server on. Also, I only know of two other people that had this problem, and both of them said that it was fixed with my last upload. Given that I cannot reproduce it, and two people say it is fixed, then I am left to believe that the problem is solved. Sorry that you had to resort to this, it will be fixed soon enough. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
WANPIPE X.25
Is there anybody here using the Sangoma WANPIPE cards to do X.25? Brian ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) --- When you love someone, you're always insecure. (Tell Her About It -- B.Joel)
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
Josip Rodin wrote: But slink is practically completely adjusted for 2.2 already. Sure, if you ignore the 12 packages that break (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/running-kernel-2.2) -- see shy jo
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
Eray Ozkural wrote: What happened to the package pools proposal? It's not been implemented. It's as if Debian developers are suffering from amnesia. It's easy to be amnesiac about vaporware. -- see shy jo
Re: Availability of unstable/interim CDs (Was: Danger Will Robinson ! Danger!)
Moore, Paul wrote: I disagree. The approach taken by slink was sensible. Have 2.0 as the base, because it was QA'd to the high standards required by Debian, but include the latest 2.2 source package for people willing to upgrade. Adding a bit more support, in the form of including the equivalent of the Using Kernel 2.2 with Slink webpage on the CD, and including (in a separate directory) debs for the relevant unstable versions of packages which need upgrading, would be enough. Well, this is a blatent plug for my employer, but you can buy just such a cd. http://www.valinux.com/software/debian/ (except it includes the 2.2 kernel as the default) ISO's are of course freely available on VA's ftp site. -- see shy jo
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 08:17:00PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: Josip Rodin wrote: But slink is practically completely adjusted for 2.2 already. Sure, if you ignore the 12 packages that break (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/running-kernel-2.2) Most people can run 2.2 on slink without the world coming to an end. I think that calling slink practically...adjusted for 2.2 is reasonable, as upgrading packages is unnecessary in most cases and minimal in most others. -- Mike Stone pgpRsBXAwQDwm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: important bug - war (openldapd #57469)
Ben == Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ben Next time please email me with correct version numbers and Ben explain things a little better, other than just it still Ben doesn't work. I've never been able to reproduce this, on any Ben of the 4 machines that I am running the server on. I am not sure why this was not clear (from BTS): [...] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: this bug is NOT fixed :-( [...] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: openldapd Version: 1:1.2.8-7 [...] where you said the problem had been fixed in this version (although it is old now). Perhaps this message never reached you, it might have been delayed/lost in the BTS. In future, I will assume that the maintainer never got my mail if I don't get any response, and send another copy. Or, perhaps I should have put openldapd somewhere on the subject line? I guess my subject line could have been better. Ben Sorry that you had to resort to this, it will be fixed soon Ben enough. Thanks. -- Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
Eray == Eray Ozkural [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Eray What happened to the package pools proposal? It's as if Debian Eray developers are suffering from amnesia. I guess the package Eray pools, as an idea at least, had found a significant appeal in Eray this list. According to some form of that proposal, what you've Eray mentioned and even better release flexibility would be Eray possible. As someone said, it remain vapourware unless someone works on it. So far, there is no implementation of that idea. Are you volunteering? ;-) I believe it is being worked on, but it is quite inchoate at the moment. manoj -- You canna change the laws of physics, Captain; I've got to have thirty minutes! Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Ari == Ari Makela [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ari Manoj Srivastava writes: It is a quality of imlementation issue. If we are seriously outmoded, we can't honestly say we are trying to be the best distribution out there. Ari I must say I completely fail to understand your point. Quality Ari has not very much to do with the fact how new the softare in an Ari unix-system is. If old software never had bugs, and we did not have new hardware, you would have a point. Another point is that to an extent. being outmoded means that fewer people use Debian; and, that implies that Debian no longer meets their goals. Not having released for nearly 18 months (that's 3 generations in internet time), we have fastr become a distribution that does not meet the needs of a vast number of people. While I am not advoocationg abondaning quality, I am saying that obsolescence is also a factor in quality of implementation. Ari Debian GNU/Linux is a great operating system and Ari I do believe that one of the reasons for the high quality is the Ari fact that Debian is developed without unnecessary haste. So who is saying we be hasty? Did I ever say we make anything but 2.2. the default kernel? Ari I feel that no operating system can be everything for everybody. Also, Ari I believe that you can choose either bleeding edge software or high Ari quality software but not both. And Debian should offer both choices, perhaps favouring the latter. Let the users decide. Ari All said, as an unix user I'm very programming and server orientated Ari and I rather buy malt whiskey than newest available hardware. Someone Ari with an Athlon or a very new video card might disagree with me. Debian tries hard to cater to both types of users. manoj -- He didn't run for reelection. `Politics brings you into contact with all the people you'd give anything to avoid,' he said. `I'm staying home.' Garrison Keillor, _Lake_Wobegone_Days_ Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/ 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Re: WANPIPE X.25
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 21:54:09 -0500, Brian White wrote: Is there anybody here using the Sangoma WANPIPE cards to do X.25? X.25 isn't particularly popular under Linux, but people do use it. Your best bet for information is probably the linux-x25@vger.rutgers.edu list. HTH, Ray -- Tevens ben ik van mening dat Nederland overdekt dient te worden.
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:50:47AM +, Paul M Sargent wrote: On a side note. I'm really not sure that this 'release' stuff works on debian. Coordinating the development cycles of an infinite number of packages is impossible. What I would like to see is an unstable tree where all development is done. As packages reach maturity they 'graduate' to the stable tree. A snapshot of stable tree at any time works. The unstable tree just becomes a place for developers to share packages. The key point is a continually evolving release. As has been said before, Debian isn't commercial. It doesn't have to behave like it is with releases. well said! and you make an important point that most people overlook - that the whole commercial product style release cycle may not be thet best way for debian releases to be made. craig -- craig sanders
Re: 14 days till bug horizon
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 07:32:06PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: Package: sawmill (debian/main). Maintainer: Mikolaj J. Habryn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 59760 sawmill: Sawmill fails to load -- missing file /usr/lib/rep/0.11/i686-pc-linux-gnu/timers.so This is filed against version 0.25-1. The version in potato is 0.20.1-2.1, which I am using on several machines quite happily. I use essentially all of gnome with it except session management... and see none of the symptoms described. I assume this means this is a bug against woody, not potato, and that this bug should not affect the release of sawmill with potato? Yes. There is an exclusion mechanism for this, but it is hard to identify such bugs. (Looking at the version number is not enough, it needs someone to actually test it on the potato version, like you did.) Richard Braakman
Re: 14 days till bug horizon
severity 59202 normal thanks On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 07:36:12PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: Package: pilot-manager (debian/main). Maintainer: Darren Stalder [EMAIL PROTECTED] 59202 pilot-manager: Method GetRecord missing in SyncPlan The pilot-manager package is quite useful even if SyncPlan doesn't work, which I can neither confirm nor deny. If there's a problem and it can be fixed, great, but don't remove this from potato just for this! It really isn't release-critical in that sense. Then it's not release-critical at all. Richard Braakman
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Filip Van Raemdonck writes:
And if they have this new hardware, does it mean they should not be
able to run Debian then? If that's the case, better start rewriting
some documentation...
