From malekith at pld-linux.org  Fri Mar 14 16:55:17 2003
From: malekith at pld-linux.org (Michal Moskal)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 16:55:17 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl>
Message-ID: <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:58:38AM -0000, bugs at pld.org.pl wrote:
> 
> Date: 2003-03-14 06:58:37+01	Author: Aredridel (Aredridel) <aredridel at nbtsc.org> 
> Title:         Crash (won't boot)
> Ticket ID:     #604
> Ticket URL:    http://bugs.pld.org.pl/?bug=604
> Package:       kernel-(none)(none)(none):2.5.59-0.12.2.23-12.4.18-2
> Distribution:  
> Category:      doesn't work as it should
> Current state: opened
> Text:
> 
> On my Athlon 1700+ XP, in a shuttle XPC computer, booting with grub, the kernel
> won't boot: it says "Uncompressing linux... Ok, booting kernel", then hangs.
> Hard reboot neccesary.  The i686 version does the same, but kernels for i586
> work fine (this happens with 2.4.18 as well;  I haven't tried 2.5.59 for i586
> as there's none in ftp.nest.pld.pl for it)

2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
it compiles. But 2.4.18 case is more interesting. You can try other
2.4.* (look in old/ directory, packages are moved there with automatic
script, so any new 2.4.* kernel is automagically outdated with existing,
broken 2.5.59). If your machine fails with 2.4.* contact us again (might
be through backtracking system). I'm running 2.4.20-2/i686 on Athlon XP
with no problems.

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h


From blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl  Fri Mar 14 17:13:20 2003
From: blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Go=B3aszewski?=)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:13:20 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>

On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> it compiles.

It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...

-- 
---------------------------------
pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        
---------------------------------
CPU not found - software emulation...


From malekith at pld-linux.org  Fri Mar 14 17:19:36 2003
From: malekith at pld-linux.org (Michal Moskal)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:19:36 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Message-ID: <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:13:20PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> > it compiles.
> 
> It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...

Hmm:

[malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
P kernel.spec
[malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
Version:	2.5.59

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h


From blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl  Fri Mar 14 17:30:17 2003
From: blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Go=B3aszewski?=)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:30:17 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>

On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> > > it compiles.
> > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> Hmm:
> 
> [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> P kernel.spec
> [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> Version:	2.5.59

sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
work? :)

-- 
---------------------------------
pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        
---------------------------------
CPU not found - software emulation...


From wolf42 at wp.pl  Fri Mar 14 17:42:03 2003
From: wolf42 at wp.pl (Bartosz Taudul)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 17:42:03 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Message-ID: <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote:
> > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > P kernel.spec
> > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > Version:	2.5.59
> sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> work? :)
2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..

wolf
-- 
  Bartek   .  - Siada towarzystwo, spok?j, cisza, mo?e to was uratowa?.
  Taudul   :  
(temp. sig):....................................................................
    w o l f <at> p l d . o r g . p l           .:. http://team.pld.org.pl/~wolf/


From misiek at pld.ORG.PL  Fri Mar 14 18:49:43 2003
From: misiek at pld.ORG.PL (Arkadiusz Miskiewicz)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 18:49:43 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Message-ID: <20030314174943.GA9926@arm.t19.ds.pwr.wroc.pl>

On/Dnia Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote/napisa?(a)
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > > 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> > > > it compiles.
> > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > Hmm:
> > 
> > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > P kernel.spec
> > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > Version:	2.5.59
> 
> sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> work? :)
decoration? :-) /test/ is managed authomaticly and that's the reason.

> pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        

-- 
Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz    CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology
arekm at sse.pl   AM2-6BONE, 1024/3DB19BBD, arekm(at)ircnet, PLD/Linux


From misiek at pld.ORG.PL  Fri Mar 14 22:33:50 2003
From: misiek at pld.ORG.PL (Arkadiusz Miskiewicz)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 22:33:50 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Message-ID: <20030314213350.GA6336@arm.t19.ds.pwr.wroc.pl>

On/Dnia Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:13:20PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote/napisa?(a)
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> > it compiles.
> 
> It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
I don't see 2.5.64 in cvs.

> pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        

-- 
Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz    CS at FoE, Wroclaw University of Technology
arekm at sse.pl   AM2-6BONE, 1024/3DB19BBD, arekm(at)ircnet, PLD/Linux


From malekith at pld-linux.org  Sat Mar 15 15:40:29 2003
From: malekith at pld-linux.org (Michal Moskal)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:40:29 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030314174943.GA9926@arm.t19.ds.pwr.wroc.pl>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314174943.GA9926@arm.t19.ds.pwr.wroc.pl>
Message-ID: <20030315144029.GB18973@roke.freak>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 06:49:43PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On/Dnia Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote/napisa?(a)
> > On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > > > 2.5.59 probably is not going to work, it was just first shoot to see if
> > > > > it compiles.
> > > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > > Hmm:
> > > 
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > > P kernel.spec
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > > Version:	2.5.59
> > 
> > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> > work? :)
> decoration? :-) /test/ is managed authomaticly and that's the reason.

