Hi Goswin,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 01:07:38AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> For example: Each repository puts its keyring into Release.keyring
> (next to Release and Release.gpg). The Release.keyring could be listed
> with checksum in Release so frontends know it is there and when it
> chan
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:49:08AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> FIXME: what if a line changes? Only allow certain changes?
> > ... that's a rather large FIXME. Without fixing this, such an
> > implementation of declarative diversions would
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 04:28:28PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> I maintain a set of packages which depend openmpi which is missing on
> certain architectures. To get around the latter problem, I use
I've frequently a similar issues: OCaml programs compiled in bytecode
depends on C stubs to in
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:39:36AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
> >apt-get install debian-backports-keyring
> >
> >or
> >
> >gpg --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 16BA136C
> >gpg --export | apt-key add -
> >
> This involves 3 separate commands, and modifies files under
Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Goswin,
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 01:07:38AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> For example: Each repository puts its keyring into Release.keyring
>> (next to Release and Release.gpg). The Release.keyring could be listed
>> with checksum in
Stefano Zacchiroli skrev:
Since apparently there are quite cases like that, what is the reason for
forbidding arch-specific dependencies in control? Can we reconsider
that?
What is the problem with arch-specific dependencies in control? I've
used them just fine (in wine, see libwine-dev) for a
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Er, I've for the life of me never understood why --rename is even an
> *option* to dpkg-divert. What does dpkg-divert do without it, and how is
> that useful?
Only thing I can think of is something like this:
dpkg-divert --package my-libc6-wrapper --
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 04:28:28PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
>> I maintain a set of packages which depend openmpi which is missing on
>> certain architectures. To get around the latter problem, I use
>
> I've frequently a similar issues: OCaml
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:20:33AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> The beauty of signatures is that you do not have to trust the source
> of the key, only the signatures. It truely doesn't matter wher you get
> the key from.
yes, you are right (given that you mean signatures on the key f
Ove Kaaven wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli skrev:
>> Since apparently there are quite cases like that, what is the reason for
>> forbidding arch-specific dependencies in control? Can we reconsider
>> that?
>
> What is the problem with arch-specific dependencies in control? I've
> used them just fine (
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:26:21AM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> What is the problem with arch-specific dependencies in control? I've
> used them just fine (in wine, see libwine-dev) for a while, no apparent
> problems. I think they do only work for arch:any packages, though, as
> they seem to b
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:34:35AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Different situation. The ocaml debs have the same depends on every
> architecture for the individual deb. They might differ between debs
> but not between archs for one arch:all deb.
Nope. I was talking about OCaml programs sh
On 11424 March 1977, Francesco Poli wrote:
> Important disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.
Those are *totally* and absolutely unimportant and a waste to write.
Could people please stop always writing them, its fairly clear by itself
that debian-legal does NOT do any lawyers work (and w
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 01:08:30PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
>
> Certainly, the backports.org keyring is useful to some people, *but* it is,
>
> 1. not free software
I don't think there's a legal basis to claim copyright on a blob of random
bytes generated by a program. Who's the copyright hol
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:05:28PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 01:08:30PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
Certainly, the backports.org keyring is useful to some people, *but* it is,
1. not free software
I don't think there's a legal basis to claim copyright on a blob of ra
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Interesting.
>
> The problem with them is that policy does not allow them :-) Well, to be
> precise, policy mentions that build-time relationships in debian/control
> can be restricted to a certain set of architectures; it does not state
> anything
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Francesco Poli wrote:
> OK, that said, if you wanted to modify a public key (in order to obtain
> something else), what form would you use for making modifications?
> I think the preferred form would be the one in which the GPG public key
> is distributed by keyservers or some
With our move to dash as sh we have to remove all bashisms from scripts
run by /bin/sh. However, checkbashism seems to moan about clauses that
work in dash as well. I don't know in which shells a trap with a signal number
is guaranteed to work, but it seems to work well in dash.
I just ran a shor
Terrific, I will give that a try, thanks very much!
-Adam
--
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Engineering consulting with open source tools
http://www.opennovation.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:34:35AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Different situation. The ocaml debs have the same depends on every
>> architecture for the individual deb. They might differ between debs
>> but not between archs for one arch:
Michael Meskes wrote, 2008-06-23, 10:07:27 +0200:
With our move to dash as sh we have to remove all bashisms from
scripts run by /bin/sh. However, checkbashism seems to moan
about clauses that work in dash as well.
