Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If glib, gtk, gnome, imlib, etc used versioned symbols then yes you
> -might- advoid this.
>
> -HOWEVER- my understanding how how versioned symbols would need to be
> implemented would make this pretty much impossible for a large portion of
> the lib
On 1 Feb 1999, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> JG> Exactly what I mentioned during the libtool thread, however that
> JG> doesn't seem to be important. Ideally we could have a
> JG> /usr/lib/gnome-compat dir
>
> Bwahahahahah! :D
My thoughts exactly :> We are going to do this again when libstdc++
Hi!
> Jason Gunthorpe writes:
>> We could change the SONAME to designate the break in
>> compatibility. But then it wouldn't match upstream. It really
>> isn't the upstream maintainer's fault that we released one version
>> compiled against libglib 1.0, and one against libglib 1.1.
JG
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Shaleh wrote:
:
: On 01-Feb-99 Nathan E Norman wrote:
: > On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Shaleh wrote:
: >
: > [ intent to package snipped ]
: >
: > Is there a URL for this, or is the code only available via supernatural
: > revelation?
:
: Only the truly blessed may wonder
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
> > > In fact, imlib is only being pulled in once. The problem is that glib is
> > > being pulled in twice (from libraries/binaries that were linked with
> >
> > The library that does this is imlib according to my investigation.
>
> Actually, it takes two librari
"Phillip R. Jaenke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Kernel and hardware incompatibilities can lead to binary
> incompatibilities.
> Plus, IIRC, the current PowerPC distributions are all
> compiled for UP. As I said, most RS/6000's are SMP.
You'd have a separate RS/6000 kernel which would be comp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) writes:
> Oscar Levi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In my opinion, this problem is not sufficient to warrant an upload at
> > this time since, contrary to the bug reporters claim, it does not
> > prevent the packing from functioning. It is annoying, yes.
>
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > > libgdk-imlib1 in slink did not seem to depend on any glib, in potato it
> > > depends on a new and incompatible glib from potato BUT the soname was not
> > > changed. So the instant you install this new libgdk-i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Edward John M. Brocklesby wrote:
> Ok, so it has more features - why should it need a seperate distribution? If
> you can add the i386 kernel code into the PowerPC, and only compile it in when
> compiling a kernel for an RS/6000, that could g
severity 30852 normal
thanks
Oh, *this* one. Silly me.
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 02:44:07PM +0100, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
> Branden, this fixes a different bug, but it does not fix bug #30852 yet.
> Bug #30852 does not have anything to do with the xbase package split
> (which is in in fact so
On Feb 1, 1999, Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 12:19:48PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>> > to do one of the above, the most sensible is to steal RH's patch so that
>> > we are compatible.
>> I agree. Option 1 is de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
> Wouldn't that make more sense as a subarchitecture of the PowerPC
> port. I gather that the userspace component would be the same. You'd
> just need work on the kernel and installation process. Or are the
> instruction sets so
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Bear Giles wrote:
> I noticed in my slink snapshot (from last month) that 'cracklib2' exists,
> 'crack-dict' is suggested but *doesn't* exist (either as a package or
> in the 'Packages' list), and 'crack' is nowhere to be seen.
I packaged cracklib2 and still plan on packagin
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 12:19:48PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > > In short, we have only three choices, regardless of what happens in
> > > libtool:
> > >
> > > 1) Implement Red Hat's ugly patch in our libc5 ld.so, and thereby be
> > >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> Unless I'm severely mistaken, the userland for all lines of Power* CPUs
> should be identical, minus a few hardware-related programs. The major
> portion of the work is kernel; if you can get them to boot, we'll
>
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:30:41PM -0600, Stephen Crowley wrote:
> > But that is not the reason why my first guess was non-free. It was
> > the fact that mpg123 is in non-free, and x11amp is (according to
> > the docs) based on it.
>
> I already have it packaged. It uses plugins for the decoder so
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:30:20PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 10:14:38PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
>
> > > I don't see why we ought to let some lawyers trying to make a good bluff
> > > scare us.
