Re: [RFS] nutsqlite 2.0.6-3

> > If changes seem appropriate, then please consider either > uploading or granting DM access. Access granted - thanks for your work on this, Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de

[RFS] nutsqlite 2.0.6-3

Greetings, I added the "tcl-thread" package as dependency of "nutsqlite", addressing #973725 (and tried to make sure nothing else was missing), wrote a manual page for update-nut(1), and begun a stub of autopkgtest, which I consider superficial for the moment, as only update-nut could be checked

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

On 03.11.20 23:23, Nilesh Patra wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Nov, 2020, 3:24 am Steffen Möller, > wrote: > > It took me a while but at some point I have understood that the > package > was already uploaded. I added the -d:release and added some bits to >

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

On Wed, 4 Nov, 2020, 3:24 am Steffen Möller, wrote: > It took me a while but at some point I have understood that the package > was already uploaded. I added the -d:release and added some bits to > auto_clean. > Thanks! > Now, > > dpkg-buildpackage && ./debian/rules clean > > will bring this

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

It took me a while but at some point I have understood that the package was already uploaded. I added the -d:release and added some bits to auto_clean. Now, dpkg-buildpackage && ./debian/rules clean will bring this git status: Changes not staged for commit:  (use "git add/rm ..." to update

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Wow! Thank you all for your help on mosdepth. No idea who is currently at it, but I just found in mosdepth.nimble task test, "run the tests":  exec "nim c --lineDir:on --debuginfo -r tests/all" which (after adding the paths) may be a nice idea. But somewhat importantly, please add -d:release

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Nilesh Patra writes: > Is there something else which can be done to fix it? > (I'm not sure, but probably overriding dh_dwz will probably void out the > very reason for appending the --debuginfo option, right?) Overriding it is perfectly reasonable, and simply means that the debug info might

Re: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#973612: I'm afrait I did some kind of sabotage by upgrading civetweb ... [karsten.hilb...@gmx.net: Bug#973612: orthanc: libcivetweb version mismatch]

Hello, After some investigation, I think that this issue comes from the fact that the "libcivetweb1" package (as of version 1.13+dfsg-2) doesn't contain a symbolic link from "libcivetweb.so.1" to "libcivetweb.so.1.13.0". Because of this missing symbolic link, Orthanc is linked against one single

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 20:27, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Nilesh Patra writes: > > > For native packages simply appending -g flag with > > gcc would fix it but I'm not sure of a way to propagate this flag with > nim. > > Please try --debuginfo:on, as listed in nim --fullhelp. > I had tried this

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Nilesh Patra writes: > For native packages simply appending -g flag with > gcc would fix it but I'm not sure of a way to propagate this flag with nim. Please try --debuginfo:on, as listed in nim --fullhelp. Thanks! -- Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)

Re: I'm afrait I did some kind of sabotage by upgrading civetweb ... [karsten.hilb...@gmx.net: Bug#973612: orthanc: libcivetweb version mismatch]

[including the list again] Hi Sébastien, On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 04:39:31PM +0100, Sébastien Jodogne wrote: > To be fair, I am unsure to understand the issue and how to fix it... > > Should I simply modify the "Build-Depends" of the orthanc package to the > fix the version of civetweb to 1.13

Re: ORCA

On 03/11/2020 07:06, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Steffen, On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:36:00AM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote: I had a second look. Impressive. Seems like linuxbrew has evolved enormously. If you had a look could you please give a short summary? For me it sounds like another

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi Andreas, Andreas Tille, on 2020-11-03 12:02:33 +0100: > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:48:41AM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > > Exciting times, nim-docopt and nim-hts made it through new within the > > > same day, so we now have some first important fruit from these nim > > > dependencies:

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi Andreas, On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 16:32, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Étienne and Steffen, > > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:48:41AM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > > Exciting times, nim-docopt and nim-hts made it through new within the > > > same day, so we now have some first important fruit from

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 03:30, Steffen Möller wrote: > Hello, > > Exciting times, nim-docopt and nim-hts made it through new within the > same day, so we now have some first important fruit from these nim > dependencies: mosdepth! > > https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/mosdepth I again took

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi Étienne and Steffen, On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 11:48:41AM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > Exciting times, nim-docopt and nim-hts made it through new within the > > same day, so we now have some first important fruit from these nim > > dependencies: mosdepth! > > > >

Re: [RFS] and peer review: mosdepth

Hi Steffen, Steffen Möller, on 2020-11-02 22:59:46 +0100: > Exciting times, nim-docopt and nim-hts made it through new within the > same day, so we now have some first important fruit from these nim > dependencies: mosdepth! > > https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/mosdepth > > This is a major

Re: [RFS] paleomix 1.3.2-1

Hi Andreas, Andreas Tille, on 2020-11-03 07:47:58 +0100: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 08:29:21PM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > Please feel free to consider reviewing the changes, then either > > uploading this new version, or if you feel confident about it, > > maybe grant me maintainer access,