Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Jeff Licquia]

On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions?
> Why isn't it enough to worry about the license?

Because software isn't documentation?

Think of it this way: national security would be so much easier to
maintain if we could just define cryptography as a weapon of war,
equivalent to a nuclear device, "for the purposes of the import
regulations".  We all know how well that worked.

Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be
software "for the purposes of the DFSG".  But does it make sense?


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)

[Jeff Licquia]

On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 19:03, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
> >I wrote this up last night after getting fed up with this thread, then
> >modified it this morning after reading the thread on -legal that was
> >referred to.   Flame away.
> >
> >http://people.debian.org/~jaq/jfdl.html
> 
> Of course, I meant
> 
> http://people.debian.org/~jaq/jfdg.html

Very nice.  I'm not sure it's 100% what's needed, but it's a good
starting point.

You might be a little more explicit that translations (which preserve
the meaning of the original, as you do point out) must be allowed, even
for invariant sections.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)

[Jeff Licquia]

On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 15:21, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > Why?  What freedoms are important for software that aren't for 
> > > documentation?
> > 
> > Revisionist history, for one.  I'm sure the FSF wouldn't appreciate the
> > GCC document being modified to make it look like Linus Torvalds wrote
> > GCC, for example.
> 
> That would involve removing names from copyright notices, which isn't
> allowed for text *or* code.

Not necessarily.  Imagine part of the README for "licquix", the hot new
free kernel that everyone's raving about:

  Copyright (c) 1991 Linus Torvalds.

  The Finn gets the copyright because he started it, even though it
  wouldn't be half the kernel it is without my obviously brilliant 
  improvements.  He did start the project, after all, even if he hasn't
  made a decent contribution in years.

Do you think Linus would have a problem with such a README for this
(fictitious) product?

> Except that a large part of the discussion is exactly whether
> documentation is considered software for the purposes of the DFSG, and
> you and many others are (incorrectly and repeatedly) speaking as if the
> issue is settled.

Hmm.  I'm probably guilty of not being clear.  That is, indeed, my point
- that there are some issues to resolve here, and they don't seem to be
resolved yet.

> I've yet to see an argument as to why Debian should call a text with the
> GNU Manifesto permanently embedded in it free, when it wouldn't do the
> same for a software license that did the same thing.  To me, it seems
> straightforward: understandable, but not free.

Having read lots more on last year's thread, I must confess that this is
the most troubling part of the whole debate.

On the one hand, it doesn't seem totally clear that freedom in
non-active written works necessarily requires modifiability.  We can
modify Thoreau (his works are in the public domain), but why would we
want to?  Isn't it more honest and more "free" to write your own works,
borrowing from people like Thoreau, but not tarring him with the taint
of our own incompletely understood ideas?

On the other, it also doesn't seem right that a quote of, say, a
paragraph or two of the Emacs manual would require me to embed the whole
of the GNU Manifesto in my manual.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free =?iso-8859-15?q?software in?= main)

[David Starner]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:34:57AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Not necessarily.  Imagine part of the README for "licquix", the hot new
> free kernel that everyone's raving about:
> 
>   Copyright (c) 1991 Linus Torvalds.
> 
>   The Finn gets the copyright because he started it, even though it
>   wouldn't be half the kernel it is without my obviously brilliant 
>   improvements.  He did start the project, after all, even if he hasn't
>   made a decent contribution in years.
> 
> Do you think Linus would have a problem with such a README for this
> (fictitious) product?

Sure. But what license is going to stop that? The GFDL doesn't prevent you
from adding stuff outside invariant sections. I know I wouldn't consider
license that tried to prohibit that free; people should be able to add
whatever stupid crap to the program without worrying (short of libel, of
course, but that should be outside the license too.)

-- 
David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"It's not a habit; it's cool; I feel alive. 
If you don't have it you're on the other side." 
- K's Choice (probably referring to the Internet)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free =?iso-8859-15?q?software in?= main)

[Anthony Towns]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 01:42, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create a 
> > > DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
> > Why?  What freedoms are important for software that aren't for 
> > documentation?
> Revisionist history, for one.  

How about correcting a supposedly historical document, for example,
taking a document that describes Windows as the progenitor of the trend
for GUIs, and adding some explanation about Apple and Xerox and suchlike?

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)

[Jeff Licquia]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 00:55, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 01:42, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 07:27:40AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". IMHO we ave to create 
> > > > a 
> > > > DFDG, "Debian Free Documentation Guidelines".
> > > Why?  What freedoms are important for software that aren't for 
> > > documentation?
> > Revisionist history, for one.  
> 
> How about correcting a supposedly historical document, for example,
> taking a document that describes Windows as the progenitor of the trend
> for GUIs, and adding some explanation about Apple and Xerox and suchlike?

That would be the obvious counterexample.

Representing such changes as the opinions of the original author would
be bad, but the DFSG covers those cases already.

I mentioned Thoreau in another thread, and the Bible in another; though
they are free in every sense, perhaps that would be a place where we
would need to be careful about modifications.  I'm sure John Stuart Mill
would be horrified to find his works published with "errata" edited by
J. Edgar Hoover.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Anthony Towns]

Replies to -legal if you must make them. This list is for development
issues, not boring license pedantry.

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions?
> > Why isn't it enough to worry about the license?
> Because software isn't documentation?

Uh, you mean "documentation isn't software". And I'm sorry, but that's
quite debatable. It's quite a valid interpretation of "software" to be the
"stuff" that's implied by all the one's and zero's in memory however those
one's and zero's might be represented, as opposed to "hardware" which
actually has a physical existance. In that case anything stored in a .deb
is software, compared to, say, a book, which is fairly primitive hardware.

> Think of it this way: national security would be so much easier to
> maintain if we could just define cryptography as a weapon of war,
> equivalent to a nuclear device, "for the purposes of the import
> regulations".  We all know how well that worked.

Quite well, in that very little cryptography was exported from the United
States. It's unfortunate, in a sense, that unlike other tools of war,
cryptography is very easy to develop outside the US, so a block on
exports doesn't really do much good.

> Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be
> software "for the purposes of the DFSG".  But does it make sense?

Well, yes it does. It's even simple. "Any content you distribute in
the .deb must have a DFSG-free license", although you have to add the
careful proviso that the license itself shouldn't be considered "content"
or gets a special exemption, or something similar.

A question you could reasonably ask is "is it useful to have all the same
freedoms for documentation that we expect for programs?" And really, it
_is_ useful. Being able to cut out all the irrelevant bits of a document
and distribute an abbreviated version you can store on your PDA, or being
able to translate it, or being able to change it to match the changes in
your program, or being able to correct it on factual errors, or being
able to rip out bits of opinion which aren't interesting or useful to
you or the people to whom you want to make copies are all reasonable
and productive things to do.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif


pgp53akviYXfP.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free =?iso-8859-15?q?software in?= main)

[Anthony Towns]

Followups to -legal.

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:07:02AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I mentioned Thoreau in another thread, and the Bible in another; though
> they are free in every sense, perhaps that would be a place where we
> would need to be careful about modifications.  I'm sure John Stuart Mill
> would be horrified to find his works published with "errata" edited by
> J. Edgar Hoover.

There are many things that people are "free" to do which would be
horrifying to many. Publishing a book giving a scientific justification
for the intellectual inferiority of people with asian and african
backgrounds, or using gcc to write viruses and r00tkits, or using gnupg
and libgmp to design a nuclear device for deployment in Jerusalem or
Los Angeles.

The trick is to make sure that people can write rebuttals, or stop
physical actions that're wrong, not to stop people from exercising purely
intellectual freedoms, like rewriting documentation or using programs.

And we have the non-free section for people who don't agree with that
philosophy in a completely wholehearted manner (like the Bitkeeper
people, eg).

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Dependencies on libpgsql2.1

[Stefan Hornburg Racke]

Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 08:09:49PM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > update_output.txt says:
> > 
> > trying: postgresql 
> > skipped: postgresql (134+2)
> > got: 46+0: a-46
> > * alpha: courier-authpostgresql, dbf2pg, ddt-server, gda-postgres,
> >   gphotocoll, gtksql, guile-pg, libapache-mod-auth-pgsql, libch,
> >   libch-dev, libdbd-pg-perl, libgql0-driver-pg,
> >   libgtrans-postgresql-6-5-3, libnss-pgsql1, libpam-pgsql,
> >   mnogosearch-pgsql, netsaint-plugins-extra, netsaint-plugins-pgsql,
> >   perdition-postgresql, php3-cgi-pgsql, php3-pgsql, php4-pgsql,
> >   pike7-pg, proftpd-pgsql, python-pgsql, python-popy,
> >   python-psycopg, python1.5-popy, python1.5-psycopg,
> >   python2.1-pgsql, python2.1-popy, python2.1-psycopg,
> >   python2.2-pgsql, python2.2-popy, python2.2-psycopg, qttudo,
> >   trafstats, www-pgsql
> 
> To clarify, not all of these packages are buggy in sid. The ones (by
> source package) that have a problem appear to be something like this at
> the moment:
> 
>   courier-ssl dbf2sql ddt gql gtksql guile-pg libch libnss-pgsql
>   netsaint-plugins pike7-crypto psycopg python-pgsql qttudo

courier-ssl is already fixed and uploaded, it is just a matter of time
when the Debian admins allow it into main/unstable. postgresql has
to wait 8 days anyway.

Ciao
Racke

-- 
Think of it !

For projects and other business stuff please refer to COBOLT NetServices
(URL: http://www.cobolt.net; Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Phone: 0041-1-3884400)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Jeff Licquia]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 01:08, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Replies to -legal if you must make them. This list is for development
> issues, not boring license pedantry.
> 
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions?
> > > Why isn't it enough to worry about the license?
> > Because software isn't documentation?
> 
> Uh, you mean "documentation isn't software".

Yeah.

> And I'm sorry, but that's
> quite debatable. It's quite a valid interpretation of "software" to be the
> "stuff" that's implied by all the one's and zero's in memory however those
> one's and zero's might be represented, as opposed to "hardware" which
> actually has a physical existance. In that case anything stored in a .deb
> is software, compared to, say, a book, which is fairly primitive hardware.

It's certainly debatable; the thread alone should be evidence enough of
that.

I don't find such arguments very interesting, though.  It's certainly
easy to "solve" a problem by shifting the definitions around, bending a
few until they match.  I could try to "unbend" them by asking what the
practical difference there is between printed and electronic versions of
books, but that's all dictionary work, and doesn't really convey
anything useful.

