On 6/19/05, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Marc Haber:
>
> > On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:20:49 -0500, Adam Majer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>That could "save" a grand total of about a second.
> >
> > It will save time in case of error when the bootup process stalls for
> > timeout
Hi,
Frans Pop wrote:
> Try mine: 195.240.184.66
> And yes, it is static and not "dynamic but unlikely to change rarely".
Not listed either.
> I started using my own mailserver because the one from my provider was
> down a lot for a while or not delivering within something like 8 hours
> (they
Hi,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> So my IP address, which my ISP promises will always be the same, and
> is initialized by DHCP, is static. But most of the IP addresses in
> the block are handed out dynamically. How will you be able to tell?
Not reliably, that is sure, but the DUL has been pret
Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
>> So my IP address, which my ISP promises will always be the same, and
>> is initialized by DHCP, is static. But most of the IP addresses in
>> the block are handed out dynamically. How will you be able to tell?
>
> Not re
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 23:22:01 +0200, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>* Marc Haber:
>> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:20:49 -0500, Adam Majer
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>That could "save" a grand total of about a second.
>>
>> It will save time in case of error when the bootup process stalls
* John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Eric Dorland writes:
> > If we don't need the "arrangement", why exactly would we accept it
> > anyway?
>
> Because they want it and it costs us nothing to give it to them. They are
> our friends. Let's accommodate them where we can.
We may be their fr
CC'ing this to correct bug number.
Ivo (from offlist email), yeah, if you read my update to that bug # i
said i posted it to the wrong one. (i actually reposted to
314844-quiet). I'm also going to have a big think about that other
package too.
On 20/06/05, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 6/19/05, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 01:41:47AM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> > The examples that come to mind immediately are those with substantial
> > components in both native code and an interpreted or bytecode
> > language, such as Perl XSUBs an
On 6/19/05, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Michael K. Edwards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I wouldn't say "accept" it, I would say "acknowledge" the safety zone
> > offered unilaterally by the Mozilla Foundation, and as a courtesy to
> > them make some effort to stay comfortably with
* Marc Haber [Thu, 09 Jun 2005 07:13:45 +0200]:
> as we all know, Planet Debian generates RSS feeds that Akregator
> doesn't grok, and both packages point at the other one for being at
> fault.
Mako fixed this today. Thanks!
--
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
Ex
Nigel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 19/06/05, Ivo Timmermans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm orphaning these packages:
>>
>> dvorak7min (bug #314844)
> I have interest in this, I really liked using this program
Please do. I always wanted to use this excessively for a whil
On Jun 19, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The amount of needed effort depends however whether the sarge installer
> is stuck with the 2.6.8 kernel or not. Strict application of the
> current stable release management rules mandate this, but there's a
> general feeling among the tea
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 01:41:47AM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 6/19/05, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Of 596 "lib" packages in woody (loosely identified), 325 are still
> > present in sarge. That's after three years of more or less constant
> > development. Where did you
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Using lvm is the fastest way to do this. Alternatives are to copy or
> untar a clean chroot for every test. But that needs more time.
You can also use a loopback file and make a copy of it. Or use UML.
Gruss
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P
* Michael K. Edwards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 6/17/05, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * John Hasler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > Exactly. If Debian doesn't need such an arrangement, neither do our
> > > users.
> > > And if our users don't need such an arrangement, our acce
Having problems in bed? We can help!
http://presenting.powerinfoonline.info/?tightenxtvuypistolszsvsmokers
He that boasts of his own knowledge proclaims his ignorance
Hell, there are no rules here-- we're trying to accomplish something.
Spring makes everything look filthy.
Change yo
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> Frank Lichtenheld and others have brought up the idea of automatically
>> testing installation, upgrading, and removal of packages. It struck me
>> that it should be pretty simple to implement at least basic versions of
>> this. The
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 04:04:24PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 04:16:28PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > [Adam Majer]
> > > That could "save" a grand total of about a second. Also, during
> > > startup the bottleneck is the hard drive in many cases so starting
> > > c
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Barth a écrit :
>> release blockers:
>> - toolchain transition
>> - xorg
>> - sorting out docs-in-main vs. the DFSG
>> - SCC; amd64 as an official arch
>
> So SCC is now a fact, not a proposal anymore?
