Marco d'Itri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is there a workaround, so that I can continue to use these libraries?
Write a small shared library providing _xstat and preload it.
I wrote this to do that, unfortunely it wasn't enough for my program
(a program compiled with the Portland Groups'
This was originally on debian-legal, but it was suggested to ask here
before mass-filing bug reports. Opinions? Should we file bugs for
this? What severity?
MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think you should file bug reports, but I think you should ask a
wider or higher audience (maybe
I went over the package list more carefully, and it seems the only two
public domain RFCs that are included in Debian testing:
usr/share/doc/dhcp3-common/doc/rfc951.txt.gznet/dhcp3-common
usr/share/doc/camstream-doc/tech/rfc959.txt.gz doc/camstream-doc
The following
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Simon Josefsson:
text/xml2rfc
From the debian/copyright file:
| The software is released under the following license. Note that the
| output produced by xml2rfc may include more restrictive copyright
| statements, to conform with ISOC and IETF
Riku Voipio [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Friday 28 April 2006 13:34, Simon Josefsson wrote:
The following packages appear to contain IETF RFCs/drafts, and I'll
file bug reports for them:
As per good mass filing practices, can you create a linda/lintian test out of
your method you used
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:46:22PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Kari Pahula [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.05.11.1535 +0200]:
* License : GPL v2 or later
That will make it pretty useless for
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 04:46:22PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Kari Pahula [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.05.11.1535 +0200
Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
gnutls changed their ABI again.
...
Gnutls in Debian is properly versioned (as opposed to Upstream, which
dropped the versioning script for no good reason), and thus I am
The change was discussed on the mailing list:
Matthias Urlichs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The change was discussed on the mailing list:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/464
If you had reported this problem to us, we would fix it.
Sorry about that -- I didn't read the list consistently.
My fault. :-/
Hi. I'd like to get in contact with someone who would be interested
in creating and supporting Debian packages for my Kerberos 5
implementation, and its related GSS-API library. Web pages are
available at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/shishi/
http://www.gnu.org/software/gss/
Shishi and GSS can
Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 03:43:43PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
One advantage with my Kerberos 5 implementation compared to
MIT/Heimdal is that it support Kerberos 5 over TLS, which means that
you can use X.509 or (work in progress) OpenPGP keys
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi. I'd like to get in contact with someone who would be interested in
creating and supporting Debian packages for my Kerberos 5
implementation, and its related GSS-API library. Web pages are
available
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:32:58AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I expect the initial packaging to be simple, it is just a './configure
make install' package. Part of the 'make install' procedure should
be duplicated in the apt install scripts
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Having you as a co-maintainer would be great.
I expect the initial packaging to be simple, it is just a './configure
make install' package. Part of the 'make install' procedure should
be duplicated
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 08:01:41PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Shishi can co-exist with either of MIT or Heimdal. It doesn't use a
similar API at all. The library has a clean name space (shishi_*).
The tools doesn't conflict with any (to me) known
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I notice from
http://josefsson.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/shishi/README?rev=1.30view=markup
that this lib is distributed under the terms of the GPL only, so I have
my
Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 08:01:41PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Shishi can co-exist with either of MIT or Heimdal. It doesn't use a
similar API at all. The library has a clean name space (shishi_*).
The tools doesn't conflict with any (to me
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
other), the addition of licensing problems means that there's basically no
motivation for anyone to try to use shishi.
One motivation would be to get the unique features that Shishi has that
the other Kerberos implementation has. E.g., non-ASCII
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The software area in which you're writing code is fairly mature and even
standardized. Pretty much everything that does SASL uses Cyrus SASL.
It is not even that good, plenty of applications implement their own
SASL code. A quick ldd $bin|grep sasl
Hi everyone!
I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
official archive (?), so I thought this would be of some interest to
you. I am trying to influence the IETF to change the copying
conditions on RFCs to
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Simon Josefsson:
I explain the current problems, and I try to put together a proposed
update, and I have a petition online at:
http://josefsson.org/bcp78broken/
Very nice, thanks.
