On Mar 12, Josh Lauricha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you figure a system that requires [nearly] all packages to be
> modified, non-specific to that project? Every Debian package that might
No, it does not. What about you read the white paper instead of
speculating?
--
m.
> Those who felt this necessary, can you please describe which specific
> features you believe are necessary, and why?
Only a toy OS like Windows need an external firewall to protect them.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
se Debian should not waste resources to support a toy OS (in this
case defined as one not secure enough to stay on the internet for real
work).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
s
the basic security features needed to safely stay on the internet then I
think it's obvious that it's not mature and useful enough to be worth
keeping it in the archive.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ps, ppp, pppconfig, setserial. There are surely more.)
I suppose that Hurd will have its own packages which implement these
functions, so the number should even out among different architectures.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mar 18, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There would definitely be duplication of arch:all between ftp.debian.org
> and ports.debian.org (let's call it ports), as well as duplication of the
> source.
As a mirror operator, I think that this sucks. Bad
erator, I think that this sucks. Badly.
> So don't duplicate ports. That's the whole point.
I'd still like to support them, on some of my mirrors.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 13, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sorry, I was under the impression that every package in Debian was
> software. Are you confusing software and computer programs?
No, I just do not believe that this specious distinction is useful.
--
ciao,
Marc
entation, like e-zines, books, etc.
This is not a new topic, if it's not familiar to you I am sure that you
will be able to find plenty of old threads about this in the
debian-devel@ archives.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ible with
the one you choose, being them DFSG-free or not.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
shame that Debian
> can't distribute them to me.
Debian does not want, it's quite a different issue.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
g needed to do it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tall the
2.95 packages from sarge?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
e know what would be needed ?
An updated exim configuration which can look at the LDAP database, I
suppose. I do not know the details of how debian.org mail is handled.
(And anyway it would not be resolutive, I get most of my debian spam
from the 23 @packages.debian.org addresses I receive...)
On Nov 21, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do others think? Would it be acceptable Policy-wise to handle
> configuration like this?
Yes.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 19, Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [udev] edit /etc/udev/permissions.rules (owned by the "udev" package,
> and thus out of reach of "fuse-utils" anyway)
Wrong. The correct solution would be to install a new file in
/etc/udev/rules.d/.
t and keep the
script forever?
Comments are encouraged, I favour the first option.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
have to live with debhelper running depmod, possibly
> redundantly.
Considering that nobody had better ideas, I'd rather remove the
update-modules debianism in the future.
Running depmod two times will not be a problem if you use -A, which
checks the files timestamps before reading them.
--
c
On Dec 11, Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But if multiple URLs could satisfactorily serve requests for a single
> repository, only one of them is currently used.
Which is fine, because we do not want people to open multiple
connections to the same server.
--
ould solve.
If a single mirror cannot saturate the network link then maybe a
different mirror should be used.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 12, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not open 3 connections one to each host?
Why do?
> Or at least fall back to the other IPs if the first one gives an
> error?
I hope that this already happens...
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
w size, and it *is* common practice for large
mirrors to tune it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
too.
The solution so far appears to be writing a rules file which will
statically assign the names.
> A lot of more detailed issues about this topic can be seen in the meeting log.
I will try to read it later.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 17, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After installation you should have a tmpfs mounted on /run.
I do not remember a consensus about this.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 18, Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> An alternative appears to be to process events in series... or maybe delaying
This was the precedent approach, and it's much slower (also, it cannot
be implemented anymore with just udevd).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Descri
On Dec 18, Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do not remember a consensus about this.
> Changes in Debian are generally decided by package maintainers, not by
> consensus.
Good to know. So I'm happy that nobody will complain when I will make
udev mand
On Dec 18, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have yet to hear any strong reason why we should _not_ implement
> /run.
> I do not count "It's ugly!" as a strong reason.
It's not needed (since we have /dev/shm/), so it's har
rains are different thigs, but a tmpfs is a tmpfs.
> Furthermore, /dev/shm is a mount point with a _very_ specific function.
> It's a bad idea to start using it for something else.
Reality check: packages have been using it for a long time and the world
has not fallen yet.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
us to some examples of the
random breakage you suggest has happened?
> Where was it ever written down that any package could use /dev/shm?
> They can't.
Oops. They already do.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 18, "Andrew M.A. Cater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will it work fine over a serial console? Is it fine for ex-Solaris/HP-UX
Sure, I often use vim over serial consoles.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ounds to me like it is a bad idea to use it.
