[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nunya) wrote on 17.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:35:54AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
| You are totally rationalizing.
*sigh* From Branden's original post where he mentioned the names:
We might use names from Christian demonology (since
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron Patrick) wrote on 18.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 01:32:41AM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
| On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 01:16, Nunya wrote:
|
| Face it. You're practicing hate speech. You're not better than what
| you hate.
|
| Ya
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Baker) wrote on 17.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:25:11PM -0800, Nunya wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 07:56:41PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
For the record, however, if you consider saying that the lifestyle or
beliefs of someone you don't
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Henning Makholm) wrote on 18.12.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Scripsit Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 03:05:46PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:39, Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Imagining it? I suppose it's possible that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 16:17:36 +0200
Source: doc-iana
Binary: doc-iana
Architecture: source all
Version: 2003.07-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL
-0999
Architecture: source all
Version: 20030621-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
doc-rfc- Migration Pseudo-Package
doc-rfc-0001-0999 - Other RFCs
doc-rfc-1000-1999 - Other RFCs
doc-rfc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerfried Fuchs) wrote on 02.06.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
See, it is nothing personal (you seem to take it that way), but
packages with similar functionality should be questioned, and if the
Says who? I reject that assertion.
A long description in an ITP would
a) reduce
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:34:38 +0200
Source: doc-iana
Binary: doc-iana
Architecture: source all
Version: 2003.06-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerfried Fuchs) wrote on 26.05.03 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please, don't simply massfile ITPs without thinking on their impact and
without any deeper informations
Please don't assume someone jasn't thought about something just because
you haven't been personally
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-simple-perl
Version : 1.4
Upstream Author : Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/R/RC/RCLAMP/Email-Simple-1.4.tar.gz
* License
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-filter-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-Filter-1.0.tar.gz
* License : Same as
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-localdelivery-perl
Version : 0.04
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-LocalDelivery-0.04.tar.gz
* License
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libemail-mime-encodings-perl
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/S/SI/SIMON/Email-MIME-Encodings-1.0.tar.gz
* License
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 12:32:32 +0100
Source: doc-iana
Binary: doc-iana
Architecture: source all
Version: 2003.03-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED
kleptog@svana.org (Martijn van Oosterhout) wrote on 01.08.02 in [EMAIL
PROTECTED]:
No reason, however in the docs there is an example line to put in apt.conf
Which docs?
What line?
to automatically generate md5sum files for every package that doesn't
contain them.
So after you do an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Langasek) wrote on 16.08.02 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
From the heated discussion I've just had on IRC, I've gathered the
following:
* It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship, upstream
has already transitioned to using the GCC 3.2 ABI, therefore
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess) wrote on 30.07.02 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't think it offers much if anything over special-purpose staging
areas as is being used for perl 5.8 right now.
It seems to me staging areas could solve a lot of these difficulties, yes.
I'm not clear on the current
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hamish Moffatt) wrote on 25.12.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, Dec 23, 2000 at 08:43:51PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
I have a comment: NO WAY IN HELL. The day that we start rejecting DUL
posts is the day that several people leave the project, me included. How
many
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miles Bader) wrote on 24.12.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
flame war
Now maybe if we were using the RBL, DUL, and RSS lists... :-)
/flame war
GNU mailing lists (supposedly) use RBL, but in a mode where `spam' isn't
deleted, but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Wirzenius) wrote on 24.12.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Robert van der Meulen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ignoring spam has made the internet the spam-ridden place it is right now.
Spam hasn't been ignored for the past six years, thank you very much.
It thrives regardless of the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 14.08.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
John == John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No real reason? Only one package can listen in on port 25, and
John There is no real reason that all must listen on port 25.