I think you might get broader support in the vendor community
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wesley J Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 06 October 2005 06:57, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
official archive
Paul TBBle Hampson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 11:16:03PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Russ Allbery wrote:
Unlimited distribution isn't the problem. Modification and
redistribution of modified
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Simon Josefsson:
I think you might get broader support in the vendor community if you
make the license for modified copying non-copyleft.
Yes, that is the intention. Requiring a copyleft license is likely to
meet with disapproval from too many
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Peter Samuelson:
* Simon Josefsson:
The Contributor grants third parties the right to
copy and distribute the Contribution, with or without
modification, in any medium, without royalty. If the
Contribution is modified, any
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson writes:
Is that license acceptable to the Debian community?
Looks fine to me. Is it going to be retroactive?
It is a good question. The RFC Editor has claimed that the RFC 2026
license apply to older RFCs too, in particular RFC 1510
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, RFCs with the new license doesn't include the license template
itself, it just reference BCP 78. So if BCP 78 is updated, perhaps it
automatically apply to RFCs that simply reference BCP 78. I
Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org writes:
Dne Sat, 25 Apr 2009 07:10:24 +0300
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net napsal(a):
Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
which automatically updates config.{sub,guess}.
If you don't build depend on autotools-dev,
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
I think it is a problem extending to all virtual packages, and I would
like to see a more general solution which is applicable to all. It
might be worth revisiting past discussion, for example this thread:
Philipp Kern tr...@philkern.de writes:
On 2009-05-11, Brian May b...@snoopy.debian.net wrote:
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Jens Peter Secher wrote:
+1 for ssmtp
I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths
Jakub Wilk uba...@users.sf.net writes:
* Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org, 2009-05-11, 12:55:
+1 for ssmtp
I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths from memory.
Please not ssmtp. If I recall it correctly I
Kalle Kivimaa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With Gnus+Mailcrypt, I was unable to vote with a signed but not
encrypted ballot. The voting daemon claimed that there was some
kind of quoted-printable problem. This surprised me: Gnus and
Mailcrypt have not
Fabio Tranchitella [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* 2007-04-12 11:29, Joey Hess wrote:
I wonder if it would be reasonable to make d-i hit one of two urls
depending on whether the user chose to enable popcon, and count the
results.
Isn't this a violation of user's privacy? If the user hitted
Jorge Salamero Sanz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 14 June 2007 04:20:53 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Two weeks ago I've sent an email no Yvan, asking if he was still
interested in maintaining those packages. Both have newer upstream
versions. There is a bug with a patch for libgsasl7 that
Jorge Salamero Sanz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thursday 02 August 2007 21:06:10 Russ Allbery wrote:
Simon Josefsson helps maintain Debian packges for several of his other
packages (gss, shishi) and may be willing to help. He's also generally
great about staying in touch with the Debian
Arnaud Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello,
Before I maintain nethack-el, it was not relying on dh_installemacsen
and startup file was installed as /etc/emacs/site-start.d/50nethack.el.
However, it now relies on dh_installemacsen and the file is now
installed as
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
there are currently 122 RC bugs remaining that affect both testing and
unstable. We need to fix them NOW.
However, in the permanent BSP state that has lasted for quite some time,
people seem to lose focus on this urgent need for the release.
William Pitcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 22:52 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
But regardless, Debian has promised that Debian is only free software.
Then why does Debian have non-free? Is that not part of Debian?
One way to resolve this dilemma is to realize that
Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The solution to your problem already exists (actually, it has been
*designed* for that): http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
, it just needs someone with the energy of finalizing the proposal
(most likely via a DEP), so that is stops
Noah Slater [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hey,
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 12:25:20PM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The solution to your problem already exists (actually, it has been
*designed* for that): http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:45:12 +0100
Kjeldgaard Morten m...@bioxray.au.dk wrote:
Thanks. Unless you setup some experimental method, any argument
should reduce
to handwaving or extension of various particular examples..
Surely, it must be
James Vega james...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 4:55 PM, markus schnalke mei...@marmaro.de wrote:
[2009-01-15 22:37] Michael Goetze mgoe...@mgoetze.net
before wild speculations ensues, you might want to specify what you
really want to know: the percentage of people installing
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:24:58 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Surely, it must be possible to get an estimate of the number of
downloads of important packages and security updates? I
Johannes Wiedersich johan...@physik.blm.tu-muenchen.de writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Merely the number of distinct IP addresses downloading a particular
popular update from security.debian.org at least once would be
interesting.