What I ment was that it's quite easy to upgrade Slink to use 2.2
series kernel or newer XFree86. Neither it's difficult to change the
kernel on the rescue floppy if the provided kernel does not support
hardware. If, Samba, for example, is not new enough, it's not
difficult to fetch the sources and compile it.
Somehow, I fail to notice a major problem here.
I trust Debian unstable enough to use it on my workstation. There have
not been many problems but a few that have been bad enough to make me
convinced not use unstable on servers.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -w -- # Ari Makela, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.iki.fi/hauva/
use strict;my $s='I am just a poor bear with a startling lack of brain.';my $t=
crypt($s,substr($s,0,2));$t=~y#IEK65c4qx AR#J o srtahuet#;$t=~s/hot/not/;my
@v=split(//,$t);push(@v,split(//,reverse('rekcah lreP')));foreach(@v){print;}
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Ari Makela wrote: series kernel or newer XFree86. Neither it's difficult to change the kernel on the rescue floppy if the provided kernel does not support hardware. If, Samba, for example, is not new enough, it's not difficult to fetch the sources and compile it. Have you ever actually tried to do this? With slink, for example, you will find that the documentation does not list all the modules you need to make a kernel with the correct modules built in to support the boot floppies. If you get past that hurdle, you will find that all the modules packages like pcmcia are broken. And so on.. -- see shy jo
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Joey Hess writes:
Ari Makela wrote:
series kernel or newer XFree86. Neither it's difficult to change the
kernel on the rescue floppy if the provided kernel does not support
hardware. If, Samba, for example, is not new enough, it's not
difficult to fetch the sources and compile it.
Have you ever actually tried to do this?
Yes, I've installed Slink on an exotic AST server hardware. 2.0 didn't
work. There was nothing that was hard to fix.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -w -- # Ari Makela, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.iki.fi/hauva/
use strict;my $s='I am just a poor bear with a startling lack of brain.';my $t=
crypt($s,substr($s,0,2));$t=~y#IEK65c4qx AR#J o srtahuet#;$t=~s/hot/not/;my
@v=split(//,$t);push(@v,split(//,reverse('rekcah lreP')));foreach(@v){print;}
quota bug
I just noticed that the quota package (that I did maintain earlier) has a release critical bug. In fact it is only a typo. The quota maintainer seems to be unreachable. Is it okay, if I adopt the package for the time being or at least do a NMU? Michael -- Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers! Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 Erkelenz| Go Rhein Fire! Tel.: (+49) 2431/72651 | Use Debian GNU/Linux! Email: Michael@Fam-Meskes.De | Use PostgreSQL!
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Ari Makela wrote: Yes, I've installed Slink on an exotic AST server hardware. 2.0 didn't work. There was nothing that was hard to fix. You're a better man than I. -- see shy jo
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:02:04AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote: I really don't like unstable either, but I've pretty much abandoned the stable tree as too behind the times back when slink was nearing freeze. Here's a serious question for you: which parts are too old on slink to perform the functions you need? Seriously? I only just upgraded two of my slink boxes to potato on the weekend, and it turns out that I didn't even need to. A friend of mine still has a hamm box; before that it was a rexx box. Works fine, no need to upgrade. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp-gpg keys, uploaded package not dinstalled?
Hi, Until recently I only had a PGP key, and as suggested by /usr/share/doc/debian-keyring/README.gz, I've now generated a GPG one, signed it with my PGP key, and submitted it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] A couple of hours later I uploaded a package (fakeroot_0.4.4-5) signed with my new GPG keys. That was all march 10, nearly 4 days ago, and fakeroot still isn't dinstalled. As the package I uploaded only had 'Distribution: unstable' in it, I would have expected it to go faster. Is there anything else I need to do? (Sign for the time being with my pgp key, wait longer, or send bribes to keyring-maint?) (I haven't had a responce from my message to keyring-maint). Thanks, joostje
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 09:08:43AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: Woody should be running 2.3 or pre-2.4. That should have been among the first things to change. We are knee deep in a release cycle. We should not be expending our resources on woody right now. speak for yourself. not everyone in debian has your priorities. more to the point, your priorities are not the only valid ones. many people can (and ARE!) contribute a lot to woody, without impacting on frozen in the slightest. We should be making potato the best that it can be. Every release cycle, peoples obsession with this new thing or that latest beta is what makes the cycle so drawn out. With all of our resources we should be able to wipe out every RC bug within a day (or atleast close to all of them). The faster we get potato out the door, the sooner we can start on those nifty new things to put into woody. then fork the stable release so that those who want to focus on it exclusively can do so without being distracted by those attracted by the shiny new toys...and those who want to work on new stuff don't have to be distracted by the test freezing cycle. and some people will happily work on both. you can't force everyone to work on frozen, trying to do so is not only highly undesirable it would be completely broken and counter-productive. volunteers work on what they want, when they want, and they contribute according to their abilities and their availabile time - many have nothing that they can contribute to stable or frozen, so they work on unstable. that is good, that is as it should be. debian's release cycle persists in being so slow because people persist in seeing debian's release in the same terms as a commercial operating system. the only viable way to speed that up is to implement the package pool idea, coupled with reasonably frequent snapshot releases and less frequent but fully-tested stable releases. craig -- craig sanders
Re: (Re)build a Debian package
SOETE Joël wrote: Dear all, I run Debian 2.1r4 on a PC with an amd486 120 MHz and 16Mb of ram. I also recompile last release of Ckermit. To manage installed software, I would like make a package with this soft. I found also package sources (.dsc, orig.tar.gz and diff.gz files) of a previous release (It is always easiest to learn new material with a good example) and put it in /mydir. In this directory I do: dpkg-source ckermitdsc and work fine by creating the directory /mydir/ckermit-193. In this last directory I try to launch dpkg --build ... which failled dpkg --build creates a .deb out of a given tree. You need to compile the package and packge it afterwards: ./debian/rules build (as user) ./debian/rules binary (as root) Regards, Joey -- No question is too silly to ask, but, of course, some are too silly to answer. -- Perl book Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 08:17:00PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: But slink is practically completely adjusted for 2.2 already. Sure, if you ignore the 12 packages that break (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/running-kernel-2.2) I believe 12 out of ~2250 counts as practically completely. -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
RE: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
From: Hamish Moffatt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:02:04AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote: I really don't like unstable either, but I've pretty much abandoned the stable tree as too behind the times back when slink was nearing freeze. Here's a serious question for you: which parts are too old on slink to perform the functions you need? Seriously? Sorry to intrude, but in my case: 1. Kernel 2.0 (need 2.2 for NTFS support) 2. X (for Matrox G400) 3. DHCPCD (don't know why, but the old version didn't work) 4. I'd like a later version of Perl (5.004 is very old) 5. fvwm (stable only has beta version 2, current is 2.2) 6. gnome (stable version is old seems buggy, unstable has 1.0) That's quite a long list. And it's fairly central stuff. It has a lot of dependencies and downloading over modem (not on a free line) is fairly painful. I'm running on a personal workstation, not a server, so unstable versions are fine. But huge downloads aren't. Sure, I'm not the only type of user, but I suggest that I am typical of a fairly large group of people who would like Debian. Paul