I don't know in which shells a trap with a signal number is
guaranteed to work, b
brian m. carlson wrote:
>> I don't think there's a legal basis to claim copyright on a blob of random
>> bytes generated by a program. Who's the copyright holder? gpg? The authors
>> of gpg? The person who typed gpg in command-line? The entropy source?
>
> Copyright (in the United States) requ
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:07:27AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> With our move to dash as sh we have to remove all bashisms from scripts
> run by /bin/sh. However, checkbashism seems to moan about clauses that
> work in dash as well. I don't know in which shells a trap with a signal number
> is gu
Hi there,
Because of the recent feedback I got in building debian package
using cmake, I decided to rewrite the current -broken- support.
As far as I understand :
1. dpkg-buildpackage *has* to be the entry point (nothing else, not
even 'cmake')
2. dpkg-buildpackage requires a 'debian' subdir
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:04:09PM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> 3. I was suggested libopensync for cmake/debian package start.
I suggested it as a package which builds for different python versions.
By that time, I didn't realize you were doing something like
deb-creation support in cmake.
I
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 09:33:14PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> On a hunch I checked the Packages.gz files on my system and found the
> following example:
>
> Package: libgnomevfs2-dev
> Architecture: amd64
> Source: gnome-vfs
> Version: 1:2.22.0-4
> Depends: libgnomevfs2-0 (= 1:2.22.0-4),
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:39:07PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> It's not guaranteed to work in any shell implementing POSIX without
> extensions, which is what Policy says you're allowed to rely on (well,
> plus a few extensions, but not including trap and kill with signal
> numbers).
Right
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:16:28 +0200 Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 11424 March 1977, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > Important disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.
>
> Those are *totally* and absolutely unimportant and a waste to write.
> Could people please stop always writing them, its fairly
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:28:36PM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:39:07PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > It's safe for use with dash, but using it is technically a violation of
> > Policy (albeit a widespread one). There is a Policy bug open requesting
> > that the
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I've found no similar text for run-time relationships.
> >
> > Should the policy be updated on this?
>
> It probably should if all of the software or at least most (plus all of
> the package installation software) supports them properly. Does it?
No.
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 19:28 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:39:07PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > It's not guaranteed to work in any shell implementing POSIX without
> > extensions, which is what Policy says you're allowed to rely on (well,
> > plus a few extensions
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 01:33:21PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> > >From this I'd say for Lenny using trap with a signal number is fine.
> >
> > Also they same question comes up with the "local" keyword. Dash seems to
> > support this, while it is not POSIX.
>
> The "local" keyword is an explicitly
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 19:34 +0200, Francesco Poli wrote:
> I *used* to think that those disclaimers are implicit in most cases.
>
> But then, I was harshly accused of not making it clear enough that
> I am neither a lawyer, nor a Debian developer, that I'm not providing
> legal advice, and th
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 09:00 -0700, Ken Arromdee wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > OK, that said, if you wanted to modify a public key (in order to obtain
> > something else), what form would you use for making modifications?
> > I think the preferred form would be the one in w
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:15:16 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> Ken Arromdee wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Francesco Poli wrote:
> > > OK, that said, if you wanted to modify a public key (in order to obtain
> > > something else), what form would you use for making modifications?
> > > I think the
Peter Samuelson wrote:
A few days ago upstream released Subversion 1.5.0, a fairly major
improvement over 1.4.x. Last night I finally fixed enough build and
testsuite bugs to be able to upload it to experimental.
For those of you who _haven't_ been caught up in the git craze yet, and
are still
On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 19:45 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 01:33:21PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> > > >From this I'd say for Lenny using trap with a signal number is fine.
> > >
> > > Also they same question comes up with the "local" keyword. Dash seems to
> > > support thi
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:59:01PM +0200, Daniel Widenfalk wrote:
> If you update your svn client to 1.5.x it will automatically
> upgrade your working copies (I guess on first use) so that
> they become incompatible with earlier clients!
This was already the case with 1.4, so what?
> For merge i
Quoting Joerg Jaspert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On 11424 March 1977, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > Important disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.
>
> Those are *totally* and absolutely unimportant and a waste to write.
I disagree.
For the very first time after too may years of electronic
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> work in dash as well. I don't know in which shells a trap with a signal number
> is guaranteed to work, but it seems to work well in dash.
