Re: [request to unsubscribe] debian-devel-digest Digest V2004 #306
unsubscribe debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--- debian-devel-digest-request@lists.debian.org
schrieb:
> ATTACHMENT part 1 message/rfc822
>
> debian-devel-digest Digest Volume 2004 : Issue
> 306
>
> Today's Topics:
> Re: Python or Perl for a Debian main [ Matthias
> Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Chris
> Lawrence <lawrencc@debian.org ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Matthew
> Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.gr ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ "Jaldhar
> H. Vyas" <jaldhar@debian.o ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Martin
> Michlmayr - Debian Project L ]
> The package "cruft" needs help [ Martin
> Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> ]
> Re: Mozilla Firefox's icon and trade [ Rico -mc-
> Gloeckner <debian-ml@ukee ]
> Re: Bug#235271: ITP: awesfx -- Sound [ Darren
> Salt <linux@youmustbejoking. ]
> Re: [40208.nospam@comcast.net: F*cki [ Daniel
> Burrows <dnb114@psu.edu> ]
> Re: Mozilla Firefox's icon and trade [ Rico -mc-
> Gloeckner <debian-ml@ukee ]
> Re: ITH: gdm -- GNOME Display Manage [
> evan@debian.org ]
> ITP: qla2x00 -- QLogic ISP2x00 devic [ Torsten
> Werner <email@twerner42.de> ]
> Re: udev uploaded to experimental [ Thomas
> Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk> ]
> Re: Need someone to take over two of [ Martin
> Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Andreas
> Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Manoj
> Srivastava <srivasta@debian.o ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Petter
> Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.co ]
> Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu [ Anthony
> Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org. ]
>
> ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 14:20:50 +0100
> Von: Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Python or Perl for a Debian
> maintainance project?
>
> Hi, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>
> >> I know, Perl's very mantra is that there's more
> than one way to do it
> >> and now my part of the program and yours need to
> work together. Ugh.
> >
> > "Oops, we forgot to agree on an API before we
> started".
> "We" being the designer of the language, IMHO.
>
> > That's even stupider, and it's still your fault.
> > [...]
> > It appears that the problem is simply that you
> don't know how to use the
> > features it does offer, and therefore assume it
> does not.
>
> I'm going to drop this discussion (to use the word
> loosely) at this point.
> It's no longer helpful to anybody.
>
>
> I'd like to note in conclusion that the way Python
> does objects, or files,
> or error handling, or ..., maps rather well to the
> way I think.
>
> Perl's ways don't, mostly, for larger programs.[*]
>
> IMHO that's one of the more important guidelines for
> choosing 'your'
> programming language.
>
>
> * I tend to react somewhat strongly to the
> implication that I must not
> know how to make Perl jump through round hoops, just
> because the ones it
> does have built in all have a varying number of
> angles. :-/
>
> --
> Matthias Urlichs
>
> ATTACHMENT part 3 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:06:23 -0600
> Von: Chris Lawrence <lawrencc@debian.org>
> An: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@debian.org>
> CC: Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader
> <leader@debian.org>,
> "debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org"
> <debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Martin Michlmayr - Debian
> Project Leader wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>you were not invited because the meeting was in
> Europe and airfare would
> >>have been quite expensive for Debian to pay.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I'm betting you could get from Texas to Spain for
> around $300 or less.
> >Debian certainly has the budget for that.
> >
> >
>
> A three-week advance purchase round-trip airfare
> from Houston to Madrid
> is $616 (on Air France or Continental and Iberia) in
> economy class,
> according to Orbitz. (I didn't bother with
> searching from other
> airports in Texas, but I can't imagine the
> difference would be more than
> +/- 10%.)
>
> Further, I'm not sure it's a good use of project
> funds for jet-setting
> developers around the world for meetings when we
> have things like IRC
> and the telephone available. One DebConf and we'd
> be tapped out...
>
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Lawrence <lawrencc@debian.org> -
> http://blog.lordsutch.com/
>
> ATTACHMENT part 4 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:14:18 +0000
> Von: Matthew Garrett
> <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
>
> >I'm betting you could get from Texas to Spain for
> around $300 or less.
> >Debian certainly has the budget for that.
>
> Expedia seems to suggest that the cheapest would be
> just under $700.
