Dan:
WOW!
THX a LOT!
Phone described as a tool.
Geg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:01:09 +
Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a general question on Unix/Linux philosophy/configuration
> on which I would be curious to know what the Debian view/situation
> is
>
> I a
This is a general question on Unix/Linux philosophy/configuration
on which I would be curious to know what the Debian view/situation
is
I am a big fan of having my sources readily and instantly available,
and one of the things I was least happy with when I moved from my
old BSD/OS system to
On 2003-11-06 09:31:35 -0700, Nate Duehr wrote:
> Sounds like what you want is better communication with your sysadmin?
>
> If the sysadmin knows you're using fetchmail and they're good, they'll
> let you know if they're going to break your setup. Or they'll warn you
> they're making an MTA cha
Sounds like what you want is better communication with your sysadmin?
If the sysadmin knows you're using fetchmail and they're good, they'll
let you know if they're going to break your setup. Or they'll warn you
they're making an MTA change. Hell, they should be doing that anyway --
system ch
On 2003-11-05 11:52:37 -0700, Nate Duehr wrote:
> It's not nonsense. fetchmail's authors can't be held responsible for
> you not configuring your MTA correctly. And they certainly shouldn't
> try to check for every possible MTA configuration under the sun.
> Maybe you wrote your own MTA? How would
I am not disputing unix philosophy. I am disputing the "if I pipe data
to another program, I am not responsible for what happens" non-sense.
It's not nonsense. fetchmail's authors can't be held responsible for
you not configuring your MTA correctly. And they certainl
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 09:34:09AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 09:08, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:42:40PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 at 21:54 GMT, Vincent Lefevre penned:
>> > > > On 2003-11-04 10:41:10 -0700, Moniq
> Have you checked your MTA's man page to see if *it* says "WARNING
> if your MTA is badly configured there will be MASSIVE LOSSAGE!"???
Bad example, my MTA doesn't rely on software X, where if X is badly
configured massive lossage will occur.
> > > fetc
server and
give it to the MTA. If the MTA then sends it to /dev/null, in
*no* way is that fetchmail's fault.
Have you checked your MTA's man page to see if *it* says "WARNING
if your MTA is badly configured there will be MASSIVE LOSSAGE!"???
> > fetchmail follows the &quo
Jeff Elkins wrote:
However, to slip into SF geekism, I remember Spock saying to Kirk, "The needs
of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
I think the needs of the many have spelled an end to email addresses being
posted on debian.org web pages.
OK,
I am going way OT here, but that is not a
ce, to get that control on all levels! but it would be nice
to have the option of functional auto-detection of more hardware than
i've recently seen distro CDs recognize.
i'm wondering what the philosophy behind this do-it-yourself (and by
"it" we mean the kitchen sink) instal
nori heikkinen wrote:
however, something like knoppix, based on debian yet compatible with
everything i've ever slipped it into, makes me wonder why the initial
debian install process can't be easier than it currently is.
Short answer:
* Debian developers don't have to install often (install it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:53:15PM +, Pigeon wrote:
> else they get "voted off" by the changes in the ratio of people
> continuing the discussion to people saying "please shut up". It's not
Though it's getting real tempting in making a procmail ru
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:02:53PM -0500, Natali Gulbahce wrote:
> Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
When dealing with open source, you're bound to get philosophy. It
goes with the territory.
> I am getting tired
Hey Yall,
Pigeon wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:02:53PM -0500, Natali Gulbahce wrote:
Hey all,
Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
It's a Debian user list with philosophically inclined subscribers.
Gotta jump in here, since the topic was my
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:02:53PM -0500, Natali Gulbahce wrote:
> > Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
ُTrying to seperate *nix from philosophy has never worked in the past (And I
hope things like Lindows won't change it in the future).
This is not a CISC
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 12:02:53PM -0500, Natali Gulbahce wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
It's a Debian user list with philosophically inclined subscribers.
> I am getting tired of getting commentary emails long and philosophical.
&
Natali Gulbahce wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
>
> I am getting tired of getting commentary emails long and philosophical.
> Am I missing sth?
> Is this the way mail lists work?
