Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On 20050708T181259-0400, Johan Kullstam wrote:
>>What signal is meant by 3.1 versus 4.0? Does your intended audience
>>have any concept of the distinction?
>
> The usual distinction, when it is made, is that bumping the major number
> indicates a disruptive upgrade
I approve
Drew Parsons wrote:
> I remember some of us belatedly suggested sarge should be Debian 4.0,
> though it was too late (May?) to accept that.
(it was me)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the same for me: I develop and mantain some gtk packages
there is no such thing as an "easy transition from gtk1 to gtk2"
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>
>> And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
>> still requires GTK1. It would b
Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
>
>
>>Their fault for releasing a book about unreleased software which is
>>bound to be outdated the day that sarge will actually release.
>
>
> Uh-uh and when will that day be? And don't give me any of that "when it
> is ready"
hi I see that some people are opposing using "4.0", so I give up.
I just write this e-mail to better understand why
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 01:17:45AM +0200, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
>
>>So I would much prefer if sarge would be called "
Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrea Mennucc wrote:
>
>>now that sarge is frozen, I would like to start a discussion
>>on the number to associate to Sarge release.
>
> Now that sarge is frozen we have /etc/debian_version, the installation
> manual, the release notes, and the
hi everybody
now that sarge is frozen, I would like to start a discussion
on the number to associate to Sarge release.
According to
http://www.nl.debian.org/releases/sarge/index.en.html
Sarge may be released as "Debian 3.1"
In 2003, Scott James Remnant proposed in
http://lists.debian.org/debian
hi
I happen to mantain 'snmpkit' ; you may give it a look
a.
Christian Hammers wrote:
> Hello
>
> [regarding #306840 and with more info in #243870]
>
> One of my packages, Quagga, is licenced under the GPL but is supposed to
> get linked against NetSNMP. That now is problematic, as NetSNMP de
Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:31:15PM +0200, A Mennucc wrote:
when a buildd builds a package, it first install all
build-dependencies, then compiles, then remove all build-dependencies.
For my package, that was a total of 113 MB of data to be moved in and
out of disks; since
hi
I have noticed a messy situation in BTS,
regarding my source package libppd (*)
my source package has this web page in BTS
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=libppd
where you see there are 4 bugs listed (resolved)
but then there is this web page
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgre
hi
I have uploaded mplayer 1.0pre6a-3
It ships a correctly repackaged upstream source;
it has a 'debian/rules get-orig-source' (as asked in debian-devel)
that creates the .orig.tar.gz
It should appear in http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html
and in I will put a copy in
http://tonelli.sns
we goofed
update-menus already has a mechanism to avoid running too many times
from the authors:
>It does not work this way. When update-menus run, it check whether the
>dpkg
>lock is taken. In this case it check if the menu lock is taken. If yes,
>it just quit. if not, it take the menu lock and w
hello
there has been a lot of interest lately on tecniques to obtain a faster
boot; for example
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-boot.html
http://www.fefe.de/minit/
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0204.0/0674.html
http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rgooch/linux/boo
Robert Millan wrote:
Hello!
What is the current status of mplayer's ITP? After the opendivx driver
removal, has anyone investigated wether it's fully free software?
I am tring to prepare a package .
There are too many threads , in debian-legal and debian-devel,
to list them all here.
a.
well, I changed my mind
a packaging of mplayer 0.90 is available at
deb http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/ ./
we asked for someone on debian-legal to scrutinize it and say if the
work we did is enough to let this package in Debian
it has also been uploaded to the queue (in case an ftp-installer
:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 11:18:14PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 08:09:47PM +0200, Andrea Mennucc wrote:
> > > Package: pgi
> > > Version: 0.9.6
> > > Severity: critical
> > > Justificat
the web
ii xbase-clients 4.1.0-14 miscellaneous X clients
ii xfonts-100dpi 4.1.0-14 100 dpi fonts for X
ii xfonts-base 4.1.0-14 standard fonts for X
ii xserver-xfree86 4.1.0-14 the XFree86 X server
ii xterm 4.1
17 matches
Mail list logo
