Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:08:23PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
>
>
>
> > sounds very good.
>
> besides that -j ("junkzip"?) is NON-DESCRIPTIVE at all. -Z or -2 would be
> better... but thats an Upstream Issue I guess.
-Z is for piping through compress, and is (I believe) legacy
compatible to a number of proprietary tars.
-[0-7][lmh] specify drive and density
I'm not sure exactly what that's for, but it does rule out -2. It
kinda sucks when you completely run out of single character
options. %-)
Re: fishing hooks
Pang Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Dear sir or madame: > we are a fishing goods trading company located in China mainland, our > products > include > Banksticks, Rodrests, Boxes, Baskets, Seats, Floats & Float > accessories,etc,if > your want to import these products from China.please feel free to contact us. > > Tel:0086-757-6239656 > Fax:0086-757-6336141 > E-mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > contact person:Pang Li Dear Pang Li, I was wondering what the license is for these fish hooks? Looking through Debian's current package list, I see a few types of fish (including sawfish, starfish, and bluefish), and a few hooks (mostly authentication related), but no fish hooks. Given this, fish hooks sound like a wonderful thing to add to Debian. Which is, of course, why I inquire as to the license. Is it DFSG free, so it can into main, or would fish hooks be forced to be in non-free? Also, what other packages, if any, do fish hooks depend on? I see they are from China, do fish hooks require Chinese fonts and/or a way to input Chinese? If you could please answer these questions, I would be most appreciative. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: "GNU/Linux" vs. "Linux"
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ok folks, why is Debian called "GNU/Linux" instead of simply "Linux"? > Is that documented somewhere? On a web-page, faq, other document? IIRC, Debian was originally funded by the FSF, who wouldn't have it any other way. Leavinger personal opinions aside in the hopes of not starting a flame war, it makes sense especially given that there is now a Debin GNU/Hurd distribution. -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://jakob.kaivo.net/
Re: Turbo Vision non-free? (Was Re: Another packages wishlist)
Damian M Gryski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Turbo Vision is non-free? > >From http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,17285,00.html >(last modified Sept 01/99) > > >Question: > Where can I find the public domain version of Turbo Vision? > >Answer: > It can be found at > ftp.inprise.com/pub/borlandcpp/devsupport/archive/turbovision/ > > >Is Borland's page wrong? You should mail them and get an official >answer. (Isn't a FAQ on their site official enough?) It certainly isn't public domain. From one file (tview.cpp, inside source.zip, inside tv.cpp): /* * Turbo Vision - Version 2.0 * * Copyright (c) 1994 by Borland International * All Rights Reserved. * */ That's about as non-free as you can get. -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://jakob.kaivo.net/
Re: Crazy Idea: debian developer conference
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Joseph Carter wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 09:35:50AM -0700, Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo wrote: > > > > Is this idea worth pursuing? > > > > > > It's a neat idea, and I'd sure like to meet my fellow Debianers, but > > > I doubt you'll get anybody to pay for it. > > > > What about Corel? They're getting a /lot/ from Debian (basing their dist > > on it), and while I'm sure they're contributing back to Debian, sponsoring > > such an event would be a wonderful gesture on their part. > > If it costs quite as much as it sounds like it's going to, it would > probably be unreasonable to ask any one source to sponsor the whole thing. > It might be interesting if they wanted to help sponsor it---and perhaps > send a couple of their linux people to the thing as well.. Yes, perhaps it would be a bit unreasonable to ask Corel to send *every* Debian developer somewhere and pay for room and board, etc., I would think that they would be willing to foot at least part of the bill. -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
Re: Steve Lamb in my killfile.