Then you and I have very
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Bridgett) wrote on 16.08.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:31:47 -0500 (+), Branden Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 07:22:26PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Well, the FHS is contradicting itself here. On one hand, it says that
ifconfig
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jacob Kuntz) wrote on 15.08.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Clint Adams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
No real reason? Only one package can listen in on port 25, and
Only one package can listen on port 25 of one IP. It is possible to
have multiple packages listening on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Gunthorpe) wrote on 14.08.00 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
You know, if apt could only support Reccommends, task packages could be
I don't care for this much, it breaks the model that apt-get follows, it
Well, I'd *very very much*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren O. Benham) wrote on 16.05.99 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 08:09:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Bristel) wrote on 14.05.99 in Pine.LNX.3.96.=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
=20
abandon those who run slink. Note that if linus did
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Bristel) wrote on 14.05.99 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
abandon those who run slink. Note that if linus did that, the 2.2.7 and
2.2.8 would never have come out because work had already begun on the 2.3
kernels.
Umm, may I point out that 2.3.0 == 2.2.8? The difference is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila) wrote on 17.12.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Juergen A. Erhard wrote:
Joey == Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joey A critical bug on an unimportant package is a sure bet to get
that package Joey pulled from the distirbution
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wichert Akkerman) wrote on 31.01.99 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Previously Michael Stone wrote:
perl-suid 31904 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Secuity hole with pe=
rl (suidperl) and nosuid mounts on Linux] [13] (Darren Stalder [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
.com )
=20
I'm not sure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Branden Robinson) wrote on 31.01.99 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
29360: point 1) is an issue for the release notes; I can't retroactively
patch an old prerm;
You could, but it would be fairly ugly, and I'm not sure it's worth it.
Startegy: pre-depend on a package that does the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bdale Garbee) wrote on 26.01.99 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
Hmmm. swinstall (HP-UX native I think) seems to support dependencies.
It's pretty ugly though and I don't know if there's a command line
version.
Yes, you can drive
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 16.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I disagree quite strongly. If the intent was to have
uncompressed originals on the system we would have shipped them as
such.
Indeed - the .debs would be smaller that way.
MfG Kai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter S Galbraith) wrote on 16.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
- If you are using some docs often on a 486, you end up uncompressing them
because it's too slow otherwise.
I'm using a 486. Uncompressing text is too slow? Ridiculous.
On the other hand, I currently have about
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Gertzfield) wrote on 16.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Brent == Brent Fulgham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brent I'd like to chime in -- It's a real annoyance that the base
Brent disks don't set up lilo to let you boot into multiple
Brent operating systems.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas Tille) wrote on 08.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
see at the people near you and look at yourself with the eyes of
an Hitchhiker)
Can't. (Can you guess that I don't much like the Hitchhiker stuff?)
- Another naming scheme without any background would be A, B,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Slootman) wrote on 07.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue 06 Oct 1998, Robert Woodcock wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what's the security track record on smail vs exim
for the last two years? The standard MTA should have a chance of being
secure from remote attacks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Maurer) wrote on 04.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On a related note, do we want to continue using names from pixar movies
now that Bruce is gone?
i see no reason not to. they are nice names, the only problem is that we
may be running out of good ones (i admit, rc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Singer) wrote on 04.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
What is the *right* way to sync to slink (or any other distribution)?
I looked into dftp and found that it seems more like a method for
installing new packages than keeping in sync with the most recent
versions.
The
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess) wrote on 02.10.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is from the linux kernel mailing list. I find it pretty completly sums
op my thoughts on all the new constitution and voting and policy voting
stuff that we've been setting up. I haven't been vocal about this, but I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Woodcock) wrote on 10.06.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* /etc/init.d/rc is modified to call a program that determines the order
the scripts should be run in, on the fly. I figure this won't be much
of a speed hit. Slrn can thread thousands of messages per second
aj@azure.humbug.org.au (Anthony Towns) wrote on 09.05.98 in [EMAIL
PROTECTED]:
On Sat, May 09, 1998 at 04:50:48PM +0300, Marc A. Volovic wrote:
2. cons: alternative to make.
Likewise.
Is there some more information about this somewhere?
Wasn't there an article about this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brederlow) wrote on 07.05.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Rev. Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[1 text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)]
On Fri, May 01, 1998 at 04:19:42PM +1000, John Boggon wrote:
Can someone tell me why a new distribution has to be started up just
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 03.05.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Raul == Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Raul [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sendmail configuration is tough but it is also the best documented
MTA bar none!
