Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Ziegler
* Package name: python-django-piston
Version : 0.2.2
Upstream Author : Jesper Noehr
* URL : http://bitbucket.org/jespern/django-piston/wiki/Home
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mathieu Malaterre
* Package name: xslthl
Version : 2.0.1
Upstream Author : Michal Molhanec, Jirka Kosek, Michiel Hendriks
* URL : http://xslthl.sf.net
* License : zlib/libpng License
Programming Lang: Java
Descriptio
I work on bug #409912 [0] in the MTA masqmail currently.
[0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=409912
See also:
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=406395
[2] http://bugs.hylafax.org/show_bug.cgi?id=842
The point is that masqmail allows only root and the group mai
On Feb 22, markus schnalke wrote:
> However, I think the problem could be solved by making the user uucp a
> member of group mail. From my limited POV, this solution represents
> the logic behind: uucp wants to use special facilities of the MTA,
> thus it needs to be in group mail.
This does not
Package: general
Severity: wishlist
Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead
of section 8.
Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search
results to target them.
Not sure if a policy violation. Or if should be made part of policy.
P.S., I am sur
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:54:54 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead
> of section 8.
> Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search
> results to target them.
Sounds more like a possible new test for lintian?
Hi jidanni,
On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead
> of section 8.
This is indeed a policy violation as it's covered by policy indirectly via
FHS:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRSHAREMANMA
Hi,
> On 17/02/2010 19:15, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On the other hand, one application will want 16x10 icons, another one
> > 24x15, another one may have some effects applied on the flags to better
> > fit the UI design, etc.
> >
> > So while applications amy be using flags already, are they really
On 22/02/10 15:54, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead
> of section 8.
>
> Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search
> results to target them.
This could rather be a lintian check.
Emilio
--
To UNSUBSCRI
HL> Do you intend to file individual bugs? I'd appreciate this.
Actually I've filed many individual bugs, some even just today.
Then I got this great idea that instead of me just mentioning in to
packages that I've stumbled into, there could be a systematic combing of
all Debian.
--
To UNSUBS
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 17:07, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> P.S., I am sure I filed this bug in the right place, as reportbug says
>> "general General problems (e.g., that many manpages are mode 755)".
>
> I'm tempted to close this bug or reassign to reportbug ;-)
Please don't.
> IME bugs against
> t
Hi jidanni,
On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Then I got this great idea that instead of me just mentioning in to
> packages that I've stumbled into, there could be a systematic combing of
> all Debian.
Can you point me to bugs about manpages in section 1 which belong in s
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:45:20AM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 08:37:57PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Simply depends on the menu package which provide su-to-root
>
> We've determined that su-to-root in it's current state
> doesn't handle the disabled-root case anyway,
Hi Sandro,
please don't cc: me, I'm subscribed.
On Montag, 22. Februar 2010, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > I'm tempted to close this bug or reassign to reportbug ;-)
> Please don't.
Neither? ;)
> The one above is the description of 'general' we retrieve from
> [1], that's the canonical place for defin
I tried to find all bugs with "section 8" in their title via
http://bugs.debian.org
An error occurred. Error was: You have to choose something to select by
I'll try this to at least find (most of) mine:
$ w3m -cols -dump
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?submitter=jida...@jidan
clone 570991 -1
reassign -1 lintian
retitle -1 "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1
manpages"
severity -1 wishlist
block 570991 by 476403
block 570991 by 512447
block 570991 by 512449
block 570991 by 512450
block 570991 by 512451
block 570991 by 512452
block 570991 by 5709
# Cc to -devel for information after the reassign
merge 570980 348864
thanks
Holger Levsen wrote, Monday, February 22, 2010 5:19 PM
clone 570991 -1
reassign -1 lintian
retitle -1 "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1
manpages"
fwiw, there *was* such a lintian check, wh
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> clone 570991 -1
Bug#570991: tuxtype: Package with doc/AUTHORS and doc/ChangeLog and doc/TODO
Bug 570991 cloned as bug 570994.
> reassign -1 lintian
Bug #570994 [tuxtype] tuxtype: Package with doc/AUTHORS and doc/ChangeLog and
doc/TODO
Bug reassi
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # wrong bug was cloned
> close 570994
Bug#570994: "please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1
manpages"
'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing.
Bug closed, send any further explanations to Osamu
* markus schnalke:
> For exim, this seems to be solved by adjusting the exim configuration:
> ``[...] you might use trusted_users and add uucp to it [...]'' [3].
> See also [4]. It appears that the system administrator has to do the
> change in order to enable uucp to call `sendmail -f ...'.
Debi
gregor herrmann writes:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:54:54 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
>> Many executables in .../sbin have their man pages in section 1 instead
>> of section 8.
>> Perhaps a piuparts like script could comb over the apt-file search
>> results to target them.
> Sounds more like
> ]$ f95 -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.f90
> ]$ time ./nbody.x 5000
> Energy 0: -0.169075164
> Energy 1: -0.169059907
> Elapsed time: 2m 31.7s
>
AFAIK, the GNU fortran compiler goes with the name gfortran (not f95).
Please give the output of "gfortran -v"
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Matthew Danish
* Package name: ats-lang-anairiats
Version : 0.1.7
Upstream Author : Hongwei Xi
* URL : http://www.ats-lang.org/
* License : GPL-3 and LGPL-2.1
Programming Lang: ATS, C
Description : The ATS langua
Well just like many of the comments to 348864, I just hate the "teasers"
in section 1 that only root can run.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wry4vo
Package: wnpp
Owner: Luca Falavigna
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: dreampie
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Noam Yorav-Raphael
* URL : http://dreampie.sourceforge.net
* License : GPLv3 and others
Programming La
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:48:11AM +0100, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Description : advanced Python shell
>
> This Python shell permits to work in a more productive way with Python
> interpreter providing features not yet implemented in standard IDLE.
>
This short and long description need qui
On 2/21/2010 10:28 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
On 2/21/2010 4:44 PM, Fuentes, Adolfo wrote:
]$ gcc -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.c
]$ time ./-o nbody.x 5000
Energy 0: -0.169075164
Energy 1: -0.169059907
Elapsed time: 1m 17.4s
]$ f95 -O3 -lm -march=nocona -o nbody.x nbody.f90
]$ time ./n
#348864 ...
--
Raphael Geissert
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002221916.54574.atom...@gmail.com
> On 2009-04-11, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > Obey Arthur Liu wrote:
> >> === And the details: ===
> >
> > [...]
> > These descriptions are very short. Assuming these are the abstracts,
> > that's not the students' fault. The abstracts were shortened this year
> > to 500 characters. I struggled to
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 10:07:45 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 12:15:10AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking
> > against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb)
> > and libselinux (affecti
On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 00:15:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils,
> the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 172 KiB; xz-utils 504 KiB,
> 160 KiB in share/doc/ and liblzma2 304 KiB, 124 KiB in share/doc/)
Regarding xz-utils' size, I
Guillem Jover wrote:
> Regarding xz-utils' size, I was just checking and it seems not all
> programs are linking against liblzma, by passing --enable-dynamic to
> both configure lines the package gets reduced to 396 KiB. Also by
> not shipping xzdec and lzmadec the package gets down to 324 KiB.
>
Package: xz-utils
Version: 4.999.9beta+20100212-1
Severity: wishlist
Guillem Jover wrote:
> Also what's
> the point of shipping the xzdec and lzmadec tools in the main package?
> It seems they would make sense as part of another package as tiny
> decompressors-only, but no in addition to the main
On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 05:20 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I don't think this would be worth it, as Marco has also said, if the
> system is hosed but you can still get to the point of obtaining a
> package to install you might as well just obtain the broken files.
> Of course you might have it alre
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Guillem Jover wrote:
> First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils,
[...]
> Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking
> against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb)
> and libselinux (affecting dpkg itsel
Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Owner: Luca Falavigna
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
> * Package name: dreampie
> Version : 1.0
> Upstream Author : Noam Yorav-Raphael
> * URL : http://dreampie.sourceforge.net
> * License
Hello Raju.
is a link in "/etc/alternatives" to "/usr/bin/gfortran".
When typing "gfortran -v" the options are:
]$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4.3.2-1.1'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.3/READ
37 matches
Mail list logo
