On 18 Jun 2002, Grant Edwards wrote:
> In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
>
> then go ahead and get a service contract. If you're running a
> server than has to have five nines up-time, then you'd better
> pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60 minutes from when
> the phone rings.
And
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
>> If you're running a server than has to have five nines up-time,
>> then you'd better pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60
>> minutes from when the phone rings.
>
> Umm... 5 9's = ~5 min/year, so they had better be there a lot faster
> than 60 minut
> If you're running a server than has to have five nines up-time,
> then you'd better pay to have somebody guaranteed on-site in 60
> minutes from when the phone rings.
Umm... 5 9's = ~5 min/year, so they had better be there a lot faster
than 60 minutes. The way to achieve 5 9's is not via an inc
Think we have a slight misunderstanding here.
I don't have a CEO and I don't like servicecontracts. I advise my own
customers not to make one with me because it isn't worth the money (talk
about shooting yourself in the foot).
But this is the way people do think and have to think today - something
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
> I want you see tell a CEO of a company:
> Well Sir we have a little IT problem.
> There are 3000 people sitting in front of a black screen and our
> customers can't reach us.
> Oh, and by the way 50 of our planes are going to crash in about 1 hour.
> But don'
On 18 Jun 2002 15:01:22 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards) wrote:
> In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
>
> > What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is
> > that the customer wants somebody he can:
> >
> > a. complain to and scream at and
>
> While I try to keep the s
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
> Klaus Imgrund writes:
>> a. complain to and scream at
>
> People frequently complain and scream at this mailing list.
With far more helpful responses that any you'll get from most
commercial operations.
--
Grant Edwards grante
In muc.lists.debian.user, you wrote:
> What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is that
> the customer wants somebody he can:
>
> a. complain to and scream at and
While I try to keep the screaming to a minimum, I do sometimes
complain (and on a particulary bad day even whine)
On 2002.06.17 21:26 Rox de Gabba wrote:
Well, if you look at it from the practical point of view... screaming
and
complainting has never done any good... at leat with computer systems
it
hasn't. Suing... well, have you ever heared of anyone get a penny off
M$ for
the bilions lost on their syste
Klaus Imgrund writes:
> a. complain to and scream at
People frequently complain and scream at this mailing list.
> b. sue for damages
You might want to read the fine print in that service contract.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
Klaus Imgrund wrote:
Well,
I am an IT - dummy but I did deal with technical service for 15 years.
What that whole Servicecontract stuff basically boils down to is that
the customer wants somebody he can:
a. complain to and scream at and
b. sue for damages
Try that with a mailing list
I unde
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:44:53AM +0200, Jan Johansson wrote:
> > so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
> > linux distro
> > means more to you than actually securing the system?
>
> Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
> _legally b
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 11:44:53AM +0200, Jan Johansson wrote:
> > so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
> > linux distro
> > means more to you than actually securing the system?
>
> Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
> _legally b
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 05:19, Andrew Fowler wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 11:27, ben wrote:
> > On Monday 17 June 2002 12:27 am, Andrew Fowler wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
[snip]
> No intention of retracting it. But I will expand: The above was in
> no-way
On 2002.06.17 05:26 Jan Johansson wrote:
> you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
> the world to
> make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
> above. go directly to
> jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
> attempt to collect
> anything at all.
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 11:27, ben wrote:
> On Monday 17 June 2002 12:27 am, Andrew Fowler wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> > IMO there's more to it that just psychology. There used to be (still is
> > ??) a saying that you wouldn't get fired for buying MS. Redha
> so contractual, however inresponsive, support from a lame-ass
> linux distro
> means more to you than actually securing the system?
Nope. Read my last paragraph. A system provider which can not also offer a
_legally binding_ support contract is simply not allowed on any production /
mission
hi ya
you ( the company ) can get support contracts for any linux
flavor one just has to understand what is covered
and what is not and what the turn around time is
for any "incidents" and how much the company gets dinged..
- both ml and "paid support" has its benefits...
if there's a
On Monday 17 June 2002 02:26 am, Jan Johansson wrote:
> > you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
> > the world to
> > make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
> > above. go directly to
> > jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
> > attempt to col
> you've got to be new around here. there isn't enough salt in
> the world to
> make your hat tasty enough to retract the last sentence
> above. go directly to
> jail. do not pass go. do not, under any circumstances,
> attempt to collect
> anything at all. bye-bye.
