Re: GR: Disambiguation of Section 4.1.5 of the constitution

Hi folks, Since I am no longer merely an interested observer in the GR process, this is going to be hard. When we talked about this the last time around, in the summer on 2000, there were two camp, with two wildly different interpretations of the constitution. Given the differ

Re: Returned Mail

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I am receiving notices of returned mail from people that I never wrote to > or do not know. Why am I getting these. Today I've gotten at least 10. > > I hope I'm reporting this to the correct person. Please help if possible. It's a virus. Emai

Re: Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 02:37, Marc Singer wrote: > Are we expecting the latest unstalble gcc compiler to correctly > compiler the kernel? Yes, as others have mentioned the code in question is buggy. If the code is in a Debian kernel-source or kernel-patch package then please file a bug report. -

Reply from Linux usage counter

The subject line of your message was Re: Wicked screensaver. This did NOT contain the word "Linux". The counter has unfortunately been the recipient of many sorts of messages, some of which were not intended as registrations. Therefore, the subject line MUST include "Linux" to perform a simple reg

Re: someone interested in adopting grub-client?

>Hi! > > grub-client is a distributed webcrawler client written in c++. The > biggest problem with it is that it simply doesn't work, and I don't > grok why. I'm not that familar with c++ and multithreading and don't > know where to look for the bug. Furthermore it seems that on the search

Re: Binaryless uploads

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Brian May wrote: > You obviously did not understand my scheme then. > > webmin-postfix and webmin-sendmail would still get built as seperate > *.deb packages. > > They just share the one source package. > Oh yeah alright. Now I get it. > A user who installs webmin-postfix.de

Re: Binaryless uploads

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:26:19PM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > For whom? For instance under your scheme, a user of webmin-postfix will > also get webmin-sendmail depite the fact he is unlikely to need it. Think You obviously did not understand my scheme then. webmin-postfix and webmin-sendma

Re: Binaryless uploads

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Brian May wrote: > > #1: One source code package by module is an overkill. > For whom? For instance under your scheme, a user of webmin-postfix will also get webmin-sendmail depite the fact he is unlikely to need it. Think of Webmin modules like Perl CPAN modules. It doesn'

Messaging Mgmt System (MMS) notification

The Airborne Express mail system will not accept this attachment due to recent virus threats. CAUTION- Airborne Express has detected Computer Viruses in an email message you recently sent to this location. The infected message was blocked and will not be delivered to recipients at this organizati

Re: stack protection

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:35, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > A paper on udev was presented at OLS this year, at the URL below you > > can find a copy in PDF format. Basically it is a way of providing > > some of the features of devfs but based around using hotplug to > > create device nodes using mk

Re: Approved

This is an autoresponder. I'll never see your message.

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 03:02, Miles Bader wrote: > Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > "Jerome demonstrated a clear understanding of the Social > > Contract and the Debian Free Software Guidelines." > > > > Perhaps you would care to re-read the Social Contract and DFSG? Y

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 04:28:07PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 11:18, Jérôme Marant wrote: > > We musn't let the bigots decide for us! ;-) > > > > > "Jerome demo

Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender

Your message attached below could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Due to technical difficulties, we have temporarily suspended our main e-mail address, please re-send your message to [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: stack protection

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 10:57:17PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > http://archive.linuxsymposium.org/ols2003/Proceedings/ > > As for why it's better than udev. There have been bugs in devfs in the past > related to race conditions. Also devfs requires that the kernel knows about > all the device

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 02:03:50PM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:59:30AM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: > > From Netcraft newsletter and web site: > > > > Debian Linux distribution 10 years old today > > > > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/

Returned Mail

I am receiving notices of returned mail from people that I never wrote to or do not know. Why am I getting these. Today I've gotten at least 10. I hope I'm reporting this to the correct person. Please help if possible.

