Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:05:16AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > And how do you reconcile the fact that most of those told us recently on > debian-vote that they believed that dropping an architecture will not help > with the delay of the release ? And giving the times of the posts, they > probably knew about this plan previously to replying that, especially those of > the scud team. Pure demagogy then ? To my best knowledge Branden did not know about the proposal at the time of the LWN interview. So from him it was no demagogy but his own honest, private oppinion. I and AJ knew about it since we were involved in the meeting. We both sidestepped the question since the proposal was still not ready at that time. btw: the results of that interview were not posted to -vote. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:58:06AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > To my best knowledge Branden did not know about the proposal at > > the time of the LWN interview. So from him it was no demagogy but > > his own honest, private oppinion. I and AJ knew about it since we > > were involved in the meeting. We both sidestepped the question > > since the proposal was still not ready at that time. > > Uhm. You knew that conclusions from that meeting would be likely to > contradict the answers from other DPL candidates, but you did nothing to > make them aware of this before they had those answers published to a > large audience? I knew nothing about the candiates' answers, no. I did not use the knowledge to my own advantage, either. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFC] OpenLDAP automatic upgrade
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:31:01PM +, Dave Holland wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:36:17AM +0100, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > > As you might have noticed or not we are working on getting OpenLDAP 2.2 > > into unstable. The packages are mostly working fine (as available in > > experimental) but what is missing is a really tested upgrade path from > > OpenLDAP 2.0 (in stable) and 2.1 (in testing, unstable). > > Ambitious target! > > I upgraded my employer's LDAP servers from 2.1 to 2.2 last week. They > are running on Debian machines, but not using the Debian packages. Here > are some points which you might find useful: > > [... some helpfull slapd.conf issues deleted ...] > > All in all, it's not a difficult upgrade, but there a lot of little > things to get right. the ldif format was not a problem? was the syntax parsed correctly from 2.1 to 2.2? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licenses for DebConf6
* Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-14 18:46:50]: > Hold on - does this mean I will or won't be able to do > apt-get install debconf6-doc you will, and most likely it will be 100% complete. if someone packages it. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: I am still on the keyring. With my old key.
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-21 08:55:52]: > On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 11:29:19 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I seriously hope the non-elected people blocking and slowing down > >several important processes in Debian soon realize that there is a > >problem and that it might be best for them to solve it by stepping > >aside or allowing new people to help them with the tasks. > > I have lost _that_ hope like two years ago. It is not the case that > these problems with the non-elected people who keep blocking processes > are new. No, they have been there even when I joined the project. i have not given up that hope yet and i invest a considerable amount of time working on this issue as part of my work on the DPL-Team. others there do so, too. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: I am still on the keyring. With my old key.
* Jaakko Niemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-22 17:12:00]: > On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > i have not given up that hope yet and i invest a considerable > > > amount of time working on this issue as part of my work on the > > > DPL-Team. others there do so, too. > > > > I hope this is true. I really do. However, I have no particular > > evidence that it is true. Maybe you could explain in more detail? > > Get to next debconf and see him actually work with people. > No need for words. did i beat someone up when i was watched? did it get caught on film, even? (c: signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: I am still on the keyring. With my old key.
* Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-22 08:52:25]: > * Andreas Schuldei: > > > i have not given up that hope yet and i invest a considerable > > amount of time working on this issue as part of my work on the > > DPL-Team. others there do so, too. > > Is this the "delegation to teams" item on > <http://wiki.debian.org/DPLTeamCurrentIssues>? A rather cryptic > reference, IMHO. yes, that was on purpose. there has been mails to/from the teams about delegation and things go slow for various reasons. I updated the above mentioned page to be a *bit* more verbose about this. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: I am still on the keyring. With my old key.
