On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 01:50:01PM +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On jeu., 2011-08-04 at 13:27 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Julian Taylor, le Thu 04 Aug 2011 12:32:27 +0200, a écrit :
> > > You might be able to reduce startup time by only linking against the
> > > libraries you need or lazy
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:51:44AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-07-19, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > If we're talking about shared libraries, this is a non issue. the .la file
> > is named like the .so symlink, i.e. without the soname; dlopening a shared
> > library without specifying an sona
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 04:31:24PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 20, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > > Again, why?
> > ZFS is a pretty big one.
> It is about as stable as BTRFS on Linux, so I do not see either a
> compelling argument right now.
BTRFS ? stable ? You must be living in the future.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 02:00:40PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ben Hutchings writes ("Re: A few observations about systemd"):
> > What's more, neither of the 'ports' to other kernels increases hardware
> > support.
>
> What they do provide is healthy competition for Linux. There are
> reasons why
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 04:03:41PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:14:39PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > I'm sure that systemd does much better than a traditional sysvinit boot
> > > with
> > > /bin/bash and no dependency-based b
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 01:22:37PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 06:51:17PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > In fact, a minimal systemd system will win in almost very aspect against
> > a remotely similarly powerful sysvinit system: you will need much fewer
> > processe
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 04:10:18PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> There are 23 packages in unstable which can't be installed on Debian
> GNU/kFreeBSD because of their unconditional dependency on fuse-utils.
> On this platform, fuse4bsd should be used instead.
>
> I indent to file one bug r
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:35:08PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 08:04 -0400, Durandal Dokucheyav wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am contacting you guys on behalf of http://gitbrew.org. We have
> > recently released the otherOS++ firmware for the Sony Playstation 3,
> > allowing
On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Emil Langrock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have currently the problem that I have to use large, computing intensive
> applications [1,2]. These are usually implemented in many source files. I
> used
> in the past pseudo c files which include all other c files [3]
Hi,
I just found out that gcc is compiled with --with-arch-32=i586, which
effectively means it builds with -march=i586 by default (and that it
still claims an i486-linux-gnu target).
I'm wondering. Is the project at large aware that we're not building for
i486, but for i586 ? That even the mainta
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:16:54 AM Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Julien Valroff wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 00:02:01 (+0200 CEST), René Mayorga a écrit :
> > >> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 01:32:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> FWIW I think that "rolling" or "CUT" miss the point entirely. As a
> Debian user I use stable on my servers (with a few backports for the 3-4
> things I need bleeding edge for). For my desktop I use unstable, and
> when that breaks
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:30:26PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 17:57]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > > > On Sat, Apr 30, 201
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 02:18:06PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 13:28]:
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > > > That being said, it
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 01:06:57PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [110430 12:16]:
> > That being said, it would be really helpful to be able to get buildds
> > to build the mozilla.d.n packages...
>
> Would it work to build the packages in uns
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 07:48:54AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-04-30, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
> >> People try out new things in experimental, and it seems to work mostly
> >> well to get new stuff migrated from there via unstable to testing onc
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:25:30AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Apr 27, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 07:20:55PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > The reason is that the kind of entities which require FIPS 140 probably
> > > also tend to require corporate vendor support, wh
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 04:09:45PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 09:19 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 à 14:02 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> > > On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 20:47 +0800, YANG,Chao wrote:
> > > > dpkg --print-architecture shows
> > > >
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 11:22:24PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Andrey Rahmatullin
>
> * Package name: git-hg
> Version : 20110408-1
> Upstream Author : Barak A. Pearlmutter
> * URL : https://github.com/barak/git-hg
>
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 03:40:17PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello *,
>
> there are several programs which open(URL) and span external webbrowsers
> like "icewesel2. The problem I am encountering is, if you use several
> profiles and have them open like "private", "devel" and "electronic
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:05:37AM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Svante R Signell wrote:
> >> Sorry, but the problem persists, since a few days by now!
> >
> > The problem seem to be continuing: apt-get update on any computer and
> > distribution from ftp.se.debian.o
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 08:58:55AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> What would it take to get cdn.debian.net become a service provided by
> the project? In other words, cdn.debian.org, instead of cdn.debian.net.