Re: stack protection

On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 03:35:04AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > A paper on udev was presented at OLS this year, at the URL below you > > can find a copy in PDF format. Basically it is a way of providing > > some of the features of devfs but based around using hotplug to > > create device

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Jerome demonstrated a clear understanding of the Social >Contract and the Debian Free Software Guidelines." > > Perhaps you would care to re-read the Social Contract and DFSG? Your > understanding seems to have wavered. It's off to

Re: Bits from the RM

On Aug 20, Theodore Ts'o ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > The real problem is that stable has a reputation of taking years and > years before we manage to do a release, so people are always desperate > to shove every last bit of functionality and new upstream release into > it. What folks don't re

Bug#206187: apt-get update fails to get index package list and therefore does nothing

On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 01:24:21PM +0200, Sasha Volkoff wrote: > At 22:51 19/08/2003 -0400, you wrote: > >- the output from this command: perl -w -e "" > > This is the output: > perl: warning: Setting locale failed. > perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: > LANGUAGE = (un

Re: What doing with an uncooperative maintainer ?

"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:05:00PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote: > > > > But sometimes there are fundamental disagreements about how something > > should be packaged and then it must be possible for two competing > > packages to exist in Debian

Banned attachment found

Incident Information:- c:/notes/data/mail.box Originator: Recipients: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Your details Date/Time: 22.08.2003 03:44:58 WARNING: Your message was quarantined because it was contained one of the following banned files : ASF, AVI, MOV, MPA, MPE, MPEG,

Re: Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > __u8 short slot_tablelen; > > Isn't it just a plain error? Either it's a char, or it's a short. It > can't be both, right? gcc used to eat it but now it rightfully complains about it. Its a bug in the source. MfG Goswin

Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages

Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:39:00AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > > I also like the idea of rebuilding packages with newer versions of > > their build-depends (or tool-chain) when a buildd is idle. That too > > would require a more automatic hand

Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages

Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Goswin von Brederlow > > | There is also another reason, not mentioned before, for source only > | uploads. It takes way less bandwith to upload a diff.gz+dsc file than > | to upload a big binary package. > > Bandwidth has costs for buildds as wel

udev [Was: Re: stack protection]

Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Aug 21, Xavier Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >- using devfs for /dev (kernel 2.4 and package devfsd installed) > devfs will probably disappear. It's better to look at udev (which I'm > packaging). Could you give a quick overview about how to

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

gwolf writes: > >Isn't Netcraft CCCP-based? If so, I think it is right - The 'former Iron >Curtain' countries (if I understand correctly, meaning 'the countries >that were behind te Iron Curtain' include Germany(west), France, USA, >UK and the Netherlands :-) No. From http://news.netcraft.com/arc

Re: stack protection

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Op do 21-08-2003, om 09:49 schreef Russell Coker: > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 17:39, Xavier Roche wrote: > > > Major issues for a ro-/ are maybe: > > > - using devfs for /dev (kernel 2.4 and package devfsd installed) > > > > Devfs is getting less support

Re: stack protection

Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:41, Brian May wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 07:16:46PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > > > Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Devfs is getting > > > less support now, it might not be the best time to > start > > > dependi

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

Steve Langasek wrote: > Would you recommend this "best effort" approach for the present case? > Will that be effective for d-i, or do we have to worry about > libpam-runtime's postinst completing before debconf is available? Basically the approach is to check to see if /usr/share/debconf/confmodul

Re: Bug#205927: ITP: eggdrop -- Advanced IRC Robot

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 16:47:36 -0700 Ian Eure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sunday August 17 2003 09:35 am, Peter Makholm wrote: > > "Guilherme de S. Pastore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > * Package name: eggdrop > > > Version

Re: Bits from the RM

At 21 Aug 2003 17:29:16 +0100, Philip Blundell wrote: > On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 09:52, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > My concern is (1) hppa build. If we can't get hppa glibc, we may need > > to drop it finally... > > I don't think the hppa glibc is as inscrutable as all that. The main > problem seems t

Re: Bits from the RM

At Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:09:29 -0500 (CDT), Adam Heath wrote: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Anthony Towns wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 05:52:32PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > > AFAIK, the unresolved difficult bugs are: (1) hppa build (2) dpkg > > > (setjmp/longjmp) on sparc (3) NIS (will be fixe

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 08:11:21PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > Given that all the files involved were conffiles prior to this > > transition, I think no additional work is needed to correctly support > > systems that are being upgraded. Can you confirm whether > > /etc/pam.

