[Jérôme Warnier]
> After the last update of OOo in Sid (aka Unstable), I wonder if it is
> generally considered acceptable to keep obsolete packages in
> experimental (currently, Sid has 2.0.1-2 and Experimental 2.0.1-1).
Hmmm, I thought experimental was garbage-collected automatically in
this ca
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 12:35:45PM +0100, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> After the last update of OOo in Sid (aka Unstable), I wonder if it is
> generally considered acceptable to keep obsolete packages in
> experimental (currently, Sid has 2.0.1-2 and Experimental 2.0.1-1).
>
> If not, is there a way to
After the last update of OOo in Sid (aka Unstable), I wonder if it is
generally considered acceptable to keep obsolete packages in
experimental (currently, Sid has 2.0.1-2 and Experimental 2.0.1-1).
If not, is there a way to remove packages from Experimental?
Regards
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 09:56:59PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 12:12:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > * allowing us to easily use python (as well as C, C++ and perl) for
> > programs
> > in the base system
> > * allowing us to provide python early on installs
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:44 +, Dallam Wych wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 05:09:03PM -0600, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 06:28 -0500, sean finney wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 11:58:51AM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> > > > Do you think your constant bitching is fu
On Jan 19, Davide Natalini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> udev now can rename the interfaces, because they haven't a name yet.
udev still loads the modules, you just have been lucky.
This is not a solution in any way.
> furthermore this (or something similar) could be useful if we need some
> modu
Md wrote:
This reminds me that there should be a list of modules which MUST NOT be
added to the initramfs because loading them too early is both useless
and as in this case actively harmful.
I'm testing this solution:
I added a blacklist file in /etc/mkinitramfs/, put "blacklist
net-module" lin
[Eric Dorland]
> This has probably been covered ad nauseum, but where do we stand in
> respect to getting mplayer in Debian?
[Nathanael Nerode]
> IIRC, the copyright issues were carefully worked out and solved
> after several years, finally reaching the approval of debian-legal.
> At which point
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 11:36:13PM -0600, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 12:12 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Some reasons:
> >
> > * compatability with Ubuntu -- so that packages can be easily ported back
> > and forth between us and them; I expect most of the work ubuntu mig
Le Mer 18 Janvier 2006 20:58, Steffen Joeris a écrit :
> > You should be aware that per the current REJECT_FAQ [1]
> > your package will be automatically rejected because it uses the PHP
> > License. Several weeks ago I emailed the FTP Masters[2], requesting
> > that they accept the PHP Licence for
On Thursday 19 January 2006 09:57, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> My own feeling about it is that the author is not very honnest with the
> debian packaging work.
From klik.atekon.de: "Thanks to debian for the software compilation and
packaging."
> Hum... It allows non permanent installation which can b
Le Jeudi 19 Janvier 2006 09:57, Romain Beauxis a écrit :
> No where in his web page is written that in fact klik is a refactoring of
> actual debian packages.
Ok I was wrong it is written in small at the end:
"Thanks to debian for the software compilation and packaging."
Romain
--
Satan is an e
> It is the great danger of this thread that Matt et al. will feel
> sufficiently put upon that they *don't* take to heart the legitimate
> suggestions that could improve cooperation between Debian and Ubuntu (and
> "distinguishing version numbers for binaries" being by far the least of
> these).
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 08:57:51PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I don't agree. This isn't even the case within Debian. Binary-only NMUs
>> > don't modify the source package, even though the bin
Le Jeudi 19 Janvier 2006 08:48, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
> For those following along at home, it seems klik is some sort of
> gateway to install Debian packages on various non-Debian distributions.
> I imagine it's an ftp frontend to alien.
Well..
In fact, it is a scripted version of apt that ca
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Spare disk space isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors.
>> Spare bandwith isn't available to add amd64 to mirrors.
>
> I see. Can we please have the numbers? Exactly how much disk space
> is
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do you really think users who fail to notice an "Origin" tag from
> apt-cache, and believe they're above using reportbug, will notice an
> "-ubuntuN" suffix in the version number?
Actually it seems fairly likely that they would -- version numbers are
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:21:06AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Thomas Bushnell BSG]
> > Since you don't do bin-NMU's, you could simply alter the version of
> > every package to add an "ubuntu" tag, and then be done with it,
> > right? That would work well and be very easy to implement.
> Yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 10:26:05AM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 10:01 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > * Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-17 11:36]:
> > > Kennedy wasn't a citizen of Berlin, either, not literally. T
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There seems to be a fairly good amount of Debian Sarge packages
> available via http://klik.atekon.de/. However, most of them are having
> unmaintained recipes and therefore some of them do not work
> properly. I think it would be an easy task for Debian maintainers to
>
On 1/19/06, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > you could check changelogs.ubuntu.com which holds changelog and
> > copyright files of the packages.
> Hi Reinhard,
> are the changelogs on changelogs.ubuntu.com only from stable releases or
> do they include testing/dapper? Also, I was checking
[Thomas Bushnell BSG]
> Since you don't do bin-NMU's, you could simply alter the version of
> every package to add an "ubuntu" tag, and then be done with it,
> right? That would work well and be very easy to implement.
You are so hung up on this point, it's not even funny.
Do you really think u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 03:47:15PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On 1/17/06, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As it is, to me, Ubuntu is just a group of people, some of which might
> > have names[1]. I find it hard to work with such a
101 - 123 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