You have posed some extremely interesting and impo
Natali Gulbahce said:
> Hey all,
>
> Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
>
> I am getting tired of getting commentary emails long and philosophical. Am
> I missing sth?
> Is this the way mail lists work?
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/
"Help and
Hey all,
Is this a philosophy mail list or Debian user list?
I am getting tired of getting commentary emails long and philosophical.
Am I missing sth?
Is this the way mail lists work?
Natali
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troubl
On Mon, 2003-03-03 at 13:25, David Z Maze wrote:
> Hmm. Is there anything informative in /etc/network/interfaces (the
> "normal" place for network settings under Debian)? You also might try
> running your DHCP client by hand, and seeing if that works. Also,
> check that your kernel configuratio
On Mon, 2003-03-03 at 13:25, David Z Maze wrote:
>
> Bret Comstock Waldow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm trying to get Debian going on my Thinkpad T21, and synchronize with
> > my Sony Clie PDA.
>
> (This works fine for me, but I always build my own kernel. I've had
> better luck using
Bret Comstock Waldow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to get Debian going on my Thinkpad T21, and synchronize with
> my Sony Clie PDA.
(This works fine for me, but I always build my own kernel. I've had
better luck using coldsync than pilot-link, and the first sync always
fails.)
> I'm
Hi,
I'm trying to get Debian going on my Thinkpad T21, and synchronize with
my Sony Clie PDA.
I installed Woody using packages via ftp, so it's up to date. During
the install, one of the choices is to use 'netenv' to configure the
network. I don't know any better - I'm new to Debian - so I let
I'm trying to get Debian going on my Thinkpad T21, and synchronize with
my Sony Clie PDA.
I installed Woody using packages via ftp, so it's up to date. During
the install, one of the choices is to use 'netenv' to configure the
network. I don't know any better - I'm new to Debian - so I let it.
Everything within me I must face, for everything within me must surely
lie outside of me...
On Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 09:36:03AM -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
> I recently filed a bug with, in my opinion, quite sufficient
> documentation. At least the level of documentation was such that had
> been routinely accepted with other bugs I'd filed in the past. In a
> subsequent update, I even
I recently filed a bug with, in my opinion, quite sufficient
documentation. At least the level of documentation was such that had
been routinely accepted with other bugs I'd filed in the past. In a
subsequent update, I even enclosed all the input files that caused the
erroneous behaviour, verbat
Take a look!
--Brock--- Begin Message ---
There are many rough edges to polish up, but the content and meaning is THERE.
And of course the meaning can always stand to be made clearer, by better choice
of words, and better English syntactic constructs...
Here's the site again:
http://www.geocities
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 02:55:20PM +0100, Gernot Bauer wrote:
> What annoyes (sp?) me is that people say "Linux needs a nice workspace"
> - and for me, kde is one - and then say, "well, kde is nice, but not
> free and therefore we dont want to distribute it". I dont want to start
> a flamewar here,
On Fri, 9 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Independently of the KDE issue, there's a question I've wondered about
> for some time.
>
> Has the GPL ever been tested in court (i.e. has there ever been a case
> that turned on it)?
>
No, I've never heard of that.
It's been successfully used to
Independently of the KDE issue, there's a question I've wondered about
for some time.
Has the GPL ever been tested in court (i.e. has there ever been a case
that turned on it)?
Best wishes,
Ted.
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[EMAIL PR
>
> As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing
> lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore.
>
> Could anyone tell me the reason why kde should not be distributed via
> the non-free-tree (ftp)... Netscape is available as well (and this is
> software
On Fri, Oct 09, 1998 at 02:55:20PM +0100, Gernot Bauer wrote:
> As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing
> lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore.
Please read the original announcment as posted on the debian-announce
mailing list and the website
As I read in some postings (slashdot.org and several other mailing
lists) debian is planning not to distribute KDE (and qt) anymore.
Could anyone tell me the reason why kde should not be distributed via
the non-free-tree (ftp)... Netscape is available as well (and this is
software what I call NON
On Wed, 20 Aug 97 12:52 PDT, Bruce Perens wrote:
>> How about a longer explanation on the list? I'm _SURE_ that _MANY_
>> inquiring minds would like to know.
