Julian Mehnle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [...]
>
>First, I think what Daniel Jacobowitz said is entirely true. Why didn't you
>start with "testing"?
>
>> All he had to do was install an older version of libc6 and every other
>> package would have been hap
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:05:56PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> > What started the chain of events was that a fairly routine minor bug bit the
> > latest libc6 release. He's an experienced sysadmin though and wasn't the
> > least
>
> What (probably; I am gu
网站：http://www.8power.net/index.asp?user=xuefang
现在，加入“百富商务网”会员代理，
无需花费一分钱，（现在免费！），你就可以拥有一个你梦寐以求的网络营销商务网站，网站上所有的资源都是你的，网站上的店主名称、QQ号、E-mail标注的都是你的，真是令人难以置信！！！你可以任意出售网站上的一切，收入都归你，别人不会染指你一分一毛。除此以外，你还可以发展你的下级代理商,让下级帮你去赚钱，你就能获取巨额回报，月收入可高达万元，一点也不假，轻轻松松，做个SOHO赚钱族。
网站：http://www.8power.net\index
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:48:25PM +1100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-11-03 22:52]:
> > but I wouldn't touch Herbert's kernels with a ten-feet pole.
>
> Can you elaborate why?
a) I can do better
b) I don't do huge monolitic patches
c) I don't like
The license is GPL. It's the test program for PaX by Peter Busser.
PaX is a Linux kernel patch which adds much stricter control on how memory
is being used by applications. A normal Linux kernel leaves the control to
the
application and does not implement any enforcement. Especially buffer
o
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:57, Juakin Kanela Loco wrote:
> Hello, I would like to know if Exec-shield has non-executable state on its
> shared library bss/data VMA's. Since you guys are so deep on your
> discussions, you may help me somehow.
Below are the paxtext results for exec-shield on 2.4.22 which
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-11-03 22:52]:
> but I wouldn't touch Herbert's kernels with a ten-feet pole.
Can you elaborate why?
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello, I would like to know if Exec-shield has non-executable state on its shared library bss/data VMA's. Since you guys are so deep on your discussions, you may help me somehow.
Best regards,
Juakin Kanela da Silva Sauro Jr.Yahoo! Mail - o melhor webmail do Brasil. Saiba mais!
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 08:23:42PM +0100, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> I need to upgrade my semi-woody system. I don't want to do a
> dist-upgrade (only upgrade MIT Kerberos V). The 1.3-2 version
> needs comerr-dev (>= 2.0-1.33-2) and I have 2.0-1.27-2.
>
> Jumping to 1.34+1.35-WIP-2003.08.21-3 seem
Investors: Come see Wall Streets only scale-trading system for blue-chip stocks
- MainScale
We DO NOT TOUT INDIVIDUAL STOCKS - This is an automated, stock-trading system
for blue-chips only
www.mainscale4u.com/?032335
MainScale started on October 1, 2002
Here are the results our investors h
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:05:56PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> What started the chain of events was that a fairly routine minor bug bit the
> latest libc6 release. He's an experienced sysadmin though and wasn't the least
What (probably; I am guessing a bit) continued the chain of events:
- no prio
A levelezőm azt hiszi, hogy Daniel Jacobowitz a következőeket írta:
>
> what they get>
>
> No, really. This is what stable and testing releases are for.
I fully agree. But...
When I tell it to my friends, some say that stable is way too
old for them. In these cases I used to think about how t
Erik Steffl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> [...] Lot of new HW has a better chance to be (better) supported on
> newer system (are new kernels available for stable?)
Of particular interest to desktop users is XFree86's video card
drivers.
-Billy
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:22:00PM -0800, Erik Steffl wrote:
> Oh, not this crap again. Or perhaps you're contending that what is
> usefull for you is usefull for everybody.
>
> Hint: there's more to "useful" than old version of software in early
> stages of development. Lot of desktop orien
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 11:39:20PM +0100, Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
> apcupsd was uploaded on 28 of October.
> It has been divided in two packages: the main and the doc.
> The doc is new so it should be added to the override file but
> apcupsd (which suggest but doesn't depend on apcupsd-doc)
Steve Greenland wrote:
On 03-Nov-03, 14:21 (CST), Erik Steffl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oh, not this crap again. Or perhaps you're contending that I've not
gotten anything done at work in the last two years using my "useless"
Debian stable desktop.
Hint: there's more to "useful" than running t
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 12:38:28PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 04:46:37PM +0100, Samuele Giovanni Tonon wrote:
>
> > some weeks ago apcupsd-devel went stable. I tried to contact apcupsd DM
> > but it seems MIA (or am i wrong) .
> >
> > I would like to takeover to apcup
Received Mon 03 Nov 2003 6:07am +1100 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
> ...
> so, with that background, i am absolutely DELIGHTED to note that
> apt has some additional information that it displays: it shows up
> the recommended and suggested packages.
>
> this is INCREDIBLY helpful because by
please note to send ALL REPLY e-mail direct to our Sales Representative at:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Thank you for expressing interest in ATGWS watches.
We would like to take this opportunity to offer you our fine selection of
Italian crafted Rolex Timepieces.
