Re: Will there be a i386 version 34 chromium .deb?
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 6:58 AM, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: All I know is there is something missing for _i386 this time That's because there was a build failure: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=chromium-browser That's easy enough to fix, I just haven't gotten around to it yet. Patches are welcome. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CANTw=MNsJ0w4-h1TGTNKek+Qs0A5MsKvTHdGKNJtsVDYt8e=b...@mail.gmail.com
splitting tar files and zero padding
hello, my goal is to eliminate (or split out) the last file from a tar archive, and i'm having trouble understanding the extra bytes added and zero padding that is done to tar files. let me illustrate what i'm doing. first, i'll create some sample files $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file1 count=100 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file2 count=100 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file3 count=100 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file4 count=100 bs=1000 and add them to a tar file $ tar cf test.tar file1 file2 file3 file4 $ tar tf test.tar -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file1 -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file2 -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file3 -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:06 file4 i can now use a hex editor to find that file2 starts at byte 100864 (864 bytes more than file1 originally occupied), so file4 should start at 302592, and if i want to eliminate it, i can use gnu split $ split -b 302592 test.tar $ tar tf xaa -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file1 -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file2 -rw-r--r-- a/a 10 2007-06-12 23:07 file3 which is exactly what i want. the last file is no longer a part of the tar archive. as a check, if i extract these files and diff them with the originals, i see that they are the same, so that is good. my question is, how can i automate this? at first i assumed that all files would have 864 extra bytes, but that isn't true. if i start with 1000 byte files, the extra size is instead 536 bytes $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file1 count=1 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file2 count=1 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file3 count=1 bs=1000 $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=file4 count=1 bs=1000 $ tar cf test.tar file1 file2 file3 file4 to get the first three files, i split at 1536*3 = 4608 $ split -b 4608 test.tar $ tar tvf xaa -rw-r--r-- a/a 1000 2007-06-12 23:42 file1 -rw-r--r-- a/a 1000 2007-06-12 23:42 file2 -rw-r--r-- a/a 1000 2007-06-12 23:42 file3 again, i can extract and diff these files and find that they match. another strange observation is that this file should only be of size 1536*4 = 6144 bytes, but instead it is zero padded to 10240 bytes. $ ls -l test.tar -rw-r--r-- 1 a a 10240 2007-06-12 23:07 test.tar maybe the tar file block size is 10240 and the hence the total size must always be a multiple of that? this is confirmed for the larger file -- the tar file ended up being 409600 bytes, which is a multiple of 10240, even though it only needed to be 100864*4 = 403456 bytes. i don't understand what is going on here with the zero padding. why are there extra zeros padded to the end of the tar file? are they necessary? but the bigger concern is why do 1k files have 536 extra bytes, but 100k files have 864 extra bytes? is there a linear relation? and how can i automate the process of splitting out the last file in the tar archive? i know that this isn't really debian-specific, but any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. thanks. mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
how secure is secure apt?
hello, i just wanted to poll the debian community on whether they think that using secure apt to upgrade/install packages over coffee shop wifi is any more or less secure than doing the same via a home connection over say roadrunner? as i see it, there is an increased chance of a middleman (at the coffee shop hop) masquerading as ftp.debian.org. i guess this brings up a larger question: if there ever is a middleman with the intent of getting malicious software onto my system, is it possible for him to convince my secure apt that his packages are legit? thanks. mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kqemu package
looks like this site has a debian package with qemu+kqemu. however, i'm not sure how trustworthy it is as there is no source package available from the site. http://nki.zie.pg.gda.pl/~verdan/debian/qemu+kqemu/ mike On 4/9/06, Rakotomandimby Mihamina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Would you know any project to make a kqemu Debian package? I know there is already a qemu, I just subscribed to the ML, but how about kqemu? -- A powerfull GroupWare, CMS, CRM, ECM: CPS (Open Source GPL). Opengroupware, SPIP, Plone, PhpBB, JetSpeed... are good: CPS is better. http://www.cps-project.org for downloads documentation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gnome ~/Desktop directory setting
Hello all, Does anyone know how to change the gnome desktop directory location? I would rather use something like ~/.desktop rather than ~/Desktop. I've searched the keys in gconf and can't find one for this setting. Thanks in advance for any help. Mike
Re: gnome ~/Desktop directory setting
my goal is to get rid of that extra directory in my home dir, so that won't really solve the problem. mike On 3/11/06, Laurent CARON [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Gilbert a écrit : Hello all, Does anyone know how to change the gnome desktop directory location? I would rather use something like ~/.desktop rather than ~/Desktop. I've searched the keys in gconf and can't find one for this setting. Thanks in advance for any help. Mike Hi, would making a symlink from ~/.desktop to ~/Desktop make you happy?
Launching apps in a new X display?
Hello all, i am using Debian Sarge and am trying to launch an application in a new X server. if I do $ xinit -- :1 the X server is indeed launched, but the default xterm application does not start. if i look at the terminal that i launched xint from, i see a lot of repeating error messages that say AUDIT: Sun Jun 26 17:19:18 2005: 16651 X: client 1 rejected from local host Xlib: connection to :1.0 refused by server Xlib: No protocol specified is there a security setting that needs to be relaxed to allow client application communication with the new X server on display 1 ? thanks for any help. Mike
