I'm rather bemused by how dynastic politics is in a country that was based on rebellion against monarchy. It seems in many minds being named Bush or Kennedy automatically makes you representative of some particular ideology. If I ran for President today my own wife probably wouldn't vote for me let alone distant cousins. What does that prove about anything?
And another thing, why do so many Americans refer to "the queen" when they mean "the queen of England?" You know you don't have a queen because you kicked out her loony German ancestor all those years ago right?
I don't know Mr. Sterlings' theological leanings but this part of his speech struck me as interesting.
I read a some writings by a Biblical scholar Hyam Maccoby (who incidentally is Jewish) which argue quite convincingly--to me anyway, though as I'm a Hindu that may not mean much--that Jesus far from being a rebel against the establishment was a mainstream Jewish Pharisee. The view we have of him today and for that matter the entire religion of Christianity, was largely the invention of St. Paul
Judaism has never been a particularly otherworldly religion and even ascetic sects like the Essenes were not against commercial activity.
The whole reason there were moneylenders in the temple in the first place is that Jews were required to make donation on certain occasions such as the birth of a firstborn son (pidyon haben) and pay taxes for the upkeep of the temple. The moneylenders changed secular coinage into special temple shekels. So it seems pretty unlikely that Jesus the Pharisee would be aghast at such activity.
Another theory is that the High Priest and his followers were Saducees (a rival sect) and collaborators with the Romans. The crime of the moneylenders was supporting foreign occupation and as "King of the Jews" Jesus would want to have none of that.
By this reading, Jesus's political views were more Peoples Front of Judea (or Judean Peoples Front) than Bolshevik.
At this point it is the freeze which has held up adding new packages it seems. In the mean time some of the Debian packagers have made their.debs available by other means. Here are the lines for/etc/apt/sources.list:
Chris Cheney: kdelibs, kdebase, kdenetwork, kdemultimedia, kdegraphics, kdeutils, kdepim deb http://www.ping.uio.no/~mortehu/kde-i386./
Ben Burton: kdesdk,kdeaddons,kdetoys,kdeedu,koffice(not there yet) deb http://people.debian.org/~bab/kde3./
I assume the other packages are being worked on by their respective maintainers.
I'm sorry if some of the following sounds harsh but you are going about things in dangerously foolhardy ways.
Ross Vandegrift asks: "Once upon a time long ago, apt-get totally trashed the company webserver while we were trying to upgrade it. Since then I have been very suspicious of apt-get. Recently, a friend from school talked me into trying it again. I slowly eeked back into it and was keeping our machines up to date, and automatically applying security patches. It was cool, I was starting to trust it again. Well, today that changes..."
So let me get this straight? You already have one bad experience of an apt-get and yet you are doing the same thing all over again? No analysis or review of what went wrong the first time and what you should be doing differently? Is it any wonder the same problem crops up again?
I'm sure everyone who has ever used RPM or apt can understand the frustration one goes thru when running into this problem. For those who have, what did you do to get your system functioning again?
"I ran 'apt-get update; apt-get upgrade' last night to upgrade one of our machines. Nothing seemed out of the ordinary, I recieved no error messages indicating something terrible happened. But now when I try to use 'su', it returns a libpam error that I've been unable to find reference to, either on the web or in the Debian mailing list archive.
I haven't had this problem but it would seem looking at/etc/pam.d/su to see if anything has changed might be a good start. To answer the larger question, on any kind of production machine, do apt-get -s upgrade before actually upgrading. The -s switch tells you exactly which packages are going to be installed/removed/whatever. For each affected package look at the changelog to see what's new. Every time a package is uploaded, the changes are sent to the debian-changes (stable) or debian-devel-changes (unstable) mailing lists. Or you can look at the packages' page on www.debian.org
This won't help you if the packager has simply made a mistake (which can happen.) To cover that eventuality, keep the last known good version of each package handy somewhere. If you don't do apt-get clean, downloaded packages will remain in/var/cache/apt/archives. Or you can keep a central repository somewhere.
So this poses the question: what do I do if apt-get fails and screws up the system? I've tried reinstalling/reconfiguring the affected packages to no end. If we used my distro of choice (Slackware), I'd have an intimate understanding of my system and would know right where to look when I get an error. But with apt, most of the packages on the machine are black-boxes;
???? How are.debs any more of a black box than slackware packages? You can get the source of any one of them with apt-get source The Debian Policy Manual explains exactly how the system is supposed to function and where things are.
I don't know much about them outside their package name and function.
Then find out! I'll admit Debian is underdocumented but certainly all the information in this message is well-known. Why are you adminstering Debian systems if you don't understand Debian? apt-get is magic in many ways but it will never be a replacement for human competence and common sense.
This is a customized version of Debian created by the people at siteROCK. Debian developers may have been involved but it isn't an official Debian project.
