[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

pcmcia



i compiled the kernel 2.2.14 on my laptop and lost
pcmcia support
i type cardctl ident and 
it said no drivers in /proc/devices

when i switched back to my old kernel 2.2.12 it works
fine

does anyone know what i need to do to get the new
kernel running with pcmcia support

Tim Ryder
debian@jawse.net

--- debian-devel-digest-request@lists.debian.org
wrote:


> ATTACHMENT part 1 message/rfc822 
> 
> debian-devel-digest Digest				Volume 100 : Issue 226
> 
> Today's Topics:
>   Re: Cannot merge bug reports - why?   [ Wichert
> Akkerman <wichert@cistron.n ]
>   Re: [script] generate symlinks betwe  [ Wichert
> Akkerman <wichert@cistron.n ]
>   Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?  [ Martijn
> van Oosterhout <kleptog@cup ]
>   Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files a  [ Christian
> Surchi <christian@firenze ]
>   Unidentified subject!                 [  ]
>   Unidentified subject!                 [  ]
>   Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files a  [ Josip
> Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> ]
>   Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf fi  [ Josip
> Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> ]
>   Unidentified subject!                 [  ]
>   Unidentified subject!                 [  ]
>   Could You help me??                   [
> "mobileriakejsi@usa.net" <mobilen@a ]
>   Re: Bug#56981: [slocate] failed to r  [ R Garth
> Wood <rgwood@debian.org> ]
>   Re: Napster clients, so much diversi  [ rob
> <really-funky-one@excite.com> ]
>   Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf fi  [ Martijn
> van Oosterhout <kleptog@cup ]
>   logprn                                [ Russell
> Coker <russell@coker.com.au ]
>   Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf fi  [ Josip
> Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> ]
>   Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf fi  [ Ben
> Collins <bcollins@debian.org> ]
>   Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files a  [ Christian
> Surchi <csurchi@mclink.it ]
>   Re: Napster clients, so much diversi  [ Jacob
> Kuntz <jpk@cape.com> ]
>   Re: Packages removed from frozen      [ tb@mit.edu
> (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) ]
>   Re: Packages removed from frozen      [ tb@mit.edu
> (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) ]
>   Re: Packages removed from frozen      [ tb@mit.edu
> (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) ]
>   Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files a  [ Malcolm
> Parsons <malcolm@ivywell.sc ]
>   Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf fi  [ Josip
> Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> ]
>   Re: Apache `srm.conf' has /usr/doc n  [ Wichert
> Akkerman <wichert@cistron.n ]
>   Re: Packages removed from frozen      [ Ben
> Collins <bcollins@debian.org> ]
>   Re: [POSSIBLE GRAVE SECURITY HOLD]    [ tb@mit.edu
> (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) ]
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:25:35 +0100
> From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cistron.nl>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Cannot merge bug reports - why?
> 
> Previously Brian May wrote:
> > No - everywhere (including IIRC changelog closes)
> works with or
> > without the hash. This is only place I have found
> where the hash must
> > not be used.
> 
> The changelog actually demands the hash.
> 
> Wichert.
> 
> -- 
>   
>
________________________________________________________________
>  / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at
> your convenience  \
> | wichert@liacs.nl                   
> http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
> | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8
> 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2.2 application/pgp-signature 


> ATTACHMENT part 3 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:25:14 +0100
> From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cistron.nl>
> To: bug1 <bug1@netconnect.com.au>
> CC: debian-devel <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: [script] generate symlinks between
> woody and potato
> 
> Previously bug1 wrote:
> > I wrote (am writing) this script to generate
> symlinks between packages
> > that are in multiple releases.
> 
> Why not use hardlinks? That makes upgrading the
> package in only one
> of the releases a lot easier since you don't need to
> chase around
> to track down all symlinks pointing to it.
> 
> Wichert.
> 
> -- 
>   
>
________________________________________________________________
>  / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at
> your convenience  \
> | wichert@liacs.nl                   
> http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
> | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8
> 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 3.2 application/pgp-signature 


