On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 11:57:32AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hamish == Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hamish The package could be redone not to use debhelper. At the same time,
Hamish the package could be rewritten not to use the C compiler.
Hamish Lazy programmers who
Hi
first I'm just a debian-user, if you guys don't mind my 2 cents then
here it is:
I think a task packages is a bad approach to the too-many-packages
problems. The organisation of the packages shouldn't be part of the
dependency system, IMHO. This organization is intended to help clue-less
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:08:43PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
Don't do this. If you're hellbent on forking Debian packages just for the
sake of doing so, or spraying them with Helix musk, then name the packages
appropriately.
helix-gnomecc
helix-gnome-core
helix-gdm
In the case of
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:02:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
No, there is no difference between our apps and the upstream in most
cases. We do brand gnome-core and gdm, but those are the only packages
I can think of offhand. Those are only graphics changes, substituting
some of our
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:12:56PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote:
stable Debian releases only have security changes and critical bugfixes going
into them once released. I feel that the security/bugfix is more important
than any of the extras offered in the Stormix packages, so your suggestion
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:48:19PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other remarks on this subject.
An Origin field is a great idea.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:28:18AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:12:56PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote:
stable Debian releases only have security changes and critical bugfixes
going
into them once released. I feel that the security/bugfix is more important
than
Dale Scheetz wrote:
/usr/local/bin/pine not found
If I explicitly call /usr/bin/pine it works just fine.
I just checked on another user login, and no problems. This must be a bash
command caching artifact. I guess logging out will fix it...
hash -r would do it too.
Ulf
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other remarks on this subject.
An Origin field is a great idea.
We have one,
Recently, I upgraded from Postgres 6.5.3 (stable Debian) to Postgres
7.0 (unstable). During the installation, it didn't ask me anything,
besides overwriting the config files. Instead it gladly removed all my
databases which were in /var/lib/postgres/data/base/.
Luckily, I had made a dump myself,
On Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 06:38:38PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Sun, Aug 20, 2000 at 07:51:14PM +0400, Michael Sobolev wrote:
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:54:53AM -0700, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Michael Sobolev wrote:
Is it possible to access this for non-developers?
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 07:24:09PM -0500, Roland Bauerschmidt wrote:
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 10:41:16AM +1100, Andrew J Cosgriff wrote:
You need to set MOZILLA_FIVE_HOME to $HOME/.mozilla
Thanks! That was it! Now it runs fine.
This was not enough for me. You also have to start mozilla at
RB == Roland Bauerschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RB ** CRITICAL **: file
RB ../../../../../embedding/browser/gtk/src/gtkmozembed.cpp: line
RB 298 (void gtk_moz_embed_init(GtkMozEmbed *)): assertion
RB `retval == TRUE' failed.
FWIW, this is exactly the same error that I got.
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 06:44:48PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
The README on security.debian.org already gives you that line..
Hmm, strange. It seems I missed reading this.
Thanks.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael@Fam-Meskes.De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29-Aug-2000 Miros/law `Jubal' Baran wrote:
Isn't /bin/ash POSIX compliant?
I run ash as my /bin/sh. As for its compliance, I am not certain and no one
will claim it being fullly compliant.
AFAIK ash is as complaint as bash (in
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:22:16AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 06:21:55PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
I doubt you know what the logic was.
No, I don't, because I can't see any logic in excluding debhelper.
I don't know how the decision ended up being made,
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29-Aug-2000 Miros/law `Jubal' Baran wrote:
Isn't /bin/ash POSIX compliant?
I run ash as my /bin/sh. As for its compliance, I am not certain and no
one
will claim it being fullly compliant.
AFAIK ash is as
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 05:56:28PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
http://home.sol.no/~egilk/mana.html
I was curious to see it, but I can't download. Ftp server does not allow
anonymous connection...
--
Christian Surchi | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 10:10:04AM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
It parses command line -en different from bash. Different getopts ;-)
How does it differ? AFAIK, ash's getopts is POSIX compliant.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmVHI~} [EMAIL
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 10:10:04AM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
It parses command line -en different from bash. Different getopts ;-)
How does it differ? AFAIK, ash's getopts is POSIX compliant.
Sorry, wrote my first message with too high blood level in the caffeine
subsystem. I
Tomas Berndtsson wrote:
Recently, I upgraded from Postgres 6.5.3 (stable Debian) to Postgres
7.0 (unstable). During the installation, it didn't ask me anything,
besides overwriting the config files. Instead it gladly removed all my
databases which were in /var/lib/postgres/data/base/.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 11:57:17AM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Sorry, wrote my first message with too high blood level in the caffeine
subsystem. I meant echo -ne.
