Re: dpkg verify mode for security?
Amos> Or an audit-trail of invocations of dpkg (e.g. "adduser 3.1-2 Amos> installed and configured successfully on Wed May 29 1997 00:00:23, Amos> replaced adduser-3.1-0") Darren> I asked for this a while back and was told that not very many Darren> people wanted it. I still think it would be a useful feature... That exists (almost as it doesn't log the version number of the replaced package). Use the dpkg-mountable package (and dpkg method) and you will have logs: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~> zgrep perl /var/log/dpkg-mountable.?.gz /var/log/dpkg-mountable.2.gz:Package perl-tk has no filename, skipping. /var/log/dpkg-mountable.2.gz:Installing package libwww-perl version 5.07-1 from /mirror/debian/frozen/binary-i386/interpreters/libwww-perl_5.07-1.deb /var/log/dpkg-mountable.2.gz:Unpacking libwww-perl (from .../libwww-perl_5.07-1.deb) ... /var/log/dpkg-mountable.2.gz:Setting up libwww-perl (5.07-1) ... -- Sorry for the delay in replying to your email, but I was Europe for six days last week and am currently moving into a new place. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Jim Pick wrote: > > > Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically! > > Can't be linked dynamically either... read the GPL. > I'm not sure from a copyright standpoint how that works. A copyright means that you are protected from me using your copyrighted item. Well, if I don't give libc or any other gpl'd library away, be it as a statically linked app, or by giving away the shared library how am I violating the gpl. If joe end-user already has the library, how am I violating the copyright. Even if commercial products build against a gpl'd library, if they are only linked dynamically against the library, i.e. they don't contain any code from the library, and that library can be replaced by another one (look at lesstif vs. Motif). In my view LPGL=I can statically link my applications to the library and sell it w/o source code. GPL=I can statically link my application to the library, but my application now has to be GPL'd because it contains GPL'd code. However, if it is only dynamically linked, since it doesn't contain any GPL'd code, I can sell it as a commercial app w/o giving out source code. Shaya -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: RFC: Policy for arch specs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Schwarz) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]>: > > > Where is the arch specification string used, i.e. what will break if we > > change it to be "i386-linux" on intel systems? > > I'm not competent enough to answer this. Anything tightly integrated with > gcc, but is there anything that doesn't break already when the version > numbers don't match exactly? If i486-linux were changed to i386-linux then I would have to repackage Checker and reupload it. This would take a couple hours but wouldn't be too difficult. However, I don't see any point to the change. `A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.' --Emerson -- Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12167 Airport Rd, DeWitt MI 48820, USA *Note*: New PGP key available at http://www.msu.edu/user/pfaffben/pgp.html -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: ttys, setuid & security...
Vincent Renardias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Has any of you had a look at this: > ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/Incoming/pttyd-0.9.tgz > > [its LSM file says: > > Description:The Pseudo-tty Daemon. Changes ownership on the slave > pseudo-tty's in an appropriate manner, mainaining security > without a suid root screen, xterm, or rxvt. > ] > > Maybe we should consider packaging this, it will allow to remove the > setuid bit of some programs like xterm, rxvt, ... > > Opinions? Here's an excerpt from an recent `linux-gcc' discussion that may be interesting. It's regarding SysV style ptys in Linux. This may be the way to go, in the long term, but would require mods to the kernel etc. From: Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: volunteer needed To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "ir. Mark M._Kettenis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, linux-gcc@vger.rutgers.edu Date: 30 May 1997 04:37:02 +0200 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ulrich Drepper) "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 1) Open /dev/ptmx to get a free master psuedo tty. The slave > pseudo-tty at this point is "locked" since the modes and permissions > haven't been set up yet. What this means is that any attempt to open > the slave psuedo-tty will return an error. > > 2) Call grantpt(master_fd) to fix up the modes and permissions. Note > that this either requires a setuid root program to be forked and > exec'ed, *or* magic kernel implementations that really paranoid about > what they do. > > 3) unlockpt(master_fd) clears the locked flag which now allows other > processes to try to open the slave pty. > > 4) Finally, ptsname(master_fd) will return the name of slave psedo-tty, > which you can then open. This all sounds plausible and I was wrong in the beginning. It's a bit more complicated than I thought. Anyhow, for complete Unix compatibility Linux needs this functionality and companies writing Unix software will probably require this interface. So, "Search for volunteers, part II": any volunteers for the kernel changes? -- Uli ---. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ,-. Rubensstrasse 5 Ulrich Drepper \,---' \ 76149 Karlsruhe/Germany Cygnus Solutions `--' [EMAIL PROTECTED] ` -- Raja R Harinath -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] "When all else fails, read the instructions." -- Cahn's Axiom "Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing." -- Roy L Ash -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: FreeQt ?
From: Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > As for OSS -- I had the impression that if I submitted patches to make > the modules *accept* command line arguments, they wouldn't be > included. But yeah, if they're straight GPL'ed that's good enough; I > could still distribute such patches even if they weren't included. The problem is that Hannu's deliberately handicapping the kernel sound drivers so that he can sell a commercial product. It's a really bad precedent. OK, I understand Hannu wrote the drivers, but aren't you glad that Linus doesn't sell a non-free "power Linux" and reserve features for his commercial version? Someone who wanted to put the effort into supporting the drivers and could convince Linus to go along could probably change the situation - I hope such a person comes along. Thanks Bruce -- Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key. PGP fingerprint = 88 6A 15 D0 65 D4 A3 A6 1F 89 6A 76 95 24 87 B3 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Copyright question
From: Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Only NON-COMMERCIAL distribution allowed. That puts it in non-free. > Redistribution of modified versions by other people than myself is not > allowed. That too. We are going to start supporting unmodified source + Debian deltas, but never unmodified binaries. > However, commercial use is no problem as long as the software > is NOT being commercially distributed. Somewhat sloppy language. > Is "deb" packaging a modification? (philosophical doubt) We change pathnames and locations of files. Bruce -- Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key. PGP fingerprint = 88 6A 15 D0 65 D4 A3 A6 1F 89 6A 76 95 24 87 B3 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> I just brought this up, since it was my understanding that if you > want to write a commercial program (ie. not under the GPL), and > link it against cygwin.dll, you've got to pay Cygnus $$$. Not all > that different than the restrictions on Qt, really. Actually, it is different. GPL-ed software gives you the right to change the source, and gives you right to link other GPL-ed software to it on all platforms. Debian doesn't presently have a rule against libraries that pass the GPL infection, although we prefer to avoid them. Thanks Bruce -- Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502 Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key. PGP fingerprint = 88 6A 15 D0 65 D4 A3 A6 1F 89 6A 76 95 24 87 B3 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Copyright question
Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote: > > > Non-free it is > > No. If the author forbids distribution a changed (i.e. bug fixed) > _binary_ version, I think the package may not even go into non-free. > > What do the others think? Before we go off half-cocked here: 1) I have e-mailed the author asking for permission to distribute a bug-fixed software 2) We are distributing various programs without source already. These programs are not fixable. (Example: xforms) I really don't think that we should make lack of modification permission to be a reason to not include in non-free (after all, isn't this what non-free is for?) -- John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org) Custom Programming| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Galen Hazelwood wrote: > Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote: > > > > > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL... > > > > > > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at > > > all*, though the libc6 one mentions both. > > > > Yep, the copyright file does not mention the LGPL at all. This seems to me > > to be very limiting of commercial software running on linux. > > I believe that regardless of what our copyright file says, glibc 1.0 > (libc5) and 2.0 (libc6) are both LGPL--at least the library parts. > Other programs grouped with the libc package are probably GPL. Ack! I must be blind, I looked right at this file right before posting too, from stdio.h: This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Library General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. Right there, 2nd line 'GNU Library General'. /usr/doc/copyright/libc5 says GPL not LGPL. Sounds like a bug in the libc5 package!! Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: FreeQt ?
