I usually compile my own kernels (using make-kpkg), but recently I
decided to try a standard debian package of 2.6.14, since it was up
before I got around to it. [This is from unstable]
It seems to work OK, but the weird thing is that I got a bunch of random
useless device nodes in /dev as a resu
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: zope-plonetestcase
Version : 0.7
Upstream Author : Stefan H. Holek, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://zope.org/Members/shh/PloneTestCase
* License : ZPL
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: zope-cmfmember
Version : 1.1b5
Upstream Author : Ben Saller (bcsaller), Jonah (MrEnoch), Geoff Davis (geoffd
/ plonista)
* URL : http://plone.org/products/cmfmember
* License
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fabio Tranchitella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: zope-atseng
Version : 0.3.2
Upstream Author : Andreas Jung, Rob Miller (rafrombrc)
* URL : http://plone.org/products/atseng/
* License : LGPL
Description : frame
On Nov 07, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to work OK, but the weird thing is that I got a bunch of random
> useless device nodes in /dev as a result, and I'm not entirely sure
> where they're coming from.
The kernel.
> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and
Hi!
Recent vanilla kernels do not include devfs any longer. Are there any
"official" plans to provide a backport of initramfs-tools for sarge?
Regards,
Jörg
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm having problems building nmap and xprobe from source because of
build-depends on libpcap-dev. I need to build these two packages
from source because I have local patches that I want to apply to the
source code before it's compiled.
I'm running sarge on i386 and have libpcap0.8-dev installed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and normally
>> /dev/pts gets used for ptys, but with the new kernel there were suddenly
>> about 10 zillion old-style pty-related device nodes -- /dev/[pt]ty[a-z][0-9]
>
> So tell the kernel team to
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 11:01:20AM -0800, Philippe Troin wrote:
> Although I agree with the above on principle, how do you manage
> membership to the floppy, audio, video, etc groups?
pam_group for example. If you want to let some users access the devices
even if they are not logged in at the con
On Nov 07, Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So tell the kernel team to stop enabling CONFIG_LEGACY_PTYS.
> I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
> that don't use udev, right?
Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
not ev
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:03 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> >> The main offender is ptys -- I use udev for my devices, and normally
> >> /dev/pts gets used for ptys, but with the new kernel there were suddenly
> >> about 10 zillion old-style pty-related device
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 01:30:56PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> not even know where to find one).
At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys and this is not
documented anywhere. I needed some time to figure out
On Nov 07, Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> > not even know where to find one).
> At least /sbin/bootlogd does not work without BSD ptys and this is not
Actually it does.
> documented anywhere. I needed some time
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>> I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
>> that don't use udev, right?
>
> Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
> not even know where to find one).
I was thinking about the case where so
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
>
> Simple question: is apt-proxy still being maintained?
Yes, it's. Chris Halls is doing a big refactoring of it.
Current sid version has a lot fixes and more's comming.
Unfortunatelly I hadn't time to work on it anymore and major of last
work was
Miles Bader wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>
>>>I presume that default kernels need legacy ptys to support older systems
>>>that don't use udev, right?
>>
>>Wrong. Nothing needs BSD ptys but some *very* old applications (I would
>>not even know where to find one).
>
>
> I was
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:56:52PM +0100, Joerg Platte wrote:
> Hi!
Hello,
> Recent vanilla kernels do not include devfs any longer. Are there any
> "official" plans to provide a backport of initramfs-tools for sarge?
It's not official, but there're current (2.6.14) kernel images backported
to
Hi,
Bastian Venthur wrote:
What I'd really like to know rightnow is whether i386 *is* the wrong therm
for the x86 (or IA32) arch or not. If not then Debian could stick to this
name, but if so I think Debian just delays the problem for a few years.
In fact, there are efforts underway to allow
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:51:55AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> Simple question: is apt-proxy still being maintained?
>
> Based on the growing list of bugs, I suspect not.
>
> A quick glance of some of the reports shows no sign of response from
> the maintainer.
>
> Some users in fact have complete
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 11:51 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> However, I prefer the approach over apt-cacher, as the apt-sources
> entries remain independent of the server that will be used to retrieve
> the files.
>
> Is there a good alternative?
I use apt-cacher and have mod_rewrite rewrite /debian/
t
Andre Luis Lopes a écrit :
> It's not official, but there're current (2.6.14) kernel images backported
> to Sarge available at http://www.backports.org/pending/ .
>
> Also, you will find there yaird (but not initramfs-tools) and udev
> backports, which should allow you to run a recent kernel in a
Roy Hills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm having problems building nmap and xprobe from source because of
> build-depends on libpcap-dev. I need to build these two packages from
> source because I have local patches that I want to apply to the source
> code before it's compiled.
You'd make me h
Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
> > The following matrix explains which version in which distribution has
> > this problem corrected.