> >
> > Fraunhofer institute holds the patent, we shouldn't take any chance
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 16:52:48 -0700 (MST)
>From: Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> That's not what I'd like libtool to do. I agree there is a problem to
>> be fixed, I just think that libtool is not the only piece of softwa
> mpg123 is in non-free because of its license. I did not find any
> documentation anywhere that indicated that x11amp uses any mpg123 code.
> (Where are you looking?) Since it's released as GPL, it's free.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] jkominek/tmp]$ tar -tzf x11amp-0.9-alpha1.tar.gz | grep mpg123
x11amp
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
> > libgdk-imlib1 in slink did not seem to depend on any glib, in potato it
> > depends on a new and incompatible glib from potato BUT the soname was not
> > changed. So the instant you install this new libgdk-imlib1 ~40 apps from
> > slink silently stop working!
>
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 10:14:38PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:05:01PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:02:13PM -0500, Shaleh wrote:
> > > On 01-Feb-99 John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
> > >
> > > the mp3 patent
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 10:14:38PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > I don't see why we ought to let some lawyers trying to make a good bluff
> > scare us.
>
> Fraunhofer institute holds the patent, we shouldn't take any chances.
The fact that they hold *a* patent does not put Debian in any sort of
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 03:05:01PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:02:13PM -0500, Shaleh wrote:
> > On 01-Feb-99 John Goerzen wrote:
> > > Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
> >
> > the mp3 patent
> Which nobody has guaranteed is valid or defensable in Germany, let alon
Samuel Tardieu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Will users upgrading from Hamm to Slink suffer from the same problems? If so,
> this may be a nightmare for them!
FWIW, I've been running slink for months (and months!) and upgrading solely
with apt, and this just bit me recently. So, it _could_ effe
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I saw the new alpha version, that has acceptable licence (GPL).
> Although it's alpha, I'd like to see it packaged. If you aren't
> interested, I'll do it.
It would be nice... btw I just downloaded and compiled it... it does not
work... I'm investigating n
Which nobody has guaranteed is valid or defensable in Germany, let alone
anywhere else. (I believe the EU does not allow software/algorithm patents,
IIRC.) And which applies only to encoders.
I don't see why we ought to let some lawyers trying to make a good bluff
scare us.
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999
On 01-Feb-99 John Goerzen wrote:
> Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
the mp3 patent
Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 09:51:35PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw the new alpha version, that has acceptable licence (GPL).
> Although it's alpha, I'd like to see it packaged. If you aren't
> interested, I'll do it.
>
> For the -devel readers: s
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 11:04:38AM -0800, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> "Phillip R. Jaenke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > A bit of history first, as it is somewhat important. For those of you who
> > don't know; Linux runs on PowerPC's. Yes. It does. Now, what big names do
> > we know that have PowerPC
Hi,
I saw the new alpha version, that has acceptable licence (GPL).
Although it's alpha, I'd like to see it packaged. If you aren't
interested, I'll do it.
For the -devel readers: section should be non-free, right?
Thanks.
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 1 Feb 1999, Rob Browning wrote:
> > Why a dolphin? Well, they're intelligent. Definitely
> > intelligent. They're pretty cute. :) And they're definitely
> > flexible. (I'd like to see *you* burst out of the water, do a
> > backflip or two midair, and make a p
Debian is mentioned in my chapter of the O'Reilly book. You can read the
draft at http://www.hams.com/OSD.html .