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-21 23:33:48]: > If the DPL team is actually addressing that issue, it is not doing so > transparently. That was on purpose. we thought that there was something to be learned from threads on public mailinglists that lead nowhere and wanted to try private mail threads that lead nowhere, instead. (c: > Hence, to the mere mortal DD; nothing has changed since > Branden's electrion, which is a real disappointment. At least to me. Well, the process is not over yet, and has not produced the results we want to see. I too am surprised to see such slow progress. But as i wrote earlier in this thread i did not give up hope yet. After all the involved individuals are sensible persons but busy. Of course business is not a valid excuse for everything, even for volunteers. If you are too busy to do your volunteer stuff you in fact stopped volunteering some time ago... signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Intel notebooks for needy developers in developing countries
* Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-12-09 00:30:09]: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 09:08:58PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > Intel is so generous to provide Debian with ten notebooks (besides > > some server hardware), which we would like to give to developers > > in developing countries who > > What exacly did you mean writing about 'developing countries'? i meant countries/persons who can not have a hope of buying a computer (but only use one in the computer room in their university or their neighbour's for their debian work) and who's income is so low that they would need many months savings of their complete income to be able to afford a cheap one. i can try to come up with a list of countries if it helps. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Intel notebooks for needy developers in developing countries
* Andy Teijelo Pérez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-12-09 11:52:07]: > Does a country considered by the U.S. government as terrorist, or with which > having commercial relationships is forbidden for american companies, apply > for this offering? I got some wise advice about not to make the contry the ulitmate critera (and to NOT give a list of countries). So if there would live a person in cuba working hard on debian and being unable to afford a computer, I would not exclude him because the US government does not like cuba. (I come from the old europe myself, after all. :-) I am not the one makeing the ulitmate decision, though. I just put together the list. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian and the desktop
* Linas Zvirblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-12-15 00:02:01]: > David Nusinow wrote: > > >>>What are you talking about Debian Style? > >> > >>Color scheme, artwork (default wallpaper, login screen, even CD covers). > >>All those little things that would make a user say "Yep, that's Debian". > > > >Check out the windowmaker package. It has (or had as of a few years ago) a > >beautiful Debian theme complete with a very nice wallpaper. Creating > >similar themes for other window managers and desktop environments would be > >great. > > I looked into it. Is indeed interesting artwork, but for something that > would represent Debian, it is way too personal (as in not neutral). Not > many people would find it acceptable for day to day use. Try that > wallpaper on a DE that has a couple (or better, a lot) of icons on the > desktop and you will see what I mean. > > The theme itself is also not too bad, but maintaining similar theme for > different DEs might cause more problems that it would solve. Anyway, > plain unthemed KDE and plain unthemed GNOME look pretty much alike, so > that is no problem. so where can i have a look at this? could it please be put up somewhere on the web? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers
* Linas Zvirblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-02 01:43:47]: > There are a lot of people out there that are willing to help Debian, but > "Help Debian" does look a bit like a horror detective story. > > I like the idea of an official title for contributers, but I am not so > keen on I-did-this-and-that counters. You can count bug reports, posts > made on the mailing list, but you cannot count the amount of work and > ideas. Not everybody wants to join existing jobs. On the contrary, new > people bring new ideas. > > And this is the hard part. What if one does not want to report bugs, > write documentation or do translation? What if all of this is already > done by more experienced people? But what if one DOES want to start a > new project, to found a new team etc.? There is next to zero public > information regarding this matter. Sure, there are many ways to find > out, but it is much easier when you have a guide. there are parts that provide a much easier and smoother entry to helping debian. The debian-installer, the inofficial security team and debian-edu for example are groups that allow even non-Debian-Developers to get their hands dirty and do real (important, relevant) work easily. This seems to have to do with the people who lead those sub-projects/effords. It would make sense to provide contact information for those parts of the project that try to incorporate new people actively. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers
* Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-02 22:26:46]: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 10:02:34AM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > > there are parts that provide a much easier and smoother entry to > > helping debian. The debian-installer, the inofficial security > > team and debian-edu for example are groups that allow even > > non-Debian-Developers to get their hands dirty and do real > > (important, relevant) work easily. This seems to have to do with > > the people who lead those sub-projects/effords. > > It would make sense to provide contact information for those > > parts of the project that try to incorporate new people actively. > > I'm part of, for example, cdd, debtags, pkg-italian (for Italians): > they can be added to the list. i did not mean to suggest that those were the only good projects in debian which actively encourage participation by non-dds. > I guess such a list would be faily big: in my experience, projects on > Alioth are usually fairly open to non-DD contributions, and Alioth makes > it easily possible. so should we try to compile such a list and advertise it better, perhaps from the startpage on www.debian.org? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers
* Alejandro Bonilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-02 09:21:43]: > On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:06:59 +0100, Frans Pop wrote > > On Monday 02 January 2006 15:42, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > > so should we try to compile such a list and advertise it better, > > > perhaps from the startpage on www.debian.org? > > > > http://www.debian.org/devel/join/ seems more suited for that. > > > > That whole page could maybe be organized a bit better by separating > > the content into sections. > > Sorry for jumping in, but if you want more Contributions, show the Volunteers > how to do things. that is exactly is happening in those projects i and enrico mentioned above. it does not start with sponsoring but with working together. that leads to "shoing how to do things", if that is required. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers
* Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-03 12:24:29]: > They are right: most probably they will find it easier to make contributions > to other > projects. we need to promote the easy entry points to contributing to debian more prominently and should hide the "how to become a DD" in comparison. we should leave that option for the ones that want to contribute above average. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to Increase Contributions from Volunteers
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-03 22:30:09]: > >> They are right: most probably they will find it easier to make > >> contributions to other projects. > > > we need to promote the easy entry points to contributing to debian > > more prominently and should hide the "how to become a DD" in > > comparison. > > What on earth for? are you asking or do you want to argue a point? if you are asking: people who want to help/contribute seem to be turned away by the burecratic nature of the NM process with it's long waiting periodes. People who want to contribute without that process need to find a way to do that easily and effectively, without spending too much time to find where they can do that. > > we should leave that option for the ones that want to contribute > > above average. > > We are trying to build the best distribution of linux on the > planet, not the so-so ditribution created by the most number of > people. Why do you think that an excellent direbution can come by > with contribution of people who are, in your own words, below > average? Manoj, i think you are trying to polarize the discussion. Please try not to do that. it does not help to reach a good conclusion. Please realize that there is a difference between people who want to *contribute* above average and *people* below average. One such difference could be technical excellent people who want to help without spending time on packaging issues (as NM in its current form often does) but rather on their field of excellence, which could be coding or graphical design or in the legal area. Other, merely average people could be willing to do the boring donkey work of coding, graphical design or legal stuff, unloading those few geniuses we have. If done properly, even the ones BELOW average could contribute, be happy and feel appreciate. Luckily that is possible today already. We dont just need to utilize the elite for all purposes. They all could help quicker and more directly if they could be routed to the places where they are needed *just now* without a detour over NM. Their help would contribute to making debian the best distribution. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Anthony Towns: What I did today
* Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-13 20:34:20]: > ...and no one can complain afterwards. you underestimate your fellow nagg^Wdevelopers. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: when and why did python(-minimal) become essential?
