Andreas Bombe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's just that making the package non-native makes it easier to
handle unless it's really a native package (i.e. written
specifically for Debian).
YMMV, obviously. I find it easier to maintain quintuple-agent without
Debian subversions; native if you
Andreas Bombe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's just that making the package non-native makes it easier to
handle unless it's really a native package (i.e. written
specifically for Debian).
YMMV, obviously. I find it easier to maintain quintuple-agent without
Debian subversions; native if you
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:59:08AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, for starters, he said the software is an official GNU project,
not something written specifically for Debian.
Debian native, does, in my definition, not imply that the
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 09:59:08AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, for starters, he said the software is an official GNU project,
not something written specifically for Debian.
Debian native, does, in my definition, not imply that the
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, for starters, he said the software is an official GNU project,
not something written specifically for Debian.
Debian native, does, in my definition, not imply that the project
must be mainly intended to run on Debian.
Policy is not very clear
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When the upstream developer and the debian developer are the same person,
it still makes sense to treat the package as a non-native package if
there will ever be non-Debian releases.
Ok, this only makes sense if (and as long as) you are both Debian
mainainer and
On Wednesday 02 May 2001 10:28, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When the upstream developer and the debian developer are the same person,
it still makes sense to treat the package as a non-native package if
there will ever be non-Debian releases.
Ok, this only makes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When the upstream developer and the debian developer are the same person,
it still makes sense to treat the package as a non-native package if
there will ever be non-Debian releases.
Ok, this only makes sense if (and as long as) you are both Debian
mainainer and lead
On Wednesday 02 May 2001 10:28, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When the upstream developer and the debian developer are the same person,
it still makes sense to treat the package as a non-native package if
there will ever be non-Debian releases.
Ok, this only makes
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package. However, the GNU HaliFAX project
is (as its name implies) an official
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 10:39:13PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package.
I think the answer is simply that you shouldn't be treating this
as a debian native package.
Why not? If no changes take place from upstream version to debian
source, tagging on -1, and creating an empty Debianization diff is
unsound.
There's nothing wrong with an empty diff.
When the
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package. However, the GNU HaliFAX project
is (as its name implies) an official
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 10:39:13PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
Steve M. Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package.
I think the answer is simply that you shouldn't be treating this
as a debian native package.
Why not? If no changes take place from upstream version to debian
source, tagging on -1, and creating an empty Debianization diff is
unsound.
There's nothing wrong with an empty diff.
When the
Hi,
I am the author of the GNU HaliFAX viewer and I have pre-packaged it
for Debian GNU/Linux. I have been a maintainer since Saturday and
although my packaging seemed correct to my applicant manager I still
have a few questions for which I have no answer.
In
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:21:21PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
I am the author of the GNU HaliFAX viewer and I have pre-packaged it
for Debian GNU/Linux. I have been a maintainer since Saturday and
Welcome !
In http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-upload.en.html,
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package. However, the GNU HaliFAX project
is (as its name implies) an official GNU project, which besides other
things, mean
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
paragraph 6.4.1 it is mentionned that the archive maintainer will
chose the appropriate category for a package. Does this mean that one
should take arrangement with him before uploading the package (so as
Most just peruse the archive, find the
Welcome !
Thanks to you and to everyone who answered my questions. Once the mail
got through the arcane of the Internet I got quick replies.
There is no fooling, this is exactly what you should do. Debian
native packages are for instance the debian package tools. In almost
all situations
Hi,
I am the author of the GNU HaliFAX viewer and I have pre-packaged it
for Debian GNU/Linux. I have been a maintainer since Saturday and
although my packaging seemed correct to my applicant manager I still
have a few questions for which I have no answer.
In
Hi,
I am the author of the GNU HaliFAX viewer and I have pre-packaged it
for Debian GNU/Linux. I have been a maintainer since Saturday and
although my packaging seemed correct to my applicant manager I still
have a few questions for which I have no answer.
In
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:21:21PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
I am the author of the GNU HaliFAX viewer and I have pre-packaged it
for Debian GNU/Linux. I have been a maintainer since Saturday and
Welcome !
In http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-upload.en.html,
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:07:38PM -0400, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
The dh_installchangelogs doesn't accept a ChangeLog parameter when the
package is a native debian package. However, the GNU HaliFAX project
is (as its name implies) an official GNU project, which besides other
things, mean
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote:
paragraph 6.4.1 it is mentionned that the archive maintainer will
chose the appropriate category for a package. Does this mean that one
should take arrangement with him before uploading the package (so as
Most just peruse the archive, find the
Welcome !
Thanks to you and to everyone who answered my questions. Once the mail
got through the arcane of the Internet I got quick replies.
There is no fooling, this is exactly what you should do. Debian
native packages are for instance the debian package tools. In almost
all situations you
26 matches
Mail list logo