Thanks
Bruce
--
Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-620-3502 NCI-1001
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 01:01:57AM +0100, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> > hugs - A Haskell interpreter
> > no outstanding bugs, there should be a new upstream version coming
> > alog with a dfsg free licence, so it should be moved to main then
>
> I
On Thu, Jan 28, 1999 at 01:01:57AM +0100, Gergely Madarasz wrote:
> hugs - A Haskell interpreter
> no outstanding bugs, there should be a new upstream version coming
> alog with a dfsg free licence, so it should be moved to main then
If nobody else wants this, I'd be happy to maintain the free ver
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 01:50:53PM -0600, Rob Browning wrote:
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok, you asked for it, you got it. Note this is a count of source package
> > uploads, not binary packages which would have inflated the hit count for
> > people maintining multiple binary pa
On Mon, February 1 1999, Christian Hammers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|Hi !
|
|I wonder if there was already a discussion about what to do with all those
|CPAN libraries. Should we package all of them (naaa...) or only the best,
|or none of them (oohhh :-().
|
|Or should we create some "Big-Packag
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 12:19:48PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > In short, we have only three choices, regardless of what happens in
> > libtool:
> >
> > 1) Implement Red Hat's ugly patch in our libc5 ld.so, and thereby be
> >bugwards compatible with everybody else's Linux.
>
> > 2) Fi
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 06:46:49PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > > nonus.debian.org 23780 nonus.debian.org: libssl-dev is obsolete [220]
> > > > (Heiko Schlittermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> > ...
> > > Will non-us ever be fixed?
> >
> > It is but I'm afraid the bugs have not been closed. Hei
"Alexander N. Benner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ok .. beat me for this .. but it does not realy meen 'good bye and
> thankyou for the fish' ! Dolphins are not more intelligent then paes
> or other animals. Intelligence referes also to somewhat of abstract
> thinking which no animal has.
Um.
"Phillip R. Jaenke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why a dolphin? Well, they're intelligent. Definitely
> intelligent. They're pretty cute. :) And they're definitely
> flexible. (I'd like to see *you* burst out of the water, do a
> backflip or two midair, and make a perfect reentry.;)
Right, and t
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > > I somehow sense that slink/potato gtk/gnome is going to be painfull..
> >
> > I agree. I'm only planning to support Gnome 0.99.x/1.0 on potato.
>
> Oh, I was just reminded of this on the dpkg list.. The gtk (
[ Congratulations! ]
Guy Maor:
> dinstall will look for a Format field of 1.6 and a new Closes field.
Is the 1.6 format required for the automatic announcement?
If yes: Would not be better to always announce it, regardless of
the format?
--
"a87a357fb4f02064e32569602502da28" (a truly random s
First, we build this large badger...
--
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 02:26:18PM -0500, Jonathan P Tomer wrote:
> i agree, though, that there should be no restriction
> that the logos actually chosen must both be drawn by the same person.
I sincerley hpoe that we will have enough taste to choose a consistent set,
and not two distinct, random
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
>
> > > And note that it links to libglib twice. Turns out this is because there
> > > is two 'gdk-imlib1' packages with the same soname but linked against
> > > different versions of glib! By my count we have 72 differ
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, you asked for it, you got it. Note this is a count of source package
> uploads, not binary packages which would have inflated the hit count for
> people maintining multiple binary packages.
Well, I might have made it on the list if you weighted by compi
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
> > I somehow sense that slink/potato gtk/gnome is going to be painfull..
>
> I agree. I'm only planning to support Gnome 0.99.x/1.0 on potato.
Oh, I was just reminded of this on the dpkg list.. The gtk (gdk? I forget)
library packages have been internationalized
> "Steve" == Steve Dunham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Steve> But on the filesystem, the i686 directory is a symlink to
Steve> the i586 directory, and i586/green_threads is empty.
Steve> Perhaps this is a bug in dpkg? (I suspect that if you
Steve> remove the jdk1.1 package and r
the rationale behind two logos is that one is a "debian is cool" logo and
another is a "this is official debian" logo. they should look different
enough that you can tell whether someone is merely praising debian or
actually shipping it. i agree, though, that there should be no restriction
that the
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
> > And note that it links to libglib twice. Turns out this is because there
> > is two 'gdk-imlib1' packages with the same soname but linked against
> > different versions of glib! By my count we have 72 different package that
> > depend on gdk-imlib1..
>
> I made
On 1 Feb 1999, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> In short, we have only three choices, regardless of what happens in
> libtool:
>
> 1) Implement Red Hat's ugly patch in our libc5 ld.so, and thereby be
>bugwards compatible with everybody else's Linux.