It's more useful, I think, to look at it this way: there is a sense that
the freedom we insist upon for executable code may not necessarily be
appropriate for other kinds of information that may be found in a Debian
package.  Indeed, we already recognize at least one such distinction:
copyright notices and licenses, which are as "proprietary" as they
come.  Could there be more?  There is evidence that at least a
significant number of Debian people, not to mention a DFSG author and
the head of the FSF, believe there are more distinctions to be made.

> > Think of it this way: national security would be so much easier to
> > maintain if we could just define cryptography as a weapon of war,
> > equivalent to a nuclear device, "for the purposes of the import
> > regulations".  We all know how well that worked.
> 
> Quite well, in that very little cryptography was exported from the United
> States. It's unfortunate, in a sense, that unlike other tools of war,
> cryptography is very easy to develop outside the US, so a block on
> exports doesn't really do much good.

Except that most of the crypto technology you used to find on Italian
and Dutch FTP servers was either code from the USA or (rather poorly)
algorithms from the USA.  The really big example: PGP.  I think ssh was
probably the first really big non-US crypto app, and it postdated PGP by
a few years as I recall.

> Well, yes it does. It's even simple. "Any content you distribute in
> the .deb must have a DFSG-free license", although you have to add the
> careful proviso that the license itself shouldn't be considered "content"
> or gets a special exemption, or something similar.

Well, yes.  But does that really reflect the values of the project?  I
think that's the question at hand.

> A question you could reasonably ask is "is it useful to have all the same
> freedoms for documentation that we expect for programs?" And really, it
> _is_ useful. Being able to cut out all the irrelevant bits of a document
> and distribute an abbreviated version you can store on your PDA, or being
> able to translate it, or being able to change it to match the changes in
> your program, or being able to correct it on factual errors, or being
> able to rip out bits of opinion which aren't interesting or useful to
> you or the people to whom you want to make copies are all reasonable
> and productive things to do.

These are all good arguments.  If they hold, I would humbly suggest then
that we rename the "Debian Free Software Guidelines" to the "Debian Free
Content Guidelines".  This, it would seem, would be more direct.

I'm not sure that usefulness is a good criteria, however, for modeling
what we believe.  For example, it would have been exceedingly useful a
few years ago to link GPLed KDE to non-free Qt, but we didn't do it
then.  Usefulness is a good thing if it doesn't contradict other, more
important values.

(Yes, I know that I'm not answering the question of what other values we
hold that are more important.)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

hello

we sould stop this and start after woody again...

On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > > > I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings the best results and is the
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg01303.html
> > > 
> > > (I use apt-pupdate all the time now, it works for me (tm))
> > > 
> > Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use rsync with the uncompressed Packages
> > file and diffs aren't necessary. Or use a packer which doesn't hinder
> > rsync from saving (gzip --rsyncable). 
> 
> This isn't server friendly.

no. sorry. I must say this:

 We can use rsync on the client site. 
  -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
  -> make the check on the client site and
  -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
  -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts

With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.


Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
Wenn man sich naeher mit Linux beschaeftigt, wird man nie versuchen,
WinNT das Attribut "stabil" aufzudruecken! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])


pgp24zK6DHCTU.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Joseph Carter]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:36:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> These are all good arguments.  If they hold, I would humbly suggest then
> that we rename the "Debian Free Software Guidelines" to the "Debian Free
> Content Guidelines".  This, it would seem, would be more direct.

That would be a massive PITA given that so far such changes seem to
require a supermajority GR vote.  I think it's probably a good idea,
personally.

-- 
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sooner or later, BOOM!
 
 Knghtbrd: We have lots of whatevers.
 dark - In Debian?  Hell yeah we do!



pgpF4vqUsSRzv.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 04:49:25AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Otto Wyss) cum veritate scripsit:
> 
> > Packages.0 from 28-March is probably the newest and the smallest upgrade
> > is problably the diff for one day (209k uncompressed, 50k gzipped). On
> > the 28th rsync's download was 130k, today it was less than 100k. I don't
> > know why your uncompressed diff is bigger than what rsync says.
> 
> Also note that this is a one-time thing, and can be served 
> through normal http protocol, or ftp, or whatever.
> 
> rsync requires handholding from the server side.
> Which is unlikely to happen for every single server serving
> Debian mirror.

no. 

technical you can move this all to the client and use ftp/http for the
download of parts of the files..

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"How hard can it be, it's just an operating system?" -- Linus Torvalds


pgp2uWU9pT7sG.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Please help - problems with Ultra DMA

[David McNab]

I'm trying to enable Ultra DMA on a woody system running a 2.4.17
kernel.

I've enabled the applicable kernel options.

CPU is Athlon 1700XP
Motherboard is an InnoBD BD7300D, with:
VIA VT8366A (KT266A) North bridge
VIA VT8233A South Bridge

Disk drive: Maxtor 5T06086 60GB 7200 RPM

But when I type 'hdparm -d1 /dev/hda', I get

setting using_dma to 1 (on)
HDIO_SET_DMA failed: Operation not permitted
/dev/hda:
 using_dma=  0 (off)

and yes, I'm running 'hdparm' as root.

I'm writing to this list as a last resort, because the HOWTOs and manpages
say nothing about this, and Google brings up a whole bunch of unanswered
questions on mailing list archives (which I hope this won't end up as).

Can someone please shed some light?

Thanks so much in advance
David




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > >  - I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
> > > 
> > > Already exists.
> > 
> > Any references?
> 
> How about the debconf manual?

but sorry, we have some outdated translations in debconf templates
files. No translator know, if someone change the english template.
Please can we use gettext or something other without 'outdated
translations'? Joey ? 

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"it was hard to write, so it should be hard to read"


pgpJ83wRzeC7l.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > > I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings the best results and is the
> > 
> > [diffs for Packages files that is]
> > 
> > > wooo!!!
> > > 
> > > http://people.debian.org/~dancer/Packages-for-main-i386/
> > > 
> > > 
> > > # Time for suggesting is up, please implement.
> > 
> > Indeed, it appears it has been implemented more than once.
> > 
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg01303.html
> > 
> > (I use apt-pupdate all the time now, it works for me (tm))
> > 
> Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use rsync with the uncompressed Packages
> file and diffs aren't necessary. Or use a packer which doesn't hinder
> rsync from saving (gzip --rsyncable). 

right.

Now I search in the lists and found the old mails... 

Maybe someone like to read the mails and reply:
  http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg00757.html


Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"it was hard to write, so it should be hard to read"


pgp6S2IxrFfDb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 11:16:44AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include 
> Joey Hess wrote on Wed Mar 27, 2002 um 02:21:49PM:
> > That is a rather misleading summary of the situation, which as a
> > subscriber to debian-boot, you should understand better. Have you done
> > any testing of the proposed base-config patch?
> 
> Sure. Peter's patches are AFAIK not ready and I have a bad feeling about
> his dbootstrap modifications. I have a testing installation image with
> hacked base-config (my patches), but I was disappointed, since many
> debconf templates in called packages templates in the first base-config
> steps were not translated. It is too late to change them all, so I can
> only keep calling it a pity and hope that people mastering customised CD
> sets would contact me or Peter.

can you put this files online? 

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"Now let me explain why this makes intuitive sense."  --- Prof. Larry Wasserman


pgpJ7WkUkIsXF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Peter Mathiasson]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)

*sigh*
Do you always need to repeat this? Do you really think it's a waste of
bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
problem caused by a change in _Debian_?

Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
Is it at all possible? Useable?

-- 
Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu
GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228


pgpyCBIaqXJdT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> hello
> 
> we sould stop this and start after woody again...
> 
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > > > > I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings the best results and is the
> > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg01303.html
> > > > 
> > > > (I use apt-pupdate all the time now, it works for me (tm))
> > > > 
> > > Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use rsync with the uncompressed Packages
> > > file and diffs aren't necessary. Or use a packer which doesn't hinder
> > > rsync from saving (gzip --rsyncable). 
> > 
> > This isn't server friendly.
> 
> no. sorry. I must say this:
> 
>  We can use rsync on the client site. 
>   -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
>   -> make the check on the client site and
>   -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
>   -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> 
> With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.

I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
use/supported.

Other than that, it's very nice idea. I beleive there may be some
semi-implementations around somewhere. The concept is no different from
normal rsync.
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> of all intelligent people.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Julian Gilbey]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:26:25PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-08
> Severity: normal
> 
> Sorry, folks, but it is clear I have not enough time to work seriously
> on a package like dupload, which is important and should be handled
> with care.
> 
> I leave it to someone more active.

I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
and dput?

   Julian

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
  website: http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~jdg/
   Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see: http://people.debian.org/~jdg/
 Visit http://www.thehungersite.com/ to help feed the hungry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Please help - problems with Ultra DMA

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 08:13:28AM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> I'm trying to enable Ultra DMA on a woody system running a 2.4.17
> kernel.
> 
> I've enabled the applicable kernel options.
> 
> CPU is Athlon 1700XP
> Motherboard is an InnoBD BD7300D, with:
> VIA VT8366A (KT266A) North bridge
> VIA VT8233A South Bridge
> 
> Disk drive: Maxtor 5T06086 60GB 7200 RPM
> 
> But when I type 'hdparm -d1 /dev/hda', I get
> 
>   setting using_dma to 1 (on)
>   HDIO_SET_DMA failed: Operation not permitted
>   /dev/hda:
>using_dma=  0 (off)
> 
> and yes, I'm running 'hdparm' as root.

Ok, do the bootup messages say anything support for that chipset? On my
PIIX4 the kernel detects it and enables the maximum ultradma completely
automatically.

Check the VIA chipset support. Does it specifically mention this chipset?
Lastly, have you tried Andres big-ide patch, which twiddles support for
several chipsets not in the main kernel.

HTH,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> of all intelligent people.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Tille, Andreas]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:

> I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
> maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> and dput?
IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
  1. confusing for users
  2. waste of time for developers. They should spend their time
 to make one better tool instead of two good tools.

Kind regards

 Andreas.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141070: ITP: aptconf -- debconf infrastructure for setting up apt sources

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Mark Eichin wrote:
> I was questioning the "exactly one release which hasn't been touched
> in 14 months", rather than the actual number; it is a general rule
> that the first public exposure of something is *not* good enough for
> real use, and I find it hard to imagine 14 months going by without any
> fixes or improvements (or, frankly, security issues, it is a network
> tool :-)

I happen to know Horms has done some work on it, for example by porting
it to bind9 (which turned out to be somewhat of a disaster due to what
can only be described as insane overdesign in bind9 which makes it
very inflexible). Perhaps he should comment on this himself :)

Wichert.

