On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, wrote:
new software for the best price for you
I am saying the same for my list
Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
inkscape - 0.00
Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
xpdf - 0.00
McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
Why?
Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0 -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
Price for Commercial Software:
Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0 -
Original Message
Subject: Re: J?rg Schilling is damage; the community should route around him
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:45:22 -0400
From: Sean Harshbarger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Steve Kemp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve
Quoting Marc Haber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Do we have infrastructure to handle different answers for the same
question? Maybe I'd like to have a different dbadmin password on my
postgresql database than on mysql?
Yes, we have it through the REGISTER command in the debconf protocol
(see man
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 10:51:21PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I think that creating a such list is a very good idea. Currently the
only way to contact mozilla package's maintainers is to do an apt-cache
search mozilla and grep for the email adresses. FYI there is currently
Or send a
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
Hi,
I intend to orphan the PowerPC bootloader quik. I haven't used it
myself for a long time, and don't feel like spending the time and
effort needed for getting it in shape again. Apart from the two
important bugs already in the bts, quik lacks the capability of
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
also sprach Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.08.2029 +0200]:
Is looking up .org domains in the wrong whois server enough to be
considered useless?
I found it rather useless in woody when the .org registrar changed.
I'd say it is a bug in
Sven Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
==
Draft for a volatile.debian.org packaging and update policy.
[...]
Policy for v.d.o
[...]
- A new version uploaded to v.d.o should restrict itself to new code
which is needed to
* Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041010 16:40]:
* Andreas Barth:
- volatile is not just another place for backports, but should only
contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them
functional;
Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:02:22AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
First of all documentation.
Definitely!
I was about to write some, to at least have an overview of what commands
are available. Unfortunately, I haven't found the time yet.
Uwe
--
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Is there any other reason why we would still need to use automake's
dependency tracking anyway?
I don't think so. You may want to use it while working on the package,
but it seems like a fine idea to turn it off when finalizing the
package.
On Sunday 10 October 2004 14:58, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 01:21:44PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote:
Il sab, 2004-10-09 alle 17:48, martin f krafft ha scritto:
I think it's not a right comparison, nullmail is an MTA. and
AFAIK, msmtp is not an MTA:
it
Christoph Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: Henning Makholm in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Should volatile include updates of packages such as debian-keyring?
debian-policy and developers-reference?
Those who need these packages will run Sid anyway.
I'd sincerely hope not. The fact that few
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, wrote:
McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
Why?
If you really care there's clamav, also for 0.00.
--
You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever.
* Nathanael Nerode:
Unless of course the firmware itself is GPL'd, and therefore no one
can legally give it out without offering the source as well.
It is GPLed. This is why it hasn't been put in non-free. :-P
Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
distribute.
* Andreas Barth:
Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
stable because backports are not available for some reason?
Are you speaking about mozilla? ;)
Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime.
Other complex packages can easily enter
Martin Zobel-Helas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i would like to see some policy, what, when and under which
circumstances gets included to volatile.d.n.
The most sensible policy would be a case by case consideration. Some
packages can sanely have the desired features backported [1], and some
can't
Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I generally have to resort to backports or unstable when installing Debia=
n=20
on recent hardware, because we don't update hardware drivers in stable. =20
Would the kernel and X be candidates for volatile?
I think those are arguments for making
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Nathanael Nerode:
Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
distribute.
Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
released
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I generally have to resort to backports or unstable when installing Debia=
n=20
on recent hardware, because we don't update hardware drivers in stable. =20
Would the kernel and X
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
File::Type uses magic numbers (typically at the start of a file) to
determine the MIME type of that file.
File::Type can use either a filename, or file contents, to determine the
type of a file.
(Another svk dependency.)
Does its feature differ
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 07:36:40AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
SHARED TEMPLATES
It's actually possible to have a template and a question that
are shared among a set of packages. All the packages have to
provide an identical copy of the template in their templates
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Hi all,
we had some discussion about volatile, and I'm more and more considering to
pick this task up. I think some issues are quite obvious:
- packages should only go in in cooperation with the maintainers;
- volatile is
paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
I think those are arguments for making releases more quickly, rather
than anything else.