You can view our large selection of
Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry this message go to the poster instead of the list.
>
There have always been some kernel headers in libc6-dev, they've
just been split out into a separate package now. Several of
these headers are referenced by headers provided by glibc
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 04:57:34PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> All I want to do is give up on this new version and go to an earlier version,
> most likely the version I had installed five minutes ago. Downgrading to
> testing would probably require a whole new set of libraries and more work.
I keep
On 03-Nov-03, 14:21 (CST), Erik Steffl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is even worse than unstable>
Oh, not this crap again. Or perhaps you're contending that I've not
gotten anything done at work in the last two years using my "useless"
Debian stable desktop.
Hint: there's more to "useful" than r
"Julian Mehnle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> First, I think what Daniel Jacobowitz said is entirely true. Why didn't you
> start with "testing"?
Sure testing is less likely to trigger this.
But testing isn't infallible either. And it shouldn't be mean Debian shouldn't
have better error handli
Sorry this message go to the poster instead of the list.
> > > There have always been some kernel headers in libc6-dev, they've just
> > > been split out into a separate package now. Several of these headers
> > > are referenced by headers provided by glibc which would break those
> > > headers i
On 03 Nov 2003 15:05:56 -0500, Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What started the chain of events was that a fairly routine minor bug bit the
>latest libc6 release. He's an experienced sysadmin though and wasn't the least
>bit fazed by that. What drove him batty was that it was so hard to reco
On 03 Nov 2003 15:05:56 -0500
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I finally convinced a sysadmin friend of mine that Debian was the way
> and the light.
Great, you are rigth!
[...]
> What started the chain of events was that a fairly routine minor bug
> bit the latest libc6 release. He's an
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:05:56PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
...
What would be really neat would be if aptitude or perhaps even apt checked for
earlier versions of the package in the pool and offered them as options if the
current one fails to configure.
No, really. This
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
First, I think what Daniel Jacobowitz said is entirely true. Why didn't you
start with "testing"?
> All he had to do was install an older version of libc6 and every other
> package would have been happy. All the infrastructure is there to do
> this,
Hi,
The tla-buildpackage system has been accepted into unstable. It is designed
to provide cvs-buildpackage-like features for tla/Arch.
The system comes with these programs:
* tbp-initarchive
Designed to initialize a tla archive and a working directory for use
with tla-buildpackage.
* tbp-
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:05:56PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> All he had to do was install an older version of libc6 and every other package
> would have been happy. All the infrastructure is there to do this, the old
> packages are all on the ftp/http sites, the package may even be sitting in
> a
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:05:56PM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
>
> I finally convinced a sysadmin friend of mine that Debian was the way and the
> light. He started a new job and showed up on his first day to set up his
> machine by installing Debian. In short, things went horribly wrong and he
> sta
* Tiago Assumpção <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [031103 17:48]:
> I won't say here that Red Hat, Inc. would be manipulating information
> to force Debian users to use one of their products, because I would be going
> down, at the same level as Coker.
This should be teached in schoolbooks as paralipsis. And
I finally convinced a sysadmin friend of mine that Debian was the way and the
light. He started a new job and showed up on his first day to set up his
machine by installing Debian. In short, things went horribly wrong and he
started this new job by wasting two days picking up the pieces. He's now
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 07:42:27AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There's another
> exploitable bug in Exec-shield that I've known of for months. Maybe
> you'll find it after you put it into Debian. Maybe not.
Suddenly I don't feel inclined to believe *anything* this guy says.
--
.''`.
Turbo Fredriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Where can I find '= 2.0-1.33-2' (or something around that number)?
> It used to be an 'attic' (morgue I think it is called) on ftp-master.
> This however only have files roughly two months back...
If it was a package then its available at snapshot.d
Jonathan Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 04:03:17PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 09:17:39PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 10:21:14AM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> Since when does the package libc6-dev depend on linux
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:26:42PM -0300, Tiago AssumpÃÃo wrote:
> First of all, maybe the most important, we have the freedom problem here.
> Itïs CLEAR, after analyzing his own words, that our friend Russell Coker
> has a big interest of getting Exec-shield as part of Debian Linux.
> That becomes
On 03-Nov-03, 11:26 (CST), Tiago Assump??o <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First of all, maybe the most important, we have the freedom problem here.
> It?s CLEAR, after analyzing his own words, that our friend Russell Coker
> has a big interest of getting Exec-shield as part of Debian Linux.
> That b
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:18:29PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > I don't know whether this package needs to match the kernel version or
> > > not, but if not I think the name is poorly chosen.
> >
> > It does not need to. Fe
I need to upgrade my semi-woody system. I don't want to do a
dist-upgrade (only upgrade MIT Kerberos V). The 1.3-2 version
needs comerr-dev (>= 2.0-1.33-2) and I have 2.0-1.27-2.
Jumping to 1.34+1.35-WIP-2003.08.21-3 seems to be to big a step...
Where can I find '= 2.0-1.33-2' (or something aroun
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > I don't know whether this package needs to match the kernel version or
> > not, but if not I think the name is poorly chosen.
>
> It does not need to. Feel free to propose a patch to document this
> more clearly (I don't reall
41 matches
Mail list logo