SCC as in forcing primary mirrors to carr
* Marc Haber:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:20:49 -0500, Adam Majer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>That could "save" a grand total of about a second.
>
> It will save time in case of error when the bootup process stalls for
> timeouts like DNS and NTP.
You should set the clock using NTP *before* start
cigar
http://whywaitlonger.com/cams3.php?SEVY
Helene
Hi,
Thanks to prompt action by the ftp-masters, the recently released slang2
is now in the archive. This mail is a request for maintainers of
packages that use slang1 to recompile and test their packages against
slang2; I intend to file patches against such packages over the next few
days, barring
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 03:13:27PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Choosing not to use greylisting because it causes mail to become
> > non-realtime is *not* a valid complaint. Which is the point I was
> > trying to make in a roundabout fashion
(also see http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianInstallerMeetings)
The fourth Debian Installer team meeting was held from 14:00UTC to 15:37UTC
on Saturday June 18th.
This was the first D-I team meeting since we had a pre-release meeting
at the end of July 2004, before releasing sarge Debian Installer RC
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 08:20:49 -0500, Adam Majer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That could "save" a grand total of about a second.
It will save time in case of error when the bootup process stalls for
timeouts like DNS and NTP.
Greetings
Marc
--
-- !! No courtesy
Hello,
Thank you for expressing interest in Rolex Replica watches.
This opportunity to offer you our fine selection
of Italian/Swiss crafted Rolex Timepieces.
You can view our large selection of Rolexes
(including Breitling, Tag Heuer, Cartier etc)
You are guaranteed of lowest prices and highest
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: dklibs
Version : 1.7.5
Upstream Author : Dirk Krause
* URL : http://dklibs.sourceforge.net
* License : BSD
Description : dirk krause's libraries
The following
Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, even if said frequency is very low. If my ISP does not give me a
> guarantee that when I reconnect I will get the same address again, and
> that noone else is going to use that address, I consider it a dynamic IP.
>> If so, lots of ISPs (mine, for
grimm
http://gvozclisgcz.ghjwatch.com/b3
Rosanne
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 11:13:31AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> > I can think of several ways that this could happen, but I haven't
> > actually seen any of them yet. Would you mind adducing some examples?
>
> I haven't bothered to find them, but given what I'm hearing a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi folks,
Over the last week or so, after wanting features that dchroot didn't
provide, I've written a replacement: schroot. This is mostly
command-line compatible with dchroot, but provides additional
functionality, such as su/sudo-like behaviour:
Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The main problem they had was that they created the debs for potato, and
> they were perfectly installable on that. But Debian changed things
> hugely in unstable, so they weren't installable there -- and then
> introduced testing, making three in
> "andreas" == Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
andreas> * Otavio Salvador ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050619 18:32]:
>> > "aurelien" == Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> writes:
>>
aurelien> Andreas Barth a écrit :
>> >> release blockers: - toolchain transit
Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 11:35 -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
>> "Debian packages just work" has been a truism for *years*, and it's
>> been one of our key technical selling points. I don't want to see that
>> fall by the wayside. This thread is a perfect
Le dimanche 19 juin 2005 à 19:11 +0200, Frans Pop a écrit :
> If I am blocked by something like SORBS when answering installation
> reports or something like that, I will sometimes resend a mail through my
> ISP, sometimes I just say "@[EMAIL PROTECTED]@ you, if you don't want to
> receive my
>
On Sunday 19 June 2005 18:39, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hrm, that would indeed be a reason to accept mail from some IPs inside
> such "dynamic" blocks. Your IP does not seem to be listed as being
> dynamic, though. :-)
Try mine: 195.240.184.66
And yes, it is static and not "dynamic but unlikely to ch
Le dimanche 19 juin 2005 à 18:39 +0200, Simon Richter a écrit :
> OTOH, I think greylisting can help here, by applying it to hosts that
> are listed as being dynamic. If the technology your ISP uses to connect
> you to the internet is so strikingly similar to the technology used by
> people who don
On 6/19/05, Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's use a popular example... I make a package that
> requires /usr/bin/bzgrep.
