[Most of the discussion on the Debian-Lex proto-subproject has been
off-list, so I'm sending this one to the list so that people can see
something of our progress. These answers will be made into an article
by Matt Black at some point after we get an official list and Web area.]
On Sun, 2003-04-2
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-26
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: konqueror-embedded
Version : 20021229_snapshot
Upstream Author : Simon Hausman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Chitescu <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.konqueror.org/embedded/
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-26
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: konqueror-embedded
Version : 20021229_snapshot
Upstream Author : Simon Hausman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Chitescu <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.konqueror.org/embedded/
Glenn Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 08:35:56PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> > * Package name: libxml-libxml-common-perl
>
> I'm sure you're just being consistent, or conforming with policy, but
> these "libxml-libxml" package names look almost as absurd a
I'd like to test some build-deps using pbuilder, but don't have the
bandwidth locally to set up/maintain it. Do any of the debian.org
machines have pbuilder/debootstrap installed? I tried a few but couldn't
spot one.
Many have chroots but don't tend to have the relevant build-deps
installed.
Than
* Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 22:29]:
> > > >>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> > > >>> and go for i486.
> > > >> Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
> > > >> i486+?
> > >
> > > > - Integrated math coprocessor
> > >>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> > >>> and go for i486.
> > >> Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
> > >> i486+?
> >
> > > - Integrated math coprocessor ( why does libc still check for its
> > > availability? ) [...
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 08:35:56PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote:
> * Package name: libxml-libxml-common-perl
I'm sure you're just being consistent, or conforming with policy, but
these "libxml-libxml" package names look almost as absurd as binutils
"2.13.90.0.18-1.7 Super Turbo Edition" v
> > It may be relatively cheap and easy for *you* to buy a two-year-old
> > system, but I don't believe that in this case you are representative
> > of nearly enough of our users to be a useful example.
>
> I also find it hard to believe that the majority of our users do not
> have or can not purc
On Sat Apr 26, 07:36pm +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> * The /etc/init.d/ scripts would need to add "need otherscript" (and
> sometimes "provide something"). As I think it is a very bad idea to edit
> these scripts in our post-install (and try to reedit them in
> pre-remove)) one would have to fi
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-26
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libxml-libxml-common-perl
Version : 0.12.1
Upstream Author : Christian Glahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.cpan.org/modules/by-module/XML/
* License : Artistic, G
Hello,
I have working "simpleinit-msb" and "minit" packages on my system.
(simpleinit-msb is an extended simpleinit, see
http://www.winterdrache.de/linux/newboot/)
and "minit" has nice monitoring capabilities and is similar to
daemontools, but GPL (http://www.fefe.de/minit/)
The initscripts for t
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:48:25PM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> An example: Before gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.2 went in the other day, no less than 607
> packages were stuck in unstable waiting for them. How many of those packages
> actually required gcc 3 to compile and run? I'd guess not many.
Without
Hi,
I've written an experimental conffile merge support for dpkg.
http://elonen.iki.fi/code/dpkg-merge/ contains the patched dpkg
and a new interactive python & curses based two-way merge tool
called imediff2 (+ 3 screenshots for the impatient).
For those who would like try it:
+ install 'dpk
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Björn Stenberg wrote:
> One difference, good or bad, between Debian and commercial distributions is
> the lack of branches above stable. When commercial distro X makes a release,
> they pick the last-known-good versions of all the packages they want, compile
> it
On 26 Apr 2003, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> * The /etc/init.d/ scripts would need to add "need otherscript" (and
> sometimes "provide something"). As I think it is a very bad idea to edit
> these scripts in our post-install (and try to reedit them in
> pre-remove)) one would have to file bugs again
Björn Stenberg wrote:
An example: Before gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.2 went in the other day, no less than 607
packages were stuck in unstable waiting for them. How many of those packages
actually required gcc 3 to compile and run? I'd guess not many.
Well, hey, if gcc 3.3 has made it into stable, this is bi
Hi again.
I have figured out that LILO used debconf a few years ago to create
/etc/lilo.conf with disasterous results. At this moment, LILO configuration
is made by running /usr/sbin/liloconfig in postinst script but, as this
script is made in perl, you cannot upgrade LILO non-interactively.
If,
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-04-27
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: gnome-sensors
Version : 0.9c
Upstream Author : Vinicius Kursancew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.vkcorp.org/gsensors/
* License : GPL
Description : A GNOME2
David Nusinow wrote:
> You say you can't deal with unstable because the software is broken.
> Well, that's because the software you want isn't ready to be released.
That's not the whole truth. A _lot_ of software is ready and working, but is
held back from entering sarge due to dependency problems
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> * The /etc/init.d/ scripts would need to add "need otherscript" (and
> sometimes "provide something"). As I think it is a very bad idea to edit
> these scripts in our post-install (and try to reedit them in
> pre-remove)) one would have to file bugs a
This message is about three interdependent goals:
1. To create /run/, which makes it possible ...
2. to implement variable resolver configuration, which will help
3. to make it possible to mount / read-only.
(In the present context, "variable" information is information
that changes during the no
Does gdk-imlib1 need to be rebuilt? It seems since the new png
changes went into debian ppc sid, the menu icons are broken in
evolution.
