On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 12:55:30AM -0300, Rog?rio Brito wrote:
> > I have seen cases of maintainers that have packages with may bug reports,
> > without any indication of an intent to fix them.
>
> Exactly. It is a frustration to have a bug filed for, say, almost one year
> (Lack of time during on
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 11:48]:
>> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
>> amount of time before processing, for complete removals, in any case.
>
> That's someone I wanted to suggest anyw
For some time I've been more or less MIA, but in the past month or so
it became impossible for me to do debian work: the processor in my
desktop, my only Debian machine (the only other machine I own has a
proprietary, non-Linux compatible (Airport Extreme) wifi card)
released its magic smok
On May 22 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Rogério Brito wrote:
> > In my very humble and uninformed opinion, some maintainers should
> > really give up maintaining their packages or should try to get other
> > people as co-maintainers, if they lack the time to fix their
> > packages. :-(
> >
> >
On Sun, 22 May 2005, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> Hi
> I am subscribed to debian-user, debian-mentors and debian-devel
> lists. I am finding that typically debian-devel and debian-mentors is
> way more spammed than debian-user. Why is it so? Am I just day dreaming
> or is there any reason? Is
Actually she takes much more time to have pleaseure.
http://VWBoasUZrcvo.yi4.net/pharm/sevy/bumptious.html
Fern
Hi
I am subscribed to debian-user, debian-mentors and debian-devel
lists. I am finding that typically debian-devel and debian-mentors is
way more spammed than debian-user. Why is it so? Am I just day dreaming
or is there any reason? Is there anything we forgot to implement on d-d
lists that
Much more better than usual, believe me.
http://GVGdfcfTWtwx.mfek.com/ph/sevy/procrustean.htm
Young
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:46:09AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> As far as I understood it, the missing infrastructure for
> testing-security was the reason why the release of sarge was delayed by
> more than half a year.
> As far as I have seen, it seems most security updates go either through
>
Guys keep it real hard.
http://VOSIeawbXRgqmby.t6i.net/pharm/sevy/rustic.php
Deanna
martin f krafft wrote:
>>You can get mdadm 1.9.0-2.2 for i386 as well as the source package
>>from
Works for me.
$ ls -l /dev/md*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 May 22 22:56 /dev/md0 -> md/0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 May 22 22:56 /dev/md1 -> md/1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 May 22 22:56 /dev/md2
also sprach Jan Dittmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.22.2305 +0200]:
> Works for me. assembled by the kernel. udev nodes are created correctly.
Thanks. a newer version, -2.3, will make it into sarge. Thanks to
everyone who helped.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Juergen Salk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libccl0
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Stephen F. Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://sbooth.org/ccl
* License : GPL
Description : Interface to configuration
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 03:56:35PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what this means, and who is trying to upload this to
> Debian without even sending me a patch first?
This gpg key belongs to Jani Monoses (Cc'ed).
Perhaps he can tell what happened (looks like an accidental upload
Can anyone tell me what this means, and who is trying to upload this to
Debian without even sending me a patch first?
- Forwarded message from Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 14:30:38 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROT
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dan Korostelev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: nautilus-open-terminal
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Christian Neumair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://manny.cluecoder.org/packages/nautilus-open-terminal/
* License
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:35:59AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 10:04:02AM +0200, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
>
> > The check shown below is almost complete (but for a couple of 2.2 patches
> > and per-arch patches).
> > I'm asking if mass bug report filing is opportune
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:40:26AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 10:04:02AM +0200, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> > The check shown below is almost complete (but for a couple of 2.2 patches
> > and per-arch patches).
> > I'm asking if mass bug report filing is opportune
I'm the (previous) maintainer of unrar. Jose Carlos Medeiros has offered to
adopt it.
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > - rename the unrar-nonfree package back to unrar
> > - rename the free unn
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:24:28PM -0500, Micah Anderson wrote:
> The package description for binutils-dev says the following:
> >Description: The GNU binary utilities (BFD development files) This
> > package includes header files and static libraries necessary to build
> > programs which use the
The package description for binutils-dev says the following:
>Description: The GNU binary utilities (BFD development files) This
> package includes header files and static libraries necessary to build
> programs which use the GNU BFD library, which is part of binutils.
> Note that building Debian
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 06:36:01PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
>> The old days? Those still exist :-)
> Yes, but the original spirit has gone.
