Goswin Brederlow wrote:
the Author of tar changed the --bzip option again. This time its even
worse than the last time, since -I is still a valid option but with a
totally different meaning.
This totally changes the behaviour of tar and I would consider that a
critical bug, since
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It is much more likely that a normal user will be generating ISO
images than ext2 loopback filesystems.
- - Original Message -
From: Peter S Galbraith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 4:15
severity 23000 standard
This is ONLY A PROBLEM FOR PEOPLE WHO ALTER PROCMAIL UNEXPECTEDLY. THIS
IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR MOST STANDARD CONFIGURATIONS. THERE IS A PERFECTLY
USEFUL WORKAROUND TO CONFIGURE SENDMAIL TO USE DELIVER INSTEAD. This is
therefore NOT release critical.
On Tue, 16 Jun 1998,
')
Both the maintainer and I (as a concerned third party and maintainer of
deliver) don't think this is important enough to hold up hamm.
On Wed, 17 Jun 1998, Herbert Xu wrote:
severity 23000 important
quit
Scott Ellis wrote:
severity 23000 standard
This is ONLY A PROBLEM FOR PEOPLE
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Peter Maydell wrote:
My point wasn't that installing man pages for multiple languages was
wrong, just that installing them without asking was wrong.
We're increasingly of the opinion recently that any postinst questions are
to be avoided.
In any event, others are correct
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Amos Shapira wrote:
The rsh/rlogin/ident/rexec services are active by default in the
inetd.conf file. Even though I keep removing them (I delete their
lines altogether since that way it's much easier to notice a change)
they seem to keep popping up after updating any
On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, Bdale Garbee wrote:
Am working on the release-critical bugs in bind. It appears that
lintian flags the 'mx' and 'ns' commands as possible namespace
pollution. These, along with '', 'soa', and 'zone' are symlinks to
'host' that do quickie lookups for those types of
Enlightened Sound Daemon (EsounD version 0.2)
This provides sound tools that are used by the new Enlightenment, as well
as possibly the new Gnome.
--
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Thu, 4 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just read on LWN the short story about Bruce's
Linux Standard Base. Both Caldera and Redhat have a guy in
it. Debian isn't even mentioned. Shouldn't we have somebody in
the commitee? What do you think about?
We are aware of the effort and
On Thu, 30 Apr 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have installed debian 1.3.1 (several times!) at home and have found
that it is NOT easy to install. Many of the utilities are older than
versions supplied with Slackware or Redhat. Examples: Man uses More
instead of Less as a pager (this
On Wed, 15 Apr 1998, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
Can anyone suggest why this script doesn't seem to work on 2.1.90?
It's my /etc/init.d/network. I added the netmask on the route line
for lo because it seemed to help, but I still get some other errors,
and ifconfig seems to hang.
#!/bin/sh
On Sun, 12 Apr 1998, Chris Fearnley wrote:
'Guy Maor wrote:'
LeRoy D. Cressy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I question the purpose of leaving broken symbolic links when
upgrading the libraries. For instance libreadline2 leaves
the following broken links reported by ldconfig:
Those
On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Brian White wrote:
In this case, if somebody has the knowledge to build their own 2.1 kernel
(since one didn't come on the CD), then they have the knowledge necessary
to get packages from unstable.
It's very unpleasant to have to download things whn you have
On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Brian White wrote:
They work if you're using a 2.1.x kernel. Since plenty of people can be
expected to get Debian on multi-CD sets which include kernel sources, I
still believe we should ship them.
Also, what happens when Linus finally puts out the 2.2.0 kernel? I
On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Brian White wrote:
What if THEY GOT IT OFF A CD, NOT THE NET? Yes, there are people that are
going to buy CD distributions that include kernel sources, and these
distributions will include 2.1.x and 2.2 when it's released. WHAT DO WE
LOSE by putting support for them
On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Nuno Ferreira wrote:
Is there any reason for libc6-dev to depend on gcc and not on any
c-compiler ?
As it is now I can't keep egcs as my only compiler without breaking
dependencies. Either libc6-dev should depend on c-compiler or egcs provide
gcc. Am I missing
Well, I've build an autoupgrade kit based on the upgrade script posted
here recently. It includes all the packages mentioned in the script (I
hope). I need people to test it however, since I don't have any more bo
machines to test it on at this time.
On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Bart Schuller wrote:
BTW,
Does anyone know where killall went? procps_1.2.2-1 doesn't seem to
include it. killall is used in quite a lot of scripts, which are now
starting to break.