>
> --
> Matthew Garrett |
> mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.devel@srcf.ucam.org
>
> ATTACHMENT part 5 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:39:09 -0500 (EST)
> Von: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@debian.org>
> An: Chris Lawrence <lawrencc@debian.org>
> CC: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@debian.org>,
> Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader
> <leader@debian.org>,
> "debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org"
> <debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Chris Lawrence wrote:
>
> > A three-week advance purchase round-trip airfare
> from Houston to Madrid
> > is $616 (on Air France or Continental and Iberia)
> in economy class,
> > according to Orbitz. (I didn't bother with
> searching from other
> > airports in Texas, but I can't imagine the
> difference would be more than
> > +/- 10%.)
> >
> > Further, I'm not sure it's a good use of project
> funds for jet-setting
> > developers around the world for meetings when we
> have things like IRC
> > and the telephone available. One DebConf and we'd
> be tapped out...
> >
>
> Be like William Shatner and use priceline.com.
>
> Adam is a major stakeholder in arguably the most
> important package
> in Debian. At a time when communication seems to be
> a major problem all
> over Debian, I wouldn't consider the use of even
> $600 to be a waste of
> money. IMO of course.
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org>
> La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/
>
> ATTACHMENT part 6 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:47:24 +0000
> Von: Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader
> <leader@debian.org>
> An: "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar@debian.org>,
> "debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org"
> <debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> * Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org> [2004-02-28
> 08:39]:
> > > A three-week advance purchase round-trip airfare
> from Houston to Madrid
> > > is $616 (on Air France or Continental and
> Iberia) in economy class,
> >
> > Be like William Shatner and use priceline.com.
> >
> > Adam is a major stakeholder in arguably the most
> important package
> [...]
>
> Wichert suggested having another meeting in
> Cambridge (UK) at some
> point. Many Debian developers are there (including
> Ian Jackson), and
> it's easy to get to from Europe. A flight from
> Texas to London might
> also not be too expensive, so I'll check this when
> details about the
> meeting in Cambridge become available.
> --
> Martin Michlmayr
> leader@debian.org
>
> ATTACHMENT part 7 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:50:10 +0000
> Von: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: The package "cruft" needs help
>
> "cruft" is a really nice tools, but it unfortunately
> is not maintained
> very well. I was wondering if there's anyone who'd
> like to go through
> the outstanding bug reports, submit patches and
> perhaps help the
> maintainer prepare a new release.
>
>
> Package: cruft
> Maintainer: Anthony Towns <ajt@debian.org>
> Description: Find any cruft built up on your system
> cruft is a program to look over your system for
> anything that shouldn't
> be there, but is; or for anything that should be
> there, but isn't.
> .
> It bases most of its results on dpkg's database, as
> well as a list of
> `extra files' that can appear during the lifetime
> of various packages.
> .
> cruft is still in pre-release; your assistance in
> improving its accuracy
> and performance is appreciated.
>
> --
> Martin Michlmayr
> tbm@cyrius.com
>
> ATTACHMENT part 8 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:02:30 +0100
> Von: Rico -mc- Gloeckner <debian-ml@ukeer.de>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Mozilla Firefox's icon and trademark
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 06:25:45PM -0500, Eric
> Dorland wrote:
> > Unfortunately it seems
> these icons and even
> > the name "Firefox" (and Mozilla even) are
> trademarked and can't be
> > used except with the official builds or permission
> of the Mozilla
> > Foundation (see
> http://mozilla.org/foundation/licensing.html and
> >
>
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=50876).
>
>
> IANAL+IMVHO the point is:
>
> - you use the original codebase from firefox to
> build the firefox
> browser: you are entitled to use icons and name.
> - you use the original codebase and change it
> and/or use the codebase
> in another application: this clearly is not the
> codebase for firefox
> anymore and you are not entitled to use icons and
> name.
>
>
> This makes sense to me and is not (IMVHO)
> contradictionary to the DFSG.
> It might be in the sense that the icons are non-free
> and may not be used
> outside firefox.[1] I do not think it is for the
> name, since assuming
> that another browser uses the codebase of firefox
> they may not call
> themselves firefox, for appearent reasons.
>
>
> [1] If this indeed *is* considered non-free, i'd
> guess there are quite a
> lot talented people in the debian-environment to
> create own iconsets.