Tsk. :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Cont
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:12:27PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
>> Wow. It reminds me the old days of Demo parties :-)
>
> The old days? Those still exist :-)
Yes, but the original spirit has gone.
--
Jérôme Marant
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 11:48]:
> One could decide to let RM: bugs on ftp.d.o always linger a certain
> amount of time before processing, for complete removals, in any case.
That's someone I wanted to suggest anyway. While I'm happy to see
removals happening much m
* Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-20 09:55]:
> Throw in a link to the full list for RFA/O/RFH too? Apart from that,
> I'd love to see it on d-d-a.
OK, I'll add links. Note sure about d-d-a or d-d yet. Someone also
suggested an RSS feed.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:26:59PM +0200, Eddy Veenstra wrote:
>
> Dear Debian team,
>
For the future: this question and others like it would be better asked
on debian-user. Debian-devel is essentially a list for Debian developers
and others to discuss the development of Debian - including off-t
We have revamped the mdadm fix in a much cleaner way, using a patch
by Erik van Konijnenburg to fix the --auto command line option.
Also, some fixes to mdrun (which is deprecated but must still work)
and device node permissions have been committed. Lastly,
a README.udev file is now provided.
If yo
Dear
Debian team,
For
several years I used Debian 2.2R5 'potato' and was a happy user. In the meantime
I've tried on that system Xfree 4.2 (download version), but it wasn't an
easy task to get it properly installed. So I went back to my 'good-old' 2.2R5
and decided to wait until Debian
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> - rename the unrar-nonfree package back to unrar
> - rename the free unnrar package to unrar-free (it can even be left out
> of sarge (version 0.0.1 that is the one year old latest upstream
> version...))
> - get the non-free pack
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:12:27PM +0200, Jérôme Marant wrote:
> Wow. It reminds me the old days of Demo parties :-)
The old days? Those still exist :-)
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Con
Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: schism
> Version : 0.2a
> Upstream Author : chisel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://rigelseven.com/schism/
> * License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: schism
Version : 0.2a
Upstream Author : chisel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://rigelseven.com/schism/
* License : GPL
Description : Impulse Tracker clone
Source:
Moin Goswin!
Goswin von Brederlow schrieb am Donnerstag, den 19. Mai 2005:
> IMHO debian-installer in unacceptable as it causes GPL violations.
> Interlocking the debian-installer builds with the exact source
...
> Any ideas? Comments? Solutions?
Relax, there is no problem. (The same was as there
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 11:47:07AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Andreas Gredler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.22.1052 +0200]:
> > brw-rw 1 root disk 9, 2 May 22 10:31 /dev/md2
> > brw-r--r-- 1 root root 9, 20 May 22 10:31 /dev/md20
> >
> > I'm not sure why some devices are g
also sprach Andreas Gredler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.22.1052 +0200]:
> Now I was able to create my RAID without the -auto=yes option.
Good.
> brw-rw 1 root disk 9, 2 May 22 10:31 /dev/md2
> brw-r--r-- 1 root root 9, 20 May 22 10:31 /dev/md20
>
> I'm not sure why some devices are group
On Thursday 19 May 2005 12:26, Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings! It seems that we are in need of a 'big usermem' kernel
> patch in Debian, so I am considering contributing such a package. It
> appears there are two approaches on the net, both in various
> incarnations of redhat
On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 05:59:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Then the new program should still have a higher version number, to allow
> > people who currently use the non-free program to upgrade to the free
> > program.
>
> That's why there's the
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 05:51:44PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> [Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> mdadm has three udev-related RC bugs (#294404, #273182 and #301560),
> which I seem to have been able to fix using previous work by Steve
> Langasek and Marco d'Itri. Since mdadm is a critical piece of
>
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 08:33:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:20:47AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
> > Repairing this issue by simply renaming the non-free package back to
> > unrar and giving the free program a different name should be pretty
> > straightforward
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Li Daobing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: bkchem
Version : 0.9.0
Upstream Author : Beda Kosata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://bkchem.zirael.org/
* License : GPL & LGPL
Description : Python based free chemic
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 10:04:02AM +0200, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> The check shown below is almost complete (but for a couple of 2.2 patches
> and per-arch patches).
> I'm asking if mass bug report filing is opportune at this stage.
> IMHO patches which cannot be applied to debian kernel-
41 matches
Mail list logo