> ATTACHMENT part 4 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 23:49:27 +1100
> From: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files? 
> 
> The packaging manual doesn't say and the man pages
> doesn't
> say either way either. The reason I ask is that conf
> files
> are unpacked as conffile.dpkg-dist but the diversion
> only
> (AFAIK) redirects conffile by itself.
> 
> Any help would be appreciated.
> -- 
> Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> 
> Trust the computer industry to shorten "Year 2000"
> to Y2K.
> It was this kind of thinking that caused the problem
> in the first place.
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 5 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:35:11 +0100
> From: Christian Surchi <christian@firenze.linux.it>
> To: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files are
> installed in different directories, index broken
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 11:37:04AM +0100, Josip
> Rodin wrote:
> 
> > They are accesible for me, I tried with info and
> pinfo viewers. What program
> > did you use? That's where the bug should be
> reassigned...
> 
> I used info to see aalib info page in
> /usr/share/info and it didn't find
> it.
> Naturally I have gzipped info page in
> /usr/share/info.
> 
> bye
> Christian
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 6 message/rfc822 
> Subject: Unidentified subject!
> 
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 7 message/rfc822 
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Unidentified subject!
> 
> 0subscribe
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 8 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:26:58 +0100
> From: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files are
> installed in different directories, index broken
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 12:35:11PM +0100, Christian
> Surchi wrote:
> > > They are accesible for me, I tried with info and
> pinfo viewers. What program
> > > did you use? That's where the bug should be
> reassigned...
> > 
> > I used info to see aalib info page in
> /usr/share/info and it didn't find
> > it.
> > Naturally I have gzipped info page in
> /usr/share/info.
> 
> Is the info page registered properly with
> install-info, i.e. does it exist
> in the /usr/info/dir file (it's a text file, you can
> view it with any text
> editor)?
> 
> -- 
> enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first
> name
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 9 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:28:48 +0100
> From: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> To: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 11:49:27PM +1100, Martijn
> van Oosterhout wrote:
> > The packaging manual doesn't say and the man pages
> doesn't
> > say either way either.
> 
> I see no reason why not.
> 
> > The reason I ask is that conf files are unpacked
> as conffile.dpkg-dist but
> > the diversion only (AFAIK) redirects conffile by
> itself.
> 
> Um, can you explain this?
> 
> -- 
> enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first
> name
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 10 message/rfc822 
> Subject: Unidentified subject!
> 
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 11 message/rfc822 
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Unidentified subject!
> 
> 0subscribe
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 12 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 14:57:38 +0100
> From: "mobileriakejsi@usa.net"
> <mobilen@abissnet.com.al>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Could You help me??
> 
> I like to thank you for epson printer.
> I have bought an Epson Stylus color 300 2 year
> before.
> 
> Actually I have formated my computer now but I have
> lost my original disk.
> would you send me by E-Mail installing program or
> can you writte me
> internet address where i can down load this program
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Bledi 
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 13 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:03:06 -0500 (EST)
> From: R Garth Wood <rgwood@debian.org>
> To: Colin Watson <cjw44@cam.ac.uk>,
> 56981@bugs.debian.org
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, Richard Braakman
> <dark@xs4all.nl>,
>   debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#56981: [slocate] failed to remove
> diversion
> 
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Colin Watson wrote:
> 
> > [Cc'd to debian-devel for sanity checking, and the
> release manager as
> > this relates to (and, I believe, finally closes)
> multiple
> > release-critical bugs.]
> 
> Apparently not but we're getting closer. :>
> 
> > > 
> > > Preparing to replace slocate 2.0-1 (using
> .../slocate_2.1-3_i386.deb)
> > > ...
> > > No diversion `diversion of /usr/bin/locate to
> /usr/bin/locate.old by
> > > slocate', none removed
> > > No diversion `diversion of /usr/bin/updatedb to
> /usr/bin/updatedb.old
> > > by slocate', none removed
> > > Removing `diversion of /usr/man/man1/locate.1.gz
> to
> > > /usr/man/man1/locate.1.gz.old by slocate'
> > > dpkg-divert: rename involves overwriting
> `/usr/man/man1/locate.1.gz'
> > > with different file
> `/usr/man/man1/locate.1.gz.old', not allowed
> > 
> > I agree with the changelog that this particular
> incarnation of the
> > diversions mess in slocate is fixed in 2.1-4.
> However, it's still broken
> > on my system:
> > 
> > # Preparing to replace slocate 2.1-3 (using
> .../slocate_2.1-4_i386.deb)
> > # ...
> > # ===============================================
> > # ===Error. The following diversions still exist:
> > # diversion of /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz to
> > # /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz.old by slocate
> > # diversion of /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz
> to
> > # /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz.old by slocate
> > # ===============================================
> > # dpkg: error processing
> /var/cache/apt/archives/slocate_2.1-4_i386.deb
> > # (--unpack):
> > #  subprocess pre-installation script returned
> error exit status 1
> 
> Ok. This is one I didn't check for. Will Fix soon.
> 
> > I feel rather responsible for this one, as it was
> my
> > "slocate makes unhelpful diversions" bug that
> prompted this mess in the
> > first place, so I think I ought to fix it.
> 
> Had to be done sometime. :>
> 
> > For debian-devel's benefit in the way of
> background, slocate used to
> > dpkg-divert findutils' manpages to locate.1.gz.old
> and
> > updatedb.1.gz.old. I asked if these could be moved
> to locate.old.1.gz
> > and updatedb.old.1.gz instead, so that they could
> still be accessible
> > with man if need be [1]. This evidently caused
> some confusion, and to
> > make matters worse it's interacted badly with the
> move from /usr/man to
> > /usr/share/man.
> 
> Ya findutils had a minor rev update and I had it on
> hold
> as I am using a poor 33.6 modem. It changed from ""
> to
> share hence the confusion.
> 
> > As far as I can tell, the maintainer's simply
> missed out one of the
> > locations to which those manpages have been
> diverted in the past (and
> > where it lived on my system). The following patch
> fixes this (for me, at
> > least):
> > 
> > --- slocate-2.1/debian/preinst.orig	Wed Mar  1
> 03:57:59 2000
> > +++ slocate-2.1/debian/preinst	Wed Mar  1 03:48:14
> 2000
> > @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@
> >  		then
> >  			$DEBUG rm /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz
> >  		fi
> > +		if [ -f /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz.old ]
> > +		then
> > +		$DEBUG dpkg-divert --package slocate --remove
> --rename \
> > +			--divert /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz.old
> \
> > +			/usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.1.gz
> > +		fi
> >  		if [ -f
> /usr/share/man/man1/updatedb.$suffix.1.gz ]
> >  		then
> >  		$DEBUG dpkg-divert --package slocate --remove
> --rename \
> > @@ -82,6 +88,12 @@
> >  		if [ -f /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz ]
> >  		then
> >  			$DEBUG rm /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz
> > +		fi
> > +		if [ -f /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz.old ]
> > +		then
> > +		$DEBUG dpkg-divert --package slocate --remove
> --rename \
> > +			--divert /usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz.old \
> > +			/usr/share/man/man1/locate.1.gz
> >  		fi
> >  		if [ -f /usr/share/man/man1/locate.$suffix.1.gz
> ]
> >  		then
> 
> Yep. Thanks.
> 
> > Sorry for all the confusion caused; if I have
> time, I'll see if I can
> > work out how to simplify the preinst, which should
> help matters somewhat
> > as the situation really is rather complicated at
> the moment. However, I
> 
> Acutally it should be more compilcated but hey time
> is finite.
> 
> > believe that all outstanding release-critical bugs
> against slocate are
> > now closed, which is fortunate as I think it's a
> useful package for
> > potato.
> > 
> > [1] This wasn't just pedantry; I was trying to
> answer somebody's query
> >     about old locate, and wanted to get at its
> manpages.
> 
> No prob, man. Thanks for the input.
> 
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | R Garth Wood                    | "...most people
> spend little time   |
> |                                 | thinking about
> concepts their       |
> |                                 | native language
> is incapable of     |
> | rgwood@debian.org               | expressing." 
> --Tim Sweeny          |
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 14 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 06:05:11 -0800 (PST)
> From: rob <really-funky-one@excite.com>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Napster clients, so much diversity.
> 
> >  Include as many as possible - everything has the
> right.. Nay, is REQUIRED
> >  to be packaged and included in Debian, no matter
> how buggy, pointless, or
> >  otherwise useles!! 
> >  
> 
> I totally agree with the fact that all packages
> however buggy (so long as
> not nasty (critical) and will break your system).
> But the reason i made the
> posting was that people may not see all the choices
> available to them as
> they are spread out so much.
> 
> Perhaps the subject of my message was a bit too
> *diverse*.
> 
> I wonder if there are any other packages this
> scenario could apply to.
> 
> rob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
_______________________________________________________
> Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
> Visit http://freeworld.excite.com
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 15 message/rfc822 
> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 01:41:34 +1100
> From: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> To: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?
> 
> Josip Rodin wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 11:49:27PM +1100, Martijn
> van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > The packaging manual doesn't say and the man
> pages doesn't
> > > say either way either.
> > 
> > I see no reason why not.
> 
> Hmm, OK.
> 
> > > The reason I ask is that conf files are unpacked
> as conffile.dpkg-dist but
