Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Anthony Towns]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 01:18:09PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
> > console-common is part of base so changing the preinst at this point
> > of the freeze is not a good idea.  Therefore, I will go ahead and add
> > a Pre-Depends on debconf if that's ok.
> I have had an impression that debconf is part of base as well,
> which means a Pre-Depends is not required.

Pre-Depends: are required for base packages. They're not required for
packages that've been Essential:yes for a long enough period, but debconf
has never been Essential.

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]

kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[Jean-Michel Kelbert]

Hi,

I made a package from kbiff : a mail notification utility.
The source code include locales files : kbiff.mo
However this file is also in kde-i18n-*. Then when I tried to installed
the package I made, dpkg stop because it tried to overwrite kbiff.mo
from kde-i18n-fr.
I asked the upstream author to know why he provide this files, here is
his answer :

"The file in kde-i18n is old.  KBiff *used* to be included in kdenetwork
a long time ago and there was some translations in kde-i18n as a result.
When I removed KBiff from kdenetwork, those .mo files were never
removed."

So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
it ?

Thanks
-- 
Jean-Michel Kelbert


pgpqsgFsNLdb2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Automatic build of autofs_3.9.99-4.0.0pre10-1 on elara fails

[Daniel Lutz]

Hello

I've uploaded a new revision of the `autofs' package. It has been
built successfully on each platform except on arm.

The output log can be found at:
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=autofs&ver=3.9.99-4.0.0pre10-1&arch=arm&stamp=1019355383&file=log&as=raw

The problem is that autoconf can't find the OpenLDAP libraries, although
the needed package is automatically installed before the build process.

The package is built on elara. The previous revision,
3.9.99-4.0.0pre10-0, was built on europa and succeeded.

How can I contact the administrator of `elara' to find out
more about this error?

Daniel Lutz


-- 
Say NO to HTML in mail and news.

GnuPG: 1024D/14E06AAF (public key available on any keyserver)


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

Re: kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[Cajus Pollmeier]

Am Montag, 22. April 2002 09:18 schrieb Jean-Michel Kelbert:
> Hi,
>
> I made a package from kbiff : a mail notification utility.
> The source code include locales files : kbiff.mo
> However this file is also in kde-i18n-*. Then when I tried to installed
> the package I made, dpkg stop because it tried to overwrite kbiff.mo
>
> >from kde-i18n-fr.
>
> I asked the upstream author to know why he provide this files, here is
> his answer :
>
> "The file in kde-i18n is old.  KBiff *used* to be included in kdenetwork
> a long time ago and there was some translations in kde-i18n as a result.
> When I removed KBiff from kdenetwork, those .mo files were never
> removed."
>
> So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
> it ?

There's a bug assigned to this issue on bugs.kde.org #39379. Since
they degraded it to "wishlist", I guess it should be fixed in debian kde-i18n 
before they act?

Greetings,
-Cajus


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

Re: kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[David Starner]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:18:41AM +0200, Jean-Michel Kelbert wrote:
> So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
> it ?

Why bring it up here? Stuff like this should usually be resolved
privately maintainer to maintainer. debian-kde would also be
appropriate, I suppose. It's an upstream problem, so you might want talk
to them (kde-i18n-doc) about it, too. There's nothing that debian-devel
can do about it, and it seems likely if you talk to the people
responsible for kde-i18n, it'll be fixed without problem. 

-- 
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: XFree 4.2.0 - again

[Michael Piefel]

Am 21.04.02 um 16:08:17 schrieb Emanuele Aina:
> Someone (I don't remember who) said that odd numbers are better than
> even numbers, because summing or multipling even numbers you can only
> get even numbers...

Multiplying odd number always gives odd numbers. Not much gain.

Bye,
Mike

-- 
|=| Michael Piefel
|=| Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
|=| Tel. (+49 30) 2093 3831


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

Re: Bug#142818: Menu icon policy (Was: Bug#142818: xteddy: Icons missing from menu entries)

[Tille, Andreas]

On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, Mark Purcell wrote:

> Sorry for the delay in replying. But I didn't receive your response directly
> (by default the BTS doesn't send followup messages to the bug submitter) .
Sorry, hope you get it directly now ...

> I'm running KDE. icewm also appears to need the full path specified.  fvwm
> (and variants) seem to pick up from the default location.
Fvwm and Gnome do so (if not I would have noticed).

> >  ...
> >  please put all icon files in the directory
> >  `/usr/X11R6/include/X11/{bitmaps,pixmaps}'
>
> It only states that that is where you should place them, it doesn't state
> anywhere that this is the default location for window managers to find them.
You are right and in my opinion this is a bug either in the menu package or
just Debian policy.  I would like it very much if you would spend some time
in reporting / clarifying this bug because I have hard time constraints
currently and I think we have to solve that.

> In fact it the menu documentation in it's only examples for icon specifies
> the full path every time. But you are correct it isn't clear:
Yes - only examples ...

