On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:28:04PM +, Russell Coker wrote:
> >> Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in
> >> bzip2
> >> format to reduce download times when using slow links?
> >
> >Good idea. And Packages files too.
> >
> >But that would need implementation in
"Oliver" == Oliver Elphick writes:
Oliver> The package `makepasswd' provides an easier command line...
Oliver>makepasswd --crypt --clear=your_password
Heh, you'd be surprised how controversial that command line is in the
BTS :-)
- PGP E4 70 6E 59 80 6A F
Tom Lees wrote:
>1. Put a file "passwd" in $CVSROOT/CVSROOT/,
> containing a line like this:-
>
>anonymous:tLE75Q0w/AnU2
>
>The password is "anonymous". Generate it like this:-
>
>echo 'main(){printf("%s\n",crypt("password","tL"));}'>t.c; \
> gcc -o t t.c -lcrypt; ./t; rm
On 21 Jan 1999, Riku Saikkonen wrote:
> George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Note that I am using the apt method of dselect using the round-robin
> >mirrors so I have no idea which site I was really connected to when I got
> >the bad .deb
>
> Does apt check the MD5sum of the package agai
Craig Sanders wrote:
> 300 sounds like a lot...are you including all shared libs and -dev and
> -altdev packages?
No, I was just including everything that ended with a number. That excludes
the -dev packages and it probably includes some things that don't belong. As
I said, it's a "crude" count.
Brian White wrote:
> Disclamers are of marginal use. It will appear as installable and tell
> people to "install me" just as an elevator buttun tells people "push me".
Installing a kernel 2.2 source package just dumps a tar file in /usr/src. I
don't see how this could break a system. Actually bui
"J.H.M. Dassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 11:28:29 -0500, Daniel Martin wrote:
> > Is my only other choice for a graphical debugger the "lesstif-induced
> > segfault" ddd?
>
> Glad to see my work is appreciated. Perhaps this is where I need to point
> you to the power
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 10:38:54 +0100, "J.H.M. Dassen" wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 20:26:12 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to
> > > Debian lists and give their feedb
Hi,
Gnome ships with icons for different kinds of files, and right now .deb
packages have the Debian logo as icon. I've been asked to make sure this
is OK from a trademark point of view. I can't find the logo license on the
web site (?) - could someone clue me in on the current status, or give
sp
On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:56:16PM -0600, Oleg Krivosheev wrote:
>
> Hi, All
>
> can someone tell me how to setup anonymous read-only
> access to CVS tree via pserver in slink?
> Of course with minimum security problems...
>
> thanks a lot in advance
Read the CVS info file, look under Admin fil
Can someone give me an overview of the current state of gnome
libraries and applications in the unstable distribution? I would like
to try our gnumeric. If I try to install it with apt I get dependency
problems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# apt-get install gnumeric
Updating package status cache...done
Shaleh wrote:
>
>On 22-Jan-99 Rafael Kitover wrote:
>> Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
>> someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
>> various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
>> enough, a per
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> > > > The script that I am working on unpacks all of the .deb files it finds
> > > > and
> > > > collects Package:, Provides:, Pre-Depends:, Depends:, Recommends:, and
> > > > Suggests: field informatio
On 21 Jan 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> Dale Scheetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > giflib3g-dev gdk-imlib-dev
> > giflib3g-dev imlib-dev
> > giflib3g-dev libfnlib-dev
>
> The full dependencies for these is mo
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, James R. Van Zandt wrote:
>
> Dale Sheetz writes:
> ...
> >
> >Package not in archives Package which depends on
> > Package not in archives
> >
> ...
> >tclx
On 22-Jan-99 Rafael Kitover wrote:
> Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
> someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
> various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
> enough, a person would then just need to apt-
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 10:02:52PM -0500, Brian White wrote:
> No. We had enough problems upgrading from 2.0.35 to 2.0.36. This would
> be a major change and have corresponding reprocussions. I'm sure it's
> very stable, but it will have incompatibilities.
