RFS: openssn
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package openssn. * Package name: openssn Version : 0.7-1 Upstream Author : Jesse Smith jessefrgsm...@yahoo.ca * URL : http://openssn.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPL2 (code), CC0 (data) Section : games Description: modern submarine tactical simulator OpenSSN is a submarine simulation (subsim) which tries to emulate the behaviour of modern submarines. The player is placed in command of a submarine and is able to move about in a deep ocean environment. It builds those binary packages (which are lintian and pbuilder clean): openssn- modern submarine tactical simulator openssn-data - modern submarine tactical simulator (data) openssn-dbg - modern submarine tactical simulator (debug) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/openssn Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/openssn/openssn_0.7-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, Vincent Cheng -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caczd_taohzvrrcsqy3jjofncu-g9edrli2tcs09nrfy0ztc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: task-spooler
Hi, David Bremner brem...@unb.ca writes: - I have a vague memory of this being discussed before, but I can't find the discussion now. As far as I can tell, there are several ways in which the socket setup could be improved. - I don't really understand why the permissions on /tmp/socket-ts.$uid are group and world readable. - having the socket in world writable location makes ts vulnerable to a denial of service attack. It can also lead to other security issues. There should be enough example in the bug tracker (unsafe use of /tmp). wouldn't it be better to put the socket in a mode 0700 directory e.g. in the users home directory? Please be aware that there are network filesystems that cannot handle sockets in $HOME. Also sockets (or symlinks to them) should include the hostname in case $HOME is shared between multiple machines. You can have a symlink to a socket somewhere else which can then have a random name. In case the real socket is in a world-writable directory, you also need to check that it is still your socket and was not replaced later (for example an attacker could recreate the socket after /tmp was cleaned on reboot). At least Chromium, Akonadi and KDE do this. Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r53y3pmo@deep-thought.43-1.org
Re: RFS: python-visvis
* Torquil Macdonald Sørensen torq...@gmail.com, 2011-09-03, 12:30: I have fixed these mistakes, reported the upstream issues, and joined the DPMT. Does this mean that it is now OK for me to upload the package to the SVN archive, before proceeding to find a sponsor? Yes, you can inject the package to the team's SVN even if you don't have a sponsor yet. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903104212.ga4...@jwilk.net
Re: Bug#466542: RFS: task-spooler
On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 12:07:59PM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: David Bremner brem...@unb.ca writes: You can have a symlink to a socket somewhere else which can then have a random name. In case the real socket is in a world-writable directory, you also need to check that it is still your socket and was not replaced later (for example an attacker could recreate the socket after /tmp was cleaned on reboot). At least Chromium, Akonadi and KDE do this. That's the approach I wanted to take, as this was the only threat I could imagine. So, I'll simply check the ownership. I'll release a new version with that. The patch should be simple. Thank you, Lluís. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903111233.gx1...@vicerveza.homeunix.net
Re: RFS: open-axiom
I have upload new version without ./contrib and ./src/include/xpm.h. The latter is going to be removed in upstream, that file is from very old Axiom version. ./contrib is not used now and has unclear license mess: ./contrib/texmacs/COPYING says about GPL-3, but sources are BSDL or GPL (1?). So, If unsure, say 'No' here ;-) http://mentors.debian.net/package/open-axiom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e62188b.8020...@gmail.com
Re: RFS: conque
Hello,
This email is a reply to three emails, so please excuse the length.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org wrote:
Please run lintian on *.changes file. That way lintian will check not only
binaries, but also the source package (and possibly more).
DONE
debian/README.Debian:
- The text is oddly wrapped...
DONE
- There is a typo: not enable - not enabled. Since this template
DONE
appears to be copied over and over from the policy document to various
READMEs, it'd nice if the template were reviewed by debian-l10n-english@
people. Would you care to file a bug against src:vim (which contains the
policy text)?
DONE
- See Section 4 for more info on this. - this sentence was not supposed to
be copied to your README.
DONE
- Contrary to what the README says, the add-on *is* enabled by default.
This might be due to some packaging bugs.
DONE
VERSION, debian/VERSION (and debian/docs):
- What are these files for?
