The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 484 (new: 6)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 123 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ricardo Ichizo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: python-odfsvn
Version : 1.0a1
Upstream Author : Wichert Akkerman - Simplon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://odfsvn.sourceforge.ne
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
>> http://www.cs.arizona.edu/people/justin/packagemanagersecurity/attacks-on-package-managers.html
>>
>> What are people's thoughts on this?
>
> It's been known for quite a while. (I asked one of the guys publishing it,
>
Enrico Zini wrote:
> Hello,
>
Hi,Hhi
>
> Am I the only one that feels very, very uncomfortable about this?
Nope: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/121242
>
>
> Ciao,
>
> Enrico
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou
reassign 492231 konqueror
severity 492231 normal
thanks
Notch-1 wrote:
> Installing debian etch on several computers and with 5 different kernels
> (2.6.15, 18, 22, 24 and 25) i found out that it's impossible to mount fixed
> drives
> (with any partition type) by clicking on them in konqueror m
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 492231 konqueror
Bug#492231: general: unable to mount fixed drives
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `konqueror'.
> severity 492231 normal
Bug#492231: general: unable to mount fixed drives
Severity set to `normal' from `important'
> th
Enrico Zini wrote:
Then I tried sbuild to build using my schroot setup, and found that by
default it disables signature checking. So I stopped using sbuild until
I find a way to reenable it.
[...]
and found that not even our buildds check signatures, and since I
understand that they don't a
Hello,
I am working on a website[1], which purpose is let the visitor browse
a _virtual_ filesystem, made of all the files shipped in Debian
packages. Then view or compare the files.
The problem is that google will never finish indexing the 10 million
pages (not on my home DSL, at least)...
My f
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:09:57 +0200
Steffen Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The EeePCs are sold throughout large resellers (Saturn, Staples, ...) in
> Germany and at least until the new ones get out they all ship with
> Debian - perfectly visible to every potential customer passing by. I have
> Are you in "disk" group?
yes
> Can you mount the disks with pmount (as non-root)?
yes, editing /etc/pmount.allow i can...
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steffen Moeller wrote:
> Kushal Koolwal wrote:
>>> I got your point, you mean we(group of debian) should make a blueprint for
>>> some Device like Netbook / UMPC /> MIDs.
>> Yes. Exactly!
>>
>>> what is your blueprint based debian like?
>> At this po
Notch-1 a écrit :
> Installing debian etch on several computers and with 5 different kernels
> (2.6.15, 18, 22, 24 and 25) i found out that it's impossible to mount fixed
> drives
> (with any partition type) by clicking on them in konqueror media:/, do you
> know about this problem?
> I got "h
Package: general
Severity: important
Installing debian etch on several computers and with 5 different kernels
(2.6.15, 18, 22, 24 and 25) i found out that it's impossible to mount fixed
drives
(with any partition type) by clicking on them in konqueror media:/, do you know
about this problem?
Kushal Koolwal wrote:
>> I got your point, you mean we(group of debian) should make a blueprint for
>> some Device like Netbook / UMPC /> MIDs.
> Yes. Exactly!
>
>> what is your blueprint based debian like?
> At this point of time I am not sure what is going to look like. May be it
> will help
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: William Pitcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: sigx
Version : 2.0
Upstream Author : Klaus Triendl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.assembla.com/spaces/sigx
* License : LGPL-2.1 or later
Programming Lang: C++
This one time, at band camp, Joey Hess said:
> The idea that you shoot off a list saying "eh, Debian would like to violate
> the
> FHS now" and get back a "oh, fine we put in a footnote, so you're still FHS
> compliant" does not match anything I've observed re the FHS.
That was sort of the point
Package: libglib-perl
Version: 1:1.190-1
Severity: important
Le jeudi 24 juillet 2008 à 01:31 +0300, Eddy Petrișor a écrit :
> During a regular upgrade of my laptop (follows lenny) I have seen these
> messages:
>
> Se pregătește înlocuirea lui linux-image-2.6.25-2-amd64 2.6.25-6 (folosind
> ...
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Damyan Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package name: libyaml-appconfig-perl
Version : 0.16
Upstream Author : Matthew O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/YAML-AppConfig/
License : Same as Perl (G
]] Gunnar Wolf
| What could be a course of action is that all webservers ship (as I
| described I am doing earlier on) their default sites in
| /usr/share//default-site, and instead of an "It works!" or
| similar page, information on what steps should the user take to turn
| it into something use
]] Andrei Popescu
| IMHO (IANADD) this is too much black-white. What if a DD would be
| interested in Ubuntu bugs, but doesn't have enough time to read the
| docs? As seen in this thread some are not even aware that Launchpad
| can be used via mail.
Then they probably don't have time to process
Hello,
some time ago, I noticed that using the default pbuilder setup I was
not checking signatures on build-dep packages when building my debian
uploads [1] [2] [3]. I thought this was bad, and since then I pay
attention to it.
Now that I have LVM in my laptop and use schroot, I take care of
bu
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 05:52:49PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 01:04:45AM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > right but still no excuse to bring in a patch set that is *known*
> > to not be merged upstream.
>
> with our current options, loosing xen dom0 suppo
22 matches
Mail list logo
