--
$B5U!o8r:](B $B"v5U!o8r:](B
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED];~Be$O=*$j$^$7$?!#Ev%5%$%H$O5U!o4uK>[EMAIL
PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]<+M3$KA*$Y$k%7%9%F%`$r:NMQ$7$F$$$^$9!#(B
$B"[EMAIL PROTECTED](B $B!D(
It's nice to get a throw explanation. Thanks.
I think you should revise the package description to include some or all
the explanation you wrote me. It will save similar question and might
help users to find the package more easily (thorough JRE & JDK keywords).
If not, you might want to tag this
Wolfgang Baer wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> this bug is apparently fixed by one of the former kaffe uploads
> as written by Dalibor in the BTS. You said you want to post if
> it really fixed your problem.
>
> Please report back if it works for you so we can close this
> bug report.
Don't have a testing
Hello,
I also think that dh_xxx files should not be mandatory. For example, I do not
use Emacs, and the fact that I have to install dh_emacs as well is annoying
and not in place. I think we should choose what documentation to install and
whats not.
Regards,
Ido
_
Hi,
Why not to include this script in debhelper itself? (a suggestion by
Baruch Even). Seems to resolve both our issues (dependencies & package
size).
--
Regards,
Lior Kaplan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.Guides.co.il
Debian GNU/Linux unstable (SID)
__
Thanks for the quick response.
I think you look more at the archive side, than the user side. Why does
a user have to download and install the package he might not ever use
(unless he builds Debian packages).
I ran a search on the Debian archive, to find small ( < 20 KB) packages
and found 6,018
Your message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:59:20 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Processed: reassign 328645 to gjdoc
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now you
Hi Lior,
Thanks for your wish.
Unfortunately this not really useful. This would create an extra package
for a 3 kb script. That is not really what we want to bloat our archive
and ftp-master would never allow it.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath!
http://www.gnu.org/p
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14
> reassign 328645 gjdoc
Bug#328645: gjdocs: please seperate dh_javadoc from gjdoc package
Warning: Unknown package 'gjdocs'
Bug reassigned from package `gjdocs' to `gjdoc'.
>
End of me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lior Kaplan wrote:
[...]
> Is there a real need to depend on gjdoc for the VM to work? As far as I can
> understand, there isn't.
>
> Please loosen the dependency on gjdoc.
[...]
Lior,
Thanks for your use of Debian. We get this type of question f
Package: kaffe-pthreads
Version: 2:1.1.5-cvs20050808-2
Severity: minor
Hi,
Is there a real need to depend on gjdoc for the VM to work? As far as I can
understand, there isn't.
Please loosen the dependency on gjdoc.
Thanks
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers un
Please upload contrib -> main moves *with* the orig.tar.gz included, thanks
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
pkg-java-maintai
Your message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2005 02:47:07 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#245204: fixed in gjdoc 0.7.5-2
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
Your message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2005 02:47:07 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#319168: fixed in gjdoc 0.7.5-2
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
Accepted:
gjdoc_0.7.5-2.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/gjdoc/gjdoc_0.7.5-2.diff.gz
gjdoc_0.7.5-2.dsc
to pool/main/g/gjdoc/gjdoc_0.7.5-2.dsc
gjdoc_0.7.5-2_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gjdoc/gjdoc_0.7.5-2_i386.deb
Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Closing bugs: 245204 319168
Thank you
gjdoc_0.7.5-2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gjdoc_0.7.5-2.dsc
gjdoc_0.7.5-2.diff.gz
gjdoc_0.7.5-2_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
pkg-java-maintain
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 296345 + pending
Bug#296345: libapache-mod-jk: Please rebuild package also for apache2
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> tags 307331 + pending
Bug#307331: libapache-mod-jk: new upstream stable version available
There were no tags set.
Chris Vanden Berghe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I made a very experimental package from the latest upstream version of
> mod_jk. It builds for both apache as apache2 (as mod_jk2 is considered
> deprecated).
>
> It can be found here:
> http://chris.vandenberghe.org/debian/libapache-mod-jk/
New packages are
Hi,
I made a very experimental package from the latest upstream version of
mod_jk. It builds for both apache as apache2 (as mod_jk2 is considered
deprecated).
It can be found here:
http://chris.vandenberghe.org/debian/libapache-mod-jk/
Please, be so kind to give it some testing and report bugs
Hi all,
as I am away over weekend and to not duplicate work.
I have the following packages already ready on disk or will work
on some during my train ride to southern germany:
Ready:
jcifs
libjdom1-java
mysql-connector-java
Will work on:
commons-beanutils (will do a new upstream)
libcommons-c
Hi all,
finally I've done the new discussed structure for the ant source
package. You can find it for further review at:
http://www.home.uos.de/wbaer/downloads/ant_reorganized/
The structure is as follows:
ant - scripts and core tasks
ant-optional - optional tasks
ant-doc - manual and javadocs
21 matches
Mail list logo