Raul Please don't confuse lots of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Branden Robinson) wrote on 30.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Am I the only one who feels that, to a large extent, ease of use *is* a
technical problem?
No. Of course not.
How else to explain apt?
I note that on April 20th, the Gnome System Control Panel Project was
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) wrote on 29.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
1. Focus on the User
I'd like to have developers who program because they like to see
their work in the hands of users, especially _naive_ users.
Well, I must say that while users are nice, naive users ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raul Miller) wrote on 27.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila) wrote on 26.04.98 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I would really like to see something like '\h:\w\$ ' (or '\w\$ ' at
least) in /etc/skel/.bashrc
Just seen on net.general:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bryan C. Andregg) wrote on 27.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 27 Apr 1998 07:52:37 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], YoYo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: I would suppose that RedHat is doing well because of the easy
install
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Brinkmann) wrote on 23.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Apr 23, 1998 at 09:53:54AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I can tell this license is DFSG-free; please let me know if you
disagree.
This is weird, especially because of point 3.
I can see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Briscoe-Smith) wrote on 24.04.98 in [EMAIL
PROTECTED]:
The gist is this: most of the obnoxious advertising clauses in
BSD-ish software specify a different sentence which must be mentioned
on advertising mentioning the software. This means that if I build
a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adrian Bridgett) wrote on 23.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Apr 23, 1998 at 09:53:54AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I can tell this license is DFSG-free; please let me know if you
disagree.
Copyright (c) 1997-1998 by Armin Biere.
Author: Armin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila) wrote on 26.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I would really like to see something like '\h:\w\$ ' (or '\w\$ ' at
least) in /etc/skel/.bashrc. Would it be against policy?
Policy 3.3.7 '/etc/skel' should be as empty as we can make it.
MfG Kai
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raul Miller) wrote on 26.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not a dpkg expert, but AFAIK modifying directly the dpkg databases
(yes, almost everything under var/lib/dpkg are dpkg databases) is a
Wrong Thing (TM) In the current
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Raul Miller) wrote on 26.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alex Yukhimets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided
olly@lfix.co.uk (Oliver Elphick) wrote on 27.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
unix.hensa.ac.uksunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk
wget http:1.97KB/s1.90KB/s
wget ftp: 5.19KB/s5.42KB/s
ftp: 4.2 Kbytes/sec
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) wrote on 04.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It looks like it's fixed again. Thanks to whoever did it!
And now it's broken again:
803 14.04 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mirror mismatch
925 15.04 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mirror mismatch
619 16.04
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 24.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
of the old wording in the policy manual, which mentioned onerous
conditions (of which this is one, IMHO) as a reason for things going
Nope. I really don't think it is.
MfG Kai
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory S. Stark) wrote on 15.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Opening files in a large directory can be extremely inefficient in many Unix
varieties. The kernel has to do a linear search for each the file. Linux 2.1
should be faster because of the dentry stuff, but even so it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila) wrote on 13.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Marcus, I was just clarifying (once more) the status of gettext in Debian.
It is in experimental because the author asked me not to distribute it
widely. This means that even if it is not accesable by dselect, we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Goerzen) wrote on 10.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Therefore, I believe it would be prudent, as a temporary workaround
for the kernel bug, to umount all local drives before umounting
network drives. It is generally not a big deal if a network drive
doesn't get umounted
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eloy A. Paris) wrote on 10.04.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
According to fclose's man page, it will return EOF and set errno to
EBADF if the argument is not an open stream.
That is not what the info docs for libc6 say:
Closing Streams
===
When a stream is closed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Yukhimets) wrote on 09.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Moin Alex!
AY I would like to question the need for this requirement.
???
Aren't you questioning my right to do that? :)
No, but it hardly seems reasonable to question this requirement.