Well, there is a valid poi
On Monday 17 June 2002 12:27 am, Andrew Fowler wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> > I think there's also some psychological thing that goes on here. People
> > think that with the help desk, they'll get an answer within a certain
> > time, while nobody guatrantees th
ben wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
[snip]
I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
doesn't explain why professionals use it. I question the claim that Red
Hat provides better support (average helpde
On Sunday 16 June 2002 04:40 pm, Ivo Wever wrote:
[snip]
> I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
> are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
> doesn't explain why professionals use it. I question the claim that Red
> Hat provides bett
On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 02:22, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> I think there's also some psychological thing that goes on here. People
> think that with the help desk, they'll get an answer within a certain
> time, while nobody guatrantees that they'll get an answer on a mailing
> list.
IMO there's mor
> I think everyone agrees that Debians package and security update systems
> are better. Red Hats installation procedure is userfriendlier, but that
> doesn't explain why professionals use it.
I can think of some reasons...
- Even being professionals, they want everything to be detected and
con
Glen Lee Edwards wrote:
>Ivo Wever wrote:
>
>>If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
>>internet connection of a small group of people for three hours a day,
>>then why is anyone using them and using them in a commercial
>>environment at that?
>
> Ivo, there is no such
On Thursday 06 June 2002 11:35 am, Ivo Wever wrote:
> >[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
> >competition.
>
> If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
> internet connection of a small group of people for three hours a day,
> then why is an
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 09:26:54AM -0400, Arthur H. Johnson II wrote:
|
| I use apt-get on my Red Hat servers that need auto updating.
How much memory do they have? How long does an 'apt-get ' take
to run, compared to debian with equivalent hardware? (not including
any network latency, just th
I use apt-get on my Red Hat servers that need auto updating. I dont trust
RH Network. It has broken at least a dozen servers that I know of, none
of them are mine of course. You can get a really great implimentation of
apt-get for Red Hat at http://www.freshrpms.net.
--
Arthur H. Johnson II
C
Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
...
> Windows may be not behave decently at all, but it sells as it is, and
> it's not only marketing. I can see some of the reasons:
>
> 1 - They do invest in their product, but thy'll target the users and do
> whatever they want.The UI, for example, that most hacke
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 11:18:01AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> Probably. More significant though, is marketing. Most of us here agree
> that Windows isn't the best OS around, but it's got the largest userbase
> because of marketing and because it's what comes preinstalled on most PCs.
"Market
On Fri, Jun 07, 2002 at 12:12:11AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
> That doesn't explain why other dists are used in production environments. It
> doesn't explain why RedHat has such a huge market share. Or am I really
> overestimating the capabilities of the majority of the admins?
Probably. More signi
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 23:55:31 -0500
"Glen Lee Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is apt-get on RH 7.3 actually usable?
>
> Red Hat isn't likely to seriously support apt-get. They're pushing
> up2date, which updates your computer for you. It's free for the first
> computer you sign up for
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 02:07:12PM +0100, Karl E. Jorgensen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote (slightly
> reformatted):
> > Sam wrote:
> >
> > >And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
> > >
> > >There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Vict
Tom Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 0, Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I would define a major change to be something like the jump to gcc-3.1
>> or a libc6 version change, ie. something the affects nearly everything
>> in the archive. I wouldn't consider a library that affects 3
On Thu 06 Jun 02 15:45, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:48:15PM -0600, user list wrote:
> [snip]
>
> | The reasons I like [debian] are:
> | 1. apt-get
>
> [snip]
>
> | I'll note in passing that the first reason has lost some edge now
> | that RH 7.3 comes with apt-get and
On 0, Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> > (There's also the problem that each of the developers has their own
> > personal pet packages that they'd really like to make the "point
> > release", but it can't happen for everyone's packages, an
Em Qua, 2002-06-05 às 18:41, Brooks R. Robinson escreveu:
> | Uh huh. And get cracked tomorrow because security updates are *not*
> | being made for woody at this time. There is a list of approximately a
> | dozen *known* security problems with woody that will be dealt with
> | *later*. Updates
you wrote:
Ivo Wever wrote:
> If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
internet
> connection of a small group of people for three hours a day, then why is
> anyone using them and using them in a commercial environment at that?
[Personal story about liking several di
David Z Maze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I agree. I think stable should be able to get more fixes and updates
>> than just security fixes. It's well known that much of the software in
>> stable is quite buggy and years behind the upstream source (Moz
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:48:15PM -0600, user list wrote:
[snip]
| The reasons I like [debian] are:
| 1. apt-get
[snip]
| I'll note in passing that the first reason has lost some edge now that
| RH 7.3 comes with apt-get and that there are ports to older RH releases.
