On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:32:16PM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> I'm not certain I agree. Point one of the social contract is "Debian Will
> Remain 100% Free Software". The obvious reading of this is that anything
> that is not free software cannot be in Debian.
>
> This includes non-free softwa
(followups to -legal, please)
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Excerpting is allowed by copyright law under the fair use principle, and
> one need not accept any license governing a work to exercise that right
> to fair use.
Australia, for example, doesn't have a
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:42:51PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> I'm getting sick of people who can't read. Let's say the same thing
> for the next time.
Have you ever considered that maybe the problem is with your
communication skills, not with the horde of people who find your
messages offensi
package: wnpp
severity: wishlist
I'm planning on packaging libsasl2-gssapi-mit, a version of the GSSAPI
plugin for libsasl2 compiled against MIT Kerberos.
This package has the same source as cyrus-sasl2, but different build
environment and options. It's not really possible to avoid having two
so
"Tille, Andreas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The same for bug/reportbug.
> Or you could just write an E-Mail to BTS or write your
> own super duper bug reporting tool.
Yes you could, like debian-bug.el
;-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
Well, I didn't expect to inspire such a vibrant thread! A couple
of responses (not in anger, just adding some perspective).
1) free vs. non-free alternatives
I use VMWare 2.0. If you think that bochs and Plex86 aren't
viable alternatives yet, you can imagine the state of the world
(2 years ago
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
> What the FSF considers software vs. documentation is not relevant to the
> DFSG.
>
> What matters is whether Debian applies the DFSG to a work, irrespective
> of whether the work is categorized by its author, the FSF, or Debian as
> "software", "docume
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:02:34PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> you propose to add 'some' diff files for all files on ftp-master.d.o?
>
> With rsync we need only one rsync-checksum file per normal file and
> all apt's need only download the neededs parts.
>
> You get the point?
With the stand
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:14:34PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > An excellent point. We *should* be more aggressive about dumping things
> > no one wants to maintain. So why did you attack someone who raised a
> > question about one particular package? The question was answered, move
>
> You g
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:27:32AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
> > phrased; [...]
>
> Uh, no, there's not. That you don't understand the terms, or misinterpret
> them, doesn't mean they absolutely need to be changed.
I w
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:22:07PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> indeed, I would not like to see people modifying my points of view and
> redistributing saying that's what I think, you see
So if I rewrite charsets (7) (which I'm considering), I should make sure
that it's under an invarian
begin Gustavo Noronha Silva quotation:
> Em Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:26:39 +0300, Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> escreveu:
>
> > If the GFDL were a "free to use and modify" license, then we would not
> > be having this discussion. The problem is that the GFDL specifies
> > parts that we are
LONDON LANGUAGE INSTITUTE
Información y reservas Tel.902180066 Fax 931479444 londonlanguages
CLASES CON PROFESOR PRESENCIAL.
Le ofrecemos un sistema único y genuino de FORMACIÓN "A MEDIDA" para aprender
IDIOMAS, nuestros profesores se desplazan a su oficina o domicilio particular.
No importa e
Em Tue, 9 Apr 2002 14:26:39 +0300, Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escreveu:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 10:02:47PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > While I don't regard the DFSG as already applying to
> > documentation, the spirit of it is naturally extended to cover
> > documentation. I would
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-10
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: ngpt
Version : 1.2.0
Upstream Author : IBM (Bill Abt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> et al)
* URL : http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/pthreads/
* License : LGPL
Description : Next G
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:26:11PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > As a small example, consider that someone might wish to condense part of
> > > your book into a reference card that can be mounted on a mousepad.
> > > Unfortunatel
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:17:48PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > As a small example, consider that someone might wish to condense part of
> > your book into a reference card that can be mounted on a mousepad.
> > Unfortunately, the license will requires that Ian M's history of Debian
> > be repr
I'll NMU this for you now!
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:28:11PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> On Saturday 06 Apr 2002 7:35 pm, Will Newton wrote:
> > Quite simple fixes:
> >
> > - Fixes build on hppa and quite possibly others.
> > - Bump version number to replace older packages correctly. (RC bug)
> >
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:04:15AM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Using my book as an example, there have been many patches submitted either
> > for spelling or content. I have included all those that were correct ;-)
> > I have never seen the book published with changes that were not made by
>
Colin Watson writes:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 11:21:14AM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 09:56:12PM -0600, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > The build on sparc is due to something else, don't have time to
> > > investigate that right now; mips doesn't seem to have even attempted t
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:20:54PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > You know, I keep hearing this. Does this mean we should ditch the entirety
> > of GCC's manuals, even old ones which weren't under the FDL, since the FSF
> > has *clea
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:51:27PM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote:
> Richard Braakman wrote:
> > What you're advocating is the evil twin of censorship,
> > namely forced speech.
