-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 17:57:11 +1000
Source: eject
Binary: eject
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.0.13-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2003 13:23:07 +1000
Source: eject
Binary: eject
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.0.13-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 13:10:16 +1000
Source: xmame
Binary: xmame-gl xmame-svga xmame-fx xmame xmame-x xmess-x
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 0.74.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:30:19 +1100
Source: eject
Binary: eject
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.0.13-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 14:49:26 +1000
Source: xtrlock
Binary: xtrlock
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.0-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Martin Mitchell [EMAIL
J.H.M. Dassen \(Ray\) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 01:41:18 -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
So we can't do squat with NcFTP 3 until Mike includes a license.
I switched to lftp myself at the time of the previous ncftp license issue,
and haven't looked back. Is there
On Wed, 19 May 1999, Remco van de Meent wrote:
Leon Breedt wrote:
apcupsd is a package to monitor and control APC UPS's.
May I ask you where I can download its source code? :)
http://www.brisse.dk/site/apcupsd/index.htm#TOP
I was looking for it some time ago and wasnt able to find any
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris Waters writes:
I *strongly* oppose eliminating it, and I'm not real big on the idea
of making the default be off. Installing new packages takes a
while, I don't mind a few extra moments there. I *do* mind run-time
delays, even if they're small,
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But dpkg-multicd is more than multiple-cds. There's multi-nfs,
multi-mount, ... that replace nfs, mounted, ...
That's why we think dpkg default methods can be removed/extracted to a
different package.
Ok, I didn't realize this. If the multi-mount,
Daniel Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Helmut Geyer is listed as the maintainer for xxgdb and bzip - xxgdb
hasn't had a maintainer upload since when bo was frozen, and bzip's
last maintainer upload was longer ago than that. Mail sent to his
listed address goes unanswered, but maybe that's
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jan 31, 1999 at 12:21:00AM +1100, Martin Mitchell wrote:
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.4.0.31
Severity: important
Please remove the following methods (based on disk):
harddisk
Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 31 Jan 1999, Martin Mitchell wrote:
Adam Di Carlo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.4.0.31
Severity: important
Please remove the following methods (based on disk):
harddisk
mounted
cdrom
nfs
Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
an easy fix for that? Splitting the packages is a possibility, but
libgeda is of absolutely no use on its own yet, and I don't think there
is anything for a libgeda-dev.
I have found this in the policy:
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
around compiling all the i386 stuff for the other archs. But nobody
goes around compiling the stuff from the other archs for i386! So if
I suddenly do all my package development on Alpha, the Alpha will have
the current versions, and perhaps the Sparc
Matthias Ettrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Indeed. If you read the GPL word for word you will find that a binary
distribution requires ALL libraries to be distributed under the GPL.
Interesting that you do not even quote the GPL to try and back up your
non-arguments.
Martin.
Sorry for the delayed reply, I've been away a few days.
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 17 Jun 1998, Martin Mitchell wrote:
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is the old .rc file, left behind by a dpkg artifact during the
upgrade. While future versions of ae
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is the old .rc file, left behind by a dpkg artifact during the
upgrade. While future versions of ae will be able to remove this file, I
don't see Brian letting it into hamm, but as it is only useful in this
mode during an install, everything will
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, but note that the current version of ae fixes a lot of these
problems. [I found this out while attempting to verify some
of my gripes about ae.]
Is it just me, or does the vi mode in the current version of ae not work
at all? I tried
ae -f
Shaleh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there anyway there could be a variable set that says do not install
/usr/doc files? This way those who do not want the docs can go on w/o
them.
And /usr/doc/pkg/copyright? We still need that for every file, as part
of policy.
Martin.
--
To
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would like to recommend that linux 2.0.34 be made available as a
part of hamm. This is because 2.0.34 is a bugfix-only upgrade to
2.0.33.
However, I don't think we have enough experience with 2.0.34 to
eliminate 2.0.33 from the distribution. So
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I downloaded the binutils-m68k-palmos-coff package. However, it
appears that it requires some gcc packages that you orphaned awhile
back. I'd like to adopt those packages but can't seem to find the
original sources anywhere. I'd rather start from what
Ben Gertzfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'll wait then. I was talking to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about
this, and whipped up some packages for the new version. They're
done, but I won't upload them until Jens or Sami gets back to me.
Martin Sami gave us http://www.x11amp.ml.org/ as website
Rev. Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
--k+w/mQv8wyuph6w0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Apr 24, 1998 at 02:22:39PM +0100, Jules Bean wrote:
On the contrary. This is an excellent point you made. ncftp
is now
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wouldn't it be enough to make dpkg-perl predepend on perl-base instead of
the whole perl? Or does it need some functionality not provided in
perl-base?
If dpkg-perl depended on perl-base instead of perl, the problem would
disappear. However I don't
Another thing that caused trouble when I tried installing from the base
disks (1998-04-11) yesterday was a libfdisk error that prevented dinstall
from detecting that a swap partition had been created. An error message
was printed before returning to the dinstall menu, and it came from this
section
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Was your swap partition a logical partition? libfdisk had a bug reading
extended partitions in big disks. A fixed libfdisk will be included in next
boot-floppies release.
Yes, it was a logical partition. It seems this problem is well known now.
