Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 00:01 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/15/06, Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Allombert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 01:19:14AM +0200
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 00:24 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 08:44 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Ron Johnson wrote:
On the home desktop reportbug uses Python's smtp
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:19:35AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You don't need to wait for a particular event to be finished processing;
instead you should wait for the resource you actually need
Marc Haber [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 16 May 2006 15:09:37 +0200, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How so? As an admin you can always comment out any conf.d file completely
if you don't want what is in there. After which dpkg will come with the
usual prompt at package
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:01:08AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why do you think there's no compatible solution?
Because basicaly all sources assume binaries go to prefix/bin. You
want to break
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:14:24AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Multiarch (so far) does not allow the same path/file in 2 packages
(with the exception of /usr/share/doc/ files)
Hmm. How do you want to handle one-arch-only binNMUs? binNMUs change
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:44:21AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Which is still stupid not to have in the kernel API as feedback from
the event manager and have insmod optionaly block.
For that to work you should make device discovery synchronous
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
which results in smtphost bugs.debian.org in the conffile. Maybe the
default to the MTA question could be N instead.
An open outgoing port 25 is commonly blocked by default anywhere you
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 10:34 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 00:01 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/15/06, Goswin von Brederlow
Roberto C. Sanchez [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
And how would that be any simpler than setting an smtp server for
reportbug? Setting up a fully usable MTA is more difficult than having
reportbug connect directly to bugs.d.o.
I'm sorry, but that is just plain
Darren Salt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I demand that Gabor Gombas may or may not have written...
[snip]
How do you want to handle one-arch-only binNMUs? binNMUs change
changelog.Debian.gz, so
- you can't upgrade just the architecture that was binNMUed without
changelog.Debian.gz becoming
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In case anyone is interested in filing mass bug reports (I am not
sufficiently interested, sorry), here are the -dev packages in
unexpected sections, obtained as follows:
grep-aptavail -r -P '.*-dev$' -s Section,Package | paste -sd ' \n' | \
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 17 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
delivered internaly or not at all for my chroots but I still want to
be able to report bugs with the right dependency informations. If you
force the use of an MTA then I would have to save
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:08:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Have you considered employing the alternatives system (or something
similar)? What I'm suggesting is that you'd basically get a /bin64
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:24:28PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
What timeout? With feedback you would know exactly when it is done and
wouldn't have to poll.
Quoting Linus:
: It really is very hard to accept the blocking behaviour.
:
: Some
Toni Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello,
On Tue, 16.05.2006 at 04:05:41 +, Brian M. Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[ udev being, umm, not very nice ]
Need I say more?
yes: Please say *why* newer 2.6.x kernels actually do depend on udev
instead of hotplug.
Thank you!
Udev
Tim Cutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Playing devil's advocate for a moment:
While we are at it why not remove sections alltogether?
We have the debtags system that by far superseeds the sections and
since the pool structure is used sections have been quite useless.
MfG
Goswin
--
To
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 04:16:33PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:24:28PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Just like the kernel always did prior to udev.
You're missing a very important thing. This is _NOT_ a udev vs.
pre
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And that is what I consider broken. I know it is not going to change
but I pain for all the users (and myself) that will (and already have
been) get hit by problems caused by it.
Then why not start working on a solution? There are several distros
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 04:52:58PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 10:08:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Have you considered
Christoph Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Re: Kevin B. McCarty 2006-05-17 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In case anyone is interested in filing mass bug reports (I am not
sufficiently interested, sorry), here are the -dev packages in
unexpected sections, obtained as follows:
Isn't that more a matter of
Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then I had the idea that I could just as well convert Sources files to
create pseudo packages for sources that depend on all the
Build-Depends. So I create a dummy deb without contents and converted
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:16:00PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
That is because udev is slower so the window of the race condition
gets increased many many times. Without udev you don't have to wait
for the mknod call to complete.
I think you
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 07:22:47PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
E.g. how do you convert startx into an udev rule so it can load
the mouse modules savely?
By the time the user types his/her password and starts startx the mouse
will be surely
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could the archive infrastructure be updated to synch the override file
with what's in the .debs automatically?
regards,
Better to just remove the sections from override altogether. Just keep
what the package says.
MfG
Goswin
--
To
Hendrik Sattler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Am Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2006 19:22 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
Because the only _solution_ with current userspace is to kill the
kernels hotplug design and go back to synchronous handling.
Another solution might be to dynamically attach to udev
Darren Salt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I demand that Matthias Julius may or may not have written...
[snip]
I think a more elegant solution would be if aptitude had a command to
install build-depends.
AOL.
It could attach a new flag to a package that causes aptitude to treat
build-depends
Margarita Manterola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
During some tests I've performed, I've found that making the init
scripts run with dash as default shell instead of bash makes the boot
time a 10% faster (6 seconds in a 60 second boot).
