Re: Which 2.6 kernel for Sarge on a Via C3?
Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 07:33:43PM +0100, Jerome Warnier wrote: >> I'm wondering why I can't see many different 2.6 kernels on my Sarge >> systems any longer. I own a Via C3-based computer (an x86 for those who >> didn't know) and can find only -386 and -686 kernels which could >> possibly match. >> >> Somebody knows? > > I seem to recall the C3 is missing the CMOV instruction which would > require that you use a kernel < i686, so in this case the i386 kernel. The C3 reports that it is a 686 without CMOV: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : CentaurHauls cpu family : 6 model : 7 model name : VIA Samuel 2 stepping: 3 cpu MHz : 800.047 cache size : 64 KB fdiv_bug: no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug: no coma_bug: no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 1 wp : yes flags : fpu de tsc msr cx8 mtrr pge mmx 3dnow bogomips: 1595.80 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 3 model name : Pentium II (Klamath) stepping: 4 cpu MHz : 299.754 cache size : 512 KB fdiv_bug: no hlt_bug : no f00f_bug: no coma_bug: no fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 2 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov mmx CMOV is one of the options in the 686 spec. There is an option to compile a C3 or a C3-2 kernel in the kernel source tree. Since the VIA machines keep getting used for servers, routers, firewalls, X-terminals, and so on, it would be nice if there was a Debian kernel supporting them. Especially if it supported the crypto acceleration and hardware RNG available on later VIA cpu s. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Dec 10, 2004 at 16:30, Will Newton praised the llamas by saying: >> > I have looked at it. And I don't think it is an acceptable thing >> > to ship as part of an operating system. I am an atheist and a >> > liberal but the majority of people in the world are not. >> >> I don't think it is an acceptable thing to ship as it has no use. > > That's a bad reason; if you applied it consistently you'd have to get > rid of frozen-bubble. Though you could try the following set of criteria: 1. Are there already similar packages in Debian? NO - okay, add. 2. Does it offer significant *technical* advantages over those packages? YES - okay, add. 3. Are any of those other similar packages poorly maintained? YES - don't add another until the others are cleaned up or removed - so don't add 4. Hairsplitting time - is there likelihood that adding it will cause grave distress to some proportion of the target market? NO - don't add. Default: then add it. Since there are a *lot* of CPU monitors, and a finite number of developers, and I'm sure at least one CPU monitor needs more maintenance, and wmbubblemon does the same job better, why add another? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Though you could try the following set of criteria: [I added these back in for the sake of clarity] >>1. Are there already similar packages in Debian? NO - okay, add. >> >>2. Does it offer significant *technical* advantages over those packages? >> YES - okay, add. >> >>3. Are any of those other similar packages poorly maintained? YES - >> don't add another until the others are cleaned up or removed - so >> don't add >> >>4. Hairsplitting time - is there likelihood that adding it will cause >> grave distress to some proportion of the target market? NO - don't >> add. >> >>Default: then add it. >> > > We could have all kinds of criteria. The ones you propose are not, in > fact, our criteria. Our criteria are something like: > > 1. Does the license meet the DFSG? > 2. Is there a Debian maintainer willing to maintain or sponsor the >package? > These are givens. I know this. It can't move from valid-ITP to package without this. > Now, you might want a different set of criteria, in which case, please > suggest them in the proper forum, which is not here. Actually, I don't want a different set of criteria. As a user, I am concerned that Debian is in danger of having a thousand "CPU monitors"[1] all with RC bugs. A process for restricting addition of semi-duplicate packages might reduce workloads all round, and improve quality of installed packages. > My concern is that Saudi Arabia and China don't get to tell us what > our criteria are, and I would oppose any criterion that amounts to > "give China a veto". Your proposal allows China a veto in some cases, > and this makes it unreasonable to me. Not quite. I simply suggest that *in the absence of any technical reason why*, and *in the presence of a social reason why not*, it would be polite to adopt "why not". That social reason might be "I can get tortured for possessing this" and it might be "pornview is tacky as a package name - come[2] up with a better one" or just "I believe this license isn't DFSG-free". Of course, the fact that the package under discussion can make possession of a Debian CD illegal in certain countries[3] trumps either of our arguments. > It is outrageous to think that China's or Saudia Arabia's censorship > regimes should somehow influence our decision making in the slightest. I believe the correct flame-inducing argument at this point is "tell that to the first person tortured or executed for possessing a Debian CD with hot-babe on it *who was not aware it was there*". Testimony elsewhere in this thread suggests that *possession* in those countries is a capital crime, with or without knowledge. This would seem to make adding this package a breach of the Social Contract, clause 4. Getting your users executed un-necessarily is, it's true, a very idealist thing to do, but I can't see everyone signing up to it. cheers, Rich. Footnotes: [1] Or any other common package type. Editors. MP3 players. Playlist managers. RSS feed agglomeraters. Xbiff clones. [2] For my English readers - I did that on purpose [3] Non-US exists because export of strong crypto from the US is an illegal act in the US. Hence, Debian has already accepted that local laws trump idealism. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Re: Licenses for DebConf6
