Hi. I'm dropping all my packages. That is dcd (a console CD
player) and lletters (a children game). Freeciv has already
been adopted by Jules Bean.
[]s,
|alo
+
--
Hack and Roll ( http://www
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:06:57PM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
>
> > But it won't. This approach ignores the fact that "stability" is a property
> > of a release as a whole (the set of packages and their interdependencies,
> > ISOs, boot floppies
On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 11:14:55AM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
>
> Package: dpkg (debian/main).
> Maintainer: Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 58091 package name "Eterm" --> "eterm"
In the meanwhile, this bug should be renamed to something like
"dpkg has problems with non-lowercase pac
[Please don't follow up in debian-devel; I'm not subscribed to
this one and also it's not the right place for this discussion.
I'm only bringing it up there because more people read it, but
people there who want to follow the thread may subscribe to
debian-publicity which is the correct place]
I'm
[#include ]
Shaleh hinted that I might want to look at the Olex license. It
does put some restriction on output - which, differently from
the "buttonware" discussion a while ago, seems legitimate to me
since Olex output is full of code written by the Olex author.
So, this is the actual LICENSE.GEN
[#include ]
While doing my necessary daily check of Slashdot and Freshmeat,
I noticed two programs I will most likely use - one is irssi, a
GTK IRC client that runs in the panel, but I can't package it
now because none of my GTK-1.1 stuff is working (figures I'll
have to give a nasty day to my poo
On Jan 25, Brandon Mitchell decided to present us with:
> The thought I had was to make pgp signatures of the package
> files and save them as Packages.pgp. This will not interfear
> with the current package files, therefore we are still
> backwards compatable. Then apt could check for a pgp file a
On Jan 19, Joel Klecker decided to present us with:
> At 17:15 -0200 1999-01-19, Lalo Martins wrote:
> >Oh boy! Cammon! Now I need to install 25M (tetex-bin~=10 +
> >tetex-base~=15) just to compile texi files into html or info?
>
> Uhh, not "now", makeinfo and texi
[#include ]
Oh boy! Cammon! Now I need to install 25M (tetex-bin~=10 +
tetex-base~=15) just to compile texi files into html or info? No
good. I hate tex and my HD is small. :-)
I really think we should continue to provide separate "texinfo"
and "texi2html" packages at least.
[]s,
On Jun 23, Philip Hands decided to present us with:
>
> 1:2.0.8-0pre1.1
> 1:2.0.8-0pre1.2
> 1:2.0.8-0pre1.2.1 (NMU)
> 1:2.0.8-1
>
> etc.
No, that's very bad, because it implies that the upstream source
is the same and the only difference is in the Debian packaging.
Wrong.
> I think we ne
On Jun 09, Anthony Towns decided to present us with:
>
> I wonder if we'd like to make a press release about this? Initial
> sentiment on the IRC channel is quite positive, but I thought I'd
> ask here as well.
Yes I think so. Not the first case of almost-free software being
made free:
1: Enligh
On Apr 08, Jeff Noxon decided to present us with:
> Anyone have a digitized copy of this? :)
I read at slashdot that the company that recorded the program
(sorry for forgetting the name, I'm not in US) will put it
online tomorrow, likely as RA.
[]s,
On Apr 07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] decided to present us with:
> hello i was wondering if anyone knew how to cross compile from
> linux for dos/win95. i wrote a lot of c code using the curses.h
> library and it does not port to borland or turbo c. is there
> some way i can tell gcc to compile it for
On Apr 07, Falk Hueffner decided to present us with:
> On Sun, 5 Apr 1998 22:43:28 +0100, Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Well, it's not broken, but we have no way to use pristine sources with
> >multiple-tar packages, so it may be improved (and it should).
>
> And there are *st
14 matches
Mail list logo