To make this speed up available to everyone, we have 2 main
Hendrik Sattler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Am Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2006 21:53 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
Hendrik Sattler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Am Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2006 19:22 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
Because the only _solution_ with current userspace is to kill the
kernels
Michal Politowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 18 May 2006 22:38:08 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
[...]
3. Make sh an alternative
dash already optionally diverts it. Isn't it good enough?
When I upload my fash (fast shell) package that would want to divert
sh too and then could
Darren Salt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I demand that Goswin von Brederlow may or may not have written...
Darren Salt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I demand that Matthias Julius may or may not have written...
[snip]
I think a more elegant solution would be if aptitude had a command to
install
Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think one of the issues here is that it depends on what kernel you
currently use, and iirc there can be a situation where one does not
want to run depmod at installation time, or when that might give wrong
results.
That used to be the case
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 19 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Alternatives are more suited for cases where one binary is provided by
multiple packages. Currently we have bash, dash, sash, posh. Anything
else?
Are you prepared to put your life
Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Currently the (/usr)/lib64 - /lib symlink is shipped in the libc6
package. Goswin von Brederlow asked for this link to be created in the
postinst instead, so that packages could install files in both
(/usr)/lib and (/usr)/lib64 directories.
I have
Andreas Jochens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello Aurelien,
On 06-May-19 04:15, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
[Ccing: amd64 and dpkg developers as they are concerned by this subject]
Currently the (/usr)/lib64 - /lib symlink is shipped in the libc6
package. Goswin von Brederlow asked for this link
Bernhard R. Link [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060518 21:20]:
Better to just remove the sections from override altogether. Just keep
what the package says.
Doesn't the current setup also ensure no package from non-free or
contrib accidentially end up
Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:25:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a
maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be.
Mm -- I always wondered why
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 05:45:46AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
Well, most of those scripts can be fixed quite easily, some require
a bit more work. I hereby promise to help fixing them to the extent
of my capability.
Let's see. The nbd-client and
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:17:20AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Alternatives are more suited for cases where one binary is provided by
multiple packages. Currently we have bash, dash, sash, posh. Anything
else?
Alternatives break on a daily
Hi,
Debian policy says:
| 8.2 Run-time support programs
|
| If your package has some run-time support programs which use the
| shared library you must not put them in the shared library
| package. If you do that then you won't be able to install several
| versions of the shared library without
Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Hi,
Debian policy says:
| 8.2 Run-time support programs
| | If your package has some run-time support programs which use the
| shared library you must not put them in the shared library
| package. If you do that then you
Christoph Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Re: Goswin von Brederlow 2006-05-19 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The line below looks for all packages with a *.so.* file in (/usr)/lib
and a file in (/usr)/bin. The assumption is that anything with a
*.so.* file in the system library dirs is a library package
Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a more elegant solution would be if aptitude had a command to
install build-depends. It could attach a new flag to a package that
causes aptitude
Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Hi,
Debian policy says:
| 8.2 Run-time support programs
| | If your package has some run-time support programs which use the
| shared library you must
Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I'm not suggesting splitting the dirs. Just the way the link is setup.
I'm suggesting creating it in the maintainer scripts instead of the
data.tar.gz so packages that do ship files in (/usr)/lib64 don't make
libc6 unupgradable.
On
Alex Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The following is based on premises that portability is good and
that POSIX is a standard. A proposal.
Over the last couple months we've built about gazillion Ubuntu/Dapper
packages. The process is heavily automated ([1], [2], [3]).
And so, to lookup the
Al Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If the library is only used for binary packages from the same source
[which always get updated together] then why not put it in
/usr/lib/package/ and make it not public?
This could be done for the qprof package. I'm not sure that qualifies
as an RC bug,
Simon Huggins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 07:56:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Aurelien Jarno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't see why this could be a problem for multiarch. The library is
only used by the binary which is the same package, so they are always
Matt Taggart and others [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi debian-dpkg,
Several people have been working on a project we've been calling multiarch,
to seamlessly support running applications for multiple different binary
targets on the same system. The main example being running i386-linux-gnu
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
Debian policy says:
| 8.2 Run-time support programs
|
| If your package has some run-time support programs which use the
| shared library you must not put them in the shared library
Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/21/06, Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For multiarch this will be an inconvenience though as people might
want to install both 32bit and 64bit of a -dev package. For such small
scripts spliting them into extra packages seems
Enrico Zini [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 05:06:13PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
While we are at it why not remove sections alltogether?
