On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 08:33:25PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > "localdomain" is not a registered top-level domain and hopefully never
> > will be, so it is safe to use locally as it won't cause communication
> > problems.
>
> It is not safe to use
Le jeudi 06 octobre 2005 à 08:33 +0200, Aurelien Jarno a écrit :
> Christoph Martin a écrit :
> > Changes:
> > openssl (0.9.8-1) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> >* New upstream release (closes: #311826)
>
> The following list of packages needs to be rebuild, otherwise some of
> the binary pa
On Oct 06, Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The following list of packages needs to be rebuild, otherwise some of
> the binary packages they built will be uninstallable after today mirror
> push. Maybe bug reports has to be filled?
308 bugs are too many.
Starting from next week send a
[Benjamin Seidenberg]
> I agree. I think that there should be a way to use apt to install a
> .deb with automatic dependency handling (in fact when I first began
> using debian I tried several times to install a .deb using apt). I
> don't know why this functionality was never written. It seems to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 9:10 schrieb Pierre Machard:
> IIRC The main reason was described in #247734
The only reason I find is that RedHat use it. But RedHat shouldn't be
debians requirement of quality. It should be other way around. RedHat is
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As it happens, due to some changes in the details of the override file
> handling, new source package names will soon make the package go to NEW too,
> even though there already exists a binary package by that name. That the new
> source package n
#include
* Joe Smith [Wed, Oct 05 2005, 08:22:48PM]:
> >I wonder why nobody did implement that feature before. I imagine
> >(without knowing much about APT's internals), the pseudocode would look
> >like that:
> >
> >- install command gets the list
> >- if the package does not exist in the cache a
Package: wnpp
Owner: Jorge Salamero Sanz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: shanty
Version : 3
Upstream Author : Duncan Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.codebunny.org/coding/shanty/
* License : BSD
Description : makes a wh
Dear webmaster,
I looked at your website - http://lists.debian.org - and I really
liked to be your partner.
I own a site - http://www.replicahause.com- . Since our sites are
not competitive with each other. So, I would like to propose a
link exchange partnership with your site.
My site gets a lo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 06, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> .localdomain is such a peace of shit which only makes troubles. So
Please explain which troubles.
- --
ciao,
Marco
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDRP57FGfw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Marco,
Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 12:37 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> > .localdomain is such a peace of shit which only makes troubles. So
> Please explain which troubles.
I cannot specify it. But I remember that I did search for problemes in
the past
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 06, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 12:37 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> > > .localdomain is such a peace of shit which only makes troubles. So
> > Please explain which troubles.
> I cannot specify it. But I remembe
Hi
Is it possible to get an alternative for a pdf-viewer, so that you can
choose /etc/alternatives/pdf-viewer in the code and this will link to a free
viewer, e.g. kghostview or gpdf?
Greetings
Steffen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Marco,
unfortunality your mail address is not valid so I answer you here.
Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 13:48 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> In other words, you don't know and are just handwaving. Next?
No, I just do not remember which software it was. I ab
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Oct 06, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> unfortunality your mail address is not valid so I answer you here.
My email address is perfectly valid, it's your system which is
misconfigured:
Oct 6 13:42:11 picard postfix/smtpd[4344]: NOQUEUE:
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:04:44PM +0200, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Hi Marco,
>
> unfortunality your mail address is not valid so I answer you here.
>
> Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 13:48 schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> > In other words, you don't know and are just handwaving. Next?
>
> No, I just do not remem
Steffen Joeris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Is it possible to get an alternative for a pdf-viewer, so that you can
> choose /etc/alternatives/pdf-viewer in the code and this will link to a free
> viewer, e.g. kghostview or gpdf?
Can't you just use "see $filename" and rely on the mailcap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
Am Do den 6. Okt 2005 um 14:22 schrieb Wouter Verhelst:
> That's not helpful.
True. Thats the reason why I give more helpfull information too in the
first mail.
> indeed cause many problems, we could consider not using it by default
> anymor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please avoid cross-posting.
And if you do it anyway, then make sure to indicate a single list to
continue discussion.
As your question is not specific to the development of Linux for
schools, I propose to post replies only on -devel.