Did you think about thousands of computers having 'private
Bernd Eckenfels e...@lina.inka.de writes:
In article 87d4enbfqd@mocca.josefsson.org you wrote:
It would establish an upper bound of well-administrated debian machines,
I think.
It is a lower bound, since I guess there are more cases where more than one
machine is updated. The case that
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au writes:
I'm having a conversation with a Debian packager regarding a manpage
that, currently, is a mere placeholder saying “please see foocommand
--help”, giving none of the useful information normally found in a
manpage.
...
I have submitted a manpage
Daniel Schepler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I finally got through the test builds of all the source packages in sid for
i386 using dpkg-buildpackage -j3 on a dual core machine. The results as
before are at http://people.debian.org/~schepler/build-logs/bymaint.html .
Which said:
shishi:
While recursively unpacking source archives in the debian repository
(see [1]), I noticed a small number of packages that contain corrupt
zip/tgz archives. Logs from unpacking them are available from:
http://josefsson.org/broken-debian-origs/
The error messages are mixed in the output due to
There weren't much response on this. I'll go through these bugs now and
file them as wishlist bugs. Any objections?
/Simon
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
While recursively unpacking source archives in the debian repository
(see [1]), I noticed a small number of packages
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No responses? No one cares enough to comment? Lets see if a change in
subject helps.
Do the files created from the RFCs also have the same restrictive license
as the RFCs themselves?
The text of the RFCs is
Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
This seems to imply that you no longer have a file named rfc3454.txt? You
want to strip all the text out of that file except for the table, but
leave the table in the tree still named rfc3454.txt.
This would imply understanding
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Suppose that a package wants to create a UNIX domain socket as part of
its test suite. If the socket is created within the package build
directory, this might fail because of the quite low path name length
limit. What is the correct way of dealing
Wookey woo...@wookware.org writes:
At this points it calls the linker and adds -L/usr/lib on the front -
thereby adding this path in front of the default cross-compiler path.
Please try to debug where the -L/usr/lib comes from, I don't believe
libtool is adding this by itself but instead it is
If there are any packages that uses SSLv2 by default you might want to
file a security bug to get them fixed. I believe SSLv2 is really that
bad, it just gives a false sense of security.
/Simon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net writes:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:30:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bastien ROUCARIES roucaries.bast...@gmail.com writes:
Patches to WebAuth to support NSS are welcome, but I'm sure not going to
bother. Seems like a waste of time to me. If I were going
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
On Apr 27, Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 07:20:55PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
The reason is that the kind of entities which require FIPS 140 probably
also tend to require corporate vendor support, which we do not
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
Enrico Weigelt weig...@metux.de writes:
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@debian.org schrieb:
I'm (as upstream) using serval macros in their own .m4 files (eg.
in ./m4/, maybe even sorted into subdirs). Can autoreconf figure
out the required search pathes all on its own ?
The problem
Brian May br...@microcomaustralia.com.au writes:
Or is there another way?
There is the option of changing GnuTLS to use something other than
libgcrypt. There are APIs for doing this dynamically in GnuTLS, and if
that is not sufficient (if you want to avoid linking to libgcrypt
entirely) we
Mats Erik Andersson mats.anders...@gisladisker.se writes:
Hello,
the package for the small web server Webfs has had SSL-support inactivated
at least since July 2006, when #395873 began discussing migration to GnuTLS.
Nothing ever happened, but now, having recently adopted the package, I am
Joerg Jaspert jo...@debian.org writes:
Now, should the technician not be able to resurrect ries, our backup
plan extends to have the disks shipped over and replace the ones
currently in rietz.
I'm wondering if Debian has the resources (DSA, local admins and
hardware) to have a hot-swappable
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bug #390664 inspired me to look in source packages for IETF RFC/I-D's
too, and the situation seem to be more problematic. I've put a list
of packages in testing (as of a few days ago, my mirror is slow) that
appear to contain IETF RFC or I-D's
Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
http://wiki.debian.org/NonFreeIETFDocuments
A useful thing to add to that page would be simple instructions on how
those authoring IETF documents could make them available under a
DFSG-free licence (presumably in parallel
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Simon Josefsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061016 13:19]:
I went over many packages looking for names of likely non-free files,
and there may be false positives. If this is the case for your
package, I'm sorry for the noise.