* Anthony Towns [2006-01-19 19:21:07]: > > In Ubuntu, we've split the package in > > order to make -minimal essential, but never install it alone (both are part > > of base). > > Then what's the benefit of having python(-minimal) be essential at all? you are able to do init.d scripts, pre- and postinsts etc in python. That is a "ease of development" helper for ubuntu. how agressive does debian use it's perl in this regard? i think hardly at all. i would welcome to either kick both higher level scrip languages out (to shrink essential) and rewrite stuff like adduser in c or c++ or see if we cant really use perl (or perhaps even python-minimal) more for scripting in these places. it is an underutilized resource currently and would be a win in readability, structure and even speed. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Backports
* Norbert Tretkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-19 17:02:03]: > * Joseph Smidt wrote: > > Do you think we will ever see backports officially supported by > > Debian? > > No. i remember a conversation where you pointed out some principal problems (security support, manpower) but in general were in favour of the idea and prefered fixing those. what happend? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Backports
* Norbert Tretkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-19 17:38:45]: > * Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > * Norbert Tretkowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-19 17:02:03]: > > > * Joseph Smidt wrote: > > > > Do you think we will ever see backports officially supported by > > > > Debian? > > > > > > No. > > > > i remember a conversation where you pointed out some principal > > problems (security support, manpower) but in general were in favour > > of the idea and prefered fixing those. what happend? > > Manpower is no longer a problem, thanks to Ganneff we're now using > dak, which means every Debian developer can upload his packages (but I > still need to manually add his gpg key to the backports.org keyring). > > A while back, I talked with Joey about the required infrastructure to > provide security advisories, but until now I had no time to implement > it. Then why did you answer "no" above? Things look comparatively peachy to me. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: new mplayer 1.0pre7try2 package
* Anthony Towns [2006-01-21 06:06:36]: > No, we have real problems with video codec stuff in Debian and they need > to be resolved thoroughly, not expediently. i was under the impression that the ftp-master team had started to work on that several month ago, shortly before the last mention of this on [EMAIL PROTECTED] is that the case? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: TODO for etch ?
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 11:39:16PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: > Hello. > > Is the TODO list for etch available anywhere? - multi level configuration for poplular services and some other unpopular ones (needed for cdds) - change policy to allow for automatic reconfiguration of packages (needed for cdds) - allow apt to install special configuration packages (which pre-seed debconf or supply configuration by other means before the packages that are to be pre-configured) are installed or reconfigured (important for modularized preconfigured subsystems) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release management conclusions
* Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060914 14:02]: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 10:38:39AM +0300, Fabian Fagerholm wrote: > > However, the most recent publications indicate that volunteer incentive > > is not a well understood area of economics. In fact, it's one of the hot > > topics that economists are faced with when trying to explain the > > economics of FOSS: > > Seems to me if it's such a hot topic, we should be able to get a > University to fund the experiment ;-) i have tried to find funding for other interested research (which i think would be even more interesting, but was not successfull. if you have contacts, please try! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Template toolkit: removed functionality issue
* Dominic Hargreaves ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061222 17:47]: > and then upload a new libtemplate-perl reflecting upstream's changes > with a NEWS.Debian entry explaining the change? Should libtemplate-perl > then Recommend or Depend on the new separate plugin modules? My > intuition would be to avoid a Depends. Potentially breaking working webapps is not a nice thing, though. The conservative thing to do would be to depend on the new plugin modules. I think debian is trying to protect the user from these kind of suprises and should be conservative and diskspace is cheap. You can change the depends to a recommends for lanny (or was it larry? lenny?) later on. /andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Embedded(/RT) Debian? Embeddian GNU/Linux?
My first mail seems to got lost. excuse me if this turns up twice. In fact I am working on an minimal debian (-based) system. I am building an embedded system which tries to be as small as possible. I started with the linux router project, took some parts from the bootfloppys and wrote some Makefiles to take essential Binaries etc out of my running potato. Right now (since half an hour) I have a 2.2.14 kernel, glibc-2.1.3, busybox plus some other stuff in 1382 Kbytes (unpacked) in the ramdisk. (this does not count the kernel, of cause. It is booted from floppy, where it takes 905 kbyte alltogether. It should be easyly adaptable and is modular by design (like lrp is). Anyone intersted should get back to me. I would be glad to cooperate. It is gpl, of cause. I am not on this list, so please reply to me privatly, too.
Re: Embedded(/RT) Debian? Embeddian GNU/Linux?