-- 
  _
 /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Jérôme Marant]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:29:02AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> 
> > I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
> IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
>   1. confusing for users
>   2. waste of time for developers. They should spend their time
>  to make one better tool instead of two good tools.

  Welcome to the Free Software world.
  There are plenty of editors, MUA, MTA and so on because people
  want to have fun doing something (and often learning from this
  experience), even if it does already exist. 
  Same thing for simple tools.

-- 
Jérôme Marant


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

How about pptp-linux? (was: Why was libpam-pgsql removed from the woody lineup?)

[Paul Slootman]

On Mon 08 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:40:04AM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> > Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup.
> 
> It has not. Check madison's output on pandora.

On a related note:
No one's responded to my question as to why pptp-linux was removed.
Its last RC bug was resolved already by the version in testing before it
was removed from testing.  It's a pretty important package for those who
use ADSL, at least here in the Netherlands.

madison on pandora doesn't say anything about it...


Paul Slootman


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Wilmer van der Gaast]

Julian [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 09:40:47 +0100:
>  I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
>  maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
>  and dput?
>  
*Ugh* Why are those nifty Perl scripts going to be replaced by Python
stuff?

(Don't tell me someone's working on a Python debhelper rewrite...)

-- 
*=-+-__
   |[EMAIL PROTECTED]: _ Ugh! Nio2f says something: __
   : http://www.lintux.cx/ |/ of load debian gilbeine httpww.ma \
~~-+-=-+~+-=*


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:29:02AM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
> > maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> > and dput?
> 
> IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
>   1. confusing for users
>   2. waste of time for developers. They should spend their time
>  to make one better tool instead of two good tools.

The implementation language really does make a difference in the case of
dupload and dput, since it affects their configuration languages.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Joseph Carter]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:29:04AM +, Wilmer van der Gaast wrote:
> >  I am happy to take it.  But a question: with the more actively
> >  maintained dput now being quite mature, do we still need both dupload
> >  and dput?
> >  
> *Ugh* Why are those nifty Perl scripts going to be replaced by Python
> stuff?
> 
> (Don't tell me someone's working on a Python debhelper rewrite...)

bug, dupload, and lintian are getting Python rewrites because people who
like that laugnage think they can do better.  I'd have to agree that both
reportbug and dput are (though dput was not when I first tried it - weird
problems that have resolved themselves with a few more revisions..)  We'll
see about linda.

If you think you can make a better tool than one that exists, make it.  I
don't care what you write it in as long as it works well.  I don't think
anyone else does either.  =)

-- 
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  You want fries with that?
 
Since this database is not used for profit, and since entire works are not
published, it falls under fair use, as we understand it.  However, if any
half-assed idiot decides to make a profit off of this, they will need to
double check it all...
-- Notes included with the default fortunes database



pgpR6H8fCARvn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Tille, Andreas]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, [iso-8859-1] Jérôme Marant wrote:

>   Welcome to the Free Software world.
Hmm, I've thought I would just be here. :)

>   There are plenty of editors, MUA, MTA and so on because people
>   want to have fun doing something (and often learning from this
>   experience), even if it does already exist.
In my opinion several Editors, MUA etc. make sense because of there
different functionality, use of resources, etc.

>   Same thing for simple tools.
I can't see any real reason in which way two tools to upload Debian
packages make Debian better.  Please give an explanation for such
stubborn and stupid people like me.  In my eyes it would be a waste
of time for developers.

The same for bug/reportbug.  Reportbug is much more developed and
takes the user at his hand and lead through the report much more
sophisticated than bug.

It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
of you want to report a bug."  Now we have to say you could use
reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
trial.  Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
own super duper bug reporting tool.

You might have noticed that freedom every time has a price.  One
important part of this price in the Free Software world is developer
time.  I wanted to decrease this price a little bit.  May be this
opens the resource to write some software which does not exist yet.

Kind regards

 Andreas.

PS: BTW: I use dupload myself but I would not have any problem to
leave it in favour of dput if dupload would be dropped.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Please help - problems with Ultra DMA

[David McNab]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 21:13, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: 
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 08:13:28AM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> > I'm trying to enable Ultra DMA on a woody system running a 2.4.17
> > kernel.
> > 
> > I've enabled the applicable kernel options.
> > 
> > CPU is Athlon 1700XP
> > Motherboard is an InnoBD BD7300D, with:
> > VIA VT8366A (KT266A) North bridge
> > VIA VT8233A South Bridge
> > 
> > Disk drive: Maxtor 5T06086 60GB 7200 RPM
> > 
> > But when I type 'hdparm -d1 /dev/hda', I get
> > 
> > setting using_dma to 1 (on)
> > HDIO_SET_DMA failed: Operation not permitted
> > /dev/hda:
> >  using_dma=  0 (off)
> > 
> > and yes, I'm running 'hdparm' as root.
> 
> Ok, do the bootup messages say anything support for that chipset?

In the bootup msgs, I'm getting 'VP_IDE: Unknown VIA Southbridge", for
the VIA VT8233A chip.

> On my
> PIIX4 the kernel detects it and enables the maximum ultradma completely
> automatically.

I'm happy for you.

> Check the VIA chipset support. Does it specifically mention this chipset?

No.

> Lastly, have you tried Andres big-ide patch, which twiddles support for
> several chipsets not in the main kernel.

Can you give me a link?
Google gives lots of mentions, but not the actual patch itself.

Cheers
David

> 
> HTH,
> -- 
> Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> > Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> > nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> > of all intelligent people.
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Tille, Andreas]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:

> > IMHO two tools with the same functionality are
> >   1. confusing for users
> >   2. waste of time for developers. They should spend their time
> >  to make one better tool instead of two good tools.
>
> The implementation language really does make a difference in the case of
> dupload and dput, since it affects their configuration languages.
Hmm, this is in fact a reason I did not considered.
Thanks for the clarification.

Kind regards

Andreas.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141070: ITP: aptconf -- debconf infrastructure for setting up apt sources

[Horms]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:40:53AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Mark Eichin wrote:
> > I was questioning the "exactly one release which hasn't been touched
> > in 14 months", rather than the actual number; it is a general rule
> > that the first public exposure of something is *not* good enough for
> > real use, and I find it hard to imagine 14 months going by without any
> > fixes or improvements (or, frankly, security issues, it is a network
> > tool :-)
> 
> I happen to know Horms has done some work on it, for example by porting
> it to bind9 (which turned out to be somewhat of a disaster due to what
> can only be described as insane overdesign in bind9 which makes it
> very inflexible). Perhaps he should comment on this himself :)

(not sure where this thread came from but)

I did quite a lot of work on Super Sparrow earlier in the year, 
which was reflected in the CVS repository but never released.
So far as bind9 goes, I did get a patch working which I have
been using on my own servers since February.

-- 
Horms



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Anthony DeRobertis]

On Tuesday, April 9, 2002, at 02:36 , Jeff Licquia wrote:
Except that most of the crypto technology you used to find on Italian
and Dutch FTP servers was either code from the USA or (rather poorly)
algorithms from the USA.
Yes, that's because it was perfectly legal to print it out and 
mail it, but not to send it on a disk.

Don't ask. Our government was, until very recently, deluded that 
foreigners could not type. Or OCR.

It _did_ have a very detrimental effect on the adoption of 
cryptography and cryptographic research in general, though. So, 
arguable, it worked. Many projects (OpenBSD, FreeS/WAN, etc.) 
still refuse code from the US. It is arguable still working to a 
small extent.

This is, however, very off topic.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How about pptp-linux? (was: Why was libpam-pgsql removed from the woody lineup?)

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Paul Slootman wrote:
> It's a pretty important package for those who use ADSL, at least here
> in the Netherlands.

Not if they tweak there modem which improves things generally

> madison on pandora doesn't say anything about it...

Try madison on auric?

Wichert.

-- 
  _
 /[EMAIL PROTECTED] This space intentionally left occupied \
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Please help - problems with Ultra DMA

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:15:45AM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 21:13, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: 
> > Ok, do the bootup messages say anything support for that chipset?
> 
> In the bootup msgs, I'm getting 'VP_IDE: Unknown VIA Southbridge", for
> the VIA VT8233A chip.

Hmm, not a good sign.

> > Lastly, have you tried Andres big-ide patch, which twiddles support for
> > several chipsets not in the main kernel.
> 
> Can you give me a link?
> Google gives lots of mentions, but not the actual patch itself.

The only place I know is on kernel.org. Try /pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick

HTH,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> of all intelligent people.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How about pptp-linux? (was: Why was libpam-pgsql removed from the woody lineup?)

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Mon 08 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:40:04AM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> > > Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup.
> > 
> > It has not. Check madison's output on pandora.
> 
> On a related note:
> No one's responded to my question as to why pptp-linux was removed.
> Its last RC bug was resolved already by the version in testing before it
> was removed from testing.  It's a pretty important package for those who
> use ADSL, at least here in the Netherlands.

I heard a rumour that it was removed because kernel-patch-mppe is buggy
and pptp-linux claims in its description that it needs that. I have no
idea whether that's the real reason.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#141945: ITP: nel -- game engine library with 3d, net, sound, pacs, ai

[Loic Dachary \(OuoU\)]

Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-09
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: nel
  Version : 0.3.0
  Upstream Author : Nevrax Ltd. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.nevrax.org/
* License : GPL
  Description : game engine library with 3d, net, sound, pacs, ai

 NeL is a software platform for creating and running massively
 multi-user entertainment in a 3D environment over the Internet.  The
 NeL library is further divided into specific modules: network, ai, 3d
 and misc.

-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux inspiron.dachary.org 2.4.18 #1 Mon Apr 1 14:06:44 CEST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Guido Guenther]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:13:14PM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:
[..snip..] 
> The same for bug/reportbug.  Reportbug is much more developed and
> takes the user at his hand and lead through the report much more
> sophisticated than bug.
> 
> It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> of you want to report a bug."  Now we have to say you could use
> reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
> trial.  Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> own super duper bug reporting tool.
Oh, come on. People have different preferences so they use different
tools. We can (and should) make recommendations but thats all.
 -- Guido


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Jérôme Marant]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:13:14PM +0200, Tille, Andreas wrote:

> >   Same thing for simple tools.
> I can't see any real reason in which way two tools to upload Debian
> packages make Debian better.  Please give an explanation for such
> stubborn and stupid people like me.  In my eyes it would be a waste
> of time for developers.

  Developers decide what they want to do with their time. Period.
  You are not in a position to decide what you want them to work on. 

> 
> The same for bug/reportbug.  Reportbug is much more developed and
> takes the user at his hand and lead through the report much more
> sophisticated than bug.