Sorry
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Simon Josefsson]
Do you have suggestions to improve the situation?
I would suspect manual inspection of each file, and only file bugs for
the files with real license problems. Using the file name to guess
about the existence of a serious bug
://packages.qa.debian.org/s/subversion.html. Probably a
temporary problem...
/Simon
[1] Old e-mail:
From: RFC Editor rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Re: Copyright and copying conditions for RFC 1510?
To: Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: RFC Editor rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11
Martin Zobel-Helas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Simon,
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 01:48:50PM +0200, Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Simon Josefsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061016 13:19]:
I went over many packages looking for names
Some raised a concern with false positives in my reports -- and also
tagged all the bugs with etch-ignore. I went through all bug reports
manually yesterday (see earlier mail), but I also realized that it
would be possible to do this automatically, to provide further
assurance that the bugs
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Josefsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The second problem seems to be generic. The reason I looked at
packages in testing was that they are the packages that are going to
be released, and if I look at what's in unstable, it seems that I
On 17 okt 2006, at 18.47, Luk Claes wrote:
Some statistics:
74 packages
401 MATCH, i.e., the RFC in the source package is an authentic RFC
79 MISMATCH, i.e., the RFC differ from the authentic RFC
6 FETCH-FAIL
Note that not all authentic RFC documents have the same license,
some of
Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au writes:
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:21PM +0100, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a
wrote:
I thought that the 2007 key was (based on [1]) supposed to be available
early in January and available in the debian-archive-keyring package. Which
doesn't seem to be
Frank Lin PIAT fp...@klabs.be writes:
-
libssh2 is the thin library implementing client side of SSH2 protocol
as defined by Internet Drafts SECSH-TRANS, SECSH-USERAUTH,
SECSH-CONNECTION, SECSH-ARCH, SECSH-FILEXFER, SECSH-DHGEX,
SECSH-NUMBERS, and SECSH-PUBLICKEY
.
This boils down
Michael Banck mba...@debian.org writes:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 05:13:51PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 07:03:16AM +0200, sean finney wrote:
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 09:40:48PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
The difference is that those tools provide a reasonable
Hans-J. Ullrich hans.ullr...@loop.de writes:
Hi guys! Good news!
Hydra is now beeing maintained again, and it is now free! Thanks to its
maintainer, hydra is now set under the GPLV3.
Yeah!
Please take a look:
http://freeworld.thc.org/thc-hydra/
Maybe you might want to put it back
Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org writes:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org
* Package name: simon
Version : 0.3.0
Upstream Author : Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org
* URL : http://www.simon-listens.org/
*
Samuel Thibault sthiba...@debian.org writes:
Peter Grasch, le Tue 14 Sep 2010 22:22:42 +0200, a écrit :
I haven't really thought about it but the license shouldn't be an issue
afaik.
This topic has come up multiple times already but have a look at theses
discussions on why I think this
Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org writes:
Peter, have you prepared a source *.deb yet? It would be interesting to
look at the code to understand how critical the non-free component is.
Sure. There are complete packages in the Ubuntu ppa:
Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org writes:
Hi!
One conclusion from earlier discussions about the Julius license on
debian-legal was that it was non-free:
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-le...@lists.debian.org/msg40898.html
The thread isn't completely clear to me what the exact
Peter Grasch gra...@simon-listens.org writes:
Hi!
Am 2010-09-21 16:39, schrieb Simon Josefsson:
Is Julius dynamically linked to Simon? I wonder whether GPLv2 is
compatible with the Julius license.
Yes it is. The simon license contains a special exception to allow this.
This is also
I just stumbled upon this initiative:
http://www.spdx.org/
It is a way to specify the licensing and copyright information (and
more) for software packages. There is some overlap between
debian/copyright file and especially the DEP5 format. Alas, the SPDX
format is XML based, an example for GNU
Michael Shuler mich...@pbandjelly.org writes:
On 12/13/2011 09:17 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Possibly DEP5-compliant files could be generated from SPDX files.
