Mailsync depends on libc-client which can be compiled one way or another
including or excluding ssl, kerberos etc.
It happens that libc-client in woody did not include kerberos but
libc-client in sid does.
Is there a way to specify this in the build dependecies? Right know I have
to decide if I w
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Michael Banck wrote:
> Maybe what we need are people who read package descriptions prior to
> install
Debian picking it's users instead of users picking Debian.
*t
--
---
Tomas Pospisek
SourcePole -
You might want to talk to the debian-installer people. They either might
have some ideas about it or will certainly be interested...
Grep the -devel list for debian-installer and Tollef Fog Heen.
*t
--
---
Tomas Pospisek
So
On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> Remember: You're just the package maintainer. The package does not belong
> to you and it's not "yours" by any means.
Oh, I think you are very mistaken. It is not his in the sense that it's
under GPL. But it's his in the sense that since he is its off
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 09:59:36AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > unfortunately treetool is non-free because there is neigther a
> > license nor any upstream author available.
And what about this:
http://www.hgmp.mrc.ac.uk/Registered/Help/treetool/
(2nd link when you search for treetool on goog
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Sebastien J. Gross wrote:
§
> Package: wnpp
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-04-16
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: switchconf
> Version : 0.0.1
> Upstream Author : Sebastien J. Gross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.sjgross.org/app/swit
Ciao Domenico
On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> i'm in the same situation of tomas, i'm sure that aspell won't compile
> on hppa in time for woody release. it has some kind of problem with
> gcc 3.0 i cannot manage and i'm not receiving any help (see bug #139515).
Maybe you're as
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> If you're testing this on your x86 (or similar) platform, the undefined
> references are to be expected. You can't link 2.95 and 3.0 C++ code,
> and QT is 2.95 C++ code. Try working on one of the architectures in
> question; they should be availabl
My knowledge of gcc-2.95 vs gcc-3.0 intricacies and C++ specialities is
far too small to figure out what's going on here:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=140032
and I estimate that I won't have the time to improve my knowledge
sufficiently either untill woody deadline so
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:06:23PM +0200, David Odin wrote:
> > The way of acting is the same as supermount, but it won't let you do
> > stupid thing such as ejecting a medium in use.
Depending on what "use" means it's not the user that is stupid, bu
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, David Findlay wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:31, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, David Findlay wrote:
> > > Well can the debconf for automount please make it easy to configure it
> > > that way? The default config doesn't do anything like it, and the
> >
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Luis Bustamante wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 12:18:42PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > What's the status of newer imp packages for woody/sid?
>
> Beta packages can be found at:
> http://tabaluga.ipe.uni-stuttgart.de/~nils/download/
Is there any problem you're aware of
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
> > > use/supported.
Possib
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 11:57:00AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > On Mon 08 Apr 2002, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:40:04AM -0700, David D.W. Downey wrote:
> > > > Just wondering why libpam-pgsql was removed from the woody lineup.
>
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Lauri Tischler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.01.15.1240 +0100]:
> > pcmcia-modules for kernels 2.19 and 2.20 dont exist.
> > Whats up duck ?
>
> pcmcia-modules have, AFAIK, been discontinued.
There's been a pcmcia-modules relea
15 matches
Mail list logo
