On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 15:57 +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> response 3: _is_ it the job of debian developers to dictate the minimum
> acceptable security level?
It is absolutely Debian's job to provide a baseline level of security by
default. Debian doesn't let you install a syste
On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 10:28 +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 11:06:06PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 13:15 +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> >
> > > default: no.
> >
> > Why not on b
On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 13:15 +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> default: no.
Why not on by default, with a targeted policy, for everyone? SELinux's
flexibility allows one to easily turn it off for specific services.
There's a lot of value in preventing a compromised or misconfigured
sy
On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 18:31, Herbert Xu wrote:
> ?
>
> (that's UTF-8) as the reference.
But your message didn't include a Content-Type header specifying that,
so it's likely to come through as garbage for most MUAs...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 01:01, Marc Wilson wrote:
> Not at all. You want to enforce on $RANDOM_UPSTREAM the idea that they
> have to support .desktop files. That is *not* going to work. Debian does
> not have that sort of power.
>
> On the other hand, the idea that an application desiring to par
On Sat, 2003-12-06 at 16:41, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:02:16PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > I remember about a message from a guy from RedHat saying more or less
> > that he see no point in supporting an environment/wm that do not
> > follow the new standards decided at freed
On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 21:04, Graham Wilson wrote:
> If you don't have much time for xml-resume-library, I am sure that you
> can give it to the Debian XML/SGML Project. Or you could even
> co-maintain it with us. Whatever works for you.
That sounds cool. I'm all about co-maintenance. So we'll m
On Wed, 2003-12-03 at 17:47, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 05:26:59PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > I'll take xml-resume-library back
>
> ok, i will stop to work on it
If you have any patches I'd be happy to take them...
signature.asc
Descrip
On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 20:49, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-10 19:02]:
> > Therefore, I'm putting most (but not quite all) of my packages up
> > for adoption. Specifically:
> >
> > build-essential crack-attack
On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 09:53, Bob Hilliard wrote:
> There is a widespread tendency to consider "newbie" to mean a
> refugee from MS or some other eye-candy system. A true newbie would
> be one who has never used a computer before. To such a person, a CLI
> is much more intuitive than any GUI
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 17:58, Brian May wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:58:33AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:43:17AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > >How about selinux support?
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=193328
>
> SE-Linux support woul
On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 01:42, Denis Barbier wrote:
> Forget all about it; if you are unable to answer to this simple question,
> I prefer seeing Colin's suggestion implemented. I do not know whether it
> solves all autotools issue, but it is sufficient for my needs.
This reminds me...I managed to
On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 03:13, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I use this package, and am interested in adopting it, except
> that I note that Colin Walters states that:
>
> > I am orphaning the calc package; it is now included in the GNU Emacs
> >
> > CVS
On Sat, 2003-07-05 at 17:22, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:35:09PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > So, I assume that with that you mean that we have "sacrificed one of our
> > core values" as well? My. All this sacrifice is making me hungry. :P
>
> Damn. That means some OTHER
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 06:05, Colin Watson wrote:
> I disagree. Unlike 286, we've got the kernel, the libc, and *almost*
> everything else. The only thing missing is part of the C++ ABI, which as
> described can be handled by a small kernel patch (at least this has been
> claimed and nobody has imm
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 03:52, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I believe it would be a mistake to kill off support for the 80386 chip.
Well, we're limited by what we can sanely support. After all, we don't
support running Debian on a 286. The 386 is really in the same class
nowadays, in my opinion anyw
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 18:34, Marek Habersack wrote:
> 5. Influence the XFS/kernel maintainers to change the default value of
> restrict_chown to enabled.
I think they really should do this. Having people be able to give away
files is something that you usually *don't* want by default.
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:38, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> > fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 18:08, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Isaac Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > How would Debian prefer to see this? Some people tell me that it'll
> > probably be too slow to build the packages on the end-user's system
> > (as is done for elisp),
>
> That's also done with Commo
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 00:48, Adam Majer wrote:
> I once read somewhere that you should _never_ compile in 486
> optimizations for use in processors other than the 486. Apparently
> since 486 optimized code is padded a lot with NOPs.
>
> Apparently you are much better off on a Pentium or Athlon w
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 13:15, Sebastian Kapfer wrote:
> I'd drop the sub-pentiums (i.e. 386 and 486) entirely. Not that my vote
> would count...
