Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Amaya]

Stephen Frost dijo:
> Those who have concerns or political issues need not attend but that
> should not stop the conference from happening if there are enough
> people who are interested.

Absolutely true, but I found Canada much mor affordable than the States
last summer ;-)

-- 
  I would rather starve than lose your acceptance
 .''`.My eyes will always show my empty soul
: :' :- Boy Sets Fire
`. `' Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux (Sid 2.4.20 Ext3)
  `-   www.amayita.com  www.malapecora.com  www.chicasduras.com

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Mathieu Roy]

> I don't think there is any definition for what an "official" Debian
> subproject is.  And even if there were, whether it's on www.debian.org or
> not would not be a reliable indicator.  I choose to use www.d.o for Debian
> Jr. because it is convenient for me to keep the pages there.  Other
> subprojects that might be considered "official" (whatever that means) are
> hosted elsewhere presumably because it is easier for the subproject leader
> to do so.

The fact a project is hosted somewhere usually imply some special
relations to his host.

For instance, projects hosted by the FSF at freesoftware.fsf.org made
often people wrongly assume that the projects were officially FSF
projects.
For the same problem, you will not get a project in
www.gnu.org/software which is not a GNU Package.

There are many examples like that, not specifically related to
computers. If you get an article on the Washington Post website,
you'll probably think that the article is somehow directly linked to
the Washington Post, published by the Post and so think that the
newspaper is responsible for it's content.

So even if, for Debian people, being hosted on www.debian.org is not a
reliable indicator, it's highly possible that many persons rely on it.
Not being hosted on www.debian.org does not make an official project
unofficial but being hosted on www.debian.org will probably 
make it in some manner official for (maybe) a lot of visitors.

I do not say that's a problem, I don't know, it's up to you. My point
is just the fact that the host name is not something completely free
(as beer!)


Regards,


-- 
Mathieu Roy
 
  Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
  Not a native english speaker: 
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Ben Armstrong]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 07:37:21PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> The fact a project is hosted somewhere usually imply some special
> relations to his host.

Sure.

> So even if, for Debian people, being hosted on www.debian.org is not a
> reliable indicator, it's highly possible that many persons rely on it.

Well, I don't mean to say that my Debian Jr. project is "not official" and
therefore people shouldn't rely on it.  Rather, my point is that where the
project is hosted shouldn't indicate that a project *isn't* "official".

If, for example, any project started by any Debian Developer in good 
standing which has been acknowledged by the community as making a positive 
contribution to Debian is deemed an "official" project, the developer
shouldn't be forced to host it anywhere in particular, but rather should 
have the choice to host it wherever is convenient.

That being said, I do believe we need a better (more comprehensive) list of
such projects with higher visibility on the web site.  But that list will 
likely consist of pointers both to www.d.o and other sites 
(people.debian.org, alioth, and *.debian.net being a few popular 
alternatives).

> Not being hosted on www.debian.org does not make an official project
> unofficial but being hosted on www.debian.org will probably 
> make it in some manner official for (maybe) a lot of visitors.

Right.

> I do not say that's a problem, I don't know, it's up to you. My point
> is just the fact that the host name is not something completely free
> (as beer!)

I don't think there's a problem here.  By mentioning that my project is a
"personal project" I just meant to underline that to be accepted as a Debian
subproject has very informal criteria.  I think this is a good thing.  As
such, I am against making hosting a project on a particular site a
requirement to bless it with "official" status.

Was that a bit more clear?

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUGhttp://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `  [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
 [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Gustavo Franco]

On 2003.05.23 13:56, Ben Armstrong wrote: 
> [...]
 
> Debian Jr. is a personal subproject[0] within Debian.  It is my chosen area
> of focus for Debian, and as such, the only "blessing" I have had from the
> Debian project for it is the little parcel of web space I have for the
> Debian Jr. home page and the mailing list.

I agree with it, but i guess that it needs rules.
 
> That being said, there is certainly a difference between "projects which
> fork Debian to make a new distro (i.e. providing own versions of existing
> Debian packages)" vs. "projects which add packages of their own (outside
> Debian) to extend Debian" vs. "projects which include all of their packages
> in Debian itself (or at least extend Debian's infrastructure itself, if the
> project doesn't have any packages of its own)".  Debian Jr. is of the latter
> sort.  Which of these three kinds of projects are Mono, ipv6, and ddtp?

Forks aren't subprojects.

"Projects which add packages or features for packages that already exists or
some sort of experimental infrastructure", these are IMHO good for Debian
subprojects.Debian Jr., Mono, ipv6 and ddtp are covered by this description,
no?

> [0] By "personal subproject" I don't mean to undervalue the contributions
> others have made.  I'm certainly grateful for the input and support I have
> received from others both inside and outside the Debian project. I mean
> simply that it was born out of my personal interests, and remains primarily
> the work of one person: me.  So again, I don't know what "official" means in 
> this context.
 
Yes, you're the leader of this subproject but IMHO you need be a developer to
start/maintain a new subproject and follow (obviously) the DFSG and the 
decisions of the entire project.I'm just trying start some points to be included
in the "Debian subproject guidelines".


Cheers,
Gustavo Franco

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Matt Ryan]

> > If your countrymen share that sort of attitute it explains why the
> > USA is in so many wars.
>
> Yeah. We rarely suffer fools gladly.

Stop it, you're killing me. People from the USA describing others as fools.
One only has to look at the dross in US newspapers and TV news bulletins to
understand the level of understanding that most Americans have of the world
outside their own trousers.


Matt.

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Mathieu Roy]

>   My government may do things in a fashion that could be
>  improved (to put it mildly), but as a people, we are generally
>  benevolent, until something impinges on our consciousness and makes
>  us take notice. And given our collective attention span, it takes a
>  lot. 

I'm not a DD but I find very strange all this nationalist talk on this
mailing-list. 

Discussing whether US-Americans are a people like "that" or "this"
seems to me very appropriate for a flame-war, not to schedule an
event.

Frankly, such generalization (American are all a good/bad people)
seems very childish. What's the point in the end, about the meeting?


-- 
Mathieu Roy
 
  Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
  Not a native english speaker: 
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Gustavo Franco]

On 2003.05.23 15:10, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> [...]

> That being said, I do believe we need a better (more comprehensive) list of
> such projects with higher visibility on the web site.  But that list will 
> likely consist of pointers both to www.d.o and other sites 
> (people.debian.org, alioth, and *.debian.net being a few popular 
> alternatives).

Yes and it isn't only a list containing these projects.As i said, we need the 
guidelines to subprojects too.
 
> [...]

Cheers,
Gustavo Franco -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo]

El día 23 may 2003, Gustavo Franco escribía:
> Hi,
> 
> Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> and many others[1] aren't? The Debian Desktop is a good
> initiative, but there are many others that are being
> excluded from the website.I've some ideas:
> 
> - Guidelines to Debian subprojects (Do you known
>   what are the official and unofficial subprojects now?);
> 
> - List the subprojects in two areas of the website:
>   * Developers' corner, to subprojects in initial state;
>   * A new area called: Subprojects, containing full
>   information about the subprojects considered mature.
> 
> [1] = "Mono for Debian", ipv6 (is it official or unofficial?),
> "ddtp", ...

  Just because nobody proposed it? debian-lex started no so much ago,
  and it was simply somebody proposing it and creating and mantaining
  it.

  BTW, apt-get install subproject-howto

-- 
  Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


pgplrzpXELG9I.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Marc Singer wrote:

> Perhaps we can look at this a different way.  I haven't read anyone
> voicing the opinion that GWB (can't say the name of the beast out
> loud) is a 'good fellow'.

Well since you asked.  I think GWB is a 'good fellow'.

>  I'm supposing that all of us agree that
> he's a snake-oil salesmen of the odious kind, interested most in
> lining his pockets and the pockets of his pals at the expense of the
> majority of US citizens as well as international citizens.

Nope.  Don't agree at all.

My only objection to a conference in the US is the weather is miserable.
I want to go somewhere warm!

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Michael Banck]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 07:07:19PM +0100, Matt Ryan wrote:
> > > If your countrymen share that sort of attitute it explains why the
> > > USA is in so many wars.
> >
> > Yeah. We rarely suffer fools gladly.
> 
> Stop it, you're killing me. People from the USA describing others as fools.
> One only has to look at the dross in US newspapers and TV news bulletins to
> understand the level of understanding that most Americans have of the world
> outside their own trousers.

/me invokes azeem's law[0]. This thread has ended.


Michael

-- 
[0] Whenever Matt Ryan enters a Flamewar, no more non-value can be added
to it and therefore the thread will die.

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Gustavo Franco]

On 2003.05.23 16:06, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> [...]
>   Just because nobody proposed it? debian-lex started no so much ago,
>   and it was simply somebody proposing it and creating and mantaining
>   it.
> 
>   BTW, apt-get install subproject-howto
Hi,

I guess that subproject-howto can be the start to 'Debian 
Subproject Guidelines' or 'Debian Subproject Policy'.What do you
think, Ben?

Cheers,
Gustavo Franco -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Jarno Elonen]

> That's funny considering just how many people are risking their LIVES to
> get here.  Then again, maybe its not, maybe its an insult to the ones
> who've died trying to get here over the years.

I don't think not wanting to go somewhere is an insult to other people who do 
want to go there.

> >  The DMCA is one problem.
>
> One which is not just a US headache.  The "EU Copyright Directive" is
> coming next, so where will all you Europeans run to when that law
> eventually comes into force?

1) It's fortuantely not here yet
2) Even the proposal is not as bad as DMCA and most countries will
   implement a much milder laws than suggested
3) Even if the DMCA was copied verbatim to Finland, I would prefer to
   get prosecuted near home where I know the culture and can speak
   my native language

> And this is also only a US problem?

Don't take us wrong, of course it's not. It's just that US IPR enforcement 
policies there are currently quite unpredictable and the general (or even 
*official*) attitude toward foreigners isn't exactly warm at the moment.

