Hello people,
A new mailing list has been created that contains everything about
intents to package something, orphan, adopt, withdraw, whatever.
It's called -= debian-wnpp =- and it gets whatever [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets.
If you like the weekly summaries that get posted to this list,
subscribing
Hi,
This note is primarily meant to alleviate the concerns about woody being
released. Please read on if you care about the release.
To reiterate the main point from the April 30th mail by Anthony Towns, the
release of woody is being held back because there is no systematic way to
build packages
Hi people,
Sorry for the most obnoxious crosspost.
If anyone has a complete archive (mbox format) of any of the following
Debian mailing lists for September 2000, please contact me immediately:
debian-68k
debian-admintool
debian-alpha
debian-arm
debian-beowulf
debian-boot
debian-cd
Hi there,
Sorry for my English :) if you're near 13e Arr on Thursday night and
wouldn't mind a purely ad hoc exchange of a key signature for a beverage
of choice, send me a private mail.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 12:58:23PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
Server news this week:
* The [22]bug tracking system has a new easy way to get to a given
bug report. http://bugs.debian.org/foo will pull up the bug report
for package foo; http://bugs.debian.org/ will pull
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:40:01PM +0100, Vincent Renardias wrote:
One more feature (or a bugfix since it pointed to 404 before :) has
been added: you can call http://packages.debian.org/some_package and
it will redirect you to the search results on some_package. Jason
Gunthorpe enabled
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 09:36:18PM -0500, James A. Treacy wrote:
Try again. The system installed version of the indexing program was being
used instead of my custom job. This has been fixed so it should work correctly
now.
Yes, gdb works now. I followed the murphy's law, and tried
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:22:56PM +, Russell Coker wrote:
Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in bzip2
format to reduce download times when using slow links?
Good idea. And Packages files too.
But that would need implementation in dselect, and will only
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:28:04PM +, Russell Coker wrote:
Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in
bzip2
format to reduce download times when using slow links?
Good idea. And Packages files too.
But that would need implementation in dselect, and
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 11:49:43AM +, Russell Coker wrote:
...but I wouldn't do that *and* remove that .tgz completely, or
hhaving all the .debs converted to tbz2.
I agree, we're not ready for that yet. However we only need bzip2 in the
base if we have bzip2 compressed .deb packages in
On Mon, Jan 25, 1999 at 10:23:34PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
Quoting Juergen A. Erhard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I personally thing either the ftp hierarchy should go to /var/ftp, or
the www data should move to /home/www (the latter I'd prefer).
/home/(ftp|www) is just plain ugly. (It's a
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 09:56:10PM +0200, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
Please do. Remember to read the Policy Manual, Developer's Reference
and Packaging manual first, if you haven't already. You can find them
at the Developer's Corner of the Debian website.
And the new maintainers' guide,
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 06:46:49PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
nonus.debian.org 23780 nonus.debian.org: libssl-dev is obsolete [220]
(Heiko Schlittermann [EMAIL PROTECTED])
...
Will non-us ever be fixed?
It is but I'm afraid the bugs have not been closed. Heiko seems really
Hi,
I saw the new alpha version, that has acceptable licence (GPL).
Although it's alpha, I'd like to see it packaged. If you aren't
interested, I'll do it.
For the -devel readers: section should be non-free, right?
Thanks.
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:05:01PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:02:13PM -0500, Shaleh wrote:
On 01-Feb-99 John Goerzen wrote:
Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
the mp3 patent
Which nobody has guaranteed is valid or defensable in Germany, let alone
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:30:20PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 10:14:38PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
I don't see why we ought to let some lawyers trying to make a good bluff
scare us.
Fraunhofer institute holds the patent, we shouldn't take any chances
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:30:41PM -0600, Stephen Crowley wrote:
But that is not the reason why my first guess was non-free. It was
the fact that mpg123 is in non-free, and x11amp is (according to
the docs) based on it.
I already have it packaged. It uses plugins for the decoder so I
Hi all,
Don't ask me what it does, I just know that mozilla code demands it :)
So I'll package it. Download location is ftp.mozilla.org, but I'll try
to find the origin. The licence is LGPL.