> >
> > oldstable (woody) stable (sarge) unstable (sid)
> > openssl 0.9.6c-2.woody.8 0.9.7e-3sarge1 0.9.8-3
> > openssl 094
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alexandre Fayolle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: python-logilab-astng
Version : 0.13.1
Upstream Author : Sylvain Thénault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.logilab.org/projects/astng
* License : GPL
Description
* Frank Küster [Mon, 07 Nov 2005 16:23:53 +0100]:
> Roy Hills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm having problems building nmap and xprobe from source because of
> > build-depends on libpcap-dev. I need to build these two packages from
> > source because I have local patches that I want to apply
Roy Hills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> I'm running sarge on i386 and have libpcap0.8-dev installed, which>> allows both nmap and xprobe to build without error if I use
>> "dpkg-buildpackage -d" to override the dependency check.> Do the programs also run without problems?Yes, there are no problems r
* Andre Luis Lopes wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:56:52PM +0100, Joerg Platte wrote:
> > Recent vanilla kernels do not include devfs any longer. Are there
> > any "official" plans to provide a backport of initramfs-tools for
> > sarge?
>
> It's not official, but there're current (2.6.14) ker
Am Montag, 7. November 2005 17:48 schrieb Norbert Tretkowski:
Hi!
> I'll add initramfs-tools soon, the reason why there's only yaird is
> that it's easier to backport than initramfs-tools.
Great news :-) I'm using initramfs-tools for sid for some time now with some
enhancements to support an rsy
2005/11/7, Roy Hills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'll submit a bug against libpcap-dev first for not allowing
> libpcap0.8-dev to satisfy the dependency, and see where that
> leads. I guess that the libpcap-dev developer should know
> what is supposed to happen.
I wonder if this shouldn't be like libre
Am 2005-11-03 11:35:22, schrieb Ron Johnson:
> If so, they've hidden it on their web site. The Elan is called
> a Am5x86 CPU, and I get the impression that the Geode isn't i386
> either.
And what about the 386EX ?
...which I have bought recently from Intel ?
> Companies *do* make them, though.
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 11:16:43PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> I have little operational experience with this PAM module, though. Does
> it cause problems for certain apps? If so, could these problems be
> solved with a less simplistic PAM configuration?
The only one I've encountered so far i
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 02:08:41PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I don't think the suggestion was to make TMP=~/tmp, but TMP=/tmp/$USER,
> where /tmp/$USER is owned by the user in question and is inaccessible to
> others. Or perhaps I read too much into the proposal?
That's pretty close... curren
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 01:47:22AM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Michael Banck wrote:
> > Do you plan to use debian-installer for installation?
>
> And do you realize that the debian installer is largely GPL licensed and
> would present the same license incompatability issues as eg, dpkg?
Yes.
At th
On Nov 07, Christopher Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This fixes both rtc and floppy. I'm assuming that the root of the problem
> here is the kernel? No surprise if that's the case. But thanks for coming
> up with a workaround. Hopefully there aren't too many more of these issues
> lurking
Dear GNU/Solaris Team!
I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your website
and found a dpkg binary on it.
Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this binary, despite
it being obviously under the GPL[2]. Therefore I request you kindly to make
the source
Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 11:01:20AM -0800, Philippe Troin wrote:
>
> > Although I agree with the above on principle, how do you manage
> > membership to the floppy, audio, video, etc groups?
>
> pam_group for example.
pam_group would work for floppy, a
David Schmitt writes:
> I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your website
> and found a dpkg binary on it.
> Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this binary,
> despite it being obviously under the GPL[2].
Was the requisite written offer included?
John Hasler wrote:
David Schmitt writes:
I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your website
and found a dpkg binary on it.
Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this binary,
despite it being obviously under the GPL[2].
Was the requisite written
On Monday 07 November 2005 15.53, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 11:51 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > However, I prefer the approach over apt-cacher, as the apt-sources
> > entries remain independent of the server that will be used to retrieve
> > the files.
> >
> > Is there a good altern
[Ian Campbell]
> It's to support older applications which don't know about the
> /dev/pyts/ interface. Whether the legacy device nodes come from a
> static /dev or from udev doesn't really enter in to it.
/dev/{pts/,ptmx} are so trivial to support (in applications) that I
think it's worthwhile to
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 22:07 +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> On Monday 07 November 2005 15.53, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 11:51 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > > However, I prefer the approach over apt-cacher, as the apt-sources
> > > entries remain independent of the server that wi
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 07:40:34AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> Frank Küster writes:
>
> > Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew Suffield writes:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 12:48:53PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
> CDDL works similar way, except on per-file basis.
>
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At the time of writing, I assumed "GNU/Solaris" implied they'd use the
> GNU libc (so I didn't even ask them about it).