>
>
>So, we want to make it clear that our CD, even if it is a revision or two
>behind, is still _current_ product in that you can easily hi
x27;stable'.
>
> > In fact while I'm at it let me expand on this general point. Let me
> > say first that I marvel at the (apparent?) organization inherent in
> > the debian development "system". Even though there are many maintainers
> > everyone
On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > How about a longer explanation on the list? I'm _SURE_ that _MANY_
> > inquiring minds would like to know.
[ long explination snipped ]
Ok, this makes sense. I will probably never agree with the idea, but I
do agree with the reasoning: make debian mo
> How about a longer explanation on the list? I'm _SURE_ that _MANY_
> inquiring minds would like to know.
You'll have noticed from debian-announce that we have reported sales of
about 2200 Official 2-CD Sets over the last 8 weeks. Of those CDs, about
half were sold by one technical bookstore chai
On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > So I am running Debian version 1.3 - and yet the CD says Debian 1.3.1 .
>
> Oops. My fault. The reason for two numbers is mostly marketing. I know
> that marketing is anathema to most of us, but someone's gotta do it and
> I'm afraid the task fell on m
On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> [snip] The reason for two numbers is mostly marketing. I know
> that marketing is anathema to most of us, but someone's gotta do it and
> I'm afraid the task fell on me. Feel free to call me up if you need a
> longer explanation.
>
> But maybe we should
> bash$ cat /etc/debian_version
> 1.3
> bash$
>
> So I am running Debian version 1.3 - and yet the CD says Debian 1.3.1 .
Oops. My fault. The reason for two numbers is mostly marketing. I know
that marketing is anathema to most of us, but someone's gotta do it and
I'm afraid the task fell on me.
I concur. The next release of the stable tree should be called 1.3
Revision 2, not 1.3.1 Revision 1.
What problem has this solved for CD retailers? Will they still be bummed
when 1.3 Revision X+1 is released and they just got 1.3 Revision X on the
shelves? Did it make any difference that it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
> > > The next version of the system will be called "Debian 1.3.1 Revision 1".
> > > People who make long-term products based on Debian requested that
> > > we not change the version number of the system if we were onl
> > The next version of the system will be called "Debian 1.3.1 Revision 1".
> > People who make long-term products based on Debian requested that
> > we not change the version number of the system if we were only making a
> > few bug fixes. For example, X windows was rebuilt because Richard
>
> H
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Does bash 2.01 solve the problem? We do update 'stable' - we're
> > currently debating that strategy on the debian-private (developers only)
> > mailing list right now. If bash
On Sun, 17 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: "Richard G. Roberto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sounds above board to me.
>
> That's some careless wording. One would think you'd know I'm one of the
> good guys by now. :-)
>
> Bruce
I should know better than to use colloqialisms(sp?) in
inte
From: "Richard G. Roberto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sounds above board to me.
That's some careless wording. One would think you'd know I'm one of the
good guys by now. :-)
Bruce
--
Can you get your operating system fixed when you need it?
Linux - the supportable operating system. http://www
On Sun, 17 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> The Official CD will have a slower release schedule than the system
> available via FTP. Those who wish the latest fixes should be willing to
> update a few packages on their systems via FTP between each CD
> purchase. Nobody can press new CDs every two we
From: "Richard G. Roberto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Is Debian not including fixes into the "official" CD image
> because of COMMERCIAL concerns??? Are the bug/security
> fixes there, but the name just not changed? Which is it?
The Official CD will have a slower release schedule than the system
avai
On Sat, 16 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Does bash 2.01 solve the problem? We do update 'stable' - we're
> > currently debating that strategy on the debian-private (developers only)
> > mailing list right now. If bash 2.0 is sufficiently broken, then tha
I think numbering things this way is a great idea. I would like to see
Debian succeed(?) on and off, in the "real world", the net. The one
thing that I have always liked about Debian is the ability to be easy
but not so easy that I have to be an ape to setup it up. I hope that
with this move t
From: Jim Pick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Does bash 2.01 solve the problem? We do update 'stable' - we're
> currently debating that strategy on the debian-private (developers only)
> mailing list right now. If bash 2.0 is sufficiently broken, then that might
> merit putting 2.01 into 'stable'.