If someone could grab it from me (either now, or after I do the initial
packaging), I would REALLY
On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 02:32:44PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
Don't ask me what it does, I just know that mozilla code demands it :)
Hm. Apparently, this already exists as part of liborbit0, so I'll
probably try to use that one.
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 08:55:44PM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
mozilla should work for potato
Maybe it will ;) We'll try.
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 12:38:36PM +0200, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
How do I distinguish between stable and unstable in this scenario ?
How do I define that my package should go into:
- unstable
- non-US
- main
or
- unstable
- non-US
- non-free
There is something I have
On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 08:09:01AM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
I hope that the site for dupload established
in Japan so that we can select the near site to upload our packages.
In current standard /etc/dupload.conf contains chiark (uk), master (us?),
erlangen (de), and giano (it). I hope
On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 02:08:13PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Who decides weather a non-US package goes in non-US/main, non-US/contrib or
non-US/non-free? Are there any guidelines available?
Yes, actually, the Debian Free Software Guidelines :)
Software that is threatened by US crypto
On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 03:44:15PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
264c7c1726f8d333a7de8c356bd7a73e 619 non-us/net optional ssh_1.2.26-4.dsc
8346f02e1de9f0771a56612e044b2b91 46926 non-us/net optional
ssh_1.2.26-4.diff.gz
d24a8fe61a54ecace08cf6349bfd5e93 430966 non-us/net optional
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 01:13:10PM +0200, Richard Braakman wrote:
mozilla should work for potato
Maybe it will ;) We'll try.
If it doesn't, I guess the current mozilla should be removed? It's sort
of old now, and it doesn't work with glibc 2.1.
I was kidding - newer mozilla
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 10:12:46PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
mozilla should work for potato
Maybe it will ;) We'll try.
If it doesn't, I guess the current mozilla should be removed? It's sort
of old now, and it doesn't work with glibc 2.1.
I was kidding - newer
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 04:14:00PM -0700, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote:
a new version of jdk117 from blackdown (v3) has been released. apparently,
the problems with glibc2.1 have been resolved, though i haven't checked this
out myself.
is anybody working on packaging it? can i
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 09:07:14AM -0700, Brent Fulgham wrote:
I think you should look in http://va.debian.org/~bfulgham/ and download
the version of mozilla that is (hopefully) still there. If it works, and
if more people agree with it, I'll put it in potato.
The only problem I had with
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 05:29:28AM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
How is the other nicname chiark, elrangen, and giano named ?
Are they named after the name of the location ?
The machines had those names in their FQDNs, ftp.uni-erlangen.de,
chiark.greenend.ac.uk, giano.com.dist.unige.it.
--
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 12:02:32PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
Everything seems to build fine according to Tinderbox. Let's
try another build Josip and see how it works out. If we can't
get it to build cleanly, I will pull CVS over my phone line at
home and try building on my Potato
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 12:23:14PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
What about non i386 builds ?
What about them? The upload will contain source, and you'll be perfectly
free to recompile it :)
Yes, ...
but mozilla is pretty big, 17MB i think, so the compile will use lots of disk
space
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 01:35:19PM +0100, Vincent Murphy wrote:
It is already in Incoming.
It was rejected from it (see Incoming/REJECT), because of some
no-distribution clause in the licence.
ok. i'm just wondering how SuSE and anybody else who gives it out on CDs
gets away with
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 12:26:09AM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
The machines had those names in their FQDNs, ftp.uni-erlangen.de,
chiark.greenend.ac.uk, giano.com.dist.unige.it.
uhm,,, the FQDN of the new upload-queue host is master.debian.or.jp,,,
Do you feel that debian-jp is
On Sat, May 15, 1999 at 01:07:26AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
Easy solution, buy one of those non-free Debian CDs, with the bits of non-free
they can shove on a CD on. Loads of vendors do them.