Please don't take it as a personal insult. I've visited USA multiple times, 
like especially NYC and have taken some very nice photos from the WTC etc. 
Still, even if I'm overly cautios, I just don't want to risk getting 
imprisoned in a foreign land for contributing to Transcode, for example. The 
situation may change in the future, of course.

I bet there are places where American Debian developer's don't feel safe to 
travel either but I doubt you mean it as an insult to people living there - 
or people wanting to move there.

- Jarno

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Emile van Bergen]

Hi,

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:14:48PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:

> On Thu, 22 May 2003, Marc Singer wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps we can look at this a different way.  I haven't read anyone
> > voicing the opinion that GWB (can't say the name of the beast out
> > loud) is a 'good fellow'.
> 
> Well since you asked.  I think GWB is a 'good fellow'.

Yes. Too bad he didn't happily stay being a good fellow on his ranch in
Texas.

Cheers,


Emile.

-- 
E-Advies - Emile van Bergen   [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
tel. +31 (0)70 3906153   http://www.e-advies.nl


pgpaRtbeDPTJj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Ben Armstrong]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 04:56:06PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I guess that subproject-howto can be the start to 'Debian 
> Subproject Guidelines' or 'Debian Subproject Policy'.What do you
> think, Ben?

Sure, it could be a start.  The subproject-howto is intended to be a
hands-on guide to creating and maintaining a subproject.  It's pretty much a
"guidelines" document already.  However, a) it only contains my point of
view and b) it is dreadfully incomplete. 

I don't think there needs to be a policy document.  Policy is appropriate 
for our software because failure to comply with policy makes it difficult 
for parts of the system to cooperate with each other.  Subprojects are much 
more self-contained, and there are as many ways of doing them as there are 
project leaders.  So a guidelines document is all that is really needed.

I'd like to see input from others into the subproject-howto document,
particularly those who are in the process of creating new subprojects, and
those who have already established their projects but may have done things
differently than I have with Debian Jr. 

Would an Alioth project for subproject-howto help move this document along?

Is the name "subproject-howto" OK?

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUGhttp://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `  [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
 [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Ben Armstrong]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:01:46PM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > That being said, there is certainly a difference between "projects which
> > fork Debian to make a new distro (i.e. providing own versions of existing
> > Debian packages)" vs. "projects which add packages of their own (outside
> > Debian) to extend Debian" vs. "projects which include all of their packages
> > in Debian itself (or at least extend Debian's infrastructure itself, if the
> > project doesn't have any packages of its own)".  Debian Jr. is of the latter
> > sort.  Which of these three kinds of projects are Mono, ipv6, and ddtp?
> 
> Forks aren't subprojects.

Sure.  I just included it as a part of the spectrum for the sake of 
comparison.

> "Projects which add packages or features for packages that already exists or
> some sort of experimental infrastructure", these are IMHO good for Debian
> subprojects.Debian Jr., Mono, ipv6 and ddtp are covered by this description,
> no?

It sounds plausible.  Debian Jr. is, at least.  I didn't look at the others.  
That's why I was asking you, since you brought it up. :)

> Yes, you're the leader of this subproject but IMHO you need be a developer to
> start/maintain a new subproject and follow (obviously) the DFSG and the 
> decisions of the entire project.

Sure.  So minimally, a subproject needs a DD to found the project and a DD 
to add what the project produces to Debian.  But beyond that fairly 
self-evident point, what else can we say about what a subproject *should* 
do?  There are probably lots of things that are *beneficial* to making a 
subproject work, but I can't think of anything else that is *necessary*.

> I'm just trying start some points to be
> included in the "Debian subproject guidelines".

And I'm glad you brought it up.  I had hoped to get further with my 
subproject-howto, but ran out of "oomph" some time ago. :)

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUGhttp://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `  [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
 [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]

Re: Getting hostname

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Matt Zimmerman]
>> a) Can I get the hostname in my shell script another way (this could be a
>> question for this list)?
> 
> getent hosts foo.bar.baz

getent is available on Linux and Solaris (7 and 8).

It is not available on Tru64 Unix 5.2, Irix 6.5.15, Mac OS X 10.2,
HP-UX (11.00 and 11.22) and AIX (5.1).

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Matt Ryan]

Michael Banck wrote:
> /me invokes azeem's law[0]. This thread has ended.

> [0] Whenever Matt Ryan enters a Flamewar, no more non-value can be added
> to it and therefore the thread will die.

I'm not sure why you see my input as non-value? Surely its not the fact that
a bunch of tightly wound geeks don't like what I preach? If so, please try
living outside of the flock and rebel against the herd mentality.
As for your rule, please review my thread on "Daft Internet Stuff" for a
run-down on my view of such things.


Matt.

autobuild request: make config.log available

[Derek Atkins]

Hi,

I'm one of the core maintainers of GnuCash.  The Debian Maintainer
has asked for my help in debugging some of the autobuild problems
with various Debian platforms.  Unfortunately he cannot provide
sufficient information to help debug the problem.

In particular, part of the problem appears to happen during the
configure phase.  In order to debug the configuration problem
I need access to the config.log during the failed build process.
Unfortunately the autobuild process does not provide access to
the contents of config.log, so there is no way to remotely debug
this problem.

Therefore, I humbly request that the autobuild process be improved to
provide config.log files for failed builds to enable remote debugging
of problems during the configure phase.

Thanks,

-derek

PS: I am not subscribed, so please CC me on replies.  Thanks.
-- 
   Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
   Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
   URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[geordie]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 12:10:35PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2003 12:38:09 +1000, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 
> 
> > PPS Be grateful that you have more control over your government than
> > I have over mine.  My government obeys yours.
> 
>   So you can't control your government to do the right thing,
>  and in frustration you lash out against my family?

No one is lashing out against your family, although you may well be 
collaterally 
damaged.  You could (a) deal with it, or (b) migrate.

Geordie.

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Don Armstrong]

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> My only objection to a conference in the US is the weather is
> miserable.

Which part of the US? Surely the weather in Los Angeles isn't
miserable... unless you consider the total absense of weather to be
miserable.

> I want to go somewhere warm!

107F and 100% humidity isn't warm enough for you? [Temp and Humidity
in Ft. AP Hill a few years ago August.]

Maybe we should hold a conference in Death Valley? [120F >48C for 43
consecutive days...[1]]


Don Armstrong
1: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/MichaelLevin.shtml
-- 
EQUAL RIGHTS FOR WOMEN
Don't be teased or humiliated. See their look of surprise when you
step right up to a urinal and use it with a smile. Get Dr. Mary Evers'
EQUAL-NOW Adapter (pat. appld. for) -- purse size, fool proof,
sanitary -- comes in nine lovely, feminine, psychadelic patterns --
requires no fitting, no prescriptions.
 -- Robert A Heinlein _I Will Fear No Evil_ p470.

http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://www.anylevel.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu


pgpknz1PvxX2Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[David Nusinow]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:14:48PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> My only objection to a conference in the US is the weather is miserable.
> I want to go somewhere warm!

You want warm? Come out to Southern California, Florida, or Hawaii for
warm weather pretty much the whole year 'round. We don't have to have a
conference in the Northeast, after all.

 - David Nusinow

Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

I just ran some stats on my APT sources (mostly Woody), and discovered
that the distribution of number of packages per developer is very
uneven.  This is the histogram of developers with the specific number
of packages they maintain:


Packages  Developers
   1 239
   2 128
   3 112
   4  89
   5  72
   6  55
   7  33
   8  20
   9  34
   10 19
   11 16
   12 16
   13 16
   14  8
   15 10
   16  9
   17  7
   18  7
   19  2
   20  6
   21  5
   22  5
   23  3
   24  3
   25  3
   26  3
   27  3
   29  3
   32  1
   33  1
   34  1
   37  1
   40  1
   41  1
   43  2
   44  1
   46  1
   47  1
   50  2
   52  1
   65  2
   76  1
   83  1
   84  1

One developer is listed as the maintainer of 84 packages.  I am
impressed. :)

24 developers are responsible for 1004 packages in Debian.

I suspect a more even distribution of packages per maintainer would be
a good thing. :)


This is the script I used to generate the histogram.

#!/usr/bin/perl -w

sub lowercase_email {
$maint = shift;
($name, $addr) = $maint =~ m/^(.+)<(.+)>$/;
#return "$name <\L$addr>";
return "$name";
}

open(APT, "apt-cache dumpavail |") || die "Unable to run apt-cache";
while () {
chomp;
$pkg = $1 if /^Package: (.+)$/;
$maint = $1 if /^Maintainer: (.+)$/;
$src = $1 if /^Source: (.+)$/;
if (/^$/) {
$pkg = $src if ($src);
#print "P: $pkg M: $maint\n";
if ( ! exists $pkgs{$pkg}) {
$pkgs{$pkg} = 1;
$maint = lowercase_email($maint);
$maintainers{$maint}++;
}

undef $src;
}
}
close(APT);

for $maint (keys %maintainers) {
#print "$maintainers{$maint} $maint\n";
$hist{$maintainers{$maint}}++;
}

for $count (sort { $a <=> $b } keys %hist) {
print "$count $hist{$count}\n";
}

Re: Getting hostname

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:11:57PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

> [Matt Zimmerman]
> >> a) Can I get the hostname in my shell script another way (this could be a
> >> question for this list)?
> > 
> > getent hosts foo.bar.baz
> 
> getent is available on Linux and Solaris (7 and 8).
> 
> It is not available on Tru64 Unix 5.2, Irix 6.5.15, Mac OS X 10.2,
> HP-UX (11.00 and 11.22) and AIX (5.1).

But the question was directed to debian-devel, not
bunch-of-broken-OSes-devel.

-- 
 - mdz

Re: autobuild request: make config.log available

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Derek Atkins]
> In particular, part of the problem appears to happen during the
> configure phase.  In order to debug the configuration problem
> I need access to the config.log during the failed build process.

