Re: RFS: many packages
On Mon, February 4, 2008 14:21, José Luis Tallón wrote: Any of you with upload powers has some time left to sign and upload some packages? I have a little too many bugs waiting for an upload to be fixed, some of them quite old already. My usual sponsors have been much too busy as of lately. Anyone wants to volunteer? If you have an update for up-imapproxy (which I see is one of 'yours'), I'm willing to take a look at it. Send me an URL to the .dsc and I'll check it out tonight. It may help to actually list the packages you're looking for sponsors for. Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: Some packages
Dear Mentors, My regular sponsors are busy at moment, so if anyone can help to upload following package (or can comment on them for better quality) I will be very thankful. A long list follows :) chmlib http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/chmlib/chmlib_0.39-7.dsc kphotobymail http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kphotobymail/kphotobymail_0.4.1-2.dsc ldtp http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/ldtp/ldtp_0.9.2-3.dsc ldtp-doc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/ldtp-doc/ldtp-doc_0.8-2.dsc mpy-svn-stats (new upstream release) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpy-svn-stats/mpy-svn-stats_0.4.1-1.dsc pygtkmvc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pygtkmvc/pygtkmvc_1.2.1-2.dsc pyslide http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pyslide/pyslide_0.4-10.dsc tepache http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/tepache/tepache_1.1-5.dsc xchm (new upstream release) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xchm/xchm_1.14-1.dsc Thanks in advance! -- Cheers, Kartik Mistry | 0xD1028C8D | IRC: kart_ blog.ftbfs.in | kartikm.wordpress.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: tcpser (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my updated package tcpser. * Package name: tcpser Version : 1.0rc12-1 Upstream Author : Jim Brain [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.jbrain.com/pub/linux/serial * License : GPL Section : net It builds these binary packages: tcpser - emulate a Hayes compatible modem The package is lintian/pbuilder clean, except for a source-contains-svn-control-dir warning which I have been advised to ignore. The package can be found in the collab-maint bzr repository at: bzr co http://bzr.debian.org/collab-maint/tcpser/unstable/ tcpser I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Thanks, -- Peter signature.asc Description: Digital signature
RFS: QA Upload - imlib - Two bug fixes, including RC bug
Hi folks, I've uploaded a version of imlib that fixes an important and RC bug. If someone has time to review/sponsor. I'm aware of the two lintian warnings about the soname not matching the package name but I didn't want to introduce that large of a change as it would end up in NEW. http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/i/imlib/imlib_1.9.15-6.dsc Thank you! Barry deFreese -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFR: mertious
Salutations. I'm requesting a review of a package I created for `mertious`: * Package name: mertious Version : 1.2 Upstream Author : Lancer-X/ASCEAI * URL : http://www.asceai.net/meritous/ * License : GPL (version 3) Programming Lang: C Description : action-adventure dungeon crawl game Far below the surface of the planet is a secret. A place of limitless power. Those that seek to control such a utopia will soon bring an end to themselves. Seeking an end to the troubles that plague him, PSI user MERIT journeys into the hallowed Orcus Dome in search of answers. Mertious is a action-adventure game with simple controls but a challenge to find a balance of power verses recovery time during real-time battles. Set in a fractually-generated world, the player can explore thousands of rooms in search of powerful artifacts, tools to help them, and to eventually free the Orcus Dome from evil. Repository (386, I'll get amd64 tomorrow): deb http://mfgames.com/debian unstable main deb-src http://mfgames.com/debian unstable main I use the quilt patching since the people in #debian-games said it was the preferred for Debian games. I also made it +dfsg since I cleaned up permissions (eveything was exectuable in the tarball) and newlines. Cheers and Thanks, Dylan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RFS: many packages
Hi all, Any of you with upload powers has some time left to sign and upload some packages? I have a little too many bugs waiting for an upload to be fixed, some of them quite old already. My usual sponsors have been much too busy as of lately. Anyone wants to volunteer? Please CC me when replying or contact me directly -- even though I am subscribed, I might miss the mail among the others. Thanks in advance, J.L. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: qterm (updated package) (2nd try)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:0.4.1-1 of my package qterm. this new upstream release add several new functions: including copy colorful article, support multi-line url, etc. I also bump policy version, bump compat version and clear license file and manpage in this upload. it's lintian clean please help check and upload, thanks. - It builds these binary packages: qterm - BBS client for X Window System written in Qt The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qterm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qterm/qterm_0.4.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards LI Daobing -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: kde4-style-qtcurve
On 2008-02-04, Salvatore Ansani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package kde4-style-qtcurve. * Package name: kde4-style-qtcurve Version : 0.55.2-1 Upstream Author : Craig Drummond [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/QtCurve+%28KDE4%2C+KDE3%2C+%26+Gtk2+Theme%29?content=40492 * License : GPL Section : kde It builds these binary packages: kde4-style-qtcurve - Widget styles for KDE4 based apps The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 462975 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kde4-style-qtcurve - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kde4-style-qtcurve/kde4-style-qtcurve_0.55.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I stopped checking this file after having read the control file. ever tried building it in - for example pbuilder? Build-Depends: debhelper (= 5), cdbs There is also a window decoration. considered building that one as well? /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: kde4-style-qtcurve