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Dagfinn Ilmari MannsÃ¥ker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> consensus >>n : agreement of the majority in sentiment or belief >>[syn: {general agreement}] >> unanimity >>n : everyone being of one mind >> A world of differen

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

Steve Langasek wrote: > Given that all the files involved were conffiles prior to this > transition, I think no additional work is needed to correctly support > systems that are being upgraded. Can you confirm whether > /etc/pam.d/other already contains 'md5' on the machine above? If not, > I'll

Re: Proposal: make kernel install easier

On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 09:02:43PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > I believe lilo and grub already have that. I am not sure lilo has it, but for grub see /usr/share/doc/grub/README.Debian.gz Initially update-grub might seem a bit weird, it extracts comments from the menu.lst file in order t

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 02:03:50PM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote: > I'm not even sure how they derive that information, Debian's Apache might > provide it in the banner information (Since when? BTW, has this always been > the case?) but many other web servers in Debian won't. This m

Re: Binaryless uploads

On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:23:14AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > As I understand it, there is an script that does the > separation for you when you package the .debs. Is there a reason a > similar script can't be invoked by debian/rules to create the > multiple debs from the same source

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

Hi Marcelo, On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 10:44:04AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:37:59PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > - Per-package /etc/pam.d/ configuration files should not include > > explicit 'password' blocks. Instead, services should use the builtin >

Failure notice: user's disk quota exceeded!

Hi, This is the mail deliver program at chinacomm.com.cn Sorry, Your message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cannot be delivered as the recipient has exceeded their hardquota limit for email.However a small (< 1KB) message will be delivered should you wish to inform the person you tried to email. --- Be

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:40:35PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > - It will now be possible to choose md5 vs. crypt passwords at install > > time without violating policy. (Currently, a number of conffiles are > > being modified by maintainer scripts in order to enable md5

someone interested in adopting grub-client?

Hi! grub-client is a distributed webcrawler client written in c++. The biggest problem with it is that it simply doesn't work, and I don't grok why. I'm not that familar with c++ and multithreading and don't know where to look for the bug. Furthermore it seems that on the search engine fr

Auto Response: Unmonitored Mailbox

*** DO NOT REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL ADDRESS *** *** YOUR EMAIL WILL NOT BE DELIVERED OR READ *** You sent an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Thank you! This is an unmonitored email account and your mail has been deleted from our system. If you require general support, please email [

Re: better make a standard for /etc/*/*_not_to_be_run

I have hope that this discussion can end in agreement on the issue raised in #156161. Toward that end I offer the following interpretation of what has been said and finally ask whether we can agree to implement the reinterpreted #156161. The original question was about how to prevent services fro

ITP: ncurses-ruby - ruby extension for the ncurses C library

Package: wnpp Severity: normal I intend to package ncurses-ruby, which is a ruby extension for the ncurses C library. It is placed under the LGPL 2.1. It's required by raggle. http://ncurses-ruby.berlios.de -- Brian Almeida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> System Administrator, Core Messaging Systems

ITP: raggle - console RSS aggregator

Package: wnpp Severity: normal I plan on packaging raggle, a console RSS aggregator. "Features include customizable keybindings, basic HTML rendering, HTTP proxy support, OPML import/export, themes, support for various versions of RSS, Screen support. browser auto-detection, and more. Raggle

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

Le jeu 21/08/2003 à 09:33, Jérôme Marant a écrit : > > According to debian-legal consensus. > > Is there any? John's message proves that there isn't any yet, IMO. I have trouble with the concept of another "nonono gfdl is free because there is free in the acronym" message affecting the consensus.

Re: Bits from the RM

On Wednesday, Aug 20, 2003, at 09:52 US/Eastern, Santiago Vila wrote: Will we some day consider seriously the idea of autobuilders compiling against testing those packages which do not need libraries from unstable to be built? If by "seriously consider" you mean "ignore all the arguments against i

Re: stack protection

rintek wrote: Russell Coker wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:13, Stefan Gybas wrote: However, ProPolice has not been ported to all architectures yet, see http://www.research.ibm.com/trl/projects/security/ssp/statuschart.html for details. Not being ported to all architectures is not a problem IMHO. Su

Re: Bits from the RM

On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 09:52, GOTO Masanori wrote: > My concern is (1) hppa build. If we can't get hppa glibc, we may need > to drop it finally... I don't think the hppa glibc is as inscrutable as all that. The main problem seems to be that Carlos is the only person working on the bug, and he is

