Re: packages.debian.org hasn't been updated for non-free-firmware

On 2/19/23 17:04, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Cyril Brulebois (2023-02-19): I tried to hotpatch it, but failed to so far. Second attempt seems better. Might take an extra dinstall (+ indexing in the following hours) to have all the things in place though. If people still see problems tomorrow, ple

Re: packages.debian.org hasn't been updated for non-free-firmware

Thanks it works now. Le dim. 19 févr. 2023 à 17:04, Cyril Brulebois a écrit : > > Cyril Brulebois (2023-02-19): > > I tried to hotpatch it, but failed to so far. > > Second attempt seems better. Might take an extra dinstall (+ indexing in > the following hours) to have all the things in place th

Re: packages.debian.org hasn't been updated for non-free-firmware

Cyril Brulebois (2023-02-19): > I tried to hotpatch it, but failed to so far. Second attempt seems better. Might take an extra dinstall (+ indexing in the following hours) to have all the things in place though. If people still see problems tomorrow, please follow up with details. Cheers, -- C

Re: packages.debian.org hasn't been updated for non-free-firmware

Alexandre Detiste (2023-02-19): > It looks trivial to provide a blind MR without any testing ... > > But this really needs testing :-/, > someone willing to clone the whole setup. I tried to hotpatch it, but failed to so far. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)

Re: packages.debian.org updated

On 9/4/07, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > exim4 [...] doesn't have any Debtags information). It does, but they are not reflected in the archive: http://debtags.alioth.debian.org/edit.html?pkg=exim4 I've noticed a couple of other packages like this (eg flasm, tesseract-ocr). --

Re: packages.debian.org updated

Hi, On Tue Sep 04, 2007 at 12:54:41 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 07:34:34AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: > > (Please CC me on replies; thanks.) > > > > On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:58:12PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > > > packages.debian.org was finally u

Re: packages.debian.org updated

On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 07:34:34AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: > (Please CC me on replies; thanks.) > > On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:58:12PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > > packages.debian.org was finally updated to the new code base that > > was already available some time from packages

Re: packages.debian.org updated

(Please CC me on replies; thanks.) On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:58:12PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > packages.debian.org was finally updated to the new code base that > was already available some time from packages.debian.net. What are "similar packages"? I'm trying wrap my head around the fa

Re: packages.debian.org updated

On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:55:16PM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote: > On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:58:12PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > - While DDTP translations are used, the translation of all other > >strings is mostly broken currently. Should be fixed someday... > > Why? Is some kind of i18

Re: packages.debian.org updated

Hi, On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:58:12PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > packages.debian.org was finally updated to the new code base that > was already available some time from packages.debian.net. great! Thanks a lot. > Some known regressions: > > - While DDTP translations are used, the tran

Re: packages.debian.org service stop ?

Hi, > > > Hi, > > > > I've dug out some information from IRC logs: > > > > saens was overloaded around 5 Jan 2006, with load average of 140 or > > something, and eventually apache stopped. Since saens is one of > > ftp.debian.org, it had a large impact, and packages.debian.org is > > disabled te

Re: packages.debian.org service stop ?

On Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:59 PM, Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've dug out some information from IRC logs: > > saens was overloaded around 5 Jan 2006, with load average of 140 or > something, and eventually apache stopped. Since saens is one of > ftp.debian.org, it h

Re: packages.debian.org version discrepency

On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 09:06:03AM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote: > The unstable link at http://packages.debian.org/freeguide shows > version 0.8, but http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/freeguide > shows version 0.7.2. Why is this? Should be fixed now. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PR

Re: packages.debian.org version discrepency

On Wednesday, October 13, 2004 5:06 PM, Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The unstable link at http://packages.debian.org/freeguide shows > version 0.8, but http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/freeguide > shows version 0.7.2. Why is this? gluck ({people,packages}.d.o}) became severe

Re: packages.debian.org version discrepency

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:06:03 -0700, Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The unstable link at http://packages.debian.org/freeguide shows > version 0.8, but http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/freeguide > shows version 0.7.2. Why is this? I see the same with the moodle package[0], it sho