Jack
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:31:36PM +0200, "Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:54:39AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
>
> > Where'd this deb come from? 0.7.0 is all I can find in the archive..
>
> Hint: look at the name of the sysvinit maint
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 01:18:02PM -0500, Andrés Roldán wrote:
> you can add the following sources to your sources.list
> deb http://people.fluidsignal.com/~aroldan/debian unstable main
> deb-src http://people.fluidsignal.com/~aroldan/debian unstable main
apt-get does not work, but i installed it
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:54:36AM -0500, Andrés Roldán wrote:
>> I have made the package with debconf and I was about to upload it
>> but I talked with some friends and they told me to ask you all first
>> before make this upload. This is because th
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:54:36AM -0500, Andrés Roldán wrote:
> I am maintaining LILO at the moment and there are several requests
> From the LILO users asking for using debconf on the package.
> I have made the package with debconf and I was about to upload it
> but I talked with some friends
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:10:44AM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 07:27:28PM -0700, Drew Hess wrote:
> >
> > Hey guys, can I do anything to help get OpenEXR into Debian?
>
> Seems that we are both MIA. I am busy with my project, and I contacted him to
> tell him I will not
Hi,
obviously debian sid is from now on capable of supporting several init
script schemes. Now I wonder if it is now possible to package R. Goochs
simpleinit [1]. But I have some questions:
* Would that require replacing sysv-rc or sysvinit+sysv-rc? I think
R.Goochs /sbin/init is capable of repl
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:54:36AM -0500, Andrés Roldán wrote:
> I am maintaining LILO at the moment and there are several requests
> - From the LILO users asking for using debconf on the package.
>
> I have made the package with debconf and I was about to upload it
> but I talked with some frien
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 12:53:04PM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> re 'at run time': Does that mean that at compile time there are
> multiple snippets of functionally-equivalent code compiled to support
> varied run-time arch's?
The support is actually in the runtime linker. libssl is compiled
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Anthony Towns wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:12:00AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> Sysvinit was split up in sysvinit, initscripts and sysv-rc. The last
>> one can be replaced by file-rc. Sysv-rc and file-rc conflict and
>> replace one another.
>
>Hrm.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:54:36AM -0500, Andrés Roldán wrote:
> I have made the package with debconf and I was about to upload it
> but I talked with some friends and they told me to ask you all first
> before make this upload. This is because this change could affect
> the default Debian insta
* Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 12:21]:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:08:12AM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
>
> > For openssl there is a huge improvement. I was doing benchmarks on
> > openssl (they were done for internally at a company I no longer work
>
> OpenSSL can (and already does
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
I am maintaining LILO at the moment and there are several requests
- From the LILO users asking for using debconf on the package.
I have made the package with debconf and I was about to upload it
but I talked with some friends and they told me to
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 05:07:41PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:55:08AM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> > * Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 10:26]:
>
> > > 486SX.
>
> > I thought that in-kernel emulation would have solved the gap between 486
> > DX and SX.
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 02:56:13AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 06:38:34PM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > It may be relatively cheap and easy for *you* to buy a two-year-old
> > system, but I don't believe that in this case you are representative
> > of nearly enough of our
On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 21:12, Milanuk, Monte wrote:
> Gag. Mail might actually be useful if Apple had had the brains to include
> simple stuff like *threading* of messages. All the fluff in the world, and
> the message sorting of pine. Go figure. When I got my first Mac (eMac
> running 10.1.5 w/
I demand that Bart Trojanowski may or may not have CCed to me WITHOUT MY
ASKING FOR THAT...
> * Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 10:26]:
>> I demand that José Luis Tallón may or may not have written...
>>> At 19:55 26/04/2003 +1000, you wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:55:08AM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> * Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 10:26]:
> > 486SX.
> I thought that in-kernel emulation would have solved the gap between 486
> DX and SX.
It works just as well for 386SX as for 486SX.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:08:12AM -0400, Bart Trojanowski wrote:
> For openssl there is a huge improvement. I was doing benchmarks on
> openssl (they were done for internally at a company I no longer work
OpenSSL can (and already does) drop in the CPU-specific variants at run
time in an ABI-com
Hi,
Chris Cheney asks
So gnome doesn't use imlib (in Debian at least it seems to), or
did I somehow miss why it appears RedHat only has one version of
imlib, which is the version compiled against libpng12?
Red Hat hacked gdk-imlib so that libraries loaded as "modules"
(like png) do N
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:12:00AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> Sysvinit was split up in sysvinit, initscripts and sysv-rc. The last
> one can be replaced by file-rc. Sysv-rc and file-rc conflict and
> replace one another.
Hrm. Any possibility of making sysv-rc and file-rc be concurrentl
At 14:17 26/04/2003 +0100, you wrote:
I demand that José Luis Tallón may or may not have written...
> At 19:55 26/04/2003 +1000, you wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
>>> and go for
* Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 10:26]:
> I demand that José Luis Tallón may or may not have written...