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:59:30AM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: > From Netcraft newsletter and web site: > > Debian Linux distribution 10 years old today > > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/debian_linux_distribution_10_years_old_today.html > > I'm not so sure about the value of th

Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:39:00AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > I also like the idea of rebuilding packages with newer versions of > their build-depends (or tool-chain) when a buildd is idle. That too > would require a more automatic handling of maybe-successfull builds > that won't be u

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 01:36:02PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > So the two major "former Iron Curtain" countries seem to be France and > Germany.. :-) Maybe they meant to say "Old Europe". >8-) /me goes to a priest to have the evil spirit of Donald Rumsfeld exorcised -- G. Branden Robinso

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

Jérôme Marant said: > Quoting Dagfinn Ilmari MannsÃ¥ker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> consensus >>n : agreement of the majority in sentiment or belief >>[syn: {general agreement}] >> >> unanimity >>n : everyone being of one mind >> >> >> A world of difference. > > No, no,

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 11:18, JÃrÃme Marant wrote: > No, no, no! You don't get it. There may be a majority among the > debian-legal zealots, but we need a consensus among Debian as a > whole (which means voting of course). > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > We musn't let the bigots decide for us! ;-) >

WARNING: YOU MAY HAVE A VIRUS

The Advanced Virus Detection software on grnleafinc.com has reported that you sent an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], containing the W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] virus in the your_details.pif attachment. The subject of the E-mail was "Re: Wicked screensaver". The E-mail containing the virus has been q

WARNING: YOU MAY HAVE A VIRUS

V I R U S A L E R T Do not reply to this email, no human will read it! Our email server viruschecker found the following virus(es) or worm(s) in an email received from your system: W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] The email was addressed to the following recipient(s): -> [EMAIL PROTECTED] The E-mai

Re: better make a standard for /etc/*/*_not_to_be_run

I retain hope that this discussion can end in agreement on the issue raised in #156161. Toward that end I offer the following interpretation of what has been said and finally a proposal. The original question was about how to prevent services from being started. Some packages employ a mechanism

Re: stack protection

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 10:41:16PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > > Indeed, it's looking likely that GregKH's `udev' will replace devfs > > sometime in the future. > > Dare I ask the obvious question: what is udev? Why is it better then > devfs? It's mostly in user-space, lighter-weight, and more conf

Re: Monitoring RC bugs

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 08:05:01PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > So, all mails sent to bugs with release-critical severities, including > acknowledgements of control messages, will now be copied to a new > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Very nice! -- Jamin W. Collins To be nobody but yourself when

Hungarian DDTP on the Xth B'day

Hi all, The main goal of this party was to translate Debian package descriptions. Unfortunately Gluck, where the ddts server is, was down quite a long time and installing a local server was not so easy as it was the first time I did this. The local server was up only a few minutes before Gluck co

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:18:10PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote: > We musn't let the bigots decide for us! ;-) Thanks for excusing yourself from the discussion thus. -- G. Branden Robinson| Software engineering: that part of Debian GNU/Linux | computer sci

When to call update-alternatives?

Well, I know that in postinst and prerm, but when which argument is passed? I thought that "cd /var/lib/dpkg/info && grep -10 update-alternatives *postinst|less -S" would help me, but it did quite the contrary. There is a total mess! A quick summary of how it is called in different packages: - a

Re: What doing with an uncooperative maintainer ?

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:05:00PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote: > But sometimes there are fundamental disagreements about how something > should be packaged and then it must be possible for two competing > packages to exist in Debian Says who? Debian is not just a collection of packages, it's

Re: stack protection

On Aug 21, Xavier Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >- using devfs for /dev (kernel 2.4 and package devfsd installed) devfs will probably disappear. It's better to look at udev (which I'm packaging). >- transforming several /etc files as symlinks and moving them to some >other place (/var/etc ?