Re: man tr segfault
Fabrizio Polacco wrote: snipped bash-2.04$ man tr Reformatting tr(1), please wait... groff: troff: Segmentation fault ||/ Name Version +++-=-== ii groff 1.15-3.ja.2 groff_1.15-3.ja.3 in Incoming fixes it. Try it. works like a charm :-) ajit -- Ajit Krishnan ajit@(julian|engga).uwo.ca http://publish.uwo.ca/~akrishna gpg key 794AE458 pgpN1gztbXFGe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:44:09AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Not having released for nearly 18 months [...] Which eighteen months do you refer to here? -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
Re: quota bug
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:29:23AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote: I just noticed that the quota package (that I did maintain earlier) has a release critical bug. In fact it is only a typo. The quota maintainer seems to be unreachable. Is it okay, if I adopt the package for the time being or at least do a NMU? Do the NMU. I didn't have any luck reaching the maintainer when I did an NMU for it. If you want the package, consider adopting it in the long term--but fix the bug first. :) -- Mike Stone pgpTHsFuztoo2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: pgp-gpg keys, uploaded package not dinstalled?
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:55:31AM +0200, joost witteveen wrote: That was all march 10, nearly 4 days ago, and fakeroot still isn't dinstalled. Was it rejected, or is it just stuck? If it was rejected, you have to reupload, if it is stuck, then ssh to master, go into incoming directory, and run ~maor/dinstall/dinstall -n fakeroot_whatever.changes That should provide an explanation. Is there anything else I need to do? (Sign for the time being with my pgp key, wait longer, or send bribes to keyring-maint?) (I haven't had a responce from my message to keyring-maint). You could try pestering James to include it sooner... but that might have a counter-effect ;) -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Tuesday 14 March 2000, at 12 h 38, the keyboard of Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Depends on the functions one needs. But i'd like to generalize a bit: the included *apps* are far too old. Stuff like teTeX, Since the teTeX in slink works fine and the one is potato is broken (a bug in babel which prevents compilation of *every* document in French), I prefer the old stuff. majority of Linux users are using it for their desktop needs (like i mainly do) and for those running current versions definitely makes sense. It all depends on the particular users perspective though which might largely differ from a Debian *developer* mindset. Blah. When I'm working on my desktop, I want as much stability than on my servers. I do not prefer a crash in Emacs which will loose texts than one in Apache which will stop the Web server. Debian. Pure Linux users are therefore probably better off with one of those .rpm based distributions, which seem to pay pay more attention to average user's needs. Yes, the users do not need stability, reliability, etc. They love RedHat 5.0 or 6.0.
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:44:09AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Another point is that to an extent. being outmoded means that fewer people use Debian; and, that implies that Debian no longer meets their goals. Not having released for nearly 18 months (that's 3 generations in internet time), we have fastr become a distribution that does not meet the needs of a vast number of people. I believe slink was released Mar 9, so we are just over a year, not 18 months (so we are only 2 generations behind ;) -- Brian Almeida Debian Developer | http://www.debian.org Linux Systems Engineer @ Winstar | http://www.winstar.com
RE: (Re)build a Debian package
Thanks a lot. Joel -Original Message- From: Martin Schulze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 12:03 PM To: SOETE Joël Cc: Debian Development Subject: Re: (Re)build a Debian package SOETE Joël wrote: Dear all, I run Debian 2.1r4 on a PC with an amd486 120 MHz and 16Mb of ram. I also recompile last release of Ckermit. To manage installed software, I would like make a package with this soft. I found also package sources (.dsc, orig.tar.gz and diff.gz files) of a previous release (It is always easiest to learn new material with a good example) and put it in /mydir. In this directory I do: dpkg-source ckermitdsc and work fine by creating the directory /mydir/ckermit-193. In this last directory I try to launch dpkg --build ... which failled dpkg --build creates a .deb out of a given tree. You need to compile the package and packge it afterwards: ./debian/rules build (as user) ./debian/rules binary (as root) Regards, Joey -- No question is too silly to ask, but, of course, some are too silly to answer. -- Perl book Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
release cycle flame war
Once again I am reading about the infamous debian release cycle. I agree that having a stable distro is important, but so is having up to date support for critical items. For most of the packages in Debian, not having the latest version is not a big deal as these packages are so mature that grabing the source for the next version and installing it yourself won't break anything else. HOWEVER a fair number of packages MUST be CAREFULLY intergrated into the distribution or they WILL be broken, or break something else. Going between MAJOR kernel versions (2.2.x 2.3/4.x), XFree86_3.3 - XFree86_4.0, etc WILL break many things and is something the casual linux user will NOT want to try to do him/her self. When major libs change (glibc2.0 - 2.1) almost EVERYTHING COULD break. Changes of this order very well might require a complete distro upgrade, better to do such lib changes at release time, even if debian lags behind the power curve as a result. Can debian do better? Maybe. Could it be possible to create an upgrade task package that would upgrade ALL the necessary packages, scripts, etc needed to go from one kernel major version to the next WITHOUT a complete distro release? How about the same for Xfree86?. If these major components can change without breaking too many packages (requiring upgrades of the broken packages, probably mostly those in admin) then maybe these system upgrade tasks would allow Debian users to keep current without waiting for the next distro release. PS. I am currently running Potato on one computer and have had only very minor problems (mostly with package depandancies being broken briefly while new verisons were being uploaded. The developers have quickly fixed these problems on the download site.) You are progressing nicely though the freeze I think. = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: realplayer installer and frozen
