On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:45:54PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> > "Chris" == Chris Halls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Chris> Hmm, seems you are talking about version 1, which has been
> Chris> rewritten. The new version isn't bug free yet but it does
> Chris> fix several problems.
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 02:33:24PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> It may sound a bit radical, but core points have been mentioned in the
> >> thread already. I suggest to do it in a more radical way:
> >>
> >> - unstable lockdown in the freeze
> >>
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 11:08:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:26:09AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [BugScan reporter]
> > > Bug stamp-out list for May 14 06:01 (CST)
> > >
> > > Total number of release-critical bugs: 565
> > > Number that will disappear after r
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 12:34:54PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 11:08:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:26:09AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > > [BugScan reporter]
> > > > Bug stamp-out list for May 14 06:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:44:31PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > Remember, Debian is a volunteer project, you cannot force people to do
> > something they do not want to.
>
> Motivation is the only factor to make them do things. Having to care
> about the release in order to continue the "fun wor
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:51:47PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Joey Hess [Sat, Oct 23 2004, 08:36:18PM]:
> > > not look appear as critical for maintainer, or not important enough to
> > > touch
> > > package in the holy "frozzen" state). Such bugs are a disaster, they make
> > > our
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 05:57:05PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Marco d'Itri [Sat, Oct 23 2004, 10:06:24PM]:
> > On Oct 23, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > ABSTRACT
> > You are trying to force developers to work on item x, which they dislike,
> > by forcing them to
On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 06:02:38PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Wouter Verhelst [Sun, Oct 24 2004, 11:41:33AM]:
>
> > > Very few bug reports from testing users are of any value at all.
> >
> > I respectfully disagree here.
> >
> > With mos
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:52:58PM +0200, Oded Shimon wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 October 2004 22:37, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > For your package to go in contrib, your dependency -- mplayer -- must
> > exist in non-free.
> Really? I didn't know this.
That's not true. There are many packages in contrib w
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:02PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 5)==
>
> User specific configuration files for applications are stored in the user's
> home directory in a file that starts with the '.' character (a "dot file"). If
> an application needs to create more than one dot file then th
On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 05:10:04PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps that's true -- I must do a little reading. However, if you
> > upload a package to contrib that build-depends on a package not in
> > contrib or non-free, you'll get a FTBFS RC bu
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 10:06:48AM +1000, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Package harbour is FTBFS on alpha, s390, m68k, powerpc and mips, as
> you can see at:
>
> http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?pkg=harbour
>
> Could someone shed some light on this problem?
>
> A build log extr
On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 08:49:54AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.10.29.0823 +0200]:
> > dpkg should not put files in /usr when it extracts programs either if
> > /usr MUST NOT BE WRITTEN TO... ;)
^^
> Come on! T
Op ma, 31-01-2005 te 09:40 -0600, schreef Ron Johnson:
> On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 15:58 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 12:45:42PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > > Unfortunately, GNOME depends on hal, and hal de
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 09:53:21PM +0100, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
> 4. Writing to debian-legal and asking for advice.
Now that's a good idea. Why did you do that on debian-devel instead?
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
soda water | tequila
WATER
-- wi
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 06:35:40PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 05:46:55PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> >
> > Now if you feel advantous, repack as many package on the source mirror
> > with gzip --rsyncable and notice the difference.
>
> Exactly how is this going to help? I c
Op wo, 01-12-2004 te 16:44 +0100, schreef jaromil:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 03:43:29PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Re: jaromil in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > in case you are an arrogant person (i don't mean you are, i just don't
> > > know yo
Op wo, 01-12-2004 te 19:34 -0600, schreef John Goerzen:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 05:53:08PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 23:32:18 +, Will Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > And we have no time to set up i judgement over content --
> > there is a clear criteria
Op zo, 05-12-2004 te 14:23 +0100, schreef Jonas Meurer:
> On 05/12/2004 James Foster wrote:
> > Pornography may be offensive to some. Is the package description for
> > hot-babe accurate? Are people who do not want it installed being
> > forced to install it?
> >
> > People who may be offended by
Op zo, 05-12-2004 te 17:15 +0100, schreef Jonas Meurer:
> On 05/12/2004 Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > so you would even accept nazi propaganda material in debian, just
> > > because you dislike censorship?