>
>
> After all, i'd prefer debian talking to the mozilla
> people before acting
> up and/or announcing that mozilla will be dropped
> off debian.
>
> --
> Rico -mc- Gloeckner | 1024D/61F05B8C |
> jabber:mc@micq.org
> http://www.ukeer.de | RICO-RIPE |
> sip:42@daheim.ukeer.de
> == mv ~/.signature
> http://www.ukeer.de/signature.html ==
>
> ATTACHMENT part 9 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:20:36 +0000
> Von: Darren Salt <linux@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> CC: 235271@bugs.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Bug#235271: ITP: awesfx -- SoundFont
> utilities for SB AWE32/64 and Emu10k1 drivers
>
> I demand that Ove Kaaven may or may not have
> written...
>
> [snip; awesfx]
> > Now I've seen #199241, and found that the reason
> for having the package
> > previously removed from Debian won't apply
> anymore:
>
> > - I do have a emu10k1 synth, so I can maintain
> this
> > - upstream *is* working on awesfx, proven by the
> 0.5.0 release in 2004.
>
> > I'll try to locate the previous debian packaging
> before packaging this
> > new upstream release.
>
> I have a copy of it in my archive (see .sig for
> location and apt-get
> details). There's also an already-packaged 0.5.0 at
> <URL:http://anarxia.dyndns.org:2180/debian/>; this
> may be of some use.
>
> --
> | Darren Salt | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington,
> | woody, sarge, | youmustbejoking | Northumberland
> | RISC OS | demon co uk | Toon Army
> |
>
<URL:http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/progs.unstable.html>
>
> ATTACHMENT part 10 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 08:52:25 -0500
> Von: Daniel Burrows <dnb114@psu.edu>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: [40208.nospam@comcast.net: F*cking
> tired with these broken package orphaned?]
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 11:10:36AM +0100, Josselin
> Mouette <joss@debian.org> was heard to say:
> > Le sam 28/02/2004 à 10:59, Nano Nano a écrit :
> > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 04:49:11AM -0500,
> Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:02:26PM -0800, Nano
> Nano wrote:
> > > > > Care to explain a bit more what is going on
> here?
> > > >
> > > > Developers wear their hearts on their sleeves.
> Or, failing that, their
> > > > changelog entries.
> > >
> > > What actually changed? From reading the
> **Changelog**, I have no clue.
> >
> > Like the changelog says: it was orphaned.
>
> The changelog does not say that, though -- it's
> not even a coherent
> sentence! All I got out of it was that Christian
> was frustrated about
> something being broken and/or orphaned. I had to
> read vte's changelog
> to figure out what was really happening.
>
> Daniel
>
> --
> /-------------------- Daniel Burrows
> <dburrows@debian.org> -------------------\
> | "Hmm, do I understand correctly that we've
> introduced a 1970 bug in |
> | order to move the 2038 bug to 2106?"
> |
> | -- Richard Braakman
> |
> \----------------- The Turtle Moves! --
> http://www.lspace.org ----------------/
>
> ATTACHMENT part 11 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:20:03 +0100
> Von: Rico -mc- Gloeckner <debian-ml@ukeer.de>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Mozilla Firefox's icon and trademark
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 03:02:30PM +0100, Rico -mc-
> Gloeckner wrote:
> > After all, i'd prefer debian talking to the
> mozilla people before acting
> > up and/or announcing that mozilla will be dropped
> off debian.
>
> Besides: <403E42D5.6050705@mozilla.org>
>
> This doesnt seem that negative as pointed out in
> this thread.
>
> --
> Rico -mc- Gloeckner | 1024D/61F05B8C |
> jabber:mc@micq.org
> http://www.ukeer.de | RICO-RIPE |
> sip:42@daheim.ukeer.de
> == mv ~/.signature
> http://www.ukeer.de/signature.html ==
>
> ATTACHMENT part 12 message/rfc822
> Datum: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:21:56 -0800
> Von: evan@debian.org
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> CC: Ryan Murray <rmurray@debian.org>
> Betreff: Re: ITH: gdm -- GNOME Display Manager
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 06:48:24PM +0100, Josselin
> Mouette wrote:
>
> > I intend to hijack the GDM package. It has several
> issues that should be
> > dealt with before sarge releases, and many
> long-standing open bugs.