>
> In Debian, I would have to read the debian/changelog for bzip2 and
> discover that this wasn't introduced until 1.0.1-3, and thus
>Depends: bzi
Hi,
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>>There is simply no point in running a mail server on a dynamic IP.
> Would you define "dynamic IP" for me, just so I can be sure I know
> what you're talking about?
> It sounds here as if you mean an IP address which changes with some
> frequency. Is that right
prison
http://pcypcvyferfwa.ghjwatch.com/b3
Mildred
> "aurelien" == Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
aurelien> Andreas Barth a écrit :
>> release blockers: - toolchain transition - xorg - sorting out
>> docs-in-main vs. the DFSG - SCC; amd64 as an official arch
aurelien> So SCC is now a fact, not a proposal anymore?
* Otavio Salvador ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050619 18:32]:
> > "aurelien" == Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> aurelien> Andreas Barth a écrit :
> >> release blockers: - toolchain transition - xorg - sorting out
> >> docs-in-main vs. the DFSG - SCC; amd64 as an official arc
* Aurelien Jarno ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050619 18:27]:
> Andreas Barth a écrit :
> >release blockers:
> >- toolchain transition
> >- xorg
> >- sorting out docs-in-main vs. the DFSG
> >- SCC; amd64 as an official arch
> So SCC is now a fact, not a proposal anymore?
I hope you remember well that SCC=
Le Dim 19 Juin 2005 18:14, Frans Pop a écrit :
> On Sunday 19 June 2005 17:48, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Frans Pop wrote:
> > > I think blocking mails based on an address being dynamic/static
> > > sucks.
> >
> > Indeed, but the only systems that send out email from dynamic IP
> > addres
Andreas Barth a écrit :
release blockers:
- toolchain transition
- xorg
- sorting out docs-in-main vs. the DFSG
- SCC; amd64 as an official arch
So SCC is now a fact, not a proposal anymore?
--
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian GNU/Linux developer | Elec
On Sun, 2005-06-19 at 11:42 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > Walking up to a "man on the street", if anything, you'll find Debian has
> > a far worse reputation than RPM and RedHat-derived distributions. The
> > general feeling is that third-party RPMs will almost always i
On Sunday 19 June 2005 17:48, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Frans Pop wrote:
> > I think blocking mails based on an address being dynamic/static
> > sucks.
>
> Indeed, but the only systems that send out email from dynamic IP
> addresses are spam zombies (90%[1]) and people who run their own MTA,
Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There is simply no point in running a mail server on a dynamic IP. It
> will not be able to accept mail in a reliable way, even with dyndns, so
> you need some other host to accept and forward your mail to you anyway,
> so you can as well route it throug
Hi,
Frans Pop wrote:
> I think blocking mails based on an address being dynamic/static sucks.
Indeed, but the only systems that send out email from dynamic IP
addresses are spam zombies (90%[1]) and people who run their own MTA,
which again are divided into clueless idiots running an open relay
Scott James Remnant wrote:
> Walking up to a "man on the street", if anything, you'll find Debian has
> a far worse reputation than RPM and RedHat-derived distributions. The
> general feeling is that third-party RPMs will almost always install on
> any system, while third-party .debs are practical
Adam Majer writes:
> The biggest problem is debugging. Sure, you can fork and start all of the
> processes concurrently, but what about if the start fails?
Then you restart with "--serial".
> You also want to have some processes started before others so you need
> asynchronous instead of synchron
On Sat, 2005-06-18 at 11:35 -0500, Ian Murdock wrote:
> "Debian packages just work" has been a truism for *years*, and it's been
> one of our key technical selling points. I don't want to see that fall
> by the wayside. This thread is a perfect example of what will happen
> if we don't worry about
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> I disagree, but again, I don't see your point
I think this sums up your entire response nicely, which is why I won't
reply to it point-by-point. You're not interested in trying to
understand these concerns, but you dismiss them out of hand. Fine.
--
see shy jo
signature
Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> > No, Debian packages just work, if dpkg allows you to install them on
> > your system.
