On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 10:53:14PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 07:26:50AM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> > > The Debian packaging system only understands progress and not
> > > necissarily the ramifications of such. This could very easily be
> > > fixed and allow for mul
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 10:02:29AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wow, you mean like the one in experimental already? That's quite some
> daring proposal. :-)
I _never_ claimed that it was original, or daring. I simply indicated
that it was a means of getting the new version in that would work with
t
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 07:18:24AM -0600, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 06:02:04PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 03:02:38PM -0600, Brian McGroarty wrote:
> >
> > > smartsuite has gone missing from all but woody. Is there a reason?
> >
> > Looks like
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 01:47:57PM -0500, stan wrote:
> Somewhere in the middle of the discussion, it became quite clear that
> he simply _did not understand_ the concept of obtaining a peice of
> software that he did not have to pay for :-(
(snip)
> I would like to provide him with a gentle in
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 12:46:16PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Nevermind that my "change X" or "rework X" is at the exact same level
> of the explanation you've given your solution. Difference is, it is
> already coded. I've thrown out several ideas.
>
> Modify the behavior of epoch.
> Inclu
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 12:43:19PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:35:34 -0600 Jamin Collins
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Because epoch's already have a use, which is different from what you
> > describe. You're suggesting tacking new fu
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 10:30:44AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:36:29 -0600
> Jamin Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Great, I'll get right on that. Oh wait, there no indication of how.
> > Sure, we can just "change" the packagi
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 10:28:41AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 11:26:38 -0600 Jamin Collins
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No it's not. Version number indicate a progression of an
> > application, they have no indication of "major difference
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:15:56AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 08:37:54 -0600 Jamin Collins
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If you've got another viable option, I'm sure we'd love to hear it.
>
> U, update the packaging sy
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:14:28AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003 08:35:17 -0600 Jamin Collins
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is not just about version numbers, it's about handling major
> > differences between two releases, regardl
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 04:36:17AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Yes, it is a matter of preference. However, since when was preference
> a matter of /policy/. I am pointing out that there appears to be no
> policy in regards to when a version number is attached to the name of
> the package.
And th
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 04:39:40AM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> The question at hand is why people believe the only appropriate
> behavior is to place the version number into the package name and not
> to figure out a way to handle it with the version field or some other
> field so that it is transp
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 12:50:16PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> I think the main reason why Debian is still on the 3.x series is
> because it is the default mailer for Debian and with the 4.x series
> Exim broke config file compatibility. I remember reading somewhere
> that because of that combinat
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 04:31:18PM -0500, Bill wrote:
> I currently have Debian 2.2 R7 I3 installed and I am not sure what
> release I have whether its stable or unstable.
Debian 2.2 would be the _old_ stable (aka potato).
> I have been trying to get the NVidia Drivers working on it and people
>
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 02:17:38PM +0100, Aaron Isotton wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-03-17 at 05:05, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
>
> > Is there something particular that you dislike about this method?
> > Or, is it in some way lacking?
>
> What I liked about using iptables-save and iptables-restore is that
On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 12:27:29AM +0200, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> Well, it seems "google is your friend" is used extensivly trough this
> mailing list. I tried my best to make friends with him and to find a
> sample iptables config file, with no success.
Ahhh, but did you try "apt-cache search ipta
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:40:51PM -0800, Martin J. Hillyer wrote:
> I'm having an irritating problem with Mozilla. After what appears to
> be a random length of time (often very short, eg, after one entry), it
> stops accepting typing in, for example, the address box, or in a
> google text input
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 04:32:36PM -0400, james leclair wrote:
> Hello, you guys have been very helpful in the past so heres another
> one for yus! I'm about to take the plunge and pick up a laptop. My
> first laptop in a number of years. So, what, if any, suggestions
> comments or what have y
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 06:18:24PM +, Joao Pedro Clemente wrote:
>
> > Can you recommend any good (not too expensive) quiet cases? I may
> > build a computer soon to be my home grown PVR/DVD combo, and of
> > course anything sitting in the living room on all the time needs to
> > be quiet.
>
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 12:11:12AM +1100, bob parker wrote:
> My son's proposed network is to be this:
>
> Firewall / NAT / Gateway machine connected to cable using 1 nic.
> Connects to hardware router / switch using 2nd nic.
No need for an additional router, the Linux firewall can provide this
f
On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:36:54AM -0800, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:
> Well if you have atleast one machine running with X11 you could
> install Firewall Builder (fwbuilder)[1] which has a relatively straight
> forward GUI that will allow you to drag and drop to create the rules you
> want for t
21 matches
Mail list logo
