Re: [FLAME WARNING] Linux Standards Base and Debian

2001-05-10 Thread Chad C. Walstrom
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:15:46PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > The LSB doesn't need the full power of a complex packaging system,
> > and it is unlikely they would get it right without really using
> > it.
> 
> I disagree with that. The people who are involved with that
> particular bit of LSB happen to be a dpkg maintainer, the apt
> author, rpm upstream, the author of dpkg-rpm and a few other capable
> people. If you don't trust that group you may as well give up and
> start your own packaging system.

Trust has nothing to do with it.  Frankly, I agree that the format of
the package file being something that standard *NIX tools can
manipulate.  I agree that a packaging "system" should be unnecessary
to install a binary package.  Marcus is right on the money with his
statement.

However, I will articulate Wichert's implied statement: get involved
with the LSB.  Bickering about it on debian-devel isn't going to get
people very far.  A little research[1] turns up the following on how
to get involved:

Invitation To Participate 
Anyone wishing to participate in the LSB project either as an
observer or as a contributor should join one of the mailing
lists[2].  There are no fees for participation or membership. 

1. http://www.linuxbase.org
2. http://www.linuxbase.org/lists.html

Related threads:

3. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0010/msg00012.html
4. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0010/msg00036.html
5. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0007/msg2.html
6. http://lists.debian.org/lsb-discuss-0105/msg00025.html

Good Hunting!

-- 
Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | a.k.a. ^chewie
http://www.wookimus.net/| s.k.a. gunnarr
Key fingerprint = B4AB D627 9CBD 687E 7A31  1950 0CC7 0B18 206C 5AFD



pgprN7UihBBmW.pgp
Description: PGP signature


dhelp and kdict: conflicting directories?

2001-05-10 Thread Hugo van der Merwe
kdict installs some stuff to /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kdict... which gets
symlinked to /usr/doc/HTML of course. Problem is, dhelp generates its
output in /usr/doc/HTML... now the kdict files have been erased, and
replaced with dhelp's indexes.

This is clearly a bug... but what should one suggest in a bug report? I
don't really know why kdict uses /usr/share/doc/HTML... is there is a
specific reason?

Hugo van der Merwe

ps. I'd appreciate a CC:, thanks.

-- 
To send me private (non-world-readable) mail, GPG encrypt it.
1024D/60715698: 5F2E 8EC2 E0A4 5D25 0569  F281 4A6C D76D 6071 5698


pgpHRjAoJdTk7.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: dhelp and kdict: conflicting directories?

2001-05-10 Thread David Starner
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 08:21:13AM +0200, Hugo van der Merwe wrote:
> kdict installs some stuff to /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kdict... which gets
> symlinked to /usr/doc/HTML of course. Problem is, dhelp generates its
> output in /usr/doc/HTML... now the kdict files have been erased, and
> replaced with dhelp's indexes.

I'm confused . . . /usr/share/doc/HTML should not be a symlink to 
/usr/doc/HTML; it should be the other way around. Nothing should
be writing actual files to /usr/doc/. dhelp is writing to 
/usr/share/doc/HTML, right?

I think I see the bug on this computer, I just wanted to make sure 
that we had our directories straight.

-- 
David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
"I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and 
laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg




Broken Nautilus {libeel1,librsvg1}?

2001-05-10 Thread David Monarres
This last apt-get upgrade that I did seemed to break nautilus for me. I
noticed that nautilus was held back on account that libeel1 and librsvg1
are unobtainable. I know that these are just new eazel libs but does
anybody know when these will make it into sid? Or are they obtainable from
another location (Mabye a non-us upload issue?)
david Monarres
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: how can Euro symbol be displayed under X [4.0.3]?

2001-05-10 Thread Peter Makholm
Wolfgang Sourdeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Since ISO-8859-15 is basicall ISO-8859-1+euro+some other characters.
> Why is the "@euro" needed ?

A few often used chars has changed. So it is important to know which
cahrset is used. For example 1/2 and the french oe-ligature seems to
be on the same place.

I have no idea if there is other differences between the two locales,
but you could expect that LC_MONETARY=es_ES and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
would give different behaviours from some programs. 

-- 
hash-bang-slash-bin-slash-bash