Re: why dig ? I wanna use nslookup !

2001-05-02 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 05:13:08PM -0400, Jacob Kuntz wrote: > from the secret journal of John H. Robinson, IV ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > I'm not sure if this has come up before, but since DJB likes to install in > /var, wouldn't any Debian package fail the policy check? that

Re: why dig ? I wanna use nslookup !

2001-05-02 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 04:56:28PM -0400, Jacob Kuntz wrote: > from the secret journal of Gerrit Pape ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > "Closed" may have been the wrong word. Non-free would have been more > accurate. You can study DJB's code all you want, but not your own > binaries or modified source. ag

Re: why dig ? I wanna use nslookup !

2001-05-02 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 04:37:33PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote: > "John H. Robinson, IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > You may distribute a precompiled package if > > > > o installing your package produces exactly the same files, in > &g

Re: why dig ? I wanna use nslookup !

2001-05-02 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 04:02:33PM -0400, Jacob Kuntz wrote: > > Closed-source software is even more of a pity. DJB's license (or lack there > of) makes it impossible to distribute binaries that aren't compiled by DJB > himself. i certainly hope you speak out of ignorance, i would hate to think t

Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat

2001-04-29 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 10:34:03AM +0800, zhaoway wrote: > > i vote for alot of binary kernels. but i'd rather see someone comes > out will better ideas. if we are voting here, i'd vote for the very minimul number of stock kernels. if someone wants something more tuned, then roll your own, or the

Re: VA Debian banner old

2001-04-25 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 05:33:31PM -0700, Alexander Hvostov wrote: > It's not compressed, and therefore not patented. I say this because > `libungif' > can read it. Or can libungif read LZW compressed gifs but not write them? the latter. -john

Re: Proper Virtual Package Selection for Althea

2001-04-25 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 07:28:46PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote: > I investigated the suggestion you provided, and there is one problem with it > for me: I use Maildir to hold my email, and not the mbox format. What solution > is there for me? Otherwise I like it very much. assuming a relatively r

Re: NMUers: STOP BEING STUPID

2001-04-24 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:31:05PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote: > > Ironically, it won't prevent the problem that sparked this thread, > namely a weird build environment on the machine where the NMU is > compiled. thanks to debootstrap, we no longer have any reason to not have a clean build env

Re: ITP: dopewars

2001-04-23 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 08:22:10PM +0200, Leon Breedt wrote: > > DopeWars is a kickarse curses based game that supports > multiplayer, its under the GPL and can be found at: > > http://bellatrix.pcl.ox.ac.uk/~ben/dopewars/ > > If no one objects, I'll package it. if you want, i have already pack

Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat

2001-04-22 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 02:47:36PM +0200, Roland Mas wrote: > Herbert Xu (2001-04-22 22:23:04 +1000) : > > Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > that would be one package, taking maybe a few hundred kilobytes > > > total. call it kernel-helper and make it depend on > > > kernel-packa

Re: Developer Behavior

2001-01-10 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 08:02:58AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 12:54:08AM +1100, Russell Coker wrote: > > The thing is that a machine that can't load the correct kernel can be > > easily > > fixed, just use another machine to dd a kernel to a floppy. > > You really nee

Re: Compiling 2.0.38 kernel

2001-01-08 Thread John H. Robinson, IV
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 05:33:26PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote: > On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:28:25AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote: > > Right, good point. In fact I did use gcc272 for the actual compile. But > > neither gcc272 or gcc 2.95.3 compiled mkdep.c properly. Hmm, I wonder if > > hmm. I wonde

<    1   2