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Bruce Perens wrote: > Someone who wanted to put the effort into supporting the drivers and could > convince Linus to go along could probably change the situation - I hope such > a person comes along. There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a module yourself :< Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On 2 Jun 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Gunthorpe) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote: > > > > > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL... > > > > > > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at > > > all*, though the libc6 one mentions both. > > > > Yep, the copyright file does not mention the LGPL at all. This seems to me > > to be very limiting of commercial software running on linux. > > Yes, very limiting. The code actually cannot be linked statically! What a > tragedy ... NOT. There seems to be some confusion here. The GPL states that when GPL code is aggregated with non GPL code the new code is covered by the GPL when they are combined (what this means I am still unsure), ie: --- These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based ^^^ This bit on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it. --- Now, when you link -- statically or dynamically -- you are including portions of libc5 in your binary. This results in your binary being covered under the GPL. I am not sure how that will effect the source code. The common belief is that it forces the source code to be included (though likely not GPL'd) with the binary. If you use a LGPL'd library then statically linking requires that you destribute relinkable object form versions of your binary so the user can upgrade the statically linked lib. Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: FreeQt ?
On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote > > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are > not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a > module yourself :< Is it useable? Is it better than OSS/Lite? Anybody care to package it up? Christian pgpmegL0y7kzf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: FreeQt ?
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote: > On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote > > > > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS > > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are > > not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a > > module yourself :< > > Is it useable? Is it better than OSS/Lite? Anybody care to package it up? If you have a GUS card then that is probably the sound driver you should be using! It looks extremely good, but I never tried it here with my gus (no time :|) Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> Now, when you link -- statically or dynamically -- you are including > portions of libc5 in your binary. This results in your binary being Umm, no, actually -- the whole point of dynamic linking is that you're *not* including portions of libc5 in your binary. A replacement libc5 that met the "interface" of the one you used could be dropped in instead. (#including header files, that counts -- but not linking -- and it's sometimes surprising how much code can get away without using the header files...) The same is true of .dll's and *that* is the crux of the discussion. Now that I've been informed that libc5 is really under the LGPL (or at least parts of it claim to be) and that the /usr/doc/libc5/copyright file is *wrong*, I can certainly see a difference between that and cygwin32.dll. Nonetheless, neither is anything like QT. For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a week or three ago about a company shipping a commercial package that uses GNU RCS underneath -- but since GNU RCS is built as a DLL (and they ship sources for those changes, and gnu rcs itself) they don't have to ship the program sources (and have allegedly run this past the FSF for confirmation that it was OK) Recall that RCS is GPLed, not LGPLed. Isn't this fascinating? :-) I must admit that I'm glad to see, all in all, that this discussion has stayed *so* polite in comparison to the typical gnu.misc.discuss or other open net thread. Thanks! -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote: > For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see > some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple > precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a > week or three ago about a company shipping a commercial package that > uses GNU RCS underneath -- but since GNU RCS is built as a DLL (and > they ship sources for those changes, and gnu rcs itself) they don't > have to ship the program sources (and have allegedly run this past > the FSF for confirmation that it was OK) Recall that RCS is > GPLed, not LGPLed. Hm, that's very interesting. Someone I was talking with a time back used the example 'Putting GZIP in a dll and then linking to it still makes your code GPL'. But if the FSF says that it is okay to do that then it is okay to do that ;> The other neat GPL issue comes in with C++, you actually DO include instances of code in your program with inlines, templates, vtables and other things. Fortunately G++ is completely free if compiled and used with GNU's compiler, LGPL otherwise. I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link to the dll. The debate around that is all based on the question of what is a derived work. One could even argue executing gzip in a pipeline makes other elements in the pipeline 'derived' somehow from gzip. The GPL just doesn't make that perfectly clear! Jason -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see > some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple > precision integer math library.) Actually, I had a very similar polite argument with RMS via private e-mail (about linking Java libs with mixed GPL/LGPL/proprietary licenses). He was pretty solid on the fact that run-time linking is the same as "compiled-in" linking. What I think it comes down to is this -- if the GPL'd code comes from a company that is willing to hire lawyers -- you'd better pay attention to the fine print, otherwise, don't worry about it that much. I'm sure that there are plenty of libraries out there that have been put under the GPL, because the author couldn't be bothered to worry about the implications. I've seen a few Java ones that fit this bill. You could probably use these in a commercial app, and nobody would care. The Linux kernel is GPL'd, but proprietary stuff gets dynamically linked to it indirectly via OS calls and such. This hasn't been an issue, since Linus Torvalds isn't going to sue you. The FreeBSD guys would have you believing otherwise. Cygnus is trying to sell commercial licenses, so that implies that they would be willing to sue. This is going to be an issue for us, the Debian project, when I finish porting dpkg to cygwin32. The GPL was a quick hack designed to cover stand-alone apps. It was never intended to be used for libraries and other dynamically-linked code where the legal implications are much more far-reaching. That's why the LGPL came into existence - the GPL was just too restrictive. The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries, using it as Cygnus is doing (to make money) goes against the spirit of Free Software. At least with Qt, Troll Tech is very up-front about the fact that it is commercial software, which they are licensing for free. Cygnus, on the other hand, called their work the "GNU-Win32 project", promoted it as genuine true-blue GPL'd "Free Software", solicited patches from the user community, and then, after 17 betas or so (maybe not all public), they issued a marketing announcement that "commercial" licenses could be arranged. Many people on the mailing list were not impressed -- they felt that they had been cheated. Don't get me wrong, I like the work Geoffrey Noer and others have done -- I'm still going to use it. But I don't consider it to be "Free Software" in spirit, even if it is under the GPL. I'd like to see Debian maintain some lofty goals as to what constitutes "Free Software", so I think that discussion on these topics is healthy. Just calling 'em like I see 'em. Cheers, - Jim pgp2R1wJKPNJd.pgp Description: PGP signature
[boldt@cardinal.math.ucsb.edu: Info package: .dsc missing. And: TkInfo]
Is there someone else who might take this packaging? I don't have time yet. Erick --- Start of forwarded message --- Return-Path: Date: Fri, 30 May 97 22:42:29 PDT From: Axel Boldt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Info package: .dsc missing. And: TkInfo Content-Type: text Content-Length: 978 Hi, I just saw that http://www.debian.org/Packages/dist/doc/info.html, the page about your info package, points to ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/stable/source/doc/info_3.7-1.dsc for the dsc file, but that file doesn't exist. The .deb in the binary directory exists, though. Anyway, I had one question: would you be willing to maintain a debian package of my tkInfo program (http://www.math.ucsb.edu/~boldt/tkinfo/)? I think it is a lot easier to use for new users than info - of course it requires X and Tcl/Tk. I myself am not on the debian mailing lists and am not familiar with the debian packaging scheme. A RedHat package exists already. The package would be completely trivial, since it's just a single tk script containing it's own documentation. If you are interested, I'd ask you to wait a couple of days as I'm about to release a new version with some new features soon. Cheers, Axel - -- Axel Boldt * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.math.ucsb.edu/%7Eboldt/ --- End of forwarded message --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [boldt@cardinal.math.ucsb.edu: Info package: .dsc missing. And: TkInfo]
There already is a tkinfo package (version 1.3). cas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is listed as the maintainer. Cheers, - Jim pgpjw0BNcP82y.pgp Description: PGP signature
Env-varaibles
Hello, for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an env-variable to be set. Should it be set with a preinst-script? I wouldn't like that to happen to my system, but I don't see any other way, if it should be set at all. Should I just put a prominent note in /usr/doc/smalleiffel/README.debian saying that this variable must be set to use the package? I'm sure others have had the same problem! What's the standard way? -- Ole J. Tetlie, Dept. of Informatics/Mathematics, Univ. of Oslo ***Eiffel fantast***Debian GNU/Linux lover*** Java: The elegant simplicity of C++ and the blazing speed of Smalltalk -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: a.s.r manpages
On May 28, 12:55pm, Joey Hess wrote:
> Buddha Buck:
> > Personally, I question placing them in the main distribution at all
> > (including non-free and contrib). I have nothing wrong with the
> > contents (if available, it would be installed on my system rather
> > quickly), but rather the unwanted publicity it could cause.
