On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:17:47PM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >
> > > Debian needs to make a decision on how it will deal with this legal
> > > minefield. Tha
On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> technically does not permit redistribution. At least 53 blobs have this
> problem. Many of them are licensed under the GPL, but without source code
> provided. Since
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:27:21AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> > technically does not permit redistribution. At least 53 blobs have this
> > problem. Many of the
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 00:29, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to say:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:51:39PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> > On Monday 28 August 2006 21:06, Steve Langasek took the opportunity to
say:
> > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:01:57PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
>
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:00:27AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:17:47PM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > >
> > > > Debian needs
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 10:22:38AM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote:
> > > So, all in all, all this fuss for seven blobs ? waw, what a waste of
> > > time.
> > 53 + 7 = 60.
> > Please Mike, you have lately a tendency to inflame discussions for
> > nothing. You've used me to expect better from you.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 17 août 2006 à 11:48 -0400, Anthony L. Bryan a écrit :
>
> Given that downloads like Debian ISOs are already putting a heavy
> bandwidth load on the servers and that they are already shared among
> many servers, I
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:00:27AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:17:47PM -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > >
> > > > Debian needs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi list,
I'm developing a set of Pan-CJK CID fonts (OTF/TTF format, not wrapped
up PS),
which will come with their own font specific CMap files. The Adobe ones
won't work.
Now my question: Where should the fonts and the CMap files be installed and
ho
On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 12:27:43 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 28, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Just yesterday night dato raised the issue on #d-release, and I was
> > telling about the virtual package, and that we could move to it now,
> > and worry later about a possible transition to that new up
On Aug 30, Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not convinced that duplicating update-inetd in most of the
> inetd providing packages is a good idea, even if this would allow
> xinetd to be able to replace a normal inetd easily. I'd prefer that the
> odd cases override update-inetd, via
Am 2006-08-24 17:51:55, schrieb Rudy Godoy:
> I do believe it's more a matter of relations with press and media than
> budget. We have no easy-way-to-get-it to tell people why they would want to
> use Debian. Ubuntu, on the other hand, has achieved to do so, and what they
> tell that we can't? not
Am 2006-08-25 11:46:20, schrieb Mgr. Peter Tuharsky:
> 1b, If things don't work, it's sometimes hard to get them working
> either. Example: Bug 372719. The OOo 2.0 keeps crashing for 2 months
> thank to KNOWN bug in security upgrade. Now tell somebody, that Debian
But OOo 2.0 is not in Stable!
Am 2006-08-26 02:56:25, schrieb Hendrik Sattler:
> Am Freitag 25 August 2006 12:54 schrieb Wouter Verhelst:
> > Given that a kernel image these days takes up about 50M already
>
> I guess that those that care for the smallest possible base system (and those
> that hate initrd/initramfs) have thei
Am 2006-08-26 02:01:21, schrieb Benjamin Seidenberg:
> You can always use a Transnational Republic ID card.
:-)
Where can I get this? - Martin?
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User
Am 2006-08-27 01:19:23, schrieb Adam Borowski:
> I am pretty sure Michelle has at least _some_ sort of ID, even as an
> illegal alien. And with the current anti-Arab scare she would be
> already deported were she lacking complete valid papers -- you can
> sit in peace if you don't travel anywhere
Hello,
On Wed, 30.08.2006 at 09:27:21 +0200, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> > technically does not permit redistribution. At least 53 blobs have this
>
Op wo, 30-08-2006 te 17:16 +0200, schreef Toni Mueller:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 30.08.2006 at 09:27:21 +0200, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> > > techni
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 05:16:29PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 30.08.2006 at 09:27:21 +0200, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> >
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 12:58:27PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 28, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 1) Split out update-inetd from netbase into a new "inetd" package.
> No, because e.g. xinetd needs a totally different update-inetd program.
> It's simpler if each inetd package
On Aug 30, Jean-Christophe Dubacq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instead, all packages should call a common update-inetd minus the last
> line. This common part registers the arguments for the service under a
> common format. Then it calls a inetd-specific script that parses those
We do not have a n
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: adun.app
Version : 0.5
Upstream Authors : Michael A. Johnston,
I. F. Galván,
Jordi Villà-Freixa
* URL : http://diana.imim.es/Adun
* License : GNU GPL
Description : Molec
"Sven Luther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:27:21AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
> technically does not permit
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: bazaar-webserve
Version : Unknown
Upstream Author : Goffredo Baroncelli
* URL : http://goffredo-baroncelli.homelinux.net/bazaar-dev/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Pyt
CC'ed debian-devel
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 04:49:11PM +0100, João Batista wrote:
>
> I'd like to propose a facility, configurable when running
> dpkg-reconfigure localepurge , to allow the sysadmin to select when
> localepurge should be run e.g.:
> - everytime dpkg/apt is run (default)
> - m
Hi list,
For deploying a number of servers at a client's, we've started using
package-based configuration. The idea is not new and not complicated:
put the local configuration files in Debian packages to deploy them.