But that was changing the default kern
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 02:13:32PM +0900, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:
> Can you put 2.2 at least in potato ? I am using here 2.1.131 but didn't
> try to upgrade to 2.2.preX as I have understood that there were some
> problems. Are the problems solved ? Can I safely grab the kernel, build
> it with kerne
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 08:24:37PM -0500, Allan M. Wind wrote:
> Most ppl. need a printer and /dev/lp changed radically betewen 2.0 and
> 2.2. diald/ppp in slink does not work with 2.2.0-pre7 (on my box, at
> least). I am sure that there are other things as well.
What's the problem with ppp? I ru
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 05:23:22PM -0600, David Welton wrote:
> The kernel is stable, but is the kernel + debian stable? No one
> knows.
>From my experience, yes. After all we also have packages that won't work
with kernel 2.0.* like pciutils.
> I think we should include it, as a service to pe
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:43:27AM -0500, Johnie Ingram wrote:
> Little things that few notice, apparently -- I would've sworn slink
> and 2.2.0-final work perfectly until someone pointed out that
> /usr/sbin/procinfo complains. Been running 2.1.1xx in production
> with frozen for months.
But th
Did anyone get this to compile? I'd like to have a look at this frond-end
tool for PostgreSQL and maybe other DBs.
The URL is:
http://www.chez.com/rmoya/software/gnome/gnome-sql/doc/gnome-sql-0.1.tar.gz
Michael
--
Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers!
Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 E
Sorry to jump in like this, but this seems to only be a problem when
someone would be using apt-get exclusively. Does xbase recommend the
various other packages people expect to have? That would make it simple
enough, a person would then just need to apt-get update;apt-get
dist-upgrade then go into
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:18:51PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > I have proposed a very simple solution, which, in addition to the
> > empty xbase (I applaud that you accepted this idea), would make the X
> > upgrades *completely* smooth.
>
> I've
Hi All,
I got the kernel pre5 and applied patches till pre9. However, after applying
pre8, the compilation gave an error in the program fs/autofs/dirhash.c pre9
does not fix this problem.
The actual error is at the end of dirhash.c and has the following lines..
struct auto_fs.. *ent,*nent;
Quoting Bob Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> I also was unable to get ppp or diald to work with a later 2.1.x kernel in
> a hamm system.
>
> Documentation/Changes says the required version of ppp is 2.3.5 and hamm,
> slink and potato all have this version.
>
> Bob
I have just performed 3 di
"Martin" == Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> I believe we should. netgod will upload a new pkg, I hope.
netgod has uploaded a new pkg, I hear.
- PGP E4 70 6E 59 80 6A F5 78 63 32 BC FB 7A 08 53 4C
__ _Debian GNU Johnie Ingram <[EMAIL PR
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:18:51PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I have proposed a very simple solution, which, in addition to the
> empty xbase (I applaud that you accepted this idea), would make the X
> upgrades *completely* smooth.
I've tried to say this more delicately. Obviously that's been
On Jan 22, Brian White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Since it is assured that some packages will have to be patched by a
>user that wants to use the new kernel, making those users go through
>a little bit more effort to get the new kernel is more than offset by
>reducing the amount of problems en
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>>
>> >I hope the pgp-i and pgp-us example will help you to see that surely
>most
>> >of these conflicts are gratuituous).
>>
>> I guess so. Hmmm. I'm still not con
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > The script that I am working on unpacks all of the .deb files it finds and
> > > collects Package:, Provides:, Pre-Depends:, Depends:, Recommends:, and
> > > Suggests: field information and deterines several things.
> >
> > You do realize that is wh
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Brian White wrote:
> > > Including the source package I could be convinced of. At least then
> > > people have to think about what they're doing before causing potential
> > > problems.
> >
> > This "think about what they are doing" thing is precisely one of the
> > reasons
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> >I hope the pgp-i and pgp-us example will help you to see that surely most
> >of these conflicts are gratuituous).
>
> I guess so. Hmmm. I'm still not convinced it's a major thing to be worried
> about. [.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> IglooFTP is a promising new gtk1.1.x based ftp client.
IglooFTP has already been packaged for potato:
Package: iglooftp
Priority: optional
Section: net
Maintainer: Adrian Bridgett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Version: 0.3.1-2
Depends: libc6, libglib1.1.11 (>= 1.1.11-1), libgtk1.
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 03:22:58PM +, M.C. Vernon wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> > > As well, my roommate and I were going to also make a character sheet
> > > program (hence the reason for making the rolldice stuff a library), so we
> > > could just enter the data, and
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> >Please note that a suboptimal packaging does not legitimate the conflict.
> >For example, my unzip and unzip-crypt packages do conflict at each other,
> >and they are optional, so I should probably make th
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>Please note that a suboptimal packaging does not legitimate the conflict.
>For example, my unzip and unzip-crypt packages do conflict at each other,
>and they are optional, so I should probably make them compatible, like
>pgp-i and pgp-us, for example. [
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:22:56PM +, Russell Coker wrote:
>> Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in
>> bzip2
>> format to reduce download times when using slow links?
>
>Good idea. And Packages files too.
>
>But that w
> > Why do I get the idea I should bring up once again my hope to gather a
> > sizable group of people to build a game system which is released under
> > free license and available to anyone with a web browser and the like? =>
>
> I'm all for it! How about it, anyone else interested? :)
Me too
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > As well, my roommate and I were going to also make a character sheet
> > program (hence the reason for making the rolldice stuff a library), so we
> > could just enter the data, and either save it to a file or go ahead and
> > print it out... my roomm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > > if you're interested, i'll dig up the files (i still have them on tape
> > > somewhere...i think. dusty old code from the early 90s :-) and mail them
> > > to you. i'll GPL them first, so you can do what you want with them.
> >
> > Cool! I'd always be gla
> > Including the source package I could be convinced of. At least then
> > people have to think about what they're doing before causing potential
> > problems.
>
> This "think about what they are doing" thing is precisely one of the
> reasons the "extra" priority does exist.
>
> According to th
> > > There is precedent for this as there is a 2.1.125 package in slink now.
> > > I think it's not a big deal if there are big disclaimers attached that
> > > slink is not a 2.2 targetted dist.
> >
> > Disclamers are of marginal use. It will appear as installable and tell
> > people to "install
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:22:32AM -0500, Stevie Strickland wrote:
> > that's the good news. the bad news is that it was all done in turbo
> > pascal. however, the algorithms were clean and readable, so easily
> > ported to C.
> >
> > if you're interested, i'll dig up the files (i still have them
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Brian White wrote:
> Including the source package I could be convinced of. At least then
> people have to think about what they're doing before causing potential
> problems.
This "think about what they are doing" thing is precisely one of the
reasons the "extra" priority doe
Is anybody from Dortmund / Germany or around here? I'd like to become a
maintainer and need somebody to sign my PGP key.
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Brian White wrote:
> I'll share that fantasy. As linux becomes more and more mainstream, it's
> going to be even more difficult to dream. Of course, the reality is that
> most users don't need the 2.2 kernel anyway.
unfortunately (maybe) for Debian, very few inexperienced u
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >
> >> >If there are optional packages that conflict with each other, we should
> >> >choose one to stay in optional and move the others to extra. (Or change/
>
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 03:45:46PM +0100, Philipp Frauenfelder wrote:
> Btw, how much is a "stone throw"?
According to the map I used it's 62.5 km (if you go by plane). By train it
will take 1.5 h .
Christoph
--
* Christoph Baumann *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Just thought I would bring this up one more time and run it by everyone.
> This can be considered a draft of what I'd like to put in the release
> notes.
[...]
> Furthermore, the X font and static library packages have been renamed. The
> following
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 09:25:14AM -0500, Brian White wrote:
> > There is precedent for this as there is a 2.1.125 package in slink now.
> > I think it's not a big deal if there are big disclaimers attached that
> > slink is not a 2.2 targetted dist.
>
> Disclamers are of marginal use. It will ap
> Brian> make any difference. Both will show up in dselect and it would
> Brian> be trivial for someone to install the new kernel... and then
>
> Heh, thats the idea. :-)
>
> Brian> wonder why things don't work.
>
> Little things that few notice, apparently -- I would've sworn slink
> and 2.2.
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Thomas Gebhardt wrote:
> shouldn't we mark #31824 (html2ps: can't execute) as critical?
> html2ps does not work at all with this bug.
Not "critical" but "grave", since it "makes the package in question
unuseable or mostly so".
> Fortunately the bug
> can be fixed by deleting
> > Would anyone object if kernel 2.2 were packaged up at least as a
> > kernel-source package for slink? 2.0.3x would remain slink's default kernel,
> > would be used on the boot disks, etc, but this would let people get ahold of
> > kernel 2.2 easily on a debian cdrom, and it would let us say tha
severity 31824 important
thanks
Thomas Gebhardt wrote:
> shouldn't we mark #31824 (html2ps: can't execute) as critical?
> html2ps does not work at all with this bug. Fortunately the bug
> can be fixed by deleting an erroneous character in the script.
I believe we should. netgod will upload a new
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>
>> >If there are optional packages that conflict with each other, we should
>> >choose one to stay in optional and move the others to extra. (Or change/
>> >clarify the definition on the policy manual).
>>
>> T
At 11:32 PM 1/21/99 -0700, you wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Brent Fulgham wrote:
>
>> > 2.2. diald/ppp in slink does not work with 2.2.0-pre7 (on my box, at
>> > least). I am sure that there are other things as well.
>>
>> I'm sure you were aware that you have to upgrade your pppd to work with an
WHO
needs the mSQL database?
For quite a while I'm very unhappy with it. For half a year I have
worked actively in moving to a different db. Yesterday I ported the
last remaining program at home which was based on mSQL to PostgreSQL
though a general SQL API.
There are however some programs lef
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 01:22:56PM +, Russell Coker wrote:
> Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in bzip2
> format to reduce download times when using slow links?
Good idea. And Packages files too.
But that would need implementation in dselect, and will only
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> >If there are optional packages that conflict with each other, we should
> >choose one to stay in optional and move the others to extra. (Or change/
> >clarify the definition on the policy manual).
>
> The manual should be fixed IMHO - there are lots o
Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> They should have `a word to say', and they do--they can subscribe to
> Debian lists and give their feedback and advice, which developers are
> free to follow or ignore. But they do n
Would it be possible to have files such as Contents*.gz also provided in bzip2
format to reduce download times when using slow links?
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Dale Scheetz wrote:
>
> > Since the recent discussion with Richard Stallman about the unsatisfied
> > suggests message, I have undertaken the examination of the main archives.
> >
> > The script that I am working on unpacks al
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Laurent Martelli wrote:
>> "ChL" == Christian Lavoie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>ChL> Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled.
>
>What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say,
>even if they can't or do not have the time to contri
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 10:45:42AM +0100, Paolo Molaro wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 07:32:27PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Package stunnel version 2.1-2 has an unmet dep:
> > Depends: libssl09
>
> Stunnel is in potato, libssl09 in slink: I guess this is the
> CSOBNS again (continuing sa
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> the libgtk* versions are compatible with each other. the libgtk*-dev
> versions, are not (it would be possible to make it so by installing
> header files in /usr/include/gtk-VERSION, but you'd still have to modify
> every source file that #included it. in
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Christian Lavoie wrote:
>DISCLAIMER: These are notes, and can have technical impossibilites
>(especially concerning '.deb'ianizing of StarOffice)
>
>- Provide single user free of charge support through internet.
>(email/newsgroups/knowledge base/whatever)
>- Provide corporate
hi
Ship's Log, Lt. Ivan E. Moore II, Stardate 210199.1558:
> >
> > Brian, would this be too grave a violation of your "no new code" rule?
>
> probably... :(
I'd say this should only apply to a not-more-then-a-month-freeze :)
until potato get's out debian would get kinda out-of-date. On the othe
Hi,
shouldn't we mark #31824 (html2ps: can't execute) as critical?
html2ps does not work at all with this bug. Fortunately the bug
can be fixed by deleting an erroneous character in the script.
Cheers, Thomas
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 07:32:27PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Package stunnel version 2.1-2 has an unmet dep:
> Depends: libssl09
Stunnel is in potato, libssl09 in slink: I guess this is the
CSOBNS again (continuing saga of broken non-us).
lupus
--
"The number of UNIX installations has gr
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 20:26:12 +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > Laurent Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't they have a word to say,
> >even if they can't or do not have the time to
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 06:12:14PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Laurent Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> "ChL" == Christian Lavoie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>ChL> Bottom line: Debian should remain developer controlled.
>
>What about non-developper users ? Shouldn't
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, David Welton wrote:
> The kernel is stable, but is the kernel + debian stable? No one
> knows.
Well, assuming it's an improvement on the pre-release ones, we can make a
pretty good guess :)
> I think we should include it, as a service to people who don't want to
> downlo
Just thought I would bring this up one more time and run it by everyone.
This can be considered a draft of what I'd like to put in the release
notes. The person managing that document has my permission to edit this
down a little bit.
***
The Great X Reorganization happened at version 3.3.2.3a-2,
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 12:02:55AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Craig Sanders wrote:
> > i agree. in fact, it's more like a solution searching for a problem than
> > even a superficial problem.
>
> It's a problem that is only evident to people who haven't lived with it for
> years. That doesn't mean
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I am thinking about being there (I'll come from italy). If you
>> find something, Wichert, can you please let me know... I CAN'T
>> read german (hope conference la
Craig Sanders wrote:
> i agree. in fact, it's more like a solution searching for a problem than
> even a superficial problem.
It's a problem that is only evident to people who haven't lived with it for
years. That doesn't mean it's not a problem.
> from the descriptions that have been posted of h
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 11:28:29 -0500, Daniel Martin wrote:
> Is my only other choice for a graphical debugger the "lesstif-induced
> segfault" ddd?
Glad to see my work is appreciated. Perhaps this is where I need to point
you to the power of having the source? You could e.g. try fixing LessTif
a
Enrique Zanardi writes:
>On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 10:22:39AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> Am I missing something here? Where does it say that users should be able
>> to install _all_ optional packages?
>
>The policy manual suggests that:
>
>"2.2 Priorities
>[...]
> optional
> (In a sen
I am about to upload sattrack. I have previously announced this on
debian-hams ... It is a sattelite tracking program. It is quite non-free
(section non-free/hamradio) but I have obtained permission from the
author to create a package, and have included that email in the copyright
file.
73,
Hamis
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> case) incompatible? This is where RH and Debian seem to differ: for RH
> they become the same package, and you need multiple versions of the same
> package to support all applications. This is probably why they need
> hacks like dependencies on files to get this working.
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 04:00:50AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > You do know that the OSS modules in 2.1.x are drastically changed,
> > right?
>
> Sure, I browse linux-kernel on occasion.
>
> > You need to provide them with the IRQs and ports that they need on t
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Brent Fulgham wrote:
>> The issue being that there IS a problem - e.g. are we going to provide
>> ppp1 and ppp2? That sounds like trouble to me.
>>
>Real Question (not a snipe): Is there any reason everyone couldn't use a
>current pppd that would be compatible with the new k
On Thu, 21 Jan 1999, Brent Fulgham wrote:
> > 2.2. diald/ppp in slink does not work with 2.2.0-pre7 (on my box, at
> > least). I am sure that there are other things as well.
>
> I'm sure you were aware that you have to upgrade your pppd to work with any
> of the higher-order 2.1.X kernels? You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 22 Jan 1999, Craig Sanders wrote:
> that's the good news. the bad news is that it was all done in turbo
> pascal. however, the algorithms were clean and readable, so easily
> ported to C.
>
> if you're interested, i'll dig up the files (i still have the
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > I noticed, otherwise you get some weird resource busy-error. Didn't help
> > though. My hardware isn't evil special.. (standard sb16 clone)
>
> Unfortunatly, this is as evil as it gets. According to the current kernel
> docs, the
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 08:24:37PM -0500, Allan M. Wind wrote:
> Most ppl. need a printer and /dev/lp changed radically betewen 2.0 and
> 2.2. diald/ppp in slink does not work with 2.2.0-pre7 (on my box, at
> least). I am sure that there are other things as well.
---end quoted text---
I think it'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Joseph Carter wrote:
> > Or if you're really crazy, you could allow optional + or - to affect the
> > total, if that were -d12 above the total would be 21 for example.. If it
> > doesn't do EVERYTHING by that point, what more can be said? =>
>
> Yes, I think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Just total, decided that was the important part (if you ask for 3d6,
> > you're only interested in the result, unless you're doing something
> > like method IV of rolling characters in AD&D (I believe), in which you
> > roll 4d6 and take the highest three, in
Ben Collins wrote:
> Any program that is suid or sgid for no reason what-so-ever is always a
> reason for a bug report, especially if it's suid root...we need some
> automatic catch for new packages that have suid or sgid binaries in
> them, or call suidregister.
Lintian can serve as a check for t
> "AF" == Anthony Fok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AF> if (geteuid()!=0) die("Must run with EUID=root");
AF> I am a little bit tempted to comment that line out, but it's
AF> probably there for a reason, and I am definitely not qualified
AF> to hack fdmount.c, so for now I s
Hello Ben, Avery and Wichert!
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 12:50:59AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Anthony Fok wrote:
> > As the Slink deep freeze and release are impending, I would like to ask your
> > advice: Should I follow the suggestion given by the bug reporter Thomas
> > Roessler?
"Brian" == Brian White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brian> make any difference. Both will show up in dselect and it would
Brian> be trivial for someone to install the new kernel... and then
Heh, thats the idea. :-)
Brian> wonder why things don't work.
Little things that few notice, apparently
Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 12:34:57PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Would anyone object if kernel 2.2 were packaged up at least as a
> > kernel-source package for slink? 2.0.3x would remain slink's default kernel,
> > would be used on the boot disks, etc, but thi
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 12:34:57PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Would anyone object if kernel 2.2 were packaged up at least as a
> kernel-source package for slink? 2.0.3x would remain slink's default kernel,
> would be used on the boot disks, etc, but this would let people get ahold of
> kernel 2.2 ea
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 09:18:50PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> > Sure no problem. I had no intention of doing so. I was just curious as
> > to the status. There will be no argument from me, especially since I
> > agreed with Debian's stance on the matter. :)
>
> Brief summary, then:
>
> KDE wi
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 07:37:18PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Or if you're really crazy, you could allow optional + or - to affect the
> > total, if that were -d12 above the total would be 21 for example.. If it
> > doesn't do EVERYTHING by that point, what more can be said? =>
>
> Yes, I think
Wichert Akkerman writes:
> It might be much easier to just replace them with snprintf's.
That is what I meant when I said I know how to fix them.
> Also check for things like strcpy()...
I'd rather trace out the input string handling than just grep for dangerous
functions. There isn't that mu
On Fri, Jan 22, 1999 at 02:37:47PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> that's the good news. the bad news is that it was all done in turbo
> pascal. however, the algorithms were clean and readable, so easily
> ported to C.
Hehe, you know there's a GNU Pascal? (package gpc) I haven't looked into
it but i
On Thu, Jan 21, 1999 at 10:43:23PM -0500, Allan M. Wind wrote:
> On 1999-01-21 17:36, Brent Fulgham wrote:
>
> > > 2.2. diald/ppp in slink does not work with 2.2.0-pre7 (on my box, at
> > > least). I am sure that there are other things as well.
> >
> > I'm sure you were aware that you have to upgr
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