Neither SuS nor POSIX specifies -e so ash is free to do whatever it chooses.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! (
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 11:57:17AM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Sorry, wrote my first message with too high blood level in the caffeine
subsystem. I meant echo -ne.
Neither SuS nor POSIX specifies -e so ash is free to do whatever it chooses.
If you noted I have not used the
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 12:31:15PM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Neither SuS nor POSIX specifies -e so ash is free to do whatever it chooses.
If you noted I have not used the word POSIX anywhere. I just said that
there
are tons things that will break.
And this is Debian where we
I don't subscribe to these lists, but I am smart enough to use archives
of these mailing-lists in www. And you can Cc: to me, if you want.
* * *
Have you guys and girls seen this? What do you think about it?
http://www.securityportal.com/closet/
Debian 2.2
Kurt Seifried
August 30, 2000 - I
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 12:31:15PM +0100, Anton Ivanov wrote:
Neither SuS nor POSIX specifies -e so ash is free to do whatever it
chooses.
If you noted I have not used the word POSIX anywhere. I just said that
there
are tons things that will break.
And this is Debian
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 07:58:14PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
I believe the goal is to remove the static pages completely. Only a
few more scripts need to be written.
And how would that be a good goal? People can mirror static pages, caches
can cache them...
We don't have a good,
Aaron Lehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED],
that on Tue, 29 Aug 2000, +02:34:41 EEST (UTC +0300)
pressed these keys:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 07:34:11PM -0400, James LewisMoss wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 00:31:11 +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
Juhapekka Who will package this?:
Le Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 03:07:03PM -0500, Joseph Carter écrivait:
Perhaps the existing Gnome maintainers interested could help by working on
the packages in CVS? This takes some load off of Peter who is currently
trying to do the whole Debianization process as well as upstream work
himself
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:02:40PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 07:58:14PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
I believe the goal is to remove the static pages completely. Only a
few more scripts need to be written.
And how would that be a good goal? People can
Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
What you mean is actually done by dircolors, which checks the terminal type
in a rather dump way, using a database, and not verifying termcaps:
Why do you need to run dircolors anyway? I don't and I still get
coloured output..
Wichert.
--
On Wed 30 Aug 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
What you mean is actually done by dircolors, which checks the terminal type
in a rather dump way, using a database, and not verifying termcaps:
Why do you need to run dircolors anyway? I don't and I still get
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 03:45:06PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
Not having the helper packages included in the autobuild system appears to
benefit, at most, around ~470 packages.
It is not a benefit; it is simply irrelevant to them.
Julian
--
Hi,
I don't like crossposting to mailinglists, so i post this to debian-devel,
as well as a Cc to the original author.
Quoting Juhapekka Tolvanen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Have you guys and girls seen this? What do you think about it?
http://www.securityportal.com/closet/
Before you flame me,
Anthony,
Is it my imagination, or is bugreport.cgi *really* slow? I think that
we should really investigate the possibility of using mod_perl. It's
using CGI.pm, which is *big* and takes time to load. I've written
scripts which I use under mod_perl and the time difference is
astonishing. It
On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
Changes:
ld.so.preload-manager (0.3.2-2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Closes:#70398
I've noticed sort of a trend here lately. Changelog entries are getting
more and more ambiguous. Can this stop please?
You won't see anything like this in
Anton Ivanov wrote:
If you are right at least apache scripts are not. I suggest you
file a bug against it.
If you know how to call apache scripts to demonstrate the error then
please file the bug yourself.
Check before, if you run an up-to-date apache.
apache starts up correctly
Since my last upgrade to potato I've been getting a lot of messages like
the following:
DEBUG: --Relation pg_rules--
DEBUG: Pages 0: Changed 0, Reapped 0, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 0: Vac 0,
Keep/VTL 0/0, Crash 0, UnUsed 0, MinLen 0, MaxLen
0; Re-using: Free/Avail. Space 0/0; EndEmpty/Avail. Pages
Quoting Dale Scheetz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Since my last upgrade to potato I've been getting a lot of messages like
the following:
snip messages
There doesn't seem to be any real information here. Can anyone tell me
what is triggering these messages?
They're postgres debug messages.
Somehow,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:17:42AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
Since my last upgrade to potato I've been getting a lot of messages like
the following:
DEBUG: --Relation pg_rules--
DEBUG: Pages 0: Changed 0, Reapped 0, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 0: Vac 0,
Keep/VTL 0/0, Crash 0, UnUsed 0, MinLen 0,
I've just read your article on debian 2.2.