This can be fixed in the package build script (debian/rules).  Just
call configure like this

  ./configure --flags || cat config.log

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Colin Watson]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:01:51PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME
> > messages for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God
> > forbid) base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form.
> 
> I should mention also that to get a base64-encoded message past the
> spam filters, one probably needs a fair amount of luck :) Same goes
> for HTML.

Except when one was using reportbug 2.[567] or thereabouts. :) Dunno if
you remember, but it resulted in several more-or-less unreadable bugs
for a while ...

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Herbert Xu]

Guido Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This only works if we have a _clean_ kernel-source-2.X.Y package. One of
> the reasons why maintaining kernel-patch-2.X.Y- packages is such a
> pain is the asymmetry between i386 and other arches - almost every time
> a new kernel-source package is uploaded the kernel-patch-2.X.Y-mips
> package has to be rediffed. So the first and maybe most important step

I can understand your pain.  However, most of the changes made to the
kernel-source are not i386-specific.  In fact, if they were, they would
not be causing these patch conflicts that you're seeing.

So essentially throwing them out means that your architecture will miss
out on all bug fixes.  If this turns out to be what most of you want, then
that's fine and I will do just that.
-- 
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email:  Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Matthew Palmer]

On Thu, 22 May 2003, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> On Thu, 22 May 2003 22:39:02 +1000, Russell Coker
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:  
> > On Thu, 22 May 2003 17:06, Miles Bader wrote:
> >> You mean the iraq war?  What's the point?  How is avoiding the
> >> U.S. going to help anything, regardless of how strongly you feel
> >> about the U.S. governments acts or positions?
> 
> > When tourism goes down the hotel, entertainment, and airline
> > industries suffer.  If enough people boycott the US because of this
> > then it'll keep the American economy down.
> 
>   I see. You all are personally taking action to make it harder
>  for my friends and relatives to find a job, or get decent health care
>  (my ex-boss has been looking for employment for 27 months now, and my
>  step daughter does not have a job with benefits), and you expect me
>  to have sympathy for your views?

Do you have a better way of encougaging the U.S.A. to take an alternate
stance?  It's fairly clear that they don't actually give a shit about the UN
or anyone else, so we can't just "express our displeasure" and expect Bush
and cronies to give a shit.

The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the world,
in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the world.  So,
it goes like this:

* The rest of the world is sick to death of US imperialism;

* The US government ignores world opinion and does it's thing;

* The rest of the world puts pressure on the US people to change things,
since they've at least got half a chance to make changes;

* The US people make the change, or live with the consequences of not
changing.

Remember, the rest of the world does *not* owe you and yours a living.

>   You are taking personal actions inimical to the standard of
>  living of me and my loved ones in retaliation for actions by my
>  government (which I have little control over), and you expect me to
>  roll over and congratulate you all on your stance? Hell, my first
>  instinct is to try and see how I can retaliate.

Not looking for congratulations.  Again, from where I'm sitting, you've got
more direct influence over US policy than I do.  If you have a better
suggestion of how foreigners can influence US policy, I'd love to hear it.

>   Let me clue all of you in: anyone who takes a stand and tries
>  to hurt the US economy, I see as a taking action inimical to me, and
>  my loved ones, and I do *NOT* see that as friendly action. 

And most of the world does not see the actions of your government (and,
since you live in a "democracy" it truly is *your* government - remember,
"of the people, by the people, and for the people", or some such) as overly
friendly, I don't quite see the problem.


-- 
---
#include 
Matthew Palmer, Geek In Residence
http://ieee.uow.edu.au/~mjp16

What makes a debconf?

[Joe Drew]

I have no objection to the existence of a Debian conference in the US, 
particularly given that people are clamouring for one. (I probably 
won't go, though.)

However, I have been bothered by something for a while now: there is no 
real way to distinguish debconf from some other Debian conference, 
excepting that it's called 'debconf.' I know that in organising debconf 
2 in Toronto, I simply asserted control and said "Debconf 2 will be at 
York University."

When Tollef said he wanted to organize Debconf 3 in Oslo, I backed down 
on my desire to have Debconf 3 in Canada again, deferring it to 2004.

It's not entirely clear to me what makes Debconf into 'the' Debian 
conference. For example, if this conference in the US ends up 
happening, what's to say it isn't Debconf 3? The defining 
characteristics, so far as I can define them, are that it is annual, 
and Debian developers go to it.

Do we need some method of deciding what constitutes 'the' Debconf? 

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Tollef Fog Heen]

* Petter Reinholdtsen 

| I suspect a more even distribution of packages per maintainer would be
| a good thing. :)

I think your stats are wrong, at least they are different from
http://www.debian.gr.jp/~kitame/maint.cgi

Not necessarily -- some packages are a lot of work, like xfree, glibc,
apache, some are a decent amount of work, like mailman, cvs and some
are close to zero work, like chrpath and xslide.  People also have
different amounts of time available -- those who are paid to do Debian
maintainence at work will have more time than somebody who works 12
hours/day without any Debian work in there, etc.

So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good thing?
Or rather, why is the current situation so bad?

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are  : :' :
  `. `' 
`-  

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Alan Shutko]

Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the world,
> in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the
> world. 

Well, didn't work that way last time...

-- 
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - I am the rocks.
Looking for a developer in St. Louis? http://web.springies.com/~ats/
Death row is entirely too small and empty.

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Sean 'Shaleh' Perry]

>
> Not necessarily -- some packages are a lot of work, like xfree, glibc,
> apache, some are a decent amount of work, like mailman, cvs and some
> are close to zero work, like chrpath and xslide.  People also have
> different amounts of time available -- those who are paid to do Debian
> maintainence at work will have more time than somebody who works 12
> hours/day without any Debian work in there, etc.
>
> So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good thing?
> Or rather, why is the current situation so bad?
>

indeed.  Some packages are "worth" 10 "normal" packages in the amount of work 
they require.

Also, perhaps the script could deal with items like qa owning orphaned 
packages and the like.

Re: What makes a debconf?

[Sean 'Shaleh' Perry]

>
> Do we need some method of deciding what constitutes 'the' Debconf?

Or maybe we need to be more freeform.  There is no inherent "betterness" of 
say the Oslo conference over one held near Washington, DC.  Maybe there are 4 
of them one year and only one the next.  Maybe we start holding one every 
year in Little Rock, Arkansas and Paris, France.

"Debconf" is about Debian developers trying to meet other devels and users.  
Its about trying to make us a stronger organization.  Its about hacking and 
all of the other reasons we love Debian.

Treating it like a Comdex, a Linux World or anything else just seems wrong.

Developers should feel encouraged to declare a conference whenever and 
whereever they can make one.  If one of us can organize a meet and people 
will show up that makes a conference.

(hmm, reading this before I hit send the above may sound confrontational. Joe 
this is not my intent.  Just expressing how I feel about the whole debconf 
idea).

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Philip Charles]

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Alan Shutko wrote:

> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the world,
> > in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the
> > world.
>
> Well, didn't work that way last time...
>
Maybe the US should elect its President in the same way as Debian
elects its DPL.

Phil.

--
  Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
   +64 3 488 2818Fax +64 3 488 2875Mobile 025 267 9420
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - preferred.  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 I sell GNU/Linux & GNU/Hurd CDs.   See http://www.copyleft.co.nz

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:26:28PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:

> > So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good thing?
> > Or rather, why is the current situation so bad?
> 
> indeed.  Some packages are "worth" 10 "normal" packages in the amount of work 
> they require.

And a maintainer who only has time for one package should maintain one
package, and do a decent job of it, rather than overextend himself.

-- 
 - mdz

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Gunnar Wolf]

Manoj Srivastava dijo [Fri, May 23, 2003 at 12:05:08AM -0500]:
>   It is easy to take actions secure in the feeling that there
>  are no consequences (which seems to be part of your complaint against
>  my goverment).

Not at all. I know that if your economy suffers, mine suffers doubly so.
Mexico is so heavily dependent on the US economy that if you enter a
mild recession we are in crisis... And it is not nice at all. However, I
often say -and this war over petroleum is a good example- that I hope
the US economy will suffer. I know that if this happens I will also
temporarily suffer the results. I am willing to. I justhope that Europe
comes out strengthened, that Europe can effectively become a second
superpower - I am not wishing this in order to harm your family. My
family suffers as well. I wish for this because it is fairier to the
world. In the world there are more families than yours and mine.

>   Hmm. What if  I pass this mail around locally and
>  reciprocate. IU doubt if people in my community would be happy about
>  tis boycott.  This could get to be fun. I'll send it along to all my
>  relatives here in the US who put me on the chain lists. If we get
>  enough people in the US participating in this boycott, it may make a
>  difference.

I doubt this mail is worth much - I am no much good at writing in
English, specially if done just as a mail an swer in a tiring
flamewar...  But you can find myriads of interesting people expressing
basically the same all over the net.

>   Since we all ugly americans, we may need to be educated about
>  where this .cx place is ;-)

As I told you, I am Mexican, and live in Mexico... Sadly, TLDs don't say
much about us - I got a .cx because they were for free for some time :)
- It is the Christmas Island, I understand that an Australian
protectorate, between Australia and Indonesia.