Only because you have no clue of what you are talking about.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 18, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW I asked Chris Yeoh for his opinion on the name and he said that
> /run sounded preferable to both /etc/run and /lib/run.
Competition with /root in tab-completion, for a start.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
often happens anyway when switching between 2.4 and 2.6 kernels, so
it's something users have always needed to be aware about.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
he future?
> /run doesn't especially /need/ to be a tmpfs fs does it? It could
The current proposal does.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
/init. Especially given our use
> of /usr/lib, it seems the most suitable dumping ground for random stuff
> like /run; and a far better one than / itself.
ACK.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
sn't especially /need/ to be a tmpfs fs does it? It could
> It does not have much sense if it is not a tmpfs, since we already have
> /var/run.
I understand that some people want a writeable file system available
before / is mounted rw.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
r a tmpfs.
> There are many uses for an ext3fs, but that doesn't mean we only have
> one ext3 filesystem. What exactly is your reasoning here?
That tmpfs will not be removed from the kernel just because shm_open()
will switch to a different implementation.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
for.
You keep saying this, but fail to provide any arguments except
handwaving.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
nd so would two programs using the same name for a SHM object (well,
they would share it, as it's designed to be).
The real lesson in this is that object names should be choosed
carefully.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
need to use an alternate location.
There is no reason why it should be moved.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 19, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's correct, but you should still not be using the namespace for
> non-SHM activities.
Because?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 19, Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any other defenders of /lib/run? Of /run?
If it really needs to exist, something of which I am not persuaded, then
at least it should not go in /.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
> > > /dev/shm mounted; you would need to use an alternate location.
> > There is no reason why it should be moved.
> How could anyone know that today?
Common sense. Stuff like not trying to invent unplausible situations for
the sake of an argument...
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 20, Anthony Towns wrote:
> (TBH, I'd be much happier just making the technical changes necessary
> to ensure /var is mounted early -- keeps the filesystem sane, and it's
> just a simple matter of programming, rather than arguing over what's
Me too.
--
cia
us the
> first tab on each line).
It breaks a widely used feature. Why should this change not be
considered a make bug?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
001 and have not yet stopped using devfs).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
" rule, which catches unconfigured
> devices and automatically creates a rule for them to keep the name
> stable across reboots.
>
> Kay
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ented in the man page).
persistent.rules and hotplug.rules are examples of complex rules using
advanced features.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
m symlink at all?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
:
dvbtune
rng-tools
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ev | udev.
> rng-tools postinst does this:
> (cd /dev && ./MAKEDEV hwrandom || ./MAKEDEV intel_rng || true)
I can't see the point. It already depends on a specific makedev release,
so the commands are supposed to work.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
SYSTEM=="net", SYSFS{address}=="?*", \
IMPORT{program}="/sbin/ifup --mac-to-name $sysfs{address}"
# if it did not work, try using other properties
SUBSYSTEM=="net", ENV{IF_NAME}!="?*", ..., \
IMPORT{program}="..."
# set th
east by most
users, which then will be able to remove it from their systems).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ed multiple copies of the same device with different owners).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
;cdrom"
>
> to
>
> ENV{ID_CDROM}=="?*", KERNEL!="hdc" GROUP="cdrom"
>
> but I'm not sure.
The correct solution would be to add this to a file like
/etc/udev/rules.d/local.rules:
KERNEL=="hdc", GROUP="disk"
README.Debian has some hints.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 30, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, I have a package that depends on makedev (pbbuttonsd) and I was
> wondering why it doesn't show up in your list? Maybe because it
> is powerpc only?
Yes, I did build the list on my x86 box.
--
ciao,
Marco
signa
On Dec 29, Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I remember them being reliable. Sacrificing their reliability at the altar of
> boot speed (AIUI) wasn't really a good idea...
No reliability will be sacrified, but some things will have to be
implemented differently.
udevinfo -a -p /sys/class/sound/dsp .
But you can break it up in enough special cases which individually are
easily tractable, e.g. by looking at $ENV{ID_PATH} for block devices,
hardware IDs for PCI and USB devices, etc.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ell aware and do not care
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
15 by the time etch will be frozen) and the upstream maintainers
promised that (modulo bugs) versions >= 072 will be forward-compatible
with new kernel releases.
Anyway, I agree that we should aim to release something better than a
six months old kernel (which sarge showed is often too old).
-
ixes and new features RHEL-style.
Do you have a better solution?
(Other than telling people "just use Ubuntu", which is what I do.)
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
aused by udev bugs.
