I wonder whether the POV in this discussion is right. I have the impression
that the discussion is about the removal of "old" packages.
Squeeze had 91 standard packages, now there are 108. The latest one:
doc-debian. When libsqlcipher0 (1) hit standard I also had doubts that its
functionality jus
The problem (insane pulseaudio defaults disabling audio output) has not been
debugged yet because there is an easy workaround: deinstall pulseaudio.
There
seems to be little interest in investigating the issue.
Why not document the status quo somewhere (known issues in the release notes
or the
>> I like that program very
>> much. For which reasons, in addition to the 7 RC bugs, a dead
>> upstream?
> That's 7 entirely sufficient reasons and one problem that arguably makes
> fixing the other seven harder. So 7.5 reasons to remove it from testing.
I just want to say that I like the approa
udev sucks! Debian should hire a developer to replace all uses of CDBS
with dh! Perl should be replaced with Python in essential! All packages
need to switch to 3.0 (quilt)! Native packages should be banned! No one
should ever be allowed to NMU anything ever if the maintainer says no!
Did
> Package: general
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks the whole system
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> When using Google Chrome (I cannot assure you that it only occurs with
Hi Felipe,
as far as I googled, Chrome is not packaged by Debian, but Chromium is.
So better complain at Google.
And provi
> Hi. I've just bought a new notebook. It has an external graphic card: AMD
> Radeon HD 7670M 2GB. I installed Ubuntu 12.10. I've been trying to
install
> the driver for more than 2 hours. However, I couldn't do it yet. When
I try
> to install the drivers that Ubuntu indicates, I reboot my PC,
[0] http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseProposals
Nice page, will study it in more detail in due time. I did not see my
proposal there, is it possible to add new information to that page?
It's a wiki. Just create an account an log in.
Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@l
Hi Tzafrir,
the name is a bad idea, as it is already in use:
http://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages
Cheers,
Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debia
Christian PERRIER wrote:
Quoting Davide Prina (davide.pr...@gmail.com):
the DDTSS is totally broken :-(
When this change happened, I somehow secretly expected someone to step
up and try fixing the DDT* things. ... So, as many, I discovered the problem
when it happened. not immediately as
Ondřej Surý (05/02/2012):
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/02/msg6.html
Please don't top-post.
Also, can you link to the reply of the release team?
Mraw,
KiBi.
There is no response in (1) yet. And there is bug report (2) - also
without response until now.
Cheers,
Marti
The changes have ill side-effects:
- DDTP/DDTSS is partially broken (1). The Database has $(nr_of_packages)
new entrys since 01-22 containing just the short description.
- These (untranslated) one-liners is what one gets visiting (2), e.g. (3).
- There are no new Translation-xx files (4).
-
Hi,
some time ago I read a post of the DPL regarding enhancing package
description
quality. Bug reports from translators should be a means for achieving
this goal.
(quoting from the developer's reference, section 8.4:)
Best current practice concerning l10n
...
As a tra
Dear John, dear Sara,
thank you for contributing the manual pages.
Having translated several manpages last year I am used to some licence
statement
at the very beginning of the manual, e.g.:
.\" Copyright (c) 1995 Michael Chastain (m...@shell.portal.com), 15 April
1995.
.\"
.\" This is free
Hi,
I would like to contribute more than just being a passive reader of the
email lists and submitting bugs.
there is also always to little manpower in the translations teams.
Cheers,
Martin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
Package: general
Severity: normal
Dear maintainers,
yesterday I found that some libreoffice package descriptions are not
accessible at
http://packages.debian.org/. The last item of the libreoffice search
result is
libreoffice-l10n-ne which is in Sid since sid 2011-02-08. The behavior
is the s
15 matches
Mail list logo