No, the non-freeness isn't the problem with this version. FTP admin
said that licence says that we
Hi,
While I was packaging hwtools, I stumbled across a program to set up
QIC-02 cards, qic02conf. It is included in hwtools, but it doesn't
have much documentation. I've found the upstream source, it was on
Metalab (Sunsite), and thought that it would be nice if someone would
package the whole
On Sun, May 16, 1999 at 10:26:18AM -0400, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
Boa is nice as well, but has too many open bugs, and the maintainer
never ever seems to respond.
Unfortunately, that would mean that boa is not maintained upstream,
because Jon Nelson is also the upstream maintainer :(
--
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 11:36:41AM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
Remove as many dependencies on old libraries as possible, this
includes:
libjpegg6a, libncurses3.4, newt0.25, libpgsql, tk4.2, tcl7.6,
libwraster1, libpng0g
and various older gtk/gnome libraries.
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 12:35:27PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
No one needs to take on that job, as the BTS already reports all open bugs
twice a week to every developer.
It does? It sure didn't send that anything like that to me...
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 04:40:14PM -0500, Oleg Krivosheev wrote:
looking into GNOME i got some (maybe stupid) idea:
what about creating empty packages only to satisfy dependancies and
be able to install loosy related set of packages. Metapackage
seems to be the right name for such creature
On Fri, May 21, 1999 at 12:00:20AM +0200, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
JM libgtop0 should be removed from the archive; it is obselete and
JM replaced by libgtop1. gnome-utils 0.99.3-1 depends on it -- but
JM gnome-utils 0.99.3-1 is also obselete, but I cannot find a
JM replacement, even though I
On Fri, May 21, 1999 at 07:41:20PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
I don't know which (pseudo-)package I should submit to, so I post it
to this list.
I e-mailed this to a couple of people but got no response.
I am no longer the maintainer of this package, but no-one has yet taken
it over. Should
On Fri, May 21, 1999 at 02:57:26PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
ae barely even WORKS!
it's crap in every other mode, it's just crap! =
_PICO_ is a more functional editor than ae, at least it works.
toss ae, and get something that functions.
From what I've seen, ae functions perfectly. It
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 12:08:00AM +0100, Steve Haslam wrote:
gtk-doc is the upstream name, but a more distinct name may be
preferred to distinguish it from gtk+-docs, libgtk1.2-doc, gnome-docu,
gnome-dev-info... Perhaps gtk-doc-tools ? Maybe keep the source
called gtk-doc and call the binary
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 12:16:26AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
Joe might also be a good option because of its wordstar-esque keys.
I HATE wordstar key binds, so does everybody else.
~~
This part of the sentence is completely absurd.
--
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 11:23:54AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
joe is not discontinued upstream. Joe Allen just hasn't worked on it in
3+ years as he worked on other things. Recent posts from him on comp.editors
suggests that he is going to start working on joe again.
That's great news!
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 12:07:59PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
That's great news!
Eh, until I see a new version from JA I'm not holding my breath. :)
Of course... :(
It is THE worst editor to use when you have a terminal with any kind
of illness (and that is my most common situation, for
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 10:10:56AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
it's more that
when you're in a hurry trying to fix some system that has gone down you
don't have time to mess around learning some stupid editor which doesn't
do any of the things you need it to do.
being restricted to a
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 03:07:19AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
Some of these can be detected automatically (#5 could be discovered with a
grep on debian/rules, for example), but some can't.
So, what's the problem? We don't autodetect all of binary dependencies
either.
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 11:13:29AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
Well, what can the bootdisk makers say about that, but - who cares?!
I use joe all the time, but I do not complain that the boot disk
doesn't contain it, and that I am restricted to a primitive editor
and I have to think about
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 01:46:18AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
This, FYI, is why I sopped using joe. Not only is it buggy if used from a
buggy terminal emulator like windoze telnet, it had occasional bugs running
in an xterm (not screen display, but failure to reset the terminal properly
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 01:20:11PM +0200, Guenther Thomsen wrote:
you are also making the mistake of assuming that joe is in any way a
standard tool. it is not. the only two text editors which can lay claim
to being a standard part of any unix are ed and vi.