  As long as someone is willing to develop bug, bug will exist.

> 
> It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> of you want to report a bug."  Now we have to say you could use
> reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
> trial.  Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> own super duper bug reporting tool.

  Stop talking about one's time. I won't repeat myself. 

> 
> You might have noticed that freedom every time has a price.  One
> important part of this price in the Free Software world is developer
> time.  I wanted to decrease this price a little bit.  May be this
> opens the resource to write some software which does not exist yet.

  Once again. Stop talking about developers's time. We are not
  working for a company, but for a free software project. 

-- 
Jérôme Marant


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

bootstrapping build process?

[Brian May]

Hello,

We have the somewhat unusual situation that Heimdal build depends on
kerberoskth and kerberos4kth build depends on Heimdal.

kerberos4kth depends on heimdal because, this way it can share some low
level libraries which are included in Heimdal. Libraries that don't have
anything to do with Kerberos in fact, such as libroken and libcomerr.
This depends isn't very satisfactory, ideally these libraries need to be
split up into a seperate source stream package, but that isn't going to
happen any time soon.

heimdal depends on kerberos4kth because it supports kerberos4.

This worked fine until the move to non-us.

However, now that the packages have moved into non-us, the builders are
confused because they don't know how to build either package, because it
depends on the other one being built first.

Mikael's suggestion was that I remove kerberos4 support from Heimdal,
and upload, hence allowing kerberoskth to build. When kerberos4kth is
built, I upload a new version of Heimdal with kerberos4kth re-enabled.
Althought this will break at least on other package while Heimdal
doesn't have kerberos4 support (arla), it shouldn't be for long.

I was hoping that this could be bypassed though, by telling the
autobuilders to initially resolve the dependancy for heimdal when
building kerberos4tkth from non-us/testing.

Is this possible?

Any comments?
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Please see the GNU FDL discussion on debian-legal

[Richard Braakman]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:02:47PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> While I don't regard the DFSG as already applying to
> documentation, the spirit of it is naturally extended to cover
> documentation.  I would suggest that the GFDL is a reasonable
> license to use for free documentation --- free as in 'free
> to use and modify', but also free as in 'free speech'.

If the GFDL were a "free to use and modify" license, then we would not
be having this discussion.  The problem is that the GFDL specifies
parts that we are _not_ free to modify, or even to delete.

> Several people said that they didn't want Debian
> documentation to be full of political rants.  They would
> like to reserve the right to delete the parts they don't
> like from the manuals they package.  But what is this but
> censorship?  And how is censorship compatible with liberty?

What you're advocating is the evil twin of censorship, namely forced speech.

Richard Braakman


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Joseph Carter]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> > of you want to report a bug."  Now we have to say you could use
> > reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
> > trial.  Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> > own super duper bug reporting tool.
> 
>   Stop talking about one's time. I won't repeat myself. 

He's talking about doing the right thing for users.  Novel concept I do
realize, but an important one all the same.

-- 
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   My opinions are always right
 
 *XawMMS*!?!
 you've gotta be KIDDING me



pgpi3uzbm3oMO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Michael Stone]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
>   Developers decide what they want to do with their time. Period.
>   You are not in a position to decide what you want them to work on. 

(Yawns) Once again, the defensive fury when someone asks a question.
Please, could you tell me how he was deciding the manner in which
someone could spend their time? Was he going to assign all developers a
task plan? Was he going to physically bar access to a computer until
such time as we followed his plan? Was he going to declare himself
emporer of the project and force his will by fiat? He *asked a frickin'
question* This is a rhetorical device employed to make people
examine the issue and *decide for themselves* whether there's merit in
the question raised. How are you in a position to tell him what
questions he might ask or opinions he might hold? People involved in a
project like this do occasionally need to ask themselves what their
goals are and whether their activities are furthering those goals. This
internal examination is not a bad thing. Period. 

-- 
Mike Stone


pgpH2HBjiN2gR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > > This isn't server friendly.
> > 
> > no. sorry. I must say this:
> > 
> >  We can use rsync on the client site. 
> >   -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
> >   -> make the check on the client site and
> >   -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
> >   -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> > 
> > With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
> 
> I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> use/supported.
> 
> Other than that, it's very nice idea. I beleive there may be some
> semi-implementations around somewhere. The concept is no different from
> normal rsync.

has someone a pointer? 

This is rsync, only the server is the client und the client work as
server... 

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"Da haben wir es, emacs ist eine Religon, kein Editor. Ich bin nicht bereit
 einer Goetze meinen Spreicher zu opfern." -- Werner Olschewski


pgpMi6mUUNMnB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Stephane Bortzmeyer]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100,
 Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
 a message of 24 lines which said:

> I am happy to take it. 

Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
first one, even before I formally orphaned it.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Jérôme Marant]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:28:14AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > It would be better for users if we would say: "Just use reportbug
> > > of you want to report a bug."  Now we have to say you could use
> > > reportbug or bug - just try it out and waste your time with this
> > > trial.  Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> > > own super duper bug reporting tool.
> > 
> >   Stop talking about one's time. I won't repeat myself. 
> 
> He's talking about doing the right thing for users.  Novel concept I do
> realize, but an important one all the same.

  Stop the bullshit. Recommending reportbug does not mean removing
  everything else that does the same job. Freedom is also about
  using the tool you prefer. Users have to know that there are
  elternatives.


-- 
Jérôme Marant


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Tille, Andreas]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, [iso-8859-1] Jérôme Marant wrote:

>   Stop talking about one's time. I won't repeat myself.
The discussion started because someone stated that he has not enough
time.  Moreover I talked about a second aspect: Confusing users.

I'll now save my time and stop posting to this thread.

Kind regards

 Andreas.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Jérôme Marant]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:35:00AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:14:55PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> >   Developers decide what they want to do with their time. Period.
> >   You are not in a position to decide what you want them to work on. 
> 
> (Yawns) Once again, the defensive fury when someone asks a question.
> Please, could you tell me how he was deciding the manner in which
> someone could spend their time? Was he going to assign all developers a
> task plan? Was he going to physically bar access to a computer until
> such time as we followed his plan? Was he going to declare himself
> emporer of the project and force his will by fiat? He *asked a frickin'
> question* This is a rhetorical device employed to make people
> examine the issue and *decide for themselves* whether there's merit in
> the question raised. How are you in a position to tell him what
> questions he might ask or opinions he might hold? People involved in a

  Stop this aggressive rant. Please read the thread and come back if you
  want to really discuss this a serious way.

> project like this do occasionally need to ask themselves what their
> goals are and whether their activities are furthering those goals. This
> internal examination is not a bad thing. Period. 

  Internal examination. How about talking about those tons of orphaned
  packages that noone uses rather that discussing about whether we have
  to keep one out of two small tools which have both many users? 

-- 
Jérôme Marant


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > use/supported.
> > 
> > Other than that, it's very nice idea. I beleive there may be some
> > semi-implementations around somewhere. The concept is no different from
> > normal rsync.
> 
> has someone a pointer? 
> 
> This is rsync, only the server is the client und the client work as
> server... 

Unfortunatly no. I just remember it as a passing comment while talking with
Andrew Tridgell (creator of rsync).

A google search turns up oblique references at:

http://rproxy.samba.org/doc/notes/server-generated-signatures.txt
http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public/rsync-specification.htm (near bottom)
http://pserver.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rproxy/doc/calu_paper/calu_paper.tex?annotate=1.1
http://olstrans.sourceforge.net/release/OLS2000-rsync/OLS2000-rsync.html

Someone on debianplanet suggests it may be a rumour. I don't know, I can't
find any precise patent numbers.

HTH,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> of all intelligent people.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How about pptp-linux? (was: Why was libpam-pgsql removed from the woody lineup?)

[Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > On Mon 08 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:40:04AM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> > > > Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup.
> > >
> > > It has not. Check madison's output on pandora.
> >
> > On a related note:
> > No one's responded to my question as to why pptp-linux was removed.
> > Its last RC bug was resolved already by the version in testing before it
> > was removed from testing.  It's a pretty important package for those who
> > use ADSL, at least here in the Netherlands.
>
> I heard a rumour that it was removed because kernel-patch-mppe is buggy
> and pptp-linux claims in its description that it needs that. I have no
> idea whether that's the real reason.

The problem (AFAI remember) is that pptp is able to communicate with M$
pptp clients when some features are enabled. From /etc/ppp/pptpd-options:

#require-chap
#require-chapms
#require-chapms-v2
#+chap
##+chapms
##+chapms-v2
##mppe-40
##mppe-128
##mppe-stateless

to have these options working and so to be able to accept M$ clients as
well (it might be that they can connect without it as well - I have not
checked) you need to apply the mppe kernel patch.

Again - pptp works fine without that, you only have to disable these
options in the default config file, which has been done:

pptpd (1.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low
[...]
  * Took out all MPPE options from pptpd-options (the options for pppd) as
long as the default pppd package does not support it.
Closes: #61651
  * Changed maintainer email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 -- Rene Mayrhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:17:51
+0100

*t


 Tomas Pospisek
 SourcePole   -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
 http://sourcepole.ch
 Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
 Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Michael Stone]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:57:45PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
>   Stop this aggressive rant. Please read the thread and come back if you
>   want to really discuss this a serious way.

Aggressive rant? You're the one who accused someone of somehow deciding
what people could work on. 

>   Internal examination. How about talking about those tons of orphaned
>   packages that noone uses rather that discussing about whether we have
>   to keep one out of two small tools which have both many users? 

An excellent point. We *should* be more aggressive about dumping things
no one wants to maintain. So why did you attack someone who raised a
question about one particular package? The question was answered, move
on. No one's preventing anyone from doing anything, just asking
questions.

-- 
Mike Stone


pgph04Lk79Emp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: How about pptp-linux? (was: Why was libpam-pgsql removed from the woody lineup?)

[Paul Slootman]

On Tue 09 Apr 2002, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > >
> > > On a related note:
> > > No one's responded to my question as to why pptp-linux was removed.
> > > Its last RC bug was resolved already by the version in testing before it
> > > was removed from testing.  It's a pretty important package for those who
> > > use ADSL, at least here in the Netherlands.
> >
> > I heard a rumour that it was removed because kernel-patch-mppe is buggy
> > and pptp-linux claims in its description that it needs that. I have no
> > idea whether that's the real reason.

Hmm, that must have been added at some point, it didn't have that in its
description when I last needed it (read: built the sid version on a
potato system for a client).
Besides, it never depended on kernel-patch-mppe.