Maybe move it somewhere to make upgrades using poldek easier?

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h


From malekith at pld-linux.org  Sat Mar 15 15:40:06 2003
From: malekith at pld-linux.org (Michal Moskal)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 15:40:06 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
Message-ID: <20030315144006.GA18973@roke.freak>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:42:03PM +0100, Bartosz Taudul wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote:
> > > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > > P kernel.spec
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > > Version:	2.5.59
> > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> > work? :)
> 2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
> something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..

It boots? Then it's better ;-)

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h


From wiget at pld.org.pl  Mon Mar 17 11:18:03 2003
From: wiget at pld.org.pl (Artur Frysiak)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:18:03 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
Message-ID: <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget>

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:42:03PM +0100, Bartosz Taudul wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote:
> > > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > > P kernel.spec
> > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > > Version:	2.5.59
> > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> > work? :)
> 2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
> something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..

I run 2.5.64 everyday and no strange behaviour detected. But this is
"small" workstation.
-- 
Artur Frysiak
http://www.pld-linux.org/


From blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl  Mon Mar 17 11:38:36 2003
From: blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Go=B3aszewski?=)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 11:38:36 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
 <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303171136310.2670@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> > > > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH
> > > > > nicer...
> > > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > > > P kernel.spec
> > > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > > > Version:	2.5.59
> > > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance
> > > to work? :)
> > 2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
> > something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..
> I run 2.5.64 everyday and no strange behaviour detected. But this is
> "small" workstation.

Well - I'm using it too.
Almoust everything works fine - framebuffer is very broken and ipv6 causes 
some oops.

But everything works really fine :)

-- 
---------------------------------
pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        
---------------------------------
CPU not found - software emulation...


From malekith at pld-linux.org  Mon Mar 17 15:37:36 2003
From: malekith at pld-linux.org (Michal Moskal)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 15:37:36 +0100
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak> <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel> <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget>
Message-ID: <20030317143736.GA12708@roke.freak>

On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 11:18:03AM +0100, Artur Frysiak wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:42:03PM +0100, Bartosz Taudul wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:30:17PM +0100, Pawe? Go?aszewski wrote:
> > > > > It would be better to remove 2.5.59 or put 2.5.64, which is MUCH nicer...
> > > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ cvs up -r LINUX_2_5 kernel.spec
> > > > P kernel.spec
> > > > [malekith at roke SPECS]$ grep Version kernel.spec 
> > > > Version:	2.5.59
> > > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no* chance to 
> > > work? :)
> > 2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
> > something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..
> 
> I run 2.5.64 everyday and no strange behaviour detected. But this is
> "small" workstation.

How about packaging it?

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h


From blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl  Mon Mar 17 16:58:48 2003
From: blues at ds6.pg.gda.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Pawe=B3_Go=B3aszewski?=)
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:58:48 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [MBT] new ticket for pkg kernel "Crash (won't boot)"
In-Reply-To: <20030317143736.GA12708@roke.freak>
References: <a2VybmVs.1183@bugs.pld.org.pl> <20030314155517.GA29064@roke.freak>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141712190.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314161936.GA30125@roke.freak>
 <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303141729360.1827@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl> <20030314164203.GA3333@bajzel>
 <20030317101803.GA28475@wiget> <20030317143736.GA12708@roke.freak>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.51L.0303171658290.23405@piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl>

On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > > sure, but what for is _broken_ version on ftp, which has *no*
> > > > chance to work? :)
> > > 2.5.64 is no better. I've got strange memory faults while compiling
> > > something, posts from bad groups in slrn, etc..
> > I run 2.5.64 everyday and no strange behaviour detected. But this is
> > "small" workstation.
> How about packaging it?

feel free to do it ;)))))

-- 
---------------------------------
pozdr.  Pawe? Go?aszewski        
---------------------------------
CPU not found - software emulation...


From ser at metalab.unc.edu  Mon Mar 31 01:43:52 2003
From: ser at metalab.unc.edu (Sergiusz Pawlowicz)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 01:43:52 +0200
Subject: [rsyncd on cvs?]
Message-ID: <20030330234352.GE3642@szafa.it-zone.org>

i  cannot rsync  cvs sever  from about  two days  - could  you
please check what is going on?


cheers - Sergiusz
--
private: http://ibiblio.org/ser/  company: http://it-zone.org/ 
______________________________________________________________
on wallpaper: tldp.org, gnu.org, pld-linux.org, hyperreal.info