While you make many valid points, I'm confused about a couple of
them.
Moving on. Once the basic install is done, you will discover
that several services are enabled in inetd that shouldn't
be. Discard, daytime, time, shell,
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:02:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
No, there is no difference between our apps and the upstream in most
cases. We do brand gnome-core and gdm, but those are the only packages
I can think of offhand. Those are only graphics changes, substituting
some of our
* Dale Scheetz in Strange messages... dated 2000/08/30 04:17 wrote:
Since my last upgrade to potato I've been getting a lot of messages
like the following:
DEBUG: --Relation pg_rules--
DEBUG: Pages 0: Changed 0, Reapped 0, Empty 0, New 0; Tup 0: Vac 0,
Keep/VTL 0/0, Crash 0, UnUsed 0,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:20:48AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:31:26PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
Why do you need to run dircolors anyway? I don't and I still get
coloured output..
Then you must have some other arrangement to get the colors;
it's not enabled by default. Try a fresh install (I have).
Maybe a direct setting of
Anton Ivanov wrote:
If you are right at least apache scripts are not. I suggest you
file a bug against it.
If you know how to call apache scripts to demonstrate the error then
please file the bug yourself.
Check before, if you run an up-to-date apache.
I do
apache
I just tried to upgrade my Corel installation via the net and have some
strange behaviour when using apt:
feivel:~# dpkg -l libc6¸
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems
Anton Ivanov wrote:
apache starts up correctly for me on every system boot, and I do have
/bin/sh pointing to /bin/ash as well.
My fault. It actually uses #!/bin/bash which it should not anyway
Well, #!/bin/bash scripts are allowed to use bashisms :)
Ulf
PT == Peter Teichman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
PT This solution looks like the best one. I'll start rebuilding our
PT packages immediately.
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christian
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 12:03:44PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 05:56:28PM +0300, Juhapekka Tolvanen wrote:
http://home.sol.no/~egilk/mana.html
I was curious to see it, but I can't download. Ftp server does not allow
anonymous connection...
I found a copy at
I was running dpkg-scanpackages to construct a custom apt source.
This was the first time I really ran it, so I encountered the
peculiar style that I had to conform to.
This was what I had to write to make a Packages file in a flat dir:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/public_html/debian$ dpkg-scanpackages .
* Chris Allegretta
| I found a copy at ftp://ftp.kvaleberg.com/pub/mana-4.0beta.tar.gz, I
| guess it's a mirror. A whole lot of warnings when trying to compile it,
| but it looks interesting.
Actually, I think it's the official site. The official homepage for
Mana is:
You may use the following apt source for my ddclient deb and
the sather debs that I've fixed for woody.
deb http://139.179.21.143/~exa/debian/ ./
Please see ITPs on wnpp and on this list for information on these
packages.
Thanks,
__
-+++-+++-++-++-++--+---++- --- -- - -
+
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:53:46PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Anthony,
Is it my imagination, or is bugreport.cgi *really* slow? I think that
we should really investigate the possibility of using mod_perl. It's
using CGI.pm, which is *big* and takes time to load. I've written
scripts
Redhat, Suse, Microsoft they need version numbers so that
they can announce their great new release of their operating
system. It is more or less marketing hype.
But Debian is different. It is a collection of several single
application on top of Linux/Hurd. And we don't need the
marketing hype of
ANNOUNCE: First official release of apt-show-source
What is it?
It's a perl script that parses the dpkg status file and that APT
list files that end with Sources, without any options it prints out all
installed packages and versions were a different version is available
through your
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2000-08-31
Severity: normal
Source: bbppp
Section: x11
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Timshel Knoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Build-Depends: debhelper (= 1.2.9), xlib6g-dev, libstdc++-dev, g++
Standards-Version: 3.1.1
Package: bbppp
Architecture: any
Depends:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2000-08-31
Severity: normal
Source: bbdate
Section: x11
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Timshel Knoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Build-Depends: debhelper (= 1.2.9), xlib6g-dev, libstdc++-dev, g++
Standards-Version: 3.1.1
Package: bbdate
Architecture: any
Depends:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2000-08-31
Severity: normal
Source: bbdate
Section: x11
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Timshel Knoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Build-Depends: debhelper (= 1.2.9), xlib6g-dev, libstdc++-dev, g++
Standards-Version: 3.1.1
Package: bbdate
Architecture: any
Depends:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2000-08-31
Severity: normal
Source: bbdate
Section: unknown
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Timshel Knoll [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Build-Depends: debhelper (= 1.2.9), xlib6g-dev, libstdc++-dev, g++
Standards-Version: 3.1.1
Package: bbdate
Architecture: any
Depends:
* Jimmy O'Regan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000829 22:40]:
) But are there any features that
) mutt and slrn do not offer yet?
