On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 12:33:24AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> >> Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
> >> > Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below,
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
...
But then it doesn't matter anymore. These days, Debian is "infrastructure".
We no longer make releases. We provide the basis from which others make releases
-- Ubuntu, Prodigy, Knopp
[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]
> The answer to that is to setup a dist-cc cluster for these archs,
> where only the master node is in the slow arch, and everything else
> is a fast arch. i.e. far stricter buildd requirements would fix it.
> Even mirror space problems can be fixed without dropping a
(from a thread in -devel)
Quoting Henrique de Moraes Holschuh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > > There isn't any evidence I've seen that these arch's actually slow
> > > down the release.
> >
> > Getting debian-installer working across all architectures was cert
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Our chances of actually releasing one day could only increase if we dropped
> arches such as mipsel, s390, m68k, ... and concentrated on those that
> actually
> mattered: i386, powerpc, amd64 -- and I'll gladly add a few more.
* Tore Anderson
| * Tollef Fog Heen
|
| > No. If you have exim4 installed and install mailman, it's a
| > reasonable expectation that you want to use those two together.
|
| But you cannot know if I have changed, added, or removed files under
| conf.d/ in such a way which would make your
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 01:16:58PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Bug 295175, the grave xfree86-common bug that was blocking many
> autobuilds has now had its fix uploaded to the archive.
>
> Unfortunately, the xfree86 build with the fix is failing, and looking
> at the build logs, I think it
Scripsit Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2005 at 12:58:15AM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
>> I don't think there can be much argument that anything that Provides
>> c-compiler also has to make sure that standard header files like
>> or are present on the system. Otherwise it
Scripsit Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> it might be a good idea for make-kpkg to check whether the
>> necessary files are present in the kernel tree (and warn loudly if
>> they are not) when one tries to build modules. On the other hand I
>> have no idea what would be involved in checking thi
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > There isn't any evidence I've seen that these arch's actually slow
> > down the release.
>
> Getting debian-installer working across all architectures was certainly
> an issue at one time, though that time passed a few months ago.
Well, if the installe
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Our chances of actually releasing one day could only increase if we
>> dropped arches such as mipsel, s390, m68k, ... and concentrated on
>> those that actually mattered: i386, powerpc, amd64 -- an
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: xchat-systray
Version : 2.4.5
Upstream Author : Patrizio Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.blight.tk/
* License : GPL
Description : xchat systray not
Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It's disheartening because while there seem to be other free ray-tracers
>> out there with even better rendering quality than povray, I've not found
>> one with anything like povray's wonderfully expressive input language --
>> most other projects seem
* Marc Haber
> If people change the configuration, they will have to bear with
> breakage this has caused.
If the users cannot safely change Exim's configuration (save using the
Debconf scripts), it cannot be considered "configuration" by any Debian
standard I have ever seen. And if so, /e
Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Our chances of actually releasing one day could only increase if we
> dropped arches such as mipsel, s390, m68k, ... and concentrated on
> those that actually mattered: i386, powerpc, amd64 -- and I'll
> gladly add a few more. But a total of eleven
On Feb 21, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So which portability problems are the ones that we waste time fixing code
> for?
You are right, close to none.
The usual sources of problems are slow or broken buillds, broken
toolchains and buggy kernels.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Desc
* Tollef Fog Heen
> No. If you have exim4 installed and install mailman, it's a
> reasonable expectation that you want to use those two together.
But you cannot know if I have changed, added, or removed files under
conf.d/ in such a way which would make your drop-in routers and
transports
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
> > Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below, and
> > others, aren't indicative that debian should drop s390, mipsel, and
> > maybe hppa from the list of architectures? How
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>> Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
>> > Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below, and
>> > others, aren't indicative that debian should drop s390, mipsel, and
>>
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:57:47PM +, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
> > Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below, and
> > others, aren't indicative that debian should drop s390, mipsel, and
> > maybe hppa from the list of architectures? How
Clint Byrum spamaps.org> writes:
> Now, can someone please tell me how messages like the one below, and
> others, aren't indicative that debian should drop s390, mipsel, and
> maybe hppa from the list of architectures? How about we release for
> i386, sparc, and powerpc, and let the others release
Hello ,
Planstotravel.com is a website all about vacation , holiday and travel .
We already have more than 5000 links on our website to hotels , resorts
campsites /
campings etc .