>
> I packaged up some of the ASR man pages as a red hat package back 9 or 10
> months ago when I was using red hat, and uploaded it to ftp.dehat.com. This
> was before dead chickens appeared on ASR. :-) I don't think that package
> generated unwanted publicity, in fact, I never heard from anyone who ever
> installed it.
I think so too... But will _try_ to ask people at a.s.r their opinion.
>
> Look at it this way: I don't think any of the man pages mention ASR at all.
> So the only person who is going to connect ASR with the package is someone
> who looks at the package description. Who's most likly to do that? The
> sysadmin who installs it [1]. Seems appropriate...
:^)
>
> Oh, to the packager: be sure to include the c(1) manpage that appeared on
> ASR yesterday.
Probably in release 1.1-1 or something :^)
I'd like to see n(1) and k(5) first, so this part would be complete :^)
>
> [1] Or at least a user clueful enough to know about dpkg -s [2]
> [2] Sorry about [1] and [2]. ASR-mode, you know..
:^)
>
> --
> see shy jo
Paul
--
(___) | Pawel Wiecek - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
< o o > | http://www.ists.pwr.wroc.pl/~coven/|
\ ^ / | finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key |
(") | * * * To err is human, to moo bovine * * * |
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: The enlightenment window manager
On May 30, 2:40pm, Martin Alonso Soto Jacome wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> I just downloaded the enlightenment window manager (see
> http://www.cse.unsw.EDU.AU/~s2154962/enlightenment/). It is somewhat slow
> and
> requieres a lot of memory and disk, but is very funny to see, anyway.
It's a grat load of stuff (originally packaged in an ugly
way), but I'd like to see it in Debian. It's so beautiful :^)
Paul
--
(___) | Pawel Wiecek - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
< o o > | http://www.ists.pwr.wroc.pl/~coven/|
\ ^ / | finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key |
(") | * * * To err is human, to moo bovine * * * |
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: RFC: Policy for arch specs
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote: > >I don't think it does any optimization at all for pentium. > > Correct. Of course, there's the experimental pgcc (http://www.goof.com/, > if anybody wants to look). > > I'd like to pack this up and stuff it into experimental, if I had a > little more time *sigh*. This is not necessary. gcc 2.8 includes the pentium optimizations from pgcc. My guess is that it won't take very long anymore until 2.8 gets released. HJL found a few more bugs and his patches for libc6/glibc2 are not integrated yet, but otherwise it seems pretty stable now. Mike -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
XFree86 3.3 now available
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- I just had a look at ftp.xfree86.org. They finally have 3.3 out. Mike -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM5J+gUAgIJ53sbT9AQEJ8gP/XaRFImH2den6zE5uMTct5YX4yrUKkxMS LZyHcbgLQ+DyLIsxdhtykHja0IBeScc/gtpeKRu6Co6O5dBAdRlHMVw3i6TT6hFm EVkXY7Gl0cCddmN8RcxXrJ4Nz9yD68g8tHUORLibY/rm6ZbDknMkiTI6tHO6K6uW q2S4d8cKLbc= =sP7j -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: RFC: Policy for arch specs
Michael Neuffer wrote: >This is not necessary. gcc 2.8 includes the pentium optimizations >from pgcc. All of it? My impression from the pgcc FAQ at http://www.goof.com/ was that only some optimizations (mostly instruction scheduling) will be taken from pgcc. The rather active pgcc development at the moment (large patch files, lots of code reorganization) seems to indicate so. -- Thomas Koenig, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double logarithmic diagram. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
More new packages...
As I've already written I prepared asr-manpages...
And there are more packages I'm working on now:
- slay - tiny script to kill all processes a user has. This is ready.
- asmail - a utility similar to xbiff but with more power and AfterStep
look and feel. This isn't done yet, but will be soon.
BTW. What section should it go to? Mail or X11?
- xzx - ZX Spectrum emulator. This isn't started yet (and I had several
troubles with xzx I compiled some time ago), but I hope it'll be
available soon.
- Also, there will soon be some new patches to mush (I have to do more
corrections to MIME support, PGP support and other stuff is also
planned) which I now maintain.