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Nathan E Norman wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Jonathan Walther wrote: > > : Will someone please notify me when Steve Lamb becomes a reasonable person. > : As of 2 minutes ago, all mail from him is being sent to /dev/null by > : procmail. > > Notification will be on the 11:00 news right after "Hell Freezes Over" I think that happened in 1996 (q.v. The Eagles). > and "Monkeys Fly Out of My Butt". That only occurs in Oz, though. :) -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
Re: FreeBSD-like approach for Debian? [was: Re: Deficiencies in Debian]
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Raul Miller wrote: > > Thursday, September 16, 1999, 10:50:57 AM, Raul wrote: > > > Um.. you're just not lazy enough... > > > # cd /usr/local/bin > > > # ln -s /usr/bin/perl > > On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 11:42:21AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > ln -s `which perl` /usr/local/bin/perl > > You're confusing keystroke time with character count. Hmm cd /ulobln -s /ubperl 28 keystrokes ln -s `which perl` /ulob 28 keystrokes Of course, these assume a fairly clean /, /usr, and /usr/local. Someone may want to double-check my counting. The answer of course, is that the first is better, as you don't have to reach for the backtick. ;) BTW, I know you can also complete the which command, but you first have to type "whic" to get past matching "while", so just typing "h" is simpler. -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
Re: Crazy Idea: debian developer conference
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Steve Greenland wrote: > > Is this idea worth pursuing? > > It's a neat idea, and I'd sure like to meet my fellow Debianers, but > I doubt you'll get anybody to pay for it. What about Corel? They're getting a /lot/ from Debian (basing their dist on it), and while I'm sure they're contributing back to Debian, sponsoring such an event would be a wonderful gesture on their part. -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
Re: ITP: fakedate
On 25 May 1999, Ben Pfaff wrote: > Edward Betts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >[...regarding time-travel library...] > >Or a clever wrapper for shareware style trial packages for linux >that stop working after a certian time. I don't think there are any >yet, but when lin= ux is popular there will be. > > Presumably such shareware authors would be smart enough to statically > link their binaries. Isn't "smart shareware author" an oxymoron? ;) -- Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ndn.net/ "As time goes on, my signature gets shorter and shorter..." - me
Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Alan Cox wrote: > I'd like to propose that for now the FHS is changed to read > > "The mail spool area location is undefined. It is guaranteed that both > /var/mail and /var/spool/mail point to this mail spool area if the system > has a mail spool. The preferred reference name is /var/mail. > > [Rationale: /var/mail is the only name available on some other modern Unix > platforms. /var/spool/mail is the older Linux tradition and needed for > compatibility] > > [Rationale2: The physical location of the mail spool is not relevant to > an application and is administrator policy. It is thus left open.] Sounds a lot like what I said last week. :) And HPA before that. ;) Seriously, I think that this solution is the one that the most people can agree on, as it seems to make everyone happy (except for maybe the ~/Mailbox people, but they should be drawn and quartered ;). +-----+--------+ | Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | NoDomainName Networks |http://www.nodomainname.net | | AtDot E-mail Services | http://www.atdot.org | +-++
Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> > The mail spool MUST be accessible through /var/mail AND /var/spool/mail,
> > and spool files MUST take the form /var/{spool/}mail/$LOGNAME. Either
> > /var/mail or /var/spool/mail, or both, MAY be symbolic links to another
> > directory.
>
> That sounds good to me
And several others, I beleive. Perhaps a vote is in order?
> > It is RECOMMENDED that /var/mail be the actual directory and
> > /var/spool/mail be the symbolic link. At some point use of /var/spool/mail
> > may become deprecated.
>
> Thats policy where it isnt needed
Then it doesn't have to be included. I only put it in to placate all the
"other UNIXen use /var/mail, so /var/spool/mail shouldn't even exist" type
people.
+-----++
| Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| NoDomainName Networks |http://www.nodomainname.net |
| AtDot E-mail Services | http://www.atdot.org |
+-++
Re: Resolutions to comments on LSB-FHS-TS_SPEC_V1.0
This is getting WAY out of hand here. How about this:
The mail spool MUST be accessible through /var/mail AND /var/spool/mail,
and spool files MUST take the form /var/{spool/}mail/$LOGNAME. Either
/var/mail or /var/spool/mail, or both, MAY be symbolic links to another
directory. It is RECOMMENDED that /var/mail be the actual directory and
/var/spool/mail be the symbolic link. At some point use of /var/spool/mail
may become deprecated.
+-++
| Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo| [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| NoDomainName Networks |http://www.nodomainname.net |
| AtDot E-mail Services | http://www.atdot.org |
+-++