> >
> > Yes, for the very same reason that many publ
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 10:01:15PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> The U. would err on the side of caution given the potential danger. If
> the "Hot Babe" package was being distributed from their facilities,
> they'd pull the plug. In order to appear to be proactive regarding
> harassing, offensive
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 04:34:54PM +1100, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 09:06:23PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>It strikes me that some of the material in question would be in
> >>violation of the Internet policies
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 13:49 +0100, schreef Frank KÃster:
> I must admit that I didn't know that failed *removals* of
> build-dependencies would cause the buildd to fail. Nobody cared to
> indicate that to us.
It can happen. It doesn't happen always, but sometimes it does. In
extreme cases, a buildd
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 12:50 +0100, schreef Michael Banck:
> *** The interested parties of the LCC should pick Debian as a base and
> Debian should make this possible. ***
>
> Rather than everybody just throwing all their stuff in together and
> mixing it up.
>
> Of course, this would also mean fo
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:22 +, schreef Will Newton:
> On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:13, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > It is. if we want people in Arabia to be able to possess Debian
> > > disks.
> >
> > The solution to censorious regimes is not to say, "
Op vr, 10-12-2004 te 15:38 +, schreef Will Newton:
> On Friday 10 Dec 2004 15:24, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > Which is a fine point of view if you are making a political point. But as
> > > far as I am aware we are trying to make an operating system.
> >
> &
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:25:53AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> As a rule of thumb ask yourself: Can I take out the harddisk and
> sell it including contents?
>
> With non-free firmware copied from a CD you can't. You have to remove
> the firmware first.
That assumes all non-free (as in s
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:34:10AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Yes. Once you eliminate the dependency on the non-free file the driver
> becomes suitable for main.
The driver does not have /any/ dependency on a non-free file. It will
function perfectly without the non-free file.
The devic
Op za, 11-12-2004 te 16:37 -0600, schreef Graham Wilson:
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 10:53:10PM +0100, Marcin Orlowski wrote:
> > Package: wnpp
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > * Package name: unlzx
> > Version : x.y.z
> > Upstream Author : Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > * URL
Op za, 11-12-2004 te 16:59 +0100, schreef Goswin von Brederlow:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
> > On Dec 10, Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> > You may want to take a look at debian-legal, because some people there
> >> > think that even free drivers for hardware d
Op za, 11-12-2004 te 20:12 -0500, schreef Glenn Maynard:
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 04:43:48PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > What about the rest of the driver? I think that if you remove the BLOB,
> > it's Free Software. It talks to a bus interface, which is a natural
> > demarcation between our
Op zo, 12-12-2004 te 04:52 +0100, schreef Goswin von Brederlow:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:34:10AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Yes. Once you eliminate the dependency on the non-free file the driver
>
you.
Not quite.
To design software, all you need is a fully functional computer.
To design hardware, you need to create and test a prototype every once
in a while. That'll cost you.
--
Wouter Verhelst
NixSys BVBA
Louizastraat 14, 2800 Mechelen
T:+32 15 27 69 50 / F:+32 15 27 60 51 / M:+32 486 836 198
Op di, 14-12-2004 te 07:48 -0500, schreef Chasecreek Systemhouse:
> > To design software, all you need is a fully functional computer.
> >
> > To design hardware, you need to create and test a prototype every once
> > in a while. That'll cost you.
>
>
> Your logic doesnt follow.
> Why, then, i
Op wo, 15-12-2004 te 05:57 -0600, schreef Marcelo E. Magallon:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 10:20:09AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
>
> > > The other problem with aptitude is touted as a design feature: it
> > > tends to be all-or-nothing. Either you use it always or you don't
> > > (automatic re
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 01:53:20PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 December 2004 09:01 am, Simon Richter wrote:
> > aptitude could be taught to have "auto-installed" being Yes,No or
> > Unknown. Whenever a package that is in "Unknown" state could be removed
> > if it were only instal
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 04:02:03PM -0500, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 December 2004 03:37 pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > ? It seems like "Unknown" would just be a synonym for "No", right?
> >
> > Uh, yes. I think.
> >
> > You ma
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 14:46 -0500, schreef Ian Murdock:
> We've heard
> directly from the biggest ISVs that nothing short of a common
> binary core will be viable from their point of view.
Well, frankly, I don't care what they think is 'viable'.
'ISV' is just another name for 'Software Hoarder'. I
I think we're looking at this from the wrong end.
Using Free Software, it's easy to produce more Free Software in such a
way that it will run on all Free platforms. This is normal; most, if not
all, Free Software is built by people who mainly (or only) use Free
Software, so they do not usually loo
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 14:38 -0800, schreef Bruce Perens:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > To address these issues, the Free Software people created the LSB
> When I founded the LSB, the job I proposed for it was to do what the
> LCC is now proposing to do. I didn't believe that a pa
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 11:01:16PM -0800, Bruce Perens wrote:
> You never lose the right to modify. You lose the right to claim that a
> modified version is the certified one. I addressed this specifically in
> DFSG section 4:/
> /
>
>/The license may require derived works to carry a differe
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 17:07 -0800, schreef Adam McKenna:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:13:11AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > I think Wouter is only asking for reciprocity here. If they don't care
> > about his concerns why should he care about theirs ? Or alternatively
> > "not caring" is a freedo
Op vr, 17-12-2004 te 01:40 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:03:00AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Indeed; however, IMO excerting the right to modify as defined by the
> > DFSG should never result in the loss of support, or other negative
> > con
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:42:52AM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:06:53AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The "us versus them" pitting of volunteer contributions against each other
> > appears to be your game alone, and is precisely the sort of thing that led
> > me t
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:13:11PM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> Also, what is involved with putting a package back into the Needs-Build
> state (i.e. requeueing it)?
The buildd maintainer replying to a log or running 'wanna-build'
manually.
> With complaints about the lack of response/response
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 08:42:07PM +0100, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
> Hi,
> First of all I am not a debian developer, so I always need a sponsor
> to upload it, and I think that the package is not yet perfect. Maybe
> an expert person can handle it better.
The first role of a sponsor is to check th
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 01:06:49PM +0100, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 12:15:43PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > I've tried to defend you for some time, because I thought your past help
> > to the m68k port should not have gone unnoticed. I stopped
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 04:16:49AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Perhaps a date based release mechanism could be built using a new
> distribution, call it prestable.
>
> Packages qualify to be enter prestable after residing in testing for
> ten days and having NO RC BUGS. The idea is to keep prest
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 05:12:57AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 13:46:
> > That's how testing started off. We stopped doing this because
> > a) it at one point stalled glibc; as a result, nothing moved to
> > testing
&
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 06:07:41AM -0800, Stephen Birch wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-01-05 14:22:
> >
> > You should ask the release managers about that.
> >
>
> Wow!! You mean the decision process is not made public? I would have
> thought it wo
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 08:44:13AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:23:18PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more
> > > work than the basic 2
scaped to '>From' in
transit. This is because some software will otherwise interpret the
leading from to be the start of a new message (it's a bit too close to
the mbox format start)
--
Wouter Verhelst
NixSys BVBA
Louizastraat 14, 2800 Mechelen
T:+32 15 27 69 50 / F:+32 15 27
Op do, 03-02-2005 te 15:44 +0100, schreef Frederik Dannemare:
> On Thursday 03 February 2005 14:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Increasing the rate at which new packages flow into unstable is NOT
> > something that should be a priority when we're trying to get the RC
> > bug count down in preparation
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 04:31:02PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /lib/libc-2.3.2.so
> GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.2, by Roland McGrath et al.
> Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software; see the so
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 10:58:55PM +0300, Sergei I. Kononov wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03 at 20:23:20 (+0100), Christoph Berg wrote:
>
> > What's the difference to makejail and debootstrap?
>
> 1. Created chroot enviroment use less disk space, and does not
> include not needed files/dirs (like: passwd
Op vr, 04-02-2005 te 15:54 +0100, schreef Goswin von Brederlow:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > There's also the fact that an executable libc is a nice way to
> > circumvent a 'noexec' restriction on a mount point :-)
>
> How does l
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 01:05:15PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> "carefully remove with appropriate tools." Anyone who goes mucking
> around their filesystem removing potentially critical compenents
> without thinking about it and using the proper tools for the job,
> is not thinking straight
On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 03:06:19PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 07:38:08AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> > Francesco P. Lovergine writes:
> > > It depends on programs, sometimes the same usage function is used for
> > > either --help or invalid options.
> >
> > Sure
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:35:42PM +0100, Marcin Orlowski wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Merging all these into one package will not do much harm to the user
> > (who will be able to install a 2M package on top of his 250MB KDE
> > installation to get all the choice o
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:53:20PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Atsuhito Kohda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > Thanks for your infomation. I met the same problem today's morning
> > so I changed exim to exim4 ;-)
>
> Fine to hear this can be done "today's morning". Is the configuration
> mig
On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 03:07:49PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 14:51:39 +0100, Wouter Verhelst
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In all but the most complex cases, migrating exim v3 to exim v4 involves
> >running /usr/sbin/exim_convert4r4 on /etc/exim/e
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
> > Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below, and
> > others, aren't indicative that debian should drop s390, mipsel, and
> > maybe hppa from the list of architectures? How
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 05:21:50PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Also, really huge stuff, like KDE, cannot be uploaded as frequently as
> perhaps the maintainers would like because it kills the slower buildd's
> for a few days.
Hypothetical daily KDE builds would also insanely increase the amount o
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 12:09:16AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > Also, really huge stuff, like KDE, cannot be uploaded as frequently
> > as perhaps the maintainers would like because it kills the slower
> > buildd's for a few days.
>
> The
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 12:04:37PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> I know this raises practical problems (the worst of it not beeing able
> to construct the same packages that are on the archive when starting
> from source+diff). But if one day BW is critical, there is a path to
> explore here.
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 11:49:46AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 05:21:50PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > > Also, really huge stuff, like KDE, cannot be uploaded as frequently as
> > > perhaps the maintainers woul
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 12:16:38PM +0100, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > Hypothetical daily KDE builds would also insanely increase the
> > amount of network traffic being used by the mirror pulse and people
> > upgrading their home boxes, so it isn't just a
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 03:53:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> >> Hypothetical daily KDE builds would also insanely increase the amount of
> >> network traffic being used by the mirror pulse and
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 08:48:48PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> Running such a system in parallel with the current systems (and comparing
> the outputs) might be a good test for gcc-as-cross-compiler, then...
And a hell of a lot of work. You can't just create checksums of the
resulting binaries a
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 11:46:37PM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 04:30:27PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > There are small KDE applications that require most of the KDE dependency
> > chain to be installed, while on the other hand XFree86's build
&g
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 02:29:33PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Is the problem that you use apt-get to install the current version, and
> then check what you got? Because you can't tell apt-get to install
> at least version X else fail?
Yes, that's how it works currently.
Since this also makes
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 03:15:58AM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Maybe we should pick up on Petter's suggestion of stricter buildd
> requirements.
> Maybe we should only build base and essential packages for the minor
> architectures [ after, apt-source is there for everybody to go further ]
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 08:54:36PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > - cpu cycles (witness Wouter's request to compile big packages
> > rarely),
>
> So you're saying that if we dropped the mips buildd's we'd have more
> cycles for other archs?
N
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 11:23:51PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation Wouter. That sounds like a big improvement.
>
> By the way, does this duplicate the functionality of 'apt-get build-dep'?
Possibly. Sbuild, however, predates the implementation of 'apt-get
build-dep', so
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 03:07:54PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Since this also makes autobuilding experimental harder, work is being
> > done to use ``apt-cache policy'' output to determine whether the ri
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 05:43:43PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> I can always tell you how to do things and you never have to
> listen. But my opinion stands that improving apt-get is the right
> thing to do, not having two divergent systems.
sbuild includes some centralized build-dependenc
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 10:57:06PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:25 -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 03:08:11AM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> [snip]
> > Oops. You jumped from "second most common" to "second most important", as
> > if they're synony
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 09:17:59PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Thomas Bushnell BSG [Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:13:42 -0800]:
>
> > Do the buildd people read this list? How do we get this cleaned up?
>
> That's not relevant, really. What matters is if they read their logs,
> and they certainly d
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 12:22:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Moreover, because it seems to be extremely difficult to know who
> manages which buildd's and get responses from them,
Have you tried @buildd.debian.org?
> I suspect that once it's cleaned up the fastest way to get my package
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 12:41:46PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > That won't help, especially not in this case. Those who manage the
> > autobuilder are best suited to know when the autobuilder will be fixed,
> >
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 08:42:05PM +0100, Sascha Berkenkamp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to help the debian team and I also read debian.org/devel ! So I
> think I would like to help testing and debugging the debian system in
> order to help to fix some bugs in some programs or debian sepcific
> stuff.
On Sat, Feb 26, 2005 at 10:00:32PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Its buildd specific. If its queue is empty it contacts wanna-build and
> puts the new packages into the queue. I can't remeber the filename but
> that should be easy to see from the source.
~buildd/build/REDO
Format:
_
If
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 11:08:14AM -0500, Rudy Godoy wrote:
> On 22/02/2005 at 10:11 Wouter Verhelst wrote...
>
> > I agree that we should not continue to provide software for outdated
> > hardware platforms just for the sake of it; but as it is, there are
> > still p
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 04:42:54AM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Goswin von Brederlow]
> > Which also avoids that packages will be unavailable on every new
> > architecture debian introduces because the maintainer has to adjust
> > the Architecture: line.
>
> I suppose it'd be nice to be abl
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 01:47:18PM -0800, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Can you folks at Debian tell me whether we are supported in Sarge?
The stock kernels support Reiser3, but not Reiser4. Reiser4 support
packages are available, however.
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -- mud -- FIRE
so
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 08:18:56PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [Goswin von Brederlow]
> >> Which also avoids that packages will be unavailable on every new
> >> architecture debian introduces because the maintainer has to adjust
> >> the A
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 01:28:58AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 08:18:56PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> &
Op za, 05-03-2005 te 18:55 +0100, schreef martin f krafft:
> also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.03.05.1840 +0100]:
> > ssh -i usualy helps.
>
> not if you cannot influence how SSH is called.
TTBOMK, distcc is free software.
--
EARTH
smog | bricks
AIR -
Op za, 05-03-2005 te 14:26 +0100, schreef Thiemo Seufer:
> Steve Halasz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've sent a few emails over the last month to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] requesting that grass be removed from
> > packages-arch-specific. But my pleas have fallen on deaf ears, or
> > p
Op di, 08-03-2005 te 14:58 +, schreef Ben Hill:
> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 00:46 +0100, David HÃrdeman wrote:
> > first of all, this might be slightly off-topic for the debian-devel
> > list, but I've got the impression that it's already been solved by some
> > DD's and might prove interesting t
Op di, 08-03-2005 te 10:33 -0800, schreef Clint Byrum:
> How much would it help with the current problems if we just picked 3
> arches(mipsel, s390, ???)
This argument has been brought up so many times by now that I'm amazed
people /still/ try it.
The answer is, simply, 'not'. Go learn to use go
Op di, 08-03-2005 te 14:36 -0800, schreef Clint Byrum:
> On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 22:22 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Op di, 08-03-2005 te 10:33 -0800, schreef Clint Byrum:
> > > How much would it help with the current problems if we just picked 3
> > > arches(mipsel
Op di, 08-03-2005 te 23:01 +0100, schreef Frank KÃster:
> Hi,
>
> I am still struggling with the setup of a local buildd for testing
> purposes. I was able to manually build a package, using the command
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sbuild -d unstable -v hello_2.1.1-4
>
> However, after I put a pack
Op di, 08-03-2005 te 17:58 -0500, schreef Joey Hess:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > This argument has been brought up so many times by now that I'm amazed
> > people /still/ try it.
> >
> > The answer is, simply, 'not'. Go learn to use google if you want to
Op za, 12-03-2005 te 16:24 -0800, schreef Thomas Bushnell BSG:
> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Practically, buildd admins can notice a longer-than-usual queue and throw
> > hardware at the problem, and that seems to work well enough, and we could
> > reduce the rate of package i
Op za, 12-03-2005 te 15:01 -0800, schreef Thomas Bushnell BSG:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Remember that the buildd queue is not FIFO at all. The queue has a
> > completly static order. Any changes to the queue are just packages
> > hiding because they are not "needs-b
Op za, 12-03-2005 te 15:19 +1100, schreef Matthew Palmer:
> I'm trying to work out why package *section* matters at all.
This is simply an attempt to avoid as much
needs-build->building->dep-wait cycles as possible; packages that are
usually build-dependencies are built before packages that are us
Op zo, 13-03-2005 te 21:19 +0200, schreef Mikko Ma Aaltonen:
> Hi Debian developers. (My first time post here.)
>
> I'm here to ask, if anyone of you know,
> has someone done some development work to get a Nokia (or some other
> brand) mobile to work with some other operating system than Symbian?
Op vr, 11-03-2005 te 17:03 -0800, schreef Thomas Bushnell BSG:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Re-uploading a package to provoke a buildd response is counterproductive,
> > *particularly* when the package is already in Needs-Build on the missing
> > architectures. Re-uploading
Op vr, 11-03-2005 te 19:14 -0800, schreef Steve Langasek:
> The queue ordering is entirely automatic, and AIUI the queue(s) is (are)
> sorted by:
>
> - target suite
- previous compilation state (already built packages are prioritized
above packages never built for the target architecture)
> -
1 - 100 of 1681 matches
Mail list logo
