On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 07:09:31PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
I agree with Branden: remove the installer from potato.
The problem that I forgot to mention is that anyone who upgrades from slink
to potato w/o upgrading realplayer, and had realplayer installed via the
On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 10:47:51PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
You are going to keep /usr/X11R6 for this release right? I guess that the
XFree86 people might get a bit irritated if you tried to drop it.
Actually, I've evilly been toying with the idea of #defining ProjectRoot to
/usr for
On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 08:20:48AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 09:59:20AM -0500, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
_please_ don't do it. It will be utterely confusing to find everything in a
new place. As a person who does X development writing -I/usr/X11R6/include
is an idiom
I use the minimal Makefile:
CFLAGS=-O2 -g -I/usr/lib/glib/include/
LDFLAGS=-L/usr/X11R6/lib -lX11 -lglib -lgdk -lgtk -lm
and get an (apparently) working program but the warnings:
ld: warning: libc.so.5, needed by /usr/lib/libc5-compat/libXi.so.6, may
conflict with libc.so.6
if i replace -lXpm by /usr/X11R6/lib/libXpm.so.4 the program links
fine. does anybody have any idea what's going on here?
ld only looks for libXpm.so, not for libXpm.so.version. In Debian,
libfoo.so is part of the libfoo-dev package, not of the libfoo package, as
you need the header files
Moin Alex!
AY I would like to question the need for this requirement.
???
Aren't you questioning my right to do that? :)
AY While this can be of importance to some users, it can be quite
AY annoying to others.
??? Please remember, a lot of languages need 8 bit clean programs. Non 8
You can't satisfy all users anyway. In addition, I would hate to be
able to switch to russian keyboard mode (by mistake) and enter some
letters which look just like English ones in the editor I use for
_programming_.
OTOH, many people'd be upset not to be able to insert comments using
Alex, this is much simpler than you think.
I will give you a simple example: My keyboard has a key for the \~n letter
(using TeX notation) which is used in the Spanish language.
When I press that key, I *expect* to produce such character.
Not obtaining that letter but some other is
Support of 8-bit characters by default
Some programs need special configuration options to work 8-bit
clean. This is very important for a lot of non-English users who
need to input umlauts, accented characters, etc. All Debian
packages will be configured to be 8-bit
Support of 8-bit characters by default
Some programs need special configuration options to work 8-bit
clean. This is very important for a lot of non-English users who
need to input umlauts, accented characters, etc. All Debian
packages will be configured to
Thomas Lakofski wrote:
You'd be surprised... I described a cross cable to a friend of mine, and
told him that he'd have to go and get one made up or get some tools. He
mailed me back 5 minutes later to tell me that he'd got it working. I
asked him how, he said he'd pried the cable apart,
It looks like you already have motif, right?
In this case I would recommend using all packages dynamicaly linked with
Motif (like ddd-dmotif, etc.) from contrib/ *and* hamm/contrib/.
Since Motif is not available for libc6 (glibc2) yet, all Motif packages,
even from unstable tree should be libc5-
On 18 Dec 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote:
Remember there are people that can't stand Emacs.
Strange... :)
Nothing strange. After a couple of _years_ of struggling in attempts to
learn emacs (I made about 6 attempts total) I found a *great* relief in...
vi (vim actually). I was able to get
And there is one thing
which I would qualify as a mistake in the above description: $2 is
actually in the form /dev/ttyS1 than just ttyS1.
Doh! I wish they wouldn't do that. I guess it's for some kinda
security?
...A. P. [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL:http://www.onShore.com/
Well, as it
Please let noone think that just because that absurd and awful
suggestion was the last thing anyone said that everyone is happy with
it.
Rather, the rest of us have more important things to do than to fight
battles with people with broken mailers and broken ideas about how
mailers ought to
FWIW I've been using run-parts in ip-up and ip-down for some time now,
the scripts reconfigure stuff based on my ip address (2 ISPs) etc.
and everything works like a charm. I dunno about packages placing
scripts in ip-[up|down].d/ -- I'd rather put them in
/usr/doc/package/examples.
One
Is there a way I can get Linux to work on my old 286?
There is an attempt to port Linux to 086 called ELKS. Look for it's link
on LDP page (http://sunsite.unc.edu/LDP/). Last time I checked I still
couldn't even boot it on my 286 though.
Alex Y.
--
_
_( )_
( (o___
I'm hoping to get my PGP keys signed by a known and registered debian
developer in the NYC area so as to comply with the Debian Developer's
Reference Section 1.2.
I'm located in Manhattan; specifically on the Lower East Side.
Any takers? Please reply to me offline. Thanks.
...A. P.
One problem with doing backports of libc5 packages is that
dpkg-dev in bo doesn't seem to support pristine sources;
it complained that the original wasn't in the .orig subdirectory.
Although dpkg-dev from hamm works fine on bo since it is not libc
dependent, it's still not possible to
Although dpkg-dev from hamm works fine on bo since it is not libc
dependent, it's still not possible to backport on a completely-bo
given this factor, unless I am missing something ..