[snip]
Is apt-get on RH 7.3
Hi,
I just thought I'd add my $.02, or what ever is the appropriate monetary
conversion, in this inevitable discussion.
First, I am a user. I write in fortran by choice, c and c++, in the past
when I was teaching, by necessity. I am not a systems programmer so my
contribution to Debian would, at
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Ivo Wever wrote:
> If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the internet
> connection of a small group of people for three hours a day, then why is
> anyone using them and using them in a commercial environment at that?
Fwiw, as well as a Debian develope
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 12:51:04PM -0400, David Z Maze wrote:
> This came up on debian-devel not too long ago. Someone proposed a
> "point release" to woody that would have gcc-3.1, GNOME 2.0, new KDE,
> and "no major changes to the distribution" -- even though this would
> require recompiling eve
After all the postings that I've read...
What I can advice all to do is:
Lets give a route to this "abandoned ship"!
Lets stop the talking and start with some
action... I don't beleive we can gather
every Debian user and ask for his or her opinion...
If we send the image of a desorganized distr
On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 18:35:28 +0200
"Ivo Wever" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glen wrote:
> >[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
> >competition.
> If the other dists are so terrible that they can't even support the
> internet connection of a small group of people for
Em Qui, 2002-06-06 às 13:35, Ivo Wever escreveu:
> Glen wrote:
>
> >Ivo, you're totally missing the point here.
>
> Yes, you are right. I shouldn't have let my personal crusade against
> arguments from emotion enter this thread.
>
> >[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders abov
Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I agree. I think stable should be able to get more fixes and updates
> than just security fixes. It's well known that much of the software in
> stable is quite buggy and years behind the upstream source (Mozilla M18,
> for example) but cannot be fixed un
Glen wrote:
Ivo, you're totally missing the point here.
Yes, you are right. I shouldn't have let my personal crusade against
arguments from emotion enter this thread.
[snippety] But as a distribution, it's head and shoulders above the
competition.
If the other dists are so terrible that the
you wrote:
Colin Watson wrote:
> Ivo Wever wrote:
> > involving elderly disabled people, to support Debian. I guess we
> > should rethink Debian if it turned out some neo-nazi group used our
> > software on their servers?
Godwin's Law; end of thread please?
Oh sorry about that, I should have wr
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:06:17PM -0700, Jim McCloskey wrote:
> The graduate students and faculty members who use these machines day
> in day out couldn't give a flying fuck, for the most part, whether
> they run `stable', `testing', or `unstable'. They don't know, and they
> have no reason to ca
Ivo Wever writes:
>Sam wrote:
>
>>And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
>>
>>There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in Australia who
>>get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are members of the Rural
>I'm sorry, but this argument isn't valid as a de
On Thu, 2002-06-06 at 05:37, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
> > involving elderly disabled people, to support Debian. I guess we
> > should rethink Debian if it turned out some neo-nazi group used our
> > software on their servers?
>
Godwin's Law;
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
>
> At the last meeting of the Linux Workshop Cologne, we had more Debian
> than other users, although some people from this list claim
> Debian to be
> delayed. Seemingly there are more important things than just being
> up-to-date with the lat
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote (slightly
reformatted):
> Sam wrote:
>
> >And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
> >
> >There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in
> >Australia who get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are
Ivo Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Completely unrelated to the current topic, could you lobby your email
vendor to support RFC2822 already? Tell them to read 3.6.4 and fix it
already. Eudora's broken references headers have been annoying the
crap out of me for years, and they've had over a ye
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 11:24:27AM +0200, Ivo Wever wrote:
> Sam wrote:
> >There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in
> >Australia who get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are
> >members of the Rural Peninsula Disability Support group - they are
> >provided comp
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> Debian is run by a few hundred programmers who do this for fun.
> Not profit. Because we do this for fun we choose where to spend our
> time. For some people the mips architecture and the required
> hacking is fun. Others are constrained by
> I'm not advocating FreeBSD. In fact, I tried it a couple of times, ran it for
> a week or two and hated it for a variety of reasons. Debian is the only
> OS/Distribution that I ever liked (which is no surprise, of course)
>
> I just wanted to say that maybe changes to "stable" should be more
Sam wrote:
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds/
There are 50 elderly/disabled people in the state of Victoria in Australia who
get their Internet access through a Debian box. All are members of the Rural
Peninsula Disability Support group - they are provided computers and pay $1
If the people in effective control of Debian's
direction no longer have this ability, then
perhaps Debian is no longer useful to most
of us.
