On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 11:24:06PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 05:51:03PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> >> >> If you still can't take the hint, I'll be more blunt: this isn't th
like you missed the point of that mail, despite
quoting it. What did you think the point was? Alternatively, what do
you think is the correct mailing list for contacting (all of) the
developers about appropriate use of d-d-a?
--
.'
anything wrong other than holding opinions you don't agree with, and
you certainly can't put any evidence behind that 'detrimental to the
project' claim, but *you* are pursuing a personal vendetta. Agai
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 06:20:40PM +0200, Sami Haahtinen wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
> > people who can't understand sarcasm?
>
> I read the part about sarcasm and i partially argee w
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 05:55:14PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > That's simply wrong given the many people who use both and who cares about
> > > both.
> >
> > By this reasoning, Windows is 'part
If you can't understand sarcasm, why didn't you read the part for
people who can't understand sarcasm?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><-
etter cooperation so that WE can fill the
> gap by taking part of their work.
Did you really just say "we should cooperate better so that we can do
Ubuntu's work for them"? The arrogance of such a statement is only
surpass
m part of the "Debian world"?
Intuitively, I would not expect any standard to classify any of the
current derivatives as 'part of the Debian world'. We have very little
interaction with any of them.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 03:11:58PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Well it's nice in theory. The problem is that you have to set the
> > threshold high enough to exempt glibc and dpkg, and when you do that,
> > I have not yet found a metric that
at*, there's ways to derive the metric in an
automated fashion.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ast two ways to accomplish this.
If they fail to contribute in a meaningful way, it just means more
work for them (in trying to maintain a diverging fork). Hence, that's
their problem. It's not really a problem for us.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/L
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 05:31:40PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/12/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:41:16PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 11:09:12PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > >
etric that complains about any other packages
(I've tried two or three times to invent one).
Sure, you could just manually exclude those few big offenders, but if
you're going to do that then what's th
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:41:16PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 11:09:12PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Let's take this one apart and see what it is that pisses people off so
> > much.
>
> I don't intend to participate in this type o
s also wrong.
I don't think it's any real surprise that people dislike this sort of
behaviour.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 03:25:01PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 02:56:35PM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/11/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 09:49:25AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 15:41 +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:43:16PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > > Manners/politeness is social lubricant. It makes society run
> > >
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:07:43AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> On 1/10/06, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> > > I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
&
? Is it an unecessary fork? Or is it
> not contributing back its changes to debian software?
I think it's the pretending that pisses people off.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
first
place.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:22:03AM -0200, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I don't[sic] the same rant over others Debian related companies
Have you ever actually subscribed to any Debian mailing lists?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
the distinction between Canonical and any other
company is pretty much nothing - except for their continual, offensive
PR effort claiming otherwise.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ty in his actions, and probably less actual
insult.
Dishonesty is *not* an equivalent substitute for respect. If you're
being nice to somebody even though you don't like them, that doesn't
make you a better person, it just makes you a l
ta>
> etc...
I shall upload some of Manoj's pornography immediately.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
re complicated than that, they means they're
getting worried that they won't like the
truth. People as things, that's where it
starts."
Mightily Oats: "Oh,
d to all these years.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
er than you) actually cares what method
such users use, so long as it does not affect us.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 11:44:57AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> On Sunday 08 January 2006 10:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 07:49:33PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > > >
SARS thing, and avian flu, and all that?
And I want a pony.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 07:49:33PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 09:02:09AM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> > On Sunday 08 January 2006 07:27, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 03:19:42PM -0500, Frans Jessop wrote:
> > > >
d possibly be right, but you never know
without reading the thing...
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ces
don't scale to the level at which we have to work *all the time*. Just
ask the BTS admins what happens when somebody scans
http://bugs.debian.org/ to collect data.
Oh, and hey - when SuSE are doing better than you at publishing the
tools they use, it's a hint that maybe you suck.
ld one expires should be safe at present. That's a conservative
estimate. To defend against ancillary attacks (like somebody grabbing
a copy of the key from ftp-master) you need to know how probable they
are, and reduce these figures accordingly.
--
.''`. ** Deb
problem at hand is exactly that /dev/hdX won't
> necessarily be stable anymore.
>
> (and, once more, and much worse: network interfaces need a solution to the
> same problem...)
nameif, ifrename - really, this problem has been solved so many times
that it's just not funny a
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:31:19PM -0500, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> >On the other hand, I think there might be some benefit to requiring
> >that the Maintainer field must always denote one single Debian
> >developer, who would be the "
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 10:43:34AM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 08:38 +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On the other hand, I think there might be some benefit to requiring
> > that the Maintainer field must always denote one single Debian
> > develo
g every *change* to a
given component to go through a single individual. Large projects need
a pumpking, because dogpiling creates lousy software. For Debian this
would be cumbersome and unwieldy as a rule, but some high-importance
tasks could benefit from it.
--
redit.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 09:56:27AM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On 12/19/05, Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:27:36PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Steinar H. Gunderson:
> > >
> > >
rts
> of the world.
I wish we could get it that cheap for my day job. What we have to pay
to get useful bandwidth has more zeros in it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`-
gt;
> Since when is a message that is on topic (or at least relevant) to
> Debian development spam?
Everything on -devel is spam these days, didn't you get the memo?
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:49:35PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> Only quoting the first part of the second definition changes the
> meaning significantly -- but that is what is necessary to make it
> apply at all.
Complete bullshit. Get a life.
--
.''`. ** Debian GN
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 06:07:58PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> Andrew Suffield writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:48:53PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
> >> CDDL works similar way, except on per-file basis.
> >
> > This is incomprehensible gibberish.
>
ehensible gibberish.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
in
violation of the license on lots of these things? That is not
deserving of respect.
Coming along and telling us that the license we chose deliberately for
the purpose of prohibiting you from doing this is wrong? That's not
deserving of res
e.
Under certain limited conditions, yes. Generally, no.
There's a few statutes on the books around the place which say "This
applies to [...] unless waived by both parties" and similar stuff.
--
.''`. ** De
e of
democracy); the case would be determined by who paid the
largest bribe to the king. Given his proclivities, that might be
the one with the cutest intern.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ce to know.
>
> Note that the latest upstream development version is star-1.5a67.tar.gz [1]
> and is CDDL licensed with the following slight modifications:
Which constitutes a trademark violation at the very least (it's not
the CDDL any more) and quite probably a copyright one (the CDDL
Author :
^^^
The point here is that these are all names for the same person?
Also, in the time it took you to type this list I could have packaged
it twice, and liberated a small country from an oppressive dictator.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
Which is because the example postrm given in ucf is wrong, so if
you're using ucf, beware. See #326085
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
have written this with equal validity:
long int typedef long int64_t;
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
stop immediately.
My experience with xmms1 has been that development stopped about two
years ago :P
(There hasn't been much but bug fixes since 1.2.8, in 2003)
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ly,
really hard to stop people from running arbitrary code on
windows. Most people can't even do it to people who *don't* have
terminal access.
Not that mindterm isn't still useful.
--
.''`. **
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 01:25:37PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Perhaps the upstream README should be renamed 'README.upstream'?
Given the context, it would probably make more sense to rename it to IGNOREME.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :&#x
x27;t think so, but we never know .-)).
>
> It speaks to /dev/i2c-* when possible and then PCI memory in the case of
> Intel video, as Nicolas described.
Definitely ask then, and include this piece of information in the
question. Only people with the relevent hardware would ever wa
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 06:50:31AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 02:42:23PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 01:47:27AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > The fact that a number of these searches wind up at microsoft.com, though,
e mozilla foundation are bankrolled by google nowadays. It can't be
'improved' without forking.
Remember folks, corporate involvement in free software is a 'good'
thing.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | An
PERS list
No. This is why the debian-jobs list exists.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 09:35:24PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > How about 'not second guessing people without cause'?
>
> Sounds like a good idea. I am not sure how this comment is connected
> to the message you replied to.
It was an a
eople without cause'? I'm not going to
argue that the rejections being made are bad ones. If you are, this is
the wrong place to do it. If you're not, then you don't have a point
here.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
t in who shouldn't, or the DAM's
already limited time would be wasted, slowing the process down more.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
me. As it stands, they don't really say anything useful.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
rovement.
Most such phrases I have seen can be 'improved' merely by deleting
them. They're content-free.
I guess you could provide patches reducing the description to one or
two lines, but it seems kinda like a waste of effort.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andr
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 10:52:52AM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> Hi,
> * Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-07-15 10:50]:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 11:21:52AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > > * Mattia Dongili
> > >
> > > | - setting the CPU
itude
> of people.
How exactly do you know that he didn't? Do you read Joey's mail for him?
[That goes for all you other people saying the same thing]
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
y. If you wanted it set early, you'd have done it on
the kernel command line.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:12:53AM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Program based of concept of hard linking of files being atomic across
> NFS.
No.
Talk to debian-l10n-english@lists.debian.org
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' :
cc 4 and X.org
> would not IMHO.
I think that none of these things warrant a major version bump, and
the Debian major version number should be increased with releases of
fspanel.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
o be working.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
r?
Mail it to root.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
e verisign certificates,
and you've got a helpful dialog box that appears whenever new
certificates are presented to the browser such that the user can just
whack 'ok' without reading it. SSL security on the internet at large
is a myth. Anybody who trusts it is insane; the ri
nuisance to have to update all the tags in the future.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 10:05:11PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield
>
> | On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 02:32:36PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> | > I therefore propose
> | > that we do the following:
> | >
> | > * Don't install any screensav
ortune on a recurring basis. There are few things that could be fatal
to Debian, but introducing a requrement for an income of several grand
per month is one of them.
Besides which, it makes economic sense to have the do
sync up in seconds when it starts up, instead of hours, before
entering normal operation).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
useless and should not be used. It can make
things worse rather than better, especially with the clocks in modern
boxes (which are grossly inaccurate).
Under *no circumstances* should adjtimex be used at the same time as
ntpd. The clock will jitter all over the place because they won&
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 03:10:07PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
> * Andrew Suffield ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 06:08:36PM +0200, Rapha?l Hertzog wrote:
> > > Le vendredi 17 juin 2005 à 14:09 +0100, Andrew Suffield a écrit :
> > > > > You c
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 07:19:21PM +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> On 17/06/2005 Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 04:25:43PM +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> > > On 15/06/2005 Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > > > Unfortunately people that are easily offen
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 06:08:36PM +0200, Rapha?l Hertzog wrote:
> Le vendredi 17 juin 2005 à 14:09 +0100, Andrew Suffield a écrit :
> > > You could also, as a courtesy to other readers, lay before us the
> > > stunningly obvious proof that a free software that elects to
nd not false positives or false
negatives, pretty much speak for themselves (and the people who cite
them) as to their relevance.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><-
simply another way to say that "the group of people who are
offended is a minority".
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
or Copyright".
>
> You could also, as a courtesy to other readers, lay before us the
> stunningly obvious proof that a free software that elects to use
> trademarks automagically transmutates into non-free state.
That would be the part where the trademark holder tells y
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 12:15:25AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 08:07:34AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 04:26:36AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 17:20 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> &
. You
must also check when their meaning changes. I have not yet been able
to find a way to do this on a per-symbol basis, only a per-library
one (I can find examples that break all the 'obvious' approaches).
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : h
power management', and is enabled by default on every
installation of X, last I looked (configure with 'xset dpms'). A
'screensaver' is those things which display silly animations, and has
to be installed extra.
So just don't install any screensavers. Why did you?
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 12:10:15AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 07:49:51AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:17:21PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > What are we setting out to achieve?
> > >
> > > -
x27;s why we
need keys in the first place (and all you people waving smtp-tls
around, go back and think about how useful that's going to be without
signing keys).
(I can't even be bothered to start laughing at the idea of encrypting
signatures. That's just too silly even for rid
oblem: ...
- Here are some proposals for solving it, along with discussion of
their merits thus far determined: ...
A fait accompli looks like this:
- Here is what we're going to do: ...
It's not hard to tell the difference.
There has, to date, been no 'starting poin
l file. Trying to do this *will not work*.
At the point when the changes are made, the source package HAS ALREADY
BEEN BUILT. What happens is that the changes made in the currentx build
get included in the *next* source package you build from the same
tree, so the source and binary are perpe
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 10:33:05AM +0200, Jesus Climent wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:40:48PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >
> > Why on earth would you? It's just more administrative overhead, and
> > yet another package you didn't need.
>
>
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 02:18:28PM +0100, Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:25:22PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:23:33AM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > > To begin with we can all go back and review:
> > > http:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 04:19:19PM +0200, Remi Vanicat wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:37:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:06:55AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:40:48PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:37:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > > Why? What if I prefer to have something from inetd only when neces
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 03:58:52PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Andrew Suffield]
> > It's supported just fine if you take backups at the appropriate
> > moment. I can't think of any useful way in which it could be more
> > supported than that.
>
>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 05:06:45PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:25, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:23:33AM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> > > To begin with we can all go back and review:
> > >
> > >
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:37:29AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 01:03:12AM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a
> > wrote:
> > > - inetd begone! -> xinetd (bett
there's no advantage to consuming an entire runlevel just to say
"/etc/init.d/xdm stop" or "/etc/init.d/networking stop", which is
all that you are proposing.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU
ess.
The page itself is a good example of why things are the way they are,
though.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
to the textual portion.
Or you could shoehorn images into the textual portion, with
uuencode. See X-Face. Note that such systems must traditionally use
the most arcane and absurd image format possible.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
1 - 100 of 383 matches
Mail list logo
