Report about packages that need work for Aug 16, 2002
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 50
Number of packages offered up for adoption this week: 7
Total number of orphaned packages: 103
Number of packages orphaned this week: 6
The number in parenthesis after each package name is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 20:28:29 +0200
Source: snd
Binary: snd-doc snd-gtk-alsa snd-gtk snd
Architecture: m68k
Version: 5.12-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Stefan
Salut tout le monde,
je suis actuellement en train de me faire la main dans la réalisation
de paquet debian avec une bibliothèque qui n'est pas encore actuellement
dans la distribution. A terme, je pense évidemment faire un ITP, une
fois le paquet finalisé. Et une fois celle-ci réalisée,
Qu'est-ce qu'elle a de mieux la Debian?
(c'est une demande d'informations, pas une provocation ;-))
Cordialement,
Almo
Almotasim écrivait :
Qu'est-ce qu'elle a de mieux la Debian?
(c'est une demande d'informations, pas une provocation ;-))
Tu t'es trompé de liste : va voir sur user-french...
PK
--
|\ _,,,---,,_ Patrice KARATCHENTZEFF
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_ mailto:[EMAIL
ben disons qu'elle est nettement moins buguée.
En plus c'est la distrib la plus GNU...
et elle est la plus puriste
voilà...
Marc
Qu'est-ce qu'elle a de mieux la Debian?
(c'est une demande d'informations, pas une provocation ;-))
Cordialement,
Almo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 10:50:42PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 04:35:01PM -0700, Michael Cardenas wrote:
Ben suggested that I make
a package for each foundry, and then a virtual package that includes
all of them. If Dustin agrees to gpl the rest of his fonts, I'll
Just an idea. Now that woody is stable. I see references to potato being
called oldstable. For instance in the changelogs for potato security
updates, the dist is oldstable-security. Looks kind of ugly to me.
Perhaps a better name might be legacy. Anyone agree? I'm not aware of
how big a
Could whoever is responsible for that upload please set their name as
uploader/builder next time. They also might want to actually sign the
package as well as upload to auric rather than pandora.
TIA.
- Forwarded message from Debian Installer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Debian Installer
On 15 Aug 2002, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
I am planning Debconf 3 to be held in Oslo, from Friday July 18th to
Sunday July 20th.
Great!
I guess this would not conflict with LSM (Bordeaux) or LinuxTag (Karlsruhe)
because this is traditionally earlier (even if there are no dates fixed).
Joeyh hess
On Aug 14, Laura Creighton wrote:
The new Python Business Forum (www.python-in-business.com) is
what is this? The link is dead. Is this the former PSA?
No. My brain was tired -- it was python-in-business.org. Apologies.
We are new. We are a Business Non-Profit Society 'to organise and
unsubscribe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kalle Valo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
waring about the modules, but then postrm failed and the package
remained in half-installed state, no chance to change that. How can i
fix up this mess?
It's a
sorry,
hatte dir die falsche adresse
geschoickt
die richtige ist: http://biggimaus.5xx.net
Birgit
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ps: hast du schon die neuen bilder auf meiner
homepage gesehen?
Hi!
I want to know where I can get KDE packages for my Debian system.
I'm currently running Debian2.2r5. This is quite important since
I really lack a good mail client, I miss Kmail! :(
Kind regards Björn Johansson
Previously Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Hi, What are the currently valid distribution to which we can make
uploads to?
I think the list currently is:
unstable experimental stable-proposed-updates stable-security
testing-proposed-updates testing-security test
Some combinations of those are
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 12:44:13PM +0100, Björn Johansson wrote:
I want to know where I can get KDE packages for my Debian system.
I'm currently running Debian2.2r5. This is quite important since
I really lack a good mail client, I miss Kmail! :(
If you upgraded your Debian system to 3.0, you
Hi!
I finished a first version of my ZINF packages (ZINF is not FreeA*p).
They seem to reproducibly cause a dpkg degfault on my machine when
doing the following:
~# apt-get install freeamp freeamp-extras libfreeamp-esound
~# dpkg -i --auto-deconfigure zinf_2.2.0-1_i386.deb
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 03:34:32PM -0700, Michael Cardenas wrote:
You will need xfs-xtt to view this font properly.
This is plain wrong. Since XFree86 4.0 we don't need xfs-xtt to use a
True-Type font.
Please don't put this sentence in your description.
Christophe
--
Christophe Barbé
* Andreas Rottmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-08-16 13:44]:
If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
packages, assuming this is a local problem.
How did you test the packages when you cannot even install them?
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:44:30PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
packages, assuming this is a local problem.
You most certainly want to test this in a chroot environment.
May I suggest using debootstrap or pbuilder to do
Martin == Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin * Andreas Rottmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-08-16 13:44]:
If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
packages, assuming this is a local problem.
Martin How did you test the packages when you cannot
Simon == Simon Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:44:30PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann
Simon wrote:
If i get no crash reports 'till Monday, I will upload my ZINF
packages, assuming this is a local problem.