This has come up in several DEP5 discussions over the past ~year, as
well as several recent mentions:
https://www.google.com/search
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes:
Note that Copyright (C) 2008 Peter Miller is different than Copyright
(C) 2011 Peter Miller is different than Copyright (C) 1991, 2012 Peter
Miller, so the cross product is going to be substantial for long lived
projects, even when the number of
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+. I'd like to upload the latest version
into Debian before Wheezy since a pretty nasty inifinte-loop bug has
been fixed. However, I am not certain what should be done before
uploading a
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
I would suggest asking the FSF licensing folks and debian-legal.
Good point about debian-legal, I'll repost the question there. I have
talked to the FSF and they suggest LGPLv3+ but will live with
dual-GPLv2+|LGPLv3+ if there are significant GPLv2-only
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
* Simon Josefsson:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+. I'd like to upload the latest version
into Debian before Wheezy since a pretty nasty inifinte-loop bug has
been fixed
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
(GPLv2-only and LGPLv3+ are incompatible.)
Nowadays, almost all GPLv2-only programs link to library code licensed
under the GPLv3 (with a linking exception on the library side), so we
pretend that they are, at least to some degree.
How does that
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 20:35:53 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+.
So maybe that's a stupid question, but... Why? You didn't have enough
license
Thanks for several responses -- however the underlying question I had,
whether the upload the new package to unstable or not, was not resolved.
Does anyone see any reason to delay or abstain from the upload? If not,
I'll do the upload within days.
/Simon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes:
On 08/17/2012 09:40 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
What I didn't know until recently is that the minified version in the
source package should be removed (or the appropriate full version should
be
Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org writes:
❦ 19 août 2012 15:11 CEST, Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org :
The difference is that we need to bug upstream about a file that we
won't even use. There is no real bug (not even a licensing issue).
They are distributing files without source, so
Pau Garcia i Quiles pgqui...@elpauer.org writes:
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
As for
verification, having the source next to the minified version does not
guarantee anything about the minified version, all the more that we
don't have currently
Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu writes:
Files-Excluded:
docs/source/fonts/*
docs/source/javascripts/jquery-1.7.1.min.js
docs/source/javascripts/modernizr-2.5.3.min.js
...
Regarding the implementation there was some uncertainity about the
actual Perl module to use. In the attached
Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu writes:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 01:25:26PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
How about resolving the empty directory problem by permitting the
Files-Excluded to match directories? Thus, if you want to remove the
docs/source/fonts/ hierarchy, you would instead write
Damien Raude-Morvan draz...@drazzib.com writes:
IMHO, it's obvious that yui-compressor is not - anymore - the most
efficient javascript minifier and better alternative exists. It's
simply not used anymore by big players of Javascript libs (like
jQuery) so it receives less attention (even from
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes:
Hey.
Apart from the question whether this RFC is anyhow reasonable...
On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 08:55 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Category: Best Current Practice
Can a BCP deprecate stuff which is standardised by RFCs from the
standards
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes:
On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 10:18 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
What RFCs are you thinking of? The X- stuff was removed from e-mail
standards long time ago, IIRC.
Well I don't have all RFCs in mind,... but weren't there others, that
gave x
Marco Nenciarini mnen...@debian.org writes:
Il giorno gio, 11/10/2012 alle 02.46 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer ha
scritto:
On the other hand, some worries are there that this could imply some
decline in Debian itself.
Well I still think Debian is the best distro out there for most (if
FWIW, I support moving forward with #6.
/Simon
You wrote:
My gut reaction was that #5 or #6 are the best option (leaning to
#6). However I guess I don't understand what making something a
system library effects the license?
Andreas Metzler ametz...@debian.org wrote:
Hello,
Debian ist
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libykneomgr
Version : 0.1.2-1
Upstream Author : Simon Josefsson si...@yubico.com
* URL : http://opensource.yubico.com/libykneomgr/
* License : LGPLv3+
Section : utils
This is a C library
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
Please ask your upstreams to remove the Unicode data files from their
version control systems and source tarballs and instead check for and
use external Unicode data files at build-time or run-time. Then your
packages can Build-Depend or Depend on the
1 - 100 of 473 matches
Mail list logo