> > ~> grep "icon" /usr/lib/menu/* 2>/dev/null | grep -v
> > /usr/X11R6/include/X11 | wc -l
> >  47
> > ~> grep "icon" /usr/lib/menu/* 2>/dev/null | grep /usr/X11R6/include/X11 |
> > wc -l
> >  19
>
> I think your maths is a little out. Have a look at exactly which files don't
> contain /usr/X11R6/include/X11.  On my system the -v case returns the
> following:
Uhmm, sorry if I do not have the time to browse this list.  I just piped it
through wc -l just to give you an idea.  I certainly was a little bit sloppy
while writing my grep pattern and I see now the evidence (it showes up all
my own packages - not only xteddy and
 /usr/lib/menu/pgaccess:icon=pgaccess.xpm
 /usr/lib/menu/postgresql-client:   icon=postgresql.xpm
(Sorry - I will not file an additional bug report against pgaccess, as
 I have seen you just did it for postgresql-client.)

> As you can see most of those applications do specify a full path (but arn't
> located in the default location)
Just understand the problem.

> I guess my patch is just one way to solve the problem.
Well, I'll apply it and will also fix my other packages because this would
be the fast solution.

> Your alternatives are another way to solve the problem.
Perhaps something could be done to use a debhelper script which places
apropriate links into a default directory.  Just an idea ...

> Either way the bug should remain until the
> icons are displayed again. (transferred to an alternative package if
> necessary)
For sure.  I would not have closed the bug as long it exists.  But I hope
to fix the problem soon.

Kind regards

 Andreas.


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

Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Santiago Vila]

It's really ok at all that a preinst depends on debconf?
AFAIK, most packages which use debconf work ok when debconf is not installed.


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

at 3.1.8-10.2 segfaults

[Valentijn Sessink]

Hello all,

at 3.1.8-10.2 segfaults:

cadmium~$ at 04252002
warning: commands will be executed using /bin/sh
Segmentation fault
cadmium~$ at -Vl
at version 3.1.8
Bug reports to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Koenig)

Debian 2.2. In Woody this seems to be solved. I have no time to look into
this - sorry for that.

Best regards,

Valentijn
(the spamblock is not a spamblock - it's a regular e-mail address)


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

Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 10:37:58AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> It's really ok at all that a preinst depends on debconf?

It's mentioned in debconf-devel(8), so ...

> AFAIK, most packages which use debconf work ok when debconf is not
> installed.

This one does '. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule' (as do most of them, in
fact). Unless I miss my guess, that'll return an error when debconf is
not installed.

Relatively few packages bother to adjust their behaviour depending on
whether debconf is or isn't installed these days.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: Heimdal vs. Kerberos4kth

[Brian May]

On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 12:43:18PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > static /**/const char *const rcsid[] = { (const char *)rcsid, "\100(#)" msg 
> > }
> 
> I'm not sure what the \100 is for (why not have it a literal @ sign?
> something excessively clever is going on there), but I suspect that if
> you nuked it, or replaced it with an @-sign, the problem will vanish...

Lots of this code I don't understand, and that line (+ the 4 other
identical definitations included in each C file) really puzzles me.

I fixed this, and also ignore the return code autoconf returns.
It seems to work...

Anyway, I have been messing up lots of code.

I have changed krb4 to build all libraries again, and not
use any from Heimdal.

I have changed heimdal to use these libraries.

So far there seems to be only two problems (and everything
compiles):

1. ftp client and daemon in heimdal require GLOB_LIMIT and GLOB_QUOTE
to be defined. However, in krb4 these are defined in glob.h,
and this glob.h conflicts with the one in glibc. I have hardcoded
these constants. I wonder what version of glob is being used anyway...

2. kafs in krb4 only has krb4 support, in kerberos it has krb5 support.
However, krb4 requires kafs to link, and kerberos requires it to link
too. I don't know what to do here. At the moment I have two conflicting
libraries.

As usual, I will put it online
http://snoopy.apana.org.au/~ftp/debian/>

Currently only krb4 is online, will put Heimdal there as soon as it
builds. Assumming it does build. It built just seconds ago, lets see if
dpkg-buildpackage works...

rats, still more of this:

../../include/config.h:1283: warning: `RCSID' redefined

I thought I fixed that :-( How many times does config.h define RCSID

If the package doesn't build for any reason (I think it should), I will
put the source online instead, so others can at least take a look.

After working on this all day, I am getting just a bit sick of
looking at this at the moment.

Any bugs, please send reports to > /dev/create_patch_to_fix_problem,
and your computer will automagically fix the problem.
-- 
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


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

Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Santiago Vila]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 10:37:58AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > It's really ok at all that a preinst depends on debconf?
>
> It's mentioned in debconf-devel(8), so ...

I meant "depends" as in "fails horribly and not gracefully when
debconf is not installed".

> > AFAIK, most packages which use debconf work ok when debconf is not
> > installed.
>
> This one does '. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule' (as do most of them, in
> fact). Unless I miss my guess, that'll return an error when debconf is
> not installed.

