I approve
Drew Parsons wrote:
I remember some of us belatedly suggested sarge should be Debian 4.0,
though it was too late (May?) to accept that.
(it was me)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
On 20050708T181259-0400, Johan Kullstam wrote:
What signal is meant by 3.1 versus 4.0? Does your intended audience
have any concept of the distinction?
The usual distinction, when it is made, is that bumping the major number
indicates a disruptive upgrade
the same for me: I develop and mantain some gtk packages
there is no such thing as an easy transition from gtk1 to gtk2
Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
still requires GTK1. It would be great
Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
Their fault for releasing a book about unreleased software which is
bound to be outdated the day that sarge will actually release.
Uh-uh and when will that day be? And don't give me any of that when it
is ready nonsense.
Joey Hess wrote:
Andrea Mennucc wrote:
now that sarge is frozen, I would like to start a discussion
on the number to associate to Sarge release.
Now that sarge is frozen we have /etc/debian_version, the installation
manual, the release notes, and the website all containing the version
hi I see that some people are opposing using 4.0, so I give up.
I just write this e-mail to better understand why
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 01:17:45AM +0200, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
So I would much prefer if sarge would be called Debian 4
Do you agree?
I would
hi
I happen to mantain 'snmpkit' ; you may give it a look
a.
Christian Hammers wrote:
Hello
[regarding #306840 and with more info in #243870]
One of my packages, Quagga, is licenced under the GPL but is supposed to
get linked against NetSNMP. That now is problematic, as NetSNMP depends
hi everybody
now that sarge is frozen, I would like to start a discussion
on the number to associate to Sarge release.
According to
http://www.nl.debian.org/releases/sarge/index.en.html
Sarge may be released as Debian 3.1
In 2003, Scott James Remnant proposed in
Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:31:15PM +0200, A Mennucc wrote:
when a buildd builds a package, it first install all
build-dependencies, then compiles, then remove all build-dependencies.
For my package, that was a total of 113 MB of data to be moved in and
out of disks; since
hi
I have noticed a messy situation in BTS,
regarding my source package libppd (*)
my source package has this web page in BTS
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libppd
where you see there are 4 bugs listed (resolved)
but then there is this web page
hi
I have uploaded mplayer 1.0pre6a-3
It ships a correctly repackaged upstream source;
it has a 'debian/rules get-orig-source' (as asked in debian-devel)
that creates the .orig.tar.gz
It should appear in http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html
and in I will put a copy in
we goofed
update-menus already has a mechanism to avoid running too many times
from the authors:
It does not work this way. When update-menus run, it check whether the
dpkg
lock is taken. In this case it check if the menu lock is taken. If yes,
it just quit. if not, it take the menu lock and wait
hello
there has been a lot of interest lately on tecniques to obtain a faster
boot; for example
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-boot.html
http://www.fefe.de/minit/
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0204.0/0674.html
Robert Millan wrote:
Hello!
What is the current status of mplayer's ITP? After the opendivx driver
removal, has anyone investigated wether it's fully free software?
I am tring to prepare a package .
There are too many threads , in debian-legal and debian-devel,
to list them all here.
a.
well, I changed my mind
a packaging of mplayer 0.90 is available at
deb http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/ ./
we asked for someone on debian-legal to scrutinize it and say if the
work we did is enough to let this package in Debian
it has also been uploaded to the queue (in case an ftp-installer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:07:35 +0100
Source: printfilters-ppd
Binary: printfilters-ppd
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.13-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Andrea Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Andrea Mennucc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:58:56 +0100
Source: gpr
Binary: gpr
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.9-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Andrea Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Andrea Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED
Robinson wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 11:18:14PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 08:09:47PM +0200, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
Package: pgi
Version: 0.9.6
Severity: critical
Justification: causes serious data loss
Just for the record: I got bitten by this, too
miscellaneous X clients
ii xfonts-100dpi 4.1.0-14 100 dpi fonts for X
ii xfonts-base 4.1.0-14 standard fonts for X
ii xserver-xfree86 4.1.0-14 the XFree86 X server
ii xterm 4.1.0-14 X terminal emulator
--
Andrea Mennucc
19 matches
Mail list logo