Kind regards,
On 06-Oct-05, 07:22 (CDT), Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:04:44PM +0200, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Problems can have many causes. One of them may be that
> localhost.localdomain is unexpected; another may be that the software
> you were using is buggy, or misco
Hello
I'm using enlightenment without KDE and without Gnome. My XFree86 is
configured with three keyboard layout:
Option
"XkbLayout" "es,il,us"
Option
"XkbOptions" "grp:shift_toggle"
My question is how I can cache when ever the keyboard Layout change an
I notice that the newest upload of pstoedit has reverted the C++
transition name change; instead of libpstoedit0c2 sid now contains
libpstoedit0, as in sarge.
However, the library exports things with interfaces such as
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" DLLEXPORT
int pstoeditwithghostscript(int argc,
Hi everyone!
I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
official archive (?), so I thought this would be of some interest to
you. I am trying to influence the IETF to change the copying
conditions on RFCs to m
On 06/10/2005 Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Christoph Martin a écrit :
> >Changes:
> > openssl (0.9.8-1) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> > * New upstream release (closes: #311826)
>
> The following list of packages needs to be rebuild, otherwise some of
> the binary packages they built will be uninsta
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 01:43:29PM +0200, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> I cannot specify it. But I remember that I did search for problemes in
> the past long time to find a error. And it was an entry of
> localhost.localdomain in a /etc/hosts. Maybe it was PVM or MySQL or
> other. I'm not sure.
IIRC leaf
Klaus Ethgen writes:
> Thats the reason why I give more helpfull information too in the first
> mail.
You haven't given enough information.
> But why changing "localhost" to "localhost.localdomain"...
It wasn't changed. "localhost.localdomain" was _added_. "localhost" is
still there.
> There
* Peter Samuelson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'd argue to go one step further and invent a virtual package like
> 'no-static-link-support' (well, a shorter name would be better) and
> generate each dependency on "libfoo-dev | no-static-link-support".
> Then I can install one little equivs package
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:31:37AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> When proposing a variation from long-standing historical practice,
> shouldn't the onus be on the on making the change? What problem does
> 'localhost.localdomain' solve? Why is is better than just 'localhost',
> which has been com
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 06, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > .localdomain is such a peace of shit which only makes troubles. So
> Please explain which troubles.
Some programs will try to solve the reverse for 127.0.0.1, during normal
operations (not to verify W
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> It's being long-standing does not mean it's correct. I started looking
But it means it is a de-facto standard, which it *is*. Every *nix system I
have mucked around with in the last five years, with the exception of a few
Linux distributions, uses plain
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, John Hasler wrote:
> > But why changing "localhost" to "localhost.localdomain"...
>
> It wasn't changed. "localhost.localdomain" was _added_. "localhost" is
> still there.
The first entry is the canonical name, and it is what the reverse maps to.
So yes, it WAS changed, and
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Stephen Frost wrote:
> don't include static library dependencies in the Depends. libtool does
> actually survive just fine if the first-level .la files go missing in
Correct.
> fact, as I recall, it's the ones below that which cause it to break,
> even for shared linking whe
Hello all. I've read enough of this thread to be convinced that
dh_libtool is not a good idea and not worth pursuing. Thanks for all
the insightful comments.
Perhaps a lintian check, as suggested by Joey Hess in the bug 192008
would be better, or perhaps we should just focus energies on fixing
On 06-Oct-05, 08:25 (CDT), Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's being long-standing does not mean it's correct.
No, but it doesn't make changing it correct, either.
Again: what actual technical problem is solved by
'localhost.localdomain"? Is solving that problem worth the potential
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> The following list of packages needs to be rebuild, otherwise some of
> the binary packages they built will be uninstallable after today mirror
> push. Maybe bug reports has to be filled?
Next time, please give us at least a three-days advance warning
Is there any chances of versioning openssl symbols properly?
I am not asking for 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 to coexist (although versioned symbols
would make that trivial), but PLEASE version the symbols.
Suggested version tag: OPENSSL_0_9_8
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One dis
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 08:33:19AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Christoph Martin a écrit :
> >Changes:
> > openssl (0.9.8-1) unstable; urgency=low
> > .
> > * New upstream release (closes: #311826)
>
> The following list of packages needs to be rebuild, otherwise some of
> the binary package
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Steffen Joeris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is it possible to get an alternative for a pdf-viewer, so that you can
> > choose /etc/alternatives/pdf-viewer in the code and this will link to a
> > free
> > viewer, e.g. kghostview or
I wrote:
> It wasn't changed. "localhost.localdomain" was _added_. "localhost" is
> still there.
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> The first entry is the canonical name, and it is what the reverse maps
> to. So yes, it WAS changed, and very much so.
The OP seemed to me to be implying that
sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and furthermore, there are some of us who have been quietly waiting for
> things to settle down from the previous major transitions before doing
> our own, at the request of the release team.
I'm only following d-d-a, -private, and -devel, but that only pa
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Pierre Machard wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 08:33:25PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > "localdomain" is not a registered top-level domain and hopefully never
> > > will be, so it is safe to use locally as it won't cause comm
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, John Hasler wrote:
> Read the discussion in the bug report. I think "localhost.localdomain" is
I did. "localhost.localdomain" solved no problems, it was not even related
to the problem they were trying to fix, and it certainly is not part of the
best compromise solution (add
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 11:24 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Is there any chances of versioning openssl symbols properly?
> >
> > I am not asking for 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 to coexist (although versioned symbols
> > would make that trivial), b
On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 11:24 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Is there any chances of versioning openssl symbols properly?
>
> I am not asking for 0.9.7 and 0.9.8 to coexist (although versioned symbols
> would make that trivial), but PLEASE version the symbols.
>
> Suggested version tag
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:32:53PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Steffen Joeris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Is it possible to get an alternative for a pdf-viewer, so that you can
>> > choose /etc/alternatives/pdf-viewer in the code and this will lin
* Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051006 17:13]:
> sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > and furthermore, there are some of us who have been quietly waiting for
> > things to settle down from the previous major transitions before doing
> > our own, at the request of the release team.
>
>
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Furthermore, as OpenSSL symbols aren't versioned, this will lead to
> random crashes if a binary ends up being linked to both version, won't
> it?
Oh crap!
OpenSSL *must* version its symbols, it is the kind of lib that ends up
linked to libs that end
On Thursday 06 October 2005 12:45, Henning Makholm wrote:
> I notice that the newest upload of pstoedit has reverted the C++
> transition name change; instead of libpstoedit0c2 sid now contains
> libpstoedit0, as in sarge.
This is, IMHO, incorrect.
> However, the library exports things with inter
On 10/6/05, Brian M. Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 October 2005 12:45, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > I notice that the newest upload of pstoedit has reverted the C++
> > transition name change; instead of libpstoedit0c2 sid now contains
> > libpstoedit0, as in sarge.
>
> This is,
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:24:12PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Pierre Machard wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 08:33:25PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > > "localdomain" is not a registered top-level dom
Jonas Meurer wrote:
> > conserver
>
> this package does not exist in debian
It's in non-free
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
"Eduard Bloch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
would it not be simpler to have have apt just ask dpkg what the
dependencies of the passed .deb are and then install the dependencies
(and
their dependecies) and then just pass the deb directly to dpkg?
Hehe, it wa
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Oct 06, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> .localdomain is such a peace of shit which only makes troubles. So
> Please explain which troubles.
See the news.software.nntp traffic with people having strange problems
with pathnames and message I
* Simon Josefsson:
> I explain the current problems, and I try to put together a proposed
> update, and I have a petition online at:
>
> http://josefsson.org/bcp78broken/
Very nice, thanks.
I think you might get broader support in the vendor community if you
make the license for modified copying
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:44:42PM +0200, Pierre Machard wrote:
> I can not remember precisely. I think that at that time I was testing the
> debian-installer and I saw it was taken a long while to boot. I saw
> that my system had no FQDN (hostname -f). When you add .localdomain, the
> FQDN is com
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Pierre Machard wrote:
> Anyway I do not understand why this issue is a problem since we
Because instead of doing this:
127.0.0.1 localost localhost.localdomain
It was done like this:
127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
Thus changing the canonical name of the loopback
On Oct 06, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See the news.software.nntp traffic with people having strange problems
> with pathnames and message ID generation because of .localdomain. There
> have been a few separate cases of that over the past year or so.
Not relevant. They would have th
On Oct 06, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because instead of doing this:
>
> 127.0.0.1 localost localhost.localdomain
>
> It was done like this:
>
> 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
>
> Thus changing the canonical name of the loopback interface. PLEASE do no
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:23:45PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Pierre Machard wrote:
> > Anyway I do not understand why this issue is a problem since we
>
> Because instead of doing this:
>
> 127.0.0.1 localost localhost.localdomain
>
> It was done like this:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> I can not remember precisely. I think that at that time I was testing the
> debian-installer and I saw it was taken a long while to boot. I saw
> that my system had no FQDN (hostname -f). When you add .localdomain, the
> FQDN is complete and it helps to s
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 05:35:34PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> On Thursday 06 October 2005 12:45, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > I notice that the newest upload of pstoedit has reverted the C++
> > transition name change; instead of libpstoedit0c2 sid now contains
> > libpstoedit0, as in sarge.
>
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Because instead of doing this:
>
> 127.0.0.1 localost localhost.localdomain
>
> It was done like this:
>
> 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost
>
> Thus changing the canonical name of the loopback interface. PLEASE do not
> do this unless you have *extr
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Oct 06, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> See the news.software.nntp traffic with people having strange problems
>> with pathnames and message ID generation because of .localdomain.
>> There have been a few separate cases of that over the past
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Pierre Machard wrote:
> The fact is that nobody complained about that... and my bug was
Now we are :)
> repported more than one year and a half ago. Plus It was disscussed on
> debian-devel. Please do not argue with me!
It is nothing personal... it is just that your email w
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Joey Hess wrote:
> FWIW, it was done as a result of bug #247734, which includes details on
> how every possible choice seems to break something and the reasoning
> that led to the current choice.
I read that bug report VERY carefully. Twice. There is *nothing* there that
seems
Andreas Barth schrieb:
> * Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [051006 17:13]:
>
>>sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>and furthermore, there are some of us who have been quietly waiting for
>>>things to settle down from the previous major transitions before doing
>>>our own, at the reque
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:17:53PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> IIRC leafnode complains about "localhost.localdomain" refusing to suck
> news unless you manually specify a domainname in its configuration file.
> Maybe you remember that trouble?
> Still, I've ever considered that an issue wi
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the openssl package.
I am currently the only maintainer, but this package really needs a
team to work on it. Too many packages depend on the library which
therefore has priority important.
The package description is:
This pac
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 09:38:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> It's complaining because upstream wishes to strongly encourage users to
> configure things so that they have a globally unique hostname part to
> message IDs that are generated by Leafnode in order to minimise the risk
IMHO is too much
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 05:02:55PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Or am I getting confused and d-i uses localhost.localdomain as the default
> hostname, and say, if I had told it that my machine is named "twerk", domain
> "foo.bar" I would get a
> 127.0.0.1 twerk.foo.bar twerk localh
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:41:13PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 09:38:03PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > It's complaining because upstream wishes to strongly encourage users to
> > configure things so that they have a globally unique hostname part to
> > message IDs th
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:20:12PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote:
> a lot of people bugged me about the new version and upstream only recommends
> this version. It also closes a grave security bug.
Hm, that wasn't listed in the changelog. Anyway, there hasn't been a security
advisory about openssl
Russ Allbery writes:
> No, they won't, because INN ignores hostnames that do not contain a
> period for the purposes of generating external identifiers, specifically
> to keep from using things like localhost or other unqualified names that
> aren't globally unique.
Relying on hostnames either wit
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
> IMHO is too much to inhibit the use of the program as a whole just to
> minimize the collision risk, a warning would have been enough.
Particularly considering that there are better ways to assure the
uniqueness of message-ids anyway.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRI
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> No, they won't, because INN ignores hostnames that do not contain a
>> period for the purposes of generating external identifiers,
>> specifically to keep from using things like localhost or other
>> unqualified names that aren't gl
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:07:01PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: normal
>
>
> I request assistance with maintaining the openssl package.
>
> I am currently the only maintainer, but this package really needs a
> team to work on it. Too many packages depend on the libr
In linux.debian.devel, you wrote:
>> a lot of people bugged me about the new version and upstream only recommends
>> this version. It also closes a grave security bug.