>
> I don't think that placing restrictions on an otherwise
> completely liberal license amounts to using any kind of
> "force
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
> license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
> the book's content, but has every reason to be "protected" from
> modification. These par
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> THE PROBLEM HE IS HAVING IS THAT VMWARE DOESN'T PROVIDE A PATCH FOR
> THE OLD VERSION HE IS USING. WITH FREE SOFTWARE, HE COULD JUST FIX THE
> PROBLEM ITSELF, WITH NON-FREE SOFTWARE THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. THE CAUSE
> OF HIS PROBLEM IS THUS THAT HE DOESN
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Isn't the goal of Debian
> providing a free system so users don't have to run any non-free
> software anymore?
No, no, nonono, no, no, no.
I'm done.
Stephen
pgpMjAfoXH8OQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:43:32PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> > ...to bring in other fixes that aren't so easy to seperate from smaller
> > ones.
> >
> > Lose the tone, it wont get you what you want. Nice is being fixed. I've
> > said this in several of t
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:52:46PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Blow off the non-free software user, no. If you have nothing to offer
> > > by way of help with vmware itself, then your silence will be enough to
> > > indicate that.
> >
> > And th
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
> ...to bring in other fixes that aren't so easy to seperate from smaller
> ones.
>
> Lose the tone, it wont get you what you want. Nice is being fixed. I've
> said this in several of the bug reports. This whole thread just needs to
> die.
You haven't said i
On Tue, 09 Apr 2002, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> But does that mean they can posts question about problems with that
> non-free software which are not related to Debian at all (the only
> relation is that the user runs Debian) to debian-devel?
No. However, this mess all started because the *wording* i
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:15:26PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have the somewhat unusual situation that Heimdal build depends on
> kerberoskth and kerberos4kth build depends on Heimdal.
>
> kerberos4kth depends on heimdal because, this way it can share some low
> level libraries which
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:27:04PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> > > This problem is very common for non-free software.
> >
> > ... which really doesn't seem all that relevant apart from sounding
> > good; hell, the change in nice()'s return value appears t
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > This problem is very common for non-free software.
>
> ... which really doesn't seem all that relevant apart from sounding
> good; hell, the change in nice()'s return value appears to be a problem
> for start-stop-daemon in dpkg, see #141500, and a minor
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:36:23AM +0200, Stefan Hornburg (Racke) wrote:
> Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > > I guess that the package will have to predepend on python, right?
> > > So, unlike the current debconf usage, a debconf dependency is no
> > > lo
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> You know, I keep hearing this. Does this mean we should ditch the entirety
> of GCC's manuals, even old ones which weren't under the FDL, since the FSF
> has *clearly* indicated that *they* do not consider them to by software,
> since th
* Marcelo E. Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> Hi,
>
> >> Sander Smeenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 1) that directory isn't apt-gettable, the Packages.gz file is
> >missing... try "deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/ ./" for
> >an aptable version :)
>
> htt
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:45:26PM +, Wilmer van der Gaast <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> Jeroen [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:30:54 +0200:
> > And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> > bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
> >
> Writing these posts
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:40:41PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:16:07PM +0100, Stephen Stafford wrote:
>
> I just say the consequences of that choice, that is you're having
> problems with an old version and you don't have the freedom to fix
> that.
>
> > >From read
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:45:56PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > The alternative is that documentation will be treated as something we
> > are enjoined by the Social Contract from distributing at all. Debian
> > Will Remain 100% Free Software. This may have been poor phrasing on
> > the part o
* Sander Smeenk ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > As those of you who read slashdot know, Apache 2.0 was released last night.
> > deb http://pandora.debian.org/~thom/apache2 ./
>
> Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
>
> 1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversio
>
> [1] Unless someone actually tries to embed arbitrary pthon in it.
dput's config is not python code. It is parsed by ConfigParser which is
essentially ini style.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:12PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> > By knowing the date it was written and what they actually meant
> > instead of what they actually have written down. (For example, they
> > meant non-free but they wrote commercial)
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:28:11PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
> I've had no reply so far. Is anyone willing to NMU this? The fixes are all
> straightforward.
You might try debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 14:00, Gerhard Muntingh wrote:
> whaah! No compiled debconfscripts on my machine. While it
> would be nice to have python bindings, I'd really like to
> hack all sorts of scripts when I need to.