Re: packages.debian.org is useless

Hi, On Thu, 27.11.2003 at 12:53:57 -0800, Carl B. Constantine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It seems p.d.o is one of the compromised machines? is there an ETA for this already? TIA! Best, --Toni++

Re: packages.debian.org

On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, James A. Treacy wrote: > On Wed, 20 Jan, 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Given that from your description swish++ sounds like a general purpose > > indexer, which has been set up to index 'natural language' is it the best > > one > > for our purposes? > > > Once I removed

Re: packages.debian.org

On Wed, 20 Jan, 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Given that from your description swish++ sounds like a general purpose > indexer, which has been set up to index 'natural language' is it the best one > for our purposes? > Once I removed a few conditions for removing words from indexing that weren'

Re: packages.debian.org

On Wed, 20 Jan, 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Given that from your description swish++ sounds like a general purpose > indexer, which has been set up to index 'natural language' is it the best one > for our purposes? The main thing is it is free software, most search engines are not. > > If t

Re: packages.debian.org

On 20-Jan-99 James A. Treacy wrote: > If it was up to me there wouldn't be any two letter package names. > I'll add two letter words when I recompile. [..snip..] > It appears that 'make' is in the list of ignored words. I'll recompile a > new version. There isn't much I can do about the quality

Re: packages.debian.org

On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 02:45:16PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > > Yes, gdb works now. I followed the murphy's law, and tried > packages.debian.org/ae. You know the story... :) > Once again, it doesn't find 'ae' (or bc), but finds aegis{-doc}. > It seems to be only the search error because ae's page

Re: packages.debian.org

On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 09:36:18PM -0500, James A. Treacy wrote: > Try again. The system installed version of the indexing program was being > used instead of my custom job. This has been fixed so it should work correctly > now. Yes, gdb works now. I followed the murphy's law, and tried packages.d

Re: packages.debian.org

Try again. The system installed version of the indexing program was being used instead of my custom job. This has been fixed so it should work correctly now. Jay Treacy

Re: packages.debian.org

On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 10:53:43PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:40:01PM +0100, Vincent Renardias wrote: > > > One more feature (or a bugfix since it pointed to 404 before :) has > > > been added: you can call http://packages.debian.org/some_package and > > > it will redire

Re: packages.debian.org

On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 11:40:01PM +0100, Vincent Renardias wrote: > > One more feature (or a bugfix since it pointed to 404 before :) has > > been added: you can call http://packages.debian.org/some_package and > > it will redirect you to the search results on some_package. Jason > > Gunthorpe ena

Re: packages.debian.org

On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 12:58:23PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > >Server news this week: > > * The [22]bug tracking system has a new easy way to get to a given > >bug report. http://bugs.debian.org/foo will pull up the bug report > >f

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

On Fri, 30 May 1997, Philip Hands wrote: > What were you trying to achieve ? --- it might be simpler than you think. > > I just discovered that most of my alias handling under qmail was drivel, and > could be dome much more simply. > > > If someone wants to spend some time on a simple mailer ha

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

> (1) user-map [if all package maintainers are local] If you just want to be delivering mail to @packages.debian.org (rather than -@packages.debian.org), you can deliver to remote addresses with: In users/assign, create one line per package: =:alias:70:65534:/var/qmail/alias:+:fwd-: so in th

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

On May 29, Bruce Perens wrote > I must admit to not understanding what that qmail alias file is for. > I do _all_ of my aliases with .qmail-* files . > > What I was trying to achieve was to have qmail forward a message without > messing around with the headers any more than necessary. Thus, I want

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] > That seems simple enough. > > I think your best bet is this: > > 1) make sure control/locals does not contain packages.debian.org But make sure it's in control/rcpthosts, of course. > add this line to control/virtualdomains: > packages.debia

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

> What I was trying to achieve was to have qmail forward a message without > messing around with the headers any more than necessary. Thus, I wanted > to have a .qmail-packages-default file to handle the packages.debian.org > domain, and that would look up the package name and map it to the maintai

Re: packages.debian.org & qmail (was Re: Using CVS for package development)

I must admit to not understanding what that qmail alias file is for. I do _all_ of my aliases with .qmail-* files . What I was trying to achieve was to have qmail forward a message without messing around with the headers any more than necessary. Thus, I wanted to have a .qmail-packages-default fil