> > > the diversion only (AFAIK) redirects conffile by
> itself.
> > 
> > Um, can you explain this?
> 
> Well, when a conffile is unpacked it goes to
> conffile.dpkg-dist. 
> Then it decides whether or not to replace the
> existing config
> file, and if so move the old one to
> conffile.dpkg-old and the
> new one to conffile.
> 
> If I dpkg-divert /etc/package.conf to
> /random/path/package.conf,
> when the new conffile is unpacked, does it go to 
> /random/path/package.conf.dpkg-dist and replace the
> one there?
> 
> Hope I'm making sense here.
> 
> -- 
> Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> 
> Trust the computer industry to shorten "Year 2000"
> to Y2K.
> It was this kind of thinking that caused the problem
> in the first place.
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 16 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 17:38:24 +0100
> From: Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: logprn
> 
> I have just written a little (111 line) C program to
> print log files.  After
> a number of seconds (specified on the command line)
> of no change in the log
> files then any data which has not been printed will
> be printed.  Think of it
> as "tail -f" which runs "lpr" (or any other program
> you specify) regularly.
> 
> I'd make a package of it, but I think that it really
> isn't significant enough
> to deserve a package of it's own.  However it's
> something that's handy enough
> that I think lots of people will want it.
> 
> I would like to work with someone who maintains a
> Debian package which needs
> such a utility to have my program in their package.
> 
> 
> Russell Coker
> 
> -- 
> My current location - X marks the spot.
> X
> X
> X
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 17 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 18:00:49 +0100
> From: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> To: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?
> 
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 01:41:34AM +1100, Martijn
> van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > > The reason I ask is that conf files are
> unpacked as conffile.dpkg-dist but
> > > > the diversion only (AFAIK) redirects conffile
> by itself.
> > > 
> > > Um, can you explain this?
> > 
> > Well, when a conffile is unpacked it goes to
> conffile.dpkg-dist. 
> > Then it decides whether or not to replace the
> existing config
> > file, and if so move the old one to
> conffile.dpkg-old and the
> > new one to conffile.
> > 
> > If I dpkg-divert /etc/package.conf to
> /random/path/package.conf,
> > when the new conffile is unpacked, does it go to 
> > /random/path/package.conf.dpkg-dist and replace
> the one there?
> > 
> > Hope I'm making sense here.
> 
> Ah, yes. That's the way it should behave. What's
> wrong?
> 
> FWIW, I've noticed an odd thing about it, see
> #58735.
> 
> -- 
> enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first
> name
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 18 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:58:49 -0500
> From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
> To: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>
> CC: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?
> 
> You are not supposed to divert conffiles, period. If
> you have a conffile
> that is the same name as another package, then you
> must do one of the
> following:
> 
> a) conflict/replace that package
>  - or -
> b) share a conffile with that package. This means
> that one package will
>    have the main conffile, and the other must depend
> on that package to be
>    installed.
> 
> You choose which is better for your package, and the
> one that it has
> issues with.
> 
> -- 
> 
>
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
> /  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage... 
> --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
> `     bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org
>  --  bmc@visi.net     '
> 
>
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 19 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:00:42 +0100
> From: Christian Surchi <csurchi@mclink.it>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files are
> installed in different directories, index broken
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 02:26:58PM +0100, Josip
> Rodin wrote:
> 
> > Is the info page registered properly with
> install-info, i.e. does it exist
> > in the /usr/info/dir file (it's a text file, you
> can view it with any text
> > editor)?
> 
> Yes, aalib is in the index of /usr/info/dir, but
> info aalib doesn't work.
> 
> bye
> Christian
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 20 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 13:24:27 -0500
> From: Jacob Kuntz <jpk@cape.com>
> To: rob@funky-penguin.co.uk
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Napster clients, so much diversity.
> 
> rob (really-funky-one@excite.com) wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > >  Include as many as possible - everything has
> the right.. Nay, is REQUIRED
> > >  to be packaged and included in Debian, no
> matter how buggy, pointless, or
> > >  otherwise useles!! 
> > >  
> 
> i took that statement to be sarcastic. with the size
> of the distribution
> growing so fast, shouldn't we have some restrictions
> on level of
> completeness?
> 
> > 
> > I totally agree with the fact that all packages
> however buggy (so long as
> > not nasty (critical) and will break your system).
> But the reason i made the
> > posting was that people may not see all the
> choices available to them as
> > they are spread out so much.
> > 
