* Stefan Fritsch ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [071116 13:03]:
> is unset. (Actually, some scripts use "${LD_LIBRARY_PATH+:
> $LD_LIBRARY_PATH}", which seems to work, too. But this is not
> documented in the bash man page, at least I can't find it.)
The difference between ${PARAMETER:+WORD} and ${PARAMETER
Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For me, exim4 is better:
> * less memory on run time
> * mailname is implimented as expected by the policy.
Postfix has a reputation for being faster and more secure than exim.
Why is it worth worrying about, though? Are the difference between exim
and
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 01:44:51 +0900, Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Just to be sure... I am running postfix now just to find out the same
> questions you have...
> I see no practical reason to run postfix on desktop machine now except
> if postfix is something you are very familiar with.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 10:52:21PM +0100, Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > If the author uses the pdf, it's the pdf. If the author uses the tex,
>
> Umpf, how do you proof/ensure that the source of a pdf is the pdf?
> I hope you
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package name: non-free/dialign-t-doc
Version : 2.2
Upstream Author : Amarendran R. Subramanian, Volker Menrad, Dorothea Emig
URL : http://dialign-t.gobics.de/
License : LGPL
Progr
Package: wnpp
* Package name: libcgi-formbuilder-source-yaml-perl
Version: 1.0008
Upstream Author: Mark Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI-FormBuilder-Source-Yaml/
* License: GPL or Perl Artistic
Description:
This Perl module reads a YAML file containing CGI::F
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Vincent Danjean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libhtml-template-pro-perl
Version : 0.66
Upstream Author : I. Yu. Vlasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTML-Template-Pro/
* License : Same as
On 11208 March 1977, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Do the DFSG apply to design???
The DFSG apply to stuff thats put into our archive.
And you know, our SC states "Debian will remain 100% free", it doesnt
say Free Software.
> Well, we are doomed to ship crippled variants of beautiful documents.
Peo
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > If the author uses the pdf, it's the pdf. If the author uses the tex,
>
> Umpf, how do you proof/ensure that the source of a pdf is the pdf? I
> hope you don't trust the "PDF Producer" field and similar?
Y
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Argg, yes, here we are again. What matters to me is that a user can use
> the INFORMATION in the document, i.e. the actual source and use it in
> case he makes a derived work.
>
> And it matters to me that people can get optimal typographic quality.
>
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Don Armstrong wrote:
> If the author uses the pdf, it's the pdf. If the author uses the tex,
Umpf, how do you proof/ensure that the source of a pdf is the pdf?
I hope you don't trust the "PDF Producer" field and similar?
So, we are settled, I could - just for the sake of discu
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Of course, that free to use and distribute is not sufficient for Debian
> main. They would also have to grant a license to create derivative works
> and distribute those derivative works, including the derivative work of
Argg, yes, here we are again. What
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > I think we need to make a difference here if upstream's original
> > document is the pdf - or if the pdf was created from xml/tex/... source.
> > It's not common to create documentations as pdf file in pdfed
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > > - the source is present, no freedom is taken: The document is present,
> > > the source code.
> > > - the pdf can be regenerated albeit with minor quality.
> >
> > Thats different to "relies on not-avai
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> In the absence of an explicit copyright license, Debian has generally
>> taken the conservative position that just because something is
>> available for download doesn't grant an implicit license, and hence
>
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
> In the absence of an explicit copyright license, Debian has generally
> taken the conservative position that just because something is available
> for download doesn't grant an implicit license, and hence doesn't mean
> that you can redistribute it or make
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Norbert Preining:
>>> These fonts are not the full fonts, but sub-setted. Otherwise type
>>> companies would NEVER allow any distribution of pdfs with their fonts.
>>> But they do.
>> But this doesn't me
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ben Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: atl2-source
Version : 1.0.40.2
Upstream Author : xiong huang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/linux-ubuntu-modules-2.6.22/
* License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Philipp Benner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cl-plplot
Version : 0.4.0
Upstream Author : Hazen Babcoc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://common-lisp.net/project/cl-plplot/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Lisp
D
* Norbert Preining:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > These fonts are not the full fonts, but sub-setted. Otherwise type
>> > companies would NEVER allow any distribution of pdfs with their fonts.
>> > But they do.
>>
>> But this doesn't mean that you are allowed to extract those s
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 10:23:36AM +0600, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> (Unfortunately, you might have to parse groff's warning text in order
> to ignore particular cases.)
I'm not familiar with Groff at all... Does it allow later `.de'
to overr
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > These fonts are not the full fonts, but sub-setted. Otherwise type
> > companies would NEVER allow any distribution of pdfs with their fonts.
> > But they do.
>
> But this doesn't mean that you are allowed to extract those subsets, put
Sorry, this is
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> I think we need to make a difference here if upstream's original
> document is the pdf - or if the pdf was created from xml/tex/... source.
> It's not common to create documentations as pdf file in pdfedit or Adobe
> Acrobat, but it may happen, and then th
> Well, I still think that there is a difference between a PDF file and a
> binary executable, and that in any case, a PDF file is not a "program"
> in the same sense as the commands and applications we use, but since
> this discussion already happened before, I will not try to change the
> mind o
* Norbert Preining:
> On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> The embedded fonts are still restricted, so it has to go into non-free
>
> These fonts are not the full fonts, but sub-setted. Otherwise type
> companies would NEVER allow any distribution of pdfs with their fonts.
> But they do.
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:
> The embedded fonts are still restricted, so it has to go into non-free
These fonts are not the full fonts, but sub-setted. Otherwise type
companies would NEVER allow any distribution of pdfs with their fonts.
But they do.
Best wishes
Norbert
* Norbert Preining:
> What if upstream ships a pdf AND the source, but the generation of the
> pdf relies on not-available fonts.
>
> I would still ship this pdf into my Debian package out of the following
> reasons:
The embedded fonts are still restricted, so it has to go into non-free
(perhaps
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: aeskulap
Version : 0.2.2b1
Upstream Author : Alexander Pipelka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.bms-austria.com/~pipelka/aeskulap/
* License : GPL, LGPL
Programming
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--- Please fill out the fields below. ---
Package name: ttf-ubuntu-title
Version: 0.2
Upstream Author: Andrew Fitzsimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
URL: http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/x11/ttf-ubuntu-title
License: LGPL
Descrip
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ocaml-portaudio
Version : 0.1.1
Upstream Author : Samuel Mimram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://savonet.sf.net/
* License : LGPL+link exception
Programming Lang: oca
Hi Jörg,
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > - the source is present, no freedom is taken: The document is present,
> > the source code.
> > - the pdf can be regenerated albeit with minor quality.
>
> Thats different to "relies on not-available fonts".
> Relies == cant be build without
Le Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 10:46:14AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> On 11208 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> > - despite the absence of latex sources one is allowed to take a
> >html, pdf or ps editor and modify the old documentation in the
> >.orig.tar.gz under the terms of the LGP
On 11208 March 1977, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Other questions arising from this:
> What if upstream ships a pdf AND the source, but the generation of the
> pdf relies on not-available fonts.
If you know it -> contrib. (And one should know, as one should try
rebuilding it at least once).
> I wo
On 11208 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
> - despite the absence of latex sources one is allowed to take a
>html, pdf or ps editor and modify the old documentation in the
>.orig.tar.gz under the terms of the LGPL;
"Despite the absence of c source one is allowed to take a .so file and a
On Mo, 19 Nov 2007, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > - the pdf can be regenerated albeit with minor quality.
> > - shipping the higher quality document helps the user more than shipping
> > a lower quality document
>
> Why would the XML-based document be lower quality? If dblatex is used
> for genera
Le lundi 19 novembre 2007 à 08:08 +0100, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> - the pdf can be regenerated albeit with minor quality.
> - shipping the higher quality document helps the user more than shipping
> a lower quality document
Why would the XML-based document be lower quality? If dblatex is use
36 matches
Mail list logo