* Joe Block <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000315 18:25]: > I'm interested. I'd like to be able to make a boot disk with ntfs & > vfat support so I can use it as a rescue disk for hosed windows boxes. > > Ideally, I'd like to see a shell script that asks what network card the > target box uses and creates a new rescue floppy with just that module. I am not sure the stuff I am working on is optimal for your purposes. But of cause you are free to do with the stuff what you like to do. I put a mds (minimal debian system) snapshot on ftp.andrive.de/pub.
Re: dualing banjos
* marty macdonald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [000912 22:52]: > I mean, the whole thing here is to show the ultimate > differences between the Linux kernel and the kernels > found when using multiple banjos. This research was > supported by Dr. Rimulak in his infamous "Kernal VS > Banjo - A Duality?". This is a must read! I seem to have missed something. What is a banjo? I know banjos as instruments similar to guitars. Could someone enlighten me? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
need headers for target architecture: asm/unistd.h
I try to build a crosscompiler i386->arm (but also other archs). At one point headerfiles for the target architecture are needed. Where could I find headerfiles for other archs? Are there development packages for this purpose? Who has done this before?
Re: need headers for target architecture: asm/unistd.h
* Andreas Schuldei ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001229 23:24]: > I try to build a crosscompiler i386->arm (but also other archs). At one > point headerfiles for the target architecture are needed. Where could I find > headerfiles for other archs? Are there development packages for this purpose? > Who has done this before? Will desaster wait at the other end if I use the include files from the kernel?
RTP: Stegfs
Stegfs is a stegnographic (spelling?) filesystem, coming in the form of a kernel patch and some userspace tools. It is a very secretiv way of storing data on partitions. It combines information hiding and cryptography with the result that even the filesystem itself does not know if there *is* any data in the locked security levels. The main author seems to have abandoned it. The last available patch is against 2.2.14, and some kernel interfaces changed since then. Some conceptional finetuning and additional features would be nice, too. I got it up and running and it works for me. It would be nice to have a debian package of this. The kernel is not my real expertise, and I think there are more capeable hands then mine for this. Is someone willing to take this and package it? This someone might also be the one takeing care of the stegfs itself in the long run.
Re: RTP: Stegfs
* Andreas Schuldei ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010108 00:35]: > The main author seems to have abandoned it. The last available patch is > against 2.2.14, and some kernel interfaces changed since then. Some > conceptional finetuning and additional features would be nice, too. This is not correct. The author is alive and well and is working on stegfs.
Re: What makes a debconf?
* Joe Drew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030524 01:11]: > 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. that it is international, and is focused on debian regarding the topics of talks, surrounding events and such? > Do we need some method of deciding what constitutes 'the' Debconf? and we do need THE Debconf. I am all for having as many debian meetings, install parties, debian beer hikes and Debian user group meetings as possible, preferable on a regualar basis. Everyting to let debian become a real-live (vs online/virtual) community, too! the intention of the debconf is to be the regular/annual meetingpoint for the debian developer/user community, where people can get in touch, enjoy the huge bandwidth of face-to-face communication, build relations to people otherwise on the other end of the earth and only met on irc/mailinglist, eat and talk,... in my opinion this servs to inspire and to enthuse people to spend insane amounts of their time on making debian the best operatingsystem. people should realise again that they are part of a greater cause, some kind of crusade, if you will. (c: it does that only if it is significant. it is less significant if it is less focused (as david pointed out in this thread) and less international. It needs to be unique for that. the significant amount of work and time (and money) the preparation of a debconf consumes will by itself ensure that there are not too many in one year. And those wishing and able to invest this time hopefully are enlightend enough to not destroy the debconf experience by creating the debconf3.2.5. it might be possible to have a debconf at several locations (even the US?) at the same time, with high-powered communication links (satellite links for video-tansmission of talks?). This sounds rather advanced and i know nothing about the economic and technical implications.
Re: Debian conference in the US?
* Aaron M. Ucko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030519 04:26]: > What are other developers' feelings on the matter these days? I would rather not come.
Re: DebConf in Vancouver (Re: debconf 2005 in Vienna, Austria)
* Joe Drew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030730 16:22]: > On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 22:09, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 07:22:00PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > > > > Next Debconf is scheduled to be held in Vancouver, Canada. > > > > That would be excellent. Who is organizing it? > > Me, if it ends up happening in Vancouver. the lesson learned from the debconfs so far is that a strong local usergroup handling all the odd jobs and a good deal of the other jobs in mandatory for a smooth event. You could see that in bordeaux and oslo. You together with the two people that helped you in Toronto were on the low side, i felt. This year were four people more or less full time running the event, with 15 more doing odd jobs here and there. Every day about 18h(gym)+3*12h(confernce)=66h of work in one or an other form were spent. On that note i heard from people in south america (with quite a bit of local and national support) who wanted to hold next years debconf/camp. This might be a good time for them to make their preliminary plans heard.