It's really not TrollTechs job to clean up the licensing mess KDE made. The QPL meets all the requirements of the DFSG just fine. It's KDE which should have thought about the implications of using the GPL. I'm a Debian developer and enthusiastic KDE user and it breaks my heart to see two great projects not coming together because of silly trivialities. And it makes me angry that KDE is still trying to avoid and deny the problem instead expending a tiny amount of energy to fix it once and for all.
Re:Apt friendly debian packages
on
KDE 1.1.1 is out
·
· Score: 1
See dpkg-scanpackages(8) from the dpkg-dev package. sources.list(5) is also usefult to read.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm rather bemused by how dynastic politics is in a country that was based on rebellion against monarchy. It seems in many minds being named Bush or Kennedy automatically makes you representative of some particular ideology. If I ran for President today my own wife probably wouldn't vote for me let alone distant cousins. What does that prove about anything?
And another thing, why do so many Americans refer to "the queen" when they mean "the queen of England?" You know you don't have a queen because you kicked out her loony German ancestor all those years ago right?
I don't know Mr. Sterlings' theological leanings but this part of his speech struck me as interesting.
I read a some writings by a Biblical scholar Hyam Maccoby (who incidentally is Jewish) which argue quite convincingly--to me anyway, though as I'm a Hindu that may not mean much--that Jesus far from being a rebel against the establishment was a mainstream Jewish Pharisee. The view we have of him today and for that matter the entire religion of Christianity, was largely the invention of St. Paul
Judaism has never been a particularly otherworldly religion and even ascetic sects like the Essenes were not against commercial activity. The whole reason there were moneylenders in the temple in the first place is that Jews were required to make donation on certain occasions such as the birth of a firstborn son (pidyon haben) and pay taxes for the upkeep of the temple. The moneylenders changed secular coinage into special temple shekels. So it seems pretty unlikely that Jesus the Pharisee would be aghast at such activity.
Another theory is that the High Priest and his followers were Saducees (a rival sect) and collaborators with the Romans. The crime of the moneylenders was supporting foreign occupation and as "King of the Jews" Jesus would want to have none of that.
By this reading, Jesus's political views were more Peoples Front of Judea (or Judean Peoples Front) than Bolshevik.
At this point it is the freeze which has held up adding new packages it seems. In the mean time some of the Debian packagers have made their .debs available by other means. Here are the lines for /etc/apt/sources.list:
Chris Cheney: kdelibs, kdebase, kdenetwork, kdemultimedia, kdegraphics, kdeutils, kdepim ./
./
deb http://www.ping.uio.no/~mortehu/kde-i386
Ben Burton: kdesdk,kdeaddons,kdetoys,kdeedu,koffice(not there yet)
deb http://people.debian.org/~bab/kde3
I assume the other packages are being worked on by their respective maintainers.
when you end up in Mexico with an English-to-Mexican and vice-a-versa dictionary.
Mexican? Everyone knows they speak Latin in Latin America.
I'm sorry if some of the following sounds harsh but you are going about things in dangerously foolhardy ways.
So let me get this straight? You already have one bad experience of an apt-get and yet you are doing the same thing all over again? No analysis or review of what went wrong the first time and what you should be doing differently? Is it any wonder the same problem crops up again?
I haven't had this problem but it would seem looking at /etc/pam.d/su to see if anything has changed might be a good start. To answer the larger question, on any kind of production machine, do apt-get -s upgrade before actually upgrading. The -s switch tells you exactly which packages are going to be installed/removed/whatever. For each affected package look at the changelog to see what's new. Every time a package is uploaded, the changes are sent to the debian-changes (stable) or debian-devel-changes (unstable) mailing lists. Or you can look at the packages' page on www.debian.org
This won't help you if the packager has simply made a mistake (which can happen.) To cover that eventuality, keep the last known good version of each package handy somewhere. If you don't do apt-get clean, downloaded packages will remain in /var/cache/apt/archives. Or you can keep a central repository somewhere.
???? How are .debs any more of a black box than slackware packages? You can get the source of any one of them with apt-get source The Debian Policy Manual explains exactly how the system is supposed to function and where things are.
Then find out! I'll admit Debian is underdocumented but certainly all the information in this message is well-known. Why are you adminstering Debian systems if you don't understand Debian? apt-get is magic in many ways but it will never be a replacement for human competence and common sense.
This is a customized version of Debian created by the people at siteROCK. Debian developers may have been involved but it isn't an official Debian project.
-- Jaldhar
Be afraid...be very afraid
> I'm sure ACLU lawyers are cleaning their guns as we speak
Errr...
It's really not TrollTechs job to clean up the licensing mess KDE made. The QPL meets all the requirements of the DFSG just fine. It's KDE which should have thought about the implications of using the GPL. I'm a Debian developer and enthusiastic KDE user and it breaks my heart to see two great projects not coming together because of silly trivialities. And it makes me angry that KDE is still trying to avoid and deny the problem instead expending a tiny amount of energy to fix it once and for all.
See dpkg-scanpackages(8) from the dpkg-dev package. sources.list(5) is also usefult to read.