Le dimanche 10 juillet 2005 à 23:34 +0200, Marc Haber a écrit :
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:01:59 +0200, Michael Bramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Maybe I miss something, but have we some Documentation about
> >alioth/gforge?
It depends on what you expect...
> >And is there some alioth mailingli
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 04:19:55 -0400, Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 04:16:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:47:45 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > If these are good settings for dupload, why is it not includ
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 04:16:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:47:45 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > If these are good settings for dupload, why is it not included in
> > the package as the default configuration for dupload?
>
> Go
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:12:53AM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Program based of concept of hard linking of files being atomic across
> NFS.
No.
Talk to debian-l10n-english@lists.debian.org
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `'
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:55:23 +1000, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> "Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (va, manoj)>
>> writes:
Manoj> ! [1]
: 7. Fix up the all the silly typos made in every BTS email sent so
:far and retransmit. (note: this is after the BTS has
I demand that Brian May may or may not have written...
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Try ctrl/atl/shift + print/scroll/pause combinations on the console. Or
>> alt+sysrq+h if thats enabled in your kernel. You get a process listing
>> with one of the first and the second can
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dominic Hargreaves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libfile-nfslock-perl
Version : 1.20
Upstream Author : Rob Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/File-NFSLock/
* License : Dual GPL/Artistic
D
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dominic Hargreaves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libcache-perl
Version : 2.02
Upstream Author : Chris Leishman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Cache/
* License : Dual GPL/Artistic
Descriptio
> "Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (va, manoj)> writes:
Manoj> ! [1]
???
Manoj> ! [2]
???
Manoj> Are we sure we want someone who is routinely this
Manoj> incompetent to help with bug triage? Seems to me we would
Manoj> be bette off without
> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Goswin> Try ctrl/atl/shift + print/scroll/pause combinations on
Goswin> the console. Or alt+sysrq+h if thats enabled in your
Goswin> kernel. You get a process listing with one of the first
Goswin> and the second can
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:01:59 +0200, Michael Bramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Maybe I miss something, but have we some Documentation about
>alioth/gforge?
>
>And is there some alioth mailinglist (or is debian-devel ok for more
>alioth questions?)
Alioth is mainly unmaintained, don't rely on it.
G
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Goswin!
>
>> Afaik it is as simple as: The Filename entries are relative to the URL
>> you would put into the sources.list, as in:
>>
>> deb url path/
>> deb url dist +
>
> I see. But how does the mirror script know how the particular Packages
> file
Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
There are some strange people in the world who consider toy names
frivolous and not grown up. But they can be mollified with sober,
professional release numbers.
Another advantage is that numbers come in an order and thereby indicate
which release came before which.
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Thomas Hood wrote:
Are release numbers really needed? Why not do away with them altogether?
There are some strange people in the world who consider toy names
frivolous and not grown up. But they can be mollified with sober,
professional release numbers.
--
Jaldhar H
Hi,
* Drew Parsons ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050710 15:15]:
> I think that's grossly unfair. There is nothing in debian-release's
> description to give any hint that it is "not a discussion list".
Thanks for your hint. This is fixed now.
Cheers,
Andi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
Am Freitag, den 08.07.2005, 17:05 +0200 schrieb Eduard Bloch:
> There is really no reason for having a "minor release
> number after dot" in the Debian version, it justs leads people to
> pointless discussions like this one.
Well, your suggestion sounds pointless to me.
I like it though. Skip the
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> I've been wondering the same about questions on updates. Why are
> (many) questions being asked on updates (first update after system
> install)? Sounds like a weird time to me.
Due to bug #238301 not being fully fixed in time for sarge.
Hmm, it's still not rolled out i
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> In the last two days I helped a friend with a sarge install who is new
> to linux. We installed the base system with the desktop task.
>
> Does the new Debian user really care if their fonts are managed with
> defoma, a technology they have never heard of? (And when did def
Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Eduard Bloch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050708 17:10]:
>
> > Does the release team agree with this change
>
> and also debian-release is not a discussion list, so please
> don't CC it for discussion threads.
>
I think that's grossly unfair. There is nothing in debian-relea
Il sistema Antivirus della posta elettronica Rai non permette la consegna del
messaggio con soggetto : Important
Il messaggio inviato da : debian-devel@lists.debian.org é stato cancellato
perchè l' estensione del file allegato non é accettata.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wi
Nigel Jones wrote:
On 10/07/05, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Are release numbers really needed? Why not do away with them altogether?
you mean, just stick with code names?
That wouldn't exactly work, Debian's apt/dpkg basicly relies on
release numbers, how else can it easily and q
su, 2005-07-10 kello 01:44 -0400, Nathanael Nerode kirjoitti:
> Peter Samuelson wrote:
> Unless someone is willing to actually enforce the requirement that all
> optional packages can coexist, this will be necessary to make Policy conform
> with reality.
Is there a tool to check for disallowed c
Hi Goswin!
> Afaik it is as simple as: The Filename entries are relative to the URL
> you would put into the sources.list, as in:
>
> deb url path/
> deb url dist +
I see. But how does the mirror script know how the particular Packages
files are referenced from a (most probably remote) sources.l
On Jul 10, 2005 at 12:26, Goswin von Brederlow praised the llamas by saying:
> David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The backend does have it. It logs the information. Higher level tools just
> > need to read the file in and display it. Why add grep functionality to
> > dpkg when we alre
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
>> > I changed my script to check whether the "Filename:" field is with a
>> > './' in front or not. Works for now. Probably another tweaking will be
>> > necessary in the future, but currently it is ok.
>>
>> The ./ is a sideeffect of dpkg-scanpa
Hi,
* David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-10 13:07]:
> On Jul 10, 2005 at 07:01, Goswin von Brederlow praised the llamas by saying:
> > David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > Why not have it in dpkg and have aptitude or synaptic use it in turn?
> > Why limit it to higher level
Nigel Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 10/07/05, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:57:54 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> > I suggested "Debian IV"
>>
>> Are release numbers really needed? Why not do away with them altogether?
>>
> you mean, just stick with
Hi!
> > I changed my script to check whether the "Filename:" field is with a
> > './' in front or not. Works for now. Probably another tweaking will be
> > necessary in the future, but currently it is ok.
>
> The ./ is a sideeffect of dpkg-scanpackages. You should not rely on
> that but just reim
On 10/07/05, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:57:54 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > I suggested "Debian IV"
>
> Are release numbers really needed? Why not do away with them altogether?
>
> --
> Thomas Hood
>
you mean, just stick with code names?
That wouldn't
On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:57:54 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I suggested "Debian IV"
Are release numbers really needed? Why not do away with them altogether?
--
Thomas Hood
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 08:40:54AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Eduard Bloch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050708 17:10]:
> > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable
> > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix
> > (for example), etc.pp.
> W
On Jul 10, 2005 at 07:01, Goswin von Brederlow praised the llamas by saying:
> David Pashley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm wondering if this wouldn't be better added as a feature to
> > aptitude/synaptic, as people who would use apt-get or dpkg would
> > probably know grep. The people he w
32 matches
Mail list logo