Re: runlevels remodeled
* Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-08-15 13:17:02]: > Scripsit Timo Aaltonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > 2 multi-user, no network services exported, no NFS > > > > -more secure service-wise than 3 > > -RH has network here, although they claim that 2 is not used > > Given that it is very rare for machines these days to have banks of > local ttys attached, is a "multi-user without network" runlevel really > relevant for even a significant minory of our users? How would those > multiple users interact with the machine? My workstation has two heads, with independent Xservers, one for me and one for my wife. The number of heads is limited by the number of PCI/AGP video cards you can use. The linuxconsole project works on a kernel patch that makes this more mainstream. three(?) commercial companies are selling such solutions. But you are right that both my wife and I think that without network the box is utterly booring. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Multi-User X machine (Was: runlevels remodeled)
* Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-08-16 01:09:53]: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 02:59:17PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > [Steinar H. Gunderson] > > > How do you make this work? Last time I tried it, X would only show > > > the one connected to the ???active??? virtual console, and blanked > > > the other. > > > > It need some patches to the kernel and X. I'm not sure how many of > > these are included in the mainstream kernel and X implementation yet. > > Check out > > http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,64163,00.html> > > and http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7852> for the story of > > HPs system making four desktop seats available from one machine. > > Ubuntu implements this from the installer down (although only for the > special cases of four nVidia, MGA, or ATI cards, and even then you > may need to fiddle with the configuration a little bit), with a > bunch of patches to xorg -- no kernel patches required. Those > patches are now in X.Org HEAD. wasnt it me who included the interesting patches into the *debian* kernel a year ago? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
migrating wiki content from twiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org)
The wiki markup languages of twiki and moin-moin are not compatible. Still it would be nice to have some content moved from the old .net wiki to the new .org one. (the debconf team for one is interested in using the features of moin-moin for easier cooperation and to keep the existing pages.) The wiki admins (DSA) would be willing to untar a tarball with the converted content to depoly it on the new system. I did not find migration scripts between the two wikis. Do they exist? Is someone who is familiar with both wikis interested in writing one? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: migrating wiki content from twiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org)
* Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-05 10:04:54]: > On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 01:34:29AM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > The wiki markup languages of twiki and moin-moin are not > > compatible. Still it would be nice to have some content moved > > from the old .net wiki to the new .org one. > > This is the first I've heard of plans for a wiki under the official > domain, and I haven't seen any discussion about moin-moin either. > Could you please point me at the relevant discussion so I can play > catch-up? as far as i know there was no discussion about that, and it is not just a plan anymore. And i actually welcome that, since it most likely would be a rehash of all the "my favourit wiki is better then yours!" and "it has notification, it is insecure, it is written in php, it is not in python, ...". I have wittnessed only two such discussions so far, and those two still have not agreed on a solution but are stalled, still. on the frontpage of the new wiki it says that DavidRichardBell works on a migration of the content now. (anyone has his email, so that he could coordinate with others?) I am quite happy with that solution so far. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Debian OpenSolaris port, exchange with Sun folks in webforum/MailingList
I just chatted with Sun's FOSS embassador Simon Phillips and i asked if Sun would switch to a LGPL compatible license even for openSolaris in the course of the recent announcement. However he said it would stay with the CDDL and was not aware how that would hinder a debian port of openSolaris. Could the people who are interested in working on this please head over to http://www.opensolaris.org/os/discussions/ and more specifically to http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=32 for the GNU-Solaris discussion to work on a way to resolve the issues (or clarify the problems, first)? Aparently there is even a mailling list interface to those formums. Feel free to figure it out yourself and mail here once you found out. (c: The Sun folks understand full well the power of a debian port of openSolaris and the lift they would get from it. (c: /andreas signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian OpenSolaris port, exchange with Sun folks in webforum/MailingList
* Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-05 21:14:20]: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 08:59:10PM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > I just chatted with Sun's FOSS embassador Simon Phillips and i > > asked if Sun would switch to a LGPL compatible license even for > > openSolaris in the course of the recent announcement. > > > > However he said it would stay with the CDDL and was not aware how > > that would hinder a debian port of openSolaris. Could the > > people who are interested in working on this please head over to > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/discussions/ and more specifically > > to http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=32 for the > > GNU-Solaris discussion to work on a way to resolve the issues (or > > clarify the problems, first)? > > > > Aparently there is even a mailling list interface to those > > formums. Feel free to figure it out yourself and mail here once > > you found out. (c: > > > > The Sun folks understand full well the power of a debian port of > > openSolaris and the lift they would get from it. (c: > > Did you per chance mean this one : > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=1093&tstart=30 the thread you found is linux related but otherwise rather irrellevant. Simon said there was not much discussion about licensing yet. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=32 was what he meant. i guess that is why he mentioned it to me. (c: signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: migrating wiki content from kwiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org)