> The problem (AFAI remember) is that pptp is able to communicate with M$
> pptp clients when some features are enabled. From /etc/ppp/pptpd-options:
[]
> to have these options working and so to be able to accept M$ clients as
> well (it might be that they can connect without it as well - I have not
> checked) you need to apply the mppe kernel patch.
> 
> Again - pptp works fine without that, you only have to disable these
> options in the default config file, which has been done:
> 
> pptpd (1.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low

Ummm... I was talking about pptp-linux (the client).
You seem to be talking about the server...



Paul Slootman


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)

> *sigh*
> Do you always need to repeat this? Do you really think it's a waste of
> bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> problem caused by a change in _Debian_?

> Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
> heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
> Is it at all possible? Useable?

Since when are Hurd fanatics concerned with minor details like 
usability and productivity?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


pgpmPOP3mCJrp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > > >  - I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
> > > > 
> > > > Already exists.
> > > 
> > > Any references?
> > 
> > How about the debconf manual?

> but sorry, we have some outdated translations in debconf templates
> files. No translator know, if someone change the english template.
> Please can we use gettext or something other without 'outdated
> translations'? Joey ? 

If you are concerned that translators receive automatic notification 
when a source debconf template has changed, that's an infrastructure 
problem.  Neither debconf nor gettext has automatic translator 
notifications built-in, and debconf's templates are not an inferior 
solution for not providing this.

Debconf, if used correctly, does correctly handle merging of outdated
translations.  See debconf-mergetemplate(1).

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


pgpgqEniZn6jl.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Jérôme Marant]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:46:48AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> >   Internal examination. How about talking about those tons of orphaned
> >   packages that noone uses rather that discussing about whether we have
> >   to keep one out of two small tools which have both many users? 
> 
> An excellent point. We *should* be more aggressive about dumping things
> no one wants to maintain. So why did you attack someone who raised a
> question about one particular package? The question was answered, move

  You got me wrong. I talked about packages noone uses, not about
  packages noone wants to maintain, this is quite different.
  On the one side, there are packages that noone maintains and 
  that noone cares about their removal. On the other side, there
  are unmaintained packages that have a lot of users. I'm not
  in favour of removing the latter. 

> on. No one's preventing anyone from doing anything, just asking
> questions.

  Alright. Let's forget about this.

-- 
Jérôme Marant


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > > use/supported.

Possibly it was only patented in the non-free united companies of america.
So it might well go into non-free (the inversion of the meaning comes straight 
out of 1984).
*t


 Tomas Pospisek
 SourcePole   -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
 http://sourcepole.ch
 Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
 Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Please help - problems with Ultra DMA

[Scott Dier]

* David McNab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020409 03:11]:
> VIA VT8366A (KT266A) North bridge
> VIA VT8233A South Bridge

You didn't set the correct kernel options:

VP_IDE: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 89
VP_IDE: chipset revision 6
VP_IDE: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with
idebus=xx
VP_IDE: VIA vt8233 (rev 00) IDE UDMA100 controller on pci00:11.1
ide0: BM-DMA at 0xfc00-0xfc07, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:pio
ide1: BM-DMA at 0xfc08-0xfc0f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:pio

Go look again and be sure you enabled stuff.  I'm actually using the
2.4.18-k7 kernel image.

-- 
Scott Dier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.ringworld.org/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Julian Gilbey]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:43:20PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:40:47AM +0100,
>  Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote 
>  a message of 24 lines which said:
> 
> > I am happy to take it. 
> 
> Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
> need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
> first one, even before I formally orphaned it.

Fine with me!

   Julian

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
  website: http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~jdg/
   Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see: http://people.debian.org/~jdg/
 Visit http://www.thehungersite.com/ to help feed the hungry


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions?
> > Why isn't it enough to worry about the license?

> Because software isn't documentation?

> Think of it this way: national security would be so much easier to
> maintain if we could just define cryptography as a weapon of war,
> equivalent to a nuclear device, "for the purposes of the import
> regulations".  We all know how well that worked.

> Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be
> software "for the purposes of the DFSG".  But does it make sense?

The alternative is that documentation will be treated as something we 
are enjoined by the Social Contract from distributing at all.  Debian 
Will Remain 100% Free Software.  This may have been poor phrasing on 
the part of the authors, but there is *not* a clear consensus that this 
is the case; which means that your only remedy is a GR to modify/clarify 
the Social Contract and/or the DFSG, and until that happens, no amount 
of debate here will prevent packages from being bounced out of main if 
their documentation licenses do not meet the DFSG.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


pgpBxFsXZPiql.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:24:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > > > use/supported.
> 
> Possibly it was only patented in the non-free united companies of america.
> So it might well go into non-free (the inversion of the meaning comes 
> straight out of 1984).

Well, a lot of patents are recognised across borders. And someone could
write it in a country that doesn't recognise software patents, but the DeCSS
stuff showed that that's not safe either.

Software patents are just plain irritating.
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> of all intelligent people.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Jeff Licquia]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 08:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be
> > software "for the purposes of the DFSG".  But does it make sense?
> 
> The alternative is that documentation will be treated as something we 
> are enjoined by the Social Contract from distributing at all.  Debian 
> Will Remain 100% Free Software.  This may have been poor phrasing on 
> the part of the authors, but there is *not* a clear consensus that this 
> is the case;

I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
phrased; where we differ is on how to clarify it.  In the absense of
such a resolution, I don't think we're forced to woodenly apply those
broken principles; instead, we try to fix them first.

> which means that your only remedy is a GR to modify/clarify 
> the Social Contract and/or the DFSG, and until that happens, no amount 
> of debate here will prevent packages from being bounced out of main if 
> their documentation licenses do not meet the DFSG.

A GR appears necessary no matter what route we choose.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Subversion packages

[Sander Smeenk]

Quoting Marcelo E. Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

> http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/packages/subversion/

Much appreciated!! But I have two things:

1) that directory isn't apt-gettable, the Packages.gz file is
   missing... try "deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/ ./" for 
   an aptable version :)
   
2) subversion-{server,client} depends on apache2-modules, but the
   newly released apache2 packages by thom do not provide
   apache2-modules, they are somewhere in the apache2 package.
   You can safely --force-depends install the packages though...

Now let's lart Thom for compiling apache2 against libdb3, instead of 
libdb4, which renders subversion unusable :)

Regards,
Sander.

-- 
| I doubt, therefore I might be.
| 1024D/08CEC94D - 34B3 3314 B146 E13C 70C8  9BDB D463 7E41 08CE C94D


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [2002-04-06] Release Status Update

[Radovan Garabik]

On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello again,
> 
> Over the past few weeks most of the following packages have been removed
> from the upcoming release due to bugs and such [0].
> 
> efingerd   

this bug has been closed already for some time, and the
security issue concerned only potato anyway

>  xtell
>

worst security issues has already been fixed in an uploaded package,
I have not closed the bug since point 2) is not fixed yet (will
be rather quickly). Gee, I do not like people who submit
zillions of unrelated bugs in one bugreport :-)
 

-- 
 ---
| Radovan Garabik http://melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__garabik @ melkor.dnp.fmph.uniba.sk |
 ---
Antivirus alert: file .signature infected by signature virus.
Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Apache2 Debian Packages

[Sander Smeenk]

Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> As those of you who read slashdot know, Apache 2.0 was released last night.
> deb http://pandora.debian.org/~thom/apache2 ./

Very nice :)   But I have 2 things:

1) Where's apache2-modules?  Subversion depends on them!
2) Why is apache2 compiled against libdb3, and not libdb4?
   Imho apache2 _must_ be compiled against lidb4, new technology
   shouldn't rely on old libs ;))

Regards,
Sadner.

-- 
| One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.
| 1024D/08CEC94D - 34B3 3314 B146 E13C 70C8  9BDB D463 7E41 08CE C94D


pgpmtmClD3vfT.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:49:49AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> 
> > *sigh*
> > Do you always need to repeat this? Do you really think it's a waste of
> > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
> 
> > Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
> > heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
> > Is it at all possible? Useable?
> 
> Since when are Hurd fanatics concerned with minor details like 
> usability and productivity?

I've always been, so do all other Hurd developers AFAIK. Why do you
think we don't care about usability and productivity? Or do you just
like spreading lies? 

It's actually the other way around, almost all recent development in
the Hurd is to make it more usable. AFAIK the Hurd developers always
have been very productive. We never cared much about speed etc,
because we are more concerned about usability and productivity.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgp1HmaFa9qgU.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> 
> *sigh*
> Do you always need to repeat this? 

Yes.

> Do you really think it's a waste of
> bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
 
First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
software, vmware isn't. This is clearly the wrong list, either go to
some vmware list or go to the glibc lists if you think it's a bug in
glibc.

And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.

> Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
> heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
> Is it at all possible? Useable?

I got GNU/Linux to boot on plex86. The Hurd doesn't work on it at the
moment (plex86 development is a bit stalled at the moment). IMHO it's
very usable, bochs is more stable but slower. For all supported
systems read the documentation of the packages.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpZ7c6Pu8ykD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Subversion packages

[Marcelo E. Magallon]

Hi,

>> Sander Smeenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

 >  1) that directory isn't apt-gettable, the Packages.gz file is
 > missing... try "deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/ ./" for 
 > an aptable version :)

http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/packages/subversion/ sid/i386/

 should work.

 >  2) subversion-{server,client} depends on apache2-modules, but the
 > newly released apache2 packages by thom do not provide
 > apache2-modules, they are somewhere in the apache2 package.
 > You can safely --force-depends install the packages though...

 nope, the client doesn't, only the server.  And the depencency is
 probably my mistake, I didn't actually search for something like an
 apache2 policy...

 > Now let's lart Thom for compiling apache2 against libdb3, instead of 
 > libdb4, which renders subversion unusable :)

 Again, I don't know about this...

 Thanks,

 Marcelo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> hello
> 
> we sould stop this and start after woody again...
> 
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use rsync with the uncompressed Packages
> > > file and diffs aren't necessary. Or use a packer which doesn't hinder
> > > rsync from saving (gzip --rsyncable). 
> > 
> > This isn't server friendly.
> 
> no. sorry. I must say this:
> 
>  We can use rsync on the client site. 
>   -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
>   -> make the check on the client site and
>   -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
>   -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> 
> With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.