>
> > At 19:55 26/04/2003 +1000, you wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> >>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/impor
In chiark.mail.debian.devel, Matthias Klose wrote:
>- Trying to "fix" this resulted in libstdc++5 packages built for
> i386 and ix86, and selecting the atomicity implementation based on
> target cpu macros. This approach doesn't work, as I learned now.
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:54:39AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Where'd this deb come from? 0.7.0 is all I can find in the archive..
Hint: look at the name of the sysvinit maintainer.
Maybe Miquel is testing the packages *gasp* before uploading them.
Marcelo
* Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 05:57]:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> > and go for i486.
>
> Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
> i486+?
I demand that José Luis Tallón may or may not have written...
> At 19:55 26/04/2003 +1000, you wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
>>> and go for i486.
>> Is there much performance i
* Grzegorz B. Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030426 04:45]:
> Anyway - I am not using any true 386 systems since years,
> so maybe first solution would be to just make i386 mean
> "i486 and higher". If there's *real* need for i386, then
> it should be possible to create i386true sub-distro in the f
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 11:12:00AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> # dpkg -i file-rc_0.8.0_all.deb
> Selecting previously deselected package file-rc.
> dpkg: considering removing sysv-rc in favour of file-rc ...
> dpkg: yes, will remove sysv-rc in favour of fi
At 19:55 26/04/2003 +1000, you wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> and go for i486.
Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
i486+?
- Integrated math coprocess
Hi Joey
Many thanks
Regards
Luiz
Before I file a bugreport I thought I'd ask here first ..
It seems that currently apt is not able to replace an essential
package. Well in fact the package I am trying to replace isn't
even really essential...
Sysvinit was split up in sysvinit, initscripts and sysv-rc. The last
one can be replace
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
>> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
>> and go for i486.
> Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
> i486+?
I've no idea,
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 07:57:00PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > That's more or less what I was hoping - however, checking
> > /usr/share/doc/fortune-mod doesn't show any references to 'language', or
> > any obvious references to i18n or l10n, at least
Hi,
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 04:12:25 +, Milanuk, Monte wrote:
> I guess 'normal' people don't subscribe to
> mailing-lists, where threading is *essential*.
Depends on the mailing list, I'd say. Most non-technical mailing lists
have so many people who use brain-dead webmail accounts that threadin
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> and go for i486.
Is there much performance improvement in dropping i386 in favour of
i486+?
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PR
* Russell Coker
| My logtools package is written in C++ with the STL. It performs
| well and will be quite useful to anyone who is running Apache for
| multiple domains on a 386.
No offense, but it is seriously slow. IIRC, it's a magnitude slower
than mergelog, especially when merging a lot of
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 02:56:13AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> I also find it hard to believe that the majority of our users do not
> have or can not purchase a system that is less than 7 years old.
That's really not so relevant, even if correct. If they already have
a shitload of Pentiums which
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 09:41:14AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I'd vote for 1 or
>
> 1a. create a stripped down version for i386, i.e. required/important
> and go for i486.
I'll drink to that!
--
Nick Phillips -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are confused; but this is your normal state.
On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 21:37, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le sam 26/04/2003 Ã 02:59, Matthew Palmer a Ãcrit :
> > For the original problem, it surely should be possible to build 386 and 486+
> > versions of libstdc++ and include both in the distro, with linker magic (or
> > installer magic) to tell th
W liście z sob, 26-04-2003, godz. 09:56, Chris Cheney pisze:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 06:38:34PM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> > It may be relatively cheap and easy for *you* to buy a two-year-old
> > system, but I don't believe that in this case you are representative
> > of nearly enough of our
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 17:56, Chris Cheney wrote:
> I also find it hard to believe that the majority of our users do not
> have or can not purchase a system that is less than 7 years old. Being
> that is how old the i686 sub-arch is... I once attempted to install
> Debian 2.1 on a Pentium 90, it took
Arnd Bergmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> 1. drop i386 support completely: simple but painful
> 2. create a crippled distro for really old systems (e.g. i386 and i486)
> 3. keep everything the i386 way: slow and incompatible
> 4. like 3, but provide alternatives for new systems (i686+):
>
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 07:31:44AM +0200, Martin Godisch wrote:
> Try instead:
>
> $ pbuilder create --distribution woody
> $ pbuilder update --distribution sid
>
> Kind regards,
... or use the version of debootstrap for unstable.
I have compiled debootstrap and pbuilder unstable versions f
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 06:38:34PM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> It may be relatively cheap and easy for *you* to buy a two-year-old
> system, but I don't believe that in this case you are representative
> of nearly enough of our users to be a useful example.
I also find it hard to believe that th
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 05:06:56AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The options we currently have are:
>
> 1. drop i386 support completely: simple but painful
> 2. create a crippled distro for really old systems (e.g. i386 and i486)
> 3. keep everything the i386 way: slow and incompatible
> 4. like
On Sat, 2003-04-26 at 00:12, Milanuk, Monte wrote:
> Gag. Mail might actually be useful if Apple had had the brains to include
> simple stuff like *threading* of messages.
Nope, not there yet, even in the latest 10.2.5 stuff...
> I guess 'normal' people don't subscribe to
> mailing-lists, wher
70 matches
Mail list logo