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-05 22:36:26]: > Any help is appreciated -- improve formatting conversion, and finding bugs. > For bugreports and patches, please mail me privately or address me on IRC > (jvw). Once I'm reasonably content with the conversion, I'll prepare a tarball > for DSA to install on wiki.debian.org, and then the rest can be done by normal > wiki edits in cases where conversion went haywire. great work. it looks very good already. one thing that i noticed is that the "!" in kwiki which keeps words Like ToDo or DebConf beeing displayed as WikiNames (and links) are not yet handled correctly. the ! at the start of a !WikiWord would need to become a `` in the Wiki``Word like this. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: a desperate request for licence metadata (was Re: migrating w iki content from twiki (w.d.net) to moinmoin (w.d.org))
* Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-06 17:39:06]: > Which I fail to understand, as the limited rights provided to me by > law should be sufficient for the wiki content in most cases. i spoke to a german lawyer about this exact (license) issue when skolelinux.de pondered an applicable license for it's wiki and aparently it is doubtfull that wiki content is worthy to protect in the first place. There needs to be a certain quality level reached, aparently, which is not necessarily given in a wiki. So this discussion about a license for the debian wiki might be very debianish but also irrelevant. (c: signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian OpenSolaris port, exchange with Sun folks in webforum/MailingList
* Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-05 20:59:10]: some discussion happend here, but later on in the thread it becomes clear that there is a lot of confusion of the official position of debian towards a debian with an opensolars kernel. http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=5914 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian OpenSolaris port, exchange with Sun folks in webforum/MailingList
* Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-07 07:31:48]: > Ok, but this is not what has been floating around, either here, or on the open > solaris mailing lists. I mostly see wild claims and plain FUD and such. Even Jörg Schilling is there. (c: signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: how to make a patch
* Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-09-07 13:57:47]: > * Paolo Pantaleo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050907 13:55]: > > I have spent some time to write the bash completion for apt-file command. > > I have written a pair of email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and i didn't get any > > response. Now i want to submit a patch for bash_completion file that > > add the apt-file support. > > > > How do i make a patch? Is > > diff -u -c > > correct? > > I usually use > diff -Nur > if I have a full directory tree, but using diff -u will work equally > well for two different files. and because i never can remember if the first or the second file is the one the resulting patch should apply to, i also use "--fromfile=" pointing to the original. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Licenses for DebConf6 [was: Re: DebConf6: Call For Papers]
* Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-08 00:28:07]: > "The authors have the freedom to pick a DFSG-free license" means that > they *may* do so, but are not required to. Am I correct? > > IMHO, DebConf paper authors should be *required* to publish in a > DFSG-free manner, as a condition for presenting at the conference. > > Don't you agree that seeing non-free or even undistributable (no license > means "All Rights Reserved", with current laws!) papers at a DebConf is > really a shame? given your knowledge level of how debconf intents to handle things and the way you escalate this issue gives me the idea that you mainly want to raise a stink and create unrest. So please inform yourself properly first. that might include to take up the issue in a friendly way with someone who is involved or trying to submit a proposal, paper or even give a talk yourself. You might also think about the organizers options when a speaker surprisingly NOT picks a DFSG free license, double-licenses his talk in an awkward way or declares before the audience that his talk must not be distributed. Also consider the legal implications of an intention or promise to release a DFSG free talk vs the actual act of releasing the work and when that happens in a legally binding way. Then consider the character of the CFP as a legaly binding document for the licenses of the actual talks of the speakers. But please do so alone, first. /andreas signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Licenses for DebConf6 [was: Re: DebConf6: Call For Papers]
sorry for replying to this only today. i had been busy preparing for a talk i was giving yesterday at a conf. * Francesco Poli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-10 01:08:49]: > > given your knowledge level of how debconf intents to handle > > things and the way you escalate this issue gives me the idea that > > you mainly want to raise a stink and create unrest. > > First of all, it is *not at all* my intention to raise stinks or create > unrest. > If I gave the impression of being rude, I apologize: I didn't want to. > I am not an English native speaker, hence I may have chosen the wrong > words or style when drafting my message; moreover I may have > misunderstood something when reading the C4P (Call For Papers). no, you could have asked on the debconf6-team mailinglist, for example. trying to get the largest possible audience by sending this to d-d and d-l is both addressing the wrong audience and trying to raising a stink. > I visited http://debconf.org/ and failed to find any other relevant > information about paper licensing, apart from the C4P itself. > If you can point me to some URL where I can get first-hand info about > how DebConf organizers plan to handle this kind of things, I would > appreciate it. you could have look at the archives of the debconf6-team mailinglist where in http://liw.iki.fi/lists/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00169.html it says "btw, the licence situation (of the talks and videos) will be taken care of in COMAS (our conference management system) directly, something like "people who'll commit talks will have to choose a (proper) licence at commit time"." the current plan is to have a drop down menu where people can choose the license they want, very much like when they chose a license for an alioth project. > I think you are involved (!) and I did raise this issue with you > privately (end of last August), yes, then you complained about the way the license and distribution of the talks had been handled, that they were not available from the debconf.org server any more (due to a breakin). That is how i perceived it, at least. you did not make any constructive suggestions at any point. (and how could you, only refering to debconf5?) > I really appreciate your efforts to organize the best conference you > can. I really *love* the idea of a conference entirely dedicated to > Debian, to be held in a different place each time. > That's why I consider this issue as an important one: every DebConf is > an event through which