Greetings,

-- 
Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)5630-9700 ext. 1366
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973  F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[David B Harris]

On Fri, 23 May 2003 11:58:45 -0300
Gustavo Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> and many others[1] aren't? The Debian Desktop is a good
> initiative, but there are many others that are being
> excluded from the website.I've some ideas:
> 
> - Guidelines to Debian subprojects (Do you known
>what are the official and unofficial subprojects now?);
> 
> - List the subprojects in two areas of the website:
>* Developers' corner, to subprojects in initial state;
>* A new area called: Subprojects, containing full
>information about the subprojects considered mature.
> 
> [1] = "Mono for Debian", ipv6 (is it official or unofficial?),
> "ddtp", ...

http://www.debian.org/devel/, "Projects" section:

* Debian Web Pages
* Debian archive
* Debian Documentation Project (DDP)
* The X Strike Force
* The Quality Assurance group
* Debian GNU/Linux CD images
* The sponsorship program
* The key signing coordination page
* Debian IPv6 Project
* Debian Jr. Project
* Debian-Med Project
* Debian-Edu Project
* Debian-Lex Project
* The Debian Desktop Project
* Automatic package building system
* Technical Committee
* Debian Description Translation Project (DDTP)
* Alioth: Debian GForge

Certainly seems that they're listed.


pgps6ZrYkKk9O.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Ben Collins]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:53:05PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> 
> I just ran some stats on my APT sources (mostly Woody), and discovered
> that the distribution of number of packages per developer is very
> uneven.  This is the histogram of developers with the specific number
> of packages they maintain:

This is terrible! Wait, I forgot, these numbers mean absolutely nothing.

I'm not sure what you think these numbers represent, but it's like
taking a ratio for each family in a neighborhood of acres/child and
deciding if those kids have too much yard work.

"Oh no, the Collins family has 2 acres per child...those poor kids! Uh,
you say that 3.5 acres of your yard is a lake?"

-- 
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
Deqo   - http://www.deqo.com/

Re: What makes a debconf?

[David B Harris]

On Fri, 23 May 2003 17:33:58 -0700
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Debconf" is about Debian developers trying to meet other devels and users.  
> Its about trying to make us a stronger organization.  Its about hacking and 
> all of the other reasons we love Debian.
> 
> Treating it like a Comdex, a Linux World or anything else just seems wrong.

The problem is that people who can get expenses reimbursed need to have
a focus. Sponsors need to have a focus. There needs to be a "major"
conference for these kinds of things; in other words, it has to be
billed as something more than just a bunch of people getting together,
even if that's what *all* conferences are at heart.

If a Debian Developer's employer is willing to let them go to one trade
conference a year, expenses paid or partially paid, and the options are
"one of a dozen Debian conferences or LinuxWorld", their employers will
say "LinuxWorld". If, on the other hand, the options are "one of a dozen
Debian conferences, Debconf, and LinuxWorld", their employers will
likely allow either of the last two.

> Developers should feel encouraged to declare a conference whenever and 
> whereever they can make one.  If one of us can organize a meet and people 
> will show up that makes a conference.

Of course, but "Debconf" is a specific term. If you're arguing that it
isn't, then we need to come up with another one, that denotes an annual
Debian conference that's official in nature :) See above.

I'm really not trying to say that people can't get together when they
want to. Just saying that having something people can *focus* on is a
benefit to the community. So an annual or semi-annual Debconf is good,
even if all that _really_ distinguishes it from the rest is that we
don't call two conferences "Debconf" within the same six/tweleve-month
time frame :)


pgpldMJDrEpvJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:26:28PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >
> > Not necessarily -- some packages are a lot of work, like xfree, glibc,
> > apache, some are a decent amount of work, like mailman, cvs and some
> > are close to zero work, like chrpath and xslide.  People also have
> > different amounts of time available -- those who are paid to do Debian
> > maintainence at work will have more time than somebody who works 12
> > hours/day without any Debian work in there, etc.
> >
> > So, why do you think having a more even distribution is a good thing?
> > Or rather, why is the current situation so bad?
> >
> 
> indeed.  Some packages are "worth" 10 "normal" packages in the amount of work 
> they require.
> 
> Also, perhaps the script could deal with items like qa owning orphaned 
> packages and the like.

The script can't even get everything a Debian Developer does for Debian.
While most, if not all, active Debian Developers do packaging work,
there's other stuff to be done -- such as taking care of autobuilders,
being a sysadmin, ftp-master, listadmin, or release manager, doing
porters' work.

The work that's being done which does not involve "being listed as a
package's maintainer" is not to be underestimated...

-- 
Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"An expert can usually spot the difference between a fake charge and a
full one, but there are plenty of dead experts." 
  -- National Geographic Channel, in a documentary about large African beasts.


pgpbbtO9j2tWn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Adam Heath]

On Sat, 24 May 2003, Wouter Verhelst wrote:

> The script can't even get everything a Debian Developer does for Debian.
> While most, if not all, active Debian Developers do packaging work,
> there's other stuff to be done -- such as taking care of autobuilders,
> being a sysadmin, ftp-master, listadmin, or release manager, doing
> porters' work.

So doing bts work is worthless?  :)

Re: Very uneven distribution of packages per maintainer

[Adam Heath]

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Ben Collins wrote:

> "Oh no, the Collins family has 2 acres per child...those poor kids! Uh,
> you say that 3.5 acres of your yard is a lake?"

Dredging.  With a snorkel.

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Russell Coker]

On Sat, 24 May 2003 09:51, Alan Shutko wrote:
> > The citizens of the US have a little more power than the rest of the
> > world, in that you have a *vote* as to who gets to fuck the rest of the
> > world.
>
> Well, didn't work that way last time...

They got their second choice.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page

Re: Constitutional amendment: Condorcet/Clone Proof SSD vote tallying

[Jochen Voss]

Hello,

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:45:51PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> I'm going to focus only on your claim that this page shows an example
> of the violation of monotonicity by Manoj's proposal.
> 
> Monotonicity (http://electionmethods.org/evaluation.html#MC) requires
> "With the relative order or rating of the other candidates unchanged,
> voting a candidate higher should never cause the candidate to lose,
> nor should voting a candidate lower ever cause the candidate to win."
> 
> But, on your page, I don't see any examples of "voting a candidate higher
> with the relative order or rating of other candidates unchanged".
> 
> Instead, I see one example of an introduced vote where B, C and A
> are all changed with respect to the default option.

Well, maybe not strictly Monotonicity, but it is an example where a
vote in favour of B causes B to loose.  This is a problem.  And the
problem is caused by the per-option quorum.

I hope this helps,
Jochen
-- 
 Omm
  (0)-(0)
http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/index.html


pgpSVhsWfCd0S.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Martin Schulze]

Martin Schulze wrote:
> Only a few people will probably have noticed the mess resulting from
> tons of different kernel packages in the stable (and unstable)
> distribution.  Not only there are several versions of kernel source in
> each architecture, they are also different for most architectures.
> Only mips and mipsel share the same kernel source.
> 
> To make it worse, there are also third party kernel modules that
> depend on a particular version of the kernel source (they don't depend
> on the particular Debian revision, though, I hope).
> 
> As a result of this, it is almost impossible to update the kernel in a
> released Debian distribution.

Manoj emphasized[1] that using one single kernel source package per
kernel version and maintaining several patch packages for each
architecture which finally build our kernel-image-$version packages is
possible.

However, Herbert Xu hasn't contributed to this thread yet and most of
our architecture maintainers haven't raised a word either.  These are
most probably the people who will continue to do the work, and hence,
need our support if the kernel source tree should be consolidated.

I wonder if some people (Maybe Manoj and Russell, who are both quite
competent) could help with this effort.

I have to admit, that having several architectures use the same plain
kernel source from Linus Torvalds aka kernel.org could be problematic
since many architecture ports use their own kernel repository which is
not always synced with the main kernel tree for whatever reasons.

However, I do believe that it should be a goal of Debian to share as
much code as possible and hence share as much of the kernel through
various architectures as well.

> Removing one kernel version and including another without rebuilding
> all modules packages will break several installations.  Not removing
> the old packages will make the archive grow through time which will
> cause problems with CD build scripts.

To make it more interesting, Matt Zimmerman revealed[2] that merging
all kernel source packages would save space of one CD from our archive
and our CD images.

Ola Lundqvist added[3] that building modules packages is a non-trivial
task since the build process often depends on having the full kernel
source installed and already compiled.  He even provided some code
that could help to cope with this.  He also added a proposed kernel
policy.  Please read and comment.

I wonder whether the build scripts of modules packages can be modified
to not require the compiled kernel source anymore.  This would at
least remove this requirement and turn module building into a less
painful task.

Links:
 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200305/msg01348.html
 2. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200305/msg01368.html
 3. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200305/msg01390.html

Since sarge is far from being released, now would be a perfect time to
start working on consolidating kernel and source packages in order to
have a new and much better working system ready for sarge when it is
time to release.

Regards,

Joey

-- 
WARNING: Do not execute!  This call violates patent DE10108564.
http://www.elug.de/projekte/patent-party/patente/DE10108564

wget -O patinfo-`date +"%Y%m%d"`.html http://patinfo.ffii.org/

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Martin Schulze]

Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> > While convenient for american developers, there are rather a number of
> > non-american developers who will not set foot on American soil, due in
> > part to the DMCA and (I imagine) the apparent dangers to non-americans
> > coming into the country.
> 
> Two of the people I originally contacted said this too, but always in
> the third person.  I ask again, who on this list actually still feels
> this way?

I do.

Even though the US may be an interesting country for holidays, its
government has plastered so many limitations and violations of human
rights that I don't believe I'll ever visit the US again.  The DMCA is
one problem.  Surveillance and misuing personal data, e.g. gained from
the flight agencies are another one.  International politics is right
another problem I dislike too much.  I rather stay a free person in a
free country.

I don't object to a DebConf held in the U.S., though, but many people
will probably not even attend if somebody pays for their flight.
However, I would like DebConf's to be helt outside of the U.S.