> 2) Find some other way to make -rpath on Debi
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is kinda neat, considering what we were talking about with libtool
> and all, examine this ldd output:
>
> Wakko{jgg}~/work/apt#ldd `which wmakerconf `
> libgdk_imlib.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgdk_imlib.so.1 (0x4000f000)
> libgtk.so.1
> > > nonus.debian.org 23780 nonus.debian.org: libssl-dev is obsolete [220]
> > > (Heiko Schlittermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
> ...
> > Will non-us ever be fixed?
>
> It is but I'm afraid the bugs have not been closed. Heiko seems really
> overloaded (and does not reply a lot even on other subje
"Phillip R. Jaenke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A bit of history first, as it is somewhat important. For those of you who
> don't know; Linux runs on PowerPC's. Yes. It does. Now, what big names do
> we know that have PowerPC based systems? Let's see. Apple. Amiga. UMax.
> IBM RS/6000 (RISC Sys
The reinstall may coerce some missing files to be properly installed.
It doesn't fix the checkVersions warning. On inspecting the source I
find the script. It claims to be part of the Linux port of the jdk
and not from the sun sources. It is the debian/rules files that
deletes it.
To make the s
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > > general 28850 gettext: security problem when used in setuid
> > > > programs [0] (debian-devel@lists.debian.org)
> > >
> > > Everyone who has a package with a setuid program or somethin
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 06:04:45PM +0100, Andreas Plesner Jacobsen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 08:23:24AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > > I intend to package GoldED when my developer-application processes
> > >
> > > From freshmeat appindex:
> > > GoldED is a very nice console full-screen m
On 01-Feb-99 Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Shaleh wrote:
>
> [ intent to package snipped ]
>
> Is there a URL for this, or is the code only available via supernatural
> revelation?
Only the truly blessed may wonder upon its blessed page ..
No (=
http://flits102-126.flit
> jdk1.1 works for me on a slink machine. It is true that Java on Debian seems
> poorly supported and the maintainers overloaded.
>
I'll do an NMU to avoid the warning...but only if we (read as Brian)
deem it necessary for release.
On 1/02, Steve Dunham wrote:
|
| I have the same problem. The file does show up in "dpkg -L":
|
|/usr/lib/jdk1.1/bin/i686/green_threads/java
|
| But on the filesystem, the i686 directory is a symlink to the i586
| directory, and i586/green_threads is empty. Perhaps this is a bug in
| dpkg
> "Stephane" == Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stephane> Sam's message indicates that the i686 directory is
Stephane> used. Since the name includes a ".." could it be a symbolic
Stephane> link problem? Sam, any symlink in /usr/lib/jdk1.1/bin? Any
Stephane> chance when deinstal
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) writes:
> Oscar Levi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In my opinion, this problem is not sufficient to warrant an upload at
> > this time since, contrary to the bug reporters claim, it does not
> > prevent the packing from functioning. It is annoying, yes.
> In
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Thomas Gebhardt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when I tried to have a look at gnome-apt_0.3_i386.deb
> I found that it depends on several potato packages.
> I tried to install as much as needed (well, as the deb dependencies
> indicate) but still get some missing so dependencies:
>
> # gno
On 1999/02/01, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Monday 1 February 1999, at 10 h 54, the keyboard of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) wrote:
> > java was not found in /usr/lib/jdk1.1/bin/../bin/i686/green_threads/java
> ...
> > The binary is somehow actually missing, and I've not done anything
Hi,
when I tried to have a look at gnome-apt_0.3_i386.deb
I found that it depends on several potato packages.
I tried to install as much as needed (well, as the deb dependencies
indicate) but still get some missing so dependencies:
# gnome-apt
gnome-apt: error in loading shared libraries
libgtk-1
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 08:23:24AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I intend to package GoldED when my developer-application processes
> >
> > From freshmeat appindex:
> > GoldED is a very nice console full-screen mail/newsreader for
> > Fidonet and Internet. It is one of the best of it's kind fo
Hi!