We have the debtags system that by far superseeds the sections and
since the pool structure is used sections have been quite
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 10:27:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- Allow arch specific depends
I propose to use Depends: pkg:arch (= 1.2-3) as syntax for
thses. While for etch no package should use them dpkg should accept
them so installing
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 19 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
setools is in the list, and contains libraries that it uses
itself, but does not break it up into multiple installed
packages. Setools is moving rapidly rnough that I do not intend
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 10:27:35PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
- Allow arch specific depends
I propose to use Depends: pkg:arch (= 1.2-3) as syntax for
thses. While for etch no package should
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
I think that Policy 8.2 is fully applicable to your package then. It
is a MUST directive so your unwillingness to allow multiple versions
of your library to coexist does not affect the violation
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow stated:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 22 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow outgrape:
I think that Policy 8.2 is fully applicable to your package
then. It is a MUST directive so your unwillingness
Ganesan Rajagopal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not sure the sections need clarification, inasmuch as
they do not really apply to setools. I might clarify that 8.2 is
meant for packages that provide shared libraries for general use by
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le mardi 23 mai 2006 à 20:52 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
So, does anybody mind if I remove depmod from the module-init-tools init
script?
Please go ahead. Anything relying on it is buggy anyway.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\
Thomas Girard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Selon Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Debian policy says:
| 8.2 Run-time support programs
|
| If your package has some run-time support programs which use the
| shared library you must not put them in the shared library
| package. If you do
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would say, off hand, that section 8.2 is for people who want
to provide a shared library for other packages, with a stable ABI,
and a development package to facilitate linking to their
library. There are certain hoops we must jump in
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually, passports are not really an answer (I have no idea
what the passport of cameroon looke like, for example). Given time,
one can pay more attention to each document (I require at least two
photo ID's issued by the government).
Travis Crump [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who actually has two forms of government issued picture ID[not counting
a passport which I never take anywhere unless I really need to since it
is really bad to lose it and doesn't fit in a wallet, not to mention my
passport photo isn't a very good
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/25/06, Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Le mardi 23 mai 2006 à 20:52 +0200, Marco d'Itri a écrit :
So, does anybody mind if I remove depmod from the module-init-tools init
script
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 25 May 2006, Goswin von Brederlow uttered the following:
Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I would say, off hand, that section 8.2 is for people who want
to provide a shared library for other packages, with a stable ABI
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:07:00AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Only the dpkg:arch is required and that can be done with Provides:
dpkg-arch again.
Right. I wonder if even this should strictly be necessary, though, or if
dpkg shouldn't be able
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
On May 26, Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, Im asking to have _one_ delay at a defined point instead of X
packages having a delay because they might have to run depmod manualy.
This is not a choice, every package which installs
Tyler MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.daemonology.net/bsdiff/
How does that compare with rsync batch files?
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tyler MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+1. We've been using bsdiff (http://www.daemonology.net/bsdiff/) at
work for some internal stuff and it's great.
Oh, and one more thing:
| bsdiff is quite memory-hungry. It requires max(17*n,9*n+m)+O(1)
| bytes of memory, where n is the size of
Tyler MacDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is quite unacceptable. We have debs in debian up to 160Mb
(packed) and 580Mb unpacked. That would require 2.7 Gb and nearly 10Gb
ram respectively.
Seems to be quite useless for patching full debs
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 05:28:35PM +0200, Filippo Giunchedi wrote:
Is there a list of official documents (with photos) that we can consider
acceptable for a KSP?. If there's not we definitely need one.
However this is rather tricky because the list
Gustavo Franco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 5/27/06, John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Looking on packages.qa.debian.org, I'm seeing some confusing
information and am hoping someone can help me figure out what's going
on.
The bacula page lists a depends on openssl, which is
John Goerzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 02:55:39AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
regards,
-- stratus
Any source that builds udebs is always frozen (openssl builds
libcrypto0.9.8-udeb). Udebs have to be moved into testing manualy and
without the freeze
curt manucredo (hansycm) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nope. You will need to keep all normal debs anyway, for new
installations.
i thought it could be possible in the end to download the tree-package
and all its patches to then have the latest
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 01:07:01AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:07:00AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Only the dpkg:arch is required and that can be done with Provides
Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 25 May 2006, El Presidente wrote:
I have seen on the internet that someone wanted to port debian to minix3, but
the report was old. Is there anyone that wants to port? I find it usefull.
I don't have the ability to do it, but if it works I
Bastian Venthur [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi all,
I want to rebuild the whole archive on my box but I don't really know
where to start. I don't want to keep the resulting packages, I just want
to seek FTBFSes.
I've installed sbuild (do I really need it? Does pbuilder/cowbuilder
suffice?)
Hendrik Sattler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Am Montag, 29. Mai 2006 10:27 schrieb Frank Küster:
Would it be acceptable to build bacula (or any other package with that
problem) in an etch environment, or on sid with manually installed
libssl from etch, and upload that to unstable? Â After
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
also sprach Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.05.29.2122 +0200]:
I think the usual way is to provide the dummy binary package
immediately from the new source package and file a bug for removal
of the old source package.
Sounds like a clean
Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 09:47:53PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Or just dump all packages into the buildds queue file (as
That would be ~buildd/build/REDO
package_version, one per line) and start it.
That would be
package_version
Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Am Montag, 29. Mai 2006 21:16 schrieb Thomas Viehmann:
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
No, but you could manually set all stuff in Depends to the needed
versions. That would also work for the buildds, I guess.
And break at the next
Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
Andreas Fester schrieb:
I create a new package with the new name which will
get uploaded to the NEW queue. This package replaces the
old package and conflicts with the old package:
Replaces: oldPackage
Conflicts: oldPackage (
Ingo Juergensmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, someone could use the database on Buildd.Net to generate such a graph.
I assume that the total number reflects the number of source packages.
Combined with the number of changes in Needs-Build it might be possible to
get the wanted data out of
Daniel Baumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[ crosspost to live, -devel and -edu; replies please to -devel ]
Hi all,
at the moment, we have two types of Live CD images:
* the small one which contains only packages of standard priority,
* and three larger ones, each of which contains one
Daniel Kobras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 09:19:42AM +0200, Andreas Fester wrote:
Absolutely. Its also the method I would prefer because it adds minimal
overhead providing the most seamless upgrade. I implemented it for my
package, and the first test succeeded very well
Andreas Fester [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Daniel Kobras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Unpacking replacement lincvs ...
Selecting previously deselected package crossvc.
Unpacking crossvc (from .../crossvc_1.5.0-1_i386.deb) ...
(Noting disappearance of lincvs
Adeodato =?utf-8?B?U2ltw7M=?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi all,
for those who don't know, nmudiff is a small script by Steinar H.
Gunderson that, when invoked in the source tree of a NMU, will create a
diff with respect the previous version, and send it to the BTS. I've
found it quite
Anthony DeRobertis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
Errr... apt-get says:
Failed to fetch
http://security.debian.org/dists/etch/updates/Release Unable to
find expected entry main/binary-amd64/Packages in Meta-index file
(malformed Release file?)
And, indeed,
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 07 Jun 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
I have always thought that when bug X is blocking bug Y, the severity
of bug X should be at least as big as the severity of bug Y.
I have
Jörg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
should I set in package jed a conflict on a package jed-extra if
jed-extra enhances jed, but jed has changed its API and now jed-extra is
useless, i.e. it must be updated. jed-extra and jed can be installed at
the same time without harm, but
Xavier Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi folks,
This is probably a louzy and obvious question, but I'm trying to fix
a package error (files moved from a .deb to another one).
When upgrading two packages (A and B) to the new version, dpkg is
having some troubles, because some files from
Xavier Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
If you see a removal attempt that fails and aborts the upgrading then
it shouldn't be dpkgs doing. Could it be that one of the maintainer
scripts attempts to clean up and calls rmdir?
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old
Xavier Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
swin von Brederlow a écrit :
*BUT* note that /usr/share/doc/httrack/html is actually a simlink to
../../httrack/html (the reason is BUG 362836, which pointed that
You mean ../../../httrack/html, right?
No, this is ../../html (jumping two levels
Adeodato =?utf-8?B?U2ltw7M=?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Goswin von Brederlow [Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:49:50 +0200]:
David Weinehall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:04:48PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Sometimes, the changelog will tell you the package was last changed 3
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 07:39:55PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
What you want is:
jed: Provides: jed-abi-23
jed-extra: Depends: jed-abi-23
You should add such a provides in jed now and update the jed-extra
package asap. The next time
Daniel Kobras [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:15:06PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
Daniel Kobras writes (Re: Renaming a package):
but the alternative patch to dpkg is quite simple (see
below). Alas, it changes current behaviour.
I don't think it this patch is correct
Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-common packages are used to reduce the size of the archive; arch
independant data need not be included in each of the 10+ arch-specific
binary packages; only one package is needed.
As expected, most of the contents of the -common packages are in
LEE, Yui-wah (Clement) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
What is a clean way to introduce a delay between the
scripts in /etc/init.d ?
I saw a problem that /etc/rc2.d/S27bind9 started before
/etc/rc2.d/S25ifplugd actually completed all the tasks
...
Specifically, ifplugd, with the help of
George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wednesday 14 June 2006 14:34, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
Hi,
I've been upgrading my machines since Woody to Sarge, then to Etch. Now,
my /var/lib/dpkg/available are huge (15MB), and it seems they never get
cleaned.
How am I supposed to clean them?
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 10:39:29AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Kai Hendry]
Affected packages are:
[...]
Petter Reinholdtsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
plan
How did you conclude that it depend on lesstif1? Its build depend is
601 - 700 of 2345 matches
Mail list logo
