[ NOTE: I don't subscribe to debian-devel, and my question is geared
towards the developers, so please ensure that responses are CC:'d
back to me ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Thanks. ]
G'Day,
I'm curious about how dpkg handles the "Conflicts:" line of packages
that are already installed on the machi
Hi,
>>"Jim" == Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Might it be possible to, say, have a list of `supported formats' --
>> .tar.gz, .zip, others? -- and at least give the option of
>> downloading upstream sources which were originally in other formats
>> as a tarball? This is far from ideal, fo
On May 13, Yann Dirson wrote
>
> It seems that this package hasn't evolved for quite a long time. As
> there are many bug-reports, and as I worked out fixes for some of
> them, I suppose its maintainer has no time for it, and I'm wishing to
> maintain it.
Have you tried to email the current maint
Hi,
[This is getting silly, I really have no objection to the proposal]
>>"Kai" == Kai Henningsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kai> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 12.05.97 in
Kai> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >>"Kai" == Kai Henningsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kai> Well, yes. Scan th
> Hi,
>
> I was asking over Linux-ISP about doing cleanup after breakins and got
> many "use tripwire" answers, and one which says that RPM has a verify
> mode which checks for files which were changed since they were
> installed. Can the dpkg maintainers consider adding such a feature
> for Deb
Tom Lees wrote:
> This gets more complicated. To allow for cross-compiling or bootstrapping,
> some packages need to be compilable using the Source from another package,
> so eg:-
>
> SrcPackage: xmp
> Depends: awe-drv | src.awe
I don't think it adds any complexity if upstream source packages,
> How about where part of the upstream archive could go into the main
> distribution, but part needs to go into non-free or non-US, even for the
> sources?
>
> That's a case where you _must_ repack the original archive.
>
>
> MfG Kai
No. I'd just say upload the upstream sources to the non
This is the message I got from the developer. If you have any comments
cc: me, as I have resubscribed to the lists yet.
Shaya
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:37:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jacques Gelinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Shaya Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> The point I was trying to make was that having dependencies on
> binary packages would be really, really nice.
This gets more complicated. To allow for cross-compiling or bootstrapping,
some packages need to be compilable using the Source from another packag
Hi,
I was asking over Linux-ISP about doing cleanup after breakins and got
many "use tripwire" answers, and one which says that RPM has a verify
mode which checks for files which were changed since they were
installed. Can the dpkg maintainers consider adding such a feature
for Debian?
Chees,
-
hi i,m just wondering if any of you companies can offer me any help
with my ansi c progrmming assignment.
Thanks
waseem
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
I am almost finished with my AP's, only having Biology tomorrow. During
my free time I have thaught up a way that may allow us to use Linuxconf,
and all of it's starting/stoping features w/o replacing init. The author
of linuxconf liked the idea so it looks like we might have an easier time
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > It would be useful if the kind of information sent to the debian-changes
> > mailing list were integrated into dpkg. For available updated packages, a
> > user
> > could use information about the number and Urgency: of each intervening
> > update.
> >
It seems that this package hasn't evolved for quite a long time. As
there are many bug-reports, and as I worked out fixes for some of
them, I suppose its maintainer has no time for it, and I'm wishing to
maintain it.
If I get no response within a week, I'll take for granted that there's
no opposi
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> > You might want to unpack a source package for other reasons than
> > to build it -- e.g., I've sometimes searched for documentation. A
> > non-programmer might want to do this so that they can typeset the
> > documentation in LaTeX, instead of printing out
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > The good definition of powerpc processors is 'powerpc', not 'ppc'.
>
> Was this issue settled ? This will be hard to change later, so it's
> important to get it right quickly.
I believe it was.
> > --- archtable Thu Feb 27 21:53:23 1997
> > +++ arc
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Chris Walker wrote:
> Further to the announcement from Ian Jackson about the creation of a
> mailing list for closed bugs
>
> There may be circumstances when I wish to know if a bug has been closed,
> but am not the person who reported the bug (eg I want to know when the
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Joey Hess wrote:
> Kai Henningsen:
> > Remember: no shell scripts in the source packages that are needed for
> > unpacking. It's just too dangerous.
>
> I don't understand why this is more dangerous than debian/rules. Why?
You don't get to review it before it's run.
--
T
On 12 May 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think, from the volume of discussion on bugs-dist, that most
> developers have signed up on that list (and I at least follow it
> quite diligently). I would rather not clutter up debian-devel with
> that traffic (if we send all reports
On Sun, 11 May 1997, Joey Hess wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius:
> > They might not understand enough about shell scripts (or Perl, or
> > whatever the script is written in) and whatever tools the script uses
> > to make an informed decision of whether the script is safe. With the
> > current scheme, they
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Mortimer) wrote on 13.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
> >
> > Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
>
> I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
> shows!
Me too!
> > > * [1.1] It must be possible to recon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Manoj Srivastava) wrote on 12.05.97 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>"Kai" == Kai Henningsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kai>> Well, yes. Scan the temp dir after unpacking. If it contains one
Kai>> directory and nothing else, that directory is the main package
Kai>> directory. If i
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
> package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
> I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
> and to define LINUX_TYPES_H for gl
On 12 May 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> say that if the source is well behaved (that is, it is a tar file
> >> that unpacks into *some* directory other than ., compressed or
>
> Kai> You seem to think a tar that unpacks into "." is a problem. I
> Kai> still fail to see why.
>
> Kai> Just un
> On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
> > probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
> > emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
>
> What do you think about "L
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Jim Pick wrote:
> If someone wants to contribute to an effort to clone a toolkit, they'd
> probably be much better off contributing to the WINE project (Windows
> emulator) or Jolt project (Java clone - kaffe, biss-awt, guavac, etc.).
What do you think about "Lesstiff"?
--
> Jim Pick wrote:
> > Even if we wrote one, I doubt the KDE guys, especially Matthias Ettrich,
> > would
> > be willing to use it. Really an unfortunate situation, IMHO. :-(
Noel Maddy wrote:
> Berate me for missing the obvious, but couldn't KDE just be compiled with
> a QT clone for Debian?
> > Please clarify - unpacking a Debian source package is different
> > than unpacking an upstream source package (which may require tar,
> > unzip, zoo, lha, jar, etc.). Right?
Andy Mortimer wrote:
> Personally, I'd be inclined to disagree here, especially given [1.5]
> below. If I've gone to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 13 May 1997, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
> package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
> I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
On May 13, David Engel wrote
> This problem is not that simple. With the current dpkg, there is no
> way to fix this even with a statically linked cp or ln. This is
> because dpkg will remove ld-linux.so.1 before any postinst script gets
> a chance to repair the damage.
How about putting somethi
On May 13, joost witteveen wrote
> > On May 11, joost witteveen wrote
> > > I just downgraded my ldso from the one in unstable, to the one
> > > in bo, and I appear to be left with a system that doesn't have
> > > a dynamic linker!
> >
> > This is because of a change from a hard link to a symlink
Jim Pick wrote:
> Vincent Renardias wrote:
> >A while ago there has been a thread about KDE and Qt's licence; some
> > people (can't remember who) told they were interested into re-writting a
> > GPL'd clone of Qt (possibly on the top on LessTif). What's the status on
> > this? I.e: has someo
I have been trying for some time to solve Bug #8882 against the 'sp'
package, which says that in order to make it buildable under glibc,
I need to call libintl as well as libnls in order to accommodate glibc,
and to define LINUX_TYPES_H for glibc. I made those changes and could
no longer get the p
> On May 11, joost witteveen wrote
> > I just downgraded my ldso from the one in unstable, to the one
> > in bo, and I appear to be left with a system that doesn't have
> > a dynamic linker!
>
> This is because of a change from a hard link to a symlink in one of
> the 1.9.x versions. I'm not sure
On May 12, Jim Pick wrote
>
> Excellent write-up, Klee. Thanks for doing it.
I second this; a lot of thought has obviously gone into this, and it
shows!
> Since I've been attacking this topic lately, I'll try to post some (hopefully)
> constructive criticisms. But, overall, I agree with what y
On May 13, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote
> On Mon, 12 May 1997, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>
> > no. bug should prompt the user with a list of conffiles before the
> > editor is called. then the user will select the config files to be
> > included, and leater in the editor he can edit them (like replac
On May 12, Brian C. White wrote
> The following message is a list of items to be completed for the upcoming
> releases of Debian GNU/Linux. If something is missing, incorrect, or you want
> to take responsibility for one or more items, please send email to:
> Brian White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
On May 12, Tom Lees wrote
> On Wed, 7 May 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you can split dinstall into two scripts: One script that is run,
> > say once an hour, that just checks incoming for new uploads and posts the
> > .changes files in the appropriate lists. This script could check
38 matches
Mail list logo