Regards,

Joey

-- 
WARNING: Do not execute!  This call violates patent DE10108564.
http://www.elug.de/projekte/patent-party/patente/DE10108564

wget -O patinfo-`date +"%Y%m%d"`.html http://patinfo.ffii.org/

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Joel Baker]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:04:05AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Martin Schulze wrote:
> > Only a few people will probably have noticed the mess resulting from
> > tons of different kernel packages in the stable (and unstable)
> > distribution.  Not only there are several versions of kernel source in
> > each architecture, they are also different for most architectures.
> > Only mips and mipsel share the same kernel source.
> > 
> > To make it worse, there are also third party kernel modules that
> > depend on a particular version of the kernel source (they don't depend
> > on the particular Debian revision, though, I hope).
> > 
> > As a result of this, it is almost impossible to update the kernel in a
> > released Debian distribution.
> 
> Manoj emphasized[1] that using one single kernel source package per
> kernel version and maintaining several patch packages for each
> architecture which finally build our kernel-image-$version packages is
> possible.
> 
> However, Herbert Xu hasn't contributed to this thread yet and most of
> our architecture maintainers haven't raised a word either.  These are
> most probably the people who will continue to do the work, and hence,
> need our support if the kernel source tree should be consolidated.

Well, okay, this is only semi-ontopic for the thread, but as the person
currently working in ~/Debian-Packages/netbsd-kernel-*, I'll speak up:

I'm trying very hard to arrange that we don't repeat the misfeatures of
this particular past. This is, granted, far easier than for Linux, since
there isn't really a concept of a 'separate arch repository' to be out of
sync, on NetBSD.

(No, this isn't pimping it; I don't even have it compiling yet.)

That said, I firmly believe the idea is one with merit, even if it won't
be easy.
-- 
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


pgpifBkogNNq0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: donations wishlist?

[Martin Schulze]

Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 10:15:54AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > I could use some non-mac m68k boxes to do exactly that :-)
> > 
> 
> Does that include boxes that are not supported by the kernel yet ? I
> have a VME 68030 board with full hardware documentation here...

You may want to attend the Oldenburg Linux Developer Meeting which
is derived from the m68k hackers meeting, taking the board and documentation
with you.  

Regards,

Joey

-- 
WARNING: Do not execute!  This call violates patent DE10108564.
http://www.elug.de/projekte/patent-party/patente/DE10108564

wget -O patinfo-`date +"%Y%m%d"`.html http://patinfo.ffii.org/

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Russell Coker]

On Fri, 23 May 2003 17:04, Martin Schulze wrote:
> I wonder if some people (Maybe Manoj and Russell, who are both quite
> competent) could help with this effort.

I would love to contribute, however at the moment I am over-committed already.

Progress towards getting SE Linux support in main is going well, when that is 
sorted out I'll have a lot more spare time for such things.

> I have to admit, that having several architectures use the same plain
> kernel source from Linus Torvalds aka kernel.org could be problematic
> since many architecture ports use their own kernel repository which is
> not always synced with the main kernel tree for whatever reasons.

That's not a problem, you just have to run diff between the source tree for 
the platform in question and the Linus tree.

It will make for some big patches (for example the patch for the kernel used 
on Familiar is extensive and has not been ported to 2.4.20 because it's too 
much work).  Which raises another issue.  Often (always?) some platforms 
don't have support for the latest kernel.  We can probably expect to have the 
last three Linus kernels in our source tree for this reason.

The proceedures for determining which kernels to keep and which to drop will 
also need to be worked out.  We have ia64, hppa, and Familiar-ARM (*) 
platforms with 2.4.19 support but no 2.4.20.  When 2.4.21 comes out we can't 
remove 2.4.20 source until after those platforms have support for 2.4.21 as 
they may just upgrade from 2.4.19 to 2.4.20.

We will probably end up having a minimum of support for three different kernel 
versions at all times.  This is a lot better than supporting three source 
trees for three architectures of the same kernel version!  Even users of i386 
often want old versions of the kernel source because of bugs (I recently had 
a request for a 2.4.18 version of one of my kernel patches because 2.4.19 and 
2.4.20 wouldn't work for someone).

Probably the first thing we should do is make some standards for kernel patch 
packages.  I suggest kernel-patch-2.x-NAME as the package name, and having 
the three latest kernel versions supported for a stable kernel (except when 
there aren't three versions of the patch with the same functionality and when 
it's too difficult to back-port the code) and up to five patches for 2.5.x 
kernels from the last 10 kernel versions.

(*)  Familiar kernel isn't in Debian yet, but hopefully soon will be.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page

Re: Accepted directory-administrator 1.3.5-1 (i386 source)

[Francesco P. Lovergine]

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 09:39:55PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 08:49:52PM +0200, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> > On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 12:31:14PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > > 
> > > >* Acknowledge NMU (closes: #174301, #172803, #179036, #177616)
> > 
> > Ugh, also this one. Do not use changelog for closing fixed bugs. 
> > Do it using BTS directly.
> 
> Come on. This is getting a bit over the top, IMHO.
> 
> After all, he *did* merge those changes from the NMU into his local
> tree. Or even if he just pulled the lastest debian source, it would
> still be a change. I think it's entirely reasonable to do this.
> 
> What is the current consensus on this?
> 

That's a general consensus about not using changelog as a BTS management
tool. That's an improper use, see some old flames about similar
cases. And it generally causes confusion in bug submitters' mind:
how many of them knows the difference between a fixed and a closed bug?
A brief note about NMU changes incorporation in changelog 
and closing those bugs in BTS by hand is more correct IMO.

-- 
Francesco P. Lovergine

Bug#194409: ITP: debnest -- Nested Build System of Debian Source Package

[Masato Taruishi]

Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-23
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: debnest
* License : GPL
  Description : Nested Build System of Debian Source Package

I'm writing a debian build system to create debian binary packages
such that their original upstream sources include debian source
packages. In build-time, this system unpacks their original debian
source packages by 'dpkg-source -x' and propagates policy-defined
targets of debian/rules to the unpacked build-tree.

Description: Nested Build System of Debian Source Package
 Debnest provides a build system to create debian binary packages
 such that original upstream sources include debian source packages,
 i.e. .dsc and other files such as .orig.tar.gz and diff.gz, or .tar.gz.
 .
 This allows as follows:
  * Manage your own debian/ such as debian/rules, debian/control,
debian/changelog and so on separately away from their original
packages.
  * Create your own tuned packages with your own DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS,
CC or something like that from their original packages without
specifying environment variables.
  * Create your own tuned packages with applying pathces to their
original sources as well as debian/* files separating
them completely away from their original source packages.
  * Make it possible to redisribute debian binaries which restrict
source-code from being distributed in modified form _only_ by
the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the
purpose of modifying the program at build time.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux taru.local.valinux.co.jp 2.4.20-686 #1 Mon Jan 13 22:22:30 EST 
2003 i686
Locale: LANG=ja_JP.EUC-JP, LC_CTYPE=ja_JP.EUC-JP

subscribe

[Torsten Landschoff]

subscribe

Re: Accepted directory-administrator 1.3.5-1 (i386 source)

[Michael Banck]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 10:12:35AM +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> And it generally causes confusion in bug submitters' mind: how many of
> them knows the difference between a fixed and a closed bug?  A brief
> note about NMU changes incorporation in changelog and closing those
> bugs in BTS by hand is more correct IMO.

I'd say we should rather ensure that bug submitters get a notification
when a bug is fixed (i.e. by the time of the NMU), in case it's not
handled like that already, than to duplicate information in the
changelog.


Michael

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Ed Cogburn]

Martin Schulze wrote:
Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
While convenient for american developers, there are rather a number of
non-american developers who will not set foot on American soil, due in
part to the DMCA and (I imagine) the apparent dangers to non-americans
coming into the country.
Two of the people I originally contacted said this too, but always in
the third person.  I ask again, who on this list actually still feels
this way?

I do.
Even though the US may be an interesting country for holidays, its
government has plastered so many limitations and violations of human
rights that I don't believe I'll ever visit the US again.

That's funny considering just how many people are risking their LIVES to 
get here.  Then again, maybe its not, maybe its an insult to the ones 
who've died trying to get here over the years.


 The DMCA is one problem.

One which is not just a US headache.  The "EU Copyright Directive" is 
coming next, so where will all you Europeans run to when that law 
eventually comes into force?  Greed among businesses is universal, there 
are plenty of European companies who love that Copyright Directive and 
are pushing it hard.  Yes, I know, only two EU members have enacted it 
so far, but there is too much Big Money behind it for it to fail, its 
just a matter of time (according to the 2 articles I read).  BTW, you 
are aware the DMCA lost its last case in court over here, right?  The 
story is not over, my gut says it will at least be amended eventually.


Surveillance and misuing personal data, e.g. gained from
the flight agencies are another one.

And this is also only a US problem?  What about the public surveillance 
camaras in Britian and elsewhere?  You think the Isrealis are laissez 
faire when it comes to who they allow on their planes?  Big Brother is a 
problem everywhere, its only a problem here now because 9/11 was used as 
an excuse for a power grab.  We have an independent judiciary that will 
eventually decide if they've grabbed too much.


 International politics is right another problem I dislike too much.

One bad President and all of America is suddenly evil?  At most he has 
only about 6 more years, and there's a real chance it will only be about 
2, but you've already written us all off huh, even though this President 
didn't even win the majority vote, you're lumping us all together as 
miscreants with no chance at salvation?  I dislike politics period, all 
governments tend to behave selfishly, erratically, and stupidly, but 
that doesn't mean I'm going to draw up a 
DO-NOT-VISIT-THIS-COUNTRY-BECAUSE-I-DON'T-LIKE-THEIR-LEADER list. 
That's just silly.

> I rather stay a free person in a free country.
So do I, and I like it just where I am.

So do we REALLY want to turn this thread into yet another exercise in 
America bashing?  If someone wants to sponsor a conference here, FINE, 
let them, for heaven's sakes!  Most of the ones doing the bitching here 
would likely not come anyway because of the expense of getting here. 
And if the Europeans want to have a conference of their own, FINE, let 
them, for heaven's sake!  Most Americans won't come not because we're 
boycotting French Fries, but because WE can't afford the travel either. 
 Its not like there is some rule that says we can only have one 
conference at a time.  This whole thread is getting ridiculous.

More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Colin Watson]

Hi,

bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In addition,
attachments are now only displayed as a download link rather than as a
download link plus the full encoded attachment.