I'm not sure about that, graphics hardware, for example, is far faster moving
than stable. And there are
* Hilko Bengen:
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
File::Type uses magic numbers (typically at the start of a file) to
determine the MIME type of that file.
File::Type can use either a filename, or file contents, to determine the
type of a file.
(Another svk dependency.)
Does
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:59:39 +0100, paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:37:57AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
It will also happily write to /usr which is IMO a no-no for user
binaries.
Where should it write to ?
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze said:
A while ago there was a discussion in which it was said that such
tools are rather useless (or even dangerous) if they don't get their
database updated in accordance with new
Matthew Garrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Christoph Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Re: Henning Makholm in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Should volatile include updates of packages such as debian-keyring?
debian-policy and developers-reference?
Those who need these packages will run Sid anyway.
I'd
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:42:57AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:42:58AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
I think those are arguments for making releases more quickly, rather
than anything else.
I'm not sure about that, graphics
Andi,
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
- It should allow any administrator to just use volatile, as they just
use security.d.o, and they should be confident that nothing is broken by
that;
It would be great to get some clarification of this.
Regards,
Paddy
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 12:55]:
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
- volatile is not just another place for backports, but should only
contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them
functional;
I would like 'must' keep them
At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:47:25 +0200,
Hilko Bengen wrote:
Does its feature differ from File::MMagic (libfile-mmagic-perl)?
It seems under different license. File::MMagic is The Apache License
because it contains mime.magic database based on mod_mime_magic.
--
NOKUBI Takatsugu
E-mail: [EMAIL
* NOKUBI Takatsugu:
At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:47:25 +0200,
Hilko Bengen wrote:
Does its feature differ from File::MMagic (libfile-mmagic-perl)?
It seems under different license. File::MMagic is The Apache License
The code is under a BSD-style license with a documentation requirement
which
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 01:13:34PM +0200, Tilo Schwarz wrote:
On Saturday 09 October 2004 15:56, Colin Watson wrote:
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 12:48:27AM +0200, Tilo Schwarz wrote:
Just one remark: When I was asked to enter a package server I would
have liked to enter my local package
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:40:30AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
released under the GPL, and actually have a case? They might as well
sue Debian because the
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 12:55]:
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
- volatile is not just another place for backports, but should only
contain changes to stable programs that are
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 15:35]:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Of course we need to reserve the right to drop packages - but, doing
that would still be bad. Adding a package to volatile means for me that
we are very confident that we can support
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 03:37:21PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 15:35]:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 02:02:47PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Of course we need to reserve the right to drop packages - but, doing
that would still be bad. Adding a package to
Jesus Climent schrieb:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 10:51:21PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I think that creating a such list is a very good idea. Currently the
only way to contact mozilla package's maintainers is to do an apt-cache
search mozilla and grep for the email adresses. FYI there is
On August 18, 2004 at 2:57PM +0900,
miles (at lsi.nec.co.jp) wrote:
Package: gawk
Version: 1:3.1.4-1
Executing the following line in a shell:
echo -e '--- orig/lisp/ChangeLog\n+++ mod/lisp/ChangeLog' | LANG=ja_JP
gawk '/[Cc]hangeLog/ { print }'
yields not the expected two lines of
On Monday 11 October 2004 07:46, Sean Harshbarger wrote:
I already put the libburn package in unstable a couple months back in
hopes that more people would adopt/help it out. The libburn team has
been somewhat idle last month or so, and I think this is the type of
poking they need to continue
Hi,
why ppp provides its own mechanism of telling programs when the interface
is coming up or down? Many programs register for the ppp mechanism, but
not for the network mechanism. Where is the difference and why both isn't
the same?
Bye, Joerg.