Calm down man. The men in the white coats will be here soon. Branden Robinson wrote: On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 05:47:41PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: The realplayer installer package in potato is broken and useless because Real has, in their infinite wisdom, removed version 6.x of the program from their download sites now that they have a beta of 7.0. (Bug #60323.) So the installer can't install anything. The package either needs to be pulled from potato, or the new package in woody that can handle realplayer 7.0 needs to be substituted in its place. The changes to the actual debian package were minor; the changes between real 6.x and 7.0 are anyone's guess and who knows what has broken. So, Dark, what should I do? Let's boycott the fuckers! Drop the package and swear to never support Real until they discard their patents and free their software! G! P! L! G! P! L! CHAGE! -- G. Branden Robinson|I just wanted to see what it looked like Debian GNU/Linux |in a spotlight. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Jim Morrison roger.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:01:15PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 09:08:43AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: Woody should be running 2.3 or pre-2.4. That should have been among the first things to change. We are knee deep in a release cycle. We should not be expending our resources on woody right now. speak for yourself. not everyone in debian has your priorities. more to the point, your priorities are not the only valid ones. many people can (and ARE!) contribute a lot to woody, without impacting on frozen in the slightest. Direct impact yes, indirectly though, we are short on needed resources for getting potato release ready. We should be making potato the best that it can be. Every release cycle, peoples obsession with this new thing or that latest beta is what makes the cycle so drawn out. With all of our resources we should be able to wipe out every RC bug within a day (or atleast close to all of them). The faster we get potato out the door, the sooner we can start on those nifty new things to put into woody. then fork the stable release so that those who want to focus on it exclusively can do so without being distracted by those attracted by the shiny new toys...and those who want to work on new stuff don't have to be distracted by the test freezing cycle. and some people will happily work on both. Sorry that getting the next stable release out the door is such a distraction. I'll try to see if there is some way we can keep this messy part of Debian out of your way. you can't force everyone to work on frozen, trying to do so is not only highly undesirable it would be completely broken and counter-productive. volunteers work on what they want, when they want, and they contribute according to their abilities and their availabile time - many have nothing that they can contribute to stable or frozen, so they work on unstable. that is good, that is as it should be. I don't recall saying anything about forcing. Maybe you mistook encourage for force. I don't know, maybe those two words are too similar for you for some reason. Not my issue though, I still think we need to encourage people to work on frozen until it's completely out the door. debian's release cycle persists in being so slow because people persist in seeing debian's release in the same terms as a commercial operating system. the only viable way to speed that up is to implement the package pool idea, coupled with reasonably frequent snapshot releases and less frequent but fully-tested stable releases. Package pools are not an end all and frequent snapshots and less frequent stable releases are only doable when we have people working on it. Since you think that encouraging people to work on it is not ok, then I don't see how we can have the resources to do this. The only people who see Debian release cycles as commercial are the ones outside of Debian who think we need to compete and market. I don't see how that directly affects the release cycle itself. Any way, package pools wont come till after potato, since it is (and should be) still the first priority right now. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: unmets in potato
libglide2-v3 (libs) depends on device3dfx-module device3dfx-module does not appear to be available That's Bug #57702, but it's not release critical, although it makes the package uninstallable! Package: libglide2-v3 Depends: libc6 (= 2.1.2), xlib6g (= 3.3.6), device3dfx-module Recommends: glide2-base, device3dfx-source compile devicd3dfx-source and you are done :) see also jeff licquia's comment on 57702 -- CU, / Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen, Germany Martin Waitz// [Tali on IRCnet] [tali.home.pages.de] _ __/// - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - /// dies ist eine manuell generierte mail, sie beinhaltet// tippfehler und ist auch ohne grossbuchstaben gueltig. / pgp5a76IGOKQ1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: important bug - war (openldapd #57469)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 04:13:52PM +1100, Brian May wrote: Ben == Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ben Next time please email me with correct version numbers and Ben explain things a little better, other than just it still Ben doesn't work. I've never been able to reproduce this, on any Ben of the 4 machines that I am running the server on. I am not sure why this was not clear (from BTS): [...] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: this bug is NOT fixed :-( [...] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: openldapd Version: 1:1.2.8-7 [...] Right, and the latest version is 1.2.9-3. where you said the problem had been fixed in this version (although it is old now). Perhaps this message never reached you, it might have been delayed/lost in the BTS. In future, I will assume that the maintainer never got my mail if I don't get any response, and send another copy. Or, perhaps I should have put openldapd somewhere on the subject line? I guess my subject line could have been better. Ben Sorry that you had to resort to this, it will be fixed soon Ben enough. Thanks. Yeah, subject line is everything when you sift through ~500 emails a day. Thanks for bringing it to my attention however. I do want things to work properly in potato. -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:02:04AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote: I really don't like unstable either, but I've pretty much abandoned the stable tree as too behind the times back when slink was nearing freeze. Here's a serious question for you: which parts are too old on slink to perform the functions you need? Seriously? I only just upgraded two of my slink boxes to potato on the weekend, and it turns out that I didn't even need to. A friend of mine still has a hamm box; before that it was a rexx box. Works fine, no need to upgrade. May a third party add something? In my case there are TWO things that make hamm/slink somewhat out of date. I would like the 2.2 kernel for a firewall system so as to use ipchains. I also think I need the glibc2.1 lib for some third party apps ([EMAIL PROTECTED] for one). Otherwise, everything does work fine. Hamish -- = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
ITP: icradius
Source: icradius Section: net Priority: extra Maintainer: Piotr Roszatycki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Standards-Version: 3.0.1 Upstream-Source: URL:ftp://ftp.cheapnet.net/pub/icradius/ Description: RADIUS daemon with PAM and MySQL support Copyright: GPL Package: icradius Architecture: any Provides: radiusd Conflicts: radiusd Description: RADIUS daemon with PAM and MySQL support Short overview: * MySQL support * PAM support * Supports access based on huntgroups * Multiple DEFAULT entries in users file * All users file entries can optionally fall through * Caches all config files in-memory * Keeps a list of logged in users (radutmp file) * radwho program can be installed as fingerd * Logs both UNIX wtmp file format and RADIUS detail logfiles * Supports Simultaneous-Use = X parameter. Yes, this means that you can now prevent double logins! -- Piotr Dexter Roszatycki GCM d- s-:- a-- C++ UL$ P+++ L+++$ E W- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] N++ o? K? w-- O-- M- V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP++ t-- 5-- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]X+ R tv-(--) b+ DI-- D++ G e h! r-- !y+
Bug#58174
This bug is listed as important bug against metamail. I do wonder though if it is important enough to warrant a removal. This bug has been reported against mime-support originally. Since no bug in mime-support was found it was re-assigned to metamail. The bug log says: I've looked at the mailcap file and can't find any reason there why there would be a problem. My guess is that it's metamail, but I don't know why. So this does not exactly mean that there is an important bug in metamail. And then there's the following report: I wasn't able to reproduce this bug. Both the slink and potato versions of mime-support and metamail worked fine: ... I don't think bugs like this should slow down our release cycle at all. IMO this bug should be downgraded to normal. Comments anyone? Michael -- Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers! Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 Erkelenz| Go Rhein Fire! Tel.: (+49) 2431/72651 | Use Debian GNU/Linux! Email: Michael@Fam-Meskes.De | Use PostgreSQL!
