Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 21:19, martin f krafft wrote: > I'd appreciate if you kept your opinions to yourself, > Can you do the same? Scott (Unsigned as I've already packed my keyring for Linux Expo today) -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the

Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Chris Cheney
Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la files that they depend on? For example: dependency_libs=' -lm -L/usr/lib /usr/lib/libogg.la' This is about to bite Debian hard with some of the XFree86 libraries moving to /usr/lib. Chris Cheney --- # libvorbis.la - a libtool

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 08:26:44PM -0400, Marco Paganini wrote: > I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. > Currently, the main executable is called "ask.py". a. Whack upstream with a cluebat. b. Repeat a. c. What happens when the program gets reimplemented in another

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:33:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la > files that they depend on? Anal-retentiveness wrt using the exact same library originaly used. > This is about to bite Debian hard with some of the XFree86 lib

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.07.0104 +0200]: > As stated above, this is not a reasonable restriction. An > arbitrary kernel patch package might conflict with *any* changes > made to the kernel-source package, including simple security > fixes. A simple fix is easier to

Re: Kernel source 2.4.22 and ipvs problems

2003-10-07 Thread Herbert Xu
Bao C. Ha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If I want both the freeswan module capability and IPVS, how should > I proceed. If all you need is to run freeswan, then you can unapply the IPSEC patch, and simply use KLIPS. If you need the new stack, then you will need to fix the conflicts. It should

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 07:33, Chris Cheney wrote: > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la files > that they depend on? > To guarantee that you don't end up linking with something totally different if the app being compiled happens to have a different search path. What

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Chris Cheney
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 10:26:45AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:33:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > > > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la > > files that they depend on? > > Anal-retentiveness wrt using the exact same library o

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
> What's more of a problem here is that libtool actually links > dependency libraries of dependencies ... it's something I've been > working on for a while. That's a bug, not a feature. From libtool's perspective at least. You have to keep in mind that libtool is designed to work around ex

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Chris Cheney
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:30:56AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 07:33, Chris Cheney wrote: > > > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la files > > that they depend on? > > > To guarantee that you don't end up linking with something totally >

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Chris Halls
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:50:07PM -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Besides, if dumb names were a problem we'd do something about > openoffice.org. $ ls /usr/bin/*openoffice* /usr/bin/openoffice What is dumb about that? The thread is about naming of files within /usr/bin. Chris pgpsBIj7fhkCn.pgp D

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Robert Millan
> > I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. > > Currently, the main executable is called "ask.py". > > a. Whack upstream with a cluebat. Euh, I think you messed up. Marco *is* upstream. On the other hand, Marco being upstream defeats John's argument: > Leave it. The pro

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:24:37PM +, Robert Millan wrote: > > > I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. > > > Currently, the main executable is called "ask.py". > > > > a. Whack upstream with a cluebat. > > Euh, I think you messed up. Marco *is* upstream. > > So perh

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread John Hasler
Chris writes: > $ ls /usr/bin/*openoffice* > /usr/bin/openoffice > What is dumb about that? The thread is about naming of files within > /usr/bin. Since the package is named openoffice.org supposedly for trademark reasons I assumed that the binary was as well. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Greg Folkert
On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 15:39, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1207 +0200]: > > Let's create a package called "linux-2.4.22" or > > "linux-2.4.22-pure-vanilla-source-for-you-to-patch" with a script which > > does exactly this. > > I oppose. Let's get

Re: A new way to specify versionned dependencies may be needed

2003-10-07 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 01:46:08AM +0200, Nicolas Boullis wrote: > Moreover, that does not answer to my real question: is there a good > reason not to implement such an extended syntax for versionned > relationships. Probably not; but there needs to be a good reason to do it. It has to be imple

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 11:11:35AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > What's more of a problem here is that libtool actually links > > dependency libraries of dependencies ... it's something I've been > > working on for a while. > That's a bug, not a feature. From libtool's perspective at

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Colin Watson
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:48:32AM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > But, this would alleviate SOME of the problems. This would be NO DOUBT > very helpful. The Binary Kernel (as in the archives could have any an > all patches you see fit Herbert) > > Would it NO doubt make entirely MUCH more sense, to

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
> > a. Whack upstream with a cluebat. > > Euh, I think you messed up. Marco *is* upstream. That doesn't preclude whackig upstream with a cluebat :-) Here, he can use mine. -- Marcelo

RE: Package verification

2003-10-07 Thread Kim Lester
The comments about debsums are useful and contribute to the whole issue butthey still miss one of my key points/queries. There is no way to verify/correct the MODE, USER, GROUP, TYPE of any files installed in a pkg. If I am wrong please point out where, with an installed pkg (and preferably witho

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Richard Braakman
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:30:56AM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote: > On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 07:33, Chris Cheney wrote: > > > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la files > > that they depend on? > > > To guarantee that you don't end up linking with something totally >

Re: Package verification

2003-10-07 Thread Steve Kemp
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:24:37AM +1000, Kim Lester wrote: > There is no way to verify/correct the MODE, USER, GROUP, TYPE > of any files installed in a pkg. That appears to be the case, partly because permissions may be changed from those files which are contained withing the .deb file via t

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 08:26:44PM -0400, Marco Paganini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. Currently, > the main executable is called "ask.py". It seems unusual (and why not say, > *ugly*) to have the language extension added to t

Re: Which packages will hold up the release?

2003-10-07 Thread Björn Stenberg
Steve Langasek wrote: > Hypothetical example: > > 29 packages wait on (151 packages are stalled by) libxml2. This package > is too young, and should be a valid candidate in 8 days. > > Suppose that the libxml2 source package provided not only the > libxml2-python2.3 binary package, but also a li

Bug#214601: ITP: r-cran-qtl -- [Biology] GNU R package for genetic marker linkage analysis

2003-10-07 Thread Steffen Moeller
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-10-07 Severity: wishlist * Package name: r-cran-qtl Version : 0.9.7-21 Upstream Author : Karl W. Broman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Hao Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.biostat.jhsph.edu/~kbroman/qtl/index.html * Lic

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Bill Allombert
Marco Paganini wrote: > I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. Currently, > the main executable is called "ask.py". It seems unusual (and why not say, > *ugly*) to have the language extension added to the program, but in this > case, it was a deliberate decision to avoid

Re: Which packages will hold up the release?

2003-10-07 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:23:32PM +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > Hypothetical example: > > > > 29 packages wait on (151 packages are stalled by) libxml2. This package > > is too young, and should be a valid candidate in 8 days. > > > > Suppose that the libxml2 source p

gnucash-sql?

2003-10-07 Thread Carl B. Constantine
I think there used to be a packaged called gnucash-sql which allowed gnucash to save data to a postgres database. That package doesn't seem to exist any longer. Has the functionality of gnucash-sql been merged into gnucash proper? -- .''`. Carl B. Constantine : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `.

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Monday, Oct 6, 2003, at 16:20 US/Eastern, martin f krafft wrote: It has existed in the freeswan patch for a while! Let's be serious, FreeS/WAN has serious issues! Being at war with the kernel routing machinery, for example.

Re: Which packages will hold up the release?

2003-10-07 Thread Matthias Klose
Björn Stenberg writes: > 2) How is meta package versioning handled? The gcc-defaults package, version > 1.9, is the only package providing the gcc binary (without -version suffix) of > which many packages require version >= 2.95. gcc-defaults implements it's own version handling. see the source.

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Monday, Oct 6, 2003, at 18:58 US/Eastern, Adam McKenna wrote: I don't see how the package being in unstable affects any part of this argument. Will the feature backport be less desirable when the kernel-source package is released in a stable revision of Debian? The whole point of not doing feat

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread Greg Folkert
On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 09:51, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:48:32AM -0400, Greg Folkert wrote: > > Would it NO doubt make entirely MUCH more sense, to only have to D/L the > > Source Code once. > > Would it be POSSIBLE to LOSE the Zippy-style CAPITALIZATION, please? Would it be

Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!

2003-10-07 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.07.1935 +0200]: > >It has existed in the freeswan patch for a while! > > Let's be serious, FreeS/WAN has serious issues! Being at war with the > kernel routing machinery, for example. Alright, I give you that. But it works. -- Please

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Branden Robinson
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 03:40:18AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 10:26:45AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 01:33:01AM -0500, Chris Cheney wrote: > > > > > Does anyone happen to know why .la files hardcode the paths to .la > > > files that the

Bug#213822: keymap be-latin1

2003-10-07 Thread Philippe Faes
tag 213822 moreinfo thanks Jan, If I understand correctly, your keyboard doesn't work right, but the rest of the system is OK. Are there other keys with AltGr that work? For example, can you type a curly brace '{' (AltGr-9)? If you try to upgrade your system (with apt-get) it doesnt't instal

Re: gnucash-sql?