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The same benefit that accrue from freedom of software still > remain if that software bits represent a presentation; the > software/presentation can be modified to suit a particular need, and > redistributed, excepts can be used in other presentations, ica can be > part of a larger educational effort. Like any other software, having > the free software/presentation bits leads to collaboation, > invention, and greater benefit to the community of users. > > It is a pity that a conference of debian developers, and > others interested in developing debian, which is itself dedicated to > being wholly free, and who has just rejected the GFDL as not being > free enough to be a part of debian, is now saying that in order to be > a part of Debian's conference, anything goes, and the sole rationale > given is that non-free stuff, while restricting the usage rights of > the community, is OK to ensure the success of the conference. Hold on - does this mean I will or won't be able to do apt-get install debconf6-doc ? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licenses for DebConf6
Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> * 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. > > Uhhh, why would something like that be packaged? Just put it on > http://www.debconf.org or something. Don't bloat the archive with more > crap like this. > > -- > Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat. And the rest of the documentation? What use is the Maintainers Guide to a user? Why would you need the Linux Gazette in the archives? I see games there too - purge them, quick! cheers, Rich. (Captain Logic is my co-pilot.) -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Man page owner
Hi, This is probably a question with an obvious answer, but I couldn't find the answer. Why are man pages installed with owner and group "root" rather than owner and group "man"? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Man page owner
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 08:40:17PM +0000, Rich Walker wrote: > >> This is probably a question with an obvious answer, but I couldn't find >> the answer. > >> Why are man pages installed with owner and group "root" rather than >> owner and group "man"? > > Why would "man" need write access to the man pages? Good point. Just seemed ... odd. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /run vs /var/run
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Dec 18, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> FWIW I asked Chris Yeoh for his opinion on the name and he said that >> /run sounded preferable to both /etc/run and /lib/run. > Competition with /root in tab-completion, for a start. Under what circumstances would you be typing /r rather than ~/ ? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: my thoughts on the Vancouver Prospectus
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] > A buildd host does not need much to work safely, so writing a security > standard should be possible. How about a security standard like the > following: > > * A buildd host must not have any port open, except for one SSH port > (preferably port 22, but may be nonstandard). > * It must run OpenSSH of at least versionissues in stable> or > * It must run a kernel from the list ofdistributions that are safe> > * It must not have PermitRootLogin enabled > * It must not have PasswordAuthentication enabled > * It must not have any tunneling enabled, except for scp > * It must not have any enabled accounts except for root and the admin > user(s) > * ... possibly something more? > > Then DSA could set up a cronjob that would run every x days, check > whether the requirements are being met, and would scream like hell if > one of the hosts was insecure? Even better - use cfengine to automagically check that the config files were accurate. Plus, it would make a good example cfengine file for the documentation package. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: proficiency-level tag for debian packages
Will Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This would be rather arbitrary and probably be liable to cause disagreements. > I think you could get much the same affect with some well chosen tags and > debtags. e.g. you could filter on: > > command line only tools > enterprise tools (e.g. groupware, RDBMS) > scientific tools (e.g. octave, R) > sysadmin tools (e.g. mrtg) Even within these categories there is some need for finer grain. For example, groupware clients are mostly "easy, end-user, corporate" groupware servers are mostly "impossible, sysadmin, corporate, server" But debtags should cope with this? I can see an installer screen like the old tasksel menu, where I can say to someone over the phone: "Yes, now the installer should have brought up a long list of words with tick-boxes by them. Select easy, desktop, internet, end-user, corporate and OurLocalPackages. Now click [Install All Relevant]" cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Example where testing-security was used?
