Re: Changes in formal naming for NetBSD porting effort(s)

2003-12-17 Thread Kevin Kreamer
[I am not subscribed to debian-bsd.] On Dec 17, 2003, at 10:20, Branden Robinson wrote: Given that we're going to be saddled with with a comprehension problem anyway, I say we abandon the effort to be descriptive in the product name. I proposed having a correlation between the first letter of the

Re: proposal: per-user temporary directories on by default?

2003-08-03 Thread Kevin Kreamer
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Kevin Kreamer > [...] > > | [1] My solution as to how to get the path from libpam-tmpdir to > | pam-tmpdir-helper was to pass it on the command line. But, since > | anyone can run pam-tmpdir-helper, anyone can create

Re: proposal: per-user temporary directories on by default?

2003-08-02 Thread Kevin Kreamer
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ATM, TMPDIR is defined using #define in libpam-tmpdir's source. > Patches for having that as a run-time configuration are accepted. I recently posted to debian-devel a patch to do this (not sure whether you saw it or not). However, at the time, I didn

Re: proposal: per-user temporary directories on by default?

2003-07-30 Thread Kevin Kreamer
Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ATM, TMPDIR is defined using #define in libpam-tmpdir's source. > Patches for having that as a run-time configuration are accepted. Attached is a patch to allow you to specify TMPDIR in the relevent pam.d file, like so: session optional pam_tmpdir

Re: Advice needed : Oracle and Debian Linux

2003-06-20 Thread Kevin Kreamer
Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 12:53:34AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: >> As for the support people, I don't think that necessarily makes it >> impossible. >> If you started up a company to produce a commercial distribution based on >> Debian for running Ora

Re: security in testing

2003-05-14 Thread Kevin Kreamer
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So where does that leave us? If none of the people who are in a > position to approve packages for inclusion in testing or > testing-security are willing to commit resources to doing so, it seems > the only other option that could have an effect is to s

Re: doc-html-w3

2001-09-23 Thread Kevin Kreamer
I've been kicking around: >a) doc-w3 (most general, my favorite; perhaps even doc-w3c) >b) doc-markup-w3 (but this name excludes style: CSS2, XSLT, etc) >c) doc-w3c-recommend >d) [your suggestion here] doc-w3c looks best to me, but any would work as long as it is -w3c