> > Perhaps the subject of my message was a bit too
> *diverse*.
> > 
> > I wonder if there are any other packages this
> scenario could apply to.
> > 
> > rob
> > 
> 
> but you're right that programs that do similar
> things should be in the same
> place.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>
_______________________________________________________
> > Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
> > Visit http://freeworld.excite.com
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
> debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > 
> 
> -- 
> (jacob kuntz)                    jpk@cape.com
> jake@{megabite,underworld}.net
> (megabite systems)                       "think free
> speech, not free beer."
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 21 message/rfc822 
> Date: 01 Mar 2000 13:41:04 -0500
> From: tb@mit.edu (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Packages removed from frozen
> 
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> 
> >         Could one reason be that it can't be built
> from source? I have
> >  considered being able to build from sourfe an
> important feature (I
> >  really envy the install .src.rpm in a standard
> place; and rebuild
> >  as simply as rpm --rebuild feature of rpm)
> 
> It can be built from source as easily as GCC can.
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 22 message/rfc822 
> Date: 01 Mar 2000 13:42:15 -0500
> From: tb@mit.edu (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Packages removed from frozen
> 
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> 
> >         Asking for dispensation for circular build
> depends was
> >  (perhaps a poor) attempt to ensure that people
> don't just declare a
> >  self build depends out of sloth; and to ensure
> that the packages
> >  properly get marked as potentially dangerous
> 
> Why dispensation?  There is no prohibition of
> circular build depends,
> and if you think there should be, then propose it on
> debian-policy.
> 
> Thomas
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 23 message/rfc822 
> Date: 01 Mar 2000 13:44:10 -0500
> From: tb@mit.edu (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Packages removed from frozen
> 
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> 
> >         In other words, as far as possible
> programs should be
> >  buildable from source, unless that is impossible,
> and in which
> >  case some extra steps should be required: asking
> for permissin and
> >  inclusio in teh security FAQW do not seem to be
> too onerous.
> 
> But the program *IS* buildable from source.  You may
> not like the
> language the source is written in, but it *is*
> buildable from source.
> 
> Thomas
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 24 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 18:51:48 +0000
> From: Malcolm Parsons
> <malcolm@ivywell.screaming.net>
> To: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#59332: general: Info files are
> installed in different directories, index broken
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 02:26:58PM +0100, Josip
> Rodin wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 12:35:11PM +0100,
> Christian Surchi wrote:
> > > I used info to see aalib info page in
> /usr/share/info and it didn't find
> > > it.
> > > Naturally I have gzipped info page in
> /usr/share/info.
> > 
> > Is the info page registered properly with
> install-info, i.e. does it exist
> > in the /usr/info/dir file (it's a text file, you
> can view it with any text
> > editor)?
> 
> It does exist in there. Typing 
> info aa
> or selecting the aa menu item from the main info
> page bring up the file, but
> info aalib
> gives a No menu item error.
> 
> -- 
> Malcolm Parsons
> finger malcolm@bits.bris.ac.uk for info
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 25 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 20:16:41 +0100
> From: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
> To: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
> CC: Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>,
>   debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Does dpkg-divert work on conf files?
> 
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 11:58:49AM -0500, Ben
> Collins wrote:
> > You are not supposed to divert conffiles, period.
> [snip]
> 
> This doesn't answer the question "Does it work or
> not?". :)
> 
> FWIW, I don't like that, conffiles should be handled
> just like any other
> file is.
> 
> -- 
> enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first
> name
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 26 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 16:11:52 +0100
> From: Wichert Akkerman <wichert@cistron.nl>
> To: "Karl M. Hegbloom"
> <karlheg@bittersweet.inetarena.com>
> CC: "Debian Developers' Forum"
> <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Apache `srm.conf' has /usr/doc not
> /usr/share/doc
> 
> Previously Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> >  `dhelp' doesn't work right now.  This is grave.
> 
> So bitch at dhelp. I'm quite sure the maintainer
> will tell you
> he didn't implement a single interface that manages
> /usr/doc and
> /usr/share/doc and you should usr
> http://localhost/HTML2
> 
> Wichert.
> 
> -- 
>   
>
________________________________________________________________
>  / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at
> your convenience  \
> | wichert@liacs.nl                   
> http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
> | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8
> 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 26.2 application/pgp-signature 