> > This is not an ultimatum. I don't like ultimatums.
> I just want to take
> > care of this package's maintenance, with the GNOME
> team as
> > co-maintainers, unless there are serious
> objections.
>
> I have serious objections to this. I'm taking it
> that you haven't
> talked this over with Ryan yet. It's just not
> acceptable to adopt a
> package against the current maintainer's wishes.
>
> If you don't think Ryan's taking the package
> seriously, you have a
> number of options, most of which are outlined here:
>
>
>
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-beyond-pkging.en.html#s-mia-qa
>
> You should follow that procedure before doing a
> source NMU. Some other
> options:
>
> * Submitting patches
> * Offering to co-maintain
>
> Being confrontational doesn't help us work together
> to make Debian.
>
> ~Evan
>
> ATTACHMENT part 13 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:05:08 +0100
> Von: Torsten Werner <email@twerner42.de>
> An: Debian Bug Tracking System
> <submit@bugs.debian.org>
> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: ITP: qla2x00 -- QLogic ISP2x00 device
> driver for Linux 2.4.x
>
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name : qla2x00
> Version : 6.6.10
> Upstream Author : not specified
> * URL : http://www.qlogic.com/
> * License : GPL
> Description : QLogic ISP2x00 device driver
> for Linux 2.4.x
>
> This package provides the source code for the
> qla2x00 kernel modules
> that support the QLA2100, QLA2200 and QLA2300
> fibre channel adapters
> from QLogic. Kernel source is required to compile
> these modules.
>
>
> Torsten
>
> --
> Torsten Werner
> email@twerner42.de
> http://www.twerner42.de/
> phone:+49 162 3123004
> jabber:bollin@amessage.de
> icq:342538944
>
> ATTACHMENT part 14 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:54:44 +0100
> Von: Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: udev uploaded to experimental
>
> Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > I think it needs to be a 2-stage system.
> /etc/rcS.d/S02mountkernfs
> > would mount all top-level kernel filesystems
> (there's also
> > non-toplevel, e.g. /where/ever/chroot1/proc) but
> not write /etc/mtab.
> > Then, /etc/rcS.d/S35mountall.sh would make sure
> that those mounts
> > get written to /etc/mtab and that the other
> non-toplevel kernel
> > filesystems get mounted.
>
> In this thread there was no explicit mention of the
> shm filesystem,
> mounted at /dev/shm. If possible I would like to
> see this mounted
> early too.
>
>
> Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > Now there are packages that want to look at /proc
> even before
> > /etc/rcS.d/S35mountall.sh. So much, that
> /etc/rcS.d/S10checkroot
> > makes sure it's mounted. And there are even
> packages that need
> > procps even earlier, like bootlogd and keysmaps.
> They mount /proc
> > to peek in and then unmount it again: ugly.
> >
> > GOTO Masanori wrote:
> >> - glibc package loses devpts.sh/mountkernfs, and
> initscripts
> >> gets it. So we need to add Conflicts:
> initscripts (<<
> >> oldversion) if we do without consideration. I
> don't want to
> >> add such Conflicts. Fortunately, my update to
> >> /etc/init.d/devpts.sh/mountkernfs is not still
> packaged to
> >> the latest glibc sid package, so we only
> consider to devpts
> >> (which is currently provided by glibc package).
> Can you
> >> provide good script which allows to coexist
> both devpts.sh
> >> and your new script?
>
> All these rcS.d scripts (including those listed
> below) mount-and-
> unmount procfs:
>
> S01devfsd
> S05initrd-tools.sh
> S05keymap.sh
> S10checkroot.sh
>
> Those that run after the new kernel filesystem mount
> script should
> be updated to reflect the new way of doing things.
>
> --
> Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>
>
> ATTACHMENT part 15 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 15:27:47 +0000
> Von: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>
> An: "Dale C. Scheetz" <dwarf@polaris.net>
> CC: Patrick Ouellette <pouelle@debian.org>,
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: Need someone to take over two of my
> packages
>
> * Dale C. Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> [2004-02-26
> 18:37]:
> > >Patrick, you volunteered to take over seesat5 a
> month ago but so far
> > >have not made an upload. Can you please at least
> change the
>
> > He and I have done one round of e-mails, but I
> never really got a
> > commitment from him. I may have scared him off
> with my list, or maybe he
> > just puked when he saw the code ;-)
> [...]
