Package: wu-ftpd
Version: 2.4-13
As you can see, wu-ftpd on chiark violates the FTP protocol pretty
badly when the pwd fails. This makes ncftp fall over.
Ian.
-chiark:~> telnet localhost ftp
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 chiark FTP server (Version wu-
I've copied my cron-driven upload scripts to chiark, where they're now
running.
The procedure for uploading via chiark is now as follows:
1. Upload your files to chiark:/pub/debian/private/project/Incoming.
2. Rename them into chiark:/pub/debian/private/project/queue.
My cron will pick them up o
I don't know if this is a good news or bad news.
but I think there is a big misunderstanding about debian-0.93 and debian-1.0
I really forsee the need to do this
debian-0.93
release -> debian-0.93
development/debian-1.0
NOTICE: NO LINK
development/trial-packages (or some such instead of inside p
>
> Matt: you can now stop mirroring Incoming.uk from chiark and delete
> it on ftp.debian.org.
GONE!!!
Enjoy!
--
Matthew S. Bailey
107 Emmons Hall
Central Michigan University
Mt. Pleasant, MI 48858
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
... Any resemblance between the above views and those of my employer,
my ter
Users of libreadline-2.0-4, please upgrade.
Changes since libreadline-2.0-5:
* Use /usr/include/readline instead of /usr/include .
* Automagically use ncurses, following the explanation in H.J. Lu's
'ELF: From The Programmer's Perspective'.
* Install tilde.h .
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root
Hi..
Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever? And also,
are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too? It's a
little confusing having "aout-gcc-2.6.3-4.deb" and "gcc-2.7.0-2.deb" - is the
2.7 ELF?
I think I read a little about this before somewh
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 1995 00:17:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Matthew Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am getting 10 - 15 complaints a day about this debian-1.0 and how
it won't install all the way or that it isn't all ELF as advertised
previously. Well I know I bite my teeth and press delete on al
> Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever?
Probably as long as we support a.out.
> And also,
> are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too?
The elf-* packages were experimental packages, for those maintainers that
wanted too look ahead towards ELF
On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, J.H.M.Dassen wrote:
> Since 1.0 is going to be ELF (meaning that all its binaries will be ELF, and
> that it compiles for ELF by default), with backward compatibility to compile
> and run a.out binaries, new packages are being made, that put their ELF stuff
> in the standard
> This brings up a potentially important question:
>
> 1.2.13 won't compile under ELF by default, and though there have been
> many threats of 1.2.14 it has yet to materialize. Are we going to push
> forward with 1.3.x, or stick with 1.2.13 and patch?
I run 1.3 kernels myself, but they are not
Changes:
* Library in /lib instead of /usr/i486-linuxaout/lib, since a base package
(bash) depends on it. Thanks to David Engel for finding this one.
* Hardwired /usr/i486-linuxaout where necessary
46972d5000aa7785bad36eed1d4505e7 aout-librl-2.0.3-4.deb
971d01c3a3f401d1f927e9bcaaf4a4d7 aout-li
Matthew Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I don't know if this is a good news or bad news.
> but I think there is a big misunderstanding about debian-0.93 and debian-1.0
> I really forsee the need to do this
>
> debian-0.93
> release -> debian-0.93
> development/debian-1.0
> NOTICE: NO LINK
> d
Carlos Carvalho writes:
> From @mongo.pixar.com:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 17 02:10:50 1995
> Old-Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 16:10:51 -0200
> From: Carlos Carvalho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: rxvt doesn't nee
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (J.H.M.Dassen) said:
> As far as I can see, the following packages will have to go through this
> transition: electric-fence, libdb (part of libc4, but not of libc5; I'll take
> a look at this), libg++, libident, libncurses.
add flex (for libfl)
The following problem reports have not yet been marked as `taken up'
by a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OVER 9 MONTHS OLD - ATTENTION IS REQUIRED:
Ref PackageKeywords/Subject Package maintainer
379 mount Repeatable mount(1) problem wi Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
41
On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, Ian Murdock wrote:
>
> Why would the mirror program be removing debian-0.93?
>
No, They have told mirror to exclude it due to space restrictions
I have been telling them NOT to mirror 1.0 if they are under a space crunch.
But rather just get debian-0.93 instead..
--
M
I have taken over the installation system from Ian Murdock, and need
some time to work on that. I'm going to convert it to ELF, go to a
one-floppy install, and eventually rewrite the installation interface
in C++, with multi-language support, using Ncurses forms. I need to do
work on the "base" pac
> > Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever?
> Probably as long as we support a.out.
>
> > And also,
> > are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too?
>
> The elf-* packages were experimental packages, for those maintainers that
> wanted too look a
> This brings up a potentially important question:
>
> 1.2.13 won't compile under ELF by default, and though there have been
> many threats of 1.2.14 it has yet to materialize. Are we going to push
> forward with 1.3.x, or stick with 1.2.13 and patch?
The kernel can still be compiled in a.out
> > As far as I can see, the following packages will have to go through this
> > transition: electric-fence, libdb (part of libc4, but not of libc5; I'll
> > take
> > a look at this), libg++, libident, libncurses.
>
> add flex (for libfl)
This brings up a good question. Do we really want to p
F'up to debian-devel!
> "Dirk" == Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dirk> Will ligb++-2.7.x be debianized or do we have to grab that ourselves?
libg++ is high on my personal priority list, since I'm using it extensively for
my work. But you'll have to wait til my network con
On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, David Engel wrote:
> The kernel can still be compiled in a.out format. The a.out
> development tools aren't completely going away. They just won't be
> the default. If you really want to compile 1.2.13 in ELF format, I
> suggest you politely request Linus to update it one la
> > The kernel can still be compiled in a.out format. The a.out
> > development tools aren't completely going away. They just won't be
> > the default. If you really want to compile 1.2.13 in ELF format, I
> > suggest you politely request Linus to update it one last time.
>
> As I remember, fro
23 matches
Mail list logo