This answers to the following needs:
* simplicity;
* ability to dep
also sprach Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.30.2023 +0200]:
> First question to the developers, what are you using for deploying
> configuration on your servers?
cfengine and puppet
> * The first thing that comes to mind is the ability to divert
> conffiles. This could
On 30-Aug-06, 12:38 (CDT), Paul Seelig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> CC'ed debian-devel
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 04:49:11PM +0100, Jo?o Batista wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to propose a facility, configurable when running
> > dpkg-reconfigure localepurge , to allow the sysadmin to select when
> > l
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> also sprach Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.30.2023 +0200]:
> > First question to the developers, what are you using for deploying
> > configuration on your servers?
>
> cfengine and puppet
Are you using both at the same time? Or moving
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder if it would be worthwhile to try to quantify this some more,
> by looking at all the RC bugs over a period of time and determining:
>
> a. What percentage were caused by issues in new uploads.
> b. What percentage by transitions.
> c. What percentag
On Wed August 30 2006 02:52, Subredu Manuel wrote:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le jeudi 17 août 2006 à 11:48 -0400, Anthony L. Bryan a écrit :
> >
> > Given that downloads like Debian ISOs are already putting a heavy
> > bandwidth load on the servers and that they are already shared
> > among man
Hello gurus,
I thought I would be slick and write a package that contains a script
that will figure out what should be installed/removed/upgraded/etc. on
each of the machines where I work. (Using sarge, btw.) I had planned
to do this by listing each of the packages and it's install status in
Joe Smith wrote:
> "Sven Luther" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:27:21AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>>> On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing whic
Sven Luther wrote:
> Since the firmware blobs are not derivative works of the kernel, but
> constitute mere agregation in the same binary format, the authors of other
> pieces of GPLed code fo the linux kernel cannot even sue us for
> distributing the kernel code with those GPL-violating binary BL
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>
>> Debian needs to make a decision on how it will deal with this legal
>> minefield. That is higher priority than the entire discussion going on
>> right now, because it determines whether Debian will dis
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:18:28PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > Since the firmware blobs are not derivative works of the kernel, but
> > constitute mere agregation in the same binary format, the authors of other
> > pieces of GPLed code fo the linux kernel cannot even
Le mercredi 30 août 2006 à 21:26 +0200, martin f krafft a écrit :
> > * The first thing that comes to mind is the ability to divert
> > conffiles. This could help a lot to build things around existing
> > packages. Do you think this is realistic? Can this be done with
> >
Hi
On Thursday 31 August 2006 01:58, Gürkan Sengün wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name: adun.app
Maybe I miss some essential parts, but I always wonder why some people add
a .app to the software name? Can you please give me a short explanation or
point me to a prev
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 09:24:21PM +1000, Steffen Joeris wrote:
> Hi
>
> > * Package name: adun.app
> Maybe I miss some essential parts, but I always wonder why some people add
> a .app to the software name? Can you please give me a short explanation or
> point me to a previous thread?
>
I
On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 14:22:07 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 30, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > I'm not convinced that duplicating update-inetd in most of the
> > inetd providing packages is a good idea, even if this would allow
> > xinetd to be able to replace a normal inetd easily. I'd prefer tha
Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote (elsewhere):
>> something changes in the archive (often for a transition that needs
>> to happen), a large number of packages are broken by this, and some
>> appreciable number of the maintainers don't respond in a reasonable
>> amount of time ("reasonable"
Toni Mueller wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 30.08.2006 at 09:27:21 +0200, Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Aug 30, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Debian must decide whether it wants to ship BLOBs with licensing which
>> > technically does not permit redistributio
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:26:56PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 08:48:00PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >> Debian needs to make a decision on how it will deal with this legal
> >> minefield. That is higher priority than the entire discussion going on
> >> right
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 22:12:04 -0400, Daniel Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 09:24:21PM +1000, Steffen Joeris wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> > * Package name : adun.app
>> Maybe I miss some essential parts, but I always wonder why some
>> people add a .app to the software name? Ca
[Nathanael Nerode]
> So -- point me to the correct parts of the installer. I don't know
> where to find this "anna".
svn://svn.debian.org/d-i/trunk/packages/anna
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:26:56PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> Actually, letting an overworked team of four with (to my knowledge) zero
>> legal expertise settle questions of legal liability is pretty absurd too.
>
> They are the team responsible for vetting the le
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Sass wrote:
>
> You seem to be ignoring that metalinker will use multiple protocols,
> servers, and connections in an effort to get the fastest download.
> http://www.metalinker.org/Metalink_3.0_Spec.pdf also indicates it will
> switch serv
47 matches
Mail list logo
