Pas de répit pour la karchérisation des archives!
Comme nous sommes en mai 2011, il est désormais possible de traiter
les archives du mois d'avril 2011 des listes francophones.
Détails du processus de nettoyage du spam sur
http://wiki.debian.org/I18n/FrenchSpamClean
signature.asc
On 04/30/2011 04:32 PM, 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 (which is *very* rare,
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 (which
]] Andreas Barth
Hi,
| Now my question is just: How to do that efficient? I.e. how would such
| a configuration file look like, and how the code to distribute the
| package on the most fitting buildd(s)? (I.e. it's better to waste 5
| out of 6 cores than to not build a package at all, but a
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
Pierre Habouzit madco...@madism.org writes:
No what we want is probably to be attractive to developers, while
keeping our standards about the stable release, which is what really
matters. And to do that, well, what we need is to make working for
On Du, 01 mai 11, 08:38:55, Mike Hommey wrote:
So while I do agree with the rest of your message, I do see a need to
make testing more attractive so that we have a solid user base actually
testing what we are going to release, and stop saying to people that
they shouldn't be using testing
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:24:41PM -0700, Ludovico Cavedon wrote:
On 04/30/2011 04:32 PM, 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
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 09:31:47PM +0200, sean finney wrote:
I second your original proposal though, that packages must not delete
system users that they have created. I don't think anyone had objections
to that, and the question is whether things should be taken further.
I do object to
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:38:55AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
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
On Du, 01 mai 11, 09:57:50, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I think we'd like people running unstable stick with testing when we
freeze, that makes sense, yes.
This doesn't make sense to me, why would I want to downgrade to
testing during the freeze? Besides, during the freeze testing and
unstable
On Sun, 1 May 2011 01:36:38 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Sometimes we have a few packages we don't want to build on a certain
buildds. Sometimes this is because this package needs lots of ram. Or
it takes quite long and would waste the parallel building a machine
supports. Or whatever else. Of
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:22:51AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Du, 01 mai 11, 09:57:50, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I think we'd like people running unstable stick with testing when we
freeze, that makes sense, yes.
This doesn't make sense to me, why would I want to downgrade to
testing
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 01:36:38AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
I have a problem I need to solve in perl within wanna-build:
Sometimes we have a few packages we don't want to build on a certain
buildds. Sometimes this is because this package needs lots of ram. Or
it takes quite long and would
* Ingo Jürgensmann (i...@2011.bluespice.org) [110501 11:55]:
On Sun, 1 May 2011 01:36:38 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
Now, what I would like to do is to write that down in a central file
with categories.
I would recommend to use a database, really.
Sorry, but that's not at all the answer to
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 08:41]:
Fixing RC bugs in testing and getting new upstream versions that are
ready in testing is not a burden for developers, it's what we're
supposed to do to ensure we can release as quickly as possible.
Who is the we you are speaking about
* Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [110501 12:02]:
I just wanted to add that if you would like more statistics reporting
for this purpose, I'll be happy to add that to sbuild.
I only worry about the ~20-40 packages that are currently sitting in
some no_auto_build on the buildds. Not more but
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 03:09:48PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
libgcrypt has some horrendous bugs which upstream refuse to fix,
for example the broken behaviour relating to
On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 17:09 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 06:48:22PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
We might some day later change the way apt works for upgrades is not an
argument for adding a pre-dependency now.
But that we do want to prevent a broken APT --
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 16:48:24 +0200, Andreas Barth
a...@not.so.argh.org wrote:
Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
start as a non-official service.
Agreed for backports, violently disagreed for volatile. Volatile has
been a source of demotivation and frustration, at
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
[...]
It appears to be usable by a lot of projects and people, so that seems
like an exaggeration. If I have understood Werner correctly, he
believes that it is the setuid binaries that are broken and should be
fixed.
[...]
Hello,
I would rather say
* Marc Haber (mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de) [110501 14:16]:
On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 16:48:24 +0200, Andreas Barth
a...@not.so.argh.org wrote:
Actually, it worked quite well for both volatile and backports to
start as a non-official service.
Agreed for backports, violently disagreed for
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Torquil Macdonald Sørensen torq...@gmail.com
* Package name: trng
Version : 4.11
Upstream Author : Heiko Bauke heiko.ba...@mpi-hd.mpg.de
* URL : http://trng.berlios.de/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:29:39PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
[...]
It appears to be usable by a lot of projects and people, so that seems
like an exaggeration. If I have understood Werner correctly, he
believes that it is the setuid binaries
Andreas Metzler ametz...@downhill.at.eu.org wrote:
Also libgcrypt does seem to be designed to be used indirectly
^
|
not
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
* Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [110501 15:08]:
Even if the NSS situation changes, surely it's immediately obvious
that a random library function should not tamper with the uid of a
process as a side-effect? Unless the caller explicitly requested
dropping of root privs, no library has
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:29:39PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
[...]
Also libgcrypt does not seem to be designed to be used indirectly (via
gnutls) without knowing and caring about it. (Threading, secmem).
Which is why about 50% of all gnutls-using
* Pierre Habouzit (madco...@madism.org) [110501 01:32]:
- link that PPA stuff to the main repository in a way that merging
PPA into unstable is just a matter of one single command, or a few.
- make it easy for users to subscribe to PPAs, meaning you have to
have some kind of
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 08:41]:
Fixing RC bugs in testing and getting new upstream versions that are
ready in testing is not a burden for developers, it's what we're
supposed to do to ensure we can release as quickly as
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:06:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I think that we should not do any trade off on the quality of
rolling/testing/the-antechamber-of-stable, but instead raise the quality
of unstable so that (which isn't *that* bad, unstable is rarely badly
broken, and I know lots
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 01:32:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Oh yes, you really want to attract new contributors ? build debhub.com
(as in github) and force everyone to package stuff in there. Let people
propose patches, packaging new upstreams and so forth using merge
requests (as in
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christian Perrier bubu...@debian.org
Package name: garmin-ant-downloader
Version : 0:20091212
Upstream Author : p...@ant.sbrk.co.uk
URL : http://www.example.org/
License : GPL v3
Programming Lang: C
Description
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 06:50:04PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
Look at the welcoming new contributors GR; what did that actually
accomplish? There isn't anything new to show for it, there are no new
means to bring contributors in, and the number of new people hasn't
really changed.
I doubt
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 06:05:35PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
In the Squeeze release we have done better than before by calling for
explicit upgrade testing (kudos to the Release Team!), but a specific
plan of alpha/beta/... might bring even more testing, especially if the
media help us out
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:11:49PM +0200, sean finney wrote:
A complete aside: I have yet to see DEPs being anything but a structured
way to bikeshed. However, if you wish to go down this route, feel free.
This does bring me full circle back to the start of my mail - if you
want to push
* Stefano Zacchiroli (z...@debian.org) [110501 16:12]:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 06:05:35PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
In the Squeeze release we have done better than before by calling for
explicit upgrade testing (kudos to the Release Team!), but a specific
plan of alpha/beta/... might bring
Ludovico Cavedon cave...@debian.org wrote:
On 04/30/2011 04:32 PM, 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
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Bug#621833: System users: removing them):
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 09:31:47PM +0200, sean finney wrote:
I second your original proposal though, that packages must not delete
system users that they have created. I don't think anyone had objections
to that, and the
* Ian Jackson (ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk) [110501 16:39]:
Steve Langasek writes (Re: Bug#621833: System users: removing them):
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 09:31:47PM +0200, sean finney wrote:
I second your original proposal though, that packages must not delete
system users that they
Le 01/05/2011 15:34, Andreas Barth a écrit :
1. How to push from a vcs (git, svn, ...) to ppa? (This should be
coordinated with ftp-masters, so that the same method could be used
later on for uploading into unstable.)
2. How could we create new ppa repositories easy enough, how do we
hold
* Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org [2011-05-01 15:40]:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 08:41]:
Fixing RC bugs in testing and getting new upstream versions that are
ready in testing is not a burden for developers, it's what we're
* Stéphane Glondu (glo...@debian.org) [110501 17:00]:
Le 01/05/2011 15:34, Andreas Barth a écrit :
1. How to push from a vcs (git, svn, ...) to ppa? (This should be
coordinated with ftp-masters, so that the same method could be used
later on for uploading into unstable.)