From qboosh at pld.org.pl  Mon Mar 31 13:13:07 2003
From: qboosh at pld.org.pl (Jakub Bogusz)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 13:13:07 +0200
Subject: SPECS: daemontools.spec (HEAD)
In-Reply-To: <daemontools.spec.1.27@cvs.pld.org.pl>
References: <daemontools.spec.1.26@cvs.pld.org.pl> <daemontools.spec.1.27@cvs.pld.org.pl>
Message-ID: <20030331111307.GB31772@gruby.cs.net.pl>

On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 12:29:07PM +0200, tjbynum wrote:
> Module name:	SPECS
> Changes by:	tjbynum	03/03/31 12:29:05
> 
> Modified files:
> 	daemontools.spec
> 
> Log message:
> - new version, daemontools are now Public Domain.
> 
> Index: daemontools.spec
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/SPECS/daemontools.spec,v
> diff -d -u -r1.26 -r1.27
> --- daemontools.spec	20 Oct 2002 10:51:57 -0000	1.26
> +++ daemontools.spec	31 Mar 2003 10:29:04 -0000	1.27
> @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@
>  Summary:	D. J. Bernstein daemontools
>  Summary(pl):	daemontools D. J. Bernstein
>  Name:		daemontools
> -Version:	0.70
> -Release:	6
> -License:	D. J. Bernstein
> +Version:	0.76
> +Release:	1
> +License:	Public Domain

Is it really public domain?

http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html :


[...]
May we distribute binaries?

   You may distribute a precompiled package if

     * installing your package produces exactly the same files, in exactly the same locations, that a user would obtain by
       installing one of my packages listed above;
     * your package behaves correctly, i.e., the same way as normal installations of my package on all other systems; and
     * your package's creator warrants that he has made a good-faith attempt to ensure that your package behaves correctly.

   All installations must work the same way; any variation is a bug. If there's something about a system (compiler,
   libraries, kernel, hardware, whatever) that changes the behavior of my package, then that platform is not supported, and
   you are not permitted to distribute binaries for it.

   You may distribute an operating system that includes a precompiled package under the same rules.

What about test packages?

   You may distribute exact copies of any of the following packages, or precompiled packages under the same rules as above,
   until the termination date shown:

   Termination           MD5 checksum                   Package
   2003-07-01  1871af2453d6e464034968a0fbcb2bfc daemontools-0.76.tar.gz
   2003-07-01  39b619147db54687c4a583a7a94c9163 ucspi-tcp-0.88.tar.gz
Why can't we rename your files?

   Compatibility is essential. Files must be accessible by the same names on all systems.
[...]


Inside source tarball some source files are marked as Public Domain, but
not all - especially files containing main() for programs are not.


-- 
Jakub Bogusz    http://cyber.cs.net.pl/~qboosh/


From kloczek at rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl  Mon Mar 31 16:21:08 2003
From: kloczek at rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl (=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Tomasz_K=B3oczko?=)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:21:08 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [rsyncd on cvs?]
In-Reply-To: <20030330234352.GE3642@szafa.it-zone.org>
References: <20030330234352.GE3642@szafa.it-zone.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53L.0303311620470.19077@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>

On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Sergiusz Pawlowicz wrote:

> i  cannot rsync  cvs sever  from about  two days  - could  you
> please check what is going on?

$ rsync -l cvs.pld.org.pl::

Admin contact: kloczek at pld.org.pl

bl             	PLD build logs
bl-ra          	PLD build logs (Ra)
bl-ra-i386     	PLD build logs (Ra) for i386
bl-ra-i586     	PLD build logs (Ra) for i586
bl-ra-i686     	PLD build logs (Ra) for i686
bl-ra-sparc    	PLD build logs (Ra) for sparc
bl-ra-alpha    	PLD build logs (Ra) for alpha
bl-ra-ppc      	PLD build logs (Ra) for ppc
bl-nest        	PLD build logs (nest)
worek          	Worek
cvs            	PLD CVS server all resources

kloczek
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
*Ludzie nie maj? problem?w, tylko sobie sami je stwarzaj?*
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomasz K?oczko, sys adm @zie.pg.gda.pl|*e-mail: kloczek at rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl*


From ser at metalab.unc.edu  Mon Mar 31 16:30:12 2003
From: ser at metalab.unc.edu (Sergiusz Pawlowicz)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 16:30:12 +0200
Subject: [rsyncd on cvs?]
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53L.0303311620470.19077@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>
References: <20030330234352.GE3642@szafa.it-zone.org> <Pine.LNX.4.53L.0303311620470.19077@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>
Message-ID: <20030331143012.GR3642@szafa.it-zone.org>

--->[Quoting Tomasz K?oczko <kloczek at rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl>:]

> $ rsync -l cvs.pld.org.pl::
> 
> Admin contact: kloczek at pld.org.pl
>
> [...]

sorry - it works now - i cannot say what was going on.


cheers - Sergiusz
--
private: http://ibiblio.org/ser/  company: http://it-zone.org/ 
______________________________________________________________
on wallpaper: tldp.org, gnu.org, pld-linux.org, hyperreal.info