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package kde4-style-qtcurve. * Package name: kde4-style-qtcurve Version : 0.55.2-1 Upstream Author : Craig Drummond [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php/QtCurve+%28KDE4%2C+KDE3%2C+%26+Gtk2+Theme%29?content=40492 * License : GPL Section : kde It builds these binary packages: kde4-style-qtcurve - Widget styles for KDE4 based apps The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 462975 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kde4-style-qtcurve - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kde4-style-qtcurve/kde4-style-qtcurve_0.55.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Salvatore Ansani -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: QA Upload - imlib - Two bug fixes, including RC bug
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:37:36PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote: Hi folks, Hi Barry, :-) I've uploaded a version of imlib that fixes an important and RC bug. If someone has time to review/sponsor. I'll try to have a look at it tomorrow. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
Charles Plessy wrote: Dear Mentors, I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more than 10 days ago, but never built on a given architecture. I am about to write an email to the buildd admin of mips and mipsel to ask for my packages to be built but before I would like to see if I am just unlucky, or if this is a more general dysfunctioning. What about checking on http://people.debian.org/~igloo/status.php?packages=PACKAGE ? Have a nice day, Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
On 05/02/2008, Charles Plessy wrote: I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more than 10 days ago, d-d-c might help? but never built on a given architecture. Not that I know. You probably want to check the queues on buildd.net, which should give you an overview of the state of each port. I am about to write an email to the buildd admin of mips and mipsel to ask for my packages to be built but before I would like to see if I am just unlucky, or if this is a more general dysfunctioning. mipsel has a huge backlog, and ISTR that mips too. Nothing related to your particular packages, I'd say. Remarks based on some packages of mine, and of some packages I've been more or less tracking during the last weeks. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois pgp9lOxcHxyNs.pgp Description: PGP signature
List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
Dear Mentors, I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more than 10 days ago, but never built on a given architecture. I am about to write an email to the buildd admin of mips and mipsel to ask for my packages to be built but before I would like to see if I am just unlucky, or if this is a more general dysfunctioning. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian-Med packaging team Wakō, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: Some packages
Hi On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:45:45 +0530 Kartik Mistry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mpy-svn-stats (new upstream release) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpy-svn-stats/mpy-svn-stats_0.4.1-1.dsc I use it so I reviewed it and it looks okay, so I will upload. -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
Hi On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:38:29 +0900 Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more than 10 days ago, but never built on a given architecture. I am about to write an email to the buildd admin of mips and mipsel to ask for my packages to be built but before I would like to see if I am just unlucky, or if this is a more general dysfunctioning. You mean something like these: http://buildd.debian.org/stats/?arch=mipselstate=Needs-Build http://buildd.debian.org/stats/?arch=mipsstate=Needs-Build So you can see you are not alone :-). -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
[CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], because the problem has not been raised there yet.] Charles Plessy wrote: I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more than 10 days ago, but never built on a given architecture. I am about to write an email to the buildd admin of mips and mipsel to ask for my packages to be built but before I would like to see if I am just unlucky, or if this is a more general dysfunctioning. Le Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 08:46:20PM -0600, Raphael Geissert a écrit : What about checking on http://people.debian.org/~igloo/status.php?packages=PACKAGE ? Le Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 03:46:43AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois a écrit : mipsel has a huge backlog, and ISTR that mips too. Nothing related to your particular packages, I'd say. Remarks based on some packages of mine, and of some packages I've been more or less tracking during the last weeks. Le Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 11:49:09AM +0900, Michal Čihař a écrit : You mean something like these: http://buildd.debian.org/stats/?arch=mipselstate=Needs-Build http://buildd.debian.org/stats/?arch=mipsstate=Needs-Build So you can see you are not alone :-). Hi all, thanks for all your ansers. At the beginning I thought that the problem was that the buildds were ignoring some packages, but finally it is only seems that they are not keeping up. So in conclusion, we have nothing else to do than hoping that the buildds will restart keeping up some day, or is it time to ask on debian-release that packages not up to date on these arches are allowed to migrate in testing anyway ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wakō, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:09:21AM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
On Tue, 05 Feb 2008, Charles Plessy wrote:
So in conclusion, we have nothing else to do than hoping that the
buildds will restart keeping up some day, or is it time to ask on
debian-release that packages not up to date on these arches are allowed
to migrate in testing anyway ?
Or you could look for a suitable mips machine that could be used to
help the existing buildd's!
I did ask around here but no one seemed to have one.
(Off-topic, but anyway...)
Having a mipsel machine would help with debugging many things as
well. For example, the most recent are:
lam FTBFSing on mipsel due to a gcc bug:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lamver=7.1.2-1.1arch=mipselstamp=1202167930file=logas=raw
lapack FTBFSing on mips due to a mysterious reason:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lapackver=3.1.1-0.2arch=mipsstamp=1202168381file=logas=raw
If I get enough money later in life, I'm definitely buying one of
these machines, _just_ for testing out stuff and doing a dput/dupload
of packages built on them. Would look awesome to stand apart with a
mips(el) or s390 upload, when others are doing only
source+{i386,amd64}. :-)
Kumar
--
Kumar Appaiah,
458, Jamuna Hostel,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai - 600 036
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
Hello, On Tue, 05 Feb 2008, Charles Plessy wrote: So in conclusion, we have nothing else to do than hoping that the buildds will restart keeping up some day, or is it time to ask on debian-release that packages not up to date on these arches are allowed to migrate in testing anyway ? Or you could look for a suitable mips machine that could be used to help the existing buildd's! I did ask around here but no one seemed to have one. Regards, Kapil. -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
On 05/02/2008, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
lam FTBFSing on mipsel due to a gcc bug:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lamver=7.1.2-1.1arch=mipselstamp=1202167930file=logas=raw
Enjoy 4.3 series… An IMHO interesting test would be trying to get it
built with 4.2.
lapack FTBFSing on mips due to a mysterious reason:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lapackver=3.1.1-0.2arch=mipsstamp=1202168381file=logas=raw
Maybe killed from outside, not necessarily a compiler error like the
first one.
If I get enough money later in life, I'm definitely buying one of
these machines, _just_ for testing out stuff and doing a
dput/dupload of packages built on them.
Porter machines could help, anyway. Depending on the architectures,
there are some of them available (at least for DDs). Some nice people
even offer access to their architectures to mere contributors (hppa,
kfreebsd-*, for example).
Would look awesome to stand apart with a mips(el) or s390 upload,
when others are doing only source+{i386,amd64}. :-)
You're forgetting powerpc uploads anyway. :p
Cheers,
--
Cyril Brulebois
pgpAudAZWrfYC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
(Removing CC to debian-mips, as your last mail got the point across).
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:01:55AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
On 05/02/2008, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
lam FTBFSing on mipsel due to a gcc bug:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lamver=7.1.2-1.1arch=mipselstamp=1202167930file=logas=raw
Enjoy 4.3 series... An IMHO interesting test would be trying to get it
built with 4.2.
While I'd love to, this is a job for Debian (mips) man!. What I mean
is, someone has to do this on a machine and tell me if this is a
regression (since doko has ruled out the possiblity of GCC 4.2 being
the preferred build toolchain component, we have confirm that it's a
regression).
lapack FTBFSing on mips due to a mysterious reason:
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=lapackver=3.1.1-0.2arch=mipsstamp=1202168381file=logas=raw
Maybe killed from outside, not necessarily a compiler error like the
first one.
Possible, since it doesn't look like this:
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=lapackarch=s390ver=3.0.2531a-1.2stamp=1202005519file=logas=raw
That is outright mysterious, though the blame goes on gcc
there. Again, this (according to knowledgeable people) is a gcc
bug. doko is working on fixing it (or working around it temporarily).
If I get enough money later in life, I'm definitely buying one of
these machines, _just_ for testing out stuff and doing a
dput/dupload of packages built on them.
Porter machines could help, anyway. Depending on the architectures,
there are some of them available (at least for DDs). Some nice people
even offer access to their architectures to mere contributors (hppa,
kfreebsd-*, for example).
True. And another thing I wish to place on record is my appreciation
and gratitude to the porters who help keep a mammoth distribution sane
on so many architectures.