Having downloaded their preview ISO:
The system is using Solaris's C library, but contains a great deal of
GPLed material. When I que
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Michael Stilkerich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gnormalize
Version : 0.46
Upstream Author : Claudio Fernandes de Souza Rodrigues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gnormalize.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Desc
On Monday 07 November 2005 21:29, John Hasler wrote:
> David Schmitt writes:
> > I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your
> > website and found a dpkg binary on it.
> >
> > Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this binary,
> > despite it being obvious
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Fr den 4. Nov 2005 um 13:36 schrieb Jon Dowland:
> ...alongside the private keys in ~/.gnupg?
Well, you can configure gnupg to write secret keys to a secure medium.
Am Fr den 4. Nov 2005 um 15:46 schrieb Noah Meyerhans:
> First of all, libpam_tm
Package: general
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.14
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTE
Matthew Garrett wrote:
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At the time of writing, I assumed "GNU/Solaris" implied they'd use the
GNU libc (so I didn't even ask them about it).
Having downloaded their preview ISO:
The system is using Solaris's C library, but contains a great deal of
GPL
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 02:50:01PM -0800, Alex Ross wrote:
> Here's the 2nd part of the answer:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The question is, are you going to pursue a legal action against Sun
> > Microsystems?
To which my answer was "yes". I'm not sure how that's supposed to excuse
you in
(Oh, and please don't see this as any sort of bias against non-Linux
kernels or non-glibc systems - I spent quite some time working on a port
of Debian to the NetBSD kernel, using the native C library)
--
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 338033 wmii
Bug#338033: general: wmifs and wmii try to overwrite each other
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `wmii'.
> severity 338033 serious
Bug#338033: general: wmifs and wmii try to overwrite each other
Severity set to `serious'.
> David Schmitt writes:
>> I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your
>> website
>> and found a dpkg binary on it.
>
>> Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this binary,
>> despite it being obviously under the GPL[2].
>
> Was the requisite written offer
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Was the requisite written offer included? Would you be willing to check
>> the CD for other GPL software and notify the authors if you find any?
>
> you can check, than re-check again and again, Nexenta OS GNU/OpenSolaris
> is a complete open source p
> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> Was the requisite written offer included? Would you be willing to
>>> check
>>> the CD for other GPL software and notify the authors if you find any?
>>
>> you can check, than re-check again and again, Nexenta OS GNU/OpenSolaris
>> is a complete o
[Added Cc: debian-legal, because the topic may be of interest there,
I would say.]
[No need to Cc: me, as long as you keep Cc:ing debian-legal (just to
make things clear: I am subscribed to debian-legal, but not to
debian-devel)]
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 10:01:48 +0100 Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> F
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What is this "will be"? You are distributing binaries now; you must
>> therefore distribute the complete source now, under terms compatible
>> with the GPL.
>
> You are welcome to obtain account at the web portal and check out the
> source directly fr
> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> What is this "will be"? You are distributing binaries now; you must
>>> therefore distribute the complete source now, under terms compatible
>>> with the GPL.
>>
>> You are welcome to obtain account at the web portal and check out the
>> source di
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> actually, I just checked. anonymous access is granted. Just browse it at
> http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1
>
> I hope I "honored" your orignal request now. :-)
It was not my request. Where is the C library, and is it bei
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> actually, I just checked. anonymous access is granted. Just browse it at
> http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1
Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.0, and lib
> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> actually, I just checked. anonymous access is granted. Just browse it at
>> http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1
>
> Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
> libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.
Dear Alex!
On Monday 07 November 2005 21:58, Alex Ross wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
> > David Schmitt writes:
> >> I have downloaded the elatte_live_prealpha1_x86.iso.gz[1] from your
> >> website and found a dpkg binary on it.
> >>
> >> Much to my dismay I was not able to locate the source for this
David,
this is the place were source code lives:
http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1/gnu
or
http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1
If you do not see something specific, or newer versions, like(you can find
debarchiver-0.3 but we have debarchiv
Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you do not see something specific, or newer versions, like(you can find
> debarchiver-0.3 but we have debarchiver-0.4 packaged), that means it is
> not committed yet and we are testing it right now and will be committed
> shortly.
Erast,
Unless you pr
Em Qui, 2005-11-03 às 12:45 -0800, Erast Benson escreveu:
> Apparently you misunderstood me.
> All I'm saying is that Debian community might want to embrace
> GNU/Solaris non-glibc port or reject it. To embrace, some core
> components, like dpkg, should be dual-licensed CDDL/GPL.
I say let's rejec
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Pierre THIERRY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: markdown
Version : 1.0.1
Upstream Author : John Gruber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/
* License : BSD-style
Description : t
> Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> If you do not see something specific, or newer versions, like(you can
>> find
>> debarchiver-0.3 but we have debarchiver-0.4 packaged), that means it is
>> not committed yet and we are testing it right now and will be committed
>> shortly.
