Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 09:17:56AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Anything which we propose to distribute as part of Debian must
> > follow the DFSG rules; otherwise, we violate our promises in the
> > Social Contract. There's nothing special
Frank Lin PIAT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 11:29 +, Robert Lemmen wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:07:52PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> > Wrong. You can help Ben Finney testing his packages. That would be much
>> > more useful than useless babbling on mailing l
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 07:29:16PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> | Package: test
>> | Depends: test-modules | test-source
>> |
>> | Package: test-modules
>> | Depends: linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc | linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc64
>> |
>> | Package: test-source
>>
>> Both apt and aptitude woul
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 08:03:15AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 14:51 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit special
>> I don't think they are at all special.
> Bullshit.
--
Gruesse/greetings
Hi, Peter,
Thanks for your very informative response. You've confirmed my
understanding that the main/contrib split is not about software
freedom at all. I've thus come to the conclusion that it was
motivated by the other Debian priority. Please bear with me while I
explore the consequences of
Hi Alexis,
> So maybe putting the -L/-l linker args in LIBADD instead would fix the
> problem.
I tried this out over the weekend, and it worked a treat.
Thanks for that,
Ben.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Ben,
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 09:17:56AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Anything which we propose to distribute as part of Debian must follow
> the DFSG rules; otherwise, we violate our promises in the Social
> Contract. There's nothing special about the *vendor-intended use* of a
> collection of bi
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 11:29 +, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:07:52PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Wrong. You can help Ben Finney testing his packages. That would be much
> > more useful than useless babbling on mailing lists.
>
> if you are talking about these [0], i
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This look complicated. Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit
> special in the world of software due to the fact they don't run on
> the host CPU.
I disagree.
That makes them special, but it doesn't at all affect the rules that
should be applied to
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 08:03:15AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 14:51 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit special
> > in the world of software due to the fact they don't run on the host
> > CPU.
>
> I don't think they are at all special
On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 14:51 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Everyone agrees that firmwares are a bit special
> in the world of software due to the fact they don't run on the host
> CPU.
I don't think they are at all special. What interprets the software - be
it a 'cpu', a 'vm' or a co-processor lik
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:34:47AM +, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> the current situation concerning firmware blobs and dfsg-freeness is a
> bit sad, among other things because there really isn't too much we can
> do about it in the short run. so how about some practical proposal tha
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> So, let's test it with a script I wrote during DC8 (as suggested by Lucas):
Thanks to Raphael's test suite, the (mainly regarding the not fully
parenthesized succession of ( ? : ), but also treating empty Debian
revisions), the comparision now works for all valid versions
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 02:39:47 am John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> Chris Bannister wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 07:48:21PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > > Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > >=2E.. hence, given that Lenny hasn't been release yet, when are we
> > > > gonna make another one? :)
>
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 12:39 AM, John H. Robinson, IV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Bannister wrote:
>> But ... *who* is gonna want the aussie beer? :)
>
> Anybody that has had Victoria Bitter before.
I hope that was sarcasm!
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 10:05:35PM +, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Pierre Habouzit 2008-10-30 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:52:58PM +, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > > Re: Pierre Habouzit 2008-10-30 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Anyways, the information is: I don't intend to ma
Chris Bannister wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 07:48:21PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > >=2E.. hence, given that Lenny hasn't been release yet, when are we gonna
> > > make another one? :)
> >
> > Let's make it a Beer Sprint. The winners receive a package wit
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Package name: treecc
Version: 0.3.10
Upstream Author: Southern Storm Software, Pty Ltd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
URL: http://www.southern-storm.com.au/treecc/
(not accessible, currently :-( )
License: GPL-2+
Description: manage
Hi,
I'm the maintainer of libv4l which passed the new queue yesterday.
Obviously the package build failed on non-Linux architectures [1]. How
do I handle this situation? Should I list all supported architectures in
the control file, or will the Hurd and BSD porter teams add libv4l to
the NOT-F
*Bonjour,
Vous êtes jeunes en âge de travailler, vous jouissez d'une parfaite
santé et voulez travailler en : FRANCE,CANADA ,BELGIQUE, ALLEMAGNE, ou
HOLLANDE au sein d'une association humanitaire ayant pour objectif la prise
en charge des personnes âgées, des enfants
orphelins ou en situations dif
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 09:37:50PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> For a really neat and complete solution you'd IMO still need something
> like I proposed though to make the vbox ABI visible in package names, but
> that can probably be postponed until after Lenny.
Well it is, namely the upstream vers
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 07:29:16PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> | Package: test
>> | Depends: test-modules | test-source
>> |
>> | Package: test-modules
>> | Depends: linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc | linux-image-2.6.26-1-powerpc64
>> |
>> | Package: test-source
>>
>> Both apt and aptitude would
22 matches
Mail list logo