2003-10-07 Thread James A. Treacy
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 10:35:40AM -0700, Carl B. Constantine wrote: > I think there used to be a packaged called gnucash-sql which allowed > gnucash to save data to a postgres database. That package doesn't seem > to exist any longer. Has the functionality of gnucash-sql been merged > into gnucash

Re: Hardcoding of .la file paths in .la files

2003-10-07 Thread Chris Cheney
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 02:58:25PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > I think the problem with .la files may be solvable by updating > Build-Depends and -dev packages' dependencies to refer to libxrender-dev > (>= 0.8.3-1), and/or libraries that are rebuilt against that version of > libxrender-dev.

Processed: Re: Bug#213822: keymap be-latin1

2003-10-07 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 213822 moreinfo Bug#213822: =?iso-8859-15?q?general=3A_keymap_be-latin1_doesn=27t_allow_typing_=5C_or?= =?iso-8859-15?q?_=40_by_using_AltGr=0D=0AThis_week_I_installed_knoppix_=28v3?= =?iso-8859-15?q?=2E2=29_on_the_computer_of_a_friend=2E=0D=0AYes

Bug#214654: ITP: ps2eps -- Convert PostScript to EPS (Encapsulated PostScript) files

2003-10-07 Thread Rafael Laboissiere
Package: wnpp Version: unavailable; reported 2003-10-07 Severity: wishlist * Package name: ps2eps Version : 1.47 Upstream Author : Roland Bless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.telematik.informatik.uni-karlsruhe.de/~bless/ps2eps.html * License : GPL De

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marco Paganini
Hi Marcello, > > Euh, I think you messed up. Marco *is* upstream. > > That doesn't preclude whackig upstream with a cluebat :-) Here, he can > use mine. I tried whacking myself repeatedly with the cluebat. Unfortunately, it was not as effective as whacking someone else. But I think I got th

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marco Paganini
Hi Daniel, > I think it's worth pointing out that if a file called "ask.py" is in > /usr/bin, the statement: > > import ask > > from a Python program in /usr/bin which hasn't modified its sys.path > will, unless I am terribly confused, pick up ask.py instead of whatever > module it was looki

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marco Paganini
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:57:42PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote: > > That would not be a problem, as no other program imports ask.py... > > Are you confident that no other program will ever want to "import ask"? Yes. "ask.py" is just the main executable. It imports all the other modules (which

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:48:17PM -0400, Marco Paganini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > Hi Daniel, > > > I think it's worth pointing out that if a file called "ask.py" is in > > /usr/bin, the statement: > > > > import ask > > > > from a Python program in /usr/bin which hasn't modif

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Marco Paganini
Hi, > > Yes. "ask.py" is just the main executable. It imports all the other modules > > (which have the .py extension and should be in /usr/lib/ask or something). > > That'd be /usr/share (lib is for arch-dependant data, see FHS) Oops, sorry! Slippery fingers. I meant /usr/share... Regards, Pag

Re: Done

2003-10-07 Thread Andreas Rottmann
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 01:24:11PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:37:48 -0500, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> > There is a distinct difference between recognizing what is missing >> > from a description, and bei

Re: Language extensions in programs under /usr/bin

2003-10-07 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 06:07:58PM -0400, Marco Paganini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 05:57:42PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote: > > > > That would not be a problem, as no other program imports ask.py... > > > > Are you confident that no other program will ever

Re: Package verification

2003-10-07 Thread Matthew Palmer
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:24:37AM +1000, Kim Lester wrote: > There is no way to verify/correct the MODE, USER, GROUP, TYPE > of any files installed in a pkg. > If I am wrong please point out where, with an installed pkg > (and preferably without having a copy of the .dpkg around) > once can tell

Re: Re: Where are we now? (Was: Bits from the RM)

2003-10-07 Thread Joey Hess
Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Maybe we should ask the user at first boot if he wishes to use tasksel, > dselect, aptitude or none-of-the-above, instead of going just tasksel > and dselect... Maybe we should look at a current install of debian before posting to -devel. -- see shy jo signature.asc Descri