In general, this seems to make bug reports much more readable. If you
need to turn it off for some reason, append "&mime=no" to the URL to
make the system revert to the old-style display.

(MIME header encoding, such as "=?iso-8859-15?q?...?=", is still not
decoded readably, nor is there any recoding performed to a common
character set. There are patches for that around that I intend to try to
merge.)

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Herbert Xu]

Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Manoj emphasized[1] that using one single kernel source package per
> kernel version and maintaining several patch packages for each
> architecture which finally build our kernel-image-$version packages is
> possible.

It seems that there is some confusion here as to what the term kernel source
package means.

I believe Martin is referring to Debian source packages, i.e., the things
that you get via apt-get source and make binary packages out of.  It
would be advantageous for security fixes if there were only one such
package so that multiple kernel-image packages can be built from it.

Manoj on the hand (correct me if I'm wrong) is referring to the source
code of the Linux kernel which is an entirely different beast.  There
is no doubt that we can get away with just one kernel-source binary
package per version.  Indeed, this is already the case bar two
architectures, ia64 and hppa.

The goal that Martin is trying to achieve is indeed a noble one.
Unfortunately I personally believe that it is not realistic.  It will
not become achievable until one of the following happens:

1. We reduce the number of architectures that we support.
2. The upstream kernel starts supporting multiple architectures by default.
3. We do not release kernel packages until all architectures are up-to-date.
   This could take up to a year in some cases and would require a lot of
   man-power.

1 is politically infeasible.  2 is out of our reach.  3 can be done but
in my opinion it is undesirable as the changes that cause delays in
architectures from being up-to-date are probably going to be the ones
that make back-porting security fixes difficult or slow.  And yes we
will have to back-port them if we went down that route.

So unless someone can come up with a solution to this problem,
we will have to live with multiple Debian source packages for now.

This does make security fixes more difficult than it would be otherwise,
however, I do not think it is unsurmountable given enough cooperation
from the people involved.


Here is my rough idea as to how it can work:

1. The architectures should be treated as independent packages.

We should not be shy of releasing DSAs for some architectures before
others.  Since we cannot assume that all architectures are at the same
version, some will inevitably take longer to fix due to the back-porting
involved.

When a security alert is raised, the Security Team can either start
building kernel images themselves or notify the kernel maintainers to
do it.  Then multiple DSAs can be released as the images are built
and uploaded.

2. We should be more liberal about adding new kernels to the stable
archive and getting rid of old ones.

The main advantage to this is in fact security.  It is routine for small
security fixes to enter a stable kernel unannounced.  For instance,
between 2.4.18 and 2.4.19, dozens of unannounced small security which only
affect specific drivers were fixed.  It also minimises any back-porting
that has to be done when a security alert is raised.

The disadvantage is of course the potential to break existing systems.
However, I believe this can be minimised through careful management and
thorough testing.  It is also mitigated by the fact that we allow multiple
kernels to be installed simultaneously so it is easy to roll back.

In fact, due to the use of modules, it is often impossible to make
security fixes which are module ABI compatible with previous kernels.
For example, the last two security holes (ptrace and net hash) both
changed the modules ABI.

3. All kernel-image maintainers should make sure that their packages
can be rebuilt on a system other than their own.  This needs to be
stressed since these packages aren't checked by the autobuilders so we
need to be extra careful.


Let me make it a bit more concrete as to what we can do about woody
right now.

Problem: Too many kernel-source packages.

This is caused in part by gratuitous kernel-patch dependencies.
Kernel-patch packages should *never* depend on a kernel-source
package since the user can always use a kernel tar ball.

Solution: Remove offending kernel-patch packages and kernel-source packages.
Users of those kernel-source packages should be encouraged to upgrade to
a later version.  I'd recommend that we keep 2.4.18 and inject 2.4.19/2.4.20
as soon as possible.  All architectures have kernel images in either
stable or proposed-updates that is at least 2.4.18 or higher.

For 2.2 I suggest that we move to 2.2.25 ASAP and move the one remaining
architecture that only work on 2.2 (m68k) to it.

Problem: Too many kernel-image souce packages.

We will have to live with this one.

Solution: None.  However, if we treat each architecture indenpendently,
the task for releasing security fixes becomes more manageble.  This
is also easier if we regularly update the kernel-image packages in stable.

Problem: Binary module packages.

This is actually not too bad for woody as we

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Michael Banck]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
> for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
> base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In addition,
> attachments are now only displayed as a download link rather than as a
> download link plus the full encoded attachment.

Great! Thanks a lot, Colin and the rest of the debbugs team :)


Michael

-- 
> "old tradition" usually seems to mean "good idea" to me.
For some people, rebooting machines at first sight of trouble is an old
tradition, too... >:)
-- Josip Rodin

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
> for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
> base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In addition,
> attachments are now only displayed as a download link rather than as a
> download link plus the full encoded attachment.
> 
> In general, this seems to make bug reports much more readable. If you
> need to turn it off for some reason, append "&mime=no" to the URL to
> make the system revert to the old-style display.
> 
> (MIME header encoding, such as "=?iso-8859-15?q?...?=", is still not
> decoded readably, nor is there any recoding performed to a common
> character set. There are patches for that around that I intend to try to
> merge.)

Is there any chance of these changes being merged into the debbugs
package? It's last update is over a year old...

-- 
Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"An expert can usually spot the difference between a fake charge and a
full one, but there are plenty of dead experts." 
  -- National Geographic Channel, in a documentary about large African beasts.


pgpFk3fOIRoLB.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Guido Guenther]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:58:15PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> That's not a problem, you just have to run diff between the source tree for 
> the platform in question and the Linus tree.
This only works if we have a _clean_ kernel-source-2.X.Y package. One of
the reasons why maintaining kernel-patch-2.X.Y- packages is such a
pain is the asymmetry between i386 and other arches - almost every time
a new kernel-source package is uploaded the kernel-patch-2.X.Y-mips
package has to be rediffed. So the first and maybe most important step
is to have a _clean_ kernel-source-2.X.Y- package to patch against
(which won't be removed from the archive as long as a single
kernel-patch-2.X.Y- depends on it). i386 would then just simply be
kernel-patch-2.X.Y-i386.
Regards,
 -- Guido

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Colin Watson]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:45:58PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Is there any chance of these changes being merged into the debbugs
> package? It's last update is over a year old...

Actually the last upload to experimental was Sun, 17 Nov 2002. But yes,
there should really be an upload to unstable at some point; I think I've
fixed the main issue that made 2.4 unsuitable for unstable (namely the
hashed directory structure breaking old non-CGI-using setups).

Pretty much everything we do goes into debbugs CVS, FWIW.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#194442: ITP: libcodetext-perl -- Syntax Highlighting for Tk

[Marc Leeman]

Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-23
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: libcodetext-perl
  Version : 0.3.1
  Upstream Author : Hans Jeuken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://cpan.org/
* License : GPL
  Description : Syntax Highlighting for Tk

 This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
 under the same terms as Perl itself.
 .
 Tk::CodeText.pm is a Tk::TextUndo widget with capabilities of syntax
 highlighting. At this moment only the Perl language is supported. The
 highlight mechanism however, is of a plugin-type. Adding additional
 languages should be a matter of writing Tk::CodeText::MyLanguage modules.
 .
 This is the initial release. It has been written and tested on a
 linux machine. It is untested for microsoft based machines or mac.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux mykene 2.4.20-xfs-v4l2 #2 Sat Mar 8 19:17:24 CET 2003 i686
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Steve Kowalik]

At 10:27 pm, Friday, May 23 2003, Wouter Verhelst mumbled:
> Is there any chance of these changes being merged into the debbugs
> package? It's last update is over a year old...
> 
debbugs_2.4_all.deb 18-Nov-2002 22:0280k

Not quite. Well, that's experimental, but whatever.

-- 
   Steve
 how about MTBF?  scsi will once again rise high and rule with a metal
fist

Bug#194443: ITP: libsyntaxhighlight-perl -- Highlighting of Syntactical Structures

[Marc Leeman]

Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-23
Severity: wishlist

* Package name: libsyntaxhighlight-perl
  Version : 1.0
  Upstream Author : Cory Johns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://cpan.org
* License : GPL
  Description : Highlighting of Syntactical Structures

 This is a  module  for  marking  up  code  files  for  presentation,
 printing,  or  publication.  This  markup  can  be  made  up  of any user-
 specified strings  and  can  include  anything  ranging  from  HTML/XML to
 PostScript  formatting  codes  to   ANSI  escape  sequences  to abstract,
 binary-data markups.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux mykene 2.4.20-xfs-v4l2 #2 Sat Mar 8 19:17:24 CET 2003 i686
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

好久不见~~开网上商店的事考虑得怎么样了？

[李静]

好久不见~~
开网上商店的事考虑得怎么样了？什么时候开张？
听说你要请人开发网店程序？那太贵了，功能还不全面，不如买个成熟产品

给你推荐一个你看看 http://www.eyangsoft.com
一个叫亿阳软件的，东西做得不错，叫popgo2.0网店系统

功能倒挺全的，关键是操作很简单，几分钟就能上手，想不到开网店原来这么简单：）

他们网站有在线演示，连后台都可以操作，你有时间去看一下，以后用什么程序也好有个参考

有不明白的直接问他们吧，我不太懂，hoho~~~，他们的联系email:[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]:93658488
电话好象是 13320220950

不聊了，改天一起去喝茶，非常时期，注意身体哦~~！
  　　　
  　　 李静
  　　 2003-5-23

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Wouter Verhelst]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:56:46PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:45:58PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Is there any chance of these changes being merged into the debbugs
> > package? It's last update is over a year old...
> 
> Actually the last upload to experimental was Sun, 17 Nov 2002.

Ah, sorry; I didn't see there was a package in experimental.