Making the cut at the Pentium as opposed to i486 would have some
benefits; the Pentium introduced some new instructions such as cmpxchg8b
that are actual
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 19:33, Joey Hess wrote:
> Today I noticed those summaries were getting spamassassing scores in the
> 30 range. I ended up whitelisting myself, though that doesn't feel like
> a good idea -- now SA might mislearn spam subjects as ham, and any
> spammer who forges mail from me
On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 06:24, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 11:08:00PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > I have read it, and I have still difficulty to understand its
> > > full implication.
> >
> > The implication is basically that we
On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 06:23, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > > Does this mean there simply is no such documentation?
> >
> > I think it's pretty clear how it should be done. Once we adopt the
> > system, we can point system administrators to the relevant file in our
> > documentation, and give pointe
On Sun, 2003-06-01 at 15:58, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I have already answered about i18n.
If you're referring to extracting the i18n information from .desktop
files; ok, that's a first step. But then we have an ugly situation
where if someone wants to fix a Debian menu entry, they have to know
t
On Sun, 2003-06-01 at 14:02, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030601 19:05]:
> > > Then please point to a documentation, how to overwrite the menus
> > > installed with the packages as admin or other things like this.
> >
> > Ba
On Sun, 2003-06-01 at 10:10, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030530 19:45]:
> > What do you mean "consistent concept overall"? Using the freedesktop
> > standards makes things more consistent, not less.
>
> Then please point to
On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 17:52, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200305/msg02071.html
>
> Could you be so kind as to summarize thoses concerns ?
The message above is fairly concise, I think. But I can basically sum
it up as:
I don't see the advanta
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 16:46, Josip Rodin wrote:
> The (simple) responsibility of developers to contact other developers
> whose packages they want to touch far outweighs the (harder) responsibility
> of developers to track general discussion and/or news forums. This is
> a de facto axiom of how De
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 04:59, Matthias Klose wrote:
> As the g++ package, which makes 3.3 the default, entered testing
> today, I files a report to build-essential to do this change, maybe
> this needs to be reflected in policy as well.
Does anyone have any objections to this change?
(I doubt it,
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 15:00, Chris Cheney wrote:
> What actual cases is this field used in? I don't think I recall seeing it
> used before. Shouldn't the menu entry exist in the package it must have
> installed (I suppose I could be missing something).
The only use case I can think of is if you h
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 03:59, Morten Brix Pedersen wrote:
> I'm working on implementing the desktop menu specification for the menu
> package
> (the C++ version, not the "new" debmenu). I hope to have the first version
> available within the next month.
Awesome!
> 1) The sections that are normal
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 05:43, Josip Rodin wrote:
> I saw all that, but none of that constitutes contacting the menu maintainer!
If our menu maintainer hasn't watched debian-devel (or more prominently,
read DWN) for the last 10 months, then something is seriously wrong.
http://www.debian.org/News/
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 05:19, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030529 22:40]:
> > Yes, it is our task to make it *consistent*. It shouldn't be our task
> > to write menu entries from scratch, when upstreams can (and are) taking
> > on t
On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 01:41, Niklas Vainio wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion, I will use your description. But I think we
> shouldn't say "like Tetris". This game belongs to same genre with Tetris but
> the idea is different. The author says "in the tradition of Tetris".
> Suggestions?
That soun
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 17:07, Niklas T. Vainio wrote:
> Description : Jools is a graphical pattern matching game that follows
The description synopsis should be a full sentence. Also there is no
need to repeat the package name, since package user agents will display
it alongside the synopsi
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 16:22, Josip Rodin wrote:
> It's very nice to see that the rest of the world has been kind enough
> not to tell anything about deploying this to our menu system maintainer. :P
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200207/msg00815.html
(and the long thread it
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 14:12, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I am not too sure I want this... One of the great things about our menu
> system is that it complies with a rather logical policy - menus are not
> overly nested.
That's an independent issue from switching to the .desktop format. The
.desktop men
On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 06:42, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 07:20:11PM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote:
> > Is the Debian menu system going to convert to using the freedesktop
> > menu spec?
> >
> > http://www.freedesktop.org/standards/menu/draft/menu-spec/menu-spec.html
> >
> > As far
On Sun, 2003-05-25 at 02:14, Debian Font Manager wrote:
> retitle 180188 ITA: Defoma -- Debian Font Manager
I see defoma has become so complex it now is capable of maintaining
itself :)
On Sat, 2003-05-24 at 11:52, Joe Drew wrote:
> On Saturday, May 24, 2003, at 03:28 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
> > Pyblosxom is so-named because it was inspired by the blosxom package.
>
> Does pyblosxom offer any features which blosxom proper doesn't?
Plugins, sane
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-05-24
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: pyblosxom
Version : 0.7beta1-1
Upstream Author : Wari Wahab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://roughingit.subtlehints.net/pyblosxom/
* License : Python
Description :
On Sun, 2003-05-18 at 22:07, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> [I've already asked a few relevant individuals about this, but am
> opening it up to the list at their suggestion.]
>
> I've recently been in touch with somebody (a lawyer and professor
> concerned with government open source policy) who is inter
On Wed, 2003-05-14 at 09:14, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> I've solved the problem for myself by just simply biting the bullet
> and using unstable. I either have gotten lucky, or maintainers of
> core packages have gotten much more careful about testing their
> packages before uploading, so I haven't g
On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 14:32, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:24:19 -0400, David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> To be precise, you said "Maybe novices should only be shown
> gui programs after all". Not that novices should be allowed to decide
> to only view gui progra
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 15:38, Enrico Zini wrote:
> That may probably be all the necessary adoption we need for having tags
> in debian, however there will probably be issues: what about CD
> installations where no network is available? How do they access the
> tags database?
The tags database s
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 17:47, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 12:30:54PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > 2) Do you forsee tags being maintained outside of the packages in the
> > future? For developing the tag system this makes sense, but it seems to
>
Hi David,
On an unrelated tangent, let me say: darcs is cool :)
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 13:51, David Roundy wrote:
> I would hope that rather than such generic terms, one could specify more
> specific tags for highly specialized packages and have these tags imply a
> certain degree of specializati
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 07:55, Enrico Zini wrote:
> Hello.
>
> The size of Debian increases, and the Sections: system has proven unable to
> scale to keep pace with it. There has been much consensus around a multiple
> tags per package solution, and now, yes, it has become a reality.
Wow, this loo
On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 21:37, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le sam 26/04/2003 Ã 02:59, Matthew Palmer a Ãcrit :
> > For the original problem, it surely should be possible to build 386 and 486+
> > versions of libstdc++ and include both in the distro, with linker magic (or
> > installer magic) to tell th
On Sun, 2003-04-20 at 15:57, Matt Ryan wrote:
> > No offense, but I think you joined the wrong project, then.
>
> No offence taken. I joined when Debian wasn't run by anal retentives. Sure
> there was the whole free software part - but not the SS Nazi [...]
Congratulations, you just proved (yet a
On Sun, 2003-04-20 at 12:16, Javier FernÃndez-Sanguino PeÃa wrote:
> Which, IMHO should be required by now. IMHO it's bad enough that dpkg does
> not handle this itself (#155799 and, better, #187019).
And even better than both of those, #155676.
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 15:17, Matt Ryan wrote:
> > Or maybe realize that Joey might perhaps know what he's talking about
> > with regard to debconf ... you could go find the text of his talk at the
> > last Debian Conference if you like.
>
> I realise he has an opinion on how things should be done.
Package: binutils
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 19:14, Joey Hess wrote:
> Enough already.
>
> Folks, if you don't stop abusing debconf with useless notes that belong
> in README.Debian and config file overwriting, I will stop maintaining
> it.
Amen. For example, we really need to kill that "kernel lin
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 13:54, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> On 18 Apr 2003 11:55:09 -0400,
> >> Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > So, opinions? Yeah, it's kind of gross. But the way things are
> > now is far worse.
>
>
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 15:16, David B Harris wrote:
> On Fri Apr 18, 11:15am -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > Perhaps I've been overly strong with the rhetoric. Let me give two
> > realistic scenarios where this "manage foo with debconf?" fails.
>
> I like y
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 15:04, John Hasler wrote:
> Colin Walters writes:
> > One might be to create a third class of configuration files; let's call
> > them "managed configuration files".
>
> Is the choice to be up to the maintainer? If so, I'm afrai
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 10:28, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > I propose a different solution to this problem, which conforms much more
> > with policy, while still allowing debconf to be used as much as
> > possible.
>
> But that's not the solution.
Yep, I agree completely. So let's talk about soluti
On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 21:56, Colin Walters wrote:
> Debian has a long, hard-earned reputation for doing things "right". We
> shouldn't toss that out the window in a mass of "manage /etc/foo.conf?"
> with debconf prompts.
Perhaps I've been overly str
On Fri, 2003-04-18 at 00:08, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> Of course I can understand that it is possible to destroy
> local changes as I wrote in a former email.
Ok, well, policy is quite clear this isn't allowed.
But let me say first that this is not to belittle your work on tetex;
I'm very glad you
[ forgot to CC my last message here to -devel ]
On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 21:28, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> From: Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Bug#189370: acknowledged by developer (irrelevant)
> Date: 17 Apr 2003 20:32:41 -0400
>
> > reopen 189370
> > tha
On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 06:47, Mike Hommey wrote:
> OTOH, xml config files (like fontconfig's config) could be losslessly parsed
> through xslt processing...
I know, but I haven't done this because expat (AFAICS) doesn't provide a
command-line tool to do XSLT, and Depend:ing on xsltproc (which use
On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 20:21, Chris Hanson wrote:
>
> I'd rather fix this properly; what you suggest is a workaround. What
> I consider a proper fix is to redefine the configuration files so that
> they can be parsed. I have learned, the hard way, that using shell
> scripts for configuration fil
Package: laptop-net
Severity: serious
I just installed "laptop-net", becuase it looked similar to something
I'd like to work on.
The first thing it asked me was whether I wanted to "manage" its
configuration file with Debconf, and it defaulted to "yes"!
This behavior needs to stop, now. It is
On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 11:10, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> So instead of using a system that works and can do what we need
> (with the exception of generating KDE-menus, though I do not see
> the fault in our system here),
The current menu system doesn't support i18n for one thing.
Anyways, there
On Sun, 2003-04-13 at 08:52, Mark Howard wrote:
> Hi,
> When the debian-desktop project was started, there was a lot of talk
> about creating kernel images patched for improved performance. Most
> people agreed that this would be a good idea. Unfortunately no such
> packages seem to have been cre
On Sat, 2003-04-12 at 02:02, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Drew Scott Daniels [Thu, Apr 10 2003, 02:11:36PM]:
> > I don't quite understand all the concepts being discussed but the
> > following web pages may be worth reading.
> > http://master.debian.org/~brinkmd/arch-handling.txt
>
> The i
On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 12:16, Enrico Zini wrote:
> I would like to propose that we switch to the freedesktop.org .menu
> format for desktop entries, and we keep providing menu informations for
> applications that do not provide one on their own.
Wasn't Chris Lawrence working on this? Or maybe he
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 01:42, Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> Sure, but geramik is the source package name. There will be a
> gtk-engines-geramik, gtk2-engines-geramik and geramik-data.
Ok, good. Hm, I wonder if we should extend the format of the ITP to
have something like:
Source: geramik
Binaries:
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 16:08, Stefan Schimanski wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: unavailable; reported 2002-12-09
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: geramik
> Description : A GTK theme which imitates the KDE 3.1 look
This package should follow the naming scheme for GTK+ 2 theme en
On Sun, 2002-12-08 at 17:26, Brian May wrote:
> When I last looked at mini-dinstall it didn't seem to try to cater for
> many of the tasks required for pools, because it doesn't appear to
> support pools.
>
> eg. with pools you need tools to install packages, maintain multiple
> Packages files fo
On Sun, 2002-12-08 at 14:44, Joey Hess wrote:
> Joel Baker wrote:
> > And don't forget debarchiver, which doesn't (yet) support pools, but is in
> > use in a number of places for doing old-style archives, too.
>
> Note that mini-dinstall can generate "old-style" archives too. That's
> what I use f
On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 14:23, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:44:31PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default
> > MTA...
>
> the sollution is not to use other packages, it is fixing the packages.
On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 05:51, Martin Schulze wrote:
> It is a bad practice to repeat the package name as the first word in the
> long description.
Fair enough. Fixed.
> Also the URL does not belong into the description but should be
> placed in the debian/copyright file instead.
>
> To quote
On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 10:51, sean finney wrote:
> also, the ispell package asks you
> which language you use by default.
Ispell is already fixed.
And we could fix the exim issue by switching to Postfix as the default
MTA...
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-12-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: startup-notification
Version : 0.4
Upstream Author : Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.freedesktop.org/software/startup-notification/
* License : LGPL
Desc
On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 14:59, Javier FernÃndez-Sanguino PeÃa wrote:
> Not only "users", software might use them too. We currently don't have
> a good search interface in our package interface UIs (good search != search by
> words). I tried to make (quite a long time ago and it's pretty much
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 20:26, Simon Richter wrote:
> Colin,
>
> > http://people.debian.org/~walters/descriptions.html
>
> Well, I'm not sure there should be a template -- people will use it (and
> thus try to squeeze information into it). I usually tell my sponsees
> that a description should answ
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-12-05
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: fontilus
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : James Henstridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/fontilus/
* License : GPL
Description : graphica
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 14:38, Joey Hess wrote:
> Your emphasis on audiences is very good, but I am leery of the treatment
> of package descriptions as advertisements. A package description that
> reads like an in-your-face advertisement can suck at being a package
> description. You're right in so
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 18:55, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> That might be true, but I would like to see language such as "best
> package for foo" explicitly deprecated in the guide. I've even written
> such stuff myself, back before I realized what the problems were.