Paul
--
(___) | Pawel Wiecek - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
< o o > | http://www.ists.pwr.wroc.pl/~coven/|
\ ^ / | finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key |
(") | * * * To err is human, to moo bovine * * * |
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
giving away ssh
Hi all, I'm writing my phd-thesis at the moment and time is getting shorter, so I do have to give away the ssh-package. I should be taken by someone in the *free world*. The next thing to do would be to split the package into a us and a non-us version (i.e., with-out and with rsaref compiled). Of course, I will provide some initial help. Greeting, jan Jan Camenisch Institut fuer theor. Informatik Tel. +41 1 632 7412 ETH Zentrum, IFW Fax. +41 1 632 1172 CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerlande-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - URL of my homepage http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/camenisc pgp-fingerprint 39 D8 9E 3C 9E 1F 65 A0 2A D4 B0 55 AF 23 35 F9 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
[ I've not been following this thread too closely, so if I've got the wrong idea, please forgive me ] > The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as > restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries, > using it as Cygnus is doing (to make money) goes against the spirit > of Free Software. Wrong. There is no obligation to give things away for no money when writing free software. The word ``free'' here applies to the free-ly available source, which you are allowed to take, and modify, and maintain yourself if you wish, and you can then sell it for lots of money, as long as the people you sell it to also get the source, and the right to modify, maintain and sell it, with the proviso, etc. etc. The main evil that RMS was trying to combat with GPL was the fact that people regularly get left with software for which they do not have the source, and find that they can not get support from the original supplier for one reason or another (gone bust, moved on to new versions etc.). I suppose the thing that Cygnus seem to have done that might be morally wrong is to take patches written in the freeware spirit, and started selling them because they hold the copyright to the work as a whole. I presume that the what they are selling is the right not to be bound by the GPL restrictions that would normally apply --- is that correct ? If they are actually maintaining two source trees, and stealing ideas from the GPL source to enhance the commercial version, then I think they are in the wrong, but I cannot imagine they would be doing that. Cheers, Phil. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Env-varaibles
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an > env-variable to be set. Is it not possible to patch the program, to default to the value that you were going to write into /etc/profile ? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: giving away ssh
> I'm writing my phd-thesis at the moment and time is getting > shorter, so I do have to give away the ssh-package. I should > be taken by someone in the *free world*. Ok, I'll take it --- I use it all the time anyway, so it should be no hardship. Also, it's about time I tried a multi-target package. Cheers, Phil. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Ultralib (was Re: FreeQt ?)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: > >On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote: > >> On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote >> > >> > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS >> > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are >> > not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a >> > module yourself :< >> >> Is it useable? Is it better than OSS/Lite? Anybody care to package it up? > >If you have a GUS card then that is probably the sound driver you should >be using! It looks extremely good, but I never tried it here with my gus >(no time :|) I'm using it here without problems - _far_ better than the OSS GUS support for most things. I've even volunteered to Debianise it, but it'll take some time... -- Steve McIntyre, CURS Secretary, Cambridge, UK. [EMAIL PROTECTED] I sent ten dollars to death.net and all I got was... well, nothing. "Can't keep my eyes from the circling sky, +-- "Tongue-tied & twisted, Just an earth-bound misfit, I..." |Finger for PGP key Mail for me sent to cam.ac.uk addresses will start bouncing soon. Please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead. Thanks. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Upcoming Debian Releases
On May 26, Brian C. White wrote > Hamm (Debian 2.0) Some more ideas/goals: * PAM-mify at least the essential authentication programs (passwd, su,...) and preferably all programs that require authentication (POP clients, webservers, ...). http://parc.power.net/morgan/Linux-PAM/>. From the FAQ http://parc.power.net/morgan/Linux-PAM/FAQ>: >Q3: Are there any distributions (of Linux) that come with PAM? >YES. Currently, the only distributions that are shipped with PAM installed >are Red Hat Linux distributions. [...] >Caldera will be supporting PAM. > >Debian has made a commitment to support PAM in the future, there is a >debian package for it but applications have not been made available. > >Nothing is known of other distributions. * Link shared libraries themselves against other shared libs, instead of including their code static (e.g. as current S-Lang already does); this can reduce memory use. See H.J. Lu's "ELF: From The Programmer's Perspective" ftp://tsx-11.mit.edu/pub/linux/packages/GCC/elf.ps.gz> for details. Greetings, Ray -- Obsig: developing a new sig -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: RFC: Policy for arch specs
On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Thomas Koenig wrote: > Michael Neuffer wrote: > > >This is not necessary. gcc 2.8 includes the pentium optimizations > >from pgcc. > > All of it? No not all, they took a stable subset. Mike -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Jun 1, Jim Pick wrote > Actually, I had a very similar polite argument with RMS via private e-mail > (about linking Java libs with mixed GPL/LGPL/proprietary licenses). He > was pretty solid on the fact that run-time linking is the same as > "compiled-in" linking. Yep, once the run-time linking has occured you're not allowed to redistribute the resulting image if you aren't willing to redistribute the source under similar terms. This isn't that big of an issue for most people. [Note: what RMS is trying to argue against is the stunt Steve Jobs & Co. pulled with Objective C.] -- Raul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Infocom Games (Was: long list of give away or orphaned packages)
> > None of the Infocom games can be distributed, however. You have to > > buy them. > > Heh. I guess that means we cant package up any of these then > > ftp://ftp.gmd.de/if-archive No, but you can leave a pointer to this place in the description somewhere. See the "apple2" package description for an example. Brian ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) --- measure with micrometer, mark with chalk, cut with axe, hope like hell -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
dpkg > 1.4.0.17
Where do I find it? I read somewhere it fixes that nasty dpkg-source bug. Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] topsystem Systemhaus GmbH| Phone: (+49) 2405/4670-44 Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10 52146 Wuerselen | Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dcfgtool and clones
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > Craig Sanders: > > This is not only simple to implement, but it is also simple to > > parse... > > Not quite so simple. If you need to allow all characters in the > values, which requires using escapes and stuff, and consequently > also makes it more difficult to parse. The /bin/sh syntax is > inadequate (the rules are way too complicated). true, that's why i said my example would only work with simple 'name=value' assignments. anything more complicated needs more work. > Making it a requirement for the files to be parsable by the `.' > (source) command in /bin/sh is a bad idea. If nothing else, it makes > it complicated to have multiple locations for the data, and to change > the locations. > You want multiple locations, so that you can have a master database, > shared by all nodes in a network, with local modifications overriding > the master, as necessary. This could be done using your favourite text processing tools (sed, perl, m4, make, whatever) and rdist. I don't agree that multiple locations are necessary - there's more than one way to skin a cat. > Having shell scripts run a `cfgtool' -like program is a much > better idea. My implementation would work, mostly, but if another > is used, I don't mind. As long as the config database is editable with vi (or other text editor), I don't mind. As far as I am concerned, the file format can be anything that works as long as I can still drive it from the command line over a ppp connection and can write whatever sh, ed, sed, awk, or perl scripts i need to automate modification of the file. Craig -- craig sanders networking consultant Available for casual or contract temporary autonomous zone system administration tasks.
Re: XFree86 3.3 now available
Michael Neuffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I just had a look at ftp.xfree86.org. > They finally have 3.3 out. Yeah, but the permissions on /pub/XFree86/3.3 don't let you look at it: XFree86:/pub/XFree86> ls -l [...] drwxr-xr-x 6 7011190 1024 Oct 1 1994 2.1/ drwxr-xr-x 6 7011190512 Dec 16 1994 3.1/ drwxr-xr-x 9 7011194512 Apr 22 1995 3.1.1/ drwxr-xr-x 8 70199 512 Oct 30 1996 3.1.2/ drwxr-xr-x 8 7011199512 Jan 18 01:50 3.2/ drwxr-xr-x 20 root 1200512 May 12 12:25 3.2A/ drwxr-x--- 7 root 1200512 Jun 2 02:52 3.3/ [...] -- Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12167 Airport Rd, DeWitt MI 48820, USA *Note*: New PGP key available at http://www.msu.edu/user/pfaffben/pgp.html -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Gunthorpe) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly > what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes > sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link to the > dll. The debate around that is all based on the question of what is a > derived work. One could even argue executing gzip in a pipeline makes > other elements in the pipeline 'derived' somehow from gzip. The GPL just > doesn't make that perfectly clear! Of course, it's actually not the job of the (L)GPL to define "derived work", and all experts I've heard seem to agree that they made a botch of it. The term is defined by law (and international treaty), and it seems quite clear that putting parts from one work into another, where these parts are small with respect to both the first and the second work, definitely DO NOT make the second one a derived work, whatever any license may claim. Think about where this comes from. If I write a book, and include Hamlet's famous question somewhere, my book is not a derived work from Shakespeare's. Now, you can of course argue about how large some peaces are - if I put half of Hamlet in my book, and this makes out half of my book, then it certainly _is_ a derived work. But nothing Shakespeare could have said about derived works (assuming he wasn't dead long before this term was invented) can possibly change that. MfG Kai -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
anyone working on updating mgetty?