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Moore's law is cpu speed. *TRANSISTORS* on a single die <http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm> cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: proficiency-level tag for debian packages
Will Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tuesday 31 May 2005 20:07, Rich Walker wrote: > >> Even within these categories there is some need for finer grain. >> >> For example, groupware clients are mostly "easy, end-user, corporate" >> groupware servers are mostly "impossible, sysadmin, corporate, server" > > If you are installing a groupware server you probably want to do more > research > than that. Hence the "impossible" tag. Having attempted to install a bunch of groupware servers on a machine, I'd agree with you that More Research Is Needed - but having a tag that tells you "you only want to do this if you are a wizard" will at least ensure others don't try without fair warning :-> > Groupware clients like evolution and kmail I would guess would > come under the end-user classification. Yes, I just like the idea of being able to filter on multiple keys simultaneously. easy + ( end-user | corporate ) you would expect to install, say, the Mozilla packages, some kind of LDAP support, DHCP-clients, and so on. > >> But debtags should cope with this? > > Debtags would cope with the scheme I proposed above, which I would not > suggest > would be 100% ideal, but is probably an 80/20 solution. Better than 0! cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Example where testing-security was used?
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:30:40PM +0100, Rich Walker wrote: >> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > >> > Moore's law is cpu speed. >> >> *TRANSISTORS* on a single die >> >> <http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm> > > Bah, yeah, but it's more or less the same thing for a given line of > chips, even when it's not a linear relationship. You don't read computer architecture stuff, I take it. Saying "more or less the same thing" would be like saying, ooh, Debian and Ununtu are more or less the same thing. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > How common was that problem you were trying to solve, again? Presumably, you never used an S3 video card. (Locks up on leaving X in many card/X permutations). Or maybe you inhabit the "Windows is stable" parallel Usenet-propagating universe :-> cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I demand that Rich Walker may or may not have written... > >> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> How common was that problem you were trying to solve, again? > >> Presumably, you never used an S3 video card. > >> (Locks up on leaving X in many card/X permutations). > > IME (one S3 ViRGE), that's VESA driver territory. (No lockup problems, though > - at least, not that I recall...) Specifically, it was using Xserver-s3v rather than X 4. If you left X, the machine became un-usable: I recall having to connect over the network to shut it down, and having to document how to do that for the customer. I know; I should have used a different card: but there were deadlines involved... cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#312669: /sbin/ifconfig: Add ifconfig to user path
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Jun 10, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> a) ifconfig is an application that exists not only on Linux, but on many >>other (free or non-free) unices as well; it would be fair to say > And indeed this is the only reason to keep it around. What *single* command in the iproute package can I call to get the same information as I get from ifconfig -a? Until there is one, I don't see you can replace it. >> b) The mere fact that there is something newer which performs the same >>function does in no way imply that the older implementation is > Wrong. iproute does much more than route/ifconfig, which cannot support > all the features of >= 2.4 networking stacks. Hey! Some of us still don't need all the features of 2.4! cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: And now for something completely different... etch!
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:14:45PM -0300, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote: > >> (1) LSB -- which Debian's policy vows to follow -- mandates the >> default differentiated runlevels. > > No. Please read > <http://refspecs.freestandards.org/LSB_2.1.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/runlevels.html>. Given that they *suggest* a set of runlevels, which provides "one spare for local config", would it be out of order for users to file wishlist bugs on packages not following these guidelines? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TODO for etch ?