In such case I don't see the need for a Pre-Depends.

> Relatively few packages bother to adjust their behaviour depending on
> whether debconf is or isn't installed these days.

Well, those who blindly assume debconf is installed without using a
depends are buggy and should be fixed.


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

Re: debiandoc-sgml issues (html being lynx/links unfriendly)

[Josip Rodin]

On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 07:40:19PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> [debiandoc-sgml] now builds PDF and PS output in a bi-stable loop
> (so various Makefiles can now be cleaned up and bug #134701 is closed).

I've no idea about code or what you mean by "bi-stable", so excuse me if I'm
asking a completely clueless question. Adam Di Carlo told me that the
debiandoc2latex* scripts used to run LaTeX a fixed number of times and that
that was the reason why he did all those ugly things in his makefiles.

This is the problem that is now fixed?

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


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

Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Josip Rodin]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:02:07AM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > It's really ok at all that a preinst depends on debconf?
> 
> It's mentioned in debconf-devel(8), so ...

I think the real question is -- why does a package need to ask a question
(via debconf) in preinst? I can't imagine but a few cases where this would
be really necessary...

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.


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

0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Daniel Ruoso]

dpkg - aviso: rebaixando cvs-autoreleasedeb de 0.01-6 para 0.1-3.

-- 
Atenciosamente,

Daniel Ruoso
Desenvolvimento de Sistemas
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oktiva Telecomunicações e Informática


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

0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Daniel Ruoso]

Hi, i'm creating the cvs-autoreleasedeb package, and the version is
growing, so I started at 0.01-1 and now I'm on 0.1-3. But when I tried
to install it i received the following warning:

Did I miss something?

dpkg - warning: downgrading cvs-autoreleasedeb from 0.01-6 to 0.1-3.

-- 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Federico Di Gregorio]

Il lun, 2002-04-22 alle 13:51, Daniel Ruoso ha scritto:
> dpkg - aviso: rebaixando cvs-autoreleasedeb de 0.01-6 para 0.1-3.

that's right. dpkg compares numbers ... numerically. so 0.01 and 0.1 are
equivalent. then -6 > -3.

-- 
Federico Di Gregorio
Debian GNU/Linux Developer & Italian Press Contact[EMAIL PROTECTED]
INIT.D Developer   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Mi piace schioccare la lingua fortemente.
-- Maria Luisa Benedetta Panzani


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[Tollef Fog Heen]

* David Starner 

| On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:18:41AM +0200, Jean-Michel Kelbert wrote:
| > So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
| > it ?
| 
| Why bring it up here? Stuff like this should usually be resolved
| privately maintainer to maintainer. debian-kde would also be
| appropriate, I suppose.

: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ > apt-cache show kde-i18n-no | grep Maintainer
Maintainer: Debian QA Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

It's orphaned.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen  ,''`.   
: :' :   
Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just`. `'
selective about who its friends are.  `- 


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

Re: Jordi Mallach net dead ?

[Jordi Mallach]

On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 08:27:09PM -0300, Carlos Laviola wrote:
> > Does anyone know the whereabouts of my AM Jordi Mallach ? I've sent him
> > 2 emails about two weeks ago and heard nothing from him ever since. Is
> > he on a vacation or something ? Or maybe my emails didn't get throught
> > to him (even though I got no SMTP error).
> Well, I've just talked to him on IRC a few hours ago.  He goes by the
> nickname of Oskuro on the OpenProjects IRC network (irc.debian.org), try
> to reach him there sometime.

Hi Leo,

I've been pretty busy with RL stuff lately, I think I warned you about
it. Anyway, I hope I can reply to your stuff soon.

Jordi
-- 
Jordi Mallach Pérez || [EMAIL PROTECTED] || Rediscovering Freedom,
   aka Oskuro in|| [EMAIL PROTECTED]  || Using Debian GNU/Linux
 Reinos de Leyenda  || [EMAIL PROTECTED]  || http://debian.org

http://sindominio.net  GnuPG public information:  pub  1024D/917A225E 
telnet pusa.uv.es 23   73ED 4244 FD43 5886 20AC  2644 2584 94BA 917A 225E


pgp4hsX1psQMz.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Ivo Timmermans]

Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> Hi, i'm creating the cvs-autoreleasedeb package, and the version is
> growing, so I started at 0.01-1 and now I'm on 0.1-3. But when I tried
> to install it i received the following warning:

Call it 0.10-3.


Ivo

-- 
Norton SystemWorks 2002 includes a file erasure program called Wipe
Info.  In the manual (page 160), we learn that "Wipe Info uses
hexadecimal values to wipe files.  This provides more security than
wiping with decimal values."  - Bruce Schneier


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Alan Shutko]

Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> that's right. dpkg compares numbers ... numerically. so 0.01 and 0.1 are
> equivalent. then -6 > -3.

What exactly do you mean by numerically?  Is 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1 ==
1.0 == 10 == 10?  What should be watched out for?

-- 
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
The star of riches is shining upon you.