Speaking for myself as a Debian maintainer (not a libtool maintainer):
Alexandre is angry because we have deliberately chosen not to fully
implement Red Hat's ugly (and effective) ld.so hack, but yet we also
claim that we're ``just following what everybody else is doing,'' and
that none of th
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> ... we would like to have two logos:
> one logo with a very liberal license that everyone is free to use (for example
> on things like webpages, shirts, etc.), and a more official logo with a
> restricted license which can only be used on more official things (like Cd's
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:16:39PM +0100, Andreas Plesner Jacobsen wrote:
> I intend to package GoldED when my developer-application processes
>
> From freshmeat appindex:
> GoldED is a very nice console full-screen mail/newsreader for
> Fidonet and Internet. It is one of the best of it's kind f
On Sun, Jan 31, 1999 at 03:42:06PM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
>
> Power, speed, and freedom: a wild horse.
Just like Stampede has it?
Marcus
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god."Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian
Hi !
I wonder if there was already a discussion about what to do with all those
CPAN libraries. Should we package all of them (naaa...) or only the best,
or none of them (oohhh :-().
Or should we create some "Big-Packages" i.e. say the user "ok, you can get
CPAN/Networking of CPAN/Databases but
On Monday 1 February 1999, at 10 h 54, the keyboard of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dale E. Martin) wrote:
> java was not found in /usr/lib/jdk1.1/bin/../bin/i686/green_threads/java
...
> The binary is somehow actually missing, and I've not done anything weird as
> far as I know. The other folks who are
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Shaleh wrote:
[ intent to package snipped ]
Is there a URL for this, or is the code only available via supernatural
revelation?
--
Nathan Norman
MidcoNet 410 South Phillips Avenue Sioux Falls, SD
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.midco.net
finger [EMAIL PROTECTE
> > Hmmm... If things were installed by hand ("dpkg --install dpkglib...")
> > or if install were to fail between the two packages, then you could have
> > a problem where the install tool doesn't function, right?
>
> Right. But since libdpkg is still a part of the dpkg package we
> shouldn't nee
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I've had a brief look at this; would anyone like to take a closer look
> ?
Not only the correct URL seem to be http://WWW.VEDOVANET.BBK.ORG/linux/vedova/,
but given the filenames and directory layouts it rather seems based on
Slackware than Debian... ;)
Oscar Levi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my opinion, this problem is not sufficient to warrant an upload at
> this time since, contrary to the bug reporters claim, it does not
> prevent the packing from functioning. It is annoying, yes.
Interesting that it works for you. It really doesn't fo
Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I remember having looked at it but, IIRC, the source was less
> comprehensible, which at the time was the most important thing.
I don't think you would have to make any changes. It's design to be
easily
On Sunday 31 January 1999, at 0 h 48, the keyboard of Michael Stone
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > boot-floppies 32269 partion harddisk fails if WIN95_EXTENDED present
> > [0] (Enrique Zanardi )
>
> The report log is a little unclear. It looks like there is a version of cfdisk
> that work
I intend to package GoldED when my developer-application processes
From freshmeat appindex:
GoldED is a very nice console full-screen mail/newsreader for
Fidonet and Internet. It is one of the best of it's kind for
Fidonet and quite usable for Internet. For Internet mail and news
you need a pr
I've had a brief look at this; would anyone like to take a closer look
?
Ian.
--- Begin Message ---
--- start of forwarded message (RFC 934 encapsulation) ---
Received: from optima.cs.arizona.edu (optima.CS.Arizona.EDU [192.12.69.5])
by baskerville.CS.Arizona.EDU (8.9.1a/8.9.1) wi
On Feb 1, 1999, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Since modifying the next release of libtool won't contribute at all to
>> fix the problem in already compiled programs, which are the only
>> programs affected by this problem
> I usually still build production code with a libc5 se
On Feb 1, 1999, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In general, it's convenient to store the path in the executable any
>> time a shared library is installed in a directory which the dynamic
>> linker does not search by default.
