thought that it took someone. There were some
license problems IIRC, but it seems it's solved now.
As it seems that soneone has yesterday orphaned phpdoc for me (wtf?) I don't
have to do it myself :-) Anyone is welcome to take over maintaining phpdoc
Petr C
x27;d jump of joy
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GNU\Linux on Win32 systems
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:55:32PM +0200 , Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> In the last update of unstable:
kdelibs didn't get installed.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try: cat /dev/urandom | perl
w restart gnumeric in other locale and you cannot load the
file :((
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<_Anarchy_> telsa: rommable debian will be potato chips
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 07:29:31PM +1000 , Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 11:05:49AM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 06:42:33PM +1000 , Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > FWIW, I do all my development under testing. I virtually ignore unstable
>
y need
to stop building postgresql module from the whole package and make it a
separate non-US package.
aj: feel free to remove php3 from testing if it will make things easier. I'd
like to get php4 there ass php3 is not maintained upstream anymore.
Petr Cech
s
(even dangerous) to upload i386 build on woody, when autobuild packages are
unstable.
Also there are problems with library dependencies. Should I let rot a
package in unstable uninstallable, just because I hope it will make it in
month or two into testing? No way!
a security hole).
>
> Whow! Now that is a great explanation. We started testing for a reason. If
yes. and some of us gave up on testing. If I could do anything with it, I
would. But as it's now I can safely ignore it
Petr Cech
--
Debian GN
om
> potato and fixing bugs that *will cause problems* for users who upgrade, then
hmm. provide a clean upgrade path with libdb2 and libdb3. How? Does that
mean, that packages using db3 are off from testing? No. You just cannot
always make upgrades painless - like upstream change in postgresql co
rted out).
>
> So, any ideas how I should solve this? Or do I conclude that imp in
> unstable is broken, and unusable in my given configuration?
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
Peak
ing to remove the ssl code from PostgreSQL.)
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
Peak
nstall some packages (and update some
> existing packages). Downloading goes well, but then: the package system halts
> with the following message:
>
edit /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg and add
no-debsig
or maybe remove debsig-verify
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux ma
; error-msg:
> /lib/libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> /lib/libc.so.6: undefined reference to [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
any optimized libs in /lib/i586(or whatever?)
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
+ netscape4.7 uploaded 125 days ago, out of date by 115 days!
> depends on X3 libs, should remove?
yes, iff it's not needed for !=i386
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:34:01AM -0400 , B.C.J.O wrote:
> php4... Is this a known problem? both potato and sid have packages. Any
yes
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try: cat /dev/urandom | perl
e XF4.0.3 or
obsolete slang ...
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We are debian.org, resistance is futile, you will be apt-get upgraded.
h to automate, does not even need an
> installer.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Joy notes some people think "Unix" is a misspelling of "Unics" which is a
misspelling of "Emacs" :)
or
by liloconfig (sp?).
anyway - use grub :)
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Obviously the only rational solution to your problem is suicide.
that will be disabled once you include the version number
if you have libbind-dev installed, than if there is a newer libbind-dev
that it will depend on the "correct" version of libbind?? and pull it in.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintaine
ude the 2.4 Kernel?
yes. It was already stated here couple of times
Petr Cech
P.S. I hope I will not show on lwn for this :)))
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the UNIX trademark has changed hands so much no one
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:54:37AM -0600 , Steve Langasek wrote:
> While a 2.0 kernel may not /run/ with a given glibc, I'm puzzled as to how
kernel doesn't care what you have under it. and newer glibc's should work OK
even with an older one.
Pe
was no
other compiler.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phear my "Typical bloody smart-arse debian attitude."
ry gcc272
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Debian - 3 million penguins can't be wrong."
and it works. if you want to be really sure, use gcc272
> what's the "right" way to make a kernel in debian? Why the discrepancy?
>
> Jason
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The guy may know awk like the back of a dingo, too.
of the whole thing. But that's about it.
Maybe you can leave some part out, but ..
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Joy notes some people think "Unix" is a misspelling of "Unics" which is a
misspelling of "Emacs" :)
s/mga_drv.o
> is unresolved!
>
> Can someone explain what happened?
enable dri in XF86Config - don't know why that's needed.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<_Anarchy_> telsa: rommable debian will be potato chips
On Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 09:41:29AM +0200 , Michael Meskes wrote:
> After upgrading my machine I found some obsolete packages. Before purging
> them I'd like to know if there are replacements:
> lde
yes. it had RC, and it is still in mess due to some strange gcc header
interactions :(
> manpages-n
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 12:13:45PM +0200 , Josip Rodin wrote:
> grep experimental /etc/apt/sources.list, please?
deb http://samosa.debian.org/debian/project/experimental/ /
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
stream
> > software.
> >
> agreed with the addition that experimental must also be apt'able. Getting
it is.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 08:58:11AM +0200 , Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 11:52:40AM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> > check that you don't mount devfs, and have IDE subsystem compiled in (it
> > changed location).
>
> DEVFS is enabled but not mounted. After
n from the LDAP db (name, email, last seen on ...)
> > - information about the NMU policy that the maintainer has adopted
> > (timeframe before a NMU is allowed, do i need an authorization to do a
> > nmu ?, ...)
This is cool. Could it be added to db.d.o right now?
[snip]
ed location).
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
m source (src/Makefile.in not up to date)
fix in Incoming
> Package: tetex-base (debian/main)
> Maintainer: teTeX maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 42698 tetex-base: The french option of babel is broken
fix should be in preparation
> Package: tetex-bin (debian/main)
> Maintainer: teTeX maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [HELP] Christoph has set up a mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> to discuss work on these packages.
> 36671 tetex-bin: xdvi fails on gzipped files
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
). Thing is, it works on RH6.1
and SuSE 6.3 , both glibc-2.1
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ibz1,
libpam-modules, libwrap0 (>= 7.6-1.1)
[snip]
and sources.list should have
deb http://nonus.debian.org/debian-non-US frozen/non-US main
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Mar 22, 2000 at 12:50:19PM +0100 , Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Richard Braakman wrote:
> > Package: debianutils (debian/main).
> > Maintainer: Guy Maor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 59121 run-parts hangs during /etc/cron.daily runs
>
> This is a nasty one..
Hmm. Why not go with the p
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 10:29:35AM +0100 , Andreas Tille wrote:
> By the way. Shouldn't dpkg at least warn that md5 sums are wrong?
It can't. dpkg doesn't know the md5sum of the .deb.
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer -
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:13:51PM +1000 , Anthony Towns wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> I'm experimenting with a script to work out whether packages are
> installable or not. I figured the world at large might be interested in
> some of the results.
>
> The following packages are not installable (ie,
t;
> perl-5.004: Version: 5.004.04-7
> fileutils (>= 3.16-4): Version: 3.16-5.3
> file (>= 3.23-1): Version: 3.26-1
but these are _run_ dependencies not _build_ dependencie (see flame :) about
creaping featurims)
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
it with perl-5.004
is what i should do.
> Yes, I realize they are different packages. But is it possible that
> for a script to depend on perl-5.005 features? I don't know perl well
Yes it is. But that package must depend on perl-5.005 and not on
perl5(virtual).
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 09:23:03AM -0400 , Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> I run Slink at work and at home, but decided to install potato's
> gcc and g++ on my home box to recompile the potato packages that
and libc6_2.1. Only compiling with new gcc won't have desired effect.
> I maintain (keeping wo
into non-US/main because it will be linked with libssl.
Petr Cech
P.S. I know, that this is on WNPP. I already settled that.
42 matches
Mail list logo