AY While this can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hamish Moffatt) wrote on 10.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I happened to copy the libc5 badblocks binaries onto my libc6
system, for a project I'm working on, and for curiousity's sake,
ran ldd on it;
[10:12am] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:DLX.lilo/rd-tree/bin# ldd ./badblocks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Morton) wrote on 08.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To the group, let me say:
Those of you who saw my first message as an attack or a flame, what nice
Well, it was.
little utpoia of the planet do you come from? sheesh! If that's all
it takes to ruffle your
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Sanders) wrote on 07.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 7 Jan 1998, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Elie Rosenblum wrote:
And thus spake Craig Sanders, on Wed, Jan 07,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Mitchell) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Stephen Zander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does libc6 depend on kernel-header ?
It's libc6-dev that has that dependency.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
I think that /usr/src should the be domain of the local admin.
I don't think kernel-{header,source}-x.xx.deb should exist, really,
because I don't think source code should be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well, there is a problem with the Gregorian calendar that has to be dealt
with in 2000 years or so (having to do with leap-millenia), but I figure
if it's more than 100 years it's no problem.
That depends on what you call a problem.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fabrizio Polacco) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 6 Jan, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
I think the general opinion was let the others take care of
not conflicting with us. So, the people on debs.fuller should make sure
that the version numbers they use will not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Stone) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Quoting Oliver Elphick (olly@lfix.co.uk):
Why does glibc2 not use long long (64 bits) for dates, insead of long int
(32 bits)? Surely we ought to change this now along with all the other
libc6 changes?
IIRC,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(b) We set up a certain directory (say /usr/lib/cronjobs) where each
package can install its own crontab file (/usr/lib/cronjobs/foo).
Use /etc/cron.often (or similar name). It will contain crontabs, not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Mitchell) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Mitchell) wrote on 06.01.98 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Stephen Zander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Richard Braakman wrote:
Do we want all packages to include the Section and Priority fields?
Probably.
I tend to do it like this:
* don't include them in the first version of the package
* see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 06.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 6 Jan 1998, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 05.01.98 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, Ian Jackson wrote:
I think that /usr/src should the be domain of the local
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Amos Shapira) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write:
| a 64 bit variable, it's good for another 4000 years.
|
|Uhhh -- no. If it went from 32 bits to *33* bits, that would get us
Actually, the current limit of 68 years (1970 + 68
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 6 Jan 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Mon, Jan 05, 1998 at 11:58:12PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Urgh, I hate it already. Can somebody post a rationale for
the section of policy quoted above? I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If there is a reason to upload a new .deb package then that alone is
sufficient to require an incremented version number. Every new release
of a package should come with a new version. Only if an md5 sum of the
new
format to store
settings
After working some hours on it today, I've come as far as producing stuff
like this:
# generated by ./autodeb-scan
$auto1 = {
USERNAME = Kai Henningsen,
POLICY = 2.3.0.1,
CONFIGURE = ,
CLEAN = make clean,
DEBIAN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 05.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 5 Jan 1998, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
Perhaps the /etc/crontab shouldn't be a conffile; but created by
the installation scripts?
Since /etc/crontab is actually a conffile (no matter if you tag it as such
or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Davies) wrote on 07.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is a request for some feedback from current and potential users of GPC.
I have GPC 2.0 compiled for hamm, built using GCC 2.7.2.3. The next
version of GPC (currently 971001) is in beta, but is already more stable
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 31.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please be aware that the GIF patent issue is for WRITERS only. Readers
do not use the patented algorithm. Often you can put the writer in non-free
and leave the rest of the program in main.
Indeed.
The problem is the compression
Hi Adam,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Heath) wrote on 31.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
| On Wednesday, 31 December 97, at 2:18:00 PM
| Kai wrote about My own Libc6 progress and package adoption drive, and I
need a mas Hi Adam,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Heath) wrote on 31.12.97 in
[EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eloy A. Paris) wrote on 01.01.98 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Kai Henningsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Well, when the original maintainer asked on -devel, I said that I'd take
: it over, and I did. I have no idea why it landed on that list.
