* Goswin von Brederlow:
> The proper use of this construct seems to be:
>
> template
> struct Foo {
> static const unsigned N = T::N;
> char bar[N];
> };
>
> struct Bla {
> static const unsigned N;
> };
>
> const unsigned Bla::N = 10;
>
> int main() {
> Foo foo;
> }
This program is ill-f
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 02:18:29PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> > FWIW, detecting a fixed libtool would be rather difficult, since it's the
> > libtool used by the depending application which does the recursion and
> > therefore needs to be fixed.
> I was thinking we'd be able to tell from the .
On 7/29/05, Steve Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 02:31:01AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> > ..last mirror update was a week ago, what's going on???
>
> > ..and, yeah, gg:"Debian mirror update" "21-Jul-2005" etc
> > finds _lotsa_ noise.
>
> > ..whether this mirror upda
On 7/15/05, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, I previously had xorg from Ubuntu installed, and upgrading from
> that to Debian's xorg _didn't_ go smoothly: the file "/etc/X11/Xsession"
> was created by two packages, x11-common [debian], and xorg-common
> [ubuntu], and in upgrading tri
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 11:32:18PM +0200, Clément Stenac wrote:
> > Someone suggested an announcement should be sent to
> > > d-d-a. What do you think ?
> >
> > Yes, go to it and find some reviewer.
>
> Will do...
>
> > Maybe you should add a 'get a random Description' link on your Page...
>
>
Hello,
> how will you handel changes in the description (from upstream, aka package
> maintainer)?
By comparing all descriptions when we are done. For packages which have
a new descriptions, a manual review/merge will be needed.
Regards,
--
Clément Stenac
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Hi,
I took a look at your site a couple of hours ago...
and I want to tell you that I'd really love to trade links with you. I think
your site has some really good stuff related to my site's topic of Packaging
and would be a great resource for my visitors.
In fact, I went ahead and added your sit
On Jul 29, "Brian M. Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have found no less than four packages which break with /bin/posh
> as /bin/sh, including one that refuses to be removed because of its
> brokenness. I am expecting many more.
Yes, like most of my packages.
posh does not provide any bene
On Jul 29, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, please note that posh is not the only shell that lacks support for
> local. IIRC, it also breaks down under one or more of dash and busybox sh.
dash supports local, or at least supports it in the way it's used in
all the packages I main
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Jul 29, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Well, please note that posh is not the only shell that lacks support for
> > local. IIRC, it also breaks down under one or more of dash and busybox sh.
> dash supports local, or at least supports it in the way it's u
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: monouml
Version : 0.1a
Upstream Author : Mario Carrión <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and others.
* URL : http://monouml.sf.net/
* License : GPL and LGPL
Description : co
The shadow package maintenance team is glad to announce the release
of version 4.0.11-1 of the shadow package, in experimental.
Shadow is the source package for passwd and login and is part of the
base system. Both packages are "Priority: required".
This package was highly desynchronized with ups
On 29-Jul-05, 08:50 (CDT), GOMBAS Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 08:38:17AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Exercise: let's say I have an application that uses GSSAPI, and has to
> be able to be built statically. Requirements:
>
> - It should build with Heimdal's libgs
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 04:08:10PM +0200, Clément Stenac wrote:
> > how will you handel changes in the description (from upstream, aka package
> > maintainer)?
>
> By comparing all descriptions when we are done. For packages which have
> a new descriptions, a manual review/merge will be needed.
N
I've started reviewing the news section, and I'm noticing that I'm
running across descriptions which are OK as-is, but could be better. So
far, Iv'e put in a comment saying how I think it could be approved, but
am clicking "OK". Is that right?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
One more question: Was the question, should short descriptions be
capitalized? ever decided?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Moreno Garza wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> * Package name: monouml
> Version : 0.1a
> Upstream Author : Mario Carrión <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and others.
> * URL : http://monouml.sf.net/
> * License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: lltag
Version : 0.6.1-1
Upstream Author : Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://bgoglin.free.fr/lltag/
* License : GPL
Description : Massive and magic comma
Followups to #320630.
--j
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brice Goglin wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> * Package name: lltag
> Version : 0.6.1-1
> Upstream Author : Brice Goglin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://bgoglin.free.fr/lltag/
> * License : GPL
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Everyone,
This is to let interested people know that the Debian Science mailing list [1]
has been created. This list is aimed to encourage discussion about how best to
use Debian as an operating system for science research and how to improve Debi
* Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050728 22:39]:
> on request of Ryan Murray I stopped the bugs2ldap-gateway on
> bugs.debian.org. I'll move that gateway to some other host as soon as I
> have time. At least the following services are broken by that:
> - the wnpp bug list
> - bts.turmzimmer.net
Hi folks,
I've got a problem with marking broken packages as fixed.
If there is (lets say) a grave functionality bug for package
"M" in unstable or testing, then a bugfix in experimental
doesn't help me. (I made very bad experiences with experimental,
e.g. broken version numbers, currupted apt sy
On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> I've got a problem with marking broken packages as fixed.
Fixed generally means that the bug has been fixed in an NMU, IE, by
someone not the maintainer; fixed-in-experimental is the tag that
usually means that the bug in question has actually been fixed
Hi,
On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 08:11 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Shouldn't it be some kind of policy to mark a bug as fixed,
> only if the fix is available on the same level as the previous
> broken package?
There's a semi-policy IMHO, you can tag[1] the bugs instead of closing
them, so there's a fi
25 matches
Mail list logo