Yes, it got broken out upstream into a seperate psmisc package. Which is
now stuck in
On 5 Jan 1998, Steve Dunham wrote:
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jan 05, 1998 at 08:59:50AM +0800, Lindsay Allen wrote:
The kernel-source-2.0.32 deb has a 130K diff file against the standard
source. Just where do these patches come from and why are they
On Mon, 5 Jan 1998, David Frey wrote:
On Mon, Jan 5 1998 20:08 +0100 Christian Schwarz writes:
Automake does support the GNU standard, a less restrict one, and (perhaps)
the gnits standard (the new GNU standard). Will there be automake support
for Debian packages ?
[...]
However,
Package: ftp.debian.org
On Fri, 2 Jan 1998, Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but why is there an gmp_2.0.2-3.deb in hamm's devel
directory when we have gmp2_2.0.2-4.deb in hamm/libs ?
Probably because Guy missed removing it. I'm forwarding this as a bug
against ftp.debian.org
On 23 Dec 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Faq-O-Matic is a FAQ generation system - it allows people to add stuff
to a FAQ via a CGI interface, and it displays it, etc. I would like someone
who is better with Perl than I to package it. Please see:
On Fri, 19 Dec 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I had been a devoted Slackware fan, trying Debian convinced me
that it is far superior a distribution. However, in the process of
installing Debian 1.3.1 at least 15 times (several computers and
several different plans on how to install them
On Thu, 18 Dec 1997, Alex Romosan wrote:
i have a c++ program compiled with no debug flag. when i do an ldd on
the executable i get the following:
ldd ./vat
libtk8.0.so.1 = /usr/lib/libtk8.0.so.1 (0x4000f000)
libtcl8.0.so.1 = /usr/lib/libtcl8.0.so.1 (0x400af000)
On Thu, 18 Dec 1997, Will Lowe wrote:
how do I do it?
Mail to either bug#[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED], the
web bug mirror has full instructions on the bug tracking system.
--
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS
After seven or eight months as Debian's mailing list manager, I'm
ready for a change of pace. I'd like to offer up the position to any
interested individual(s).
I'm offering the position because I haven't been spending as many
late nights at my day job's office, and I've
On 12 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote:
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
On 11 Dec 1997, Guy Maor wrote:
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm sick of trying to find a useful workaround for people who just
want to install a few packages from hamm without upgrading the whole
thing.
There isn't one. I assumed you, as libc5-to-libc6 maintainer, knew
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Scott Ellis wrote:
Corruption of utmp/wtmp is a MINOR PROBLEM. Many people don't care if the
file is corrupted, they just want to use some libc6 stuff without being
forced completely into libc6.
How do I know which
On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Chris Fearnley wrote:
Actually, I think Martin is correct. In order to prevent CDROM based
1.3.1 users from corrupting their utmp, libc6 must conflict with older
libc5. Modulo my typo (Martin's = is right, not my ), I think my
other post suggests the best solution. Of
On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Michael Meskes wrote:
It disappeared on my system. Is it in a different package nowadays?
I believe lilo20 obsoleted it. Check out the lilo docs.
--
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST:
On Thu, 4 Dec 1997, Brian White wrote:
Just to let everyone know, EGCS has very recently (hours) just put out
their first release!
ftp://ftp.cygnus.com/pub/egcs/releases/egcs-1.0
It contians it's own integrated libstdc++, libg++ is not supported right
now and is obscolecent.
On Tue, 2 Dec 1997, Yann Dirson wrote:
Scott K. Ellis writes:
BTW, is there a particular reason that e2fsprogs got renamed to
e2fsprogsg? This seems to be the biggest chance to completely screw over
someone's system in all of Debian now.
Yes: e2fsprogs used to contain shared libs,
On Wed, 18 Jun 1997, Charles Briscoe-Smith wrote:
How about this: Have the policy dictate that no packages may be
compiled against libc4/5, and then move any packages that don't comply
with the policy to 'contrib'. I believe that one of the reasons for
having 'contrib' is to contain packages
On Tue, 17 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote:
The files /usr/bin/{editor,pager} will be managed through alternatives.
Since alternatives can be changed by the sysadmin only, we allow the user
to define EDITOR and PAGER to override this.
That's why we need sensible-{editor,pager}. These are
On Wed, 21 May 1997, Tim Sailer wrote:
Can someone verify that this is a problem? I installed ssleay and ssltelnet,
and when ssltelnet ripped through the install, it never paused for me
to enter the info for the certificate.. This is what it looked like:
Generating a 512 bit private key
36 matches
Mail list logo