On a rescue disk you
On Mon, May 24, 1999 at 12:53:51PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
Can I upload packages with the /usr/info - /usr/share/info modification?
Yes you may :) GNU info has been set to read its files from that directory
since long time ago, IIRC before hamm.
Can I upload packages with the /usr/man -
On Mon, May 24, 1999 at 09:24:48PM -0400, James R. Van Zandt wrote:
Can I upload packages with the /usr/info - /usr/share/info modification?
Yes you may :) GNU info has been set to read its files from that directory
since long time ago, IIRC before hamm.
Okay, then I propose that we next
On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 07:48:54AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
Can I upload packages with the /usr/info - /usr/share/info modification?
Yes you may :) GNU info has been set to read its files from that directory
since long time ago, IIRC before hamm.
Can I upload packages with the
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 12:04:53AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Yes you may :) GNU info has been set to read its files from that directory
since long time ago, IIRC before hamm.
No, it's not in policy yet.
Sorry, I meant to say yes you can. But it should become policy soon,
so that
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:46:41PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
So, what's the problem? We don't autodetect all of binary dependencies
either. Maintainers generally know what they need to build their
packages;
it should be trivial for them to list the dependencies explicitly!
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:38:11PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
no, but vi as been standard unix editor since times immemorial, and people
expect to find it on any unix system.
The boot disk is not a system at all - it is crippled in every way.
And we don't have a vi that would fit in 25KB.
--
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:31:15PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
remove this help stuff, and have just some sort of help binding that will
bring
it up. That would be nicer, and let more space for editign.
That's okay too, as long as it is clearly written (e.g. like in joe,
Ctrl-K H for help).
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 06:40:09PM +0300, Fabrizio Polacco wrote:
Of course, these are all very nice ideas... but we currently don't
have any PLACE to put the list (where it'll get used by dpkg* tools),
whether it is manually or automatically generated!
IIRC Ben Collins had made a
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 07:42:35PM +0300, Amos Shapira wrote:
Not daring to upgrade my machines to glibc 2.1 yet for lack of
stability, I was hoping I'll be able to upgrade my package on
master.debian.org but now see that it is also based on glibc 2.0.
Is there any debian glibc 2.1 machine
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 10:42:36PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
This package has been a major source of serious security bugs and
indicatiosn are that it will remain as such. Our Policy states that
packages that are not sufficiently free of bugs to meet our standards
should not be in main and
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 03:44:36PM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote:
The current `sub-release' (whatever) of Debian 2.1 is r3, right?
I was just wondering, as all references on the web site are to r2,
but I thought I received a message from the security team about
r3 last week somtime. Just wanted
PLEASE reply below the old text, cut unneeded quote, and wrap your lines
at 76 characters!
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 07:52:24AM -0700, David Bristel wrote:
This package has been a major source of serious security bugs and
indicatiosn are that it will remain as such. Our Policy states that
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 07:53:06AM -0700, David Bristel wrote:
The current `sub-release' (whatever) of Debian 2.1 is r3, right?
I was just wondering, as all references on the web site are to r2,
but I thought I received a message from the security team about
r3 last week somtime. Just
Guy Maor wrote:
What about just keeping the last 2.0.x and the last 2.2.x ?
I agree. One 2.0.x, one 2.2.x, eventually one 2.[34].x version.
This has been discussed before, people agreed that there's too much of
the kernel packages in there. You're the FTP admin, please act.
Brian Mays wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 11:22:59PM +0200, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
Anyway, which ftpd in unstable do you see as the package to promote as
the ftpd of choice in Debian?
Just to see what our alternatives are.
