On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 07:17:47PM -0600, Default User
wrote:
> IMHO, the idea of paying privileged, pet, mercenary
> developers, while others work for free, was a VERY BAD
> IDEA! And it FAILED MISERABLY: (12-4-06 release? It's now
> 12-15-06 UT; still no release in sight).
Less than a month ove
d or pets or mercenaries?
With all respect to the DDs (and I apologize for adding my voice to
the noise), I have to admit I don't *get* this dunc-tank furor thing.
Shouldn't we all be happy that someone wants to add incentive to the
release team to get Etch out the door? Doesn't all of De
Default User wrote:
> IMHO, the idea of paying privileged, pet, mercenary developers, while
> others work for free, was a VERY BAD IDEA!
Well, that's your perogative. However, who said they were privledged or
pets or mercenaries?
> And it FAILED MISERABLY: (12-4-06 release? It's now 12-15-06
Hi Miles,
Am 2006-12-15 10:59:21, schrieb Miles Bader:
> Default User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How would YOU feel working hard for $0/mo while someone else gets paid
> > (perhaps) $6,000/mo for working on the same project?
>
> Just fine thank you.
>
> When I do work as a free software vol
Am 2006-12-14 19:17:47, schrieb Default User:
> IMHO, the idea of paying privileged, pet, mercenary developers, while
> others
> work for free, was a VERY BAD IDEA! And it FAILED MISERABLY: (12-4-06
> release? It's now 12-15-06 UT; still no release in sight). How would
> YOU feel working hard for
On Fri, 2006-12-15 at 08:51 +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 21:03 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > IIRC someone related to the debian project 'holds' the debian.net domain
> > and it is used as a sort of 'staging' site before it joins debian.org.
> > The wiki at wiki.debian.org was
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 21:03 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> IIRC someone related to the debian project 'holds' the debian.net domain
> and it is used as a sort of 'staging' site before it joins debian.org.
> The wiki at wiki.debian.org was on wiki.debian.net first. So since this
> is a new project, the
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think my statement was meant to say that most contributions to
> Debian are by people who are not getting paid. Would that be closer to
> a fact?
Of course. But what of it? The real question is whether it matters or
not. As I mentioned in another post,
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 10:41:40AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Traditionally no one is paid to do Free software work.
>
> This of course, is simply (and obviously) not true.
>
Hi Miles,
I guess I agree that this statement is false. There are more than a
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 02:30:12AM +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 19:35 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > Have you seen this?[0]
> > > debian-desktop project has made for etch, etc. The design itself looks
> > > like something stuck way back in 1998. The newly created debian sites
; an
employee gives up some of that freedom for income).
Perhaps debian volunteers are more fragile than usual, I don't know.
[I'm not saying the dunc-tank project is producing useful results; maybe
it isn't...]
-Miles
--
`Suppose Korea goes to the World Cup final against Japan and
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 02:30:12AM +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 19:35 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > Have you seen this?[0]
> > > debian-desktop project has made for etch, etc. The design itself looks
> > > like something stuck way back in 1998. The newly created debian sites
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Traditionally no one is paid to do Free software work.
This of course, is simply (and obviously) not true.
-Miles
--
Run away! Run away!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED
Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Traditionally no one is paid to do Free software work.
This of course, is simply (and obviously) not true.
-Miles
--
Run away! Run away!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, 2006-12-14 at 19:35 -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> Have you seen this?[0]
> > debian-desktop project has made for etch, etc. The design itself looks
> > like something stuck way back in 1998. The newly created debian sites
> > for debconf[1] by comparison looks modern and fresh.
> Cheers,
> Ke
IMHO, the idea of paying privileged, pet, mercenary developers, while
others
work for free, was a VERY BAD IDEA! And it FAILED MISERABLY: (12-4-06
release? It's now 12-15-06 UT; still no release in sight). How would
YOU feel working hard for $0/mo while someone else gets paid (perhaps)
$6,000/mo
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 11:59:14PM +0100, Sven Arvidsson wrote:
> I agree with a lot of what you said, and really miss DWN myself.
>
> For people already interested in, and involved with Debian, reading
> mailing lists, the wiki, and the blogs on planet was probably a better
> way to keep up. Howe
D G Teed wrote:
> I understand the political tug of war the DWN editor is involved in, but
> in the end, holding a gun to the head of what you like isn't helping
> anything. The missing DWN is one missing piece of "product" continuity,
> and reading the "why" just makes things worse.
The editor o
27;t make that decision on
> my own. I found it was a challenge to convince
> others in the decision making process that Debian
> is solid and here to stay when the Dunc Tanc causes
> the Weekly News to drop out of consistent appearance.
> I know there are alternate sources of infor
I agree with a lot of what you said, and really miss DWN myself.
For people already interested in, and involved with Debian, reading
mailing lists, the wiki, and the blogs on planet was probably a better
way to keep up. However, DWN was important as it was an easy to find,
and easy to read summary
de on a replacement for FreeBSD for 14 servers.
> >
> > I favor Debian, however I can't make that decision on
> > my own. I found it was a challenge to convince
> > others in the decision making process that Debian
> > is solid and here to stay when the Dunc Ta
27;t make that decision on
> my own. I found it was a challenge to convince
> others in the decision making process that Debian
> is solid and here to stay when the Dunc Tanc causes
> the Weekly News to drop out of consistent appearance.
> I know there are alternate sources of infor
ion making process that Debian
is solid and here to stay when the Dunc Tanc causes
the Weekly News to drop out of consistent appearance.
I know there are alternate sources of information, but
one must consider that non-Linux users are amongst
the visitors of the Debian project web site.