> But yes,
> there should really be an upload to unstable at some point; I think I've
> fixed the main issue that made 2.4 unsuitable for unstable (namely the
> hashed directory structure breaking old non-CGI-using setups).
> 
> Pretty much everything we do goes into debbugs CVS, FWIW.

Thanks.

-- 
Wouter Verhelst
Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org
Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org
"An expert can usually spot the difference between a fake charge and a
full one, but there are plenty of dead experts." 
  -- National Geographic Channel, in a documentary about large African beasts.


pgpj71FILsG2F.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Alan Shutko]

Glenn McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Thu, 22 May 2003 12:20:39 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  Let me clue all of you in: anyone who takes a stand and tries
>>  to hurt the US economy, I see as a taking action inimical to me, and
>>  my loved ones, and I do *NOT* see that as friendly action. 
>
> What you say is just bad, bad, bad, and you should be ashamed.

Did you forget to take logic while you were in school?

> In the least it implies you personally are only friendly with people
> when you are taking their money. In other words, you dont have any true
> friends.

No, Manoj isn't implying that at all.  He said that if an individual
is taking a stand to hurt the US economy, he views that as an
unfriendly action.  He can certainly be friends with people who
aren't giving him money, but if someone has the intent "I'm going to
take certain actions to hurt their economy and hope they learn a
lesson" that's not friendly.

> On the Australia-US trade deal thats being worked on.
> If it worked out to be better for Australia than for the US, would you
> bear a grudge against all individual Australians ? 

See your below comment on separation between between governments and
individuals.

If the trade deal turned out to help Australia more than it helped
the US, who cares... we're still doing better.

If the trade deal _hurt_ the US while helping Australia, I'd be far
more likely to bear a grudge against the US politicians who
negotiated it, because it's pretty likely that they screwed the rest
of us for something that helped them out.

> There is a layer of abstraction been government and people, any action
> by or against your government is not necesarily an action from or against
> individual US'ians.

Yes, and that's what you seem to be missing.  The US economy is huge
mass of individuals.  Hurting the economy will certainly hurt
individual US'ians more than it will hurt anyone involved in
government (because those in government are usually independantly
wealthy).  So people intent on harming the US economy are intent
individuals.

This seems much the same rationale as spam fighters... trying to hurt
innocents in hopes they'll rise up and convince their ISP to take
some action.  Except with spam all that's lost is some mail... taking
deliberate actions to hurt an economy can destroy families.


> I hope you can see the obvious flaws in your comments, and can learn
> from your mistakes.

Ditto.

-- 
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - I am the rocks.
Looking for a developer in St. Louis? http://web.springies.com/~ats/
"I am Tigger of Borg! HooHooHoo...Assimilatin's what Tiggers do best!"

Re: Orphaning my packages

[Goulais, Raphael]

On Friday 23 May 2003 03:52, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Morgon Kanter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > None taken. And no, I am not.
> [a DD]
>
> OK, then, I'm going ahead and taking fltk1.1.

Does this mean that debian policy is that DD have priority over a non-DD ?
Perhaps Morgon wants to become a DD ... and packaging fltk1.1 could be an 
interesting work for him, and could give him some help in the process of 
displaying interest to the debian community. Who are you to take over this 
package, just because you made it through the processs before him ?

Raphael

Non-DD package maint.

Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Gustavo Franco]

Hi,
Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
and many others[1] aren't? The Debian Desktop is a good
initiative, but there are many others that are being
excluded from the website.I've some ideas:
- Guidelines to Debian subprojects (Do you known
  what are the official and unofficial subprojects now?);
- List the subprojects in two areas of the website:
  * Developers' corner, to subprojects in initial state;
  * A new area called: Subprojects, containing full
  information about the subprojects considered mature.
[1] = "Mono for Debian", ipv6 (is it official or unofficial?),
"ddtp", ...
Comments?
Regards,
Gustavo Franco -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Accepted directory-administrator 1.3.5-1 (i386 source)

[Josip Rodin]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:28:34AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> > And it generally causes confusion in bug submitters' mind: how many of
> > them knows the difference between a fixed and a closed bug?  A brief
> > note about NMU changes incorporation in changelog and closing those
> > bugs in BTS by hand is more correct IMO.
> 
> I'd say we should rather ensure that bug submitters get a notification
> when a bug is fixed (i.e. by the time of the NMU), in case it's not
> handled like that already, than to duplicate information in the
> changelog.

I figure a patch could be provided for the right part of katie -- it already
knows NMUs (special case for not closing bugs), you just have to insert the
sending of mail with the right verbiage.

The latter, however, doesn't strike me as particularly obvious. What do you
tell the submitter? Do you recommend the upgrade, or just suggest it?
Do you mention it's a NMU, should they care? It's somewhat puzzling, as
there are NMUs of various qualities... Arguably, there are maintainer
uploads of various qualities, but given it's the official upload, the
"licence" to recommend it is implied, whereas with a NMU, it is not.

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Josip Rodin]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
> for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
> base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form.

I should mention also that to get a base64-encoded message past the spam
filters, one probably needs a fair amount of luck :) Same goes for HTML.

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Re: Maintaining kernel source in sarge

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:04:05AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:

> To make it more interesting, Matt Zimmerman revealed[2] that merging all
> kernel source packages would save space of one CD from our archive and our
> CD images.

I was probably exaggerating slightly; I did not do the calculations.
However, each kernel-source package represents 25M of binary and 30M of
source packages, which is a significant amount of space both in the main
archive and on the CD set, not to mention the benefits in simplicity and
maintainability.

> Since sarge is far from being released, now would be a perfect time to
> start working on consolidating kernel and source packages in order to have
> a new and much better working system ready for sarge when it is time to
> release.

Another thing that concerns me is the upgrade process.  The practice of
overwriting the running kernel and modules results in a risky, interactive
installation process, and makes it impossible to back out to the old kernel
unless the user takes appropriate measures.

I noticed that the current 2.4.20 kernel-image packages in unstable have
taken a different approach.  When the i386 kernel was updated to include the
ptrace fix, it was built as a separate binary package, 2.4.20-1-
rather than 2.4.20-.  This allowed both kernels to be installed
simultaneously, and the upgrade easily reverted.  Users who had installed
the kernel-image-2.4-686 metapackage were still automatically upgraded.

-- 
 - mdz

Re: Orphaning my packages

[Josip Rodin]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 04:28:59PM +0200, Goulais, Raphael wrote:
> > > None taken. And no, I am not.
> > [a DD]
> >
> > OK, then, I'm going ahead and taking fltk1.1.
> 
> Does this mean that debian policy is that DD have priority over a non-DD ?
> Perhaps Morgon wants to become a DD ... and packaging fltk1.1 could be an 
> interesting work for him, and could give him some help in the process of 
> displaying interest to the debian community. Who are you to take over this 
> package, just because you made it through the processs before him ?

It's nobody's package -- first come, first served. Obviously the one who
uploads first gets to be the maintainer. In addition, Aaron's mail came
first, at least in my mailbox.

Besides, people who haven't been through the NM queue are implicitely less
trusted with packaging a library than those who have. There's thousands of
way to fuck up a library... I'd name examples, but then I'd get killed :)

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Josip Rodin]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> and many others[1] aren't?

You're on crack. http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/

It's hard to discern useful information when you start out by showing you
haven't done the slightest hint of pre-investigation...

-- 
 2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Ben Armstrong]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> and many others[1] aren't? The Debian Desktop is a good
> initiative, but there are many others that are being
> excluded from the website.I've some ideas:
> 
> - Guidelines to Debian subprojects (Do you known
>   what are the official and unofficial subprojects now?);
> 
> - List the subprojects in two areas of the website:
>   * Developers' corner, to subprojects in initial state;
>   * A new area called: Subprojects, containing full
>   information about the subprojects considered mature.
> 
> [1] = "Mono for Debian", ipv6 (is it official or unofficial?),
> "ddtp", ...

I don't think there is any definition for what an "official" Debian
subproject is.  And even if there were, whether it's on www.debian.org or
not would not be a reliable indicator.  I choose to use www.d.o for Debian
Jr. because it is convenient for me to keep the pages there.  Other
subprojects that might be considered "official" (whatever that means) are
hosted elsewhere presumably because it is easier for the subproject leader
to do so.

Debian Jr. is a personal subproject[0] within Debian.  It is my chosen area
of focus for Debian, and as such, the only "blessing" I have had from the
Debian project for it is the little parcel of web space I have for the
Debian Jr. home page and the mailing list.

That being said, there is certainly a difference between "projects which
fork Debian to make a new distro (i.e. providing own versions of existing
Debian packages)" vs. "projects which add packages of their own (outside
Debian) to extend Debian" vs. "projects which include all of their packages
in Debian itself (or at least extend Debian's infrastructure itself, if the
project doesn't have any packages of its own)".  Debian Jr. is of the latter
sort.  Which of these three kinds of projects are Mono, ipv6, and ddtp?

[0] By "personal subproject" I don't mean to undervalue the contributions
others have made.  I'm certainly grateful for the input and support I have
received from others both inside and outside the Debian project. I mean
simply that it was born out of my personal interests, and remains primarily
the work of one person: me.  So again, I don't know what "official" means in 
this context.

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUGhttp://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `  [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
 [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Ben Armstrong]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 05:51:14PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> > and many others[1] aren't?
> 
> You're on crack. http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/
> 
> It's hard to discern useful information when you start out by showing you
> haven't done the slightest hint of pre-investigation...

Reread that.  He said Debian Desktop *is* on the official website but others 
aren't.

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUGhttp://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `  [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
 [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Adam Heath]

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Colin Watson wrote:

> bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME messages
> for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God forbid)
> base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In addition,
> attachments are now only displayed as a download link rather than as a
> download link plus the full encoded attachment.

That's how I originally coded that.  But, I was attempting to do at little
changes to the formatting, as compared to the pre-MIME code.

Also, are MIME parts with a Content-Disposition of inline still displayed
inline?  I haven't looked at the new pages  yet.