IMHO it's better to make just diffs instead of extra rsync-checksum
files and then having to download all parts of those files.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpmOLJmDBDJh.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please help - problems with Ultra DMA - Solved

[David McNab]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 22:38, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:15:45AM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 21:13, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: 
> > > Ok, do the bootup messages say anything support for that chipset?
> > 
> > In the bootup msgs, I'm getting 'VP_IDE: Unknown VIA Southbridge", for
> > the VIA VT8233A chip.
> 
> Hmm, not a good sign.
> 
> > > Lastly, have you tried Andres big-ide patch, which twiddles support for
> > > several chipsets not in the main kernel.
> > 
> > Can you give me a link?
> > Google gives lots of mentions, but not the actual patch itself.
> 
> The only place I know is on kernel.org. Try /pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick

Thanks to Vojtech Pavlik's suggestion, I've upgraded to 2.4.19-pre5 and
now enjoy 35MB/s instead of 7MB/s on /dev/hda! - full UDMA :)

And, 'hdparm -d1 /dev/hda' now works!

Thanks for help, all

Cheers
David


> 
> HTH,
> -- 
> Martijn van Oosterhouthttp://svana.org/kleptog/
> > Ignorance continues to thrive when intelligent people choose to do
> > nothing.  Speaking out against censorship and ignorance is the imperative
> > of all intelligent people.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Steve M. Robbins]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> > 
> > *sigh*
> > Do you always need to repeat this? 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > Do you really think it's a waste of
> > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
>  
> First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> software, vmware isn't. This is clearly the wrong list, either go to
> some vmware list or go to the glibc lists if you think it's a bug in
> glibc.
> 
> And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.

I'll bet they don't waste nearly as much of your time as composing
your juvenile "go away" replies does.

-S
-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:02:14AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > > > >  - I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Already exists.
> > > > 
> > > > Any references?
> > > 
> > > How about the debconf manual?
> 
> > but sorry, we have some outdated translations in debconf templates
> > files. No translator know, if someone change the english template.
> > Please can we use gettext or something other without 'outdated
> > translations'? Joey ? 
> 
> If you are concerned that translators receive automatic notification 
> when a source debconf template has changed, that's an infrastructure 
> problem.  Neither debconf nor gettext has automatic translator 
> notifications built-in, and debconf's templates are not an inferior 
> solution for not providing this.

I know this. And as infrastructure we can use the ddtp.

I have already work on this. But in the last weeks I don't have real
time and I break this sub project.

> Debconf, if used correctly, does correctly handle merging of outdated
> translations.  See debconf-mergetemplate(1).

ok. thanks. I don't know this. Maybe I must RTFM... 


Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
Ja, aber der Bootvorgang ist doch so sch?n mit den Wolken und so. Das
st?rt meiner Meinung nach garnicht. (Martin Heinz zum Rebooten von M$-W)


pgp8vSydUMyki.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [2002-04-06] Release Status Update

[Josip Rodin]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:13:45PM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote:
> I have not closed the bug since point 2) is not fixed yet (will
> be rather quickly). Gee, I do not like people who submit
> zillions of unrelated bugs in one bugreport :-)

You now have the "clone" command to fix this.

http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=109426&msg=10

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Stephen Frost]

* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Do you always need to repeat this? 
> 
> Yes.

..

> And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.

Filtering them out would save you more time, bandwidth and processing
power than replying in the manner you do.  If your concern is with
bandwidth, processing power and time then deleting based on a subject
filter of 'vmware' would be the best solution.

If you'd rather waste more of your time, bandwidth and processing power
then continue to reply to posts which talk about vmware, or Oracle or
any number of non-free-software that people use.

I seriously doubt there is anything which could be done to stop the
posts from being sent here short of moderating the list and having a
moderator who thinks they shouldn't be here.  I don't think the list
should be moderated myself, nor do I feel the posts are inappropriate.

Stephen


pgpldCYY2GRp7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#141847: O: dupload -- Utility to upload Debian packages.

[Josip Rodin]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:29:55PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > I am happy to take it. 
> > 
> > Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
> > need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
> > first one, even before I formally orphaned it.
> 
> Fine with me!

doogie also replied with an ITA, but several hours late. Sorry :)

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Anthony Towns]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:08:18AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
> phrased; [...]

Uh, no, there's not. That you don't understand the terms, or misinterpret
them, doesn't mean they absolutely need to be changed.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Anthony Towns]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > Do you really think it's a waste of
> > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
> First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> software, vmware isn't.

Fourth, we support the use of non-free software, and we provide
infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for non-free software packages.

If you don't agree with Debian's social contract, perhaps you should be
part of a project that's more philosophically acceptable to you.

Regards,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``BAM! Science triumphs again!'' 
-- http://www.angryflower.com/vegeta.gif


pgpnIylIf5NpO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:10:20AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> > bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
> 
> Filtering them out would save you more time, bandwidth and processing
> power than replying in the manner you do.  If your concern is with
> bandwidth, processing power and time then deleting based on a subject
> filter of 'vmware' would be the best solution.

That isn't my biggest concern.

> If you'd rather waste more of your time, bandwidth and processing power
> then continue to reply to posts which talk about vmware, or Oracle or
> any number of non-free-software that people use.

I don't think that advocating free software is a waste of those
things.

> I seriously doubt there is anything which could be done to stop the
> posts from being sent here short of moderating the list and having a
> moderator who thinks they shouldn't be here.  I don't think the list
> should be moderated myself, nor do I feel the posts are inappropriate.

I don't think it's wrong saying that if they want to keep using their
favourite non-free software they should post to some other
mailinglist and that if they want help from Debian they should use
free alternatives which are in Debian.

(Well, somebody thought saying that is such a bad thing that he asked
DAM to put my application on hold.)

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpJoziPUi0oc.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Peter Mathiasson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> software, vmware isn't. This is clearly the wrong list, either go to
> some vmware list or go to the glibc lists if you think it's a bug in
> glibc.

Okay. So now we're not going to discuss things because they are not
debian specific?

> And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
> 
> > Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
> > heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
> > Is it at all possible? Useable?
> 
> I got GNU/Linux to boot on plex86. The Hurd doesn't work on it at the
> moment (plex86 development is a bit stalled at the moment). IMHO it's
> very usable, bochs is more stable but slower. For all supported
> systems read the documentation of the packages.

plex86 is Debian specific isn't it? Because, if it's not, I'm sure
plex86 got some mailing list where you can move this.

-- 
Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu
GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228


pgpfFrNqoUaqg.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Stephen Frost]

* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> That isn't my biggest concern.

Apparently.  This implies, of course, that the additional bandwidth due
to those messages isn't the real problem.

> I don't think that advocating free software is a waste of those
> things.

Advocating free software isn't.  That has nothing to do with the
conversation at hand, however.

> I don't think it's wrong saying that if they want to keep using their
> favourite non-free software they should post to some other
> mailinglist and that if they want help from Debian they should use
> free alternatives which are in Debian.

I don't believe it's wrong to ask questions on a debian list when a
change in debian causes a change in some application, be it a part of
Debian or not.  I do think it's wrong to tell people to not ask
questions on a debian list about a change in Debian.

Stephen


pgptuBgIV0NDe.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Jeff Licquia]

On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 10:27, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:08:18AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
> > phrased; [...]
> 
> Uh, no, there's not. That you don't understand the terms, or misinterpret
> them, doesn't mean they absolutely need to be changed.

I didn't claim a consensus on whether they should be *changed*; I
claimed a consensus on whether they should be *clarified*.  A
clarification that "documentation = software for the purposes of the
DFSG", or Branden's proposals in debian-legal, wouldn't be changes, for
example.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: O: gnu-standards -- GNU coding standards

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:36:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> It's more useful, I think, to look at it this way: there is a sense that
> the freedom we insist upon for executable code may not necessarily be
> appropriate for other kinds of information that may be found in a Debian
> package.

I reject this premise entirely.

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/debian-legal-200112/msg00250.html

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|One man's theology is another man's
Debian GNU/Linux   |belly laugh.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-- Robert Heinlein
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |


pgp6SJ8obvCPD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Wilmer van der Gaast]

Jeroen [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:30:54 +0200:
>  And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
>  bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
>  
Writing these posts probably takes (wastes) even more time.

>  I got GNU/Linux to boot on plex86.
>  
It'll reduce my XP1700+'s power to a K6/400, I'm told. What's the fun in
that? Not to mention a complete emulator like Bochs..

I think you should build your own computer next time. There's probably a
lot of non-free stuff in it!

-- 
*=-+-__
   |[EMAIL PROTECTED]: _ Ugh! Nio2f says something: __
   : http://www.lintux.cx/ |/ the but a bocelope is all supporg \
~~-+-=-+~+-=*


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:34:43PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > no. sorry. I must say this:
> > 
> >  We can use rsync on the client site. 
> >   -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
> >   -> make the check on the client site and
> >   -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
> >   -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> > 
> > With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
> 
> IMHO it's better to make just diffs instead of extra rsync-checksum
> files and then having to download all parts of those files.

you propose to add 'some' diff files for all files on ftp-master.d.o? 

With rsync we need only one rsync-checksum file per normal file and
all apt's need only download the neededs parts.

You get the point?

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"Like sex in high school, everyone's talking about Linux, but is anyone 
 doing it?"  -- Computer Currents


pgpA31TJ6OvFp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Michael Bramer]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:25:04PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > > use/supported.
> > > 
> > > Other than that, it's very nice idea. I beleive there may be some
> > > semi-implementations around somewhere. The concept is no different from
> > > normal rsync.
> > 
> > has someone a pointer? 
> > 
> > This is rsync, only the server is the client und the client work as
> > server... 
> 
> Unfortunatly no. I just remember it as a passing comment while talking with
> Andrew Tridgell (creator of rsync).
> 
> A google search turns up oblique references at:
> 
> http://rproxy.samba.org/doc/notes/server-generated-signatures.txt

 'The current RProxy specifications at sourceforge.net do not have
  the client calculating the signature. Instead, the client gets the
  signature from the server when it first downloads the file, and saves
  this signature (just like an ETag) for use when re-loading the file.
  This mechanism was chosen only because of possible patent problems
  with client calculation of signature. These patent problems may need
  to be investigated.'

 Read the mails. The checksum-file is _download_ from the server and
 _not_ calculated from the client!

> http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public/rsync-specification.htm (near 
> bottom)

the same...

> http://pserver.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rproxy/doc/calu_paper/calu_paper.tex?annotate=1.1

the same...

> http://olstrans.sourceforge.net/release/OLS2000-rsync/OLS2000-rsync.html

the opposite point.

maybe I don't understand some points...
3 times server generateted checksums are forbidden by partent and one
time a client generateted checksums are forbidden...

Gruss
Grisu
-- 
Michael Bramer  -  a Debian Linux Developer  http://www.debsupport.de
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]  -- Linux Sysadmin   -- Use Debian Linux
"GNU does not eliminate all the world's problems, only some of them."
- Richard Stallman - The GNU Manifesto, 1985


pgpKim1jMD89C.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > Do you really think it's a waste of
> > > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
> > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> > software, vmware isn't.
> 
> Fourth, we support the use of non-free software, and we provide
> infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for non-free software packages.