REMOVED
conque.doc-base:
- This is file not used during build, it refers to files that don't exist...
REMOVED
debian/conqueterm.1:
- What is the manual page for? Section 1 is for executable programs or
shell commands but the binary package doesn't ship anything like that. I'd
expect help for the add-on to be available via the vim's :help command, not
in a oddly-formatted manual page...
REMOVED
debian/control:
- Use debhelper (= 8) rather than debhelper (= 8.0.0).
DONE
- What is build-dependency on sharutils for?
REMOVED
- The package could be Architecture: all. Similarly, you can remove
DONE
${shlib:Depends} from Depends.
DONE
- Your vim dependency (vim | gvim) is incorrect. In fact the addon doesn't
work with vim.basic, provided by package vim. The package needs a vim that
is linked with libpython.
The plugin is operational in vim-tiny, operational in the sense that
it complains that it needs a python linked vim in a scratch window. We
could patch that to say the debian specific way to get that would be
to install vim-gtk
However invoking :ConqueTerm bash in vim.tiny results in E492: Not
an editor command: ConqueTerm bash. man vim-tiny *or* vim.tiny path
was not of particular help.
We have quite a few such vims, but fortunately all
of them provide virtual package vim-python.
vim-python is a virtual package, it was a transition package in lenny.
The source of the virutal package was vim-gtk. I have made the binary
depend on vim-gtk. Moreover depending on vim-python gave a lintian
error. This is my rationale for depending on vim-gtk rather than
vim-python.
- I'd omit Plugin is only usable if you have vim-gtk (or vim-python)
installed from package description. This is what we have Depends for.
DONE
debian/copyright:
- The file doesn't include the most important part: the actual upstream
license!
DONE
- According to the DEP-5 specifications, format URI should be versioned,
while yours is not.
I am confused
Format: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5
Does not do ??
clicking on http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5 and going to the example
section gives
Format: VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL but i have no idea what a valid value
for VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL would be.
- This is of course personal choice, but I would recommend you not to use a
more restrictive license for Debian packaging than the upstream uses.
DONE
(More review later...)
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org wrote:
* Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org, 2011-08-28, 17:33:
To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/conque
Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/conque/conque_2.2-1.dsc
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
[...]
(More review later...)
As promised:
debian/control:
- There's a trailing space in the very first line.
I could not find it, linitian is not complaining, but i had missed a
space in line 12. I have added it
debian/copyright:
- You wrote Copyright: 2011 nicoraffo nicora...@gmail.com, but copyright
statements in the upstream source look like this: Copyright (C)
2009-__YEAR__ Nico Raffo. Why don't use his real name in the copyright
file? Please tell upstream to replace __YEAR__ with the actual year and then
use this range in the copyright file.
DONE
debian/install:
- This is in direct violation of Packaging Policy for Vim, section 3.1:
Addons should not be installed directly under a directory contained in the
Vim runtime path.
- In addition to that, /usr/share/vim/vimcurrent is a symlink, so putting
any files there is a really bad idea. Just think what will happen with your
package once the symlink start point to another directory...