The signal numbers are different on various architectures. I think in the
GNU world at least mach and FreeBSD kern
Ian Campbell wrote:
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 11:32 +0200, Daniel Widenfalk wrote:
Ian Campbell wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 14:16 +0200, Daniel Widenfalk wrote:
Ok, so dropping back a step. Let's assume that I build the 3.2.0 XEN
hypervisor and dom0 kernel using 2.6.18 as base. I should
Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:16:28 +0200 Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> > On 11424 March 1977, Francesco Poli wrote:
> >
> > > Important disclaimers: IANAL, TINLA, IANADD, TINASOTODP.
> >
> > Those are *totally* and absolutely unimportant and a waste to write.
> >
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:07:27AM +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
With our move to dash as sh we have to remove all bashisms from scripts
run by /bin/sh. However, checkbashism seems to moan about clauses that
work in dash as well. I don't know in which shells a trap with a signal number
is guarante
Le lundi 23 juin 2008 à 20:10 +0200, Bastian Blank a écrit :
> > For merge info to be fully supported you'll need to update
> > your repositories manually using svnadmin or some other
> > method, e.g. dumping and reloading the repository.
>
> This can't be true. I used merge tracking on a format 3
"Mathieu Malaterre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3. I was suggested libopensync for cmake/debian package start.
> 3.1 where is the internal name 'libopensync1exp3' coming from ? what
> does the '1exp3' stand for ?
You shouldn't try to invent a new system for building packages if you
are not famil
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mathieu Malaterre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 3. I was suggested libopensync for cmake/debian package start.
>> 3.1 where is the internal name 'libopensync1exp3' coming from ? what
>> does the '1exp3' stand for ?
>
> Y
Hi,
I'm forwarding this orphaning bug to debian-devel as I hope this rises
the chances to find somebody who is willing to take care of ispell.
According to http://ficus-www.cs.ucla.edu/geoff/ispell.html the version
in Debian is pretty outdated, also there's a number of bugs to triage...
Best rega
El domingo, 22 de junio de 2008 a las 12:54:09 -0600, Wesley J. Landaker
escribía:
> Actually, how are debian-keyring and debian-archive-keyring free-software,
> anyway? Do I get source code for the all GPG keys they contain?
> The /usr/share/doc/debian-keyring/copyright even says "The keys in
Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:15:16 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> > I don't think that "modifying" has any reasonable meaning when talking
> > about cryptographic keys.
>
> Why not?
Because it implies that you'd obtain something meaningful after
the modification. The intent of
Le lundi 23 juin 2008 à 22:11 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
> That's just rude. Even if you are a super star in the debian-world
> and a fantastic hacker, your comment can not possibly be coming from a
> grown up adult.
Rude? Come on. You are trying to reinvent the wheel in the worst
possib
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Walter Landry wrote:
> Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > But then, I was harshly accused of not making it clear enough that
> > I am neither a lawyer, nor a Debian developer, that I'm not providing
> > legal advice, and that I don't speak
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:31:02 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:15:16 +0200 Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> > > I don't think that "modifying" has any reasonable meaning when talking
> > > about cryptographic keys.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> Because it implies
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 12:54:09PM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> Actually, how are debian-keyring and debian-archive-keyring free-software,
> anyway?
Next time you have a similar question about these things, please
consider dropping -devel from the list of CCs.
thanks,
Michael
--
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le lundi 23 juin 2008 à 22:11 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
>> That's just rude. Even if you are a super star in the debian-world
>> and a fantastic hacker, your comment can not possibly be coming from a
>> grown
This one time, at band camp, Francesco Poli said:
>
> There were some other people who seemed to more or less agree with
> Anthony Towns. But he was certainly the loudest one complaining about
> this.
I think it's quite likely I objected to you appearing to speak
authoritatively on behalf of the
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 00:20 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> > Stop. Don't even try to go further. This is NOT the right way. Your
> > brand new wheels are going to drive you straight into a wall after way
> > too much effort.
>
> Please give such real world examples of failure (if they are
> doc
On 2008-06-23, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> for months, looking at you drowning in your brain-dead system, you
> should try to write patches to make cdbs and/or debhelper 7 work
> transparently with cmake. This is the right way, and it requires much
cdbs already works pretty well
"Adam D. Barratt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Supporting "local x" would be relatively simple; suggestions for a
> reliable regex to catch use of -a/-o welcome... :)
There was a fairly good one in Lintian that I took out once Policy blessed
it, or at least we didn't get a lot of false positive
"brian m. carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As for the signal numbers, different architectures have different signal
> numbers. See signal(7), but the most common ones *are* identical.
> However, signals such as SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2 are not, and using a number
> for these will break on at lea
59 matches
Mail list logo