>
> If we had cdn.debian.org, we could make it into a default mirror (which
> could pote
On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 10:58:47AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 06/03/11 at 10:43 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 10:10 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > I prefer the situation where we empower users to make the switch if they
> > > decide to, to the situatio
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 01:43:19PM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Olaf van der Spek
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> >> On to, 2011-03-03 at 12:47 +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> >>> some package announce their existance to
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:32:23AM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > Not everything gets set up in DNS and ssh caches the host
> > key so doing a mitm attack after the initial handshake is prevented.
> > It's not like it'll magically be pulled in on servers or anybody is
> > suggesting making it
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:13:06PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 01:51:35AM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thursday 03,March,2011 12:02 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > - Instead, we move all packages that are to be unpacked into
> > > half-insta
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 03:53:08PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Julien Cristau writes:
>
> > I'm still not sure how 'Build-Depends: foo [i386] | bar [amd64]'
> > would make sense (as opposed to making it an 'and').
>
> They're equivalent, so I would view it as intended for human readers, not
> f
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 12:59:46PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 18 février 2011 à 10:29 +0100, Benjamin Drung a écrit :
> > I favor a combination of idea one and two, which is: Keep 3.5 in
> > unstable and push the last 4.0 betas/rc to experimental. Push 4.0 to
> > unstable when it
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:12:42AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> As I mentioned above, my initial idea was to go with the second option,
> breaking most rdeps in the process, but then I remembered that 4.0
> doesn't work on all our architectures, and I'm hesitating, now.
>
&
Hi,
Now that squeeze is released, it's time to start pushing new things to
unstable. I've been asked several times already how things would be
evolving in the near future, to which I answered it would quite stay the
way it is now until upstream releases 4.0, at which point I'd upload 4.0
to unstab
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:45:56PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:09:05 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> > > getbuildlog(1) from devscripts downloads (almost, if you ignore a
> > > small header/footer) text-versions of build logs.
> > it is exactly that header and footer th
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:58:57PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 21:43 +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 22:05, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > > * Throwaway DD built .debs (well, let's have the fight^Wdiscussion)
> >
> > could you please keep in mind the bandwid
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 06:24:19PM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org):
>
> > It looks like you forgot what was happening before 6 months ago, which
> > we should really not be reproducing. (and here, mostly, I'm thinking
> >
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 05:03:46PM +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (lea...@debian.org):
>
> > varying degrees of flame-ness. Also, still IIRC, the release team has
> > already acknowledged that they intend to work on improving various
> > aspects of the release process
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 02:27:44PM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On su, 2011-01-09 at 15:18 +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > * Lars Wirzenius , 2011-01-09, 14:00:
> > > [3] http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dep/web/deps/dep5.mdwn?rev=153&sc=0
> > >
> > >If you are interested, please give the spec a quick rea
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 03:29:08AM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Nice write-up, you raise many good points I agree with.
>
> Just a small remark:
>
> On 05.01.2011 01:25, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> > 2) /usr is mounted read-only for security and safety
> >
> >Mounting /usr read-only is commo
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 03:30:29PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > name the temp file properly, and teach your program to clean old ones up
> > *safely* (see vim swap file handling for an example) when it starts.
>
> What about restoring meta-data? File-owner?
owner, permissions, acl, xattrs,
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 01:52:13PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 29 décembre 2010 à 12:50 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
> > If so, that's a bug in python-xpcom. Any package which registers a
> > hook with another package must be prepared for its hook to be run even
> > when the regis
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:50:06PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Mike Hommey writes ("Re: Full install/removal/upgrade test results
> available"):
> > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:59:16PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > So the problem is that python-xpcom
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:59:16PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Mike Hommey writes ("Re: Full install/removal/upgrade test results
> available"):
> > Unfortunately, while some cases were fixed, the original case for which
> > the pre-depends was added fails agai
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 09:08:14PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 27 décembre 2010 à 18:57 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 08:36:38PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > You could use dpkg-trigger to force the trigger to be run after
>
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 08:36:38PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 21 décembre 2010 à 20:59 +0100, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > Adding update-python-modules -p in python-xpcom postinst could make
> > things slightly better, but that would still leave xulrunner-1.9.1
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 09:41:54PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Mike Hommey , 2010-12-21, 20:59:
> >>I think you could manually trigger xulrunner-1.9.1 in
> >>python-xpcom's postinst if it's not already registered. See the
> >>attached patch (well, except
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 08:37:53PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Mike Hommey , 2010-11-19, 09:18:
> >>Mike Hommey
> >> python-xpcom (U)
> >
> >I /think/ this could be solved by not using a pre-depends on
> >xulrunner-1.9.1.
