On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 09:28:46PM -0400, Ricky Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Ricky Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> * Package name: smolt
> Version : 0.9.8.3
> Upstream Author : Mike McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : h
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The rationale for samba depending on update-inetd was that samba does
> *not* depend on the availability of an inet superserver; it only depends
> on the availability of the update-inetd interface, in order for its
> maintainer scripts to run correctly.
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 12:57:03AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I don't know exactly how it happened, but a large number of maintainers
> apparently ignored the discussions on this list and added to their
> packages a dependency on update-inetd.
> This is *TOTALLY WRONG* because the /usr/sbin/updat
> It might be helpful if you could summarise what packages are supposed to
> be doing here - this may even affect enough packages to warrant a mail
> to debian-devel-announce. I don't recall ever seeing an announcement
> about this and I imagine that even among those maintainers who read this
> li
"Tim Hull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I knew about that, though it's not actually an official Debian
> repository (to my knowledge).It is missing a few things I need, though.
> I may look in to contributing over there, and it would be nice to see it
> as an official part of the Debian project,
>
>
> Are you aware of backports.org? I use it extensively for cherry-picking
> specific packages where I need a newer version for feature reasons while
> keeping the rest of the system running stable. That means there's only a
> few packages I have to pay special attention to for security
> vuln
"Tim Hull" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That said, there is a significant issue that I see with Debian and most
> distributions in general that I wanted to bring up. The issue is that
> once a stable release is declared stable, that's it - there are no
> updates except for security holes. This
Hi,
I must say I hope no one takes this the wrong way or flames me because of it
- I really appreciate what Debian has done, and I think you have the most
stable, logically laid out, and free (as in freedom) Linux distribution out
there.
That said, there is a significant issue that I see with Deb
On Jul 29, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So is anything ever valid other than openbsd-inetd | inet-superserver as a
> dependency? I keep getting confused on the rules around using virtual
> packages. Would rlinetd | inet-superserver be okay? Would
Formally yes, but I do not think th
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ricky Zhou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: smolt
Version : 0.9.8.3
Upstream Author : Mike McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/smolt/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Jul 29, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Currently, lintian allows any combination of dependencies on the
>> following packages to satisfy the dependency requirement from calling
>> update-inetd in maintainer scripts:
>>
>> update-inetd
On Jul 29, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So what are they *supposed* to depend on, only inet-superserver? I'm
Yes. Actually "openbsd-inetd | inet-superserver", since it is a virtual
package.
> failing to extract a clear guideline from half-remembered debian-devel
> discussions (as is
On Jul 24, Magnus Holmgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyway, you have proposed that all superserver packages provide their own
> update-inetd implementation, which is fine and simple enough, except that
> it's not clear how the configuration would be transferred when one
> superserver is rep
On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 12:57:03AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I don't know exactly how it happened, but a large number of maintainers
> apparently ignored the discussions on this list and added to their
> packages a dependency on update-inetd.
> This is *TOTALLY WRONG* because the /usr/sbin/updat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> I don't know exactly how it happened, but a large number of maintainers
> apparently ignored the discussions on this list and added to their
> packages a dependency on update-inetd.
> This is *TOTALLY WRONG* because the /usr/sbin/update-inetd interface i
I don't know exactly how it happened, but a large number of maintainers
apparently ignored the discussions on this list and added to their
packages a dependency on update-inetd.
This is *TOTALLY WRONG* because the /usr/sbin/update-inetd interface is
guaranteed to be provided by whatever implements
Tatsuya Kinoshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> There is now emacs22 in lenny/sid. While emacs21 still exists, to
>> prefer emacs22 (or emacs), I'll submit bug reports with `Severity:
>> wishlist'. If emacs21 is removed, the severities will be bumped up.
>
> I've submited a wishlist Bug #434978
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
I imagine that the reason why no one responds to this suggestion is that
the discussion is very focused: The friends of the complete Debian menu
on the one hand, and the advocates of a "newbie friendly" desktop
environment - and those newbies (I think) a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: pkpgcounter
Version : 2.18
Upstream Author : Jérôme Alet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.pykota.com/software/pkpgcounter
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Pytho
Am Samstag 28 Juli 2007 18:05 schrieb Sam Morris:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:15:50 +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > Is that really worth it, knowing that it will probably never be in a
> > stable release? There is also a p54 in wireless-dev, based on mac80211.
> > Maybe you have knowledge of what's
On Sat, Jul 28, 2007 at 12:53:42PM +0200, Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: randim
>Version : 0.5
>Upstream Author: Adrian Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://interstitiality.net/ifs_f.html
> * License : G
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:15:50 +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Is that really worth it, knowing that it will probably never be in a
> stable release? There is also a p54 in wireless-dev, based on mac80211.
> Maybe you have knowledge of what's going on there? Please enlighten me.
The wireless-dev tre
Le samedi 28 juillet 2007 à 04:36 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
> So, if you want to keep you menu small and non-comprehensive,
> you should not be pushing for f.d.o formatting. :)
But I am not pushing it. I am trying to prevent the mess that will be if
that actually happens.
--
.'
Am Samstag 28 Juli 2007 16:40 schrieb Sam Morris:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Package name: p54
> Version : 20070728-6e46e62
> Upstream Author : Jean-Baptiste Note, NetChip Technology, Inc.,
>
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le jeudi 26 juillet 2007 08:25 +0200, Frank Küster a écrit :
>
>> Could you give guidelines how a maintainer of an application should
>> classify their app,
>
> Using categories described in [0] is a good start. The maintainers would
> also have to agr
Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I really wonder whether this concept of user roles are really that strange
> or stupid that all posters seem to ignore this idea. (Feel free to teach
> me in private to keep silent with those stupid ideas.)
Personally, I think it's probably a very good
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 juillet 2007 03:52 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
>> > In the end, the people who know whether an application should be given
>> > tags that will exclude it from certain menus are the application's
>> > maintainers, not the menu systems
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 juillet 2007 à 03:52 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
>> > In the end, the people who know whether an application should be given
>> > tags that will exclude it from certain menus are the application's
>> > maintainers, not the menu syste
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Package name: p54
Version : 20070728-6e46e62
Upstream Author : Jean-Baptiste Note, NetChip Technology, Inc.,
David Brownell, Mich
On Sat, 2007-07-28 at 04:47 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:22:11 +0200, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> As long as it is not shown, it doesn't matter, so I guess we can
> >> agree on this matter.
>
> > No, not
#include
* Florent Rougon [Thu, Jul 26 2007, 02:55:16PM]:
> Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >> Witness:
> >> >> - usable completion in the File Open dialog -> gone
>
> [...]
>
> > Note that AFAIK, completion never disappeared from the file open dialogs.
> > You just have to en
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: randim
Version : 0.5
Upstream Author: Adrian Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://interstitiality.net/ifs_f.html
* License : GNU GPL
Description : Random Image Generation using Iterated Function
Sy
#include
* Ross Burton [Thu, Jul 26 2007, 12:49:34PM]:
> > I was even not
> > able to get rid of this nautilus thingy at all because killing it opens
> > a new one. I just renamed it and killed it to get rid of.
>
> If you don't use nautilus, why not remove the package? If you want to
> keep t
On Sat, 2007-07-28 at 04:39 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > If you don't use nautilus, why not remove the package? If you want to
> > keep the package installed but never use it, why not remove it from
> > the session?
>
> Because other users of the machine might want to? Or is Gnome
>
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:22:11 +0200, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> As long as it is not shown, it doesn't matter, so I guess we can
>> agree on this matter.
> No, not at all. I have not yet seen a convincing argument for hiding
> menu ent
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:07:16 +0200, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Le vendredi 27 juillet 2007 à 03:52 -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
>> > In the end, the people who know whether an application should be
>> > given tags that will exclude it from certain menus are the
>> > applicati
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:49:34 +0100, Ross Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 13:33 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> I was even not able to get rid of this nautilus thingy at all because
>> killing it opens a new one. I just renamed it and killed it to get
>> rid of.
> If you
37 matches
Mail list logo