Planstotravel.com have more than 35000 umique visitors per day .
Take all those visitors to your website and to you
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Morten Brix Pedersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: flpsed
Version : 0.3.2
Upstream Author : Johannes Hofmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.ecademix.com/JohannesHofmann/
* License : GPL
Description : a
Package: wnpp
Followup-For: Bug #217094
The packaging of the GNU polyxmass software suite for simulation and
analysis of mass spectrometric data of (bio-)polymers has improved
dramatically these last days. The packages are available from
http://www.polyxmass.org/debian and are currently reviewed b
Bug 295175, the grave xfree86-common bug that was blocking many
autobuilds has now had its fix uploaded to the archive.
Unfortunately, the xfree86 build with the fix is failing, and looking
at the build logs, I think it's because the buildd chroots are still
corrupted with the damage that the bug
I intend to orphan xkeycaps.
xkeycaps is no longer maintained upstream (see http://www.jwz.org/xkeycaps/)
and I haven't changed the Debian package in over two years, The package is
in reasonable shape, but there are a number of bugs on record
(http://bugs.debian.org/src:xkeycaps) which could be ad
Quoting Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> No, it's not a good idea. Let's keep the change in mind for etch.
That, I fully agree with...:)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 08:06:46 -0600, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>At least make enabling the change a Debconf
>question.
Impossible with current policy since maintainer scripts are forbidden
to mess with dpkg-conffiles.
Greetings
Marc
--
-- !! No co
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I don't know how these translation things are handled technically. But
>> since the intended meaning didn't change at all, I don't see why it is
>> better to have a "bad" english version and 40 equally "bad" translated
>> versions, over having a bett
> I don't know how these translation things are handled technically. But
> since the intended meaning didn't change at all, I don't see why it is
> better to have a "bad" english version and 40 equally "bad" translated
> versions, over having a better english version, 10 better translated
> version
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050220 15:25]:
> Marc writes:
> > I would consider it a feature to have mailman work immediately after
> > installation on a default system, and the exim4 configuration scheme has
> > explicitly invented with that possibility in mind.
> I would consider it an obn
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Miguel Gea Milvaques <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: mydms
Version : 1.4.3
Upstream Author : Markus Whestfal
* URL : http://dms.markuswestphal.de/about.html
* License : GPL
Description : Document Management Sy
hi
I have uploaded mplayer 1.0pre6a-3
It ships a correctly repackaged upstream source;
it has a 'debian/rules get-orig-source' (as asked in debian-devel)
that creates the .orig.tar.gz
It should appear in http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html
and in I will put a copy in
http://tonelli.sns
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On 18 Feb 2005 17:54:42 -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>Still, one piece of useful advice has come from the thread: that the
>>installation comment should tell the user what to do, rather than what
>>not to do.
>
> Fixing this is
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: octave-gtk
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Muthiah Annamalai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://octave-gtk.sf.net
* License : GPL
Description : GTK+ binding for GNU Octave
Octave GTK+ is a Octave binding fo
* Tore Anderson
| * Tollef Fog Heen
|
| > It's also a nice way for other packages to update exim's configuration
| > -- I'm considering shipping files for mailman, for instance. It would
| > be nice if SA did the same and so on.
|
| But you'd do it so that the routers/transports you add a
Marc writes:
> I would consider it a feature to have mailman work immediately after
> installation on a default system, and the exim4 configuration scheme has
> explicitly invented with that possibility in mind.
I would consider it an obnoxious bug for the installation of a package to
alter my ema
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 10:07:48 +0100, Tore Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>* Tollef Fog Heen
> > It's also a nice way for other packages to update exim's configuration
> > -- I'm considering shipping files for mailman, for instance. It would
> > be nice if SA did the same and so on.
>
> I would
Hendrik Frenzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> i got a question regarding package updates.
>
> If I have a source pack-1.1 from which some packages including
> pack-gui-lang-de-1.1_2 (Provides: pack-gui-lang) are build.
>
> Now i want to build the languages in seperade packages say
> pack-l
* Tollef Fog Heen
> It's also a nice way for other packages to update exim's configuration
> -- I'm considering shipping files for mailman, for instance. It would
> be nice if SA did the same and so on.
But you'd do it so that the routers/transports you add are disabled by
default, right?
40 matches
Mail list logo