>
> Indeed.
>
&
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 01:22:19PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 10:46:44AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > Unfortunately, it will require translations though...
> >
> > Reportbug is not translated :)
>
> While the not translated fact makes things easier in the issue of th
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 11:11:18AM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 11:27:44AM +0100, Joachim Wiedorn wrote:
> > Lucas Nussbaum wrote on 2010-12-03 10:36:
> >
> > > No, sorry. I must admit that I didn't spend any time investigating the
> > > failures. However, my irssi backlog
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:35:11AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Mike Hommey, le Tue 30 Nov 2010 10:07:55 +0100, a écrit :
> > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 07:18:17AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > > What's going on here? sync_file_range() is a Linux specific system
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 07:18:17AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > What's going on here? sync_file_range() is a Linux specific system
> > call that has been around for a while. It allows program to control
> > when writeback happens in a very low-level fashion. The first set of
> > sync_file_ran
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:52:07AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 16:09:10 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > How about dpkg doesn't care, like it used to, *except* for really
> > important packages (say, essential ones, or priority importan
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 03:53:27PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> But right now from the point of view of dpkg maintainers, this bug is a
> "wontfix" at our level.
>
> Just to sum up what dpkg --unpack does in 1.15.8.6:
> 1/ set the package status as half-installed/reinst-required
> 2/ extract al
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:19:05PM +0100, marcin wrote:
> Package: general
> Severity: important
>
> I'm sorry but I cannot tell which package exactly is the source of the problem
> so I put it in 'general' section. While there is a flash movie content running
> in iceweasel (for example from yout
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 08:37:17AM -0600, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Mike Hommey
>python-xpcom (U)
I /think/ this could be solved by not using a pre-depends on
xulrunner-1.9.1. OTOH, the pre-depends solves a part of another
problem though not entirely, due to triggers ordering: the
xul
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:04:07PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 22:58, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >> A number of packages in the archive sets the PYTHONPATH environment
> >> variable
> >> in an insecure way. They do something like:
> >>
> >> PYTHONPATH=/spam/eggs:$PYTHONPATH
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:03:30PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:35:34AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > I have a package my-apt-config that installs the gpg key for the local
> > repository, a /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ file, /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/ file
> > and /etc/a
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:36:59AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 09:57:23AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:20:56 +0200
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> > > Indeed, installling Squeeze (without any task) needs 460MiB
> >
> > If you want to trim that
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 28/09/10 at 09:16 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:37:55AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > > OK, thanks for the clarification. Still, we need to decide—sort of
> > > > now—whether we need to add s
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:50:26PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 03:13:06PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> ...
> > By policy, we use full-disk encryption at my workplace (where full-disk
> > really means "except the bootloader and /boot"). For a 2-year-old recipe for
> > it, wh
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 08:26:22AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:47:31 +0200
> Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > > Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
> > >
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
>
> How does a major, disruptive, transition get done?
I think his proposal boils down to this: we *always* have unstable and
testing to upload whatever we want and handle transiti
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 12:27:14PM +0200, Salvo 'LtWorf' Tomaselli wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 12:02:38 Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> > What about using nc ?
> > nc -l < /etc/passwd
> >
> > http://localhost:/ => bingo.