Mgetty is quite a few versions behind.. is anyone actively maintaining this package? If not, I have enough free time now to take it. -- Paul Haggart - phaggart at cybertap dot com - Debian Linux - PGP 0xD61313E9 "Is all the world jails and churches?" - Rage Against the Machine -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: XFree86 3.3 now available
right, usually that means "mirror sites only" and then in a day or two they'll all change the modes together. (This keeps the master site from getting flooded; I remember Jim Gettys posting about people connecting to ftp.x.org which was a heavily loaded Sony NEWS machine buried off a local net in the MIT LCS "swamp" when gatekeeper.dec.com had it's *own* T1 to one of the west coast hubs, and enough RAM to keep the entire distribution in buffer cache :-) However, I'll bring a zip disk with me to work today, and I'll be keeping an eye on the mirrors... _Mark_ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The Herd of Kittens Debian X Maintainer -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> > On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote: > > > For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see > > some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple > > precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a > > week or three ago about a company shipping a commercial package that > > uses GNU RCS underneath -- but since GNU RCS is built as a DLL (and > > they ship sources for those changes, and gnu rcs itself) they don't > > have to ship the program sources (and have allegedly run this past > > the FSF for confirmation that it was OK) Recall that RCS is > > GPLed, not LGPLed. > > Hm, that's very interesting. Someone I was talking with a time back used > the example 'Putting GZIP in a dll and then linking to it still makes your > code GPL'. But if the FSF says that it is okay to do that then it is okay > to do that ;> I'm not familiar with the RCS debate, but I was reading gnu.misc.discuss during the libmp situation. Based on that debate, I can see why rcs.dll might be allowed, but gzip.dll might not. The issue in the libmp was a package containing a midified RSAREF that could be linked to libmp. Libmp is aparantly faster than the standard multiprecision library available. Libmp also has a slightly different interface, so it isn't a simple drop-in replacement for the standard library (as glibc or libc5 (theoretically) is). The FSF contended that the resulting modified package (which was not distributed with binaries or source for libmp) must be GPLed, since the -product-, namely the executable binaries, must contain GPLed code (the libmp library), so must be GPLed. The source is merely the preferred distribution method for the product. In this case, the product was being distributed in two pieces. The justification for this position was that libmp had a unique interface. Any program written to use that interface had no choice but to use libmp, and thus the resulting binary was derived from libmp. In this particular case, the program was thus subjected to both the GPL -and- the license on RSAREF, which are incompatable licenses. The FSF objected to the distribution of the modified package -at all-, since it would be impossible to fulfill the requirements of both licenses. That particular package is now distributed with a simple libmp-compatable non-GPLed multiprecision integer package (thus avoiding the unique interface issue, since now there are two libraries with the same documented interface), and instructions to link it with the FSF libmp, because it is a much better library. RMS agreed that this would solve the problem. Applying that to rcs.dll, it seems to me that as long as the dll doesn't rely on any GNU-specific RCS feature, then it would be providing a non-unique, standard interface. Two dll's could exist -- one based on GNU rcs, and the other that makes the appropriate system() calls (or whatever the Windows equivilant is) to do the job. If the latter is in fact what the dll does, requiring separate installation of an appropriate RCS package, then it obviously doesn't have the same encumberance problems as the libmp did. However, the unique interface issue does exist with regard to gzip, since that is purely a GPLed product. I think a libgzip or a gzip.dll would run into the same issues as the libdb did. > I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly > what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes > sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link to the > dll. The debate around that is all based on the question of what is a > derived work. One could even argue executing gzip in a pipeline makes > other elements in the pipeline 'derived' somehow from gzip. The GPL just > doesn't make that perfectly clear! There are a lot of unclear issues, unfortunately. I think that there are at least 4 different issues here: 1) what the FSF and RMS want, 2) what their lawyers think they can get away with using the license, 3) reasonable lay interpretations of the license, and 4) judicial interpretation of the license. The second point implies subterfuge on the part of the lawyers or RMS. I don't think so. I think RMS has made it perfectly clear what he wants: a complete overhaul of the intellectual property system with regards to software in the vain hope of returning to the free and open early days of the labs at MIT. But his lawyers must work -within- the existing IP system to subvert it. They believe (and are staking their professional reputation on it) that the GPL represents the closest approximation of RMS's desires (of a complete subversion of IP law) within the framework of existing law. It is always tricky to subvert a structure from within, and that is why the GPL is so tricky to interpret. However, it is item 4) that is the key, and the GPL has (to my knowledge) never been tested in court. Perh
deleting binary soft link on ftp sites
In anticipation of Debian being released (publically)for platforms other than ix86 it would be a good idea to phase out the use of the binary -> binary-i386 link on the ftp sites as this could cause confusion. Is there anything that actually uses this link? - Sue -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
Buddha Buck wrote: >However, the unique interface issue does exist with regard to gzip, >since that is purely a GPLed product. I think a libgzip or a gzip.dll >would run into the same issues as the libdb did. The source code to the zlib library has been released together with ssh with a non-GPL license (pretty much BSD-like). -- Thomas Koenig, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double logarithmic diagram. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> However, the unique interface issue does exist with regard to gzip, > since that is purely a GPLed product. I think a libgzip or a gzip.dll > would run into the same issues as the libdb did. Not to distract from the original point (thank you for the clearer explanation of the libmp issue!) note that "zlib", which uses the same algorithm, is an unencumbered implementation (more suited for embedding anyway, which makes a gzip.dll simply a poor choice :-) and thus the whole issue is fairly well side stepped. (X is using zlib for both low-bandwidth-X and for font compression now...) libdb would be an issue if you used the db interfaces; if you used the dbm_* interfaces, you'd presumably be ok... -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dcfgtool and clones
On Jun 1, Kai Henningsen wrote
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Sanders) wrote on 01.06.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > The config database should be regarded as a convenience for
> > {pre,post}{inst,rm} scripts and /etc/init.d/ boot time scripts only.
>
> Well, that was what started the discussion, anyway. Then the general-admin-
> tool stuff merged with this discussion, and now everybody is talking about
> different things.
>
> I think we should try to separate these things out again.
>
> AFAIKT, we actually have three problems to solve:
>
> 1. We have configuration info in scripts. This makes those scripts hard to
>update.
>
>This is where the text db should come in. Programs and data should be
>separated. The scripts still need to be conffiles, because individual
>admins will sometimes want to do things differently, but a stock Debian
>system should not have any config data in scripts.
i agree.
>
> 2. We need a general system administration tool. Lots of other Unix and
>Unix-like Systems already have those, with varying quality. This thing
>should ideally be able to configure everything that is globally
>configurable on a Debian system, probably via modules provided by the
>packages, and be able to run in text mode, under X, and via the web.
>And it should not change the format of the configuration info, so
>people can avoid it alltogether, and can exchange configuration files
>with other systems.
i agree. but this is a realy huge task, and i know noby that has started
it. all other distributions have their own config files, don't support
all config files (or only restricted) or have some sort of templates
they sed to fill in konfig values to generate the config file.
the only one who might parse the real config files is linuxconf, but
their way is not acceptable (writing c code to parse) - that's too much
work.
> [2a. An individual-user version of this would be good, too. (The dotfile
> generator?)
> ]
again,. i agree.
> 3. We need a general way to separate configuration from installation. It
>should be possible to take all or part of a system's global
>configuration and put it on another system, either before the
>installation of the respective packages, or automatically during that
>installation.
>
>One of the things we should have is a single-floppy net-or-CD automatic
>install - make a customized floppy, put it in the machine, boot, go
>away, come back, and find the machine up and running, fully configured.
>Network administrators really need this feature, and even Windows has
>it. We ought to be able to do what Windows can!
i agree.
> Of course, these these three things ultimately need to be able to work
> together.
yes, but till now nobody showed me a reason why they should not. 2.)
would has to parse so many different and complex config files, it should
be _very_ easy to parse a simple list of name/value stored in the
textdb.
> So, let's try for some terminology, just so we know what we are talking
> about:
>
> 1. This thing essentially holds parameters for scripts. It's the
>PARAMETER DB.
>
> 2. This beast is the SYSADMIN TOOL.
>
> 3. And this is about AUTOMATED CONFIGURATION.
ok. terminology is the right way to go.
> Anyway, if we want to be able to do this, we need a name convention.
> Something like PDB__ might do. Otherwise, this
> is sure to break a script because a local var clashes with another
> package's config var.
there was a discussion to use path style names like
boot/verbose or network/interface/eth0 or network/route/default or
x11/start/xconsole ...
start to write a long list, where config values should go, so we can
discuss it (and there is a lot to discuss IMO (like : split the ifconfig
commands into several values ? i would like one big value)).
> I'm against the latter. Besides the problems you mentioned, it introduces
> interesting new ways in which this can break.
i agree. everything should work via the text db IMO.
regards, andreas
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dcfgtool and clones
On Jun 1, Craig Sanders wrote > It should NOT attempt to be some universal replacement for > package-specific config files. i agree. > All that is needed is a set of "key=value" pairs in a plain text file. Take > a look at FreeBSD's /etc/sysconfig or NextStep's /etc/hostconfig for an > example. > > This is not only simple to implement, but it is also simple to > parse...and it allows the sysadmin to change the setup with > vi/pico/ae/joe/emacs or whatever. Later, a GUI or web front end can be > layered ON TOP of this. that's what we don't want : one big file with all settings. but it will be a text file, so anyone can edit it. > parsing the files in shell is simple: > > source /etc/sysconfig but that way you have to look at /etc/sysconfig, what is done there. a simple call to the database to say "give me thiese values" is more transparent and not (much?) slower. > parsing it in perl is almost as easy. The following code fragment reads > /etc/sysconfig into an associative array called $config. we don't have perl in system bootup scripts, i hope. and of course you can also get the informations from the database with perl (using a small call). > So, a decision needs to be made: whether to allow only simple > assignments or to also allow complicated assignments like > "foo=`cat /etc/bar`". no, we shouldn't have this one. it says, that we would have one file per variable. not a good idea. the dtxtdb/configtool is to get rid of such stuff. > at minimum, we need to support sh/bash/ksh/zsh, and perl. no problem. also csh/tcl/whatever shouldn't be hard to support. (anything can be used, that can call a program an eveluate it's output). > we need code fragments in all of these languages to add, read, modify, > and delete (comment out) "name=value" pairsand do it WITHOUT > disrupting any comments or the order of assignment statements in the > file. that's why we don't want one big file and we don't want direct access. a small tool will do all this, the languages will "only" need to exec it with the right parameters. and this way it should not be possible to destroy the database or at least not that easy like a buggy script could do it. > btw, i don't care what the file is called. /etc/sysconfig is just an > example. your comments are right. but we don't want one big file. a small directory with several files, and a tool to access them will be better. regards, andreas -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> [ I've not been following this thread too closely, > so if I've got the wrong idea, please forgive me ] > > > The GPL is a very restrictive license. In many ways, it is just as > > restrictive as the Qt license. Particularily in the case of libraries, > > using it as Cygnus is doing (to make money) goes against the spirit > > of Free Software. > > Wrong. (I think I'm right) > There is no obligation to give things away for no money when writing free > software. No, there isn't an obligation. There isn't an obligation to even have to write free software. I have no problem with people who write proprietary software -- something's got to pay the bills. But there are varying degrees of freedom. There exists "Free Software" where somebody isn't trying to make a buck off of it. Most "Free Software" falls into this category. The GPL license is used by many of these packages in order to prevent anybody from putting the software under a proprietary license in order to 'extort' money (and other things) from out of the user base. The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict the rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the authors to do the exact same thing. To me, this is clearly hypocritical, and I don't consider that software to be as 'free' as it could otherwise be. If cygwin.dll was put under the LGPL, it would be a more 'free' piece of software that if it was under the GPL. But then Cygnus couldn't 'extort' money from their users (some of whom may be writing commercial software to put food on the table for their kids). [I use the word, 'extort' in a Free Software sense, since the library is being passed off as Free Software] There's something wrong with thinking that just because something is under the GPL, it is automatically as 'free' as is could be. > I presume that the what they are selling is the right not to be bound by the > GPL restrictions that would normally apply --- is that correct ? That's true. But if there is a great demand for relaxed restrictions, a true-blue free software author would investigate using a less restrictive license, such as the LGPL, rather than prying money out of the hands of the users. (hopefully I'm clearing up some people's thinking on this topic) Cheers, - Jim pgpl9QeB0Kulz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > I really must admit I find the GPL very cryptic, it's hard to say exactly > what it means if you look at very small detail. I do think that it makes > sense however that you should be able to put RCS in a dll and link to the > dll. That depends, if you put it in a .dll, and the original author is just a student, or a hobbiest, it's unlikely that you would ever have to prove your point in court. But if the original author is a commercial entity that is trying to make money, or perhaps the FSF that has a point to prove, you might find yourself in court, with a bunch of expensive lawyers on the other side. Cheers, - Jim pgpdA77lNmXjz.pgp Description: PGP signature
"build" with other ID?
Is it possible to rebuild a debian source package (that uses debmake), through the "build" command, signing it with another PGP key than the one belonging to the maintainer in debian/changelog without modifying the source (i.e. by providing command-line options to "build")? Ray -- LEADERSHIP A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with auto- destructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own. - The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote > The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict the > rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo > such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the > authors to do the exact same thing. To me, this is clearly hypocritical, > and I don't consider that software to be as 'free' as it could otherwise > be. First off, this list isn't the right forum to discuss Cygnus morality issues. Can someone point out a better forum? Second, I find it hard to conceive of some case wher Cygnus would sue someone for selling commercial software which happened to use a DLL authored by Cygnus. It would trash their (Cygnus's) reputation, and eat into their bottom line. Third, I think you're (Jim, I mean) making a mountain out of a mole hill. Can't we talk about something more interesting? Like, a mechanism for informing maintainers of packages what issues they need to address to get packages out of Incoming and into the distribution? -- Raul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: FreeQt ?
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Christian Hudon wrote: > > > On Jun 1, Jason Gunthorpe wrote > > > > > > There is something called the UltraSound Project. They have made OSS > > > interface compatible drivers for the various GUS based cards. But they are > > > not included in the official kernel, you have to get it and build it as a > > > module yourself :< > > > > Is it useable? Is it better than OSS/Lite? Anybody care to package it up? > > If you have a GUS card then that is probably the sound driver you should > be using! It looks extremely good, but I never tried it here with my gus > (no time :|) > I use it with a GUS Max PnP. Is so much better than the OSS-Lite module that comes with the kernel. Also I remember reading a message in debian-devel about someone trying to package the GUS driver and having problems with the procedure to package a kernel module. I will search in my mail-folders and try to find that one... -- Enrique Zanardi[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental Univ. de La Laguna -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Upcoming Debian Releases
On 30 May 1997, Kai Henningsen wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lees) wrote on 27.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > There are ways to avoid this. For example, modify dpkg not to include any > > line with "config=yes" in it in the md5sum of certain files. > > This is a troll, right? Wrong. > Or maybe you have forgotten how conffiles are actually handled: > > (old=original install, new=this install, current=possibly edited version) > > If old md5 = new md5, ignore new file (package unchanged) > If old md5 = current md5, install new file (conffile was not edited) > otherwise, prompt (both changed) > > Your change would mean that in case 2, dpkg would have to figure out how > to put the variables from the old script into the new one. But, for a package which adds config info, the new md5 != the old md5. Therefore, it would ask! And for a package where old includes config lines, the pkgtool would be rerun to update info which was config=yes. Locally modified lines wouldn't be config=yes, so the md5 would be different. Therefore, unless the sysadmin forgets to modify "config=yes" (put a banner to remind them), it works. So:- non-cfgtool md5 != cfgtoolized md5: old md5 != new md5. local file not modified: update anyway to use new cfgtool version. local file modified: cfgtool md5 == cfgtool md5: old md5=new md5 local file "not modified" (enough) - install new THEN, update from cfg database. See, it does work. -- Tom Lees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/ PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6 finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for full public key (also available on keyservers) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: "build" with other ID?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- J.H.M.Dassen wrote: > Is it possible to rebuild a debian source package (that uses debmake), > through the "build" command, signing it with another PGP key than the one > belonging to the maintainer in debian/changelog without modifying the source > (i.e. by providing command-line options to "build")? dpkg-buildpackage has a "-p" option. Using a pgp wrapper could be just whay you need. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: latin1 iQCVAgUBM5MIySqK7IlOjMLFAQHVlwP/Um5GU4h1w1LpvlSwoNdjhpQV3F5vwJFh 2AejRt2kczpnWqJLFcmZ8pSwM6yDTRiaCPxEsEQECoGCa2ztvA59OtLFZdFYdPA5 Q9xjcHse3SkC04yEjrDEvWJ7QWXyFlTjAixEinfFQ2UdctY9V/OzoRxVLo13Ozx2 CG3kJ56mqg8= =Tbi9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: GOAL: Consistent Keyboard Configuration
On Mon, 26 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote: > On Mon, 26 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote: > > > I agree 100% with what Ian says. (Let's do it) > > Me too! (I didn't know that such a simple solution is possible :-) > > So what about the other keys? I suggest that all character keys, symbols, > etc. should produce the character that's printed on the key (this sounds > reasonable, doesn't it :-) > Then I have a "special ALT" key on my german kbd, that's label "Alt Gr". > In DOS/Win95 it behaves like pressing Ctrl-Alt together. It's useful to > get some "alt-alt keys" (for example, I have "=", "0", and, "}" on one > key). I think the behaviour should be the same in Debian. Yep. We need to make sure that the AltGr key on most European keyboards does something (and even on UK keyboards... it produces a IBM line-drawing char IIRC). This involves adding a "modifier" to the keymap (at least for std console). > Other keys: > > - "End": Should jump to the end of the line/document, depending on where > it's used, for example, jumps to end of line in "readline", but end of > document in "less". Ok? > - "Home": Opposite of "End". Fine > What about the second "cursor block" at the right? It would be nice if one > could switch between the function keys (left, right, etc.) and the digits > (0, 1, etc.) with the "Num Lock" key. Is this possible? (The current > behaviour is to produce digits all the time, no matter if "Num Lock" is > set.) This works at the console (with uk.map). > Then I have a "Print" key, "Scroll-Lock", and "Pause". All three keys > don't have an effect in my X configuration--on the console "Scroll-Lock" > starts/stops terminal output, just like "C-S and C-Q". Is there any useful > meaning for "Print" and "Pause" in Linux? Ctrl+Pause (=Break) should do one of those kernel dumps IMHO. Or produce SIGINT, whatever... > Does someone have any other special keys on his keyboard that we should > define? (We'll just do it if the keyboard layout is widely used.) Ctrl+PrintScreen (=SysRq) should do a kernel info thing. What about W95 keys (3 of them)? Define as F20 or something? -- Tom Lees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/ PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6 finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for full public key (also available on keyservers) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: FreeQt ?
On Jun 1, Galen Hazelwood wrote > My understanding was that if a shared library is GPL'd rather than > LGPL'd, linking commercial programs against it is illegal unless you > provide source. The LGPL removes that restriction, and that's why glibc > (as well as libg++) uses the LGPL. Static linking (where you wind up distributing part of the GPL'd library with your software) is much more significant, from a copyright point of view than dynamic linking (where you don't need to distribute a copy of the library). Of course, distributing a copy of the library might still be pretty desirable, in which case you you need to pay attention various license details covering such things. Here, it might be good to distribute your code in a fashion where you own the interfaces (e.g. freely distribute a wrapper for the library and code to the wrapper, or write a library replacement and make sure your code runs against it). Commercial software can earn you some money, but sometimes it involves a bit of work... -- Raul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
> On Jun 2, Jim Pick wrote > > The cygwin.dll case in an example where the GPL is being used to restrict > > the > > rights of other people using the code so that they can't do something taboo > > such as charge money, while at the same time, reserving the right for the > > authors to do the exact same thing. To me, this is clearly hypocritical, > > and I don't consider that software to be as 'free' as it could otherwise > > be. > > First off, this list isn't the right forum to discuss Cygnus morality > issues. Can someone point out a better forum? I'm not saying that they're being immoral. I don't think they have properly addressed the issues though. Maybe that means they would be open to releasing the cygwin.dll under the LGPL in addition to the GPL and their proprietary license. > Second, I find it hard to conceive of some case wher Cygnus would > sue someone for selling commercial software which happened to use > a DLL authored by Cygnus. It would trash their (Cygnus's) reputation, > and eat into their bottom line. Cygnus has made it clear that they intend to make money off of cygwin32. How aggressively they do that, I don't know. > Third, I think you're (Jim, I mean) making a mountain out of a mole hill. Perhaps. Cygnus hasn't released enough information for me to decide whether it is a mountain or a mole hill. I hope it's a mole hill. Just so you understand why I'm so interested - I'm working on porting dpkg to cygwin32. That way, we'll be able to host the entire Debian distribution on top of Windows 95 and Windows NT (at least the stuff that will port). It would just be another Debian port, like PowerPC, Sparc or Alpha. This could potentially be a really big thing. :-) Little licensing details could really come back to haunt us. Imagine if everybody that wanted to make a non-free application that ran on top of Debian GNU/Win32 had to pay Cygnus a licensing fee. Imagine if Microsoft demanded that everybody had to use a certain license in order to run on top of their operating system. > Can't we talk about something more interesting? This is interesting! :-) (Nobody's forcing you to read this thread) Cheers, - Jim pgpv1yZd6vYvT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)