As far as I understand, you just told that you can use dpkg-dev from hamm
to produce binary
Moin Christoph!
CL 200Mhz Pentiums are the standard fare today. And I am running
CL the boa webserver for example on some low memory 486DX66s with
I'm using a 486/100 and a 486SL/33. In my opinion we should avoid using
the server to uncompress the files. We should find another solution.
Am 29.06.97 schrieb aqy6633 # is5.nyu.edu an Marco Budde ...
Moin Alex!
AY Right, but does all WWW server offer this feature? We can't force the
AY user to install a specific server.
AY Why not? This could be a part of Debian documentation system.
Because no admin would like to have
I am really irritated by such insistence on a view my box at home and
nothing
else matters. We are not all just hacking for fun at home. Some people
actually
make their living with the stuff.
I completely agree with you. But this is just some kind of a Debian
sickness not to think of
Whats the difference between the jdk packages and the jdk1.1 packages? I
just found both in the archive.
Well, jdk packages represent jdk 1.0.2, the other -- jdk 1.1.1
Java interpreter is 2 times faster in 1.1.1 plus much expanded API, but it
is new and only a few browsers support it.
Though
On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
[snip]
contrib. Try to run it on Lesstif and it won't work, because it will
not find a Motif 2.0 library. Lesstif provides a Motif 1.2 lib.
Yeah, but Lesstif was not meant to be *binary* compatible with real
Motif, only *source code
The reason we need virtual packages is so that we can allow people who
(like myself) have gone out and bought real Motif to use it on Debian.
I would be glad to throw away my Motif CD, and only use Lesstif. Last
time I tried compiling Nedit against lesstif, the results were almost
usable,
Option 3: We ship .texi files and produce HTML and/or info files on
demand (in the postinst script).
Advantages:
- No work for the maintainers.
- Great flexibility (the sysadmin could even produce PostScript
files when needed!).
This is extremely good
On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
What about the motif-dummy thingie we discussed? How can I run plan having
Motif and not lesstif installed? Can you make sure it doesn't Depends: on
lesstif, but rather on a virtual package 'motif-libs' which lesstif, and a
I don't think that support for different Moitfs are needed.
All known software despite of being compiled with Motif 2.0 does not
use features not present in Motif 1.2
The reason for this is that big unices does not have Motif 2.0 actively
shiped from the vendors yet and using Motif 2.0
Hello,guys.
At some point I found that when I try to execute dpkg-source -x *.dsc
(for the most recent ddd in hamm) I got the error message:
dpkg-source: error: diff contains unknown line `\ No newline at end of
file'
What could be the reason for that?
And more, executing it on hello (!)
pgpxvBvJPfRN3.pgp
Description: PGP message
On Jun 16, Alex Yukhimets wrote
I am sorry to say, but you are wrong. Even on this list there were
several postings regarding this matter. There are several known
problems and who knows how many unknown. You just can't afford to
experiment with production system this way. Anyway, I
The problem of having both libc5 and libc6 run-time libraries is minor,
the main one is that those stuck with libc5-dev cannot use other
newly-available versions of *libraries* from hamm.
How do you mean? You can install the *libraries* just fine, it's just
the development versions that
Hello all.
Some time ago there was a posting on the list stating that typical Debian
user is of SysAdmin type. The guy received a lot of negative responses and
as a result we have now dotfile-generator in the distribution as our
statement of being friendly to novices. Good thing, but what is
Alex Yukhimets:
Debian is the effort of a large number of developers and primararily
*for* developers.
I disagree. I think Debian is for anyone who wants a good Linux
system, and who doesn't need much non-free software
Okay, so say some random person who has installed Debian wants XEmacs 19.15
because he needs some feature. This seems like a reasonable request... He
could get it from the Hamm distribution, except that would mean he'd need
libc6...and he doesn't want to do that, because he's heard that it
I'm not entirely certain I see why we need to remove libc5 packages from
the system for Debian 2.0. While I agree that the primary packages should
really be glibc, I don't see how a few lib5 packages are going to hurt the
distribution
Well, they won't hurt much, but they would:
-
Of cource, there isn't such a list now (as far as I know, at least I
guess that list would be empty now).
Anyways, Debian just can't compete with commercial distributions which can
allow to suppose that they are self-contained. Debian is NOT. Unlike
RedHat (which has, for instance its
Jim,
why didn't you upload shared Motif library version of jdk1.1-runtime?
I just wonder if there is any reason for that.
Thanks.
Alex Y.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Hi.
In 1.3 release announcement Debian compatibility with rpm and
Slackware packages mentioned 2 times. And one time it explicitly
states that it is achieved via enclosed utility to convert
mentioned packages to Debian format. (This is alien, right? :)
How can we cope with the fact that
Is it me, or are the Debian lists really quiet? My secondary list server
hasn't transferred a single thing from the primary server in several
hours, perhaps even a day.
Am I crazy, or did I break something?
No you are not. During the last 24 hours I received only 2(!) debian
41 matches
Mail list logo