> >
> > We will probably not convince you, but there are
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 06/09/10 at 20:32 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > On Lu, 06 sep 10, 17:52:17, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > Alexander Reichle-Schmehl writes ("Backports service becoming official"):
> > > > Because of limitations in the Debian Bug Tra
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 03:44:54PM +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> >So maybe these transient homepages (remember they only show up when
> >the xulrunner version changes, which won't happen in squeeze
> >stable/security updates or when running iceweasel for the first
> >time) should just thank user
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 01:42:34PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: For those who care about their packages in Debian"):
> > Ben Hutchings writes:
> >
> > > Please stop filing ITPs and concentrate on packages that should be
> > > included in squeeze. The sooner squeeze is ou
Hi,
For those not reading debian-rele...@l.d.o, I planned to include some
further changes to iceweasel before the freeze, except that the freeze
happened earlier than I expected. Anyways, the plan was more or less
accepted by the release team, but now that I actually started to make
the changes, I
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 06:27:01PM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> Thus, getting to the main point of this long e-mail: what are we going
> to do with libcairo2 in squeeze? If we keep it at 1.8.10, I think it
> makes sense to apply the above mentioned patch, because it has been
> accepted by up
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Hommey
* Package name: pyxpcom
Version : 0.0~hg20100212-1
Upstream Author : ActiveState Tool Corp.
* URL : http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/pyxpcom
* License : MPL-1.1 or GPL-2 or LGPL-2.1
Programming Lang: C
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 08:02:41AM -0400, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 07:28:26 (EDT), Darren Salt wrote:
>
> > I demand that Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton may or may not have written...
> >
> > [snip]
> >> basically, an interpretation of the decision from the mozilla foundatio
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 12:28:26PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
> > basically, an interpretation of the decision from the mozilla foundation is
> > that all languages but javascript can get lost. i do not understa
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:42:07PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> Package: vmfs-tools
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 9.1.1
>
>
> Hi.
>
> I might have spotted a policy violation here (therefore the sevirity serious).
>
> Policy section 9.1.1. specifies:
> "The location of
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:52:59AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> For people interested in more intelligible information than the above
> rant, some xpcom exposed interfaces in xulrunner have been "tweaked"
> such that they will only work when called from javascript. Such
> inte
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 06:07:27PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> hi folks,
>
> i don't know if you're aware of the ... issues shall we say ...
> surrounding xulrunner 1.9.2 but there's a few changes going on.
> python-xpcom is being *dropped* from xulrunner as a first class
> citize
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:27:43AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 01:18 AM, Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:
> > On 06/30/2010 06:15 AM, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> >> I just noticed that the chromium-browser package releases in Debian
> >> GNU/Linux unstable are synced version-for-version with the
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 09:58:28AM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Am 30.06.2010 02:31, schrieb Michael Gilbert:
>
> > Advantages of switching to backports:
> > - very simple for the maintainers to keep up to date with respect to
> > security updates (a matter of just recompil
ttempt at assembling a sound argument
> supporting this proposal. Note that my only vested interest in the
> outcome of any decision is reducing the burden on the security team. I
> understand that Mike Hommey is ultimately responsible for any decision
> that may be made, and the con
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:06:04PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:29:20 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:24:00AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > No, my proposal is to move the package to a better home: backports.
> >
>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:51:47AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> The point I was trying to make in that paragraph is that there are two
> browser codebases (webkit and mozilla) that need to be supported, which
> could be halved by dropping one.
As long as there are people to support both, why d
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:35:28AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:37:46 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 02:57:32AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > Mozilla actively makes it hard to stay up to date
> > > (by providi
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 11:24:00AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> No, my proposal is to move the package to a better home: backports.
Same question as for Md with volatile:
apt-cache rdepends xulrunner-1.9.1 libmozjs2d libwebkit-1.0-2
What do you do with these packages ? backports too ? Do you
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 02:57:32AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Mozilla actively makes it hard to stay up to date
> (by providing as little information as possible in their advisories);
> webkit (for the most part except for Apple announcements) makes it
> easy. This means security fixes are go
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:29:54PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jun 28, PICCA Frédéric-Emmanuel
> wrote:
>
> > Do you have an entry explaining how to create from scratch a symbol file
> > for a given library ?
