=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 11 fully signed off packages
* 27 packages missing signoffs
* 16 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (2 total) ==
== All packages in [testing] for more than 14 days (16 total) ==
* kdeplasma-applets-networkmanagement-1:0.9.0.4-1 (i686), since 2012-07-29
* kdeplasma-applets-networkmanagement-1:0.9.0.4-1 (x86_64), since 2012-07-29
* networkmanager-vpnc-0.9.6.0-1 (i686), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-openvpn-0.9.6.0-1 (i686), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-pptp-0.9.6.0-1 (i686), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-0.9.6.0-1 (i686), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-vpnc-0.9.6.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-openvpn-0.9.6.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-pptp-0.9.6.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-0.9.6.0-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-07
* networkmanager-openconnect-0.9.6.2-1 (i686), since 2012-08-09
* network-manager-applet-0.9.6.2-1 (i686), since 2012-08-09
* networkmanager-openconnect-0.9.6.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-09
* network-manager-applet-0.9.6.2-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-09
* openconnect-1:4.06-1 (i686), since 2012-08-12
* openconnect-1:4.06-1 (x86_64), since 2012-08-12
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 0 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 0 fully signed off packages
* 2 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== Incomplete signoffs for [community] (2 total) ==
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 5 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 8 fully signed off packages
* 13 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (5 total) ==
Juhapekka Tolvanen writes ("[juhtolv@iki.fi: Are you MIA?]"):
> I sent that E-Mail 2012-08-10 and I still haven't got any answer.
> Hence, it is obvious and evident that Debian-developer is MIA. Please,
> follow your own protocols to handle the situation. I think I did what
> I must do, already.
Your email, as you quote it, is quite unpleasant. I'm not surprised
you didn't get a reply.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20557.54118.630149.995455@chiark.greenend.org.uk"> http://lists.debian.org/20557.54118.630149.995455@chiark.greenend.org.uk
09-10-2012, 02:42 PM
"burslem2001@yahoo.com"
http://www.eliw.cba.pl/655784.php--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
09-10-2012, 04:07 PM
Christopher Svanefalk
O that I had a botnet to ram down your sockets.
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:42 PM, burslem2001@yahoo.com <burslem2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
--
Best,
Christopher Svanefalk
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
09-10-2012, 08:53 PM
"Adam D. Barratt"
On 10.09.2012 12:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
Juhapekka Tolvanen writes ("[juhtolv@iki.fi: Are you MIA?]"):
I sent that E-Mail 2012-08-10 and I still haven't got any answer.
Hence, it is obvious and evident that Debian-developer is MIA.
Please,
follow your own protocols to handle the situation. I think I did
what
I must do, already.
Your email, as you quote it, is quite unpleasant. I'm not surprised
you didn't get a reply.
But it is also very ridiculous to have RC-bugs like #155182
unresolved many years.
Outstanding bugs -- Important bugs; Unclassified (3 bugs)
#155182 [i| | ] [arpwatch] arpwatch: Reports strange errors on
arm
None of the open bugs listed on the URL above have RC severity.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/73b181047722470be94ea775b64b89c2@localhost
09-10-2012, 10:57 PM
Ricardo Mones
On Mon, 10 Sep 2012 12:47:50 +0100
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Juhapekka Tolvanen writes ("[juhtolv@iki.fi: Are you MIA?]"):
> > I sent that E-Mail 2012-08-10 and I still haven't got any answer.
> > Hence, it is obvious and evident that Debian-developer is MIA.
> > Please, follow your own protocols to handle the situation. I think
> > I did what I must do, already.
>
> Your email, as you quote it, is quite unpleasant. I'm not surprised
> you didn't get a reply.
Completely true, these are not the words to address any maintainer or
developer, regardless his or her level of absence from the project.
Juhapekka, please, refrain from invoking or pretending to follow
Developer's Reference procedures for developers (which you are not
member of) that you have randomly read and obviously not understood.
From our point of view fuji developer is MIA, not semi-absent. If you
have more info of his whereabouts, please tell us at mia@qa.d.o.
As said, that's still no reason to send nasty mails, of course.
regards,
--
Ricardo Mones, on behalf of Debian QA/MIA team
http://people.debian.org/~mones
«You worry too much about your job. Stop it. You are not paid enough
to worry.»
09-11-2012, 07:30 AM
Matt Johnson
All,
* Is it a sensible idea to install solid state drives in a ltsp server?
* Could we expect to benefit significantly (60 workstations, 32 used*concurrently in a lab)?
* If so... With solid state drives faster but more expensive than traditional magnetic drives, would it make sense to install the root directory (/) on solid state but /home on the traditional drive just for user file storage?
* That got me thinking... If I'm on the right lines, what other directories would it make sense to mount on the traditional drive rather than the more expensive but faster drive (and still*enjoy*a much faster system)?
Thanks as always.
--*
Matt
--
edubuntu-users mailing list
edubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/edubuntu-users
09-11-2012, 08:07 AM
Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 6 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 8 fully signed off packages
* 17 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14 days
(Note: the word 'package' as used here refers to packages as grouped by
pkgbase, architecture, and repository; e.g., one PKGBUILD produces one
package per architecture, even if it is a split package.)
== New packages in [testing] in last 24 hours (6 total) ==
