-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[ Please don't reply to debian-devel-announce ]
Hi,
I'd like to publicly welcome Gergely Madarasz and Antti-Juhani
Kaijanaho who are joining Guy, Richard and I as members of the archive
maintenance team.
Even though we originally only asked for one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[ Please do not reply to debian-devel-announce ]
Hi,
There is now a new 'science' section in potato. If you have a package
which belongs in there or know of one which does, please either file a
bug against ftp.debian.org or (preferably) just reply
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Due to a nasty brown-paper-bag bug on my part with the keyring all the
upload queues effectively became convinced that there were was no
longer any Debian developers and fastidiously rejected every upload
they received as a result.
So if you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Sorry to beat this half to death but I'm concerned by how many people
already think it's okay to upload crypto (despite the big blink
style warning in the NI proposal mail) and how many more are going to
confuse themselves with the warning that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
The following new sections were recently added to the archive:
o embedded
o gnome
o kde
o libdevel
o perl
o python
'embedded' was added in response to the recently added opie packages;
but there's more that can be moved there. The other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
gluck is currently down. A hardware upgrade (machine replacement
necessitated by a CPU fan fault in the existing box) went pear-shaped
when it came to moving the external RAID array from oldgluck to
newgluck.
For now people.debian.org and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
*NB* bear in mind that:
a) the information on the break-in in comes from compromised machines
and thus has to be taken with appropriate skepticism.
b) the investigation is still ongoing - as I was writing this draft
further
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[To any press/general public type folks who might be reading this:
this mail is really aimed at developers, hopefully a more (coherent
etc.) public announce will go out soon through the normal channels
for the relevant to non-developer bits (e.g.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
If you haven't already, please read:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/debian-devel-announce-200312/msg1.html
for context.
Accounts
-
All accounts (that were active prior to the compromise) have now been
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
HP has a scheduled power outage for the building that hosts several
debian.org machines. The outage will occur 1pm GMT May 29 through to
1pm GMT May 30. This will affect:
gluck.debian.org (people, cvs, www-master)
paer.debian.org(hppa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[ Please do not reply to debian-devel-announce ]
I've no idea if this mail is appropriate for this list. Every time
I've bought the issue up on IRC, I've had at least 3 suggestions for
which list I should send it to. If you think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
For the last month and a half, I've been working on re-implementing
dinstall and switching to package pools. Here are the details.
Comments would be appreciated, _but_ I'm really not looking for
Wouldn't it be nice if or this small detail is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[ Please reply to debian-devel@ (i.e. obey the Reply-To) and don't Cc
me on replies, I read the list. ]
Hi,
I've gone on a cruft cleaning exercise in experimental for three
reasons:
o It was long overdue...
o I've got a bug report requesting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
The following changes have taken place as of today's daily archive
run.
(1) Experimental is dead, long live experimental.
As mentioned in an earlier email, I've cleaned a lot of the cruft out
of experimental. What remains has been migrated
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On Sunday evening gluck.debian.org started experiencing problems
writing to it's disks. The local admins investigated and after
physically power cycling machine it became apparent that the RAID
controller was deeply unhappy - it claimed to have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I'm sorry to say that Debian's hosting of machines at Above.Net has
come to an end. Michael Shields and Steve Osborn have hosted critical
Debian machines for over 6 years now in what's been one of the best
and hassle-free donated hostings we've
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
As previously mentioned[1], newraff and newsamosa have lost their
existing hosting and are being relocated.
They've now been shutdown and are in the process of being FedEx-ed
back to HP. Because a) that shouldn't take long and b) our inability
Darren/Torin/Who Ever... [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know perl, and am only going on what Ray has been telling
me. It was my understanding that perl could be made to
dynamically load it's gdbm part on request and that way perl need
only recommend or (better) suggest gdbm. Is this
Francesco Tapparo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So my question is: must I add Depends: debianutils ( 1.6), or I'm
guaranteed that will be upgraded the essential packages first? Is
this bug-fix worthy of an hamm release?
Yes, no, IMO no.
--
James
~Yawn And Walk North~
Edward Betts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
15:37:30 $ ldd `which gnuplot`
libvga.so.1 = /usr/lib/libc5-compat/libvga.so.1 (0x4000c000)
libreadline.so.2 = /lib/libc5-compat/libreadline.so.2 (0x40048000)
libm.so.5 = /lib/libm.so.5 (0x4006a000)
libc.so.5 =
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ruud de Rooij) writes:
Package: jde
[...]
Depends: emacs20 | xemacs20-bin
^^
Why? We run JDE on Emacs 19.34 here in the department just fine.
Recommends: jdk1.1-dev
\begin{just checking}You realise, of course, this puts it in
Igor Grobman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some time around Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:07:24 +1000,
Craig Sanders wrote:
elvis-tiny is small enough to fit on too (although that may have
changed now that we use slang rather than ncurses - can
elvis-tiny use slang??) and provides a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ruud de Rooij) writes:
Depends: emacs20 | xemacs20-bin
^^
Why? We run JDE on Emacs 19.34 here in the department just fine.
According to the requirements as listed on
http://sunsite.auc.dk/jde/, to get JDE to work with [x]emacs 19.x,
Florian Hinzmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Later someone will reassign that bug to the correct package, but the
maintainer of that package won't get any mail.
That's simply not true.
--
James
~Yawn And Walk North~ http://yawn.nocrew.org/
--
To
Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RANT
If people weren't being childish about the addition of 2 characters to the
changelog, which the users generally never see, we wouldn't be having this
discussion.
[...]
Use the tools provided!
/RANT
(Sorry for the AOL, but...) Well said; I
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 23 Jun 1998, James Troup wrote:
(Sorry for the AOL, but...) Well said; I wish people would get
over their epoch-phobia already.
And I wish people would stop suggesting a poor solution.
How is it a ``poor'' solution?
I'll tell you what _is_
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The current problem can be solved by a version suffix and therefore
does not require an epoch.
Eh? Almost any version-number problem can be solved by a version
suffix[1]. What's your point? Are you saying we don't need epochs?
Or anyone using epochs is
Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Troup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eh? Almost any version-number problem can be solved by a version
suffix[1].
Not where 1.0 follows 3.14, for example.
You clearly can, as I demonstrated in my footnote.
Anyway, this is obviously somewhat
Michael Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
but i didn't find SOURCE OF WHIPTAIL at all, what's going on there??
You didn't look very hard.
Package: whiptail
Version: 0.21-8
[...]
source: newt
--
James
~Yawn And Walk North~
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 05:36:37PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Assuming, of course, that Debian will accept them as a developer.
Are people with legitimate packaging interests being rejected?
That's a ridiculously simplistic question that I won't
Kikutani Makoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do you accept a passport as the above formal documents ?
Yes. [Though if there is any opportunity to meet another developer in
real life and cross sign each others keys, this is the preferred
method, where it's viable.]
--
James
Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Old/slow/lomem machines can't properly compile X or Mozilla anyway.
Bzzt. I've compiled xfree86 for Debian/m68k on a 386/25 equivalent
with only 14Mb (don't ask) of memory several times. Took 5 days,
like, but it compiled ``properly''.
--
James
Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes in gratuitous QP:
On Sun, Oct 04, 1998 at 12:15:40PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
Old/slow/lomem machines can't properly compile X or Mozilla anyway.
Bzzt. I've compiled xfree86 for Debian/m68k on a 386/25 equivalent
with only 14Mb (don't ask
Christopher Barry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If your mighty 386/25
^
a) cut out the sarcasm, it's uncalled for.
b) get your facts right, it's not a 386, it's a 386/25 equivalent[1]
as I said already.
with 4MB can make World the entire X distribution and custom kernels
Russell Coker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What about pop stars? We could have Debian sporty, Debian Ginger, Debian
Posh...
*bang*
--
James
[EMAIL PROTECTED](James A. Treacy) writes:
Should apt have to download the dsc file for a package before it
knows what the source files are?
Why on earth not? If it's going to download the source, the .dsc file
is part of the source and has to be downloaded anyway.
If there are plans to
[ Please don't Cc me on replies to a public mailing list ]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (James A. Treacy) writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED](James A. Treacy) writes:
Should apt have to download the dsc file for a package before it
knows what the source files are?
Why on earth not? If it's going to
Roberto Lumbreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.4.0.30
$ dpkg-shlibdeps src/fortify; cat debian/substvars
shlibs:Depends=libc6 (= 2.0.7u)
$ fakeroot dpkg-shlibdeps src/fortify; cat debian/substvars
shlibs:Depends=libc6, libc6 (= 2.0.7u)
^
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam P. Harris) writes:
Roberto Lumbreras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Friday, October 9 1998, at 21:19:38, James Troup wrote:
: Look at fakeroot's shlibs file. This is not a bug (or certainly not
: the one you're claiming it is).
Ok. Of course, you are right
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
Do you think this list would be useful or that the already
existing lists can carry the load (namely debian-devel)?
This list is not needed and I don't consider it useful at all.
(As a porter) I disagree; I've often wanted
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So you want to force all porters to join another list?
HTH does one force volunteers? No, I want the list to be available if
porters want to join it.
Why not contact them in their native lists?
Because these lists are for users too and mass
[ Why on earth is this on devel? It's not relevant here. ]
Martin Schulze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It provides:
[ Gratuitous advertisement for smail snipped ]
The same setup should be installed on kullervo. If not, I might get
over and remove exim there in order to install Smail, too.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Format: 1.5
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 15:03:31 -0400
Source: es
Binary: es
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.90beta1-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
es - An extensible shell based on `rc'.
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[ Moving this to debian-devel, discussion doesn't belong in the bug report. ]
[ Killed the Cc: line. ]
James Troup wrote:
There is no i386 port in as much as i386 maintainers 99.5% of the time
_don't_ compile packages from scratch, which is when over
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Troup wrote:
They don't compile from freshly unpacked source.
How odd. Other maintainer must work substantially differently than I, then.
If you're building foobar 1.1-3, do you really recompile from a
freshly unpacked foobar_1.1-3.dsc?
Another
Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Troup said:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Troup wrote:
Why does a binary-only NMU give you the right to skip waiting, while
a normal NMU does not? Why are they different?
Because I'm not forcing my changes on anyone
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
binary-only MNU hits only one arch
normal NMU hits possible all archs=20
A binary-only MNU violates the GPL, end of story.
FUD, FUD, FUD and more FUD. The source changes for our binary-only
NMUs are _always_ sent to the BTS.
Also, please get over this GPL
Dave Swegen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Out of curiosity, which version of PGP is the debian de facto standard.
I'm currently using v5, but I've seen a number of people use 2.6...
2.x; we don't accept later stuff.
--
James
Hartmut Koptein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1. binary-only NMUs breaks policity
2. every NMU must be with source
3. Porters needn't to ask maintainers for permission
4. a NMU fixes bugs; no need to forward this to the BTS or the maintainer
ok for all ?
That would be a big fat no.
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hartmut Koptein wrote:
1. binary-only NMUs breaks policity
Probably.
Wrong.
--
James
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're building foobar 1.1-3, do you really recompile from a
freshly unpacked foobar_1.1-3.dsc?
Yes.
Congratulations; you're in the minority.
Binary-only and normal NMU's are the same thing,
No they're not. Why do you insist on this
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Each day you autobuild say, 30 packages from Incoming.
Building (especially auto-building) packages from Incoming is a bad
idea, please don't encourage it.
--
James
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
James Troup wrote:
Who said [binary-only NMU's for i386] were bad?
You did.
No, I said binary-only NMUs as a whole were not ideal; I didn't say
anything about binary-only NMU's for i386. Please try to stick to the
facts.
They are very rarely
David Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 08:23:38PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
Dave Swegen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Out of curiosity, which version of PGP is the debian de facto standard.
I'm currently using v5, but I've seen a number of people use 2.6...
2.x; we don't
Bob Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is the status of gnupg?
Not yet used in Debian.
Is there a Debian package available?
Yes, on non-US.
--
James
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam P. Harris) writes:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
around compiling all the i386 stuff for the other archs. But
nobody goes around compiling
Zed Pobre [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's not discouraged, it's simply not allowed or usable. New
maintainer don't accept PGP 5 keys; PGP 5 keys don't go in the
Debian keyring and dinstall doesn't accept them.
I find it strange that you would make this mistake.
I've looked at PGP 5
Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could somebody explain me, why, oh why, do we have to wait more than
two months for trivial ftp.debian.org bugs to be fixed?
Perhaps because the more you whine about it the more prone we are to
ignore you?
--
James
Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bugs against ftp.debian.org are often important - these ones are holding
up slink's release (granted, they're not the only things holding it up).
No, it's not these ones. Santiago is whining (again) about other bugs.
The release critical bugs for
Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Previously Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
As I mentioned in an earlier posting, there's no reason for this bug
to be release-critical.