>
> You add "dh_makeshlibs -- -c4" to debian/rules and then edit the diff in
> th
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 05:36:11AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> Ah yes, Iceape. Their releases are so few and far between, this could
> possibly mean that we won't see Iceweasel 3.6 or Icedove 3.1 for some
> time, correct? Upstream Seamonkey 2.1 will be build against gecko 1.9.3,
> but its release
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 09:55:22AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-06-28, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > If there is no manpower to do better than this then I feel that it would
> > be more honest to just use volatile.
>
> The catch-all for "I can't maintain this stuff properly"[1] is not volatile,
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 11:35:17AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jun 28, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, as xpcom is guaranteed forward compatible but not
> > backwards compatible, some plugins and extensions, once built against
> > xulrunner 1.9.2, are lik
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:25:59AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> Seeing as though upstream Firefox 3.6 released December 1, 2008, and
> upstream Thunderbird 3.1 released just a couple days ago, it might be
> high time to get xulrunner 1.9.2 into Sid, as both Iceweasel 3.6 and
> Icedove 3.1 will dep
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 01:25:11PM +0200, Jarek Kamiński wrote:
> Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
> > I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
> > leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
> > is unwilling to fix.
> > Unless the ma
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:44:40PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> * Mike Hommey [2010-05-27 12:00 +0200]:
> > There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
> > when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
>
> Doesn't look like it
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:27:40PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00:47PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > Why they want it unfortunately is a wrong reasoning - the actual
> > > pending and still unanswered question is "why it is needed". T
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:26:02AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> * Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 08:11:36 CEST]:
> | As far as I understood it, it's not that much about unpacking, because
> | the format is pretty clear then, but about packing (or in this case
> | repacking) the source p
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 08:39:00PM -0400, Ryan Oram wrote:
> >From the Ubuntu mailing list, in case of you aren't subscribed there:
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Dane Mutters wrote:
> > I think some of you would be interested in reading this page that
> > (allegedly) documents some of the
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:54:28PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Petter Reinholdtsen:
>
> > I am bothered by http://bugs.debian.org/56 >, and the fact
> > that apt(-get,itude) do not work with Squid as a proxy. I would very
> > much like to have apt work out of the box with Squid in Squeez
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 02:55:20PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > And it was said in this thread that UID == GID is not always true with
> > UPG. You only need to create a group for that to become false for users
> > you would create afterwards.
>
> I'd say if Debian's idea of UPG doesn't matc
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 01:04:22PM +0200, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Harald Braumann wrote:
> > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:48:19AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> >> Will be done in base-files 5.4.
> >
> > I think that this change was done prematurely. There is
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 09:47:36AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 06 mai 2010 à 21:11 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen a écrit :
> > These days, the init.d script dependencies in Squeeze are quite
> > complete, so complete that it is actually possible to run all the
> > init.d scripts in paral
On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 12:48:47PM +0300, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 11:27:27AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > "Harm others" is a vague term that can be applied to a wide range of
> > activities usually considered ok[1].
>
> I am indeed discussing this matter with upstream. Th
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 12:03:54AM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Ok, I added it to the poll, but i doubt that it will win against
> browser-plugin-*.
Really, this is getting out of proportion. How about we don't care and
try to improve searching by debtags in the various apt frontends? (if
that e
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:54:41PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 25.04.2010, 23:51 +0200 schrieb Yves-Alexis Perez:
> > On dim., 2010-04-25 at 18:58 +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > > > What should we do?
> > >
> > > I think we should start using the new naming policy to add the
>
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 01:21:29PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Mike Hommey]
> > There is a general problem with fuse, actually. fuse-utils is needed by
> > any program using libfuse and allowing users (i.e not root) to mount a
> > filesystem: In this case, libfuse
Cc'ing to -devel, as it is a more general problem and I'd like to hear
feedback from other fellow developers.
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 01:05:37PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 02:16:58PM +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> > One of my packages, fuse-convmvfs (uploaded by a
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 01:24:17PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:49:55PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >> 2/ You explain that you have no reason to switch to the new formats. Fine.
> >>I have explained you that I bel
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:49:55PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> 2/ You explain that you have no reason to switch to the new formats. Fine.
>I have explained you that I believe there are good reasons for
>switching (I won't repeat the wiki page). Why are you insisting to not
>switch w
101 - 200 of 874 matches
Mail list logo