we get public attention and can thus spread our > philosophy. The message really works better if we act consistently with > our philosophy, IMHO. do we limit personal freedom of speakers in favour of our own, when we prescribe a license? debconf is about exchange of ideas (among others). will we only permit ideas from people that already share out view of DFSG-free? > > You might also think about the organizers options when a speaker > > surprisingly NOT picks a DFSG free license, > > If the rules mandate a DFSG-free license (as I suggest), I think > the only option for the organizers is to not include the > paper/presentation/handout in the conference proceedings and to not > distribute it through the conference website, until the licensing issue > is solved. > Just like a Debian package doesn't enter main, until it meets Policy > requirements (DFSG-freeness being one of them). yes, and i guess it will have consequences when speakers choose a non-free lisenese for their talk. It will reduce their chances to get a slot. > > or declares before the audience that his > > talk must not be distributed. > > In that case the talk cannot be distributed through the conference > website or in the proceedings. > But this holds even if you do not mandate a DFSG-free license. > > Actually the C4P already requires some permissions from the authors: the point is that the authors can violate the (informal) agreement given on the website and in a last minute action deliver a talk with an other license then aggreed uppon. We (the lynch mob) could wrestle down the speaker, beat her up, smash her notebook and carry her outside for further treatment, i guess. or something similar. (c: (attention! joke!) > | Debconf requires non-exclusive publication rights to papers, > | presentations, and any additional handouts or audio/visual materials > | used in conjunction with the presentation. > > Hence, you already have to plan what to do, when an author does not > fulfill the C4P requirements. > Correct me, if I'm wrong. and so we do (c: they are not very specific, so far, though. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Licenses for DebConf6
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-12 23:40:57]: > On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 12:13:51 +1000, Anthony Towns > said: > > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 10:21:08PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > But instead, what I'm led to wonder is if this is really standing up > > for our beliefs and fighting the good fight, or actually just trying > > to avoid those issues. Because insisting non-free stuff not appear > > at debconf seems like trying to avoid acknowledging its existence in > > the same manner as "sweeping stuff under the carpet", rather than > > having the non-free stuff appear and trying to convince possibly > > disagreeable folks that the DFSG's terms really are worth following > > no matter what your goals. > > This is a conference for Debian development. By definition, > Debian is 100%free. Am I mistaken in assuming that people > contributing to Debian are already familiar with the social contract, > and have decided to conform to it? (If now, why try to help Debian, > which, as a project, has ratified the SC, and thus the DFSG == free > ideal). at the last debconf in Helsinki there were people from outside debian giving talks, too. Hopefully we will have input from outside even in the future. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Licenses for DebConf6
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-12 20:42:39]: > Well, a conference that is not affiliated with Debian, such a > requirement is not tenable, that is true. But if such a conference > uses the Debian trademark, we can indeed ask that our core values, > as enshrined in our social contract, be respected. > > If there is ever a collection of papers that appear to be a > product of the Debian project, or seem to be endorsed by it, I suspect > we can ask for the spirit of the social contract be not blatantly > violated. the goal of the debian conferences is not to produce a pile of papers or other materials. it's goal is to inspire the participants to work on debian even in the coming year, give them new ideas and renew their dedication and passion to the project. If talks and papers conflict with that goal we might have to skip them. They are not the main purpose of the conference, but are supposed to serve as a tool to that end. That said, we strive for free papers and talks and discourage non-free ones strongly. We, the organizers, would like to have the freedom to use common sense and judge together if a given speaker/topic/idea who's paper's license conflicts with our requirement still can give a talk, if we think that it is worth it. Of course we will try to work together with him to find a way to license his talk/paper in a way that would fit both his and our requirements. So far it is doubtfull that that is even necessary, as last years lack of freely licensensed papers was mainly due to speakers not picking a lisense instead of them picking a non-free one. We recognized that problem and will make it easier for them to pick a free lisense by letting them pick one from a list when submitting the paper via the website. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Google Summer of Code 2008
* Lucas Nussbaum ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080227 08:41]: > On 27/02/08 at 00:42 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > Hey folks, > > > > Google are running their Summer of Code programme again this year[1], > > and if we want to take part again we need to apply between March 3rd > > and March 12th. If we're accepted as a mentoring organisation, then > > students will be able to apply to work with us up until the 1st > > April. [2] > > Hi, > > I have had a problem with the way GSOC was handled in Debian in the past > years. so has someone noticed that in contrast to earlier years 100% of the projects assigned to us also finished? I know that among Google itself looks at that number. There is something to be said for people who know the setting they are going to work in. Debian being special and friendly and all could be a huge dissappointment for all those that think they can pick a fight here or start flamewars. :-) /andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFH: curl, c-ares and ipv6
Hi! As a solution for "#481189 curl: cannot connect to IPv6 hosts anymore" I added a patch to hook curl to c-ares even for ipv6 lookups. Upstream is very interested in this patch, too. Could someone with ipv6 connectivity please test the curl packages (version 7.18.2-1e1) in experimental[1] and verify that the test mentioned in #481189 works now? Does it fail on other ipv6 (or other NORMAL) operations? /andreas [1] I just uploaded them, it might take them a moment to show up for you. Please come back later. :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFH: curl, c-ares and ipv6