--
Real programmers don't comment their code.
#include hallo.h
* Johannes Rohr [Fri, Oct 08 2004, 10:20:12AM]:
I remarked that mozilla-firefox is built on hppa using gcc-3.2 (I
[...]
Dear all,
due to the ever increasing number of mozilla-based packages I wonder if
it would be a good thing to have a separate debian-mozilla
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 09:06 -0400, sean finney wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:40:30AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
might sue you for distributing something that they have written and
released under the GPL, and
Scripsit Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Price for Commercial Software:
Cost: several hundreds dollar and vendor lock-in
And even more if one wants legit copies.
Membership has its privedleges!
Which? No membership is required.
--
Henning Makholm ... and that
sean writes:
they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
providing the source code to the firmware blobs. if they were in fact in
violation of said terms, debian could not legally distribute the
At Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:29:15 +0900 (JST),
Tatsuya Kinoshita wrote:
Package: gawk
Version: 1:3.1.4-1
Executing the following line in a shell:
echo -e '--- orig/lisp/ChangeLog\n+++ mod/lisp/ChangeLog' | LANG=ja_JP
gawk '/[Cc]hangeLog/ { print }'
yields not the expected two
Scripsit Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
stable because backports are not available for some reason?
Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending on sarge's lifetime.
Other complex packages can easily enter this
I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
drivers do not work, the kernel module doesn't load.
So I tried running the
Scripsit George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IMHO a MTA must be capable acts as a client and as a server to transfer
messages between machines and is responsible for properly routing
messages to their destination, e.g. RFC 974. msmtp does not do all
of these, therefor it is not a MTA, and might
* Henning Makholm ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 18:30]:
The goal should be that I, as a user, can add volatile to my
sources.list and periodically do an apt-get upgrade - without risking
to suddenly have my web browser updated to a new major release where
it starts behaving differently, all my
* Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
drivers do not work, the kernel
Scripsit sean finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
providing the source code to the firmware blobs.
The copyright holder cannot logically be in violation of his
Henning Makholm [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Scripsit sean finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
they may have released it under the GPL, but there's a strong case for
arguing that they're in violation of their own licensing terms for not
providing the source code to the firmware blobs.
The copyright
SHARED TEMPLATES
It's actually possible to have a template and a question that
are shared among a set of packages. All the packages have to
provide an identical copy of the template in their templates
^
files. This can be useful if
Henning Makholm writes:
1. Volatile is a means for *pushing* updates to stable
installations, where such updates are necessary for *preserving*
the utility of packages due to changes of the outside world.
2. Necessary for preserving the utility should be judged under
the
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can volatile receive critical updates which are usually not applied to
stable because backports are not available for some reason?
Mozilla, GnuPG, and maybe even PHP 4, depending
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Nathanael Nerode:
Until they do one of these two things, the firmware is not safe to
distribute.
Of course it is safe to distribute. What do you fear? That Broadcom
might sue you for distributing something that they have
Andreas Barth writes:
I could however see the possiblity to add a new package mozilla1.7,
that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
I see no reason for new packages to ever go into volatile. Such things
belong in backports.
--
John Hasler
Eduard Bloch schrieb:
[...]
Dear all,
due to the ever increasing number of mozilla-based packages I wonder if
it would be a good thing to have a separate debian-mozilla mailing
list. Personally I have big difficulties understanding the hacked way
What is wrong with an Alioth project, say
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 19:55]:
Andreas Barth writes:
I could however see the possiblity to add a new package mozilla1.7,
that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
I see no reason for new packages to ever go into volatile. Such things
belong in
Thomas writes:
In cases like this one, what has happened is that the copyright holder
has simply failed to make legal distribution possible, by saying you
must distribute complete source and then failing to provide it.