An alternative is wu-ftpd. It would be rather foolish to support wu-ftpd
100%,
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 06:36:47PM +0200, Robert Vollmert wrote:
With /bin/sh - /bin/ash, I get the following error:
guess.datestyle: 25: Syntax error: word unexpected (expecting ))
It works fine with bash. It seems the opening brace on
case $x in ( SystemV | posix | right )
On Sat, Sep 18, 1999 at 10:51:33PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Sep 18, Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An alternative is wu-ftpd. It would be rather foolish to support wu-ftpd
100%, however, it has almost the same status as sendmail - it is a very
You mean that it's like sendmail, i.e
On Wed, Sep 22, 1999 at 03:13:03PM +0800, Paul Harris wrote:
i have agreed to take VRweb off Fabien Ninoles' hands, and have been
successful in making it work under my Potato system! woo hoo!
however, i have no idea what the next steps are:
- What is the technique to rediff a package for
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 10:43:01AM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
dpkg-source: error: Expected ^@@ in line 4569 of diff
\ No newline at end of file
This bug is already known, reported, and is promised to be fixed in
the next dpkg(-source) upload.
--
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 08:35:06AM -0700, Darren Benham wrote:
| And do what... there are going to be keys that aren't in the debian
keyring..
Non-developpers should not be allowed to *manipulate* bugs IMO.
What do you think?
Make me PGP/GPG/whatever sign all messages I send to
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 01:32:29PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
So, why are there packages with depends lines that include both perl5 and
a particular version, like perl-5.005?
When a package depends on a virtual package which is provided by multiple
real packages, but none of these are already
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 02:23:03PM +0200, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
Scavenging the mail folder uncovered Siggy Brentrup's letter:
There should be one for the main distribution. Assume I want to go
into the CD business providing support for packages in the main
dist.
The way it is, I
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 07:13:58AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
How comes mtools depend on xlib6g? I don't use X, and thus I consider it
very stupid to have both xlib6g xfree86-common installed, but I have to
if I want mtools installed...
If something supports X it should be compiled with
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 11:22:34AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
ftp.phys.ocean.dal.ca users/kelley/gri/ gri-*.tgz debian uupdate
Am I doing something obviously wrong?
IIRC you can use this:
ftp.phys.ocean.dal.ca /users/kelley/gri gri-(.*)\.tgz debian uupdate
See the
Subject: mtools: please put X related stuff in another package
Package: mtools
Severity: normal
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 10:16:20AM -0500, Brian Servis wrote:
How comes mtools depend on xlib6g? I don't use X, and thus I consider it
very stupid to have both xlib6g xfree86-common installed,
severity 46184 wishlist
thanks
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 12:28:08PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
Correction: mtools in slink does *not* depend on anything but libc6, so
there is still time to do it, cleanly.
Maintainer, please do it.
The bug tracking system has a weird X-Debian-CC system
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:45:18AM -0400, Mark W. Eichin wrote:
It looks like floppyd is the only thing that needs X.
I'm not sure it *is* better to fork things off; that's a fair amount
of hair for one isolated program.
Maybe not - it wouldn't be the first nor the last 50kb large Debian
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 03:35:41PM +, Dale Scheetz wrote:
mtools, it's only one single file; a daemon (floppyd, if I'm not all
wrong) that needs xlib6g. It'd be simple to extract this daemon from
mtools and create an extra package with just this file, and make this file
recommended by
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:23:00AM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
I am the maintainer of python-gnome and the associated modules. The
current python-glade has support for the libglade library in
_libglademodule.so. Problem: Lintian complains that _libglademodule.so
contains position
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 09:47:24PM -0500, Eric Weigel wrote:
I wanted to look at each of ipopd, gnu-pop3d and cucipop. I could only
look at one at a time. It was ok in my case, because the machine I was
using has very little pop3 traffic. But it was awkward.
If I wanted to download source
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:43:17AM -0700, John Lapeyre wrote:
Something I have noticed several times. If you are doing a remote
upgrade (probably a crazy idea), the telnet daemon (maybe inetd or
something) becomes unavailble for quite some time. Maybe it is between the
time that netbase is
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 12:28:36PM -0400, Dpk wrote:
I recently adopted dhcpcd... previous versions of dhcpcd would restart
during upgrades, which obviously is bad for those doing it remotely.