Simon You most certainly want to test
I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
I'm entirely fallible and I don't pretend to understand all the issues
involved with doing
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: nttcp
Version : 1.47
Upstream Author : Elmar Bartel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.leo.org/~elmar/nttcp/
* License : Original (non-free)
Description : New test TCP
[for debian-gcc people: please Cc: to me because I am not subscribed]
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:51:34 +0100,
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* If your package contains no C++, do nothing. One fine day,
gcc-defaults will be changed to gcc-3.2 and you'll start using GCC
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
So it will be impossible to have both the old and new library packages
on the system simultaneously. That's broken.
Why don't we just change the sonames?
Because upstream chooses
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:51:34PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
This is a proposal. You will be notified when this is a real plan
Why don't we just change the sonames?
Because upstream chooses the soname to match their API. If we change
the soname then we render ourselves
Previously Oohara Yuuma wrote:
1. Does a C (not C++) library compiled with gcc 2.95 work with
a C++ program compiled with gcc 3.2?
Yes
2. Does this mean I must not use gcc 3.2 before it becomes gcc-defaults?
There may be a case where gcc 3.2 offers better optimization.
Yes.
Wichert.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:47:07PM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
[for debian-gcc people: please Cc: to me because I am not subscribed]
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 14:51:34 +0100,
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* If your package contains no C++, do nothing. One fine day,
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
* If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb - libdb4.0++c.deb. This
is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
of libraries.
What
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 03:17:21AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Peter Hicks wrote:
well, I would hate to dissuade you from packaging the linux-wlan
drivers, but I have no trouble using prism2, orinoco, or cisco aironet
cards with the stock debian 2.4.18 kernel. Both my lucent card and my
smc
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 04:06:56PM +0100, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
So it will be impossible to have both the old and new library packages
on the system simultaneously. That's broken.
On 16 Aug 2002, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
Hi!
I finished a first version of my ZINF packages (ZINF is not FreeA*p).
They seem to reproducibly cause a dpkg degfault on my machine when
doing the following:
~# apt-get install freeamp freeamp-extras libfreeamp-esound
~# dpkg -i
Steve,
There shouldn't be huge issues in the gcc 2.95.4 to gcc 3.2 transition.
Currently the only two major ones I know if are...
1) Rebuilding glibc with gcc 3.2 *may* require an arch to add a libgcc-compat
section to provide libgcc symbols, now .hidden in gcc 3.2's libgcc_s.so,
with
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g situation??
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
situation??
i explained this elsewhere...
Why don't we put the libs in a different
On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, Adam Heath wrote:
Selecting previously deselected package zinf.
dpkg: considering removing freeamp in favour of zinf ...
dpkg: yes, will remove freeamp in favour of zinf.
(Reading database ... 101551 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking zinf (from
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
situation??
Because doing so would require changing the soname. Which is possible,
but
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
situation??
Err, weren't we able to do that because we moved all the libc5 libs to
another directory?
Mike.
Steve Langasek writes:
* It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship, upstream
has already transitioned to using the GCC 3.2 ABI, therefore our
current packages are already binary-incompatible with the rest of the
world. (ok)
right. One reason for the 3.2 release was a
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:51:34PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
* If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
the name of your .deb, eg libdb4.0++.deb - libdb4.0++c.deb. This
is similar in spirit to the glibc transition adding `g' to the end
of
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Steve Langasek writes:
* In these cases, having a package whose soname is compatible with the
rest of the world is considered more important than providing
compatibility for binaries locally compiled by our users against
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is a proposal. You will be notified when this is a real plan
I think Jeff Bailey's plan is entirely different, and I like his plan
more. Here are the differences.
* If you maintain a library written in C++, add a `c' to the end of
the
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I sincerely hope that g++ 3.2 applications will be allowed to coexist on
the system with g++ 2.95.x applications.
I don't think this will happen, atleast not for shared libraries. Any
scheme that tries to solve this problem will be horribly complex,
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: iftop
Version : 0.4
Upstream Author : Paul Warren [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris Lightfoot [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/iftop/
* License : GPL
Description
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000 packages
currently in the archive. 10%. Per architecture. Is Jeff really going
to bNMU all of these packages on the same day for all architectures?
I think this is the plan. You'll
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Not necessarily: you can write wrapper scripts around the executable
which automatically set LD_LIBRARY_PATH, then invoke the original
binary. That has worked very well in the past.
If you mean that the manual intervention is
close 156956
thanks
* Guillem Jover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:37:41PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
[...]
Package: iftop
Status: install ok installed
ARGH, my fault... I only looked into
If upstream aren't inclined to change their Linux soname for the new gcc,
though, not changing our soname but doing the upgrade anyway seems the
best option.
even if some are willing not all will be. Then we have to worry about dead
upstreams too. It seems like changing the sonames to
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jeff Bailey planned to put these libraries in /usr/lib/gcc-2.95 (like
in the libc5/6 transition) and rename the packages containing the 2.95
libraries.