Did you let the maintainer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yann Dirson) wrote on 30.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 30 Dec 1997, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark W. Eichin) wrote:
So, timezone (7.48-3) is installed, and required, so dpkg won't
remove it. timezones (2.06-1) is available, and replaces/conflicts
timezone, but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Browning) wrote on 29.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I find this hard to believe. kernel-headers and kernel-source
packages write to the directories kernel-headers-X.X.XX and
kernel-source-X.X.XX. They create symbolic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark W. Eichin) wrote on 31.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Isn't there something *else* going on here as well? Namely, why does
libc6-dev suddenly want kernel-headers, and a particular version at
that, when neither it nor libc5-dev ever did before (and for
good reasons?)
Hi Adam,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Heath) wrote on 31.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
adbbs
What for? Anything wrong with my adbbs package?
MfG Kai
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Sailer) wrote on 24.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Minivend is a GPL-ed online ordering application. It's worth looking at
***
(and I'm sure one of you will want to package it). See:
http://www.minivend.com/minivend/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Mitchell) wrote on 25.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
I seem to recall that the case in question (it _was_ Atari vs. Amiga,
right?) still allowed you to run _the_very_same_kernel_ on both systems.
This has nothing to do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Leutloff) wrote on 22.12.97 in [EMAIL
PROTECTED]:
--pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Dec_22_12:02:15_1997-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Tommi Virtanen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I don't understand how to modify this address! 8-(
I'd guess not at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Mitchell) wrote on 24.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
As in, ISA vs. MCA vs. PCI? :-)
No, as in e.g. Intel-PC vs. Sun :-)
Hardly. That would be a case of incompatible CPUs. Or does Sun produce x86
machines
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 22.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dr. Drake Diedrich writes:
Before I put any effort into this, is anyone familiar with this law?
This
C Notice of Public Domain nature of MOPAC
C
C 'This computer program is a work of the United States
C
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roman Hodek) wrote on 22.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As in, ISA vs. MCA vs. PCI? :-)
No, as in e.g. Intel-PC vs. Sun :-)
Hardly. That would be a case of incompatible CPUs. Or does Sun produce x86
machines these days? Nothing is impossible ...
Ok, you're right that we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roman Hodek) wrote on 18.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Is this any different from Intel packages that only make sense when
you have specific hardware installed? We have several of those.
It's not just that you have different hardware installed, but you have
a totally
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David ROCHER) wrote on 14.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
package: doc-rfc
version: 1997.12-1
all files into doc-rfc have 1000,1000 for owner.
That was dpkg_1.4.0.19_i386-libc5.deb. With fakeroot 0.0-9.
Aargh! We _need_ proper version numbering for libc5 versions.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roman Hodek) wrote on 17.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
There are now some packages for m68k that make sense only on a
specific machine type. Currently we have such packages only for Atari,
but others can follow easily. The packages are nvram and setsccserial,
and atari-fdisk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Welton) wrote on 17.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Dec 17, 1997 at 09:22:51PM -0800, Guy Maor wrote:
According to Stevens on page 300, writev is atomic, so I would regard
Linux's behavior as a bug.
On one tty I start wserv, the offending program with the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila) wrote on 17.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 17 Dec 1997, James Troup wrote:
Michael Alan Dorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is part of an email exchange Sven and I had. Simply put, I put
in a new alpha binary of dpkg-1.4.0.19 that represented
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Maor) wrote on 16.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Gonzalo A. Diethelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps you could point out how I could force all of those people
with broken mailers and/or ideas to use one of your great mail
clients, so I won't get four, five, six or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Enrique Zanardi) wrote on 16.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
Uh? Why don't you just do...
int p[2];
pipe(p);
if(!fork())
{
dup2(p[1],2);
exec...
}
/* now you can read the output from the p[0] file
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michel LESPINASSE) wrote on 14.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
My immediate problem is that I have the hardware clock set to GMT and
my system clock is never getting set to the local timezone.
Do you see /etc/localtime when you type date +%Z ?
If so, then I'd say that you ran
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 13.12.97 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I need to connect a Linux box to an NT server over a dial-up line. The NT
box uses a Remote Access Server. I remember seeing a discussion of this
recently, but can't find the reference in my mail archives. Can anyone
1 - 100 of 199 matches
Mail list logo