I'm
[ most deleted for bravity ]
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
|I find that while the quality of distributions is generally "high"
|the emphasis from the developers is more on "let's get that hot new
|release going" rather than "let's get all the bugs out of this latest
|distribution and
From: "Jens B. Jorgensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I agree that we have to
> move on the the next distribution, but given the fact that
> *most* debian 1.3.1 users use netscape
> and that *most* of those folks will want
> to use a plug-in, I think this bug merits an upgrade to 2.01 bash
> for 1.3
I marvel at the (apparent?) organization inherent in
> the debian development "system". Even though there are many maintainers
> everyone seems to be on the same page. However, I disagree with the
> philosophy of fixing bugs in "old" distributions. Who decides when a
>
"Jens B. Jorgensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This really annoys me. (No, not you Jason.) I agree that we have to
> move on the the next distribution, but given the fact that
> *most* debian 1.3.1 users use netscape
> and that *most* of those folks will
> want to use a plug-in, I think thi
"Jens B. Jorgensen" wrote:
> Who decides when a
> bug is important enough to be rolled back into an old distribution[?]
After a few months of using Debian, I don't know the answer to that.
I don't even know *if* distributions are updated after
Dear Jens and other Debianers:
> ...
>"To support these goals, we will provide an integrated system of
> high-quality, 100% free software, with no legal restrictions that
> would prevent these kinds of use.
>
> I find that while the quality of distributions is generally "high"
> the e
first that I marvel at the (apparent?) organization inherent in
the debian development "system". Even though there are many maintainers
everyone seems to be on the same page. However, I disagree with the
philosophy of fixing bugs in "old" distributions. Who decides when a
bug is im
On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Alexander Gieg wrote:
> > Linuxconf has some nice features but it has the serious drawback
> > that it replaces the sysvinit. This would break every single program
> > that needs to be started at boot time. Using Linuxconf would require
> > changing nearly every important pack
> > It seems that someone is packaging LinuxConf. This software can
> > also take care of the Linux's boot process, but the Debian
> > developers seems don't know about it... :-(
>
> Linuxconf has some nice features but it has the serious drawback that it
> replaces the sysvinit. This would break
WOW! Now my delete key is working under XWindows!
Now *I* discover .inputrc! This should definitely be set by default.
Can I make a global file so these options will apply to all users?
(Maybe put it in /etc/X11/inputrc)? Yes? No?
On Sat, 1 Mar 1997, Lindsay Allen wrote:
>
> Ever since I s
Ever since I started using Debian about two years ago I have been gnashing
my teeth here because the DEL/HOME/END keys did not work at the prompt.
Now I discover .inputrc.
This is IMO a prime candidate for something that can and should be
installed along with bash on day one, on ix86 boxes. Or a
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Alexander Gieg wrote:
> *All* of this, except those things about default prompts,
> are done by the LinuxConf project, a very cool system manager
> for Linux. See at:
>
> http://www.solucorp.qc.ca/linuxconf/
>
> It seems that someone is packaging LinuxConf. This softw
> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> So when I installed debian, I was pleasantly suprised to
Joey> find all these packages prompting me for configuration
Joey> information in their postinst scripts, and I ended up with a
Joey> working system with all the nec
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
> So start by learning what you need to know to have a "nicer setup". If
> you dont have the time to trace through all the documentation to find
> out exactly what needs to be done, then at least skim the docs to get an
> overview of how it works and ask s
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Scott Stanley wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > >
> > > I wonder if it would be possible to make a package that included a good
> > > degree of the t
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Scott Stanley wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
> >
> > I wonder if it would be possible to make a package that included a good
> > degree of the typical customizations? I have setup 3 debian machines right
>
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, [iso-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> >
> > > > If someone is going to evaluate an entire distribution on a prompt
> > > > (even if there are other factors), I'm not going t
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote:
>
> > > > Debian comes up in a much "rawer" form after install - for
> > > > instance, no prompt beyond the basic "#" for root and "$" for the
> > > > user (RedHat gives you the now famous "username /home/
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, [iso-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
>
> > > If someone is going to evaluate an entire distribution on a prompt
> > > (even if there are other factors), I'm not going to be upset if they
> > > don't choose Debian.
