On Fri January 14 2011 22:06:21 Christian PERRIER wrote:
> You're right. No Debian developer is involved in large institutions or
> corporations where hundreds of such servers are in use. All Debian
> developers are kids playing on their parents' computer to build a
> distro, during hacking nights,
]] Roger Leigh
| On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 04:07:58PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
| > Roger Leigh writes:
| >
| > > I've yet to find a single system which upgraded to insserv cleanly.
| > > This is mostly due to removed packages which need fully purging to
| > > remove the last traces of old init
Quoting Mike Bird (mgb-deb...@yosemite.net):
> You have no idea what configurations are in use on stable servers.
>
> You have no idea how many stable servers you're going to break.
You're right. No Debian developer is involved in large institutions or
corporations where hundreds of such server
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
> > I've yet to find a single system which upgraded to insserv cleanly.
> > This is mostly due to removed packages which need fully purging to
> > remove the last traces of old init scripts which break the process.
>
> Huh. Every syst
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 04:52:13PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > Yes, and this is what I did. It's just rather tedious to (IIRC)
> > repeatedly run "dpkg-reconfigure sysv-rc" and then find out which file
> > is offending, run "dpkg -S $file", and then purge it.
>
> I've
Roger Leigh writes:
> Yes, and this is what I did. It's just rather tedious to (IIRC)
> repeatedly run "dpkg-reconfigure sysv-rc" and then find out which file
> is offending, run "dpkg -S $file", and then purge it.
I've not looked at the mechanism involved at all, but it does seem like we
shoul
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 04:07:58PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > I've yet to find a single system which upgraded to insserv cleanly.
> > This is mostly due to removed packages which need fully purging to
> > remove the last traces of old init scripts which break the proce
Hi Yves-Alexis.
Excerpts from Yves-Alexis Perez's message of Sex Jan 14 19:22:31 -0200 2011:
> On ven., 2011-01-14 at 18:05 -0200, Marco Silva wrote:
> > This documentation is generated automatically
> > from the source code, using a documentation generator called haddock.
> > Haddock
> > is par
On Fri January 14 2011 16:07:58 Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
> > I've yet to find a single system which upgraded to insserv cleanly.
> > This is mostly due to removed packages which need fully purging to
> > remove the last traces of old init scripts which break the process.
>
> Huh.
On Fri January 14 2011 15:08:13 Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Ben Hutchings said:
> > Strange, I can't find your ITP for Trinity.
>
> That's because he trolls without ever actually doing anything. Don't
> feed the waste of time.
The problem is not a lack of ITP. Lenny alread
Roger Leigh writes:
> I've yet to find a single system which upgraded to insserv cleanly.
> This is mostly due to removed packages which need fully purging to
> remove the last traces of old init scripts which break the process.
Huh. Every system I've upgraded had no problems. What is the fail
"Jesús M. Navarro" writes:
> Why the package(s) got 400 bugs to start with? If the problem is there,
> then it's there. If somebody opened the bug then there was a bug at
> least on his opinion which nobody challenged. If there was a bug, then
> it need to be supposed that it will be there til
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 09:44:12PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:11:51AM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
> > If that impression is wrong, I'd really like to fix at least
> > two major bugs in Squeeze:
> >
> > (1) sysv-rc upgrade should not bring in insserv and wreck
> > startup
Hi, John:
On Friday 14 January 2011 16:49:18 John Goerzen wrote:
[...]
> I think it is a huge waste of time to expect DDs to go through 400 bugs
> just to see if the problem is still there. Just close them outright.
Why the package(s) got 400 bugs to start with? If the problem is there, then
This one time, at band camp, Ben Hutchings said:
> Strange, I can't find your ITP for Trinity.
That's because he trolls without ever actually doing anything. Don't
feed the waste of time.
Cheers,
--
-
| ,''`.
On Fri January 14 2011 13:44:12 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:11:51AM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
> > The impression I get of Debian is that in order to contribute
> > I need to spend a year or so humoring somebody with a tenth my
> > programming experience.
> > (1) sysv-rc upgrade
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:11:51AM -0800, Mike Bird wrote:
> On Fri January 14 2011 03:51:48 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> > Am 13.01.2011 11:54, schrieb Olaf van der Spek:
> > > Instead of stepping down, it might be better to ask for a co-maintainer.
> >
> > You mean like this http://www.debi
On ven., 2011-01-14 at 18:05 -0200, Marco Silva wrote:
> This documentation is generated automatically
> from the source code, using a documentation generator called haddock. Haddock
> is part of the compiler and is also updated when the ghc is. It would be
> good to regenerate the documentation
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andrey Rahmatullin
* Package name: xboxdrv
Version : 0.6.4
Upstream Author : Ingo Ruhnke
* URL : http://pingus.seul.org/~grumbel/xboxdrv/
* License : GPL3+
Programming Lang: C++
Description : A Xbox360 gamepad dr
Hi.
In the Debian Haskell Group we are with the following problem. When the
compiler (ghc) is updated, we binNMU all the stack of libraries to make them
compiled with the new compiler. Each library has the documentation in a -doc
package, which is Arch: all. This documentation is generated auto
On Fri January 14 2011 03:51:48 Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Am 13.01.2011 11:54, schrieb Olaf van der Spek:
> > Instead of stepping down, it might be better to ask for a co-maintainer.
>
> You mean like this http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/help_requested?
> Let's have a look:
>
> # chromium
Dominique Dumont wrote:
> > Also, note that "Comment: foo" is not flagged as a problem (despite
> > being apparently illegal -- DEP-5 puzzlingly does not allow a comment
> > to have a synopsis).
>
> Now that I have finally understood this notion of synopsis, I can fix these
> issues.