> Especially if it is related to the executable. If it
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 1999 11:39 PM
> To: Buddha Buck
> Cc: Jason Gunthorpe; Debian Developers; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What hack in ld.so?
>
>
> On Jan 29, 1999, Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 1, 1999, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem is that I want to be able to obtain with libtool the
> same service I can obtain usually without it (although with a lot
> more difficulties): Build shared libraries and executables, that
> will work on various libc5 or l
> -Original Message-
> From: Ian Lance Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 1999 11:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: -rpath with libtool and Debian Linux
>
>
Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But dpkg-multicd is more than multiple-cds. There's multi-nfs,
> multi-mount, ... that replace nfs, mounted, ...
> That's why we think dpkg default methods can be removed/extracted to a
> different package.
Ok, I didn't realize this. If the multi-mou
On Feb 1, 1999, Bernard Dautrevaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Once more this proves that -rpath is harmful: If Devian use -rpath thsi
> will *force* the other distribution makers to place Devian-specific
> stuff in /dev (and if Devian was crazy, placing standard stuff in /dev,
> their programs
> -Original Message-
> From: Gordon Matzigkeit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 1999 5:41 AM
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Ian's solution [was: What hack in ld.so?]
>
>
> Hi, all!
>
> There's been so much traffic on this thread, th
> -Original Message-
> From: Marcus Brinkmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 1999 12:53 AM
> To: Jason Gunthorpe; Alexandre Oliva
> Cc: Debian Developers; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What hack in ld.so?
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 1999 at 04:06:04PM -0700, J
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 1999 at 10:54:20AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > > xbase 30852 X packages do not upgrade automatically due to name change.
> > > > [41] (Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
>
> [...]
> >
> > There's supposed to be a new versio
Previously Brian White wrote:
> Hmmm... If things were installed by hand ("dpkg --install dpkglib...")
> or if install were to fail between the two packages, then you could have
> a problem where the install tool doesn't function, right?
Right. But since libdpkg is still a part of the dpkg packag
Previously Jonel Rienton wrote:
> Slink's latest lprng is broken, it's give me a problem about permission or
> something'.
Vincent already uploaded a fix for that.
Wichert.
--
==
This combination of bytes forms a messa
Previously John Hasler wrote:
> Has been taken by... ?
Stampede Linux iirc.
Wichert.
--
==
This combination of bytes forms a message written to you by Wichert Akkerman.
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.wi.leide
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, January 31, 1999 12:29 AM
> To: Jason Gunthorpe
> Cc: Debian Developers; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: What hack in ld.so?
>
>
> On Jan 30, 1999, Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If
On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 23 h 31, the keyboard of Larry Wilson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The professor asked me to find out :
> "What is distinctive about Debian Linux development that affects
> its assurance? "
As a recent Debian developer (Sep. 1998), let me give my opinion:
Hi !
I would like to package the Perl module "Net::RawIP".
It is, like the name suggests, a low level Networking module. It allows you
to create any kind of IP package and gives special support for TCP, UDP and
ICMP. There is even raw Ethernet support.
This package makes it possible to write "t
On Saturday 30 January 1999, at 16 h 41, the keyboard of Paul Seelig
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay, let's be serious again: unfortunately this actually means that
> some of the most obvious installation profiles of slink stay to be
> unnecessarily bloated.
Giving the size of the current pro
Here is the announcement of the logo contest I intend to send out later
today, since the gimp contest starts today. If anyone has commments
please tell me about them so I can make changes.
--
As you might know Debian GNU
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 12:05:27PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Joey Hess wrote:
> > Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > > general 28850 gettext: security problem when used in setuid
> > > > programs [0] (debian-devel@lists.debian.org)
> > >
> > > Everyone who has a package with a setuid
i intend to package rtjpeg and vstream: rtjpeg is real time jpeg compressor with
client/server mechanisms to allow running a BTTV card over a network using ~1/10
of 10BaseT bandwidth; and vstream is an app targeted at making mpeg movies from
a
BTTV stream.
--
Robert Edmonds
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