> >
> > Unless, now, they happen to be built by someone running the other
> > distribution.
>
> I can think of several ways that this could happen, but I haven't
> actually seen any
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 04:16:28PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Adam Majer]
> > That could "save" a grand total of about a second. Also, during
> > startup the bottleneck is the hard drive in many cases so starting
> > concurrently might not speed up your boot process significantly.
>
> Do
[Adam Majer]
> That could "save" a grand total of about a second. Also, during
> startup the bottleneck is the hard drive in many cases so starting
> concurrently might not speed up your boot process significantly.
Do you have any good references document this fact? I've seen
articles documenting
[Joey Hess]
> I want to run a test that installs each package in woody in turn,
> upgrades them to sarge, then to sid, then purges it, then looks for
> /usr/doc and /usr/info stuff that is were produced during the
> package's install or upgrade and not removed.
I made a script to test upgrades fro
> "lars" == Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
lars> la, 2005-06-18 kello 22:53 -0400, Joey Hess kirjoitti:
>> I want to run a test that installs each package in woody in
>> turn, upgrades them to sarge, then to sid, then purges it, then
>> looks for /usr/doc and /usr/i
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 10:14:27PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Adam Majer dijo [Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 01:15:00PM -0500]:
> > > - Change boot system, to one capable of handling dependencies and
> > > parallell invocation, to speed up the boot process.
> > >
> > >
> > Err.. Why? The current "slow"
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 08:17:43AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The excuses pages are showing that my vncsnapshot package is being held
> > back for two reasons. First, it is only 4 of 10 days old, which is
> > acceptable. Second, because it de
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> Quoting BugScan reporter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Bug stamp-out list for Jun 17 06:06 (CST)
>
> > Package: netsaint-plugins (non-US/main)
> > Maintainer: Turbo Fredriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 305479 [ + ] netsaint-p
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gifshuffle
Version : 2.0
Upstream Author : Matthew Kwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : Public domain
Description : GIF colourmap stegan
la, 2005-06-18 kello 22:53 -0400, Joey Hess kirjoitti:
> I want to run a test that installs each package in woody in turn,
> upgrades them to sarge, then to sid, then purges it, then looks for
> /usr/doc and /usr/info stuff that is were produced during the package's
> install or upgrade and not rem
su, 2005-06-19 kello 11:28 +0200, Turbo Fredriksson kirjoitti:
> > Package: roxen3 (debian/main)
> > Maintainer: Turbo Fredriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 298934 [] [X] roxen3: contains non-free fonts
>
> In one of Debian's lists (have no idea which), I/we discussed this. It was
> YEARS
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 03:19:14PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> > "Steve" == Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Is this process "correct"? Or did something go seriously wrong
> >> here? If it was correct, why was it correct? If it was wrong,
> >> why was it wrong?
>
>
Quoting BugScan reporter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Bug stamp-out list for Jun 17 06:06 (CST)
> Package: netsaint-plugins (non-US/main)
> Maintainer: Turbo Fredriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 305479 [ + ] netsaint-plugins: check_log plugin breaks system
I thought I requested for this package(s)
Hi,
> Frank Lichtenheld and others have brought up the idea of automatically
> testing installation, upgrading, and removal of packages. It struck me
> that it should be pretty simple to implement at least basic versions of
> this. The result: http://liw.iki.fi/liw/download/piuparts-0.4.tar.gz
>
On 6/19/05, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of 596 "lib" packages in woody (loosely identified), 325 are still
> present in sarge. That's after three years of more or less constant
> development. Where did you come up with this absurd idea that all binary
> packages "of any great comp
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:22:35PM -0700, Michael K. Edwards wrote:
> On 6/18/05, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > Practically speaking, the differences in compatibility between Ubuntu and
> > > Debian is of as much concern as those between Debian stable and Debi
Le dimanche 19 juin 2005 à 00:34 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
> > Just to make clear: this "requirement" of yours is one you have
> > invented.
> Me and a large part of the Internet.
> (Hint: RFCs are not the word of $GOD, but something which sites agree
> about to help interoperability.)
How abo
70 matches
Mail list logo