>
> Hm, that wasn't listed in the changelog. Anyway, there hasn't been a security
> advisory about openssl recently, did you backpo
On Thursday 06 October 2005 14:02, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Joey Hess wrote:
> > FWIW, it was done as a result of bug #247734, which includes details on
> > how every possible choice seems to break something and the reasoning
> > that led to the current choice.
>
>
On Thursday 06 October 2005 06:57, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
> Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
> official archive (?), so I thought this would be of some interest to
> you. I am tryin
Wesley J Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thursday 06 October 2005 06:57, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> I know the copying conditions of IETF RFC's has been a concern for
>> Debian in the past, and that the RFCs has been removed from the
>> official archive (?),
If they haven't been yet, the
Hello all,
I'm one of the maintainers of OpenAFS, a distributed file system whose
client involves a kernel module. Currently, the OpenAFS package builds an
openafs-modules-source package but doesn't build any binary module
packages, so each user has to build their own kernel modules with
make-kpk
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 01:50:26PM -0400, Joe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was
heard to say:
> "Eduard Bloch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >Hehe, it was my first thought about a possible solution, howerver:
> >You also need the Conflicts string. And while the dependencies/conflicts
> >are
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 01:10:42PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Josselin Mouette [Tue, Oct 04 2005, 10:10:22AM]:
>
> > > Far too often people (read: newbies) get confused when they can't get
> > > *insert favorite package manager* to install the .deb's they've just
> > > downloaded.
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Upgrading to SHA-1 is still a good idea, of course,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't there been collision attacks on
SHA-1, too?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Carlson wrote:
>> You must not pass by reference with an extern "C" declaration, because C
>> doesn't support that.
Dan Jacobowitz wrote:
>Why not? An extern C definition doesn't mean that it needs to be
>usable from C. It just means to use the C calling convention.
Perhaps because there i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But I don't think that versioning the
>symbols in Debian alone would be such a good idea. Than we would be
>incompatible with other distributions.
Well, only in one direction if I remember my versioning rules correctly.
Consider the following cases:
* binary built against
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, only in one direction if I remember my versioning rules correctly.
> Consider the following cases:
> * binary built against unversioned libssl from other distro, running with
> versioned libssl on Debian
> Breaks because it can't find the symb
A few weeks ago, libpng10-0 was removed from the archive. A
consequence of this was that all gnome-1 packages (and there are a
number still around) instantly became FTBFS.
I am now the de-facto gnome-1 tsar, but I don't intend to do much
other than keep things limping along. I am doing this bec
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Russ Allbery wrote:
> At least in my testing, binaries built against an unversioned library work
> fine with a versioned library. Maybe I wasn't testing properly?
You are correct, they work just fine. DEPENDING on the version of ld.so,
you might get a helpful warning, but th
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Unlimited distribution isn't the problem. Modification and redistribution
> of modified versions is the problem, and that restriction was apparently
If the IETF allows modified versions that are *RENAMED*, then it would meet
the DFSG. They can even rest
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> So it was just papering over a real bug, namely the existence of the
> "-f" option of hostname. "hostname -f" assumes that the hostname (as
> returned by gethostname(3)) has something to do with networking, which
> is false. It also assumes that the syste
Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, after a quick googling I found that this bug has already been
> reported for MySQL: http://bugs.mysql.com/11822 and is fixed in
> MySQL 5.0.11. So if it bothers you, you should upgrade.
Changing the canonical name of localhost is an arbitrary change
Pierre Machard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyway I do not understand why this issue is a problem since we
> simply add an alias to localhost. Nobody say that we will remove
> localhost and exchange it by localhost.localdomain.
If what you wanted to do was to add an alias, you should have read
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:25:15PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:31:37AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
>> When proposing a variation from long-standing historical practice,
>> shouldn't the onus be on the on making the change? What problem does
>> 'localhost.localdomain'
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Unlimited distribution isn't the problem. Modification and
>> redistribution of modified versions is the problem, and that
>> restriction was apparently
> If the IETF allows modified versions th
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 11:16:03PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> Unlimited distribution isn't the problem. Modification and
>>> redistribution of modified versions is the problem, and that
>>> r
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 188 (new: 3)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 87 (new: 11)
Total number of packages request
97 matches
Mail list logo