Vmware isn't even in Debian. This is truely a problem of vmware
itself. IMHO this isn't something for debian-devel. Or do you want to
make debian-devel a list where all Debian users can come with their
problems running buggy non-free software?

> If you don't agree with Debian's social contract, perhaps you should be
> part of a project that's more philosophically acceptable to you.

I agreed with the social contract, but I think it should be
changed. Some parts are just wrong, other things are confusing. 

To talk about the social contract, our priorities are free software
and our users. Somebody is having problems with non-free
software. What is wrong with telling him that the kind of problems
he's having is normal with non-free software and say that there are 2
free alternatives in Debian which would probably not have those
problems?

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpQ32X6qRe7Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:46:33AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > That isn't my biggest concern.
> 
> Apparently.  This implies, of course, that the additional bandwidth due
> to those messages isn't the real problem.

I never claimed that. I was asked if I considered those messages a
waste of bandwith, I said that I think it's waste. Is it just so
difficult to *read*?

> > I don't think it's wrong saying that if they want to keep using their
> > favourite non-free software they should post to some other
> > mailinglist and that if they want help from Debian they should use
> > free alternatives which are in Debian.
> 
> I don't believe it's wrong to ask questions on a debian list when a
> change in debian causes a change in some application, be it a part of
> Debian or not.  

The answer was already given, it was a vmware-specific problem.

> I do think it's wrong to tell people to not ask
> questions on a debian list about a change in Debian.

The question I replied to was truely vmware-specific. The guy I
replied to doesn't make such a problem of my mail than almost anyone
else on the list.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpiEVQyOQIDO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free =?iso-8859-15?q?software in?= main)

[Dale Scheetz]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines". 
> > > 
> > > Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
> > > in Debian.
> > 
> > Documentation isn't software.  Neither are conffiles, icons, etc.  So,
> > if we're to be true to our creed, here's what we have to do:
> 
> Ahh, but icons which fail the DFSG have been declared non-free in the
> past.  So we have (still more) precedent for applying the DFSG to
> non-software.

The point being made, which everyone is so carfully ignoring is the word
"Software" in the title.

These are software guidelines, nothing more. They don't even define the
whole of Debian, just the software.

The differences are obvious. While my book is written in LaTeX, and the
image file (ps or pdf) is constructed from these source files via the use
of Make, it is very different from what we call software. The difference
is in the target. The output of the LaTeX "compiler" is intended to be
viewed by a human being, who, hopefully, has the capability of not
following written instructions or ignoring contrary philosophies. The
output of the C compiler is intended for a specific CPU, and all
instructions are "forced" upon that CPU with no choice over which it will
execute and which it will ignore (thank goodness for that ;-)

My freedom is enhanced by being able to make those instructions for the
CPU be just what I want them to be. (This machine IS after all my slave)
My modification needs extend over the complete work as defined by the
source, and we can all see just why this should be.

The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
the book's content, but has every reason to be "protected" from
modification. These particular words have a value that must be protected.

The front and back cover text may be used to give credit to someone who
provided substantial financial support during the time of the works
production. Without requiring such credit, other publishers could benefit
from the work without giving the proper credit.

None of these issues force behavior on the reader, like code does for the
CPU. So no "freedoms" are being infringed upon by forcing the text to
remain unchanged. The freedom of expression of the author is what is being
protected by this clause. The freedom to express opinion without having
those statements twisted into something completely different is one of the
reasons for the creation of the copyright in the first place.

If you insist on judging documentation against the same standard as
software, the results are always going to be wrong.

Just to contradict my previous statement:

The GPL allows (demands) two invarient sections of the original source;
the copyright statement, and the license statement. Requiring these
sections to be invarient does not make the license non-free. These
sections are, in fact, necessarily invarient if the author's and the
user's rights are to be protected.

Allowing non-technical content to be made invarient does nothing to
restrict the freedom to modify the parts of the document that are a
technical description. 

Using my book as an example, there have been many patches submitted either
for spelling or content. I have included all those that were correct ;-)
I have never seen the book published with changes that were not made by
me, so it isn't clear to me just what the pressing modification
requirement is in the first place...

Luck,

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-   Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux"  _-_-_-_-_-_-
_-_-
_- aka   Dale Scheetz   Phone:   1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_-   Flexible Software  11000 McCrackin Road  _-
_-   e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL  32308_-
_-_-
_-_-_-_-_-  Released under the GNU Free Documentation License   _-_-_-_-
  available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:34:35PM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> > software, vmware isn't. This is clearly the wrong list, either go to
> > some vmware list or go to the glibc lists if you think it's a bug in
> > glibc.
> 
> Okay. So now we're not going to discuss things because they are not
> debian specific?

No.
 
> > > Even though I haven't tried plex86 and bochs in about a year I've never
> > > heard anyone run Windows XP, FreeBSD, etc on any of them.
> > > Is it at all possible? Useable?
> > 
> > I got GNU/Linux to boot on plex86. The Hurd doesn't work on it at the
> > moment (plex86 development is a bit stalled at the moment). IMHO it's
> > very usable, bochs is more stable but slower. For all supported
> > systems read the documentation of the packages.
> 
> plex86 is Debian specific isn't it? Because, if it's not, I'm sure
> plex86 got some mailing list where you can move this.

True, but then other people don't know that I've answered his question
and might answer his question too if they aren't subscribed to the
plex86 list.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpxpvg7OeZ2r.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian's problems, Debian's future

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Michael Bramer wrote:

>   -> make the check on the client site and
>   -> download the file partly per ftp/http 
>   -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> 
> With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.

Rumor around rsync circles is that this is patented.

Jason


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Stephen Frost]

* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I agreed with the social contract, but I think it should be
> changed. Some parts are just wrong, other things are confusing. 

That certainly looks like a contradiction to me.  How do you agree with
it if you feel it's wrong?

> To talk about the social contract, our priorities are free software
> and our users. Somebody is having problems with non-free
> software. What is wrong with telling him that the kind of problems
> he's having is normal with non-free software and say that there are 2
> free alternatives in Debian which would probably not have those
> problems?

Nothing is wrong with that.  However, that isn't what you said.

* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)

That's the original message you sent which *is* wrong.  Debian supports
its users regardless of if they run non-free software or not.  In fact,
we specifically support their running of non-free software and we
provide infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for them.

Stephen


pgp00yn57nkIB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > > glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> > > software, vmware isn't.
> > 
> > Fourth, we support the use of non-free software, and we provide
> > infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for non-free software packages.
> 
> Vmware isn't even in Debian. This is truely a problem of vmware
> itself. IMHO this isn't something for debian-devel. Or do you want to
> make debian-devel a list where all Debian users can come with their
> problems running buggy non-free software?

What if they turned out to be caused by bugs in our free software?
Telling them to go away then would be foolish, since we want to know
about bugs, no matter how they were caused.

Apparently this breakage was caused by a change in glibc. As a general
rule, changes in the C library should not break any software, whether
free or non-free. Sometimes this is not the case (e.g. StarOffice's use
of private glibc symbols a few years ago), but bugs should be
investigated rather than casually dismissed.

> To talk about the social contract, our priorities are free software
> and our users. Somebody is having problems with non-free
> software. What is wrong with telling him that the kind of problems
> he's having is normal with non-free software and say that there are 2
> free alternatives in Debian which would probably not have those
> problems?

Because it runs the risk of hiding real problems.

Given that he'd already tried the free software and found it unusable
for his purposes, it also sounds like you need to pick better times to
advocate free software, or else spend your time improving that software
instead so that you have a better chance of being able to advocate it in
the future. *That's* what debian-devel is about - a list for improving
the technical quality of Debian. Turning it into advocacy and other
non-technical debates is the very reason why many of our best developers
don't even bother to subscribe to this list any more.

(In that spirit, please direct non-technical followups to debian-project
or private mail.)

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)

As this might be a bit too offensive I apologize if you read it that
way. Here is an alternative wording which says what I actually meant
(I never try to write a mail quickly just before I got to bed):

This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being
slower) but you probably won't have the same problems you're having
now. We can also help you with problems you are having with plex86 and
bochs. If you insist on using vmware, we can't help you, you should go
to the vmware guys when you've got problems.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpXha1GWjo4L.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:21:49PM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > > > glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> > > > software, vmware isn't.
> > > 
> > > Fourth, we support the use of non-free software, and we provide
> > > infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for non-free software packages.
> > 
> > Vmware isn't even in Debian. This is truely a problem of vmware
> > itself. IMHO this isn't something for debian-devel. Or do you want to
> > make debian-devel a list where all Debian users can come with their
> > problems running buggy non-free software?
> 
> What if they turned out to be caused by bugs in our free software?
> Telling them to go away then would be foolish, since we want to know
> about bugs, no matter how they were caused.
> 
> Apparently this breakage was caused by a change in glibc. As a general
> rule, changes in the C library should not break any software, whether
> free or non-free. Sometimes this is not the case (e.g. StarOffice's use
> of private glibc symbols a few years ago), but bugs should be
> investigated rather than casually dismissed.

Did you *read* the thread? The cause of the problem was already found,
it was a vmware bug, vmware already provided patches but not for the
version Donald was using. You don't have to tell me how glibc works, I
develop it.

> > To talk about the social contract, our priorities are free software
> > and our users. Somebody is having problems with non-free
> > software. What is wrong with telling him that the kind of problems
> > he's having is normal with non-free software and say that there are 2
> > free alternatives in Debian which would probably not have those
> > problems?
> 
> Because it runs the risk of hiding real problems.
> 
> Given that he'd already tried the free software and found it unusable
> for his purposes, it also sounds like you need to pick better times to
> advocate free software, or else spend your time improving that software
> instead so that you have a better chance of being able to advocate it in
> the future. 

I agree that my reply was not very friendly, I apologized for that. I
was actually a bit tired and very busy skimming through all my mails
and replying too fast (I know it's not a reason to be unfriendly, but
it was the cause).

> *That's* what debian-devel is about - a list for improving
> the technical quality of Debian. Turning it into advocacy and other
> non-technical debates is the very reason why many of our best developers
> don't even bother to subscribe to this list any more.

I think that's also because of other things, see below.

> (In that spirit, please direct non-technical followups to debian-project
> or private mail.)