Roman Hodek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I was receiving the message error reading sector 0 all the time,
but cfdisk handled the partitioning just fine, so I expect this is a
problem in libfdisk or dinstall somewhere.
That's really strange, since the message is about a real read error.
Is
I installed a debian hamm system yesterday and noticed a problem involving
dpkg-perl. After installing the base system from disks, I ran dselect
to install some more packages. On the first installation run however,
dpkg-perl was the first package installed, and it failed because perl
was not yet
Christian Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just go get this right: As Policy Manager I have fiat power WRT policy
decisions. (This was stated by Bruce when I was nomiated and repeated by
Ian J. on 8 Dec 97--check out debian-private if you have doubts.)
As I wrote to debian-policy a few
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Someone wrote:
4 or 5? No, in fact there are only 2 vi clones in main: nvi and vim.
ae and emacs in vi-mode certainly don't count. elvis, unlike nvi and vim
is the only one with X support. We should continue to push for it to be
made free.
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From the copyright:
From the README on archive.cs.umbc.edu:
1) GUS instruments were freely obtained from anonymous ftp site:
archive.epas.utoronto.ca/pub/pc/ultrasound/gravis/disk
So they were extracted from the GUS install disks
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I will take over the orphaned elvis package, unless someone else has already
said they'll do it.
Elvis is non-free and the author ignores all mail coming from us,
both copyright mails as well as bugreports and fixes.
We should not give up so
Enrique Zanardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, Apr 18, 1998 at 02:13:52AM +1000, Martin Mitchell wrote:
4 or 5? No, in fact there are only 2 vi clones in main: nvi and vim.
ae and emacs in vi-mode certainly don't count. elvis, unlike nvi and vim
is the only one with X support. We
I will take over the orphaned elvis package, unless someone else has already
said they'll do it.
Martin.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ulf Jaenicke-Roessler) writes:
where should 'ps' reside, according to the standard?
In the latest version it moved from /bin/ps to /usr/bin/ps.
I noticed this too, and filed a bug. The maintainer says it will return to
/bin in the next release.
Martin.
--
TO
Stephen Zander [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know, however it would allow people to much more easily install and
maintain their own kernel sources for these includes.
Surely if they're clever enough for that, they're clever enough to
override
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes:
[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
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.
Perhaps weakening the dependency to Suggests might be the best solution
[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:
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why does libc6 depend on kernel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ulf Jaenicke-Roessler) writes:
When I use 'dpkg -i gnuchess_* gnuchess-book_*' (ie. in an alternate
sequence) this doesn't happen.
I found, that this is caused by a divertion in gnuchess-book.
1) Should there really be a diversion here?
Probably not. I'll take a
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that /usr/src should the be domain of the local admin.
I agree.
I don't think kernel-{header,source}-x.xx.deb should exist, really,
because I don't think source code should be distributed as .deb files
anyway. So I'm not unhappy about making a
[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 with the kernel, please do not confuse the issue.
specific programs that only
Hi,
I intend to package a program called synaethesia. It is a cd player with
graphical effects, and is quite compact. The license is GPL, the section
would be hamm/sound.
Martin.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble?
Hi,
I noticed some new updates of packages recently have not complied with
changelog policy[1]. They are packages that I had made non-maintainer
releases of previously, and to which I had added a changelog entry.
It is clear that the actual maintainer, when preparing the new release,
did not
Chris Fearnley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
'Martin Mitchell wrote:'
The 5.4.33-6 package is _not_ broken, and should not be removed.
It rightly conflicts with libc6 due to the different utmp format between
libc5 and libc6. The 5.4.33-7 package in hamm has modified utmp routines
so it can
Scott Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Installing libc5 from hamm forces you to abandon your old libc5
development system since it CONFLICTS (correctly) with libc5-dev. Not
everyone is going that route yet.
True, so they can stay with bo for now.
Okay there is a different utmp format. Lets
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote:
libc6: Conflicts: (libc55.4.33-6)
(Necessary due to utmp issue -- Hell, someone upgrading from a CD
with stock 1.3.1 will be able to
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 13 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 1997 at 03:19:29PM -0500, Chris Fearnley wrote:
libc6: Conflicts: (libc55.4.33-6
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Huh? The upgrade path is quite clear: install a newer libc5 (5.4.33-7)
from hamm, then you may install libc6.
The solution isn't quite so simple. The libc5 from hamm DEPENDS ON libc6.
There is a definate problem here.
You install both hamm
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Still doesn't solve the problem of the hamm libc5 conflicting with
libc5-dev and the bo libc5 conflicting with libc6. It is a compilation of
different breakages here. My concern is for people who still want to do
libc5 development WITH THEIR NORMAL
Michael Alan Dorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm officially orphaning ncftp and glimpse, for a couple of reasons.
I shall take over maintenance of ncftp, unless anyone objects.
Martin.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guess
why i proposed to name a directory with libc5 compiled hamm packages
bo-unstable?
Surely bo-unstable == hamm, so please invest your time in hamm, not
something that will be discarded in a few months.
Martin.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS
Paul Seelig [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Surely bo-unstable == hamm, so please invest your time in hamm, not
something that will be discarded in a few months.
Sure, but why invest my time in hamm which will be obsoleted in half a
year anyway?
Wrong. What is your basis for saying this?
53 matches
Mail list logo