Re: Orphaning my packages

[Chris Butler]

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 04:58:05PM +0200, Stefan Schwandter wrote:
> spiralsynthmodular (http://www.pawfal.org/Software/SSM/) :  a modular 
> software synth. Needs fltk.

I'll take this one.

-- 
Chris


pgpFjKF7aVL4U.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Orphaning my packages

[Aaron M. Ucko]

"Goulais, Raphael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Does this mean that debian policy is that DD have priority over a non-DD ?
> Perhaps Morgon wants to become a DD ... and packaging fltk1.1 could be an 
> interesting work for him, and could give him some help in the process of 
> displaying interest to the debian community. Who are you to take over this 
> package, just because you made it through the processs before him ?

First of all, he said "if no one else wants to"; I wanted to, as I had
already been doing some work with the package and had a relevant ITP
of my own.

Also, he seems to have no official status whatsoever; if he's serious
about wanting to maintain stuff, he is welcome to go through the NM
process.

Please note that I will be happy to consider suggested patches from
him or any other member of the community.

-- 
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[John H. Robinson, IV]

Marc Singer wrote:
> (Unintentionally, I first sent the reply to you directly.)
> 
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 02:09:24PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Incidentally "North America" != "USA".  
> 
> And your point is, what?

that north america contains not one, but three countries: Candada, USA,
and Mexico

i'm a seppo (read: citizen of the USA), and it grates my ears each time
i hear American equated with citizen of USA. there are lots of people
that are americans, that come from North America, Central America, and
South America.

i do have a better word for US citizen, but it is so rarely used, no one
would understand it: Usian. for now, i will continue to use seppo, or
gringo, depending upon my mood and whom i am talking to (if speaking
with mexicans, i am usually a gringo).

this is entirely off topic for -devel, let's move it to -politics or
-curiosa or somewhere else more appropriate.

-john

Re: More bugs.debian.org MIME work

[Colin Watson]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:58:39AM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2003, Colin Watson wrote:
> > bugs.debian.org's web interface now decodes each part of MIME
> > messages for display, so for example quoted-printable and (God
> > forbid) base64-encoded text is now displayed in a readable form. In
> > addition, attachments are now only displayed as a download link
> > rather than as a download link plus the full encoded attachment.
> 
> That's how I originally coded that.  But, I was attempting to do at
> little changes to the formatting, as compared to the pre-MIME code.

Yeah, this was a larger change to the formatting. It seemed like a
logical extension to your work, though.

> Also, are MIME parts with a Content-Disposition of inline still
> displayed inline?  I haven't looked at the new pages  yet.

Yes, they are.

Cheers,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, 23 May 2003 12:21:05 +1000, Glenn McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> On Thu, 22 May 2003 12:20:39 -0500
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> Let me clue all of you in: anyone who takes a stand and tries to
>> hurt the US economy, I see as a taking action inimical to me, and
>> my loved ones, and I do *NOT* see that as friendly action.

> What you say is just bad, bad, bad, and you should be ashamed.

Ah yes. Argument by assertion. 

_You_ may live in a country where you may be ashamed to defend
 your friends and loved ones, but I do not. I do, however, pity you:
 If you think that when people express a desire to hurt your
 relatives, you need to feel ashamed if you raise a voice in protest,
 you really should get the heck out of your country.

> In the least it implies you personally are only friendly with people
> when you are taking their money. In other words, you dont have any
> true friends.

Ah. Either you can't read, or you have absolutely no concept
 of logic. In either case this discussion is doomed; but let me try an
 exercise in futility.

I said "If you are acting in a desire to hurt my loved ones by
 hurting an already fragile economy, I see this action as inimical."
 How you got from there to ascribing mercenary motivations to me is
 beyond me. 

> On the Australia-US trade deal thats being worked on.  If it worked
> out to be better for Australia than for the US, would you bear a
> grudge against all individual Australians ?  If it was more
> benificial to the US would you be friendlier to Australians ?

If you can't distinguish between a trade deal (which usually
 is biased one way or the other) and an stated intention to harm my
 economy, I suggest you also need introductory courses in economic
 theory. 

> If your countrymen share that sort of attitute it explains why the
> USA is in so many wars.

Yeah. We rarely suffer fools gladly.

> There is a layer of abstraction been government and people, any
> action by or against your government is not necesarily an action
> from or against individual US'ians.

But the intention was not to protest the actions of my
 government, or to act against it in the UN. It was to get down and
 try to hurt my friends and family by hurting the economy that
 nurtures us, in the hope that we shall be blackmailed into changing
 our government.

I do not like coercion. 

> I hope you can see the obvious flaws in your comments, and can learn
> from your mistakes.

That will be the day.

manoj
-- 
Now I lay me down to sleep I hear the sirens in the street All my
dreams are made of chrome I have no way to get back home Tom Waits
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

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Thu, 22 May 2003 20:55:31 -0700, Marc Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> Perhaps we can look at this a different way.  I haven't read anyone
> voicing the opinion that GWB (can't say the name of the beast out
> loud) is a 'good fellow'.  I'm supposing that all of us agree that
> he's a snake-oil salesmen of the odious kind, interested most in
> lining his pockets and the pockets of his pals at the expense of the
> majority of US citizens as well as international citizens.  He is a
> ignorant bully whose opinions and actions don't represent me or my
> cohort.

While I personally may not be unsympathetic to that line of
 reasoning, you should realize that the president enjoys a high
 approval rating domestically, and so not all people agree with that
 sentiment.

I think this is the basic flaw of people espousing your views
 on this subject: You are so convinced of your utter infallibility
 that any action you propose in accordance with your viewpoint are
 justified; which is ironical, since that is precisely what you accuse
 the americans of doing.


manoj
-- 
We're only in it for the volume. Black Sabbath
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

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Thu, 22 May 2003 12:43:22 -0500, Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> It may be too little if only one person does it... But I know *MANY*
> people who simply will avoid (to de extent possible in Mexico, at
> least) buying any American goods.

> In my particular cas -and I think many other developers will agree-
> this did not suddenly start with the Iraqi war - The USA have long
> been a country with little or none respect for privacy and freedom,
> standing in the way of technological advance.

> How will it help anything? First of all, if they notice that they
> are ceasing to be the focus of technological development, they might
> understand that they are doing something wrong. And even if they
> don't, at least I feel better ;-)

It is easy to take actions secure in the feeling that there
 are no consequences (which seems to be part of your complaint against
 my goverment).

Hmm. What if  I pass this mail around locally and
 reciprocate. IU doubt if people in my community would be happy about
 tis boycott.  This could get to be fun. I'll send it along to all my
 relatives here in the US who put me on the chain lists. If we get
 enough people in the US participating in this boycott, it may make a
 difference.

Since we all ugly americans, we may need to be educated about
 where this .cx place is ;-)

manoj
-- 
There's no saint like a reformed sinner.
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

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, 23 May 2003 12:38:09 +1000, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: 

> On Fri, 23 May 2003 03:20, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> You are taking personal actions inimical to the standard of living
>> of me and my loved ones in retaliation for actions by my government
>> (which I have little control over), and you expect me to roll over
>> and congratulate you all on your stance? Hell, my first instinct is
>> to try and see how I can retaliate.

> Great!  Now we are making some progress.  The US (both government
> and people) does this sort of thing routinely to other countries.
> Most Americans can't understand why it will make people outside the
> US unhappy.

We, the american people, delibrately go out of our way to try
 and hurt the economy of other countries? Hell, we don't ewven know
 where most of the countries inthe world are, far less be bothered to
 individually go out and try to hurt their economies.

My government may do things in a fashion that could be
 improved (to put it mildly), but as a people, we are generally
 benevolent, until something impinges on our consciousness and makes
 us take notice. And given our collective attention span, it takes a
 lot. 

>> Let me clue all of you in: anyone who takes a stand and tries to
>> hurt the US economy, I see as a taking action inimical to me, and
>> my loved ones, and I do *NOT* see that as friendly action.

> It seems that a large portion of the US population is trying to hurt
> the economy of any country that doesn't follow the US line (see
> France as an example).

Yes. There is a segment of the population which is indeed
 taking what I would call enemy action against france. But we are also
 prepared to live with the retaliatory consequences of our actions. 

> What do you think of the boycots of French products?  Do you oppose
> them on principle?

Actually, I do, since I think that the French government did
 nothing illegal, and was well within its rights to decide as it
 damed well pleases; but having stated my opinion as an american, I am
 not going to pass the buck when it comes to actions some americans
 are taking, even if I disagree. 

> PS How exactly would you retaliate against the rest of the world?

I dunno. Depends on pissed I am. 

> PPS Be grateful that you have more control over your government than
> I have over mine.  My government obeys yours.

So you can't control your government to do the right thing,
 and in frustration you lash out against my family?

manoj
-- 
In an age when the fashion is to be in love with yourself, confessing
to be in love with somebody else is an admission of unfaithfulness to
one's beloved. Russell Baker
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

Re: Unofficial projects related with Debian.

[Gustavo Franco]

On 2003.05.23 12:51, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> Why Debian Desktop subproject is on official website
> and many others[1] aren't?
You're on crack. http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/
It's hard to discern useful information when you start out by showing
you
haven't done the slightest hint of pre-investigation...
You didn't understand my affirmation.Debian Desktop is on www.debian.org
and many others aren't there, for example: "Mono for Debian" and "ipv6".
What are the rules to be there? AFAIK, there are no documented rules.
Cheers,
Gustavo Franco -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: Debian conference in the US?

[Marc Singer]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 10:03:38AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Marc Singer wrote:
> > (Unintentionally, I first sent the reply to you directly.)
> > 
> > On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 02:09:24PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > > Incidentally "North America" != "USA".  
> > 
> > And your point is, what?
> 
> that north america contains not one, but three countries: Candada, USA,
> and Mexico

Good grief.  If you'd read the original message carefully, you'd
notice that I know the difference.  I wrote North America and meant it.