It is sm
Hi John;
If windoz can't handle it then I can think of ONE reason for doing it that
way! :->
You certainly could be right on the possibility of a "post-ppp" login but
I thought it was possible.
best,
-bill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Leach writes:
> One question that I have: Is it true that ALL ISPs that use chap or pap
> authentication also do not require an initial login? I don't personally
> know of any exceptions but I also don't see any technical reason why it
> would not be possible to use chap following login.
I'v
Hi John;
One question that I have: Is it true that ALL ISPs that use chap or pap
authentication also do not require an initial login? I don't personally
know of any exceptions but I also don't see any technical reason why it
would not be possible to use chap following login.
It also seems to me
n ISP connection is horribly messy.
I agree. This is partly an upstream problem. 2.3.1 improves the situation
quite a bit.
> I don't know your own priorities but suggest that ALL connection methods
> be considered for eventual inclusion in your setup software, even slip.
I monitor the ne
quot; it is proving to be
anything but! I believe that in part, a problem is that it is not at all
clear "who is doing what with whom (and which whom)" as far the files are
concerned when trying to use such things as xisp or dunc and the like.
Inasmuch as hamm seems to create the &
es (multiple connections support is built in).
Multiple connections aren't hard. Seperate providers for each user isn't
hard either with 2.3.1.
> It wouldn't require taking over dunc to create a new tool with a more
> limited objective. I don't think that's what John
ppp options sets in the
> > > same file unless the option requirements are identicle. ... I
> > > personally have three different connection requirements and use dunc/dppp
> > > to manage them.
> >
> > It should be possible to handle this with a seperate pr
irements are identicle. ... I
> > personally have three different connection requirements and use dunc/dppp
> > to manage them.
>
> It should be possible to handle this with a seperate provider file for each
> isp (pon would need to be revised, or the user told to type '
ction requirements and use dunc/dppp
> to manage them.
It should be possible to handle this with a seperate provider file for each
isp (pon would need to be revised, or the user told to type 'pppd call
').
> I had thought of making a way to manage the system options file
> automat
Just to clear up some confusion about dunc, I realize the
script has shortcomings and John is looking into taking over
the package so it can get properly attended to. However,
its really quite useable in its current state -- even on a
bo system. It's just an ash script that uses dialog,
On 03 Dec 1997 15:43:13 you asked:
> Can anyone give me some feedback on dunc?
Several weeks ago I experimented with dunc 1.5. The major bug I
found was in the dialup_connect script. There is what I think is
called a race condition that causes the "/bin/rm -f /tmp/wchatfile&qu
On 3 Dec 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can anyone give me some feedback on dunc? I'm revising it and would like
> to hear opinions on what should be changed. Already planned are pap/chap
> support and use of the standard option and chat files.
What version of dunc are you &quo
Can anyone give me some feedback on dunc? I'm revising it and would like
to hear opinions on what should be changed. Already planned are pap/chap
support and use of the standard option and chat files.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, PATRICK DAHIROC wrote:
> Hi
>
> I recently asked for help concerning PPP dial up and you suggested that I
> use DUNC for this. I already have unpacked the source code in my system
> but when I ran "make" the only it did was move the source cod
Hi
I recently asked for help concerning PPP dial up and it was suggested
that I use DUNC for this. I already have unpacked the source code in my system
but when I ran "make" the only thing it did was move the source code to
/usr/bin; the code itself was not compiled. Am I forget
On Thu, 14 Aug 1997, Eugene Sevinian wrote:
> Thanks, Richard!
> Now it works. After few attempts to modify old
> /root/.ppprc I have noticed that dunc replaced it
> by the short file with one option (defaultroute)
> and 2-3 strings as well. Then I just added this option
>
Thanks, Richard!
Now it works. After few attempts to modify old
/root/.ppprc I have noticed that dunc replaced it
by the short file with one option (defaultroute)
and 2-3 strings as well. Then I just added this option
in old (and valid) .ppprc file. Hope this will be fixed later.
On Thu, 14
I just noticed
that its not in the latest one.
You can grep for "default" in you *.ctn file(s) under
~/.dunc and see if defaultroute is getting set. If not, you
can filre up dunc and go to "Modify" (then select "next",
OK, bla bla, select your connection) an
epting the fact when I did not find
> > some nice lovely things like xman and xload]
> >
> > Now I am trying to configure ppp conection to my Debian machine at work.
> > (I have already ppp conection from w95 working nice). At this point I use
> > some scripts and files
On Aug 04, Eugene Sevinian wrote
> Here is what I am getting in /var/log/ppp/log:
>
> Aug 3 22:45:41 gdak pppd[146]: pppd 2.2.0 started by root, uid 0
> Aug 3 22:45:42 gdak chat[147]: send (atdpm0343656^M)
> Aug 3 22:45:43 gdak chat[147]: expect (CONNECT)
> Aug 3 22:46:28 gdak chat[147]: atd
On Mon, 04 Aug 1997 16:07:24 +0400 Eugene Sevinian
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> few weeks ago I have installed Debian from self made CDs with 1.3.0a.
> It seems that everything was fine! [Exepting the fact when I did not find
> some nice lovely things like xman and xload]
[snip]
xload is in th
conection from w95 working nice). At this point I use
some scripts and files prepared by 'dunc'. After running 'dialup_connect'
I am able to hear the tone from modem speaker during ~1 min but no pulse
dialing at all. Although, I put debug option in command line string but I
d
]
>
> Now I am trying to configure ppp conection to my Debian machine at work.
> (I have already ppp conection from w95 working nice). At this point I use
> some scripts and files prepared by 'dunc'. After running 'dialup_connect'
> I am able to hear the ton
46 matches
Mail list logo