* Yves-Alexis Perez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080626 08:42]: > On jeu, 2008-06-26 at 00:28 +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > Hi! > > > > As a solution for "#481189 curl: cannot connect to IPv6 hosts > > anymore" I added a patch to hook curl to c-ares even for ipv6 > > lookups. Upstream is very interested in this patch, too. > > > > Could someone with ipv6 connectivity please test the curl > > packages (version 7.18.2-1e1) in experimental[1] and verify that the > > test mentioned in #481189 works now? Does it fail on other ipv6 > > (or other NORMAL) operations? > > Here it seems to work fine even with curl 7.18.2-1: that is because curl 7.18.2-1 does not do asynchronous dns lookups as c-ares provides them (and are desireable for higher performance) but uses blocking dns lookups that libc offers. Because we took the save solution first (to do synchronous slow lookups in order to get the newest curl into lenny) the reportet bug is closed already (and curl is home free in testing). It would be nicer (and preferend by upstream) if curl was able to do asynchronous lookups AND do it right for ipv6, of course. That is (hopefully) the solution that is in experimental now. /andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFH: curl, c-ares and ipv6
* Luca Bruno ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080626 09:57]: > Rebuilt from incoming for i386, it seems to work here too: good. thanks! > I've also seen that -4 doesn't really force ipv4 resolution and connection: great that you thought of testing that, too. It is entirely possible that there are more cases that dont get checked yet, as c-ares together with curl are just in the early stages for ipv6. we will need to fix this. can you think of more funny things to test? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upcoming debian meetings
* Wookey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070208 17:48]: > On 2007-02-08 16:52 +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote: > > If you know of other meetings, locations and/or sponsors that > > would be interested in hosting meetings, please let me know! > > Some of us are at the Free Software World conference 3.0 in Badajoz, > (Speaking about the Debian Extremadura workmeetings) and the politicos > here have just commited to continue the series of Debian meetings > which ran here in 2006 (translations, d-i, emdebian, q-a, skolelinux) > > I'm not sure exactly when, where, or what form this will take, but you > should definately talk to them about how best to take that forward. > > I suggest best initial contact is Cesar Gomex Martin: yes, very cool! thanks for the update. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bits from the DPL
* Sam Hocevar ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070427 05:55]: > Meetings > > >Matt Taggart proposed that dpkg developers meet in person during a > dpkg summit[9] to talk about future dpkg development. The meeting would > be sponsored at least by Debian and HP. I suggested inviting people from > the Fink and ipkg projects as well as other distributions, too. when planning that event with taggart we thought it best to let first the people we hope to attend confirm their attendence and then open up the event for other people. do you think the overlap with the other projects is significant? i just dont know. /andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The IPsec kernel problem
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031006 21:57]: > > The IPSEC stack does nothing unless you specify policies through > > PFKEY or NETLINK. In other words, it is disabled by default. > > From glancing over the patch, it *also* replaces parts of the non > IPsec i.e. standard IP stack. Maybe it provides the same > functionality to the end user. It does *not* provide the same > functionality to the developer. kernel developers dont use the debian source package as a base for their work.
Re: Grsec/PaX and Exec-shield
* Peter Busser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031104 13:55]: > You didn't touch the other facts in the list, because you know you don't have > any proof to easily dismiss them. You would be my hero if you succeeded in > improving on PaX. But in all honesty, exec-shield does not do that I'm afraid. > In fact, there is simply no technical reason whatsoever for exec-shield to > exist at all. None. you seem to suffer from an accute case of hybris. i feel you are in the position to bring proof, if you disagree with ingo. He seems to have thought about the issue a minute or two and dislpayed some skill in the area allready.
Re: Backport of the integer overflow in the brk system call
* Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031203 04:03]: > I have sent a message to Werner asking if the GPG smart-card device could be > re-implemented with a USB interface. I think that a USB dongle with GPG > technology would be a good option as most developer's machines already have > USB support. as discussed in depth in an earlier c't magazine (german) usb is not a save bus to use for security relevant applications, since it allows for recording and backplaying of command sequences.
Re: DebConf 3 for New Maintainers
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030514 15:42]: > organization, though. Tollef, do you know if there'll be wireless base > stations around or, will we be doing ad-hoc mode?) yes, there will be wlan. not user about the mode of operation. and there will also be some stationary pcs there.
Re: Debian conference in the US?
* Aaron M. Ucko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030519 04:26]: > * As mentioned, we have an enthusiastic sponsor lined up, which is a > definite plus. What do we get from that sponsor? Conference rooms, network, accomodation, food, flights and tshirts?
samba cvs debian packages?
I am looking for a URL or apt-sources.list line where I can get up to date debian packages (cvs) of samba? I need the winbind tool to connect to a windows 2000 domain. I have allready founded and tested the samba-tng debian packages. that winbind does not work for me and I would like to try out the samba mainstream cvs version. It might make sense to have a regular build like the wine-nighly-builds to provide packages to people who need this fuctionality.
it is now possible to help debian/openbsd
On http://pandora.debian.org/~andreas/obsd are the tools needed for creating debian packages of software on openbsd. As stated vaguely half a century earlier, I would like to create a secure debian/gnu/openbsd with the best of both worlds. For that I would now begin to package the openbsd source tree and slowly transform it to follow policy. This will go faster and will be more fun (yay!) if more then one person works on it. So download those tools, install them and debianize your openbsd box! Get back to me with questions so some basic FAQ can be written. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Potato->Woody kernel upgrade problems
* Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020419 13:31]: > > Did the initrd load at all? If it did then it could be a bug in > > initrd-tools. Please show me the boot messages. an other reason for failiour was that the space in the /boot partion was used up. I made my boot partition just big enough for a few kernels in the old days. today that could be not enough. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