2. How could
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
This is the root cause, I think. libgcrypt was developed as part of
gnutls, and although it's a separate library, it's insufficiently
generalised. It's implicitly doing things the way gnutls wanted them
doing, and rather than making the library
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
However, to get that done right for multiple software is not so easy.
But please prove me wrong - as soon as 2. is done, I'm happy to help
setting up autobuilding (even if that happens this afternoon). It
needs however done in a way where buildds only
Le 01/05/2011 17:16, Andreas Barth a écrit :
I don't understand why this is only point 5. Setting up a custom
repository easily usable is quite easy... and done already
(mozilla.debian.net has been mentioned; I also happen to provide
unofficial packages on ocaml.debian.net).
It's easy for
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 18:23]:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
However, to get that done right for multiple software is not so easy.
But please prove me wrong - as soon as 2. is done, I'm happy to help
setting up autobuilding (even if that happens this
* Stéphane Glondu (glo...@debian.org) [110501 18:24]:
Le 01/05/2011 17:16, Andreas Barth a écrit :
Well yes, but how many autobuilding suites should we add? 50? 100?
200? How do we do key management so that we know that the autobuilder
build the packages that they should?
Why would we
Hello,
Marc laid that wonderful bait in this thread to which then Stefano
bite, and then the thread ended after some clarification by Marc
where IMHO there was no clarification needed [not shown].
On 04/30/2011 12:28 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Marc
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 03:39:57PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 08:41]:
Fixing RC bugs in testing and getting new upstream versions that are
ready in testing is not a burden for developers, it's what
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 06:34:02PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 18:23]:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
How can we submit jobs to a buildd?
- APT entry to add (i.e. URL of the PPA so that the buildd can fetch
build-dependencies not
* Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [110501 18:46]:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 06:34:02PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org) [110501 18:23]:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Andreas Barth wrote:
How can we submit jobs to a buildd?
- APT entry to add (i.e. URL of the
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 06:24:00PM +0200, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
I was thinking of a request that would include a base suite (e.g.
squeeze, wheezy, or sid), files to drop in /etc/apt/sources.list.d (and
/etc/apt/preferences.d), and the key used to sign unofficial
repositories. Of course, the
* Roger Leigh (rle...@codelibre.net) [110501 19:04]:
WRT the signing key, there would need to be some form of trust path
or else the signature would be worthless. If packages are being
uploaded to Debian infrastructure, and are under our control, can't
we use a single signing key? We
]] Stefano Zacchiroli
| I've been dreaming of a similar integration in Debian since the days
| where I was pushing for the Vcs-* headers, but as you explained later on
| in your mail the problem is: how can we converge on a specific Vcs in
| Debian? Or, even easier, how can we converge on the
Hi,
kdelibs3 was removed recently from the archive and the last tiny bit
of KDE 3 remaining, aRts, will be removed quite soon.
This means the KDE team is not longer interested in Qt3 and we are looking
for new maintainer(s).
Personally, I would have gone for removing Qt3 too but the
On 01/05/11 at 18:38 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
You're saying:
Problem:
I acknowledge that people are not interested in stable releases
enough and that the RT has to compensate all the time.
Those two statements are true:
- A subset of DDs care about doing stable releases. The
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christoph Egger christ...@debian.org
* Package name: python-enet
Version : 0.0~svn21
Upstream Author : Andrew Resch andrewre...@gmail.com
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/pyenet/
* License : GPL (buildsystem), MIT/X
Hi,
On Sun May 01, 2011 at 20:02:51 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
2. determine who is in support of each action plan, through a GR or a
poll.
I don't think we need a GR for that. Those who are interested in rolling
releases could show that they are interested and just doing so (like
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:02:51PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 01/05/11 at 18:38 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
You're saying:
Problem:
I acknowledge that people are not interested in stable releases
enough and that the RT has to compensate all the time.