> (hopefully there isn't anything
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 18:58, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:55:50PM -0500, Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> was heard to say:
> > I think the package descriptions are a very important product of this
> > project. They're going to be one of the
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 14:01, David B Harris wrote:
> I do have some differences of opinion, though. It's sad, but there are a
> getting to be a fairly large number of DDs who are "attention grabbers".
> Just a few days ago, I saw a package description that said something
> along the lines of "this
Hello,
I think the package descriptions are a very important product of this
project. They're going to be one of the first things people see when
they use Debian, and their quality directly reflects on the quality of
Debian. I've been putting in some random efforts here and there to
comment on n
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 17:37, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 05:21:09PM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 12:47, Andrew Lau wrote:
> > > VeeJay is a video tracking tool for Linux similar in concept to
> > > FastTrack
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 12:47, Andrew Lau wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: unavailable; reported 2002-12-03
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: veejay
> Version : 0.3.2
> Upstream Author : Niels Elburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://veejay.sourceforge.net/
> *
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 06:27, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 01:09:42AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > Or else include a "precompiled" version of the docs into your diff
> > > file.
> >
> > Hm, I don't think I like this.
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 09:00, Christophe Barbà wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: unavailable; reported 2002-12-01
> Severity: normal
>
> I request an adopter for the xmlto package.
Between stuff like this, and our lack of an XML catalog, I'd say that
Debian really needs someone skilled in XML tech
On Sun, 2002-12-01 at 19:09, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Or else include a "precompiled" version of the docs into your diff
> file.
Hm, I don't think I like this. The gif images aren't the preferred form
of modification. Would we accept it if someone had a program written in
a language which only h
[ No need to CC me ]
On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 11:36, Graham Wilson wrote:
> how about: Windows Terminal Services (RDP) client for GNOME?
>
> gnome 1 probably is not going to be in sarge, so the difference between
> gnome 1 and gnome 2 arent going to matter to someone installing sarge.
You're right
On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 17:50, Ari Pollak wrote:
> > IIRC Ari has caused upset with NMUs before; xscreensaver, I believe.
> > (I express no opinion about whether that upload was a good idea or
> > not.)
>
> Didn't you sponsor the upload?
No, that was me...
On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 21:09, Andrew Lau wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-29
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: tsclient
> Version : 0.56
> Upstream Author : Erick Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.gnomepro.com/tsclient/
> * Lice
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 12:37, Mateusz Papiernik wrote:
> > But unlike dpkg-source v2, you can start using CBS right now. Sound
> > interesting? Here's the URL where you can download CBS:
> > http://cvs.verbum.org/debian/rules
>
> Yes, it sounds interesting, but I had a problems with CBS and two
>
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 16:09, Martin Loschwitz wrote:
> * Package name: gtk-xfce-engine
We've standardized on a naming convention for GTK+ 2 engines; this
package should be named gtk2-engines-xfce. See the archives of
-gtk-gnome for more info. Thanks.
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 09:19, martin f krafft wrote:
> where can i find gpg-agent? is it packaged for debian? if not, then
> i'll file an ITP unless someone has valid things to say against that.
Have you looked at quintuple-agent?
[ Could you please not CC me? ]
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 22:05, John Goerzen wrote:
> Are you comparing released version to released version? (Debian stable to
> NetBSD -STABLE?) If so, I stand corrected.
Yes.
> In any case, we surely have come a long way.
Definitely!
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 22:36, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> The module should be:
> /usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/gtk-2.0/bonobo/activationmodule.so
>
> It seems to be in the python2.2-gnome2 package, at least on my system.
Hm, I seem to be suffering from the breakage in #169035.
> Maybe, although
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 19:42, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> After about 10 hours of me pulling my hair out due to the complete and
> utter lack of documentation for GNOME2 and its Python bindings, I have
> produced "foomatic-gui".
Nifty. I tried to make-go it, but I got:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ./foomatic-
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 12:20, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:39:41AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> > Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
> > strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
&g
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 22:46, Brian Nelson wrote:
> What I fail to understand is why Debian insists on supporting every
> single arch itself.
Because, somewhat circularly, that's what has emerged as one of Debian's
strong points, and we like it. Certainly it makes the releases slower.
But it's
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