> >
> > I'm
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote:
> > > Debian comes up in a much "rawer" form after install - for
> > > instance, no prompt beyond the basic "#" for root and "$" for the
> > > user (RedHat gives you the now famous "username /home/username$"
> > > prompt).
> >
> > # and $ are standard/
Yoav Cohen-Sivan:
> It seems that Debian is taking a rather different philosophy on
> pre-configured packages than other distributions, such as RedHat. What I
> mean is that after installation of RedHat you have a more or less
> pre-tailored system setup. You can start tweaking your h
Chris Walker:
> I'm not sure about the situation in unstable, but in stable neither the
> menu package, or fvwm2 seem to provide /etc/menu-methods/fvwm2.
> This file is available in /usr/doc/menu/examples. Because of this, the
> menu is not updated by default. Is this the case in unstable or sho
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, [iso-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > If someone is going to evaluate an entire distribution on a prompt
> > (even if there are other factors), I'm not going to be upset if they
> > don't choose Debian.
>
> I'm no talking about just the prompt. We're talking about good
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Kevin McEnhill wrote:
> Yoav wrote:
>
> #ifdef QUOTE
>
> It seems that Debian is taking a rather different philosophy on
> pre-configured packages than other distributions, such as RedHat. What I
>
&
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote:
>
>
> > Debian comes up in a much "rawer" form after install - for instance,
> > no prompt beyond the basic "#" for root and "$" for the user (RedHat
> > gives you the n
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote:
>
>> X is pretty bare in Debian after install, too - if you just "startx"
>> you get a simple xterm with no default menus, no menued way of running
>> another xterm, heck not even a FvwmModule running on scree
> Debian should provide a nicer default for the prompt. Many people
> take this things into account when deciding which distribution they
> like best.
The flag of Texas should be a good prompt. DOS can do that, you know!
Sorry, it's been a long day.
This .sig is multi-threaded.
===
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Pete Templin wrote:
> > He's right Debian should provide a nicer default for the prompt. Many
> > people take this things into account when deciding which distribution they
> > like best.
> If someone is going to evaluate an entire distribution on a prompt (even
> if ther
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, [iso-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > # and $ are standard/expected prompts. if you want something different,
> > customise it yourself.
> He's right Debian should provide a nicer default for the prompt. Many
> people tak
Nicolás Lichtmaier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Debian should provide a nicer default for the prompt. Many people
> take this things into account when deciding which distribution they
> like best.
My mind is reeling.
Guy
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe"
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > Debian comes up in a much "rawer" form after install - for instance,
> > no prompt beyond the basic "#" for root and "$" for the user (RedHat
> > gives you the now famous "username /home/username$" prompt).
> # and $ are standard/expected prompts. if y
On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Yoav Cohen-Sivan wrote:
> It seems that Debian is taking a rather different philosophy on
> pre-configured packages than other distributions, such as RedHat. What
> I mean is that after installation of RedHat you have a more or less
> pre-tailored system setup. Y
> "Yoav" == Yoav Cohen-Sivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yoav> My proposition - let's go for the more casual, yet
Yoav> sophisticated user. A user that DOES want to read the Fvwm man
Yoav> page to learn how to set it up to his own tastes, BUT doesn't
Yoav> want to do it 2 hours after inst
Yoav wrote:
#ifdef QUOTE
It seems that Debian is taking a rather different philosophy on
pre-configured packages than other distributions, such as RedHat. What I
It seems as if Debian is catering to the more techie crowd - the ones
that want a bare
It seems that Debian is taking a rather different philosophy on
pre-configured packages than other distributions, such as RedHat. What I
mean is that after installation of RedHat you have a more or less
pre-tailored system setup. You can start tweaking your heart out but the
basics are already
89 matches
Mail list logo
