Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marco d'Itri
I intend to package the new version of libxcrypt, which will replace the
orphaned libxcrypt source package.
Some day it may replace crypt(3), currently provided by glibc:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Replace_glibc_libcrypt_with_libx
On 2018-07-16 17:59:28 [+0200], Matthias Klose wrote:
> architectures. Some notes on other candidates for release architectures:
>
> - armel: The armv4t default isn't used very much anymore, and we had
>issues in the past.
Would things get better with armv5te as default or is the lack of FP
Quack,
(This is a followup of the thread started on debian-private. This is not
a private matter at all, and we should have discussed this openly from
the start.)
It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and the
name of the binaries and further content was deemed offen
"Marc Dequènes (duck)" writes:
> It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and
> the name of the binaries and further content was deemed
> offensive. This was already raised in the past (~2012 IIRC) but the
> package was reintroduced and has been in the archive since then.
Matthew Vernon wrote:
>
>Part of the problem, I think, is that there are just so many of these
>"little things", and that together they make up an environment that is
>hostile to folk who aren't male (and, often, white and heterosexual). If
>it was just one "little thing" then perhaps it wouldn't b
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:03:53PM +0900, Marc Dequènes (duck) wrote:
> (This is a followup of the thread started on debian-private. This is not a
> private matter at all, and we should have discussed this openly from the
> start.)
No! It's bad enough that this kind of massive flamewar is goi
On 2018-07-18 18:24, ju xor wrote:
Philipp Kern:
Should this live in some kind of tor-* namespace?
no
Without any rationale? :(
Kind regards
Philipp Kern
Philipp Kern:
> On 2018-07-18 18:24, ju xor wrote:
>> Philipp Kern:
>>> Should this live in some kind of tor-* namespace?
>> no
>
> Without any rationale? :(
>
i'm not sure what you mean, but in case it helps, here some arguments
why sbws package is not called something like tor-sbws:
- upstrea
On 2018-02-27 18:34:13 [+0100], Héctor Romojaro Gómez wrote:
> El mar, 27-02-2018 a las 17:36 +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine escribió:
> > [...]
> >
> > I would suggest to provide a migration package for AOLserver users
> > with a NEWS document about possible issues due to known problems.
>
> Agre
On 15102 March 1977, Marc Dequènes (duck) wrote:
> It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and
> the name of the binaries and further content was deemed offensive.
> This was already raised in the past (~2012 IIRC) but the package was
> reintroduced and has been in the arch
On 7/18/18 7:03 AM, Marc Dequènes (duck) wrote:
> It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and the
> name of the binaries and further content was deemed offensive. This was
> already raised in the past (~2012 IIRC) but the package was reintroduced
> and has been in the archiv
Forwarding the ITP e-mail because I forgot to Cc debian-devel.
--
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/
--- Begin Message ---
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sergio Durigan Junior
* Package n
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:03:53 +0900, Marc Dequ?nes (duck) writes:
>It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and the
>name of the binaries and further content was deemed offensive.
'deemed' by whoever...right, that's very authoritative and i'm
highly impressed. not.
i'm for
Marc Dequènes (duck) writes ("Should the weboob package stay in Debian?"):
> It has been brought to my attention that this package, its name and the
> name of the binaries and further content was deemed offensive. This was
> already raised in the past (~2012 IIRC) but the package was reintroduced
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:35 PM, Lumin wrote:
> I just noticed that one of us tries to package deep-learning based
> application[1], specifically it is AlphaGo-Zero[2] based. However, this
> raised my concern about software freedom. Since mankind relys on artificial
> intelligence more and more, I
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sergio Durigan Junior
* Package name: python-openidc-client
Version : 0.6.0
Upstream Author : Patrick Uiterwijk
* URL : https://github.com/puiterwijk/python-openidc-client
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Python
D
]] Michael Stone
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 03:14:20PM +0200, Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
> >It writes to `/dev/shm` which is not disk.
>
> All else that's been said aside, this idea is also dangerously
> incorrect in a typical configuration: the tmpfs backend will write to
> swap under memory pressure
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> Assuming it's small enough, using a pipe (or possibly a FIFO) could
> work. That's kernel memory and iirc it won't be swapped out. (I'm
> happy to be corrected on this, I'm basing it on what I've heard before
> and my recollection of it.)
There's a Kerberos ticket cac
Hi,
On Fri, 18 May 2018 10:29:03 +0200
Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> > Does it fail like in bug #858153 (which has a patch) or in a different way?
>
> That bug is a year old and for 0.19, not sure if it's still any relevant
> for current releases, when trying to run a bootstrap build with 0.25 it's
19 matches
Mail list logo
