On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 10:54:32PM -0300, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > Purpose of Rant: Stir up the coals ...
>
> Have you already put some meat?
>
Yes, but unfortunately it was all devoured immediately by ravenous wolves.
Barely raw as well... and apparently there was some indigestion therea
I thought the netbase breakup was because of a old-BSD/GPL license
incompatibility...
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> John Galt wrote:
> > The big package breakups have historically been related to licensing
> > issues
>
> Not as far as I can remember. The X breakup and the netbase brea
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:39:33AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Mon 28 Aug 2000, Nils Rennebarth wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 02:52:01PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
>
> > > The problem here, as I mentioned in an earlier reply before this got
> > > crossposted to l-k, is that "our" versio
John Galt wrote:
> The big package breakups have historically been related to licensing
> issues
Not as far as I can remember. The X breakup and the netbase breakup, for
instance, had nothing to do with licenses that I know of.
--
see shy jo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
> Purpose of Rant: Stir up the coals ...
Have you already put some meat?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> When I wrote, that the proxy variables were ignored just my description
> was wrong. May be they are used but they are used in an other way
> than if I use settings in /etc/apt/apt.conf. While trying several different
> proxy-settings (sorry, don't re
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >From /var/lib/dpkg/available:
> Package: makedev:
> ...
> MD5sum: 7f6b97b984c246ead2c7be45ce4f1678
>
> /var/cache/apt/archives/partial> md5sum makedev_2.3.1-46_all.deb
> 7f6b97b984c246ead2c7be45ce4f1678 makedev_2.3.1-46_all.deb
Please use apt-cache
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> I like it, but why not fold this functionality in update-rc.d itself?
> update-rc.d --query ? And why not define update-rc.d --list as well..
Well, for starters I don't grok perl, and I wasn't about to let that little
detail stop me from writing
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 02:38:07PM -0700, Darren/Torin/Who Ever... wrote:
> Domenico Andreoli, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
> >i don't know how much what i'm going to say would be of help, but if you
> >added
> >a new check in configure.in in order to let your source know what kin
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 12:57:10PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> On 13-Sep-2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Sorry to bring up this subject again.
> > I just wanted to know that can't mp3 encoders be distributed from a non-us
> > site where the policies are much more relaxed ?
> >
> the pate
Of course the moment I decided to upload 0.80 they released 0.81. Luckily
most of the modifications survived intact. I'm just fixing up a few
little things.
--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Domenico Andreoli, in an immanent manifestation of deity, wrote:
>i don't know how much what i'm going to say would be of help, but if you added
>a new check in configure.in in order to let your source know what kind of db.h
>you have? you could be pretty sure that your sources are getting compiled
from debian-freshmeat, where we are talking about setting up the new DFMR
(Debian Freshmeat Repository)
Seth:
b) apt-get able, so it's a ftp and/or http site, and a
single line to stick into etc/apt/sources.list
Jeff Covey of freshmeat:
this would rock.
we'll have to work with the apt codi
13 matches
Mail list logo