Debian is no longer useful to us when they no longer put out a product
that we can use. That is hardly the case.
To save the Debian Attack Team th
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 10:23:56PM -0700, Terry wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> > Thank you. It is messages like this that make me continue to
> > put in the time and effort for Debian.
>
> Well here's another one.
And here's a third - http://www.vicnet.net.au/~rpds
Someone wrote:
> perhaps Debian is no longer useful to most of us.
Two years ago I set up a small network of Debian machines for graduate
students and faculty members in my department. There are six machines
in the network and a lot of people depend on them. This effort cost my
university exactl
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> So my motivation for working on free software (it pleases me,
> and provides me with a stable box I can use) is condescending?
I am glad that your motivation is to create a stable box you can use ...
because so I can participate in this effort
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Thank you. It is messages like this that make me continue to
> put in the time and effort for Debian.
Well here's another one.
I've been using Debian for a long time on all the systems where the
choice has been mine.
Sure it is sometimes frus
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> So my motivation for working on free software (it pleases me,
> and provides me with a stable box I can use) is condescending?
I am glad that your motivation is to create a stable box you can use ...
because so I can participate in this effort
Oleg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 05 June 2002 01:57 pm, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
>> > How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable, yet modern
>> > (compared to Potato)?
>>
>> I think it's because they don't have a "zero-bugs" release policy like
>> Debian. The bas
Someone posted that security updates can simply be downloaded from
Sid and used with Woody.
However, at least one package in unstable is already not installable
on my Woody box, because a library has been upgraded in Sid.
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manager, Dueling Modems Comput
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 04:41:39PM -0500, Brooks R. Robinson wrote:
> It was not my intention to lead users astray, my intention was to enlighten
> people to the fact that testing is, for the most part, not going to change.
> The security fixes are flowing into sid. It's not a big trick to get not
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 01:57 pm, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> > How does FreeBSD manage to stay reasonably secure and stable, yet modern
> > (compared to Potato)?
>
> I think it's because they don't have a "zero-bugs" release policy like
> Debian. The base system is stable. The stuff in the port
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> For the record, the number is currently 1073 (unless I made a mistake in
> my database query). Of course, not all of those are active.
Oh, that's the problem then. If we had 2000 developers, woody would
have been out in half the time, right? ;^)
--
A
Alan Shutko wrote:
> (With 2000 developers, any unqualified statement is likely to be
> false)
I'm unsure where this 2000 developers number that I've seen floating
around this list comes from. At last count, when we were preparing the
release announcement, there were less than 1000, and of cou
Manoj wrote:
Are you sure condescending means what you think it means? (Oh,
BTW, that is me being condescending again).
I don't consider that condescending.
Condescending, in context, implied that I felt superior to the people I
was talking to. There was no suggestion that any one el
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 06:00:23PM -0400, Alan Shutko wrote:
> (With 2000 developers, any unqualified statement is likely to be
> false)
For the record, the number is currently 1073 (unless I made a mistake in
my database query). Of course, not all of those are active.
--
Colin Watson
>>"Ivo" == Ivo Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ivo> It is an unqualified statement indeed. I'm just exagerating
Ivo> Manojs point and claim I understand it (because calling it
Ivo> 'condescending' supposes that the majority of the society feels
Ivo> that way and I want to make clear that at l
ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> please stop propogating the rumor that manoj said that he didn't care about
> the users. read the full thread.
I wasn't. I was responding to the post I quoted. Apologies if it was
too subtle.
--
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
May
>>"Alan" == Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alan> Maybe the developers should amend the Social Contract to make this
Alan> more explicit? At least in the vote, it would become clear to what
Alan> degree that statement is true or untrue.
Ah, yes, the social contract argument.
Alan Shutko wrote:
Ivo Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And, as he said: he doesn't care. Doesn't care because no
> developers will leave and the users leaving doesn't endanger
> the existance of Debian; in essence the developers are making
> it for themselves.
Maybe the developers should am
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 03:00 pm, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Ivo Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > And, as he said: he doesn't care. Doesn't care because no
> > developers will leave and the users leaving doesn't endanger
> > the existance of Debian; in essence the developers are making
> > it for
Ivo Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And, as he said: he doesn't care. Doesn't care because no
> developers will leave and the users leaving doesn't endanger
> the existance of Debian; in essence the developers are making
> it for themselves.
Maybe the developers should amend the Social Contr
Ian D. Stewart wrote:
While stating that you don't give a rip about the users may be
intelectually honest, one should not be surprised when
such statements endanger userbase loyalty.