I probably
On 01/13/2011 06:19 PM, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
Hi, Sune:
On Thursday 13 January 2011 00:12:06 Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2011-01-12, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
I have considered to take this one step further. Close bugs reported in
Debian BTS with a severity of important or less that is a bug that
John Goerzen dijo [Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 05:08:26PM -0600]:
> So let's run out your scenario a bit: upstream asks user to test with
> upstream version X. Bug isn't reproducible by maintainer. Does the
> maintainer now have to provide user with binaries? This gets
> complicated when packagin
Michael Biebl dijo [Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 01:34:45PM +0100]:
> >> My workaround was to purge network-manager and I'm planning to fix this by
> >> creating a package which Conflicts: network-manager. Maybe you could
> >> provide
> >> this kind of package by default :)
> >
> > Unless you have more u
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:29:58AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> We have written a bit about what's needed here:
>> http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org/bugs.html
>
> A while ago I've reviewed a little bit which kind of contributions
> distr
On Thursday 13 January 2011 22:48:48 Joey Hess wrote:
> Also, it's missing BSD-2-clause etc.
ok. Fixed. Unless I remove all these license keyword check... Still thinking
...
> The original format from the wiki page uses comma to separate
> Files. Might be worth detecting and converting those?
D
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 10:27:12 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-01-13, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>> We can't demand or require anyone to do anything. Yet we expect
>
> I think this is mostly wrong.
>
> We can demand or require people to step down. And we should if we don't
> think they do a prope
On Thursday 13 January 2011 22:27:02 Joey Hess wrote:
> Thanks for your work, here are a few things I stumbled on.
Thanks for trying and reporting issues :-)
> Worst problem: -save *removes* all Comment fields except for one
> in the header section.
Looks like I messed up the routine that transf
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:38:37 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Felipe Sateler writes ("Re: Forwarding bugs upstream"):
>> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:56:56 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > I think it is always reasonable for the maintainer to forward the bug
>> > upstream.
>> >
>> > But what I think is bad is
Olaf van der Spek (14/01/2011):
> There are lots of packages with old bugs without any comments that
> are not on that list.
Oh, indeed! Crap! I hereby request help for the 167 following
packages:
ccsm
compiz
compizconfig-backend-gconf
compizconfig-backend-kconfig
compizconfi
On 14.01.2011 12:30, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 janvier 2011 à 20:58 +0200, Anssi Kolehmainen a écrit :
>> My workaround was to purge network-manager and I'm planning to fix this by
>> creating a package which Conflicts: network-manager. Maybe you could provide
>> this kind of packag
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:29:58AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> We have written a bit about what's needed here:
> http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org/bugs.html
A while ago I've reviewed a little bit which kind of contributions
distros are looking for, from people who are willing to get involved
with
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Am 13.01.2011 11:54, schrieb Olaf van der Spek:
>
>>> Now we just need to define what a proper job is.
>> Instead of stepping down, it might be better to ask for a co-maintainer.
>
> You mean like this http://www.debian.o
Hi!
Am 13.01.2011 11:54, schrieb Olaf van der Spek:
>> Now we just need to define what a proper job is.
> Instead of stepping down, it might be better to ask for a co-maintainer.
You mean like this http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/help_requested?
Let's have a look:
# chromium-browser [..] reque
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 11:54 +0100, Olaf van der Spek a écrit :
> Instead of stepping down, it might be better to ask for a co-maintainer.
I hereby request a new co-maintainer for the GNOME packages.
--
.''`.
: :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know
`. `' that a h
Le mercredi 12 janvier 2011 à 20:58 +0200, Anssi Kolehmainen a écrit :
> My workaround was to purge network-manager and I'm planning to fix this by
> creating a package which Conflicts: network-manager. Maybe you could provide
> this kind of package by default :)
Unless you have more useful sugge
On 2011-01-14, Iker Salmón San Millán wrote:
> 2011/1/14 Sune Vuorela
>
>>
>> Hi Andreas. Would you like to be delegated to help reporting bugs in
>> packages maintained by Qt/KDE team upstream?
>>
>> /Sune
>>
>>
> I would be glad if i could help you in that (or any) way sune.
> Unfortunately mi
As new (sponsored) mantainer i have a few things to say about this thread.
First of all. If i receive a bug report, i do my best to handle it in the
rigth way, i am in contact with upstream author and fortunately i have no
bugs in my package. I personally don't care to forward bugs to upstream.
Bu
Hi, Peter:
On Friday 14 January 2011 10:29:57 Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Jesús M. Navarro]
>
> > If any, bugs you (properly) pass to the upstream developer are bugs
> > that will cost you not a dime of your valuable time from them on.
>
> You didn't read the rest of the thread, did you?
Yes I did.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 08:43:36AM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-01-13, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > In short: The Debian maintainer is responsible that a bug will be
> > reported upstream. I don't see a problem if he delegates the actual
> > work to somebody else who is able and willing to do
[Jesús M. Navarro]
> If any, bugs you (properly) pass to the upstream developer are bugs
> that will cost you not a dime of your valuable time from them on.
You didn't read the rest of the thread, did you?
> If you understand what I said, good; if you didn't, please, make me
> the honour of cons
[Jesús M. Navarro]
> > Dear Jesus. Are you seriously saying that
> > - the kernel mainatiners should step down
> > - the xorg maintainers should step down
> > - the mozilla maintainers should step down
> > - the gnome maintainers should step down
> > - the kde maintainers should step down
> >
On 2011-01-13, Andreas Tille wrote:
> In short: The Debian maintainer is responsible that a bug will be
> reported upstream. I don't see a problem if he delegates the actual
> work to somebody else who is able and willing to do the job (but please
> be nice to the user when asking for this kind o
44 matches
Mail list logo