The contents of the autoload directory in the package tree needs to be
in the vimcurrent path. If the contents of the autoload directory are
not logically in
/usr/share/vimcurrent/autload/ and the plugin is
Re: RFS: getstream
Hi! Hervé Rousseau he...@moulticast.net writes: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/getstream/getstream_20100616-1.dsc The orig.tar.gz downloaded from the website differs from the orig.tar.gz in your package: 1144dc0180cedb494f6c7826e994fc3bcf7eebe4 getstream_20100616.orig.tar.gz.website 1e45acb2b75b6da9ecd446408f04dd2631c5f71f getstream_20100616.orig.tar.gz.mentors Is there any reason for that? Regards Christoph -- 9FED 5C6C E206 B70A 5857 70CA 9655 22B9 D49A E731 Debian Developer | Lisp Hacker | CaCert Assurer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d3fhx1kn@hepworth.siccegge.de
Re: RFS: open-axiom
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:07:39 +0400, Igor Pashev pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote: I have upload new version without ./contrib and ./src/include/xpm.h. The latter is going to be removed in upstream, that file is from very old Axiom version. ./contrib is not used now and has unclear license mess: ./contrib/texmacs/COPYING says about GPL-3, but sources are BSDL or GPL (1?). I guess that makes sense to me about contrib. It might be possible to fix by asking upstream for clarification what that COPYING file is meant to apply to. Removing xpm.h alone would not be a good reason to repack (although here, there is no real pristine upstream tarball), but since you are repacking anyway, OK. I'm rebuilding as we speak. By the way, parallel build support would be nice ;). d -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ehzxyf71.fsf@zancas.localnet
RFS: pidgin-twitter (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package pidgin-twitter. The upload would fix Bug #625418: ftbfs with gcc-4.6 -Werror * Package name: pidgin-twitter Version : 0.9.2.1-1 Upstream Author : Yoshiki Yazawa (@yazuuchi) y...@honeyplanet.jp * URL : http://www.honeyplanet.jp/pidgin-twitter/ * License : GPL version 2 Section : net It builds those binary packages: pidgin-twitter - Pidgin plugin for Twitter To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/pidgin-twitter Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pidgin-twitter/pidgin-twitter_0.9.2.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- Regards, dai GPG Fingerprint = 0B29 D88E 42E6 B765 B8D8 EA50 7839 619D D439 668E signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: pidgin-twitter (updated package)
Hi, Higuchi-san. I would like to upload the one. On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 22:24:16 +0900 deb...@vdr.jp wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- ++++++++++++++ Yukiharu Yabuki (矢吹幸治) I use Debian GNU/Linux mail: yab...@netfort.gr.jp ++++++++++++++ pgp5cehvuo2Bd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: fizsh
Hi, I am looking for a sponsor for my package fizsh. [...] I've reviewed your package fizsh and have the following comments: - .orig.tar.gz differs from upstream: aclocal.m4 |4 configure | 328 ++--- 2 files changed, 147 insertions(+), 185 deletions(-) - No need to depend on coreutils, it is essential. - debian/docs is empty - (You had already noted yourself the hyphen-used-as-minus-sign.) Other than the above, the package looks really fine. The first item (differing orig.tar.gz), however, is a show stopper. Best, Michael pgpxEYbuN2kE3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: open-axiom
Greate! Thank you. OA is uploaded to FTP. What about other architectures (i386, alpha, powerpc, etc)? Do I need another sponsor? :-) How much time does it take for package to appear in repo? 03.09.2011 16:37, David Bremner пишет: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:07:39 +0400, Igor Pashev pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote: I have upload new version without ./contrib and ./src/include/xpm.h. The latter is going to be removed in upstream, that file is from very old Axiom version. ./contrib is not used now and has unclear license mess: ./contrib/texmacs/COPYING says about GPL-3, but sources are BSDL or GPL (1?). I guess that makes sense to me about contrib. It might be possible to fix by asking upstream for clarification what that COPYING file is meant to apply to. Removing xpm.h alone would not be a good reason to repack (although here, there is no real pristine upstream tarball), but since you are repacking anyway, OK. I'm rebuilding as we speak. By the way, parallel build support would be nice ;). d -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e623aef.90...@gmail.com
Cannot install paraview package
Dear all, could someone please confirm there is something weird going on with paraview package in unstable: $ sudo apt-get install paraview The following packages have unmet dependencies: paraview : Depends: libavcodec52 (= 4:0.6-1~) but it is not installable or libavcodec-extra-52 (= 4:0.6-1~) but it is not installable Depends: libavformat52 (= 4:0.6-1~) but it is not installable or libavformat-extra-52 (= 4:0.6-1~) but it is not installable E: Broken packages This is done from a side schroot system. Thanks, -- Mathieu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CA+7wUsx=w-=tvzdur8szc32fxgyadgqdhvquzk5nr2f0e12...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: open-axiom