Those two
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 04:17:10PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
JFYI, Sean and Raphael have taken DEP number 10
They have? I haven't seen mail to debian-project about this, which is what
http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep0/ requires?
(The chance of a collision here is quite small of course,
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 09:43:51PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:55:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
(1) you'll split the userbase, some of the users will use rolling
instead of testing, and during the freeze we're very interested
about our users to
On 01/05/11 at 20:51 +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
Hi,
On Sun May 01, 2011 at 20:02:51 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
2. determine who is in support of each action plan, through a GR or a
poll.
I don't think we need a GR for that. Those who are interested in rolling
releases could
On 01/05/11 at 20:55 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:02:51PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 01/05/11 at 18:38 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
You're saying:
Problem:
I acknowledge that people are not interested in stable releases
enough and that
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 (which is *very* rare, really) I go to snapshots
On 05/01/2011 08:02 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
There are compromise solutions, too:
[Plan C -- freeze rolling before forking frozen:]
- do plan A.
- But When the release team decides to do a general freeze,
rolling is frozen for a few months to maximize user testing and
developer
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 04:01:20PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
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
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 09:35:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
[ Note that my position is based on the assumption that we have a
share of DDs interested in rolling similar to the share of DDs
interested in stable releases. Unfortunately, it's very difficult to
know where we stand regarding
Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Who are they? Unlike this constant handwaving, I've shared my experience
^^^
If you feel that my contributions and experience in Debian consist of
constant handwaving, feel free to ignore and dismiss me.
--
see shy jo
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 04:26:57PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Who are they? Unlike this constant handwaving, I've shared my experience
^^^
If you feel that my contributions and experience in Debian consist of
constant
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Out of curiosity, have the d-i discussed with the release team the
possibility of presenting them as alpha/beta/... of Debian as a whole?
It seemed better when I was leading d-i to just do it, rather than
talk about doing it.
(Which AFAICS also holds true of this
On 01/05/11 at 22:17 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 09:35:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
[ Note that my position is based on the assumption that we have a
share of DDs interested in rolling similar to the share of DDs
interested in stable releases. Unfortunately,
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Those are real users from real life. I'm not saying we-re
representative of a majority of Debian Users, but unlike all the
handwaived users we've read about in this thread, those are real.
First of all I think you should concede
* Stefano Zacchiroli [2011-05-01 15:43 +0200]:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 02:06:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
I think that we should not do any trade off on the quality of
rolling/testing/the-antechamber-of-stable, but instead raise the quality
of unstable so that (which isn't *that* bad,
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:36:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 01/05/11 at 22:17 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 09:35:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
[ Note that my position is based on the assumption that we have a
share of DDs interested in rolling similar
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:41:07PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Those are real users from real life. I'm not saying we-re
representative of a majority of Debian Users, but unlike all the
handwaived users we've read about
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Carsten Hey wrote:
Testing, OTOH, is really unique in that respect, with its mixture of
fresh software and quarantine period.
A 'frozen' requiring most updates to go through *-proposed-updates would
make this quarantine period a lot less useful, and it would make
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:07:48PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Carsten Hey wrote:
Testing, OTOH, is really unique in that respect, with its mixture of
fresh software and quarantine period.
A 'frozen' requiring most updates to go through *-proposed-updates would
On 2011-05-01, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
- I've talked at several trade shows and conferences with developers of
rolling distros based on Debian (in particular: Aptosid/Sidux and
Linux Mint Debian Edition). They usually claim they have built those
distros because Debian
Hi Ste(ve|fano),
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:02:47PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 04:17:10PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
JFYI, Sean and Raphael have taken DEP number 10
They have? I haven't seen mail to debian-project about this, which is what
Hi Stefano,
On Mon, 2 May 2011 06:41:07 AM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Those are real users from real life. I'm not saying we-re
representative of a majority of Debian Users, but unlike all the
handwaived users we've read about
On 01/05/11 at 22:48 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:36:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
It's clear that we are not going to stop doing stable releases anytime
soon. However, there seem to be some interest in the rolling release
concept. The question is: can we
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:39:47PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 01/05/11 at 22:48 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 10:36:07PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
It's clear that we are not going to stop doing stable releases anytime
soon. However, there seem to be some
Hi
On Sunday 01 May 2011, Philipp Kern wrote:
On 2011-05-01, Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org wrote:
- I've talked at several trade shows and conferences with developers of
rolling distros based on Debian (in particular: Aptosid/Sidux and
Linux Mint Debian Edition). They usually
Dne 3.4.2011 18:08, Fernando Lemos napsal(a):
* It doesn't have a good command-line interface
It does have CLI interface. Those commands are bundled directly in
NetworkManager:
nm-cli
nm-tool
nm-online
I'm not sure if this qualify as good command-line interface :)
Miroslav Suchy
--
To
On 01/05/11 at 23:46 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Benefits for Debian:
- attract users who think that testing is only a development branch, and
want newer software than what one finds in stable. Those users are
likely to be rather advanced users (developers, free software
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:17:21PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
The problem is, you need to entry points, one for testing as we know it,
one for rolling.
snip
So basically you split our users in two non overlapping sets, meaning
that you divide coverage and tests. How come is that in the
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-01 23:17 +0200]:
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:07:48PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011, Carsten Hey wrote:
Testing, OTOH, is really unique in that respect, with its mixture of
fresh software and quarantine period.
A 'frozen' requiring most
2011/5/1 Miroslav Suchý miros...@suchy.cz:
Dne 3.4.2011 18:08, Fernando Lemos napsal(a):
* It doesn't have a good command-line interface
It does have CLI interface. Those commands are bundled directly in
NetworkManager:
nm-cli
nm-tool
nm-online
I'm not sure if this qualify as good
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 18:21:12 +0200
Source: icedove-l10n
Binary: icedove-l10n-all icedove-l10n-af icedove-l10n-ar icedove-l10n-be
icedove-l10n-bg icedove-l10n-bn-bd icedove-l10n-ca icedove-l10n-cs
icedove-l10n-da icedove-l10n-de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 08:35:37 +0200
Source: libhx
Binary: libhx27 libhx-dev libhx-doc
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 3.10.1-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Bastian Kleineidam cal...@debian.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 08:35:01 +0200
Source: libpam-mount
Binary: libpam-mount
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.10-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Bastian Kleineidam cal...@debian.org
Changed-By: Bastian Kleineidam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:13:03 +0200
Source: openvas-scanner
Binary: openvas-scanner
Architecture: source i386
Version: 3.2.3-2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OpenVAS Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 08:52:41 +0200
Source: unhide.rb
Binary: unhide.rb
Architecture: source all
Version: 12-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Forensics forensic-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By: Julien
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 13:28:43 +0200
Source: libimobiledevice
Binary: libimobiledevice2 libimobiledevice-dev libimobiledevice2-dbg
python-imobiledevice libimobiledevice-utils libimobiledevice-doc
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 02:34:34 +0800
Source: stumpwm
Binary: stumpwm
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:20110420.git14571fc-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Common Lisp Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 17:06:31 +0900
Source: van.pydeb
Binary: python-van.pydeb
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.3.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian/Ubuntu Zope Team
pkg-zope-develop...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 09:29:45 +0200
Source: zim
Binary: zim
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.52-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphaël Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphaël Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 10:36:03 +0200
Source: python-scientific
Binary: python-scientific python-netcdf python-scientific-doc python-mpi
mpichpython lampython
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 2.8-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 01:49:11 -0700
Source: pam
Binary: libpam0g libpam-modules libpam-runtime libpam0g-dev libpam-cracklib
libpam-doc
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 1.1.2-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 11:55:48 +0300
Source: kaffeine
Binary: kaffeine kaffeine-dbg
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.2.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian KDE Extras Team pkg-kde-ext...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:28:58 +0200
Source: xorg-server
Binary: xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-core-udeb xserver-xorg-dev xdmx
xdmx-tools xnest xvfb xserver-xephyr xserver-xfbdev xserver-xorg-core-dbg
xserver-common
Architecture:
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
