On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:15:24PM +0200, Andreas Rönnquist wrote:
> (in this case - RFR = Request For Review - I am not sure if its a
> used/correct abbreviation)
Correct.
> Could someone please check out my devilspie2 package?
Yes.
> It is a continuation of the original Devilspie by Ross Burt
Hi Jakub,
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:17:12AM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Helmut Grohne , 2011-10-12, 09:12:
> >Your debian/rules file basically needs to be rewritten.
>
> Sorry, but that's not helpful. Care to elaborate what's so
> inherently wrong with the current debian/rules?
I highlighted s
Hello,
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011, Jason Heeris wrote:
> I have an account on Alioth, but I'm no longer using or contributing to
> Debian. Can I remove or deactivate my account, or should I just abandon it?
You should file a support request to get it removed, see
http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#How_c
I have an account on Alioth, but I'm no longer using or contributing to
Debian. Can I remove or deactivate my account, or should I just abandon it?
— Jason Heeris
Stupid fools who depend on Lintian :-) Isn't there enough for them to learn!?
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:21 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Guido van Steen writes:
>
>> > You never need to duplicate license text in a DEP 5 document
>> > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#stand-alone-license-paragraph>.
>>
Guido van Steen writes:
> > You never need to duplicate license text in a DEP 5 document
> > http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#stand-alone-license-paragraph>.
>
> Thank you, Ben! I have updated my copyright file one more time,
> although Lintian did not complain about the remaining mistakes in the
On 13/10/11 16:13, Joey Parrish wrote:
[...]
> Does the Debian community standardize on git, or is an svn repo also
> acceptable? I don't have any experience with git yet, but I'm a
> frequent user of svn.
If you like SVN you may be interested in checking out Mercurial; it
speaks git, so you can
Hi,
I'm the maintainer of the qemulator package, months ago I was contacted
by Daniele Lacamera, Daniele is the upstream author of virtualbricks a
fork/replacement of qemulator, he asked me about the possibility of the
substitution of qemulator with Virtualbricks.
Qemulator is not longer developed
On 10/13/2011 06:04 PM, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Am 12.10.2011 20:20, schrieb Julian Taylor:
>> Else the package looks nice, good work.
>
> I implemented all changes from you and Sylvestre and re-uploaded the
> package:
>
it still does not build. Its missing a dependency on libltdl-dev for
ltdl.m4
Quoting "anatoly techtonik" :
It's 9 months since the patch to upgrade trac-bitten was committed to
Debian repository and it's not packaged yet. Can anybody release it?
Problem is: I can't (currently) test new versions properly - no time.
Second issue: I really want to have two packages: Master
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Joey Parrish wrote:
Does the Debian community standardize on git, or is an svn repo also
acceptable? I don't have any experience with git yet, but I'm a
frequent user of svn.
Git is definitely more popular (and my preference) but there's nothing
wrong with svn.
--
Jal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gogglesmm".
* Package name: gogglesmm
Version : 0.12.4-3
Upstream Author : Sander Jansen
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/gogglesmm/
* License : GPLv3
Section : sound
It builds those bin
Am 12.10.2011 21:10, schrieb Julian Taylor:
> Its missing a bunch of links: [...]
> as with cpl there are a couple of file from the FSF in the source not
> mentioned in debian/copyright [...]
> you use dh-autoreconf so you don't need to depend on autotools-dev.
I added the needed library, changed
Am 12.10.2011 20:20, schrieb Julian Taylor:
> Else the package looks nice, good work.
I implemented all changes from you and Sylvestre and re-uploaded the
package:
* Package name: cpl
Version : 5.3.1-1
Upstream Author : ESO Project Team
* URL : http://www.eso.org/
Hi,
Le 13/10/11 15:26, Reinhard Tartler a écrit :
> One solution would be to throw all sources into a big source package and
> build everything from that.
Looks like the sane solution to me.
Another would be to, on the contrary, split the source packages, if
possible, to completely break the lo
On 2011-10-13, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> However this seems like something that's eminently fixable. Your first
> order of business should be to set up a public git repository on alioth so
> that you can get the wider Debian community to help.
Does the Debian community standardize on git, or is a
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 15:26, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> In my tests, it *seems* that apt indeed prefers a real package over a
> virtual package. I'm aware of the following drawbacks:
It does, but you are better of handling this as an internal detail
- because it is easier/faster to try non-virtu
Hi,
I'm seeking for advice for how to handle this rather complicated
solution. I'm packaging a large software base that builds a number of
libraries and applications. In order to simplify things:
- foo (source package) builds:
- libfoo-dev, libfoo0, libfoo0-bin, ...
- and build depends on
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qasconfig".
* Package name: qasconfig
Version : 0.2.0-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qasconfig
* License : GPL-3
Section : sound
It builds those binary
>
> http://ddumont.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/debian-copyright-dep5-parsereditorvalidatormigrator-is-released/
It seems a good idea to me to integrate a recent version of this
libconfig-model-perl with lintian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
> You never need to duplicate license text in a DEP 5 document
> http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#stand-alone-license-paragraph>.
Thank you, Ben! I have updated my copyright file one more time,
although Lintian did not complain about the remaining mistakes in the
previous version.
--
To UNSUBSC
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Joey Parrish wrote:
Dear mentors (and those BCC'd whom I've been speaking to about "flex-sdk"),
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "flex-sdk-4.5".
I'm on it. Expect an upload later today.
This is the latest released version of Flex from Adobe, but if either
of
It's 9 months since the patch to upgrade trac-bitten was committed to
Debian repository and it's not packaged yet. Can anybody release it?
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/python-apps/packages/trac-bitten/trunk/debian/changelog?r1=6417&r2=6416&pathrev=6417
--
anatoly t.
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 5
hi,
At Thu, 6 Oct 2011 09:58:54 +0900,
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> in debian/control...
>
> Homepage: http://fallabs.com/qdbm/
> Standards-Version: 3.9.1
> Vcs-Git: git://anonscm.debian.org/collab-maint/qdbm.git
>
> Standards-Version was set to 3.9.1.
> But debian/changelog has "New Standards-Ver
Dear mentors (and those BCC'd whom I've been speaking to about "flex-sdk"),
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "flex-sdk-4.5".
Bugs #591969 (package "typo3-src") and #632478 (package "nicofox") are
both waiting on this package so that these packages can build their
swf files from source.
* Francesco Namuri , 2011-10-13, 11:44:
I'm trying to fix bug 627267 [¹], but I can't reproduce it, all the
tries on a amd64 system are going successfully,
Indeed, this FTBFS cannot be currently reproduced in unstable, thanks to
a bug/misfeature in the linker:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-d
On Wednesday 12 October 2011 08:17:39 Jan-Pascal van Best wrote:
> This hit me also and it took some time to figure out.
> - indent multi-line fields with a space
> - use 'space dot' - ' .' for empty lines in a multi-line field.
This formatting is also taken care of by DEP-5 parser/editor mentione
Hi to all the list,
I'm back after a long idle period :)
I'm trying to fix bug 627267 [¹], but I can't reproduce it, all the
tries on a amd64 system are going successfully, So I'm thinking to
request a rebuild to release team. My doubt: is it a good approach?
Thank you.
Francesco Namuri
signat
28 matches
Mail list logo