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
*Ari Makela wrote: Joey Hess writes: Ari Makela wrote: series kernel or newer XFree86. Neither it's difficult to change the kernel on the rescue floppy if the provided kernel does not support hardware. If, Samba, for example, is not new enough, it's not difficult to fetch the sources and compile it. Have you ever actually tried to do this? Yes, I've installed Slink on an exotic AST server hardware. 2.0 didn't work. There was nothing that was hard to fix. Maybe you find it easy. But you are relatively elite in debian knowledge. I got a notebook two months ago. The video, sound, and pcmcia are not supported by slink. I installed a minimum slink and then used another debian system to burn enough packages to upgrade on a CD (made an archive with apt-zip, I think) Then I got the pcmcia working by building a new kernel and pcmcia sources, then upgraded over my fast net connection. Maybe people who can't do that are lazy and stupid and don't deserve Debian. Maybe Linus was right. People can't ship stable Debian on new machines, but they can ship RH and SuSE. (I don't want to attack with the sarcasm, just to make a strong point). btw. I like the idea of releasing something like a semi-stable which differs mostly in that it supports new hardware. Maybe we can argue about whether the latest apache should be shipped. But I can't see how you can argue that our only stable product should not be able to run on most new machines. -- John Lapeyre [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson,AZ http://www.physics.arizona.edu/~lapeyre
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
Ari Makela ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Filip Van Raemdonck writes: And if they have this new hardware, does it mean they should not be able to run Debian then? If that's the case, better start rewriting some documentation... What I ment was that it's quite easy to upgrade Slink to use 2.2 series kernel or newer XFree86. Neither it's difficult to change the kernel on the rescue floppy if the provided kernel does not support hardware. If, Samba, for example, is not new enough, it's not difficult to fetch the sources and compile it. Somehow, I fail to notice a major problem here. you obviously don't manage a large group of servers. one of the reasons a lot of people run linux these days is because you can build huge server farms without paying huge license fees. people like debian because it is so easy to manage. compiling the new samba because it offers functionality and stability you just can't get out of stock is neccicary. the same is true for debian's php, snmp, apache, and mysql packages. i imagine those are some of the most commonly installed packages today, and i had to build them for a dozen machines because stable was too far behind. -- (jacob kuntz)[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED],underworld}.net (megabite systems) think free speech, not free beer.
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:02:04AM -0500, Mark Mealman wrote: I really don't like unstable either, but I've pretty much abandoned the stable tree as too behind the times back when slink was nearing freeze. Here's a serious question for you: which parts are too old on slink to perform the functions you need? Seriously? Well off the top of my head I need the 2.2 series kernel for Compaq Smartraid controller support. But it's as much principle as anything else. When apache 1.3.11 is on the streets, there's little excuse to be running 1.3.1 on a production server. 95% of the security notices I see are on versions of software far older than anything in the unstable tree. I only just upgraded two of my slink boxes to potato on the weekend, and it turns out that I didn't even need to. A friend of mine still has a hamm box; before that it was a rexx box. Works fine, no need to upgrade. It's great that your friend can run systems on software that's 2 years old. Most of us are required to be state of the art on production systems. I'm not alone in my displeasure of these long release cycles. I've been running unstable on production web servers for over a year and a half now. And quite frankly stable is useless on workstations. xmms, gnome, kde, netscape, window managers are changing on a monthly, sometimes weekly basis. New software is hitting the net at rapid speed and being added into the Debian unstable archives in a timely manner, but because a user is pointed at stable he or she simply doesn't have access to it. Debian unstable is on par, stability-wise, with most major Linux distrubutions. We could outright kill the need for a stable Debian if we had a way to ensure that critical packages didn't break and there was someway to roll back to an older package version should the new one be junk. Or we could create a development branch of Debian that filters packages into unstable after the packages have been cleared of containing any box-stopping bugs. I think if you did a poll you'd find most Debian users run unstable on workstations despite warnings of This can trash your system at any time. That tells me there is a need to go beyond a totally stable / totally unstable development mindset. -Mark
Becoming a developer
Has the process for admiting new debian developers gone on line yet? There is a ham radio program that I would like to see as a debian package. As I am not currently a developer, pehaps someone else might like to look into packaging this. Otherwise, I will do it, if I can run your ganlet and join your ranks. The program is QSSTV (the ONLY slow scan TV program that I know of that works on Linux.) As the name implies, it is based on QT. It now (version 3.0m) works with both qt1.44 and 2.0.2. It is also GPL'ed. Hope it can go in main, or at least contrib. The URL is http://ourworld.compuserve/homepages/on1mh/qsstv = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Re: Becoming a developer
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:08:34AM -0800, Kenneth Scharf wrote: Has the process for admiting new debian developers gone on line yet? There is a ham radio program that I would like to see as a debian package. As I am not currently a developer, pehaps someone else might like to look into packaging this. Otherwise, I will do it, if I can run your ganlet and join your ranks. The program is QSSTV (the ONLY slow scan TV program that I know of that works on Linux.) As the name implies, it is based on QT. It now (version 3.0m) works with both qt1.44 and 2.0.2. It is also GPL'ed. Hope it can go in main, or at least contrib. The URL is http://ourworld.compuserve/homepages/on1mh/qsstv As most people will note, you don't have to become a developer to package things. You can attempt to find a sponsor that will validate and upload your packages for you. I suggest emailing debian-mentor to see if any other HAM people would be willing to take you under their wing. -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Becoming a developer
Kenneth Scharf wrote: The program is QSSTV (the ONLY slow scan TV program that I know of that works on Linux.) As the name implies, it is based on QT. It now (version 3.0m) works with both qt1.44 and 2.0.2. It is also GPL'ed. Hope it can go in main, or at least contrib. The URL is http://ourworld.compuserve/homepages/on1mh/qsstv No, it is QPLed, not GPLed. This is important because if it was GPLed it wouldn't be distributable. From qsstv.cpp: As this program is based on the Qt Free Edition, it is released under Q Public Licence. Read this licence carefully before using, distributing or modifying this program. Included with this distribution is the QPL licence, a copy is also available at www.troll.no -- Brian Kimball
Re: Becoming a developer
From what I read on this subject, I thought that most of the flame war was on KDE, and that it might be possible to include KDE IF, they made certain specific releases in their license. Since I thought that RMS had appoved the newer QT license as a free license (does KDE yet use Qt2, which is the new QT license?), that this problem was going away. I admit I am NOT a legal expect on this kind of stuff. Is there a way to search the archives on debian-legal for QT? Maybe some of my questions will have answers there (If one can wade through the flames). Is there a way (via license modification disclaimers) that a program written using QT can be GPL'ed at all? Finally I note that debian DOES have the QTLib in the distro, will this remain (allowing users to at least use such programs via source)? I don't know if I would attempt to re-write QSSTV to replace the QT calls with GTK calls, but that would be a last ditch idea. Wonder if a tool kit for doing such an insane thing exists? Anyway I didn't intend to prase or bury the QT, only to get a new ham radio application into debian, somehow. --- Alisdair McDiarmid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:08:34AM -0800, Kenneth Scharf wrote: The program is QSSTV (the ONLY slow scan TV program that I know of that works on Linux.) As the name implies, it is based on QT. It now (version 3.0m) works with both qt1.44 and 2.0.2. It is also GPL'ed. Hope it can go in main, or at least contrib. I'm sure you'll get a lot of mail about this, but it won't go into Debian at all. The GPL is incompatible with the QPL, therefore distributing QSSTV is technically illegal. See the archives of debian-legal and debian-devel for much flameage on this issue. Regards, -- Alisdair McDiarmid [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ http://wasters.org/] = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
re:becoming a developer
To everyone that replied to my previous email. It appears that QSSTV is licensed under the QT public license. It is not clear if this is the older or newer version of the QT license. However, there would be no GPL infection here! I have emailed the author to get more details. The license info was buried in one of the main source files, not a separate text file as the the more customary. And yeah, I know I am running off half cocked on this, forgive my over zealousness. I should read a little more before I hit return :- = Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
X Packages?