Byte-compiling Python modules isn't the same as compiling C code; it's
an optimi
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Blow off the non-free software user, no. If you have nothing to offer
> > by way of help with vmware itself, then your silence will be enough to
> > indicate that.
>
> And the user will never find out why he's having that problem. I don't
> think th
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:16:07PM +0100, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> By knowing the date it was written and what they actually meant
> instead of what they actually have written down. (For example, they
> meant non-free but they wrote commercial). And I'm not the only one, I
> know more Debian developers who don't rea
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg00757.html
Thanks for this pointer.
My debiansynch script never runs into problem "1. rsync -r" since it
always does single file transfers. And for problem "2. rsync of near
identical files" it's not astonishing using a high cpu l
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > The best would be if "man would bring up a list of man pages
> > with a choose facility when more than one page exists. Maybe this change
> > in behavior could be set through an environment variable.
>
> No need. Try 'man -a '.
>
>
Le mar 09/04/2002 à 20:13, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit :
> > -> make the check on the client site and
> > -> download the file partly per ftp/http
> > -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
> >
> > With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
>
> Rumor around rsy
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:11:59PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:45:16PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:21:49PM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > > Vmware isn't even in Debian
Colin Watson wrote:
> The implementation language really does make a difference in the case of
> dupload and dput, since it affects their configuration languages.
There exist perl modules to parse files more or less identical to dput's
configuration file[1]. Heck, it should take about 5 lines of c
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:11:59PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > This problem is very common for non-free software.
>
> ... which really doesn't seem all that relevant apart from sounding
> good; hell, the change in nice()'s return value appears to be a problem
> for start-stop-daemon in dpkg, se
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 01:36:40PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On Apr 07, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Isn't it a bit heavy to make debconf depend on python ?
>
> Why would debconf have to depend on python? You stick the module in
> and only bytecompile if python is installed.
whaah! No compil
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:48:59PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> Hmm, I knew somebody would find something to complain about in my
> second try to word my opinion. I'm not even going to try to do it a
> third time.
I'm sorry. That just doesn't wash. I read: "I knew somebody would ...
complain"
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
> > > > Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:20:38PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
> > avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
> > Debian, plex86 and bochs.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:45:03AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 20:53, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > Why should the DFSG have to worry about such philosophical questions?
> > > Why isn't it enough to worry abo
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:58:20PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> Of course you can say that in the social contract says "Thus, although
> non-free software isn't a part of Debian, we support its use," but if
> I interpret that correctly, it just means the non-free software
> packages provided by D
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> This problem is very common for non-free software. If you want to
> avoid such problems, you could try one of the free alternatives in
> Debian, plex86 and bochs. Those might have other problems (like being
> slower) but you probably
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:45:16PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:21:49PM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > Vmware isn't even in Debian. This is truely a problem of vmware
> > > itself. IMHO this isn't som
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:03:11PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> The history section in my book, which is declared invarient in the
> license, was written by Ian M. and has no technical bearing on the rest of
> the book's content, but has every reason to be "protected" from
> modification. These par
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:53:59PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequence
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns writes:
Anthony> How about correcting a supposedly historical document, for
Anthony> example, taking a document that describes Windows as the
Anthony> progenitor of the trend for GUIs, and adding some
Anthony> explanation about Apple and Xerox and suchlike?
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:13:25PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I agreed with the social contract, but I think it should be
> > changed. Some parts are just wrong, other things are confusing.
>
> That certainly looks like a contradiction to me. Ho
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:25:47PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmware
Joey Hess wrote:
>> Protecting the freedom of this form of speech requires a somewhat
>> different strategy from the one used to protect the freedom to copy
>> source code.
> Freedom of software and freedom of speech are two entirely
> different animals, and attempting to confuse them as you do
>
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:21:49PM -0500, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > > First of all this isn't a
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> with your vmware problems. (Debian does support plex86 and bochs, BTW)
As this might be
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:29:14PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > > glibc. Second vmware isn'
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I agreed with the social contract, but I think it should be
> changed. Some parts are just wrong, other things are confusing.
That certainly looks like a contradiction to me. How do you agree with
it if you feel it's wrong?
> To talk about the socia
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Michael Bramer wrote:
> -> make the check on the client site and
> -> download the file partly per ftp/http
> -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
>
> With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
Rumor around rsync circles is that this
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:34:35PM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> > glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> > software, vmware isn't. Th
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:53:54AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > > > DFSG stand for "Debian Free Software Guidelines".