How about it's pine ;)
No further questions. ;-)
Problem is though, the discussion about the IMAPD license
started with rms mentioning that the FSF had tried to
resurrect
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 05:05:58PM +0200, Thomas Guettler wrote:
But I am interested
what you think about this crazy idea to remove
version numbers (like debian2.2) from debian?
How do u call slink? Old Stable? :)
No i think it is not a bad idea to have a version number. The only question
is
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 03:49:27PM -0700, Michael Meskes wrote:
Could anyone please explain this to me? Did Corel do anything to their files
that makes apt think it has to upgrade although its up-to-date? Or is this
a bug in apt?
I see this quite often, so it is a bug in the curret apt lib.
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 03:50:08PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
PT == Peter Teichman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
PT This solution looks like the best one. I'll start rebuilding our
PT packages immediately.
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 03:43:29PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:53:46PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Anthony,
Is it my imagination, or is bugreport.cgi *really* slow? I think that
we should really investigate the possibility of using mod_perl. It's
using
On 29-Aug-00, 16:05 (CDT), Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it make sense to make policy something like All official Debian
auto-build machines will have installed this set of build packages: gcc,
..., and debhelper. Debian packages are not required to specify build
dependencies
On 30-Aug-00, 04:21 (CDT), Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know how the decision ended up being made, but the argument
I presented at the time is that a dependency on debhelper is far more
likely to be versioned than the others are. A package that makes use
of a new
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Jules Bean wrote:
Well, they're from Postgres, I can tell you that much.
OK...
Probably you have one of the debug trace options on in your postgres
config files (in /etc/postgresql).
I have? ;-)
I looked in /etc/postgresql and found several files, none of which set
Hi,
If you were to augment apt-show-source in the following ways, I can see
it becoming a household word :)
I think for people inside debian who never gets out, this package can
be useful, because then they can see what upstream source pkg to get if
they decide to poke outside.
However, I
Previously Christian Marillat wrote:
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Where did that come from That won't do anything at all and will make
dpkg-gencontrol complain loudly at you.
Wichert.
--
A Debian package is either unstable, (testing) or stable.
And everybody should use the package that fits his needs.
Debian is evolving constantly, not in single steps.
But I am interested
what you think about this crazy idea to remove
version numbers (like debian2.2) from debian?
I
Hi,
I've read on this list about ITP of galeon (web browser), but
i don't remenber who announce ITP and I can't find that package on
experimental.
thank you.
--
Daniele Cruciani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universita` di Pisa - Informatica -
http://www.cli.di.unipi.it/~cruciani/
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Ashley Clark wrote:
They are courtesy of PostgreSQL, the behaviour of the config file has
changed between two of the versions. You can add PGDEBUG=0 to your
/etc/postgresql/postmaster.init file and they will disappear.
Cool!
Thanks,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of The
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:20:48AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
3) Libraries - All possible effort should be made to make Debian the
primary source of libraries. Period full stop. This is so important
because of what we are seeing with helix and their special library
On 2830T112651-0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 29-Aug-00, 16:05 (CDT), Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it make sense to make policy something like All official Debian
auto-build machines will have installed this set of build packages: gcc,
..., and debhelper. Debian
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:30:39PM -0500, Roland Bauerschmidt wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Sorry, /me is a fool. I should have looked in the bug database before
reporting this. :-/ Nevertheless I've made a galeon package which should
work ok. You can find them under
Juhapekka Tolvanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I fear, that it will take so much time, that we must have separately
packaged XEmacs/Gtk meanwhile. And I fear, that latest upstream sources
of XEmacs will ship with too old version of XEmacs/Gtk. Just check out,
how old version of Gnus and Auctex
On 30-Aug-00, 12:51 (CDT), Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2830T112651-0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
That's pretty much the definition (or at least the *use*) of
Build-Essential: packages that may be assumed to be present, so that
they need not be listed in
Robert van der Meulen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't like crossposting to mailinglists, so i post this to debian-devel,
as well as a Cc to the original author.
Maybe you should have *really* Cc'd the original author :) (Read the
article again; he isn't Juhapekka, that's for sure ...)