Greetings all. I am in the process of engeneering a tryout of XFree 4 and I need to know this to continue. What packages come directly from the XFree86 sources. I know the basics (xserver-*, xfree86-common), but does anyone have a complete list? TIA, Scott Fenton
cvs-makerepos
The configuration script for cvs_1.10.7-6 mentions that you can create a repository with standard permissions using cvs-makerepos. Is that a program or an option to cvs or ...? I couldn't find anything like that.
Re: X Packages?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (SCOTT FENTON) wrote: Greetings all. I am in the process of engeneering a tryout of XFree 4 and I need to know this to continue. What packages come directly from the XFree86 sources. I know the basics (xserver-*, xfree86-common), but does anyone have a complete list? Install the grep-dctrl package and use something like: grep-available -FSource -nsPackage xfree86 | sort -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Becoming a developer
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:23:58PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: There is a ham radio program that I would like to see as a debian package. As I am not currently a developer, pehaps someone else might like to look into packaging this. Otherwise, I will do it, if I can run your ganlet and join your ranks. As most people will note, you don't have to become a developer to package things. You can attempt to find a sponsor that will validate and upload your packages for you. I suggest emailing debian-mentor to see if any ~~ The address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] just to make sure nobody sends mails to void :) other HAM people would be willing to take you under their wing. -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
Re: Becoming a developer
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:31:58AM -0800, Kenneth Scharf wrote: (does KDE yet use Qt2, which is the new QT license?), No, it doesn't in 1.x. KDE 2.x will be linked against QT2. Is there a way to search the archives on debian-legal for QT? Maybe some of my questions will have answers I think there is a search function for the mailling list archive on va.debian.org, isn't there? there (If one can wade through the flames). Is there a way (via license modification disclaimers) that a program written using QT can be GPL'ed at all? Yes, there is. Look at apt. It's GPL, but other programs using QT (like the Corel(R) Package Manager) may be linked against it. You've to include a paragraph that says that this is allowed. Finally I note that debian DOES have the QTLib in the distro, will this remain (allowing users to at least use such programs via source)? Why not? If I understood it right, KDE isn't included because of an invalid license (GPL-programs linked against QT). QT has a valid license. There are a lot of other non-free packages in Debian, too. For which reason should qt not be included? Greetings, Roland -- Roland Bauerschmidt -- Freiberger Str. 17, 28215 Bremen, Germany e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], phone: +49 421 3763482, fax: +49 421 3763483 Debian GNU / Linux -- the choice of a GNU generation
Re: aptitude
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 02:23:12PM +0900, Julian Stoev wrote: I personally don't like the Stormpkg thing. Maybe I am broken by dselect ;) I included slink ftp in apt and got many nice programs, which are not part of Stormix using dselect. No problem at all. But Stormpkg may be better for somebody who starts now with Linux? I didn't work much with the Storm Package Frontend, but it seemed to me as if it was very very close to dselect, only graphically. I think it's nice for new users. I think Stormix distribution should be applaused very much! This is very good way to promote Debian to the public. I think so, too. The people are really friendly and want their distribution to be as much compatible to official Debian as possible. At CeBIT fair in Germany, they gave half of their booth to us. the main Debian page. Maybe for first time Linux users this *is* a better way to install Debian?... And why not help them to get working install CD Definitely. The installation program is not that powerful, but it's very comfortable and easy to use for beginners. The current boot disks are good for experienced users, but most Linux beginners will go away and install another distribution because all of the main other distributions have nice easy-to-use graphical installation now. Greetings, Roland -- Roland Bauerschmidt -- Freiberger Str. 17, 28215 Bremen, Germany e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], phone: +49 421 3763482, fax: +49 421 3763483 Debian GNU / Linux -- the choice of a GNU generation
TeTeX bugs
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:11:03PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: Since the teTeX in slink works fine and the one is potato is broken (a bug in babel which prevents compilation of *every* document in French), I prefer the old stuff. Surely that should be an important bug (#42698)? In fact, browsing the bugs against tetex-base, several of them seem important, including at least one security bug (#57746, same as #32652). Should I upgrade them? Unfortunately, the security bug seems non-trivial to fix. --Dylan Thurston
Re: X Packages?
Thanks. One more question (sorry!). Is there a way to do the equivilent of dpkg -L on an uninstalled package? Colin Watson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (SCOTT FENTON) wrote: Greetings all. I am in the process of engeneering a tryout of XFree 4 and I need to know this to continue. What packages come directly from the XFree86 sources. I know the basics (xserver-*, xfree86-common), but does anyone have a complete list? Install the grep-dctrl package and use something like: grep-available -FSource -nsPackage xfree86 | sort -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: X Packages?