On Fri, 30 May 1997, Philip Hands wrote: > What were you trying to achieve ? --- it might be simpler than you think. > > I just discovered that most of my alias handling under qmail was drivel, and > could be dome much more simply. > > > If someone wants to spend some time on a simple mailer hack, you can > > make this work. > > If you want mail to, for instance: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] IIRC you can also alias an entire domain (packages.debian.org) to one user (how lists.debian.org is currently done). So [EMAIL PROTECTED] gets translated to, say bruce-packages-rsync. Then, ~bruce/.qmail-packages will execute a script to process it, or you can have .qmail-packages files for each pkg if you are worried about speed. -- Tom Lees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/ PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6 finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for full public key (also available on keyservers) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: deleting binary soft link on ftp sites
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > In anticipation of Debian being released (publically)for platforms > other than ix86 it would be a good idea to phase out the use of > the binary -> binary-i386 link on the ftp sites as this could > cause confusion. Is there anything that actually uses this link? Very old versions of dselect use it. It's meant for backwards compatibility. Guy -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On Jun 2, Raul Miller wrote > > [Note: what RMS is trying to argue against is the stunt > Steve Jobs & Co. pulled with Objective C.] Could you describe what the said 'stunt' was? I'm curious... Christian pgpyv2Q82qumI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Env-varaibles
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Hands) wrote on 02.06.97 in <"sS5XS1.0.gy5.Mhgap"@debian>: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > for SmallEiffel (which I am packaging) to work at all, it needs an > > env-variable to be set. > > Is it not possible to patch the program, to default to the value that you > were going to write into /etc/profile ? I have a similar problem with Sather, and while it certainly is possible to patch it, I don't know the code good enough to do that. My current plan is to simply use some wrapper scripts. MfG Kai -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
On 2 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote: > > Now, when you link -- statically or dynamically -- you are including > > portions of libc5 in your binary. This results in your binary being > > Umm, no, actually -- the whole point of dynamic linking is that you're > *not* including portions of libc5 in your binary. A replacement libc5 > that met the "interface" of the one you used could be dropped in > instead. (#including header files, that counts -- but not linking -- > and it's sometimes surprising how much code can get away without using > the header files...) > > The same is true of .dll's and *that* is the crux of the discussion. Correct from my viewpoint > > Now that I've been informed that libc5 is really under the LGPL (or at > least parts of it claim to be) and that the /usr/doc/libc5/copyright > file is *wrong*, I can certainly see a difference between that and > cygwin32.dll. Nonetheless, neither is anything like QT. However, as far as I know, you can't statically link something a .dll under windows anyways, so it doesn't matter. The GPL is fine, and you can still use it for commercial software. > > For some more perspective on the "interface" argument, go back and see > some of the flaming a year or two ago about the GNU "libmp" (multiple > precision integer math library.) See also the discussion of just a > week or three ago about a company shipping a commercial package that > uses GNU RCS underneath -- but since GNU RCS is built as a DLL (and > they ship sources for those changes, and gnu rcs itself) they don't > have to ship the program sources (and have allegedly run this past > the FSF for confirmation that it was OK) Recall that RCS is > GPLed, not LGPLed. > > Isn't this fascinating? :-) I must admit that I'm glad to see, all in > all, that this discussion has stayed *so* polite in comparison to the > typical gnu.misc.discuss or other open net thread. Thanks! > Me too. Shaya -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: anyone working on updating mgetty?
On Jun 2, Paul Haggart wrote : : Mgetty is quite a few versions behind.. is anyone actively maintaining this : package? If not, I have enough free time now to take it. : I thought about it, but didn't manage it. (Since I'd have to remove all debmake stuff ...) And first I should finish the wu-ftpd and/or the wu-ftpd-academ ... Heiko -- email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp : A1 7D F6 7B 69 73 48 35 E1 DE 21 A7 A8 9A 77 92 finger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpz9PwWDl97a.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: confusion regarding kernel-source and ibcs source
Hi, >>"Colin" == Colin Telmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Colin> modutils: /usr/doc/modules/examples/Stacking/modversions.h Colin> So my question is, does kernel-package put that file into the Colin> source tree? Or, more generally, how did it get into my source Colin> tree? You get that file when you configure the sources for your machine (make (x|menu)?config in the kernel sources directory). kernel-package only introduces stuff in ./debian directory transiently while building things, but otherwise does not touch kernel sources. manoj -- The universe is laughing behind your back. Manoj Srivastava mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mobile, Alabama USAhttp://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/> -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: time stops on latest kernels
Hi, I can get version 2.1.37 to work -- 38, 39, 40, and 41 have hung badly (have yet to try 42) manoj -- "My past is my own." The Shadow (DC Comics) Manoj Srivastava mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mobile, Alabama USAhttp://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/> -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Copyright question
On 1 Jun 1997, John Goerzen wrote: > Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote: > > > > > Non-free it is > > > > No. If the author forbids distribution a changed (i.e. bug fixed) > > _binary_ version, I think the package may not even go into non-free. > > > > What do the others think? > > Before we go off half-cocked here: > 1) I have e-mailed the author asking for permission to distribute > a bug-fixed software > 2) We are distributing various programs without source already. > These programs are not fixable. (Example: xforms) > > I really don't think that we should make lack of modification > permission to be a reason to not include in non-free (after all, isn't > this what non-free is for?) Not exactly. non-free is not the place for doing illegal things :-) It just the distribution used for programs which have some restrictions on commercial distribution. Even the programs in non-free will have to comply with a few rules, as for example, we must be allowed to ship a modified binary. (Note, that this is something different from programs where no source is available but we are allowed to modify, i.e. hack, the binary.) Thanks, Chris -- Christian Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], Don't know Perl? [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA http://www.perl.com http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
dtextdb uploaded into experimental
pgpZHFB2uUNIM.pgp Description: PGP message
Proper section?
What is the proper section for Perl modules? Should they go into devel, interpreters, libs, what? I am a little confused about this since Perl modules kinda fit the descriptions for all of those. -- John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org) Custom Programming| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: cygwin.dll license (was Re: FreeQt ?)
Hi Jim, > Imagine if Microsoft demanded that everybody had to use a certain > license in order to run on top of their operating system. Well, they do actually. Microsoft charges for the licences to use it's ``operating systems''. If the Freeware community produces software that ends up helping closed vendors sell their wares on closed OS's, then we might end up damaging our cause. That is presumably what is behind Cygnus' attempt to put some pressure on developers to release their software as Freeware, by charging them if they don't. Unfortunately, this makes ``Debian GNU/Win32'' a rather complicated problem, to which I don't know the answer. As a Freeware bigot, I'm tempted to say ``sod them, they can't use our software unless they GPL'', but that is a probably an unenforceable (and somewhat childish) position, so what to do ? Cheers, Phil. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