Since my recent upload does not restart dhcpcd, I need to start it for
those upgrading from previous
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 04:59:35PM +0200, Martin Bialasinski wrote:
Whatever, I won't restart this thread again. I wouldn't touch wuftp
with a 10ft pole. I switched to proftpd, when there was a hole in many
ftpds (creating a very deep directory hierarchy), the fix for proftpd
was available
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 02:43:37PM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
One possible technique we could employ is to require that the list
address appear visibly in the headers (to: or cc:). This would
prevent Bcc'ing the lists which is a shame (and care would need to be
taken with -private, which is
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 04:20:07PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
Is there any easy to understand HOWTO available? I'd like to play a little
bit with grub but after reading the texinfo files it seems to be too
complicated to do just that. And I don't like to spend hours to understand
something
- Forwarded message from Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug#57636: Security problem with emacs19
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Debian-PR-Message: report 57636
X-Debian-PR-Package: emacs19
X-Debian-PR-Keywords:
Date:
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 12:07:11PM +0100, Christian Hammers wrote:
Package: nfs-kernel-server (debian/main)
Maintainer: Chip Salzenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
59641 nfs-kernel-server: conflicts with Standard package nfs-server
Package: nfs-server (debian/main)
Maintainer: Herbert Xu [EMAIL
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 08:19:29PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
BTW I was told removing all non-current Netscape Navigator versions
will be done RSN (if it wasn't already done, haven't checked today).
that could be a problem on the powerpc branch as the only available
netscape is an outdated
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 09:12:52PM +0100, Igor Mozetic wrote:
Can we remove emacs19 from unstable now? It's de facto orphaned both
upstream and in Debian, and a new version exists, supported in both
upstream and Debian.
What happens to vm then? I depends on emacs19 (and not emacs20) ...
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
being a year behind is suicide in any industry. being a year behind in an
industry that moves as fast as open source software, is idiocy.
Why do we have to be a part of an industry? Debian would be commercial if we
truely cared about
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 11:41:10PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Josip Why do we have to be a part of an industry? Debian would be
Josip commercial if we truely cared about the industry...
It is a quality of imlementation issue. If we are seriously
outmoded, we can't honestly say
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 07:18:35PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
They can't both be standard if they conflict with each other, see Policy.
Well, then, don't remove one, just change its priority!
Who said I want to remove one? :)
--
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 09:39:52AM +1100, Drake Diedrich wrote:
New hardware support seems to be a reasonable justification for allowing
new versions into stable/frozen if there is also an older version there
for the rest of us to fall back on in case it's a lemon.
This would be valid,
On Sun, Mar 12, 2000 at 10:40:36PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
There are exactly ONE HUNDRED server modules built by the stock 4.0 source
tree.
No, I don't know yet what exactly I'm going to do about that.
If I got Driver Status document right, perhaps you could divide them per
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:50:47AM +, Paul M Sargent wrote:
Woody should be running 2.3 or pre-2.4. That should have been among the
first things to change.
There's a misunderstanding here: the distribution has no default kernel,
the boot floppies do. Since nobody is working on woody boot
This is a message for debian-mentors mailing list, please use that one.
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 12:07:07PM +0100, SOETE Joël wrote:
In this last directory I try to launch dpkg --build ... which failled
because it did not find DEBIAN/control file (which stand in debian/control)
You can't build
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 01:43:46PM +, Paul M Sargent wrote:
Woody should be running 2.3 or pre-2.4. That should have been among the
first things to change.
There's a misunderstanding here: the distribution has no default kernel,
the boot floppies do. Since nobody is working on
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 03:04:26PM +, Paul M Sargent wrote:
If the kernel isn't even in the archive then potential problems aren't
going to be found.
I wouldn't put that much `weight' in the fact that kernel is in the archive:
kernel packages don't get upgraded to new upstream
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 08:17:00PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
But slink is practically completely adjusted for 2.2 already.
Sure, if you ignore the 12 packages that break
(http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/running-kernel-2.2)
I believe 12 out of ~2250 counts as practically completely.
--
1 - 100 of 658 matches
Mail list logo