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Sean Neakums]

commence  Alan Shutko quotation:

> Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> that's right. dpkg compares numbers ... numerically. so 0.01 and
>> 0.1 are equivalent. then -6 > -3.
>
> What exactly do you mean by numerically?

Leading zeroes after the decimal point are ignored, by the looks of it.

-- 
 /  |  | The spark of a pin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |  (require 'gnu)  | dropping, falling feather-like.
 \  |  | There is too much noise.


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Agustin Martin Domingo]

Alan Shutko wrote:
> 
> Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > that's right. dpkg compares numbers ... numerically. so 0.01 and 0.1 are
> > equivalent. then -6 > -3.
> 
> What exactly do you mean by numerically?  Is 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1 ==
> 1.0 == 10 == 10?  What should be watched out for?
> 

point in versions is not decimal separator, but major or minor version
separator. So

0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1

all means 

major version=0
first minor version=1

but not equal to 1.0, which would mean

major version=1
first minor version=0

and also different to 10 or 10, which would just mean major versions
10 or 10

Cheers,

-- 
=
Agustin Martin Domingo, Dpto. de Fisica, ETS Arquitectura Madrid,
(U. Politecnica de Madrid)  tel: +34 91-336-6536, Fax: +34 91-336-6554,
email:[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://corbu.aq.upm.es/~agmartin/welcome.html


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena]

Package: general
Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-22
Severity: important


The current sections layout in Debian is mostly useless due to
the large size of the package database (in woody +- 9000, in potato
+- 4500). This is due to sections not being refined enough (we have not
changed them in the last four years IIRC), thus any package administration
interface is useless for browsing packages since there are too many
packages per section.

As a suggestion, I would use the layout used by either the current Menu
system, the GNOME or KDE proyect for the layout of applications together
with some of our "special" sections (base).

Some samples of how sections could be divided:

 admin - system, configuration,  package system, security, accounting (logs)
 comm - modem, fax, 
 devel - languages, libraries, compiler, kernel-source
 doc - convertors, guides, manpages, admin-doc, devel-doc, games-doc,...
 editors - emacs, 
 games - adventure, arcade, board, tetris, simulation
 graphics - themes, video, diagrams, postscript/pdf, viewers,
 interpreters - perl, tcltk, python, 
 mail - client, server, transport
 math - spreadsheet, calculator
 misc 
 net - http, ftp, news, telnet, irc, utils, samba, ppp, printer, firewall,
nfs, dns, finger, proxies
 news -> should be moved to net
 science - astronomy, biology, chemistry
 sound - drivers, players, midi, 


-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux avalon 2.4.18 #1 SMP mié abr 3 12:47:49 CEST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=spanish, LC_CTYPE=spanish



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

Processed: three cheers for severity inflation

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> severity 144046 wishlist
Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained
Severity set to `wishlist'.

>
End of message, stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Randolph Chung]

> What exactly do you mean by numerically?  Is 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1 ==
> 1.0 == 10 == 10?  What should be watched out for?

>From the debian policy manual (section 4):

"The strings are compared from left to right.

First the initial part of each string consisting entirely of non-digit
characters is determined. These two parts (one of which may be empty)
are compared lexically. If a difference is found it is returned. The
lexical comparison is a comparison of ASCII values modified so that all
the letters sort earlier than all the non-letters.

Then the initial part of the remainder of each string which consists
entirely of digit characters is determined. The numerical values of
these two parts are compared, and any difference found is returned as
the result of the comparison. For these purposes an empty string (which
can only occur at the end of one or both version strings being compared)
counts as zero.

These two steps (comparing and removing initial non-digit strings and
initial digit strings) are repeated until a difference is found or both
strings are exhausted."

randolph


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Alan Shutko]

Agustin Martin Domingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> point in versions is not decimal separator, but major or minor version
> separator. So
>
> 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1
>
> all means 
>
> major version=0
> first minor version=1

Many developers don't consider those identical, though.  I wonder if
fields should be zero-padded to equal width before comparison?  So
comparing 0.01 and 0.1, you'd zero-pad 0.1 -> 0.10, and get the right
comparison.

-- 
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
A crucifix?  Oy vey, have you got the wrong vampire!


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Anthony Towns]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:58:21AM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Agustin Martin Domingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > point in versions is not decimal separator, but major or minor version
> > separator. So
> > 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1
> > all means 
> > major version=0
> > first minor version=1
> Many developers don't consider those identical, though.  

Then they're wrong and should educate themselves.

You can consider numeric fields as being zero padded from the front
and still get the right answer, if you prefer. That's not the way dpkg
actually does things though.

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: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Rune B. Broberg]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:58:21AM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Agustin Martin Domingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > point in versions is not decimal separator, but major or minor version
> > separator. So
> >
> > 0.1 == 0.01 == 0.1
> >
> > all means 
> >
> > major version=0
> > first minor version=1
> 
> Many developers don't consider those identical, though.  I wonder if
> fields should be zero-padded to equal width before comparison?  So
> comparing 0.01 and 0.1, you'd zero-pad 0.1 -> 0.10, and get the right
> comparison.