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

Christian Perrier dijo [Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 01:36:02PM +0200]: > Wow.According to this chart, about a third of hosts running Debian > are in France.. :-) > > For sure, several major web hosting and Internet Access Providers run > Debian hosts for their key servers herebut I think this gr

Re: non-DD contributors and the debian keyring

* Martin Quinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Judging from the amount of translation rotting in the BTS, I guess some of > you guys react the same way, and I want to change this by easing this trust > relationship, if possible. Eh. Personally I tend to doubt it's lack of trust that's causing tran

Re: non-DD contributors and the debian keyring

* Martin Quinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 05:03:17PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > I doubt a poor translation would make it into a released version. > A lot of poor translation get into stable, mainly by lack of manwork, but > you are right no offending translation get

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

Jérôme Marant dijo [Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:18:10PM +0200]: > > consensus > >n : agreement of the majority in sentiment or belief > >[syn: {general agreement}] > > > > unanimity > >n : everyone being of one mind > > > > > > A world of difference. > > No, no, no!

Re: Does anyone use barrendero, or know of an equivalent?

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 10:42:28AM +0200, Sam Hocevar wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2003, Steve Langasek wrote: > > But descriptions can be deceiving. Does anyone use this package who > > could comment on its reliability? Does the lack of other bugs indicate > > that the software is mature and stable

Re: [RFC] Debian ruby policy (Re: Fw: Re: Ruby 1.8 transition plan; debian-ruby)

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 02:53:12AM +0900, Fumitoshi UKAI wrote: FU> Dmitry Borodaenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FU> libyaml-ruby1.8 (<- libyaml-ruby) I think that since whytheluckystiff is developing Syck/YAML right in the Ruby CVS, there is little chance for a separation of libyaml-ruby1.8 in the ne

Re: What doing with an uncooperative maintainer ?

"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Talk with the maintainer. Or NMU. Or make noise on -devel. > But don't "fork" packages. I agree and disagree. Talking with the maintainer works sometimes. Sometimes one is in a position to NMU. Sometimes it helps to make noise on debian-devel

Re: Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:44:11PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > > __u8 short slot_tablelen; > > Isn't it just a plain error? Either it's a char, or it's a short. It > can't be both, right? That's what I think, too. It looks, too, to be something added in a patch because the indentation is dif

Re: Bits from the RM

On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 05:52:32PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > AFAIK, the unresolved difficult bugs are: (1) hppa build (2) dpkg > > (setjmp/longjmp) on sparc (3) NIS (will be fixed?) (4) misterious > > apache on ia64 bug. > > Is there a bug# for (2

Re: stack protection

On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:41, Brian May wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 07:16:46PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > > Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Devfs is getting less support now, it might not be the best time to > > > start depending on it. > > > > Indeed, it's looking likely that Gr

Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages

On 21 Aug 2003, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Doogie already said he wants to implement a smart comparator for deb > in dpkg 2.0 which would then be used to compare that different builds > of the binary-all even give the same result. This means you give the 2 debs(which probably only differ by d

Re: Debian Weekly News - August 19th, 2003

> We musn't let the bigots decide for us! ;-) Sorry, but that insult doesn't put a winksmiley on my face. Please don't try to start a useless flamewar. They break out so easily on their own. There is no need to discuss this matter here; it has already been thoroughly discussed in debian-legal an

Re: stack protection

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 07:16:46PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Devfs is getting less support now, it might not be the best time to start > > depending on it. > > Indeed, it's looking likely that GregKH's `udev' will replace devfs > sometime in the fut

Re: Bits from the RM

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:39:35AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > > I am only realistic. When in history did a non-trivial software > product meet its release schedule? > > I am surely hoping for the best, but I seriously do expect sarge to be > released in early 2004. Which is a pretty good track re

Re: stack protection

Op do 21-08-2003, om 09:49 schreef Russell Coker: > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 17:39, Xavier Roche wrote: > > Major issues for a ro-/ are maybe: > > - using devfs for /dev (kernel 2.4 and package devfsd installed) > > Devfs is getting less support now, it might not be the best time to start > depending

Re: Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

> __u8 short slot_tablelen; Isn't it just a plain error? Either it's a char, or it's a short. It can't be both, right? -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/

Re: Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 09:37:40AM -0700, Marc Singer wrote: > > gcc --version > gcc (GCC) 3.3.2 20030812 (Debian prerelease) > I'm getting a new error when I compile the kernel. In the structure > below, it doesn't like the declaration for slot_tablen complaining > that > ide-cd.h:440: err