Adam Majer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > >> - Change boot system, to one capable of handling dependencies and >> parallell invocation, to speed up the boot process. >> >> > Err.. Why? The current "slow" bootup is caused mostly by hardware > detection from my experience. Speeding up hardware detection or remove > it in favour of manual /etc/modules entries would speed up the boot > process a lot more than changing the boot process. If it ain't broke, do > not fix it. At present, almost everything installs itself in runlevel 20. This kind of suggests that almost everything is order-independent. But this isn't true: the raid and device mapper stuff *has* to have the right order, or your boot fails. Other stuff probably has subtle ordering constraints that are not being managed: the system "just works". Example: foo:~--# ls /etc/rc5.d/ K11anacron S19ssh S20diald S20klisa S20setkey S50systune K90metalog S19userv S20exim S20lprng S20smartmontools S50wu-ftpd S10ipchains S20alsa S20exim4 S20mailman S20smartsuite S83chrony S10iptables S20amavis-ng S20famS20makedev S20swapd S89anacron S10metalog S20apache-perl S20firestarterS20mdnsresponder S20sysstat S89atd S10sysklogd S20arpwatch S20firewall-easy S20mon S20teapop S89cron S11klogd S20atop S20framerdS20mysql S20totdS90samba S12kerneld S20autofsS20gpmS20netsaint S20wwwoffleS91apache S13genpower S20binfmt-supportS20greylist S20nfs-kernel-server S20xfs S91apache-ssl S14ppp S20cfengine2 S20hddtempS20nut S20xprint S99fetchmail S18portmap S20clamav-daemon S20hylafaxS20p3scan S21nfs-common S99kdm S19amavisS20clamav-freshclam S20inetd S20pdnsd S23ntp-server S99rmnologin S19bind S20crywrap S20iptotalS20postgresql S30squid S99stop-bootlogd S19nis S20cupsysS20isdnutils S20queue S31sqcwa S99xdm S19slapd S20daapd S20jmon S20rsync S31squid-prefetch S19spamassassin S20dcc-clientS20junkbuster S20sauce S45usbmgr Now, I may have tweaked a few things in there, but it seems to me that firewalls should start after networking and before network-using things email (exim) should start before programs that send email (mailman, smartmontools) databases should probably run after filesystems, firewalls, system monitors, swap daemons, and so forth. and there are probably a few other easy deductions. Switching to a "make -j runlevel5"-type system (dependencies encoded in makefile fragments, some kind of "foo Provides firewall" structure, and (hard) a method for stopping things as well as starting them would (a) allow parallel startup, important for some users (b) allow correct ordering to be specified cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Greylisting for @debian.org email, please
Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] > Sounds like you've been a victim of a poorly implemented greylisting > service. Probably greylistd. It does exactly what it says on the can - unfortunately, the combination of the fact that the list of "known [EMAIL PROTECTED]" mail servers is incomplete, and the delay introduced on first-time-mails from legitimate sources, results in screaming from users really quick :-< cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upcoming removal of orphaned packages
Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Martin Michlmayr wrote on 16/06/2005 19:18: >> findimagedupes -- Finds visually similar or duplicate images [#218699] >> * Orphaned 590 days ago >> * Package orphaned > 360 days ago. > > Though I probably can't adopt it (due to lack of time), it would be a > pity to loose this since there is no comparable commandline tool fdupes? Doesn't do partial matching, but is otherwise excellent. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upcoming removal of orphaned packages
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-06-16 22:53]: >> > if-transition -- A Change in the Weather, an interactive short story >> > [#260720] >> > * Orphaned 327 days ago >> >> I cannot find this one on powerpc. > > It's in non-free. > >> > moria -- A roguelike game with an infinite dungeon [#274472] >> > * Orphaned 255 days ago >> I think that would be a shame. As I don't play it myself, I might not be >> the best choice for a maintainer, but I'd offer sponsoring. :-) > > It's non-free. There were discussions about moving to GPL but this > hasn't happened yet. It can always be re-uploaded once it's GPL. Perhaps you haven't seen: <http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.games.roguelike.angband/browse_thread/thread/d667a1ca262882f7/a198687e1e992879?q=moria+debian+author&rnum=1#a198687e1e992879> Most of the creditted authors have stated that they are happy for it to be converted to GPL. And moria hasn't had a bug in a long time. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upcoming removal of orphaned packages
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While many bugs are a reason to remove a package quickly, no bugs > aren't a reason to keep it forever. The Debian QA group maintains > packages that are orphaned to give other maintainers the chance > to adopt it without too much hassle, and as a service to those > that use them. But this has to be only a temporary solution. Point taken. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Greylisting for @debian.org email, please
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What's painful about it? > > It stops a lot of viruses and spam, with no false positives. What's the > problem? These are common misapprehensions about greylisting. Unfortunately: It has false positives. /var/lib/greylistd/whitelist-hosts lists a selection of mail servers that do not handle greylisting properly. There are others as well. Only if the person who sent the mail phones up and says "why didn't you answer my mail" do you stand a chance of discovering that another mail server is broken. It delays mail from people who haven't mailed you before. This is *guaranteed* to cause senior people in the company to come knocking on your door within hours of you turning it on. Otherwise, I'd use it :-> cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Debian-uk] Sun have (probably) patented apt-get
Stephen Birch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On 4 Jul 2005, at 11:44 am, Wookey wrote: >> Take a look at this patent (granted this week in europe) >> >> http://gauss.ffii.org/PatentView/EP1170667 >> >> I'm fairly sure that apt-get and associated package-integratity >> checking tools could be considered infringing. (Does dpkg/apt have >> a modular structure?) > > It seems that when RMS cried "the sky is falling" [this time regarding > patents] he was, once again, absolutely correct. Software patents are > the single biggest threat not only to the open source movement but > also to small/medium sized software companies. Note that this particular patent is: EP Status: Granted. Within 9 month opposition window So if you have *proof of prior art* you can oppose the patent grant In practical terms, this means someone who can "prove" that the Debian Packaging system does this. Which probably means an Official Debian Person sending the letter, with dates of when the technology was introduced into Debian, and perhaps extracts from the Packaging Manuals of the period to show this. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFA: etask-el -- Define and manage projects within Emacs with Gantt
Daniel Martins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Site =http://members.chello.at/rene.weichselbaum/etask.el You mean http://members.chello.at/rene.weichselbaum/etask.html cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#357703: udev breaks syslog
"Olaf van der Spek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 3/28/06, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 06:15:27PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: >> > Harder than it looks. There are multiple syslog daemons, how can the >> > package know which one is installed and needs to be restarted? >> >> are there really that many syslog daemons (my count is 5)? why not make >> a list, fire off invoke-rc.d on each of them during upgrade, >> and ignore the return codes? if you really cared i suppose you >> couldtest before calling invoke-rc.d too, but the point is i >> don't think it's a great deal of work to do so. > > That doesn't sound like a clean solution. :) > I doubt udev/syslog are the only packages that encounter this situation. There are a number of situations where one of a selection of packages can reasonably be installed. mail transport agent imap daemon dns server proxy server logging daemon Presumably, there is a standard way to handle the case of needing to restart a 1-of-N service handler? cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#357703: udev breaks syslog
Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That much is easy, but how do you turn a process ID into a script that > can be invoke-rc.d'd? Make it part of the Debian spec? define a known script name (logging-daemon) that must exist in /etc/init.d/ and can be a symlink to another one. submit a small patch to each logging daemon to add/remove this link when the package is installed/removed? -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unreproducable bugs
"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7/15/05, Manoj Srivastava va, manoj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> What's with the recent push to get every little things written >> down into policy, so the developer no longer is required to have an >> ability to think, or exercise any judgement whatsoever? > > Welcome to the software industry in 2005. [snip] Yes, to rely on 1300 developers to all think of your cunning method of solving a problem clearly makes sense. After all, to *write down* a technique that solves the problem, and make it available to all of them would stilt their creativity, hinder their intellect, and prevent the development of a consistent style! Sheesh, next you'll be arguing in favour of personal indentation styles! cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unreproducable bugs
"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7/15/05, Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > On 7/15/05, Manoj Srivastava va, manoj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> What's with the recent push to get every little things written >> >> down into policy, so the developer no longer is required to have an >> >> ability to think, or exercise any judgement whatsoever? >> > >> > Welcome to the software industry in 2005. >> >> Yes, to rely on 1300 developers to all think of your cunning method of >> solving a problem clearly makes sense. After all, to *write down* a >> technique that solves the problem, and make it available to all of them >> would stilt their creativity, hinder their intellect, and prevent the >> development of a consistent style! > > I am having a hard time reading this as anything but a non sequitur. Umm; it follows more from Manoj's comment than yours. > Personally, I prefer for a solution to be demonstrated to work, both > socially and technically, before it is enshrined in policy. Drafts > are, of course, welcome at any stage. "Rough consensus and running > code." YMMV. You scale an organisation, I understand, by removing the *need* for everyone in it to be a genius at everything it does. Hence the comment about the US army: "designed by genius to be run by sergeants". There does seem to be a lot of discussion on the debian groups about policy. If Debian is lucky, or well-managed, then it is the process you are describing. If it is unlucky, then it is a bunch of rule-lawyers having fun. > >> Sheesh, next you'll be arguing in favour of personal indentation styles! > > Well, yes -- as long as the indent / emacs-mode / vim-mode > incantations that reproduce them are well documented, preferably in a > magic comment at the end of each file. :-) Exactly: that and an indent script in the checkin routine remove any issue. See how that compares to policy, which is hopefully implemented in such a way as to be mechanically testable? cheers, Rich. > > Cheers, > - Michael > -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: unreproducable bugs
"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7/15/05, Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I am having a hard time reading this as anything but a non sequitur. >> >> Umm; it follows more from Manoj's comment than yours. > > Ah. OK. Should have sent two postings :-> > >> > Personally, I prefer for a solution to be demonstrated to work, both >> > socially and technically, before it is enshrined in policy. Drafts >> > are, of course, welcome at any stage. "Rough consensus and running >> > code." YMMV. >> >> You scale an organisation, I understand, by removing the *need* for >> everyone in it to be a genius at everything it does. > > Bingo! You also take care not to formalize unduly, or you get a > sclerotic bureaucracy. Given the difficulty of getting agreement in this place, I think that unlikely. (As a practicing SubGenius, I like to think of the "ornery, cussing Debian", up there with the Two-Fisted Jesus, and the Butting Buddha. Others may have other views) > >> Hence the comment about the US army: "designed by genius to be run by >> sergeants". > > As a close associate of several sergeants in the US Army, I question > only the "designed by genius" part. Given what armies do for a > living, Darwinian selection is probably also a factor. :-) Helps. The British Army likes to send officers out in front - produces lots of dead heroes in the upper classes, as well as reducing incidence of fragging... By the way, a spot of Google produces: Child (1984) cited A machine designed by geniuses to be run by idiots, Herman Wouk, The Caine Mutiny, on the organization of the wartime US Navy. [snip sane remarks] >> >> Exactly: that and an indent script in the checkin routine remove any >> issue. > > As long as it's purely advisory, please -- no tool is perfect > (although TeX is damn close). > >> See how that compares to policy, which is hopefully implemented in such >> a way as to be mechanically testable? > > To within certain limits, as demonstrated by lintian and linda -- up > there with dpkg and debhelper in the pantheon of Debian's > contributions to the world. Not quite on par with the DFSG, but > that's only to be expected; the DFSG is not intended to be testable by > a machine that is less than Turing-complete. :-) I get asked from time to time by academics for interesting projects for their students. I think I now have another: Implement a system capable of using standard AI techniques to process the (a) existing judgements and (b) content of debian.legal such that it can issue plausible analysis of a new software license... cheers, Rich. > > Cheers, > - Michael > -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: /etc/gconf/gconf.xml.defaults/ --- Why /etc ?
Jens Peter Secher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> [ Complain about useless/unnecessary differences in Gnome /etc file. ] >> >> Please, could someone tell me why these should not be in >> /usr/share/gconf? Otherwise, I propose a mass bug filing. > > I wholeheartedly agree with this. When a system administrator tries to > get an overview of system changes or upgrades, there is just too much > noise in /etc. As an effect of this, I have had to special-case Gnome > files in /etc in the changetrack package so that these files are > ignored, which is obviously not ideal. Also, the presence of 20MB of extra files in /etc/ is a serious hindrance on machines with limited disk space or small root partitions. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: real-i386
Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Em Qui, 2005-11-03 às 21:39 +0200, Yavor Doganov escreveu: >> At Thu, 3 Nov 2005 02:38:51 -0800 (PST), Nick Jacobs wrote: >> > You mean, it's seriously been proposed that a significant amount of >> > work should be done to restore support for a processor that has not >> > been manufactured for 10 years? While slightly degrading performance >> > for the 99.9% of x86 users who have Pentium/Athlon/or better? >> Why not supporting it, if it is not so hard? > > I think i386 debian arch is not suitable anymore for real-i386 machines > (self-experience), I mean, it's not suitable even for a Pentium 133 with > 32 Mb RAM. Ok, I know it works, but it's a waste of memory and CPU > cycles to run a full glibc-based distro in such restrictive > environment... It's also useful for people using x86-type CPUs without the full 686 instruction set - vis. the Via C3 cpu's, in use in a *lot* of systems. Not having a 386-compatible kernel+libc, just a 686-compatible one, would mean you couldn't run Debian at all on those machines. cheers, Rich. -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
verifying deb installation
This is probably a dumb question, but I figure there should be an answer, and I couldn't find it. When hacking on a scratch box, I had /usr on /dev/hdc1, and /usr/share on /dev/hda4 as /misc/share with a symlink... I then added a big drive, and moved /usr onto it. And forgot to move /usr/share onto it before hosing /dev/hda4. I realised because my next apt-get upgrade gave some ... interesting ... errors, and all sorts of things had vanished. dpkg --audit didn't help much. I did a search on debian.org for "verify packages" and other related things, but still didn't get any sign of what I wanted: * how do I get dpkg to check the manifest list of the installed packages against the files installed, and reinstall the missing ones? * Or should I just hack something up and submit it somewhere? (I eventually tar'd /usr/share from another box and untar'd it on the scratch box. Seems okay, but we'll see) cheers, Rich. -- rich walker no-work anarcho and stuff his signature file no content yet no vanity website