--
Colin
Juhapekka Tolvanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you guys and girls seen this? What do you think about it?
http://www.securityportal.com/closet/
I demur from the generally benign flavor of the reactions I've seen so far. I
think this was a hatchet job by a guy who appears completely
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 06:59:25PM +0200, Daniele Cruciani wrote:
I've read on this list about ITP of galeon (web browser), but
i don't remenber who announce ITP and I can't find that package on
experimental.
I have made a package which can be found uder
Package: www.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
On 2830T130630-0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
find out what I could leave out of by Build-Depends stanza. It would
*much* easier for developers, if less ideologically pure, to just list
the damn packages on the Developers Corner part of the website.
Christian Marillat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whoa! What packages understand this, and where is it documented?
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Hello.
Anand Kumria schrieb:
Not having the helper packages included in the autobuild system appears to
benefit, at most, around ~470 packages.
May I ask how they benefit?
It's only a (little) burden on the packages that use debhelper,
but I can't see any benefits for packages not using it.
Thomas Guettler wrote:
But I am interested
what you think about this crazy idea to remove
version numbers (like debian2.2) from debian?
It's really crazy. Removing version numbers mean that the
dependency graph must be synchronized globally which is
impossible AFAIK. In addition to this, it
JG == John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG Whoa! What packages understand this, and where is it documented?
Sorry this is a error.
The right place for this is in:
/usr/share/bug/$package/control
For more
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 02:52:16PM -0400, Randolph Chung wrote:
Installed:
console-apt_0.7.7.2potato1_i386.deb
to dists/proposed-updates/console-apt_0.7.7.2potato1_i386.deb
What does it mean? console-apt is not in potato and is it put again in
stable?
bye
Christian
--
Christian Surchi
orion:exa$ galeon
/usr/bin/galeon-bin: error in loading shared libraries: libgtkembedmoz.so:
cannot open
shared object file: No such file or directory
What's happening? Where's this library? How could I install the package
if this is a dependency?
Thanks,
--
Herbert == Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Herbert And this is Debian where we have a policy that says #!/bin/sh scripts
Herbert need to be POSIX compliant.
What policy says is:
The standard shell interpreter ``/bin/sh'' can be a symbolic link to
any POSIX compatible
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vincent L. Mulhollon) writes:
Perhaps any package can live in unstable, but any package that has a
release critical bug older than 1 week is zapped from stable and placed back
in unstable. Upon next package upload, it will be reinstated into stable.
Ack! Can you imagine
You cannot use it as a default shell without auditing all scripts.
I have used ash for over a year now as my /bin/sh.
Previously Paul Slootman wrote:
Then you must have some other arrangement to get the colors;
it's not enabled by default. Try a fresh install (I have).
Maybe a direct setting of LS_COLORS in your .bash_profile or
whatever?
Nope:
[tornado;~/cistron]-15 env|grep LS
zsh: done env |
zsh:
You cannot use it as a default shell without auditing all scripts.
I have used ash for over a year now as my /bin/sh.
OK, OK, OK, I surrender.
I have to admit my experience was rather old
and the quantity of bashisms have sharply decreased. So you can run
another
Hi,
my suggestion about choosing between a simple to install or increased
security: you can work for easy installing and giving the people the freedom
to choice at the end of the installation process if secure the system. There
will be a procedure at the end of the installation that will take any
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Could anyone please explain this to me? Did Corel do anything to their files
that makes apt think it has to upgrade although its up-to-date? Or is this
a bug in apt?
I see this quite often, so it is a bug in the curret apt lib. aptitude is
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
For your amusement: (it's actually been a year or two since I last posted
this now too... The comments are probably pretty outdated)
Bugs Over Two Years Old
...
Package: emacs19
Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Michael Meskes wrote:
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err:
uppercase=bad)
||/ NameVersionDescription
Previously Steve Greenland wrote:
It is not unreasonable to assume that the latest-and-greatest version of
all the build-essential packages will be installed.
I wonder what world you are living in. It is in reality a completely
unreasonable assumption.
Wichert.
--
Previously Richard Braakman wrote:
I don't know how the decision ended up being made, but the argument
I presented at the time is that a dependency on debhelper is far more
likely to be versioned than the others are. A package that makes use
of a new feature of debhelper is going to have to
Previously Thomas Guettler wrote:
Debian is evolving constantly, not in single steps.
True.
But I am interested
what you think about this crazy idea to remove
version numbers (like debian2.2) from debian?
Won't work. Users demand a know really stable system, and with a dynamic
system we
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