He has provided what he claims is source. If he sues me for redistributing
On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IMHO a MTA must be capable acts as a client and as a server to transfer
messages between machines and is responsible for properly routing
messages to their destination, e.g. RFC 974. msmtp
Scripsit Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I could however see the possiblity to add a new package mozilla1.7,
that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
Me neither. For example, if I was already using somebody else's
backport of mozilla1.7, I wouldn't like it if
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you mean by legally? Copyright infringement is a tort, and there
is no way they could win an infringement lawsuit against a distributor for
failing to redistribute the source for the blobs when they did not supply
it themselves and yet asserted
paddy writes:
Whatever the solution is to the mozilla problem, there does at least
appear to be consensus that there has been one.
IMO Mozilla belongs in something like backports.debian.org.
--
John Hasler
On Oct 11, Joerg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why ppp provides its own mechanism of telling programs when the interface
is coming up or down? Many programs register for the ppp mechanism, but
not for the network mechanism. Where is the difference and why both isn't
Historical reasons? Also,
Nathanael Nerode writes:
To me, this means that Broadcom didn't know what the hell it was doing.
I cannot divine Broadcom's actual intentions from that, and Broadcom can
easily and convincingly claim that it intended something different from
what you assume.
The intent implied by publically
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:00:35PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
MTA is a software talking at least one Mail Transfer Protocol (like SMTP,
UUCP, X.400 ...)
My example, delivering mail via 'ssh mailhub /usr/sbin/sendmail', is
an example of transporting mail.
These Mail Transfer Agents are
Scripsit paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
A backport of a new Mozilla release is something vastly
different from new rules for a spam filter,
To be fair, the issue is that if were just rules, there wouldn't
be a need.
Why not? I
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 08:34:57AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
X-Debbugs-CC: wouldn't kill people, would it?
For reference, this is #275935.
Regards,
Kyle McMartin.
Scripsit George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
The definition of mail-transport-agent is that it provides a
/usr/sbin/sendmail that local software can use to submit emails for
delivery to arbitrary addresses with some reasonable
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 01:13:40PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
paddy writes:
Whatever the solution is to the mozilla problem, there does at least
appear to be consensus that there has been one.
IMO Mozilla belongs in something like backports.debian.org.
It's certainly not in the category of
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 21:00]:
Happily, Andi appears open-minded, but focused on the hard work of
doing the 'obviously right' things first.
Well, I'm just waiting for maintainers to say: Yes, please include a
more uptodate version of my package foo.
Cheers,
Andi
--
Carl B. Constantine wrote:
* Carl B. Constantine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I just did an update on my system. it updated my kernel to a newer
version of the same kernel. It also updated all the nvidia packages. But
X no longer works. Even though the nvidia packages are installed, the
drivers
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 19:00, George Danchev wrote:
Normally I wouldn't mention it but if you're going to pull people up on
their grammar please at least get it right. :-)
p.s. s/an MTA/a MTA
Nope. An MTA, an SOS, a UPS. It's dependent on vowel /sounds/ rather
than vowels.
Adam
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas writes:
In cases like this one, what has happened is that the copyright holder
has simply failed to make legal distribution possible, by saying you
must distribute complete source and then failing to provide it.
He has provided what he claims
Kevin Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 11:37:06PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
Price for Commercial Software:
Adobe Illustrator CS - 90.00
Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional - 100.00
McAfee Personal Firewall Plus 2004 v. 5.0 - 20.00
Adobe Photoshop Elements 2.0 - 40.00
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The intent implied by publically releasing a work under the GPL is well
understood and widely known. I don't believe that they would stand any
chance of getting an injunction, let alone damages.
You cannot infer person A's intent in doing something
[ I'm not subbed to -devel, this was pulled from the archive -- please Cc me
on replies ]
Thomas Dickey wrote:
Jeff Teunissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Primitive? heh. And as for the rest, I haven't had trouble -- it's
just an infocmp away. In any case, switching the emulation is trivial
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 07:22:15PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
A backport of a new Mozilla release is something vastly
different from new rules for a spam filter,
To be fair, the
Andi,
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:01:41PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* paddy ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [041011 21:00]:
Happily, Andi appears open-minded, but focused on the hard work of
doing the 'obviously right' things first.