> ATTACHMENT part 27 message/rfc822 
> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 14:26:56 -0500
> From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
> To: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Packages removed from frozen
> 
> On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 01:14:02PM -0600, Manoj
> Srivastava wrote:
> > >>"Rob" == Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu>
> writes:
> > 
> >  Rob> Is this really a release-critical bug?  It's
> just the nature of the
> >  Rob> rscheme package.  You can't build rscheme
> unless rscheme is
> >  Rob> installed.  That will probably be fixed in
> the future, but at most,
> >  Rob> I'd think it's wishlist.  Further, the
> message that you get from
> >  Rob> debian/rules when you try to build without
> rscheme installed should
> >  Rob> explain why things failed.
> > 
> >  Rob> Granted a Build-Depends would be better, and
> I'll add that, but I
> >  Rob> don't see why this is release critical, or
> why it warrants removal.  
> >  Rob> I'm downgrading this to wishlist, and I
> think that rscheme should be
> >  Rob> restored to frozen.
> > 
> >         Could one reason be that it can't be built
> from source? I have
> >  considered being able to build from sourfe an
> important feature (I
> >  really envy the install .src.rpm in a standard
> place; and rebuild
> >  as simply as rpm --rebuild feature of rpm)
> 
> The problem was not build-depends. The problem was
> that he had a specific
> function being performed *in* debian/rules that
> checked the build-depends,
> and failed to build if they were not met.
> 
> This caused problems however. Since he used dpkg
> --status to check if
> rscheme-modules was installed. On my system, in in
> fact was not installed,
> yet his check failed anyway. Why? Because
> rscheme-modules was not known to
> the package system, since it had *never* been built.
> So, his check is
> flawed.
> 
> He did add build depends, however he has not removed
> the flawed checks,
> and so it still fails the build unless I manually
> edit the debian/rules
> file. Hence, it is a bug.
> 
> -- 
> 
>
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
> /  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage... 
> --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
> `     bcollins@debian.org  --  bcollins@openldap.org
>  --  bmc@visi.net     '
> 
>
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 28 message/rfc822 
> Date: 01 Mar 2000 14:42:46 -0500
> From: tb@mit.edu (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
> To: Pierre Beyssac <beyssac@enst.fr>
> CC: Ruud de Rooij <ruud@ruud.org>, Joseph Carter
> <knghtbrd@debian.org>,
>   Martijn van Oosterhout
> <kleptog@cupid.suninternet.com>,
>   Samuel Tardieu <sam@debian.org>, Adam Di Carlo
> <adam@onshore.com>,
>   "Huneycutt, Doug" <doug.huneycutt@lmco.com>,
> 56821@bugs.debian.org,
>   pb@enst.fr, quinot@enst.fr,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: [POSSIBLE GRAVE SECURITY HOLD]
> 
> Pierre Beyssac <beyssac@enst.fr> writes:
> 
> > The security hole is that the console is made
> insecure by default
> > without any warning from the installation program.
> That, in itself,
> > would warrant a security advisory.
> 
> Are you really sure your machines are secure
> notwithstanding this?  I
> doubt it seriously.
> 
> Not counting the possibility of physically dinking
> with the hardware,
> are you sure that C-c during bootup won't do the
> wrong thing?  How
> about telling LILO to boot Linux single-user?
> 
> Thomas
> 

=====
Tim Ryder
jawse@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com


Reply to: