Thanks to Matt Zimmerman and Joe Drew, apt-listchanges will now display
NEWS.Debian entries for upgraded packages. They're displayed before the
regular changelog entries, and Matt plans to later let it be configured
to only display news, if the user wants (more useful for stable users).
The NEWS.D
Marc Singer wrote:
> There is the related trouble that the only way to disable most
> packages is to uninstall them. Sometimes, it is desirable to
> temporarily disable a service without removing the binaries or
> changing the executability of the init.d script.
Take a look at invoke-rc.d and its
Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would
> be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the
> install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages
> have intelligent defaults. If the package absolutely must be
> conf
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:11:48AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would
> > be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the
> > install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages
> >
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:42:10PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> And, incidentally, the specific issue you address has -- I'm sure you'll
> be quite startled -- discussed at length on debian-legal. Maybe you
> ought to check out those archives?
I'm well aware that some people have flogged
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:54:17PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 14:53, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:34:56PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > | The Debian Social Contract says "Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software".
> > | If there are things "i
Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 15:19, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>
>>Cameron Patrick wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:36:48PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>>Oh, cool. How about changing in DFSG to "Anything that can go in main or
>>contrib."
> Because that's a circular definiti
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:50:07AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:42:10PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > And, incidentally, the specific issue you address has -- I'm sure you'll
> > be quite startled -- discussed at length on debian-legal. Maybe you
> > ou
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:06:14AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Marc Singer wrote:
> > There is the related trouble that the only way to disable most
> > packages is to uninstall them. Sometimes, it is desirable to
> > temporarily disable a service without removing the binaries or
> > changing the ex
Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
> quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
At prsent rates, I expect we will be down to maybe 50 packages calling
this in 1 year's time, at which point some bug reports could be filed
* Goswin Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030704 05:35]:
> I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
> quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
> [...]
> libapache-mod-dav
You must have done something wrong as since 1.0.3-6 dh_undocumented is
not long
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-04
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: lksctp
Version : 2_5_59-0_6_4
Upstream Author : La Monte H. P. Yarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Grimm
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, et al.
* URL : http://lksctp.sourceforge.net/
* License
Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on debian-med:
> Hint to Frank: I'm looking foreward to "Please include ling description"
> mails. :)
> I suggest to add it now because you can be sure that people will ask you for
> this.
Err, here it comes:
Description: Display and analyze structures o
Selon Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:46:11AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
>
> > RFCs aren't software, and so applying the Debian Free /Software/
> > Guidelines to them seems a little odd.
>
> But...but...what if you want to make your own "RFC 2661" by embracing
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:46:11AM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> Of course not. They're software.
>
> RFCs aren't software, and so applying the Debian Free /Software/
> Guidelines to them seems a little odd.
Hmmm...
Depends on your definition, really. They're sure as hell not hardware
or fir
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:01:14AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Thanks to Matt Zimmerman and Joe Drew, apt-listchanges will now display
> NEWS.Debian entries for upgraded packages. They're displayed before the
> regular changelog entries, and Matt plans to later let it be configured
> to only display
* Goswin Brederlow
| I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
| quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
[...]
Such a list is useless unless it includes maintainer addresses (or
just maintainer names) as well.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
On Wednesday 02 July 2003 15:45, Matt Hope wrote:
> This Perl module provides an object oriented interface to access
> Revision Control System (RCS) utilities.
Is this the original rcs specifically, or revision control system utilities in
general? This is not entirely clear to me from this desc
> "Jérôme" == Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jérôme> But we absolutely don't want to do this.
Jérôme> It is just like modifying someone else' speach and
Jérôme> redistributing it without changing the author's name.
Jérôme> It is obvious it should be out of the scop
* Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-07-04 00:03]:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 07:58:37PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> Please check the update_excuses, it would make package foo _not_ a
>> valid candidate, if that happens.
>
> That doesn't happen for circular dependencies (i.e. cycles of pac
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:16:07PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:19:59PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote:
> > You have some free software, and it comes with a manual. You modify
> > the software in a manner which suits you... bu
Thanks a lot, this is great!
On Friday 04 July 2003 10:02, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> Is it reasonable to think about some sort of localizzation support for NEWS
> file? Changes documented there might be worthy of translation.
Not about i18n, really, but please at least specify from
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 05:38:46PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Maybe this is a good time to present this idea I've been kicking around,
> but never really got anywhere with, for as long as I've been working on
> debconf. My idea is to add an abstraction layer for package install-related
> logging in
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:18:33AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> sometimes think Eric Troan really got this part of rpm's design right
> (some 7 or 8 years ago) when he completely forbade any I/O between the
> install scripts and the user at install time.
[...]
> (And perhaps by removing this crutc
Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There seem to be someone believing that standard documents should be
> treated as software. Standards are not software. Standards do not
> improve if everyone is allowed to modify them and publish the modified
> version as an updated version of t
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I fully agree. Banning RFCs from debian is just silly.
And I wonder what's next? fsf-funding(7)? The GPL?
Debian really needs a separate policy for works which are not
software.
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So be it. The Social Contract and the traditions of our project
> compel us to make principled decisions, not politically expedient
> ones.
Not correct. Look at the handling of security issues. The project
has chosen (never formally, though) that
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
> I've recently revamped my debhelper graph page to make it easier to
> track deprecated programs. The ones that don't seem likely to go away at
> all soon are dh_installmanpages and dh_movefiles.
Especially since some of us do like dh_movefiles a LOT :-)
--
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:19:07PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I fully agree. Banning RFCs from debian is just silly.
>
> And I wonder what's next? fsf-funding(7)?
Yup, I'll go file a bug about that now; thanks for pointing it out. We
shouldn't
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003, Marc Singer wrote:
> > Take a look at invoke-rc.d and its policy program.
>
> OK. I can tell that this feature is available, though obscured by the
> lack of a man page for policy-rc.d or even a reference to a package
> that implements it. I *did* find a document through goo
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:39:46PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > So be it. The Social Contract and the traditions of our project
> > compel us to make principled decisions, not politically expedient
> > ones.
>
> Not correct. Look at the handling of security issues. The project
> has chosen
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
> Thanks to Matt Zimmerman and Joe Drew, apt-listchanges will now display
> NEWS.Debian entries for upgraded packages. They're displayed before the
THANK YOU guys! I will add NEWS support to my packages (and backport
apt-listchanges to stable, see people.debi
Content rejected.
Based on an automated review of the content in a message you sent,
the message appears to be unsolicited commercial e-mail or to contain
content that we deem inappropriate for our business environment. The
message has been blocked from delivery. If you feel you received
this mes
Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Debian really needs a separate policy for works which are not
>> software.
>
> We could have a policy for non-software, but it should still exclude
> non-free things. What you are trying to say is "Debian really needs to
> include non-free things".
T
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:39:46PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > So be it. The Social Contract and the traditions of our project
>> > compel us to make principled decisions, not politically expedient
>> > ones.
>>
>> Not correct. Look at the handlin
I'm trying to run debootstrap to see if it plays nice with sysvinit.
And the other way around.
But at the moment, it bails out because it wants to install
libident which still is in the potato part of the archive ...
and my local mirror doesn't carry dists/potato anymore.
There's a handful of pac
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 11:58:49AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> I'm trying to run debootstrap to see if it plays nice with sysvinit.
> And the other way around.
>
> But at the moment, it bails out because it wants to install
> libident which still is in the potato part of the archive ...
On Friday, July 4, 2003, at 04:02 AM, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis
wrote:
Just curious: why not NEWS.gz for native packages?
It's prohibitively difficult to detect whether any given file is in
debian changelog format.
NEWS[.gz] exists in many packages already, and is of no particular
format
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> I'm trying to run debootstrap to see if it plays nice with sysvinit.
> And the other way around.
>
> But at the moment, it bails out because it wants to install
> libident which still is in the potato part of the archive ...
> and my local mirror
Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This one time, at band camp, Christian Marillat said:
[...]
>> Yes, I know, but this user said that x-terminal-emulator is configured
>> to xterm and when he call a bsdgames menu enties a dialog box said that
>> gnome-terminal is missing. Of course file
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-07-04
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: libcddb
Version : 0.9.4
Upstream Author : Kris Verbeeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://libcddb.sourceforge.net/
* License : LGPL
Description : C library to acces
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 02:04:51PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> But how far goes clause 4? Obviously not that far that Debian
> includes Java (for rather complete values of "Java", which seems to
> imply a certain proprietary implementation at the moment).
Which non-free Java implementations a
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 03:55:30PM +0200, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 02:04:51PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > But how far goes clause 4? Obviously not that far that Debian
> > includes Java (for rather complete values of "Java", which seems to
> > imply a certain propriet
On Friday 04 July 2003 05:59, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > Yes, keep the two versions of stunnel is probably the right way to handle
> > this problem. Now the problem is that stunnel is uploaded in version 4 on
> > stunnel package. What is the correct way to reintroduce stunnel for
> > compatibility
Martin Quinson wrote:
> I want to help on this, please keep me informed !
Don't get the wrong idea: I just wanted to get the idea out there. I
think if I was going to implement this I would have already, since I've
had the idea in my head for several years. I hope someone will take it
and run with
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 02:04:51PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> > So be it. The Social Contract and the traditions of our project
> >> > compel us to make principled decisions, not politically expedient
> >> > ones.
> >>
> >> Not correct. Look at the handling of security issues. The projec
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 12:19:16PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Keep stunnel as a stub package depending on either stunnel3 or stunnel4,
> change the description of stunnel3 explaining the situation and urging
> users to upgrade if possible.
Yeah, he could use a debconf note for this for example.
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 09:47:52AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> | I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
> | quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
> Such a list is useless unless it includes maintainer addresses (or
> just maintainer names) as
"Artur R. Czechowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 09:47:52AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> | I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
>> | quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
>> Such a list is useless unless it inclu
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:54:17PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
| How do you show it's not software? How does it differ from software?
|
| What if I take the view that Mozilla is an interpreter and anarchism is
| the program? Please explain how that differs from the Perl interpreter
| and Perl pro
* "Artur R. Czechowski"
| On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 09:47:52AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| > | I came accross some sources still using dh_undocumented so I did a
| > | quick search through sids *.diff.gz files. Here is the result:
| > Such a list is useless unless it includes maintainer address
On Thu 03 Jul Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña]
> > (For those who are not aware of this issue, please read #92810)
>
> There seem to be someone believing that standard documents should be
> treated as software. Standards are not software. Standards do not
> improv
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 09:45:41PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
>
> Why not indeed traft a DFDG spec that includes licenses such as the GFDL
> and IETF's and W3C's licenses, as someone suggested, and add a separate
> 'Documentation' section?
Because that has been already drafted. Not only I su
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 05:59:57PM +0200, Benjamin Drieu wrote:
> This doesn't help if you maintain dozens of packages and you just want
> to know if one of your packages is offending.
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 06:18:06PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> Uhm, it's far easier just to generate the list
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 06:44:57PM +0200, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 09:45:41PM +0200, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> >
> > Why not indeed traft a DFDG spec that includes licenses such as the GFDL
> > and IETF's and W3C's licenses, as someone suggested, and add a
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:43:10PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> You have some free software, and it comes with a manual.
Your counter example does not apply to IETF Standards documentation. It
is not software.
In a more general reaction to posts on the list, to say an RFC is an
editable docum
Andrew Suffield wrote:
>>people to http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/ddp-policy/ch-common.en.html.
> This claims the GNU FDL is acceptable, so it's worse than useless.
It claims that GNU FDL sans cover texts and invariant sections is acceptable.
Cheers
T.
pgpFhyQTZaH4d.pgp
Description: PGP si
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:47:19PM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> To require or demand that the IETF changes their copyright policy or
> their publishing practices to cater to someone else's idea of what the
> document should be used for is plain arogance.
Which is why no one is doing any such thin
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:47:32PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >>people to http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/ddp-policy/ch-common.en.html.
> > This claims the GNU FDL is acceptable, so it's worse than useless.
> It claims that GNU FDL sans cover texts and invariant se
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:47:19PM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:43:10PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > You have some free software, and it comes with a manual.
>
> Your counter example does not apply to IETF Standards documentation. It
> is not software.
Then we ha
I've got a good start on an RFC search engine. Try it out at:
http://www.pdxlinux.org/search.html
... and find the code at:
http://www.hegbloom.net:3006/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/?root=Perl
The modules to look at are Swish.pm, RFC.pm, and the RFC/ directory. It
needs to be completed and turned in
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:47:19PM -0500, Chad Walstrom wrote:
> To require or demand that the IETF changes their copyright policy or
> their publishing practices to cater to someone else's idea of what the
> document should be used for is plain arogance. Respect the wishes of
> the original auth
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:24:20PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> OTOH, maybe dh_undocumented should be removed from debhelper with prior
> notice? "This program does nothing and should no longer be used."
well, this would break compatibility. IMHO i think it is enough to add a
lintian check
On Fri, 2003-07-04 at 11:06, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 11:54:17PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
>
> | How do you show it's not software? How does it differ from software?
> |
> | What if I take the view that Mozilla is an interpreter and anarchism is
> | the program? Please e
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:47:32PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>
>>Andrew Suffield wrote:
>>
people to http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/ddp-policy/ch-common.en.html.
>>>This claims the GNU FDL is acceptable, so it's worse than useless.
>>It claims that GNU FDL san
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:36:13PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Bullshit. It is common for RFCs to be revised over time, and
> formulated into new documents. This license prohibits agencies other
> than the IETF from revising an RFC and publishing the result.
Yes, and the new document is given
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 01:18:02PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Which is why no one is doing any such thing. Instead, we are pointing
> out that the RFCs do not comply with the DFSG, and thus, under the
> Social Contract as written, should not be included in main.
Yes, I read more into the thre
#include
* Bill Allombert [Fri, Jul 04 2003, 08:55:41PM]:
> It is now possible to select the encoding used to write files generated
> by menu in a menu-method. You just need to add outputencoding=""
> in the menu-method file, where is a valid iconv encoding.