How would this work? Would those using gcc-2.95 software have to set an
rpath or
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:27:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:03:48PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Steve Langasek writes:
* In these cases, having a package whose soname is compatible with the
rest of the world is considered more important than providing
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:37:41PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: iftop
Version : 0.4
Upstream Author : Paul Warren [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris Lightfoot [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
* URL
On Friday 16 August 2002 15:51, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
I'm entirely fallible and I don't
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
In Jeff's plan: All C++ packages will be uploaded via NMUs. The
package maintainer can upload their packages afterwards if they have
to make other corrections.
All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At some point in the future, we will change gcc-defaults to make
gcc-3.2 the default on all architectures. At that time, you should
remove the setting of CXX and the explicit
If temporary breakage of some applications is acceptable, you can
spread this over a couple of days, by tsorting the 1000 packages.
or do a staging in experimental or somewhere else. Upload everything there,
let people look at it for a day or two then move it over.
This staging could also
Have You got your own computer and internet connection ?
Why don't You use this for earn the money ?
You must not buy, sell or click in some links! This way is so simply!
Please, leave your name and mail in link :
http://www.notterhrbiz.i8.com
and we will contact You and meet You with this
severity 156227 grave
thanks
Hi Christopher,
please explain why you think that it's not RC that packages depending
libvorbis0 no longer run when upgrading libvorbis0 (the problem is similar
to the recent libc6 - db breakage that will be fixed by a dependency of
libc6 on libdb1-compat)?
Your
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:53:22PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
The majority of such packages links to libstdc++ only, so there may be
no need for action at all.
Do we have non-free C++ packages that we have to worry about? My
comments were more directed at unpackaged software that users
debian-devel:!
Office2000Office2000
http://www.iboss2000.com
!
2002-08-18
!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2002-08-18
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson) writes:
Generally speaking, Debian packages aren't relocatable anyway. Many of
them (unavoidably) end up with paths compiled into binaries.
We may have to deal with this for things like allowing ia32 binaries to run
on ia64 systems... though so far, all of the
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The restriction
is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are author.
There are two ways to be the owner of a copyright. First, you can buy
it from someone else (or otherwise get
Joseph == Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joseph Well there's the proprietary JDK, but it already uses a
Joseph -compat package library.
Eh? Are you refering to java plugins for mozilla et al, or any actual
JDK?
--
Stephen
To Republicans, limited government means not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The restriction
is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are author.
There are two ways to be the owner of a copyright.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 02:54:03PM -0700, Stephen Zander wrote:
Joseph == Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joseph Well there's the proprietary JDK, but it already uses a
Joseph -compat package library.
Eh? Are you refering to java plugins for mozilla et al, or any actual
kleptog@svana.org (Martijn van Oosterhout) wrote on 01.08.02 in [EMAIL
PROTECTED]:
No reason, however in the docs there is an example line to put in apt.conf
Which docs?
What line?
to automatically generate md5sum files for every package that doesn't
contain them.
So after you do an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Langasek) wrote on 16.08.02 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
From the heated discussion I've just had on IRC, I've gathered the
following:
* It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship, upstream
has already transitioned to using the GCC 3.2 ABI, therefore
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joey Hess) wrote on 30.07.02 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't think it offers much if anything over special-purpose staging
areas as is being used for perl 5.8 right now.
It seems to me staging areas could solve a lot of these difficulties, yes.
I'm not clear on the current
My concern is that locally compiled apps built against C++ libraries
other than libstdc++ will silently stop working on upgrade. This is
certainly not the most important issue facing us in the transition, but
so far it seems to me that people are regarding it as so *un*important
that it's
Ben Pfaff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The US government definitely is allowed to own copyrights. The
restriction
is on _enforcing_ their copyrights on works of which they are author.
There
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:34:00PM +0200, Kai Henningsen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Langasek) wrote on 16.08.02 in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
From the heated discussion I've just had on IRC, I've gathered the
following:
* It is assumed that for the vast majority of C++ libs we ship,
Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Previously Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Hi, What are the currently valid distribution to which we can make
uploads to?
I think the list currently is:
unstable experimental stable-proposed-updates stable-security
testing-proposed-updates
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2002-08-16
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: cl-asdf
Version : unversioned, cvs distribution
Upstream Author : Dan Barlow Contributors [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/cclan
* License :
Hola!
El jue, 15-08-2002 a las 17:41, Fermín J. Serna escribió:
Gracias por la pronta respuesta... mi siguiente duda seria: que tipos de
paquetes son interesantes para debian (no conozco el caso mencal) y no
Yo mantengo (y soy autor) de barrendero, que debe ser el paquete menos
usado de toda
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:48:47AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 12:06:49PM +0200, Amaya wrote:
Fermín J. Serna dijo:
1) ITP
1.1) Mandar Cc: a debian-devel y ver si nadie esta en contra por lo que
sea. Si lo estuvieran, como en el caso de
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 01:00:12PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 11:48:47AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 12:06:49PM +0200, Amaya wrote:
Fermín J. Serna dijo:
1) ITP
1.1) Mandar Cc: a debian-devel y ver si nadie esta
77 matches
Mail list logo