0.9 compared to 0.89 would then be the same as 0.90 compared to 0.89?
Not good.

-- 
Rune B. Broberg


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Marcin Owsiany]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 03:46:06PM +0200, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena wrote:
> As a suggestion, I would use the layout used by either the current Menu
> system, the GNOME or KDE proyect for the layout of applications together
> with some of our "special" sections (base).

I think it would be better to drop the sections altogether and use a
keyword-based system someone suggested a few months ago. The advantages
would be:
 - ultimate fine-grainedness (?)
 - no dillemas about where to put packages which fit in more than
   section (like x11 net-related programs)

Marcin
-- 
Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://marcin.owsiany.pl/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216  FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75  D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña]

> I think it would be better to drop the sections altogether and use a
> keyword-based system someone suggested a few months ago. The advantages
> would be:
>  - ultimate fine-grainedness (?)
>  - no dillemas about where to put packages which fit in more than
>section (like x11 net-related programs)

Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software. Keyword
by themselves are not that much useful since they would be only appropiate
to the language used. Several disadvantages:

1.- more difficult to translate than sections
2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)
3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
(sections are easily represented as trees).


If you want to have a keyword-based system I would suggest you
take a look at dpkg-iasearch (yes, not documented, but it's a proof of
concept) which uses natural language retrieval techniques (TFIDF
vectorisation of documents) to allow for more powerful searchs than
"apt-cache search XXX".
This kind of stuff (dpkg-iasearch or apt-cache search) should be
implemented in the GUI too, but sections are very much needed IMHO and
could be very useful if properly organised.
Also take in account that the users will always see a
hierarchicaly (sp?) division of software if using the menu system (in any
window manager) or KDE and GNOME.

Javi


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

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:18:21PM +0200, Rune B. Broberg wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:58:21AM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> > Many developers don't consider those identical, though.  I wonder if
> > fields should be zero-padded to equal width before comparison?  So
> > comparing 0.01 and 0.1, you'd zero-pad 0.1 -> 0.10, and get the right
> > comparison.
> 
> 0.9 compared to 0.89 would then be the same as 0.90 compared to 0.89?
> Not good.

OTOH, this scheme has been in operation for quite a few years now (read:
since the beginning) and changing it would probably break more things than I
care to imagine.

Get used to it and move along...
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout  http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Canada, Mexico, and Australia form the Axis of Nations That
> Are Actually Quite Nice But Secretly Have Nasty Thoughts About America


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

Re: Jordi Mallach net dead ?

[Leo Costela]

On Mon, 2002-04-22 at 09:23, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 08:27:09PM -0300, Carlos Laviola wrote:
> > > Does anyone know the whereabouts of my AM Jordi Mallach ? I've sent him
> > > 2 emails about two weeks ago and heard nothing from him ever since. Is
> > > he on a vacation or something ? Or maybe my emails didn't get throught
> > > to him (even though I got no SMTP error).
> > Well, I've just talked to him on IRC a few hours ago.  He goes by the
> > nickname of Oskuro on the OpenProjects IRC network (irc.debian.org), try
> > to reach him there sometime.
> 
> Hi Leo,
> 
> I've been pretty busy with RL stuff lately, I think I warned you about
> it. Anyway, I hope I can reply to your stuff soon.
> 
> Jordi

Oh, sorry

I guess I'm just a bit impatient =]


-- 
Leo Costela
Public Key: http://wallsplash.net/leo/pubkey.asc
"you must cut down the mightiest tree in the forest... with... a
herring!"


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

bin==1

[George Kraft IV]

The LSB's bin==1 requirement has been removed from the specification by the
LSB's newly formed "Specification Authority".  Hopefully this will resolve the
user/group issue for Debian.  The spec-auth group will meet biweekly to resolve
issues submitted to them; however, since there is a backlog, they will meet
weekly or semiweekly to get caught up.

http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/lsbreview.html

Sorry for the delay.  I appreciate everyone's contributions and encouragement.

-- 
George Kraft IV
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: bin==1

[Matt Wilson]

The definitions need to be corrected.  I would change:

binbinAdministrative user with some restrictions
daemon daemon Subprocess special privileges 

To:

binbinLegacy uid/gid
daemon daemon Legacy uid/gid

Cheers,

Matt

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:33:36AM -0500, George Kraft IV wrote:
> The LSB's bin==1 requirement has been removed from the specification by the
> LSB's newly formed "Specification Authority".  Hopefully this will resolve the
> user/group issue for Debian.  The spec-auth group will meet biweekly to 
> resolve
> issues submitted to them; however, since there is a backlog, they will meet
> weekly or semiweekly to get caught up.
> 
> http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/lsbreview.html
> 
> Sorry for the delay.  I appreciate everyone's contributions and encouragement.