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 04:01:51PM -0500, SCOTT FENTON wrote: Thanks. One more question (sorry!). Is there a way to do the equivilent of dpkg -L on an uninstalled package? dpkg -c packagename.deb Yes, it is documented in dpkg(8) :P -mj -- Michael-John Turner | http://www.edr.uct.ac.za/~mj/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]| Open Source in WC ZA - http://www.clug.org.za/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG/PGP key via mail, WWW or finger @phantom
Re: unmets in potato
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 03:16:56PM +0100, Martin Waitz wrote: compile devicd3dfx-source and you are done :) Am I the only one where make-kpkg modules-image fails on devicd3dfx? I have to do it manually! But maybe that's related to my non debian 2.2.14 Kernel??? Thanks, Matthias -- +-created at Tue Mar 14 22:33:14 CET 2000-+ |Matthias Berse Phone:+49-2323-42397 | \Bachstr.28 44625 Herne, GermanyeMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ The heart is not a logical organ. -- Dr. Janet Wallace, The Deadly Years, stardate 3479.4
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 09:02:50AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:01:15PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 09:08:43AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: We are knee deep in a release cycle. We should not be expending our resources on woody right now. speak for yourself. not everyone in debian has your priorities. more to the point, your priorities are not the only valid ones. many people can (and ARE!) contribute a lot to woody, without impacting on frozen in the slightest. Direct impact yes, indirectly though, we are short on needed resources for getting potato release ready. you miss two important points. the first is that the release is not everyone's highest priority. the second is that some people have nothing to contribute to frozen/stable, so discouraging (or preventing) them from working on unstable is counterproductive. both of these points are proved by the fact that we have over 500 developers yet, according to your own words, we are short on needed resources for getting potato release ready. if everyone, or the majority...or even a substantial minority, had your priorities then that would not be the case. in any case, simply adding more people to the project won't make it happen any faster. what WILL make it faster is to fork off the stable release as a sub-project of debian, and give the release team absolute authority over the release, with the right to make NMUs of any package and make any other changes for any reason they see fit. as with any other debian initiative, any developer (or user) would be free to work on it or not as they please. also, the issue is not man-power, the issue is man-hours - i.e. how much time any of the people doing the important jobs can devote to debian. most of them have full-time jobs or are full-time students and are working on debian in their spare time. the really imporant tasks can't be sped up by some kind of time-sharing arrangement. then fork the stable release so that those who want to focus on it exclusively can do so without being distracted by those attracted by the shiny new toys...and those who want to work on new stuff don't have to be distracted by the test freezing cycle. and some people will happily work on both. Sorry that getting the next stable release out the door is such a distraction. I'll try to see if there is some way we can keep this messy part of Debian out of your way. it doesn't distract me at all. i mostly ignore it these days as it is of little or no relevance to me. like many others, i am perfectly happy with the real debian (i.e. the live development version aka unstable) as it has served my needs extremely well on production servers and workstations for 5+ years. in other words, empirical evidence over the years has shown that the distinction between stable and unstable is not only irrelevant, it is an arbitrary falsehood. this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. the main reason they were still running stable is because they didn't have fast, reliable internet connections - i.e. if regular snapshot CDs were available, they would have been up to date. i would like to see the real debian become more accessible to the general public, and the way to do that is to make frequent snapshot CD images. I don't recall saying anything about forcing. Maybe you mistook encourage for force. no, i didn't. i simply put your current remarks in context with other statements of yours in the past, where you have been an advocate of the insane idea that unstable should be closed down between the freeze and the release. Not my issue though, I still think we need to encourage people to work on frozen until it's completely out the door. fine, keep on with the encouragements. just keep the shoulds and should nots in check. they are shrill and irritating. Package pools are not an end all and frequent snapshots and less frequent stable releases are only doable when we have people working on it. one person can do a snapshot release in a day or so - that's the point...it's an untested snapshot of unstable as it is at that moment in time. use at your own risk, just like unstableand just like 'stable' - we don't after all, offer any guarantee for stable. there's no need to even make new base/install disks for a snapshot release - the old ones from the previous stable release will be adequate...just install those and then upgrade to the snapshot. the stable releases will, of course, still take time to test and to produce new boot-floppies. however, that time will be reduced because some of the testing will already have been done by people using the snapshots. Since you think that encouraging
Re: unmets in potato
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 10:34:54PM +0100, Matthias Berse wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 03:16:56PM +0100, Martin Waitz wrote: compile devicd3dfx-source and you are done :) Am I the only one where make-kpkg modules-image fails on devicd3dfx? I have to do it manually! But maybe that's related to my non debian 2.2.14 Kernel??? I compiled it fairly recently (maybe 2-3 weeks ago) for a friend's box with a non-debian 2.2.15pre kernel, and had no major issues that I recall, other than for some reason *needing* to 'rm -rf' the modules/device3dfx directory and re-extracting between builds. not sure why it doesn't clean up properly on its own, and I haven't check the BTS to find out if others have noticed it too. Marc
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 08:42:07AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. Uh, which were the packages in question? Did you report it at the time? -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 11:02:20PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 08:42:07AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. Uh, which were the packages in question? Did you report it at the time? no need, the holes were already well known - and fixed in unstable. security is one of the main reasons i run unstable and upgrade regularly...script kiddies may be stupid, but they are capable of running an exploit written by someone else - so you have to keep at least a few months ahead of them. running unstable is not a 100% guarantee of security (nothing is or can be)...however, in practice there is only a few days (at most) window of opportunity between an exploit becoming known and my servers being secured against it. all i have to do is login with ssh and run apt-get to upgrade. craig -- craig sanders
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
Well, it's really sad that you like to dredge up year old context for this thread to suit your mundane arguments, they have little context with what I was saying. resources on woody right now. speak for yourself. not everyone in debian has your priorities. more to the point, your priorities are not the only valid ones. many people can (and ARE!) contribute a lot to woody, without impacting on frozen in the slightest. Direct impact yes, indirectly though, we are short on needed resources for getting potato release ready. you miss two important points. the first is that the release is not everyone's highest priority. the second is that some people have nothing to contribute to frozen/stable, so discouraging (or preventing) them from working on unstable is counterproductive. Once can argue that the reason is because they don't know how they can help. Everyone within Debian has a stake in frozen, simply by being a member, and every can help. There is nothing preventing that. both of these points are proved by the fact that we have over 500 developers yet, according to your own words, we are short on needed resources for getting potato release ready. if everyone, or the majority...or even a substantial minority, had your priorities then that would not be the case. First of all, you need to check your numbers. Last I checked there were ~350 official developers in the keyring. Right, so this proves my point in that we should encourage developers to put a priority on frozen and the next release cycle. And please stop refering to stable. That is not my main concern here, and I never brought it into this conversation. in any case, simply adding more people to the project won't make it happen any faster. what WILL