This is another bug. Not being able to compile a package at all *is*
a release-critical problem and violates the
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+case ${host} in
+ *-pc-linux-gnu)
^^
s/pc/*/ (pc==non-i386 unfriendly)
--
James
Never trust trucks
Edward John M. Brocklesby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't think so - Octopi can't fly!
Someone who obviously hasn't read RFC 1925...
--
James
Never trust trucks
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 08:29:42PM +, James Troup wrote:
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+case ${host} in
+ *-pc-linux-gnu)
^^
s/pc/*/ (pc==non-i386 unfriendly)
Good point. However, /usr/doc/lintian/libtool
Guy Maor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Adam Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmm, is it really a good thing to have dinstall announce the
uploads? I often depend on the announcements to alert me to new
versions in Incoming. In the new setup, the announcements won't
come until the package
)
| Installed-Size: 50
| Maintainer: James Troup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Description: render images of the earth
| xplanet is similar to xearth, where an image of the earth is rendered
| into the X root window. Both mercator and orthographic projections
| can be displayed as well as a window
Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 30 Sep 1999, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
Philippe Troin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah, just uploaded some new packages which fix the typo.
I just hand-edited my available file. :-)
Maybe it should be trapped by dinstall
I tend to
Hi,
OpenBSD have started working on the last free SSH (1.2.12 was under a
DFSG free license AFAICT[1]), they also, (again AFAICT [I'm going by
the CVS commits]), are ripping out the patented algrothims (IDEA,
etc.). Unfortunately, I'm chronically busy with work and haven't had
time to look into
Torsten Landschoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If somebody could come up with a better method of handling this it would be
most welcome.
Don't do it (muck around with /bin/sh links). Guy made a comment in
the bug report about this and AFAIK didn't do it yet in case of
breakages like this.
--
Joel Klecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 09:55 +0100 1999-10-01, Philip Hands wrote:
James Troup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OpenBSD have started working on the last free SSH (1.2.12 was under a
DFSG free license AFAICT[1]), they also, (again AFAICT [I'm going by
the CVS commits
Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am pretty sure that SSH was never free software. Could you show
me the license on the version that they started with?
-
This file is part of the ssh software, Copyright (c) 1995 Tatu
Herbert Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They use libssl, which begs the question why isn't libssl in non-US/non-free?
Uh, because I keep forgetting. I've been meaning to do that since Guy
split non-US up... I guess I'll go file a bug against ftp.debian.org.
--
James
Ian Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Six days ago I discovered that one of the Debian system
administrators had made a deliberate and highly unusual
configuration change which predictably broke mail from or via master
to:
Err, no. Mail was _already_ bouncing, but after reaching the retry
Roderick Schertler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does anybody know what happened to netcomics? I'd been assuming it
was pulled from potato but left in woody, but I just looked and that
doesn't seem to be the case. The only normal or archived bug on it
doesn't say anything about pulling the
Christopher C. Chimelis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Looks like quite a backlog has been created by NM being shut down
for so long.
Actually, no, way less than half the current backlog are applicants
from the shut down period.
But, after picking a few people to look at that are currently
Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What I am suggesting is that katie has a list of such cases (although
I'm not proposing a particular format):
From my point of view, such information would ideally be:
o not centrally controlled, but package/maintainer(s) controlled[0]
o trivial
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm having a hard time getting it to work though. I tried Uploaders with
dpkg 1.9.17 and no go:
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown information field Uploaders in input
data in general section of control info file
It needs to be in the source section of the
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's how I tried it, no go. dpkg-gencontrol does not contain the
word '[Uu]ploaders' on my system either.
Oh, right, yah, okay; it appears it was only dpkg-source that was
patched. The dpkg-gencontrol is just a warning though, the Uploaders
field still
Richard A Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see this status at the excuses page:
Bogus dep-wait; I've given it back so the buildd will actually try it.
--
James
Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 01:04:40AM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis
wrote:
copyright-should-refer-to-common-license-file-for-gpl may fail to
understand that GPL is only mentioned in the copyright notice, and is not
the type of the license
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I looked at katie; it seemed to be a complicated and undocumented
mess that was a total overkill for my purpose (eg. I don't need a
database).
That complicated and undocumented mess has been running the Debian
archives successfully and without major
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If I were to clean things up and make DAK easier to use for private
archives (eg. by isolating all Debian specific stuff, ideally into
a limited number *.conf files), would somebody be willing
to commit the changes to CVS?
No one sane agrees to pre-commit
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Change paths to config files in utils.py.
Sigh, you don't need to do that. See /etc/katie/katie.cnf on
e.g. auric.
- rose creates initial directories (actually some where missing; I can't
remember which onces were missing and which ones were
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
5. What is the dsync-flist used by mkchecksums, and where can I get it
from? Google search returns nothing.
http://cvs.debian.org/?cvsroot=dsync
--
James
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that will fix the problem.
*sigh* all the mail sent by the python scripts is done by
utils.send_mail(); if you want to ensure they don't send any mail make
that function a nop. But it's becoming increasingly clear to me that
the source should
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 01:11:08AM +, James Troup wrote:
Err, bullshit, there's doc/*.1.sgml and --help for most of the key
scripts.
[1106] [snoopy:unstable:bam] ~/cvswork/dak helena --help
helena is not a key script. Try again. grep -lir 'Options
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First you were encouraging us to learn to use it, now your
discouraging us from even trying
Err, no I wasn't. I don't encourage people to use katie, in fact I
actively discourage it. Even the README now tells people to use
something else and that's
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- rose creates initial directories (actually some where missing; I can't
remember which onces were missing and which ones were misconfigured
though now).
rose uses the provided config file; it'd be hard for her to misconfigure a
directory
Andreas Tille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps the most important part of the build log shoulc be quoted as well:
Or not.
The following central src deps are (probably) missing:
libglib1.2-dev (= 1.2.0), libgtk1.2-dev (= 1.2.10-4)
Which is just that the central src deps are out of
Adam Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Roger Leigh wrote:
This works fine when the locales exist for each localisation, but if
they don't exist, it defaults to C locale/US-ASCII charset. Can the
autobuilders guarantee a full set of generated locales, or is only C
available?
Autobuilders
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Btw, looking at the reports, I see 30 submitted from i386 architectures,
one from a powerpc machine, none from other architectures, although all
architectures are affected. Conclusions? ;-)
Well, duh, let's see. Several architectures' build were
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 12:52:02AM +0200, Guido Guenther wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 04:23:49PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
The BTS now has lfs (large file support) and ipv6 tags.
http://bugs.debian.org/tag:lfs and http://bugs.debian.org/tag:ipv6
Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure, but the architecture tags can be used n ot only for buildd
failures?
No, that's my point, IMO they shouldn't be used _at all_ for FTBFS
bugs, because they'd be useless and misleading - and if these tags are
available people will try to use them
Hi,
As many of you will have already noticed samosa is down and has been
for a while. Unfortunately the machine is in a bad way - the
motherboard just beeps constantly when the machine's powered on.
The local admin has taken it out of it's rack and home with him to try
and fix it. However even
Mathieu Roy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Having bugs not fixed in 4 years (3 years even with a patch
provided)
Don't be such a disingenuous troll. The patch for that _wishlist_ bug
has been there since April. Not for 3 years.
--
James
Marc Haber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 00:36:10 +0200, Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 07:57:55AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
So what is the single command to apt-get install all the GNU versions
of everything?
Just create and maintain a
Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just uploaded another version, which resulted in receiving
the attached message. Note the NEW status, and the warning. Is this
a katie bug? Or did I do something wrong?
It's a James-is-a-moron problem. I broke (read: deleted)
experimental's
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What didn't work about anonymous FTP?
The queue daemon can no longer handle PGP 2.x keys; I don't know why
and since a) the number of developers still using these kind of keys
for uploads can be counted on the fingers of a mutilated hand, b)
there are
Noèl Köthe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
is there any reason why packages, which are already accepted and now are
in incoming.d.o are not moving to the archives?
for example http://incoming.debian.org/wget_1.9-1_m68k.deb is there
since 2003-11-04.
Other packages like xmule or webmin are having
Marc Haber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I had to wait almost three weeks to have the package REJECTED by
ftpmaster
20031023144719~jennifer~Moving to new~linux-atm_2.4.1-10_i386.changes
20031103144602~lisa~rejected~linux-atm_2.4.1-10_i386.changes
Hmm, that doesn't even look like 2 weeks to me...
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My memory is horrible, but IIRC James Troup (ie, our keymaster..) did
some similar study at the DebConf5 KSP and ended up with a list of
people whose GPG signtures he didn't trust anymore because of whatever
trick they fell for.
Err, for the record, no I
1 - 100 of 322 matches
Mail list logo