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

Re: kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 02:07:07PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * David Starner 
> | On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 09:18:41AM +0200, Jean-Michel Kelbert wrote:
> | > So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
> | > it ?
> | 
> | Why bring it up here? Stuff like this should usually be resolved
> | privately maintainer to maintainer. debian-kde would also be
> | appropriate, I suppose.
> 
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ > apt-cache show kde-i18n-no | grep Maintainer
> Maintainer: Debian QA Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> It's orphaned.

It really shouldn't be. From what I can tell, kde-i18n is too important
to KDE to be left without a maintainer. However, it's such a large
package (68Mb .orig.tar.gz) that I think the core KDE maintainers
haven't had time to pick it up yet.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Re: kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-*

[Junichi Uekawa]

Jean-Michel Kelbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:

> "The file in kde-i18n is old.  KBiff *used* to be included in kdenetwork
> a long time ago and there was some translations in kde-i18n as a result.
> When I removed KBiff from kdenetwork, those .mo files were never
> removed."
> 
> So to my mind kbiff.mo should be removed from kde-i18n-* package, isn't
> it ?

Er yes, and add "Replaces: kde-i18n-* (<< whatever.version)" to your package


regards,
junichi

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4
Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/


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

C++ ...

[Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando]

George Kraft IV wrote:
The LSB's bin==1 requirement has been removed from the specification by the
LSB's newly formed "Specification Authority".  Hopefully this will resolve the
user/group issue for Debian.  The spec-auth group will meet biweekly to resolve
issues submitted to them; however, since there is a backlog, they will meet
weekly or semiweekly to get caught up.
http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/lsbreview.html
Sorry for the delay.  I appreciate everyone's contributions and encouragement.
Hi Everyone,
   I want to understand why the specific said: "C++ immature" ...
   http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/gLSB/gLSB/cppmapping.html
   Would KDE be excluded based on this immaturity ?
Thanks,
Giovanni
--
--
 Future Technologies, The TOTAL Linux Company!
  http://www.futuretg.com
  ftp://ftp.futuretg.com/
  mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Italia:  USA
  Via Cairoli, 1   1620 26th Street - 3rd floor South Tower
  33170 - Pordenone (PN)   Santa Monica - CA
  Telefono: +39 0434 - 209 107.
  Fax:  +39 0434 - 209 510.
http://www.FTLinuxCourse.com -  The best training product ever made!
http://www.futuretg.com/FTOSX - The best Operating System ever made!
http://www.LinuxUtilities.org - The most incredible and original 
Utilities for Linux!
http://www.LinuxWebCampus.com - The Web site for Linux E-Training !
*


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Dmitry Borodaenko]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:15:23PM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > I think it would be better to drop the sections altogether and use a
> > keyword-based system someone suggested a few months ago. The
> > advantages would be:
> >  - ultimate fine-grainedness (?)
> >  - no dillemas about where to put packages which fit in more than
> >section (like x11 net-related programs)
>   Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software.
> Keyword by themselves are not that much useful since they would be
> only appropiate to the language used. Several disadvantages:
> 
> 1.- more difficult to translate than sections

You will end up with no less section names than with tag names, and with
same level of detail it will be exactly as difficult to translate.

> 2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)

That is actually benefit as I see it.

You can arrage tags in arbitrary order depending on your needs: group by
'net' first and then by 'x11' and build hierarchy from that. But how can
you rearrage it and sort by 'x11' first, if within hierarchy you have
fixed positions 'x11/net' and 'net/x11'?

> 3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
> (sections are easily represented as trees).

Take a look at synaptic.

<...>
>   Also take in account that the users will always see a
> hierarchicaly (sp?) division of software if using the menu system (in
> any window manager) or KDE and GNOME.

That is not a good reason to keep it that way. If we come up with
tag-based package classification scheme, we can provide support for it
in Debian menu system.

-- 
Dmitry Borodaenko


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

Re: Adding a Pre-Depends on debconf in console-common?

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 11:13:54AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 10:37:58AM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > AFAIK, most packages which use debconf work ok when debconf is not
> > > installed.
> >
> > This one does '. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule' (as do most of them, in
> > fact). Unless I miss my guess, that'll return an error when debconf is
> > not installed.
> 
> In such case I don't see the need for a Pre-Depends.

Sorry? The preinst will fail with exit status 1 if debconf is not
installed, therefore clearly needs it, and must either be changed to not
require it or else have the pre-dependency added.

> > Relatively few packages bother to adjust their behaviour depending on
> > whether debconf is or isn't installed these days.
> 
> Well, those who blindly assume debconf is installed without using a
> depends are buggy and should be fixed.