Re: Transition: new PAM config file handling in unstable

Steve Langasek wrote: > - It will now be possible to choose md5 vs. crypt passwords at install > time without violating policy. (Currently, a number of conffiles are > being modified by maintainer scripts in order to enable md5 > passwords.) Actually making this process policy-compliant wil

Latest gcc-3.3 and kernel compilation

Are we expecting the latest unstalble gcc compiler to correctly compiler the kernel? > gcc --version gcc (GCC) 3.3.2 20030812 (Debian prerelease) I'm getting a new error when I compile the kernel. In the structure below, it doesn't like the declaration for slot_tablen complaining that id

Re: stack protection

Russell Coker wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:13, Stefan Gybas wrote: However, ProPolice has not been ported to all architectures yet, see http://www.research.ibm.com/trl/projects/security/ssp/statuschart.html for details. Not being ported to all architectures is not a problem IMHO. Such stack prote

Bug#206576: ITP: livejournal -- The code that runs livejournal

Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-08-19 Severity: wishlist -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 * Package name: livejournal Version : 2003042200 Upstream Author : Brad Fitzpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.livejournal.com/code * Lic

Re: stack protection

> Who is interested in stack protection? I am. >I think it would be good to have some experiments of stack protected packages >for Debian. Probably the best way to do this would be to start with >ssh-stack and sysklogd-stack being uploaded to experimental. I don't have >time to do this, but

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

Citat Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Quoting Christian Surchi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > From Netcraft newsletter and web site: > > > > Debian Linux distribution 10 years old today > > > > > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/debian_linux_distribution_10_years_old_today.html >

RE: Bits from the RM

cobaco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2003-08-20 15:33, John Goerzen wrote: > > tne pain of breaking desktops is no less when > > you consider how many more desktops we're talking about here. > > that's assuming that all those desktops crash at the same time no? No, it's assuming that all those

Re: Bits from the RM

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 05:52:32PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > AFAIK, the unresolved difficult bugs are: (1) hppa build (2) dpkg > (setjmp/longjmp) on sparc (3) NIS (will be fixed?) (4) misterious > apache on ia64 bug. Is there a bug# for (2)? If not, could someone forward the appropriate mai

Re: FTBFS: architecture all packages

* Goswin von Brederlow | There is also another reason, not mentioned before, for source only | uploads. It takes way less bandwith to upload a diff.gz+dsc file than | to upload a big binary package. Bandwidth has costs for buildds as well. -- Tollef Fog Heen

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thursday 21 August 2003 13:36, Christian Perrier wrote: > I like "having a significant following in the former Iron Curtain > countries". So the two major "former Iron Curtain" countries seem to > be France and Germany.. :-) Well, part of Germany was on the far side of the Iron Curtain regardl

Bug#206544: ITP: nicotine -- feature complete client for the SoulSeek filesharing network

Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-08-21 Severity: wishlist * Package name: nicotine Version : 1.0.1 Upstream Author : Hyriand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://nicotine.thegraveyard.org/ * License : GPL Description : feature complete clien

Re: stack protection

On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:13, Stefan Gybas wrote: > However, ProPolice has not been ported to all architectures yet, see > http://www.research.ibm.com/trl/projects/security/ssp/statuschart.html > for details. Not being ported to all architectures is not a problem IMHO. Such stack protection should n

Re: stack protection

Hi On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 02:56:34PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 12:57:06PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > > Who is interested in stack protection? x86 only? Pro police is the most platform independent iirc. > > I think it would be good to have some experiments of stack prot

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 11:59:30AM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: > From Netcraft newsletter and web site: > > Debian Linux distribution 10 years old today > > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/debian_linux_distribution_10_years_old_today.html > > I'm not so sure about the value of th

Re: Debian Birthday in Netcraft

Quoting Christian Surchi ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > From Netcraft newsletter and web site: > > Debian Linux distribution 10 years old today > > http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/16/debian_linux_distribution_10_years_old_today.html > > I'm not so sure about the value of their Debian geographi

Bug#206536: correcting URL

Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-08-21 Followup-For: Bug #206536 As Thomas said, the right URL is http://www.phpdoc.org, not http://www.phpdocumentor.org. Thank you very much, Thomas. Regards. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel:

  1   2   >