Would look awesome to stand apart with a mips(el) or s390 upload,
when others are doing only source+{i386,amd64}. :-)
You're forgetting powerpc uploads anyway. :p
Accepted; I've seen a few people do that. But an esoteric (from my
POV) architecture would be too cool! :-)
Kumar
--
Kumar Appaiah,
458, Jamuna Hostel,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai - 600 036
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
On 05/02/2008, Kumar Appaiah wrote: (Removing CC to debian-mips, as your last mail got the point across). Well, that was on purpose… Enjoy 4.3 series... An IMHO interesting test would be trying to get it built with 4.2. While I'd love to, this is a job for Debian (mips) man!. What I mean is, someone has to do this on a machine and tell me if this is a regression (since doko has ruled out the possiblity of GCC 4.2 being the preferred build toolchain component, we have confirm that it's a regression). … since I'd bet it's more likely to have a subscriber of -mips than a subscriber of -mentors be able to do so, that's why I replied with a cross-post. You might want to try [EMAIL PROTECTED], but looks to me you might have more chance by asking the -mips subscribers. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois pgpmx7ObiBLxq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 06:21:24AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: On 05/02/2008, Kumar Appaiah wrote: (Removing CC to debian-mips, as your last mail got the point across). Well, that was on purpose... I know, and that was the right thing. Enjoy 4.3 series... An IMHO interesting test would be trying to get it built with 4.2. While I'd love to, this is a job for Debian (mips) man!. What I mean is, someone has to do this on a machine and tell me if this is a regression (since doko has ruled out the possiblity of GCC 4.2 being the preferred build toolchain component, we have confirm that it's a regression). ... since I'd bet it's more likely to have a subscriber of -mips than a subscriber of -mentors be able to do so, that's why I replied with a cross-post. You might want to try [EMAIL PROTECTED], but looks to me you might have more chance by asking the -mips subscribers. I am thankful to you for doing so, which is why I said you got the point across (to the right people). :-) Just to confirm, is it considered all right to mail debian-port for help on debugging architecture specific problems? I guess people who listen wouldn't mind helping out, would they? Thanks! Kumar -- Kumar Appaiah, 458, Jamuna Hostel, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai - 600 036 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: libthai 0.1.9-2 (updated package)
On Jan 31, 2008 11:19 AM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.9-2 of my package libthai. A review: Maybe libthai0/libthai-data shouldn't have any docs (README/TODO/etc) in them since those are mostly automatically installed, instead it should go in the -dev package and the -doc package. Good to see you are using a symbols file, mole says you need different symbols files for different arches: http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/mole/seedsymbols?pkgname=libthai0 I also note that the seedsymbols script indicates that some functions have been removed, but the ABI has not been increased. The -doc package installs stuff to /usr/share/doc/libthai0-doc, shouldn't it be /usr/share/doc/libthai-doc? Your shlibs says = 0.1.7 but the max version in your symbols file is 0.1.6. I'm not sure what the machine-readable copyright proposal says, but I expected to see copies of the this is GPL blurbs from the source code in debian/copyright I don't see filenames in the Licence line in the copyright proposal. I think there are supposed to be commas between the authors and each author should have their own copyright years? Why do you copy config.sub/guess in clean rather than in configure? CFLAGS doesn't seem to be passed to configure? Please rewrite the descriptions considering the audience for each of them. libthai0/libthai-data will always be automatically installed, libthai-dev will sometimes be automatically installed (build-dep) and libthai-doc should be only installed by humans. libthai0/-data could have a one-line description, the amount of info in the -dev and -doc descriptions should reflect who will be looking for them. Tip: $(MAKE) -C foo works too -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Jan 27, 2008 4:37 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.4.2-1 of my package thailatex. lintian -I: I: thailatex source: build-depends-without-arch-dep dpkg-dev debian/control: ...based on _the_ babel package... s/Thai words/Thai word/ debian/copyright: I don't see filenames in the Licence line in the copyright proposal. I think there are supposed to be commas between the authors and each author should have their own copyright years? Is fonts/waree simply a copy of Bitstream Vera (which will be removed from debian)? Copyright info for debian/babel.sty is a bit unclear. Including debian/babel.sty alone seems to violate its licence: This file may only be distributed together with a copy of the Babel system. You may however distribute the Babel system without such generated files. Sounds like it is not source code, but a generated file (DFSG #2). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.2-1 (updated package)
A review of your package: debian/control: s/insert/inserting/ debian/copyright: files-in-licence commas-missing-in-copyright blurbs-missing-in-licence debian/rules: nostrip is handled by dh_strip now CFLAGS doesn't seem to be passed to configure h, not sure about make -j2 - isn't there a DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS thing for that? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