That is exactly the case here.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Junichi Uekawa]

"Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:

> Package: general
> Some samples of how sections could be divided:

Note that there are some special sections, that have 
very clear-cut definitions. Namely:

libs:   lib* packages go there
devel:  lib*-dev packages go there


regards,
junichi


-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa   http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423  7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4
Libpkg-guide: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Erich Schubert]

> > I think it would be better to drop the sections altogether and use a
> > keyword-based system someone suggested a few months ago. The advantages

i suggested this a few months ago. unfortunately i havn't reworked my
proposal yet, nor did i make a proof of concept especially for my new
enhancements. (a kind of proof-of-concept can be seen in aptitude, as
well as on  http://people.debian.org/~erich/packagebrowser/
which basically has the algorithms required for the first stage.
(second stage will need a useful amount of "tags" added to packages)

> >  - ultimate fine-grainedness (?)

indeed. like selecting gpl licenced apps only, gtk apps only etc.

> >  - no dillemas about where to put packages which fit in more than
> >section (like x11 net-related programs)

correct.

>   Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software. Keyword

correct, but the keywords don't need to be hierarchically themselves.
You just have to give the user a way to browse the keywords
hierarchically. (that way different users can even have different trees,
which is a pro against hardwired hierarchies)

> by themselves are not that much useful since they would be only appropiate
> to the language used. Several disadvantages:

> 1.- more difficult to translate than sections

Don't think so. I think they'll be much simpler, as you don't have to
say which mail tools go in there and which not, these keyword-tags are
much simpler than the categories.

> 2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)

external hierarchies have always been included in my concept.

> 3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
> (sections are easily represented as trees).

you can represent this as tree easily. Have a look at the url i posted
above. Packages (and even sub-trees) appear multiple times.
For example
  Programming -> IDE -> VI
  Editors -> VI
  Editors -> IDE -> VI
are all the same.
Definitely a pro with such flexible tree hierarchies.

>   If you want to have a keyword-based system I would suggest you
> take a look at dpkg-iasearch (yes, not documented, but it's a proof of

As i understand this works by kind of indexing the descriptions.
Which is by-design inferior to hand-tuned keywords imho.

what i'm planning to add to my proposal is the use of weighted keywords.
Such as "progress 0.8" and "licence:free 1.0", so i could select only
apps that are considered to be quite useable by the maintainer and
dfsg-free.  unfortunately this will lead to further bloat of the
packages files. :-(

The most difficult part will be an intuitive user interface. But i think
that a user interface doesn't need to implement all features directly.
(for example these weights could be in some extended selection menu
only, and influence only the sorting by default)

Gruss,
Erich Schubert

--
erich@(mucl.de|debian.org)--GPG Key ID: 4B3A135C
A polar bear is a rectangular bear after a coordinate transform.
Die kürzeste Verbindung zwischen zwei Menschen ist ein Lächeln.


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

Re: Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[David B Harris]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:15:45 +0200
Javier Fern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software.
> Keyword by themselves are not that much useful since they would be
> only appropiate to the language used. Several disadvantages:
> 
> 1.- more difficult to translate than sections
> 2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)
> 3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
> (sections are easily represented as trees).

Agreed. However, there's no reason why one can't conceivably have more
than on tree.

The tasks system is kind of like that. In fact, it's arguable that if
all packages belonged to at least one task, we would actually have a
hybird keyword/category system.

A package, gnome-calculator, could belong to the desktop task, the gnome
task, and the desktop-calculators task.

/me ponders...

What's it take to get a new task? Just a matter of adding a Task: field?
No other hoops?

If that's the case, then maybe the original poster would like to come up
with a relatively long list of "keywords" (really, just tasks).

The aforementioned gnome-calculator task could appear as the following
leaves in the tree:

desktop-calculators/gnome
gnome/desktop-calculators
desktop/desktop-calculators

Easy to present in a UI, and since a) the list of keywords (tasks)
needn't be a very small number, and b) a package can belong to more than
one task (have more than one keyword), it meets the original poster's
request.
-- 

\ David B. Harris, Systems administrator   |   http://www.terrabox.com /
/  [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://eelf.ddts.net  \
\==/
/ Clan Barclay motto: Aut agere, aut mori.  (Either action, or death.) \



pgpyUB2lfVyFl.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: 0.01-6 > 0.1-3 ?????

[Federico Di Gregorio]

Il lun, 2002-04-22 alle 16:18, Rune B. Broberg ha scritto:
[snip]
> 0.9 compared to 0.89 would then be the same as 0.90 compared to 0.89?
> Not good.

NO. 0.9 < 0.89 because 89 > 9.

-- 
Federico Di Gregorio
Debian GNU/Linux Developer & Italian Press Contact[EMAIL PROTECTED]
INIT.D Developer   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  La felicità è una tazza di cioccolata calda. Sempre. -- Io


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: C++ ...

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
>I want to understand why the specific said: "C++ immature" ...
> 
>http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/gLSB/gLSB/cppmapping.html

The C++ ABI is still evolving and changing every few gcc releases.

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: bin==1

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Matt Wilson wrote:
> To:
> 
> binbinLegacy uid/gid
> daemon daemon Legacy uid/gid

Definitely agreed.

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: C++ ...

[Wichmann, Mats D]

> 
> I want to understand why the specific said: "C++ immature" ...
> 
> http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/gLSB/gLSB/cppmapping.html
> 
> Would KDE be excluded based on this immaturity ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Giovanni

Any C++ app is problematic today.