And, as he said: he doesn't care. Doesn't care because no
developers will leave and the users leaving doesn't e
| Uh huh. And get cracked tomorrow because security updates are *not*
| being made for woody at this time. There is a list of approximately a
| dozen *known* security problems with woody that will be dealt with
| *later*. Updates are not propogating from sid to woody at all right
| now, even for
| Are you really named "Brooks Robinson" or is that a nom du net?
Yes this is my true and given name. Long story short: my brother was a fan,
my mom agreed to something she never thought would happen
| > My conclusion is that Woody is effectively released already.
|
| So, Woody changed to a 2.4
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:14:14PM -0300, Michel Loos wrote:
| You have 2 stable releases which are up-to-date:
| woody and sid
| They are perfectly stable, but the distribution is changing
| just like the RedHat distribution is changing every few weeks,
| the only difference is that they call
Hi Stephen!
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002, Stephen Ryan wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 13:32, John Schmidt wrote:
>
> > I certainly appreciate the multiple architecture support of Debian. I
> > have it installed on a powerpc, m68k, and x86 box. I initially
> > installed it on my m68k box, since Debian
>>"Noah" == Noah Meyerhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Noah> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:47:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Indeed, the security team indicated that potato support would
>> have to be dropped summarily when woody was released _unless_ changes
>> were made (or a decision w
On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 13:32, John Schmidt wrote:
> I certainly appreciate the multiple architecture support of Debian. I
> have it installed on a powerpc, m68k, and x86 box. I initially
> installed it on my m68k box, since Debian was the only distribution
> that supported it. I made the swit
>>"Ian" == Ian D Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> And yes, I do find it condescending. Particularly the reference to
Ian> 'unwashed masses' and the general attitude of 'I have done this thing
Ian> because it pleases me. You should be content that I allow you to
Ian> benefit from my l
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 03:59:41PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> I'm using 2.4.18 myself, but that isn't relevant to the original
> poster's request for a stable distribution using (meaning something
> like "coming with") a 2.4.x kernel.
But woody does come with kernel 2.4.x. Just because it's not i
> I doubt that this would be a useful metric, given that people
> tracking less-stable versions are likely to be updating more
> frequently.
It is possible to count unique IPs, rather than bytes. Another poster
pointed out the problem of local archives, but there is no reason to
assume that stabl
>>"David" == David Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It's not really at all clear that this was where the mistake lay.
David> I never thought I would be advocating more management, but here goes...
David> Debian, as another poster pointed out, has grown from ~50 to
David> ~2000 developers
>>"Ian" == Ian D Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> But to answer your question, there are several projects I have
Ian> an interest in. I have even started writing code for eventual
Ian> contribution to one of them. You, or anybody else for that
Ian> matter, are perfectly welcome to pr
>>"John" == John Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> I certainly appreciate the multiple architecture support of Debian. I
John> have it installed on a powerpc, m68k, and x86 box. I initially
John> installed it on my m68k box, since Debian was the only distribution
John> that suppo
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 06:43:57PM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> Surely you can use any kernel you like. I've been using 2.4.18 since it
> came out and will upgrade to 2.4.19 as soon as it's released.
I'm using 2.4.18 myself, but that isn't relevant to the original
poster's request for a stabl
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:47:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Indeed, the security team indicated that potato support would
> have to be dropped summarily when woody was released _unless_ changes
> were made (or a decision would have to be made to only support some
> arches, but not
>>"Noah" == Noah Meyerhans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Noah> The 11 architecures *are* what's holding up the release. The
Noah> whole reason the security team needs the new build
Noah> infrastructure is that it's not a reasonable expectation for
Noah> them to be able to manually build updated
On 2002.06.05 13:47 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>"Ian" == Ian D Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian> Speaking only for myself, it was the condescending tone adopted
Ian> by one of the developers (don't remember the fellow's name; he
Ian> was the one ranting about about his $250,00/hr fee) m
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:47:17PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Ian" == Ian D Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Ian> Speaking only for myself, it was the condescending tone adopted
> Ian> by one of the developers (don't remember the fellow's name; he
> Ian> was the one ranting a
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:30:12AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Well, this is only partially true. All architectuures for
> Woody are ready. They are not delaying the release. What is not ready
> is the ability to support security for woody and potato for even the
> architectures that
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 13:47:27 -0500
"Dave Sherohman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 11:18:29AM -0700, David Wright wrote:
> > in the interest of Debian getting to
> > know the needs of its customers (a phrase calculated to annoy Manoj
> > :-), what are the percentage users of p
1 - 100 of 123 matches
Mail list logo