Well, I'm just waiting for maintainers to say: Yes, please
This one time, at band camp, paddy said:
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 12:45:34PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Martin Schulze said:
A while ago there was a discussion in which it was said that such
tools are rather useless (or even dangerous) if they don't get their
This one time, at band camp, John Hasler said:
Henning Makholm writes:
1. Volatile is a means for *pushing* updates to stable
installations, where such updates are necessary for *preserving*
the utility of packages due to changes of the outside world.
2. Necessary for
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:15:47PM +0200, Ramón Rey Vicente wrote:
Leo Costela Antunes wrote:
| PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be
| fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for example, so, does it need
| to stay in contrib?
And, whats about dosemu?
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mediawiki
Version : 1.3.5
Upstream Author : Mediawiki developers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Description : Wikipedia wiki engine
MediaWiki is the wiki
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 10:47:26AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
What do you mean by legally? Copyright infringement is a tort, and there
is no way they could win an infringement lawsuit against a distributor for
failing to redistribute the source for the blobs when they did not supply
it
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: kftpgrabber
Version : 0.4.0
Upstream Author : Jernej Kos [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://kftpgrabber.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Description : A KDE FTP client
It supports SSL/TLS connections to
On Monday 11 October 2004 21:30, Henning Makholm wrote:
Scripsit George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
The definition of mail-transport-agent is that it provides a
/usr/sbin/sendmail that local software can use to submit emails for
Subject says all. Interested people can have a look on it and return
feedback on BTS. I have no intention to release 1.2.10 in sarge at this
time, anyway.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Frank Küster [u] wrote on 10/10/2004 19:17:
Sven Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
==
Draft for a volatile.debian.org packaging and update policy.
[...]
Policy for v.d.o
[...]
- A new version uploaded to v.d.o should
Henning Makholm [u] wrote on 11/10/2004 19:48:
Scripsit Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I could however see the possiblity to add a new package mozilla1.7,
that users can optionally install. However, I also won't like it.
Me neither. For example, if I was already using somebody else's
Henning Makholm [u] wrote on 11/10/2004 20:22:
[volatile.debian.org]
Security fixes should be handled by security.d.o.
Perhaps yes, perhaps no. At least it should follow two rules:
1) If not handled by security.d.o, it should at least be handled
in close cooperation with security.d.o
2) It has
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 09:00:35PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
On Monday 11 October 2004 19:18, Henning Makholm wrote:
That is up to the system administrator to arrange. If it provides a
Satifying package's Depends: is in the domain of packaging system handlers.
Ever seen a debian/control
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: mpfr
Version : 2.0.3
Upstream Author : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.mpfr.org
* License : LGPL
Description : C library for multiple-precision floating-point
computations with exact rounding
The
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In this case, one would be well advised to obtain an explicit waiver
on the point, rather than to rely on such.
Regardless, the question is irrelevant to Debian, because we require
source.
Debian does not require source for non-free. The
Sven Mueller writes:
Say a new open source network security scanner enters the world, and it
works well when compiled against Debian stable, we might want to add it
to v.d.o even though it wasn't available when the last stable
distribution was released. Or a new version of clamav is released,
* Wouter Verhelst ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Hi,
Recent versions of automake add an option --disable-dependency-tracking
to the generated configure script. If you don't use that option, the
generated Makefile will wrap all calls to the compiler in a call to
'depcomp', which will generate a
* Johannes Rohr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[Cc and reply-to debian-devel]
Am 2004.10.08 06:49 schrieb(en) Mike Hommey:
On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 12:24:07AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
I remarked that mozilla-firefox is built on hppa using gcc-3.2 (I
[...]
Dear all,
due to the ever
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 01:44:50 -0400
Source: libtest-differences-perl
Binary: libtest-differences-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.47-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Jay Bonci [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Jay
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