And anyway, it's called unstable for a reason. udev in stable is stable.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
)
This program still looks like a bad idea.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d_104]
-
--
ciao,
Marco
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I uploaded to experimental a udev new package with the (theoretical)
potential of breaking some custom rules referencing sysfs attributes.
I expect that the supporters of experimental will install it today and
report their experience. (Lack of reports will be considered positive.)
--
ciao,
Marco
, in any form you find convenient" they could actually do
it... I'm tired of begging for patches.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tp://utnubu.alioth.debian.org/scottish/by_maint/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
You are totally missing my point.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t it's not much more
different from just downloading the .diff.gz files from their archive.
I still need to do it from time to time and then hunt for changes since
the last time.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jan 12, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The relevant context is generally available in the changelog (which is in
At least for my packages, this is often false.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: wnpp
Followup-For: Bug #338694
Owner: Marco Bertorello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: denyhosts
Version : 1.1.4
Upstream Author : Phil Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net
* License : GPL
Description
;
This RUN action will never work because /root is not writeable when the
rule is processed. You should use something like:
RUN+="/bin/touch /dev/flag-eth0-1"
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jan 18, Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, network interface names are given by the kernel
> and they've nothing to do with udev.
Obviously you have no clue about udev (nor about proper quoting).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Des
/opensuse/distribution/SL-OSS-factory/inst-source/suse/src/sysconfig-0.50.0-3.src.rpm
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
This reminds me that there should be a list of modules which MUST NOT be
added to the initramfs because loading them too early is both useless
and as in this case actively harmful.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
l if we need some
> modules not to appear in the initramfs.
If you do not want to load modules in the initramfs then do not put them
there in the first place.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
must be handled by udev because if it's not then
network hotplug handlers will be called with the wrong interface name.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
u use ifrename to rename the device then the hotplug agents
run by udev will not know about the new name.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
etwork hotplug events will be synthesized at boot time.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jan 19, Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there an objection, or shall I file a serious bug against ffmpeg?
Yes, I object to asking for removal of MPEG encoders because there is no
good reason to do it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
on a regular basis as part of my
> mythtv PVR setup. I hope to be able to continue as Kenneth did and
> provide backports from my website at http://debian.crustynet.org.uk/.
>
> -- Chris Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:50:24 +
>
--
ciao,
Marco
s
On Jan 31, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why send this to debian-devel? I suggest talking to Chris directly
Because this way other developers may learn something useful from the
thread.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
td will have been
rewritten, so if you care you need to fix this first.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ly the files in /etc/ would be left.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
this property (and the dependencies on
I don't.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
unreasonable, which suggests
> that it really shouldn't be considered free.
No, it's quite easy: "net" is a common name, "PHP" and "Apache" are not
(and are even the names of the software being licensed).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marco Nenciarini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: wengophone
Version : 0.99+svn4179
Upstream Author : Wengo SAS
* URL : http://dev.openwengo.com/
* License : GPL with exception for ssl linking
Description
t; and deceived many other developers should have
tought about this.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.
The change had deep practical effects, so it was obviously not
"editorial".
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
software, and they shall be distributed with their original sources)
The usual suspects from time to time have already been trying to start
an images madness on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you care about Debian, please contribute sane ideas to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
k FSF what they think about this situation?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
th, software (possibly trivial) and data in the same
file.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
in.
This may be annoying for you, but it's a fact that there is an
interpretation of the old wording which has been used for years to
accept non-free documentation into main.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Feb 09, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone come forward and said "I was deceived by GR 2004-03"? I
Yes, multiple people did. HTH.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ppose you could be partially excused.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
It shows that there was a widely accepted meaning of what "software" is
in the context of the DFSG, so the change was not "editorial".
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d aj's message.
> What did they say in response to questions like "did you read the
> changes?"
I do not remember. I do not think it's relevant either.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ful.
> Were you "deceived" by the 2003 amendment?
No, because the second time I received the ballot I had time to waste
and spent it reading the proposed changes. But just by reading the
subject I would have believed too that these were trivial changes, just
like in the precedent GR.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 13, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However it whould be great if update-inetd could create a file in
Many new features in update-inetd would be great, but nobody ever
finished implementing them.
- --
ciao,
Marco
-
l pattern: I explain what needs to be done to
somebody who starts implementing it and then disappears when it's close
to be finished.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
etc.,).
You use google groups to search the linux.debian.bugs.dist newsgroup.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
101 - 200 of 2186 matches
Mail list logo