This went somewhat off-topic, but head over here for more
on the C++ issue:

http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/candidates/index.html

or, more generally:

http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/

Next-generation features are generally going to be worked
through first in lsb-futures before migrating to the main
LSB workgroup. There's an lsb-futures mailing list (reference
from www.linuxbase.org/lists.html)

You'll notice there's an issue with Qt that relates to
KDE, and that's the dual-license topic (essentially, GPL
or commercial, where the LSB has preferred to include
libraries that followed the LGPL model).  We'd be interested
in more feedback on how big an issue that is... currently
Qt is listed as "blocked" until that question is worked
through.


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

Re: C++ ...

[Matt Wilson]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 05:07:56PM +0200, Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I want to understand why the specific said: "C++ immature" ...
> 
> http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/gLSB/gLSB/cppmapping.html

The ABI (Application Binary Inteface) for C++ is still in flux.  A
standard has been established for C++ name mangling, exception
handling, vtable layout, etc -- but there isn't a released GCC that
properly implements it.

> Would KDE be excluded based on this immaturity ?

No.  If an application was using KDE interfaces and wanted to become
an LSB 1.1 Compliant Application, the application would need to ship
any KDE libraries required for that application to run in a
application-specific library directory.

If you're talking about including KDE in the LSB, yes - this lack of
C++ ABI stability will block any C++ library from being included in
the LSB.

Cheers,

Matt


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Shaun Jackman]

>   Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software. Keyword
> by themselves are not that much useful since they would be only appropiate
> to the language used. Several disadvantages:
>
> 1.- more difficult to translate than sections

Not true if the keywords are limited to a specific selection. This is no more 
restrictive than the current system, except instead of being able to pick 
only one section, you can pick many.

> 2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)

Putting each package into exactly one section is not hierarchical 
organisation; it's a partition on a set. Programs can naturally belong to 
more than one set, but we restrict them to exactly one relationship. 

> 3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
> (sections are easily represented as trees).

If the keywords are limited to a specific selection, they can also be 
represented as trees. The root level contains every keyword. Expanding one of 
those gives a second level of keywords. So, if you're looking for the list of 
KDE apps, you could browse X11 -> KDE and look from there. If you simply want 
a comprehensive list of mail applications, you could look at Net -> Mail, and 
then from there browse to Net -> Mail -> KDE (which would be identical to X11 
-> KDE -> Mail). Every package will exist multiple times in the tree, but if 
each package is typically only a member of max three or four keywords, I 
don't think this will get out of hand.

Cheers,
Shaun


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

Bug#144046: general: Sections are not finely grained

[Marcin Owsiany]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 04:15:45PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > I think it would be better to drop the sections altogether and use a
> > keyword-based system someone suggested a few months ago. The advantages
> > would be:
> >  - ultimate fine-grainedness (?)
> >  - no dillemas about where to put packages which fit in more than
> >section (like x11 net-related programs)
> 
>   Users need a hierachical layout in order to find software.

Who said that available keywords must be kept in a flat list? :-)
You could always group them in sections!

I think that a properly designed keyword system can have all the
benefits of a section-only system, while being much more flexible at
the same time.

> Keyword
> by themselves are not that much useful since they would be only appropiate
> to the language used.

What do you mean?

> Several disadvantages:
> 
> 1.- more difficult to translate than sections

How is "modem" more difficult to translate then "comm"? :-P

> 2.- are not organised hierarchicaly (sp?)

Like I said, grouping them shouldn't be a problem. Then selecting a
group in a hypothetical package browser could mean the same as selecting
a "OR" of all the keywords in it.

> 3.- difficult to represent graphically in a package-administration gui
> (sections are easily represented as trees).

Ease of representation doesn't mean ease of use. The problem is with
packages which might be in more than one subtree (i.e. section): think
of a GNOME IRC client (could be both in x11/gnome or in net/irc in the
setup you suggest) or some network-based scientific computation system
(both in net and science/math).

Since a package may only be in one section, if you dive into wrong
subtree, you're moving away from the goal. This is the disadvantage of a
tree system.

But when using keywords, each keyword you select brings you closer to
the goal. You could think of keywords like of a tree system, where each
package can be at as many branches as many keywords it has.

I hope you know what I mean.

>   If you want to have a keyword-based system I would suggest you
> take a look at dpkg-iasearch (yes, not documented, but it's a proof of
> concept) which uses natural language retrieval techniques (TFIDF
> vectorisation of documents) to allow for more powerful searchs than
> "apt-cache search XXX".

I'll have a look at it. But I think that such tools would be most useful
if each package would have a "Keywords:" field.

>   Also take in account that the users will always see a
> hierarchicaly (sp?) division of software if using the menu system (in any
> window manager) or KDE and GNOME.

I guess that's a completly different thing. We're discussing package
management now.

regards

Marcin
-- 
Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://marcin.owsiany.pl/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216  FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75  D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216


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