> > >
> > > Yes, and since Debian is 100% Free Software, that applies to everything
> > > in Debian.
> >
> > Documentation isn't sof
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:46:33AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > That isn't my biggest concern.
>
> Apparently. This implies, of course, that the additional bandwidth due
> to those messages isn't the real problem.
I never claimed that. I was asked
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:31:35AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > Do you really think it's a waste of
> > > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
> > First o
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:25:04PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > > u
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:34:43PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > no. sorry. I must say this:
> >
> > We can use rsync on the client site.
> > -> get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
> > -> make the check on the
Jeroen [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Tue, 9 Apr 2002 16:30:54 +0200:
> And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
>
Writing these posts probably takes (wastes) even more time.
> I got GNU/Linux to boot on plex86.
>
It'll reduce my XP1700+'s po
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 01:36:15AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> It's more useful, I think, to look at it this way: there is a sense that
> the freedom we insist upon for executable code may not necessarily be
> appropriate for other kinds of information that may be found in a Debian
> package.
I r
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 10:27, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:08:18AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
> > phrased; [...]
>
> Uh, no, there's not. That you don't understand the terms, or misinterpret
> them, do
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> That isn't my biggest concern.
Apparently. This implies, of course, that the additional bandwidth due
to those messages isn't the real problem.
> I don't think that advocating free software is a waste of those
> things.
Advocating free software isn'
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> glibc. Second vmware isn't Debian. Third Debian goes about free
> software, vmware isn't. This is clearly the wrong list, either go to
> some vmware list or go to the
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:10:20AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> > bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
>
> Filtering them out would save you more time, bandwidth and processing
> powe
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > Do you really think it's a waste of
> > bandwidth and processing power to let the vmware users discuss a
> > problem caused by a change in _Debian_?
> First of all this isn't a Debian-specific change but a change in
> glibc. Second
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:08:18AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> I think there's a consensus that the DFSG and Social Contract are poorly
> phrased; [...]
Uh, no, there's not. That you don't understand the terms, or misinterpret
them, doesn't mean they absolutely need to be changed.
Cheers,
aj
--
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 02:29:55PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > I am happy to take it.
> >
> > Several people already stepped in (which, IMHO, replies to the "Do we
> > need dupload?" question). See the bug report. Josip Rodin was the
> > first one, even before I formally orphaned it.
>
> F
* Jeroen Dekkers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > Do you always need to repeat this?
>
> Yes.
..
> And yes, I think vmware is a waste of processing power and
> bandwith. Those posts also waste my time.
Filtering them out would save you more time, bandwidth and processing
power than replying in t
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:13:45PM +0200, Radovan Garabik wrote:
> I have not closed the bug since point 2) is not fixed yet (will
> be rather quickly). Gee, I do not like people who submit
> zillions of unrelated bugs in one bugreport :-)
You now have the "clone" command to fix this.
http://www.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:02:14AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > > > > - I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alread
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:30:54PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 22:38, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:15:45AM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 21:13, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > Ok, do the bootup messages say anything support for that chipset?
> >
> > In the bootup msgs, I'm getting
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> hello
>
> we sould stop this and start after woody again...
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > > Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use
Hi,
>> Sander Smeenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) that directory isn't apt-gettable, the Packages.gz file is
> missing... try "deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/ ./" for
> an aptable version :)
http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/packages/subversion/ sid/i386/
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > the consequences. Debian doesn't support vmware, so go somewhere else
> > with your vmwa
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 07:49:49AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:37:31AM +0200, Peter Mathiasson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:47:42PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > > It's your own fault. You choosed to run non-free software, now you get
> > > the consequences
Quoting Thom May ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> As those of you who read slashdot know, Apache 2.0 was released last night.
> deb http://pandora.debian.org/~thom/apache2 ./
Very nice :) But I have 2 things:
1) Where's apache2-modules? Subversion depends on them!
2) Why is apache2 compiled against libd
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 10:24:34PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> Over the past few weeks most of the following packages have been removed
> from the upcoming release due to bugs and such [0].
>
> efingerd
this bug has been closed already for some time, and the
security is
Quoting Marcelo E. Magallon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> http://people.debian.org/~mmagallo/packages/subversion/
Much appreciated!! But I have two things:
1) that directory isn't apt-gettable, the Packages.gz file is
missing... try "deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/ ./" for
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 08:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:12:41AM -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > Similarly, it would be a lot easier to just define documentation to be
> > software "for the purposes of the DFSG". But does it make sense?
>
> The alternative is that documentat
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