make it faster is to fork off the stable release as a sub-project of debian, and give the release team absolute authority over the release, with the right to make NMUs of any package and make any other changes for any reason they see fit. as with any other debian initiative, any developer (or user) would be free to work on it or not as they please. How would that help? That is simply a superficial thing. Calling it a seperate project would do nothing to improve the situation. Plus that creates havoc with changes made to the frozen release that aren't in unstable. So we get split bug reports and a lot of other crazy things. also, the issue is not man-power, the issue is man-hours - i.e. how much time any of the people doing the important jobs can devote to debian. most of them have full-time jobs or are full-time students and are working on debian in their spare time. the really imporant tasks can't be sped up by some kind of time-sharing arrangement. Ok, let's play word games. Man-hours is a direct result of man-power. Everyone in Debian only has but so many hours than can put into the project, so increasing each developers time in the project is not an option. So we encourage developers to spend their time that they have to projects for the next stable release. then fork the stable release so that those who want to focus on it exclusively can do so without being distracted by those attracted by the shiny new toys...and those who want to work on new stuff don't have to be distracted by the test freezing cycle. and some people will happily work on both. Sorry that getting the next stable release out the door is such a distraction. I'll try to see if there is some way we can keep this messy part of Debian out of your way. it doesn't distract me at all. i mostly ignore it these days as it is of little or no relevance to me. Safe to say, that is a really self-centered attitude. One which I hope that most developers don't have. Not a very team oriented situation if everyone felt that way. like many others, i am perfectly happy with the real debian (i.e. the live development version aka unstable) as it has served my needs extremely well on production servers and workstations for 5+ years. in other words, empirical evidence over the years has shown that the distinction between stable and unstable is not only irrelevant, it is an arbitrary falsehood. this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. the main reason they were still running stable is because they didn't have fast, reliable internet connections - i.e. if regular snapshot CDs were available, they would have been up to date. i would like to see the real debian become more accessible to the general public, and the way to do that is to make frequent snapshot CD images. Another sad situation. Sad because you feel that it is better to forget the harder situations, and simply deal with the
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 11:02:20PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 08:42:07AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. Uh, which were the packages in question? Did you report it at the time? And were they keeping up with packages on security.debian.org meant specifically for the stable release? -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: TeTeX bugs
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Dylan Paul Thurston wrote: On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:11:03PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: Since the teTeX in slink works fine and the one is potato is broken (a bug in babel which prevents compilation of *every* document in French), I prefer the old stuff. Surely that should be an important bug (#42698)? In fact, browsing the bugs against tetex-base, several of them seem important, including at least one security bug (#57746, same as #32652). Should I upgrade them? Unfortunately, the security bug seems non-trivial to fix. Where is this security flaw? There has been no response to the question asked by Christoph Martin on 1 Feb 1999 URL:http://cgi.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?archive=nobug=32652 Denis
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 09:18:00AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: this same empirical evidence has also proved that 'stable' is LESS stable and reliable and secure than 'unstable'. the few debian boxes which i know of that have been compromised were cracked BECAUSE they were still running stable and had older versions of various programs which had known security holes. Uh, which were the packages in question? Did you report it at the time? no need, the holes were already well known - and fixed in unstable. Security fixes have to be (and are) fixed in stable, too! -- enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
Re: The nature of unstable (was: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!)
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 05:27:26PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: it doesn't distract me at all. i mostly ignore it these days as it is of little or no relevance to me. Safe to say, that is a really self-centered attitude. One which I hope that most developers don't have. Not a very team oriented situation if everyone felt that way. OTOH (to play devil's advocate) the stable process seems to continually get bogged down. Slipping deadlines, inappropriate package upgrades, etc., begin to make things seem hopeless. When push comes to shove, things usually get done--but what's the push right now? -- Mike Stone pgpL3uVBScuka.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
John Lapeyre writes:
Maybe you find it easy. But you are relatively elite in debian
knowledge.
I'm not a beginner. I even earn my living as an unix
administrator. But I'm certainly not a unix guru.
I got a notebook two months ago. The video, sound, and pcmcia are
not supported by slink.
Are these really a big problem? During the summer same happened to me and
what I did was following:
I installed Slink. I went to a local xfree86-mirror and got SVGA
xserver version 3.3.5 which supports NM2200 chip. I dropped it in
place of the distributed. Yes, that's a wrong way of doing things but
it has always worked for me. I didn't know about URL:
http://www.debian.org/%7evincent/ at the time (BTW: this is a
problem, people don't know about these unofficial updates).
Sound support for esssolo-1 came when I compiled 2.2-kernel. There
are instructions what needs to be updated on Debian web site.
PCMCIA is not needed for installation and it can be compiled later. It
doesn't have to work at first.
I feel that anyone who tinkers with GNU/Linux - or with any unix or
unix clone - should be able to do above things if documentation is
available. Documentation in one place instead of several web pages
which are hard to find. I've not seen such a document. Is it that I
haven't found it or is it non-existent? If latter is true I could
write some kind raw version if others agree with me on this.
Maybe people who can't do that are lazy and stupid and don't
deserve Debian.
And you say you don't use sarcasm? :)
People can't ship stable Debian on new machines, but they can ship
RH and SuSE.
I agree that many users cannot replace the kernel on the rescue disk
like I did. One needs some knowledge and also a Linux system which
most people don't have. But it's not so hard that it might sound,
either. It's enough that it works on one system, it doesn't have to
result a system where every device works.
I feel Athlon is the most important problem. As far as I remember
this is the only case where it has been impossible to install Debian
on an Intel system if we don't count very exotic hardware.
(I don't want to attack with the sarcasm, just to make a strong point).
It seems that I am not able to write what I think so I try again:
I don't deny that there are problems for some users but in most cases
stable is too old problems can be solved relatively easily. This
could be made easier for inexperienced people if two things would be
done:
- if it would be easier to find the unofficial updates for
xfree and Gnome.
- as simple and short documenation as possible where it is
told how Debian is updated.
If the development cycle were faster there might not be enough time to
test enough. That's what I'm afraid of. The pool system might be a
solution.
--
#!/usr/bin/perl -w -- # Ari Makela, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.iki.fi/hauva/
use strict;my $s='I am just a poor bear with a startling lack of brain.';my $t=
crypt($s,substr($s,0,2));$t=~y#IEK65c4qx AR#J o srtahuet#;$t=~s/hot/not/;my
@v=split(//,$t);push(@v,split(//,reverse('rekcah lreP')));foreach(@v){print;}
Re: TeTeX bugs
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 01:11:03PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Since the teTeX in slink works fine and the one is potato is broken
(a bug in babel which prevents compilation of *every* document in
French), I prefer the old stuff.
I've provided information to close #42698, here it is again
PS: I'm not a Debian developer.
--- tetex-src-1.0.orig/latex/base/ltoutenc.dtx Thu Mar 4 09:51:25 1999
+++ tetex-src-1.0/latex/base/ltoutenc.dtx Wed Mar 15 00:02:29 2000
@@ -800,6 +800,7 @@
%\begin{macrocode}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
\accent#1 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
%\end{macrocode}
% \end{macro}
%
Denis