> > Anyway, if Patrick is still out there, and still
> interested, drop me a
> > line and let's talk.
>
> I've filed an RFA now so this is not forgotten about
> - #235300.
> --
> Martin Michlmayr
> tbm@cyrius.com
>
> ATTACHMENT part 16 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 17:12:56 +0100
> Von: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> * Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org) [040228
> 16:55]:
> > Right now Sven Luther has a [patch] bug against
> > kernel-package, but I am not comfortable with the
> change, and I think
> > I have a better way of addressing the underlying
> issue.
>
> In this case I'd send mail to the bug report
> explaining so, and remove
> the tag "patch". (On the other hand, during
> preparation of a NMU, I
> ask the maintainer if there are any issues against a
> patch that's
> already in the BTS.)
>
>
> Cheers,
> Andi
> --
> http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
> PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE
> F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
>
> ATTACHMENT part 17 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 09:29:12 -0600
> Von: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 13:53:22 +0200, Jarno Elonen
> <elonen@iki.fi> said:
>
> >> You may have perfectly valid reasons for not
> being able to work on
> >> dpkg at the moment, I'm not contesting that.
> However these reasons
> >> should not stop *anyone else* working on dpkg.
>
> > Indeed. There are actually 49 entries with "Tags:
> patch" on them,
> > including one of my own.
>
> Umm. I tend not to blindly apply patches to my
> packages
> either. Anyone can stick any tag on a report; the
> quality, and the
> type, of change still needs to be reviewd.
>
> Right now Sven Luther has a [patch] bug against
> kernel-package, but I am not comfortable with the
> change, and I think
> I have a better way of addressing the underlying
> issue. However,
> until I have time to think through the
> ramifications of my way, and
> to implement it, there is a bug sitting on the BTS
> with a tag
> [patch].
>
> I would be very unhappy if there was an NMU
> implementing that
> patch (I would, indeed, revert that NMU asap).
>
> manoj
> --
> QOTD: "It's a cold bowl of chili, when love don't
> work out."
> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
> 1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D
> 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B
> 21BA DABB BF24 424C
>
> ATTACHMENT part 18 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 16:53:50 +0100
> Von: Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> [Manoj Srivastava]
> > Umm. I tend not to blindly apply patches to my
> packages
> > either. Anyone can stick any tag on a report; the
> quality, and the
> > type, of change still needs to be reviewd.
>
> Good. I believe you share this attitude with most
> package
> maintainers. :)
>
> > Right now Sven Luther has a [patch] bug against
> > kernel-package, but I am not comfortable with the
> change, and I think
> > I have a better way of addressing the underlying
> issue. However,
> > until I have time to think through the
> ramifications of my way, and
> > to implement it, there is a bug sitting on the
> BTS with a tag
> > [patch].
> >
> > I would be very unhappy if there was an NMU
> implementing that
> > patch (I would, indeed, revert that NMU asap).
>
> If your view on the patch already is in BTS, as a
> reply to the mail
> supplying the patch, I would be very surprised if
> someone did an NMU
> without furhter comments.
>
> The problem is that there are lots of bugs in BTS
> with a patch and no
> comment on the patch from the package maintainer.
> These rightfully
> increase the chance of NMUs.
>
> :)
>
> ATTACHMENT part 19 message/rfc822
> Datum: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 02:05:36 +1000
> Von: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
> An: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Betreff: Re: *UNAPPROVED* dpkg nmu
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 09:29:12AM -0600, Manoj
> Srivastava wrote:
> > Right now Sven Luther has a [patch] bug against
> > kernel-package, but I am not comfortable with the
> change, [..]
>
> You should consider removing the patch tag then:
>
> patch
> A patch or some other easy procedure for
> fixing the bug is
> included in the bug logs. If there's a
> patch, but it doesn't
> resolve the bug adequately or causes some
> other problems, this
> tag should not be used.
>
> Not that this is any excuse for not being careful
> when working out what
> to do in an NMU, though.
>
> Cheers,
> aj
>
> --
> Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au>
> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed
> mail preferred.
>
> Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
> http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17,
> 2004
>
> ATTACHMENT part 19.2 application/pgp-signature
name=signature.asc
Mit schönen Grüßen von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Reply to: