On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 13:32 -0400, Steve C. Lamb wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:24:08PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Without us, odds are the i386-based machine you're sitting at wouldn't
exist.
Employing the royal we? Somehow, Paul, I think that without you we'd do
just fine.
On Monday 21 July 2008 02:51, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 00:04 +0300, Shachar Or wrote:
On Sunday 20 July 2008 23:55, Steve Lamb wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of the
box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became
On Monday 21 July 2008 02:54, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Consider submitting a patch instead. I suspect few have this problem.
Yes, because everyone is a developer.
Be positive, please!
--
Shachar Or | שחר אור
http://ox.freeallweb.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:24:08PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
Without us, odds are the i386-based machine you're sitting at wouldn't
exist.
Employing the royal we? Somehow, Paul, I think that without you we'd do
just fine.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your
Celejar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:29:01 -0400 Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:59:22PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:43:25 +0200
Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 2008-07-14 17:15:41, schrieb Sam Leon:
Paul Johnson wrote:
So I guess that's why Ubuntu folks are working on Ubuntu instead of
doing the Right Thing by working on Debian Desktop[1], eh?
Yeah, because it has nothing to do with wanting to maintain a 6
month release schedule. Let's see, the first release of Ubuntu was
4.10. So
On Sunday 20 July 2008 23:55, Steve Lamb wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of the
box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became standard on
most consumer grade mice. :P
Where do I file a bug for this? Seriously. I've a zillion buttons in my
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:55:13 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of
the box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became
standard on most consumer grade mice. :P
I recently did a lenny install and those
Brian Marshall wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:55:13 -0700
Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of
the box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became
standard on most consumer grade mice. :P
I recently did a lenny
On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 13:55 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of the
box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became standard on
most consumer grade mice. :P
Interestingly enough, about once a decade is about how often I
On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 00:04 +0300, Shachar Or wrote:
On Sunday 20 July 2008 23:55, Steve Lamb wrote:
BTW, let me know when Debian finally gets MB 4/5 to work out of the
box as forward/back. Only been a decade since those became standard on
most consumer grade mice. :P
Where do I
Paul Johnson wrote:
Consider submitting a patch instead. I suspect few have this problem.
Yes, because everyone is a developer.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Johnson wrote:
Interestingly enough, about once a decade is about how often I come
across a mouse with a fourth and fifth button. It's happened once, and
that was about a decade ago.
Well, there's not accounting for the technological backwoods of the PRO.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 16:54 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Interestingly enough, about once a decade is about how often I come
across a mouse with a fourth and fifth button. It's happened once, and
that was about a decade ago.
Well, there's not accounting for the
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 20:17 -0500, Mumia W.. wrote:
Debian is a serious Linux O/S meant for serious and knowledgeable people.
I guess games doesn't exist. And since when am I a serious
person? :o)
--
Paul Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 03:28 -0500, Mumia W.. wrote:
And I don't see Debian in competition with Ubuntu. Or maybe I'll clarify
further: Debian isn't in competition against Ubuntu; Debian is in
competition /with/ Ubuntu. If Ubuntu wins, Debian wins.
So I guess that's why Ubuntu folks are
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:43:25 +0200
Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 2008-07-14 17:15:41, schrieb Sam Leon:
Please can you trim you rpostings next time please?
Welcome to the club. I used to feel the same way when I first found
debian (ubuntu showed it to me). I don't
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:59:22PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:43:25 +0200
Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 2008-07-14 17:15:41, schrieb Sam Leon:
Please can you trim you rpostings next time please?
Welcome to the club. I used to feel the same way
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:29:01 -0400
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:59:22PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 20:43:25 +0200
Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 2008-07-14 17:15:41, schrieb Sam Leon:
Please can you trim you
Am 2008-07-14 16:51:37, schrieb Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp):
I hope you didn't type up all that, at least on the topics I raised...
it was a waste...
My topics were..
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
Then some parts of Debian GNU/Linux would not more work
on at
Am 2008-07-14 17:15:41, schrieb Sam Leon:
Please can you trim you rpostings next time please?
Welcome to the club. I used to feel the same way when I first found
debian (ubuntu showed it to me). I don't worry about it too much any
more. I like how it will keep all the newbies away from
On Thu,17.Jul.08, 15:28:09, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 08:27:25PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
You should contact debian-www about that. I think I recall a discussion
about the children-distros page being outdated, but I guess manpower is
missing again. I you would be
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 08:27:25PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
You should contact debian-www about that. I think I recall a discussion
about the children-distros page being outdated, but I guess manpower is
missing again. I you would be willing to supply patches against the CVS
source I'm
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:17:28 -0500
Mumia W.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Mumia,
serious Linux O/S meant for serious and knowledgeable people. Here,
That precludes me from using it then; I'm neither serious nor
knowledgeable. :-)
--
Regards _
/ ) The blindingly
On 07/15/2008 01:56 AM, Brad Rogers wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:17:28 -0500
Mumia W.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Mumia,
serious Linux O/S meant for serious and knowledgeable people. Here,
That precludes me from using it then; I'm neither serious nor
knowledgeable. :-)
:-)
I
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 07:44:02PM +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
to add to this... it sounds like OP is asking for known good snapshots
of lenny to be tagged somehow and frozen until the next known good
snapshot comes along. Okay, it's an interesting
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
to add to this... it sounds like OP is asking for known good snapshots
of lenny to be tagged somehow and frozen until the next known good
snapshot comes along. Okay, it's an interesting idea..
You're the first person to truly grasp what I was trying to say, I'm
On Monday 14 July 2008 02:11:38 pm Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
What you are proposing is that packages move from Unstable, to a Testing
alpha package, then to Testing which would be the basis of the RC's, and
then onward to Stable.
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have
Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
First of all I want to bring up the idea of a FSF Debian GNU/Linux,
everyone I have spoken to on IRC so far are in support of this idea so I
thought I'd outline it here so that theres a record of it.
...
Hi
Erase the contrib non-free part in your
Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
I hope you didn't type up all that, at least on the topics I raised...
it was a waste...
My topics were..
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
Like I said in other mail, use just main repositories.
2) Lets add dreamlinux and
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 04:06:49PM -0300, Ignacio Mondino wrote:
3) Lets try a medium ground between stable and testing.
I Think there is a project called etch and a half in trac of that.
It's called backports. :)
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink,
Steve C. Lamb wrote:
I Think there is a project called etch and a half in trac of that.
It's called backports. :)
Ok, Now we have two! Debian is wonderfull! :D
I hope backports become an official project soon, they do a great job.
--
On Mon,14.Jul.08, 14:42:30, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
[...]
First of all I want to bring up the idea of a FSF Debian GNU/Linux,
everyone I have spoken to on IRC so far are in support of this idea so I
thought I'd outline it here so that theres a record of it.
I'm tired of seeing
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 11:12 -0400, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Alpha release: We have that, it is called testing. Packages are dumped
into Sid, after a period of time with out bug reports, it is moved into
testing (10 days?) automatically.
Other way around. sid is still in development,
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 16:17 -0300, Ignacio Mondino wrote:
Steve C. Lamb wrote:
I Think there is a project called etch and a half in trac of that.
It's called backports. :)
Ok, Now we have two! Debian is wonderfull! :D
I hope backports become an official project soon, they do
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 19:11 +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
What you are proposing is that packages move from Unstable, to a Testing
alpha package, then to Testing which would be the basis of the RC's, and
then onward to Stable.
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have
On Monday 14 July 2008 05:01:11 pm Paul Johnson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 11:12 -0400, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Alpha release: We have that, it is called testing. Packages are
dumped into Sid, after a period of time with out bug reports, it is
moved into testing (10 days?)
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 16:17 -0300, Ignacio Mondino wrote:
Steve C. Lamb wrote:
I Think there is a project called etch and a half in trac of that.
It's called backports. :)
Ok, Now we have two! Debian is
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 11:36 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
it's a complicated thing that OP proposes, I think. ISTM that it's
much easier to realize that testing is a moving target alpha
release (complete with security support, BTW) and the RC's are beta
releases.
Correct me if I'm
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 19:23 +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
These milestones don't have to affect the way it is developed, just
someone keeping an eagle eye out for a weekly generated ISO that -kinda
works OK- that can be relabelled Alpha 1, 2, 3 etc... and with a tweaked
apt so it
Please disable sending in HTML. HTML email violates list guidelines.
Aslo, please include a quotemark of some sort like everyone else instead
of expecting a one-inch indent to be sufficient.
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 16:09 -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
I disagree. I think it's inappropriate
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 02:01:11PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm not sure Ubuntu mostly solved this issue so much as they made it
pretty. Debian does the same thing, too, you know...it's not like we're
still using the old boot-floppies installer and debconf doesn't exist to
answer questions
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 17:08 -0400, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Agreed. IMHO Debian rocks. I was simply speaking of the out of the box
experience. Debian is not a good fit for someone who does not want to get
dirty and edit a file (once in a while). Most users do not want to EDIT
(ohhh,
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 17:28 +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
answered by my /rant/ about firmware and clusers
My point about the FSF Debian sister project was that it can be done so
On Mon,14.Jul.08, 14:18:38, Paul Johnson wrote:
Please disable sending in HTML. HTML email violates list guidelines.
Aslo, please include a quotemark of some sort like everyone else instead
of expecting a one-inch indent to be sufficient.
The text part was quoted correctly so I guess getting
Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
Hi folks,
This is my first time on the Debian mailing list. I wanted to bring up
a number of things I have been thinking about as of late. I had a long
lng chat in #debian-offtopic if some of you remember.
Abrotman - you're gonna love this :P
Apologies
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 02:11:13PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 11:36 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
it's a complicated thing that OP proposes, I think. ISTM that it's
much easier to realize that testing is a moving target alpha
release (complete with security
On 07/14/2008 04:18 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
I'm not suggesting that they're the same, I'm suggesting that by making
backports official it would be self defeating (why not just update
stable?) and complicate things for developers (now they have two stable
packages to follow). There's a time and
Hi folks,
This is my first time on the Debian mailing list. I wanted to bring up
a number of things I have been thinking about as of late. I had a long
lng chat in #debian-offtopic if some of you remember.
Abrotman - you're gonna love this :P
Apologies in advance for the
Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
---
All we have to do is form an official sister project that makes a
slightly tweaked version of stable (Etch) with a different Kernel that
doesn't contain the binary firmware.
snip
This sister project can act as a
Steven
hmmm? Where to start?
Alpha release: We have that, it is called testing. Packages are dumped
into Sid, after a period of time with out bug reports, it is moved into
testing (10 days?) automatically. Alpha, pre-release canadate : alpha
stage; a stage when it is being actively
I hope you didn't type up all that, at least on the topics I raised...
it was a waste...
My topics were..
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
2) Lets add dreamlinux and sidux to the list on debian.org and p.s. have
a little look
3) Lets try a medium ground between
On Monday 14 July 2008 11:31:01 am you wrote:
I hope you didn't type up all that, at least on the topics I raised...
it was a waste...
ehh, practice on my composition skills.
My topics were..
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
answered by my /rant/ about
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
answered by my /rant/ about firmware and clusers
My point about the FSF Debian sister project was that it can be done so
easily that it gives us something to aim for. I already know if such a
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 17:28:38 +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[...]
Please respond back to the debian-user list.
You have a reply-to set you realise so replies go to yourself and not
the list.
You are confusing reply-to with mail-followup-to.
--
snip
My topics were..
1) Lets try a version of Debian Etch without the binary firmware
Go for it. If it is something you want to see, then there is nothing
stopping you from trying.
snip
3) Lets try a medium ground between stable and testing.
Why? I don't really see your point.
From my
Stackpole, Chris wrote:
Personally, I would feel bad for the developers who would be forced to
upkeep an unstable, a testing alpha (may or may not break), a testing
(may or may not break), and a stable release version. It would be like
having a version of testing as a perpetual Release
* Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008 Jul 14 09:05 -0500]:
First of all I want to bring up the idea of a FSF Debian GNU/Linux,
everyone I have spoken to on IRC so far are in support of this idea so I
thought I'd outline it here so that theres a record of it.
I believe that if
What you are proposing is that packages move from Unstable, to a Testing
alpha package, then to Testing which would be the basis of the RC's, and
then onward to Stable.
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or form.
I could re-explain but I
On Monday 14 July 2008 02:11:38 pm Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
What you are proposing is that packages move from Unstable, to a Testing
alpha package, then to Testing which would be the basis of the RC's, and
then onward to Stable.
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or
form.
I could re-explain but I won't... you just wasted 8 reading paragraphs
of my life listening to you arguing against a suggestion I didn't make.
Please re-read what I suggested in my -original- message
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 05:28:38PM +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
...
3) Lets try a medium ground between stable and testing.
...
This wouldn't be one more step... as I have already explained! It won't
be unstable - testing - alpha - stable... that would be plain stupid.
Alpha
Florian Kulzer wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 17:28:38 +0100, Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[...]
Please respond back to the debian-user list.
You have a reply-to set you realise so replies go to yourself and not
the list.
You are confusing reply-to with
Stackpole, Chris wrote:
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or
form.
I could re-explain but I won't... you just wasted 8 reading paragraphs
of my life listening to you arguing against a suggestion I didn't make.
Please re-read what I
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
On Monday 14 July 2008 02:11:38 pm Steven Maddox (Cyorxamp) wrote:
What you are proposing is that packages move from Unstable, to a Testing
alpha package, then to Testing which would be the basis of the RC's, and
then onward to Stable.
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not
You're gonna get tired of me telling you that you don't read.
snip
I think you're just closed minded - sorry
I am reading, trying to understand your comments, and I am not
purposefully trying to be close minded. I just don't see the point in
what you are asking for. Judging from the feedback
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 01:17:44PM -0500, Stackpole, Chris wrote:
To be blunt... -Fail-
That is not what I have suggested what so ever in any way shape or
form.
I could re-explain but I won't... you just wasted 8 reading paragraphs
of my life listening to you arguing against a suggestion I
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 09:55:19AM -0500, Kent West wrote:
..
I've found that for me, running Sid is less painful than running Testing.
AOL that.
A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
68 matches
Mail list logo