(This is for the list in general, not personally to you)
And let people just say false things without correcting it? Really, I
already wrote a couple of replies telling people that they should read
first what I've actually said or what the problem was.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpPjFa2kE3mD.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Please see the GNU FDL discussion on debian-legal

[Thomas Hood]

Joey Hess wrote:
>> Protecting the freedom of this form of speech requires a somewhat
>> different strategy from the one used to protect the freedom to copy
>> source code.

> Freedom of software and freedom of speech are two entirely
> different animals, and attempting to confuse them as you do
> [...] just muddies the waters.

I agree that they are different.

I wasn't confusing the two ... I just chose my words in order
to concede the point that it is impossible to deny categorically
that software is any kind of speech.

> PS: I think you know that terms like "censorship" and
> "freedom of speech" are very loaded, and I resent you
> dragging them into this discussion.

Resent away.  The words are relevant to the discussion.
(Tip: Most readers of the mailing list don't want to 
waste their time reading personal attacks.)

> Debian is not an organizaton formed to protect people's
> freedom of speech. We are here to produce an excellent
> operating system which our users are free to use and
> modify as they see fit. Where that conflicts with freedom
> of speech, we should throw freeodm of speech out the
> window.

I think that that is a reasonable position to take.  To be
consistent with it you should draw up DF Documenatation G
in such a way as to exclude invariant-text licenses from the
main archive altogether.  If this is the way Debian decides
to go, though, then I would like to see the policy applied
consistently.

Richard Braakman wrote:
> What you're advocating is the evil twin of censorship,
> namely forced speech.

I don't think that placing restrictions on an otherwise
completely liberal license amounts to using any kind of
"force", but that's mere semantics I suppose.  I do agree
that the various authors of a document may disagree about
what they want it to contain, and that resolving the 
matter by means of "invariant sections" licenses is not
to treat documentation in the same way as Debian treats
software.  

--
Thomas Hood



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> 
> As this might be a bit too offensive I apologize if you read it that
> way. Here is an alternative wording which says what I actually meant
> (I never try to write a mail quickly just before I got to bed):
> 
> This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
> avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
> Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being
> slower) but you probably won't have the same problems you're having
> now. We can also help you with problems you are having with plex86 and
> bochs. If you insist on using vmware, we can't help you, you should go
> to the vmware guys when you've got problems.

Have you ever tried to do any work beyond the boot process in plex86? 
It's unbearably slow.  I have a day job, as well as spending plenty of
time doing other Debian work; it's not like I have time to sit down,
spend hours beating on plex86 (it's a real pain to get going, I did it
anyway!), and then spend months of my life making it faster.  There is
only one program in the caliber of VMWare, and that's VMWare itself. 
You're perfectly free to not use it, but those of us who have to get
work done are also perfectly free to use it - and Debian's Social
Contract, as Anthony pointed out, says that we'll try to help people
who need to do that.

Plex86 is not an alternative to VMWare in any reasonable sense of the
word.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz   Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:13:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I agreed with the social contract, but I think it should be
> > changed. Some parts are just wrong, other things are confusing. 
> 
> That certainly looks like a contradiction to me.  How do you agree with
> it if you feel it's wrong?

By knowing the date it was written and what they actually meant
instead of what they actually have written down. (For example, they
meant non-free but they wrote commercial). And I'm not the only one, I
know more Debian developers who don't really support non-free and
would rather see it removed.

> > To talk about the social contract, our priorities are free software
> > and our users. Somebody is having problems with non-free
> > software. What is wrong with telling him that the kind of problems
> > he's having is normal with non-free software and say that there are 2
> > free alternatives in Debian which would probably not have those
> > problems?
> 
> Nothing is wrong with that.  However, that isn't what you said.

I did say it, although a bit unfriendly.
 
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
  ^
> > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> 
> That's the original message you sent which *is* wrong.  Debian supports
> its users regardless of if they run non-free software or not.  In fact,
> we specifically support their running of non-free software and we
> provide infrastructure (such as our mailing lists) for them.

Does Debian support vmware? So if Debian does support that, where is
it written down that Debian supports every piece of non-free software? 

Of course you can say that in the social contract says "Thus, although
non-free software isn't a part of Debian, we support its use," but if
I interpret that correctly, it just means the non-free software
packages provided by Debian. And this actually my major complaint with
the social contract, it's too vague to actually agree or disagree with
it. I just interpretted it in the way I think was meant and agreed,
because that is a lot easier than trying to change the social
contract.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpAuRnjT9ebB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free software in main)

[Manoj Srivastava]

>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns  writes:

 Anthony> How about correcting a supposedly historical document, for
 Anthony> example, taking a document that describes Windows as the
 Anthony> progenitor of the trend for GUIs, and adding some
 Anthony> explanation about Apple and Xerox and suchlike?

An invariant segment wouldn't preclude this, I think. You can
 add a new invariant segment that says "Though Worm Tongue has said
 foo did the deed, I, Manoj Srivastava, do hereby state it was bar who
 did it truly". And thus indelibly mark the disagreement in to the
 copyrighted work forever more.

I think adding a section, stating the correction, may be
 preferred to merely removing the incorrect statement -- and the
 evolving history of the saga.

nanoj

-- 
 The reward of energy, enterprise, and thrift--is taxes.
Manoj Srivastava   <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:53:59PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> > 
> > As this might be a bit too offensive I apologize if you read it that
> > way. Here is an alternative wording which says what I actually meant
> > (I never try to write a mail quickly just before I got to bed):
> > 
> > This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
> > avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
> > Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being
> > slower) but you probably won't have the same problems you're having
> > now. We can also help you with problems you are having with plex86 and
> > bochs. If you insist on using vmware, we can't help you, you should go
> > to the vmware guys when you've got problems.
> 
> Have you ever tried to do any work beyond the boot process in
> plex86? 

Not really as I didn't got the Hurd beyond the boot process.

> It's unbearably slow.  

If I'm right the plex86 developers know why it's slow.

> I have a day job, as well as spending plenty of
> time doing other Debian work; it's not like I have time to sit down,
> spend hours beating on plex86 (it's a real pain to get going, I did it
> anyway!), and then spend months of my life making it faster.  There is
> only one program in the caliber of VMWare, and that's VMWare
> itself. 

But if it doesn't work because there is a bug in VMWAre and it isn't
fixed because the version it too old, we can't help those people who
are running VMWare.

> You're perfectly free to not use it, but those of us who have to get
> work done are also perfectly free to use it - and Debian's Social
> Contract, as Anthony pointed out, says that we'll try to help people
> who need to do that.

If I'm right, but correct me if I'm wrong, debian-devel isn't a
mailinglist to ask questions about every random piece of software
which runs on Debian.

> Plex86 is not an alternative to VMWare in any reasonable sense of the
> word.

It is IMHO. Just like that GNU/Linux is an alternative to
windows. (But it isn't even "user-friendly", how could it ever be an
alternative???)

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgpi88eH6LRlt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: sid: libc6-2.2.5-4 kills vmware workstation 3.0

[Stephen Stafford]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
> 
> As this might be a bit too offensive I apologize if you read it that
> way. Here is an alternative wording which says what I actually meant
> (I never try to write a mail quickly just before I got to bed):
> 
> This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
> avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
> Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being
> slower) but you probably won't have the same problems you're having
> now. We can also help you with problems you are having with plex86 and
> bochs. If you insist on using vmware, we can't help you, you should go
> to the vmware guys when you've got problems.
> 



I think you totally miss the point.  Free software is about choice.  What
you are saying is that it is okay for a library to change in a way that
breaks software which I *choose* to run.  The fact that software is non-free
is irrelevant.  I *choose* to run it.  I made an informed choice.  I looked
at the alternatives, and made a decision.  You look like you are wanting to
remove my ability to make that choice.

>From reading this thread, it looks to me almost as if you would advocate a
system whereby Debian refused to run any non-free software at all.

The free alternatives to VMware are not really all that good at all I am
afraid.  Development on plex86 has pretty much died since Kevin changed
jobs.  bochs was never really an alternative at all, its aims are somewhat
different.

VMware might be non-free, but it is damn good.  When a libc6 change breaks
it, then asking why is not *ever* a bad thing.  Expecting changes in libc6
to not break things is sensible.  If it does break stuff then we should look
at why.

If it turns out that the breakage is unavoidable, or serves a greater good
then fine.  I don't really understand this case well enough to know if that
is the case or not.  The breakage is/was deemed necessary by the libc6
maintainer (presumably) and I tend towards trusting Ben's judgement.

Your "advocacy" looks like so much wind and piss in all honesty.  You do no
favours either to yourself or to the free software movement by it.  You look
and sound like a rabid, unthinking, kneejerking moron.  That is usually a
description reserved for RMS :)

Seriously examine what it is that you are saying.  What it looks like to me
(at least, probably others too) is "You run non-free software, so fuck off,
we hate you, we hate your mother, we hate your sister's cat.  Go whinge to
the people who made the non-free software, because they should have forseen
when they wrote their software a couple of years ago that we were going to
break it."

When I joined Debian I did so with the understanding that "Our priorities
are our users and free software".  Free software is not served at all by
your silly rants, and our users are definitely not served by firstly having
the software they *choose* to run break, and secondly being insulted and
belittled by you for making that choice.  

One way or the other, VMware not working any more is a bug somewhere.
Whether it is a bug in libc6 or a bug in VMware itself.  Since VMware has
been running on this machine essentially without change for over a year, and
a new version of libc6 has just been installed, then surely I can be
forgiven for asking questions of libc6 first?

I know that it is very easy to be infected by the rabidity of "non-free is
bad by definition -- people who use it are either evil or misguided".  All I
can do is assure you that most people grow out of that.  I *choose* to use
non-free software of many kinds.  I am also forced to do so ssometimes.  I
will *not* have someone try to make me feel evil, stupid or misguided
because of it.




Cheers,

Stephen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GNU FDL (was Re: Bug#141561: gnu-standards: Non-free =?iso-8859-15?q?software in?= main)

[Branden Robinson]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
> license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
> the book's content, but has every reason to be "protected" from
> modification. These particular words have a value that must be protected.

I'll put you down as being in favor of eternal copyright, then.

"The Congress shall have the power to PROMOTE THE PROGRESS OF SCIENCE
AND USEFUL ARTS, by securing for LIMITED TIMES to authors and inventors
the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"

(Emphasis added.)

What a tragedy that the value of all works published before 1926 has
been irrevocably lost because we're not protecting them anymore.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson|  "There is no gravity in space."
Debian GNU/Linux   |  "Then how could astronauts walk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |   around on the Moon?"
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |  "Because they wore heavy boots."


pgpZ5VF9lqvR1.pgp
Description: PGP signature