>
> For example to force output to b
Title: Out of Office AutoReply: Application
I will be out-of-the-office on Thursday, July 3rd without any access to email or voicemai. If you require immediate assistance, you can try to contact Kim Parker at 763-212-6161. Thank you.
* Bernd Eckenfels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030704 20:50]:
> On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 07:24:20PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> > OTOH, maybe dh_undocumented should be removed from debhelper with prior
> > notice? "This program does nothing and should no longer be used."
> well, this would break co
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Additionally, I would like to seriously propose establishing a
> pre-upload interface to ftpmaster so that a developer could learn that
> he is writing a package pending rejection after upload _before_
> spending time on building that pa
Op vr 04-07-2003, om 02:11 schreef Christoph Berg:
> Re: [devel] logging for package installs [Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thu,
> Jul 03, 2003 at 05:38:46PM -0400, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> > - Display various fairly unimportant warnings, which are often not
> > useful until after the package is
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:27:35PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> It _is_ already the case, also for linda. And you can get results
> quite easy from
> http://lintian.debian.org/reports/Tlink-to-undocumented-manpage.html
This is treated by lintian as a warning. Policy says, that lack of manpage
is c
Op do 03-07-2003, om 23:38 schreef Joey Hess:
> Maybe this is a good time to present this idea I've been kicking around,
> but never really got anywhere with, for as long as I've been working on
> debconf. My idea is to add an abstraction layer for package install-related
> logging in debian.
Why
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Joey Hess wrote:
> #!/bin/sh
> if [ "$1" = configure ] && grep -q evil /etc/myconfig; then
> dpkg-log --priority=critical \
>--warning=$"/etc/myconfig has evil in it! See README.Debian!"
> elsif [ "$phase_of_moon" = full ]; then
> dpkg-log --priority
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 11:57:54PM +0200, Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> I think that next step to be taken is informing concerned developers
> by email (debian-devel isn't obligatory).
This is not needed, it is included in the policy change document. All
developers who upgrade the policy standard w
Hi,
* Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-07-04 22:17:23]:
> #include
> * Bill Allombert [Fri, Jul 04 2003, 08:55:41PM]:
>
> > It is now possible to select the encoding used to write files generated
> > by menu in a menu-method. You just need to add outputencoding=""
> > in the menu-method fi
Oh, and I forgot something...
* Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-07-04 22:17:23]:
> #include
> * Bill Allombert [Fri, Jul 04 2003, 08:55:41PM]:
>
> > It is now possible to select the encoding used to write files generated
> > by menu in a menu-method. You just need to add outputencoding=""
On Thursday 03 July 2003 16:51, Marc Haber wrote:
>
> Additionally, I would like to seriously propose establishing a
> pre-upload interface to ftpmaster so that a developer could learn that
> he is writing a package pending rejection after upload _before_
> spending time on building that package. I
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In my situation ftp.masters once rejected a package because of licensing
> issues (which was ok), but then i reuploaded the package and the rejected it
> because of a missing (unneeded) configure option to exclude ssl. I think the
I don't know the sp
> "Brian" == Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brian> Couldn't you write a new document along the lines of "This is
Brian> based on RFC1341 with the following exceptions "?
Brian> That way you can see exactly what differences there are to the
Brian> known standard, at
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 04:24:20PM +0800, Isaac To wrote:
> It is far from obvious. What if I develop my software, finds the
> specification of MIME to be very similar to what my software does, but yet I
> need to modify the things here and there so as to suit my needs; and when
> documenting my s
Artur R. Czechowski wrote:
> OTOH, maybe dh_undocumented should be removed from debhelper with prior
> notice? "This program does nothing and should no longer be used."
As a rule I try to avoid causing less than 469 FTBFS bugs with any given
change I make to debhelper. I have removed programs when
Bill Allombert wrote:
> For ISO-8859-1, outputencoding="ISO-8859-1"
>
> There is a special encoding "LOCALE", which refers to the current locale
> encoding.
Won't this make the menu-method not work with versions of menu prior to
2.1.9-1? Packages would need to update their depends or conflicts wi
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 11:41:51AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
> Couldn't you write a new document along the lines of "This is based on
> RFC1341 with the following exceptions "?
Tell that to the authors of RFC2616 :-)
Sometimes it's very valuable to NOT have people reading the old version
first,
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 12:18:33AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On a separate but related topic, I think a much better approach would
> be to handle configuration as a step entirely separate from the
> install phase. Let the install be entirely quiet, and let packages
> have intelligent defaults.
im wondering if anyone can help me with bug #196563. the bug says that
xmllint is segfaulting on m68k. the reporter can reproduce the segfault.
i asked him for a backtrace, but gdb segfaulted. he was able to provide
strace output however. it seems that the bug manifests before the
program's main()
88 matches
Mail list logo