>
> Erast,
>
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> actually, I just checked. anonymous access is granted. Just browse it at
>>> http://www.gnusolaris.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/browser/gnusolaris1
>>
>> Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK. point taken. This will be "fixed" soon. Hopefully in Alpha 1, which
> bits is planned to be release by the end of this week.
That is not acceptible. You must fix it now, not soon. You can fix
it by, for example, removing the binaries you are dist
Dear Erast!
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:01, Erast Benson wrote:
> > Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
> > libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.0, and libgcc_s.so.1,
> > which must be provided under terms no more restrictive than GPL
> > sections one and two.
>
>
> Dear Erast!
>
> On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:01, Erast Benson wrote:
>> > Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
>> > libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.0, and libgcc_s.so.1,
>> > which must be provided under terms no more restrictive than GPL
>> > sections one and
On Monday 07 November 2005 11:28 pm, Francesco Poli wrote:
> [Added Cc: debian-legal, because the topic may be of interest there,
> I would say.]
> [No need to Cc: me, as long as you keep Cc:ing debian-legal (just to
> make things clear: I am subscribed to debian-legal, but not to
> debian-devel)]
On Saturday 05 November 2005 11:27 pm, Brian May wrote:
> Can't we just pick one standard name for the environment variable and
> stick to it?
If we do that, I'd request that it be $TMPDIR, as that's what SUSv3 has
standardized.
--
Brian M. Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Running on GNU/kFreeBSD; i
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> /dev/{pts/,ptmx} are so trivial to support (in applications) that I
> think it's worthwhile to disable legacy BSD pty support in Debian
> kernels, and fix whatever still breaks. That is, unless we think there
> are still a significant number of third-p
On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> The way I read it was that "the authors may pick any license, so long as it's
> DFSG-free". Do you see how it could be read that way?
You sound just like Henry Ford.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-text-kvj
Version : 2.2
Upstream Author : CrossWire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire.org/s
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-text-rv
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Crosswire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire.org/sw
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-strongs-greek
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : Crosswire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-strongs-hebrew
Version : 1.2
Upstream Author : Crosswire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:58 am, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > The way I read it was that "the authors may pick any license, so long as
> > it's DFSG-free". Do you see how it could be read that way?
>
> You sound just like Henry Ford.
My goal was to do e
Hi!
* Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [051108 01:48]:
> > (0.6.40.1-1.1) nor your patched debhelper (4.9.3elatte) as requested in my
> > other mail.
> I'm personally working on it, and I will not commit those changes until
> they will be tested. Rememer, these all binaries are under development,
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 04:48:52PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
> > Dear Erast!
> >
> > On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:01, Erast Benson wrote:
> >> > Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
> >> > libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.0, and libgcc_s.so.1,
> >> > which must
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 04:48:52PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
>> > Dear Erast!
>> >
>> > On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:01, Erast Benson wrote:
>> >> > Specifically requested were the source for libintl.so.3,
>> >> > libiconv.so.2, libc.so.1, libz.so, libbz2.so.1.0, and
>> libgcc_s.so.1,
>> >> >
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 04:48:52PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
> this URL also does _neither_ offer access to the apt
> > (0.6.40.1-1.1) nor your patched debhelper (4.9.3elatte) as requested in my
> > other mail.
> I'm personally working on it, and I will not commit those changes until
> they wil
Hi,
A new version of kernel-package is imminent, it is undergoing
boot camp out in experimental. For the impatient, this release brings
the log awaited debconf usage for kernel image packages -- and the
raison d'etre of this mail. Below are the new features of the
upcoming kernel-packa
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: kompile
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Tommaso Frazzetto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=30223
* License : GPL
Description
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 04:48:52PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
>
>> this URL also does _neither_ offer access to the apt
>> > (0.6.40.1-1.1) nor your patched debhelper (4.9.3elatte) as requested
>> in my
>> > other mail.
>
>> I'm personally working on it, and I will not commit those changes until
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-comm-scofield
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Crosswire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
* Package name: sword-comm-tdavid
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Crosswire Bible Society <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://www.crosswire.or
"Erast Benson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I understand your concern. We will release ISO image with CDDL/GPL sources
> very soon. Majority of them already available at /apt. The rest is
> comming.
Once again, delete the binaries *now*.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 07:35:11PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 04:48:52PM -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
>
> > this URL also does _neither_ offer access to the apt
> > > (0.6.40.1-1.1) nor your patched debhelper (4.9.3elatte) as requested in my
> > > other mail.
>
> > I'm
Quoting Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Hi,
>
> A new version of kernel-package is imminent, it is undergoing
> boot camp out in experimental. For the impatient, this release brings
> the log awaited debconf usage for kernel image packages -- and the
> raison d'etre of this mail
91 matches
Mail list logo