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 18:34:23 +0400, Igor Pashev pashev.i...@gmail.com wrote: What about other architectures (i386, alpha, powerpc, etc)? Do I need another sponsor? :-) How much time does it take for package to appear in repo? Other architectures will be built on the autobuilder network, all going well. For the second question, it depends how long the package takes to pass through NEW. It is usually pretty quick these days, but it could be a week (or longer if the ftp-masters get busy). d -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871uvxy7ki.fsf@zancas.localnet
experimental or unstable
The last release of roxterm went to experimental instead of unstable. TBH I forgot that I'd changed it to experimental at some point, but after release I thought perhaps it's just as well because of the major changes. However, I think this has resulted in few users noticing the new version and I think it's reliable enough for unstable. There's a new release ready; should I switch back to unstable for it? You're probably thinking if I'm making a new release already it can't be that stable! But only one of the changes relates to something specific to roxterm 2, and it's to make a new feature optional rather than to fix a bug https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3365527group_id=124080atid=698431. It also closes a bug in previous unstable releases (#639687). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903163211.322e1742@tiber.centauri
Re: Cannot install paraview package
Sounds like you got bitten by a transition: http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libav.html Until it gets rebuilt you will need to have testing added to your sources.list. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6GAg_jsxHkMCd9v=LdBZxJm5BdwR5=rhUA=gakmfan...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: assimp (3rd try)
Hi, Dear mentors, sponsors and fellow Debianistas, here is my third attempt to find a sponsor (or more reviewers) for my package assimp. [...] Package built, signed, and uploaded. Will be sitting in NEW now. Best, Michael pgp3CYWHaluU9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: spotweb (third version)
Hi Jan-Pascal, On my request, upstream has added an explicit LICENSE file detailing the (BSD-3-clause) license. Up to now, the license wasn't in the source package itself. I've also changed to packaging to use debhelper instead of cdbs. The new .dsc is at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spotweb/spotweb_0~20110818+git9fcd44c4-1~pre2.dsc [...] I've taken a look at your package and have the following comments: - debian/compat says 5 but your require debhelper 8 in debian/control. - I don't see where you migrated to debhelper from cdbs!? - Please try to convince upstream to produce release tags - using git SHA1 in version numbers means that essentially you can only do a single release on any given date. Other than the above, your package looks pretty ok. In your changelog, however, you indicate that this packaging is preliminary. I suppose the next version will be a releasable one!? Best, Michael pgp4ra1LMSY6N.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: pidgin-twitter (updated package)
Hi Yabuki-san, thank you for your offering. please look after this package. On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 10:56:50PM +0900, Yukiharu Yabuki wrote: I would like to upload the one. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. -- Regards, dai GPG Fingerprint = 0B29 D88E 42E6 B765 B8D8 EA50 7839 619D D439 668E signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: libharu (updated package)
Hi, [...] I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2.1-1 of my package libharu. [...] Looks good. Built, signed, and uploaded. Best, Michael pgpwxxdN84WF6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gkrellm-gkrellmpc
Hi, I am looking for a sponsor for my package gkrellm-gkrellmpc. * Package name: gkrellm-gkrellmpc Version : 0.1~beta10-2 Upstream Author : Mina Naguib webmas...@topfx.com * URL : http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Client:GKrellMPC * License : GPL-2 Section : sound [...] Thanks a lot for this update. Built, signed, and uploaded. One request for future uploads, though: please include a watch file. In my opinion, this should be reasonably easy by using http://mina.naguib.ca/dist/ as a watch space. Best, Michael pgpAN9e3ieyPM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: presage (updated package)
Hi Matteo, [...] I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Done. Thanks a lot for this update, Michael pgpHJU4dX8bKp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: experimental or unstable
Hi, [...] You're probably thinking if I'm making a new release already it can't be that stable! But only one of the changes relates to something specific to roxterm 2, and it's to make a new feature optional rather than to fix a bug https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3365527group_id=124080atid=698431. It also closes a bug in previous unstable releases (#639687). It's in almost all cases completely up to you to decide whether a package is ready to go in unstable or not (and should go in experimental instead). Best, Michael pgpxAhRZNtpx4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: qmpdclient
Hi, I am looking for a sponsor for my package qmpdclient. * Package name: qmpdclient Version : 1.2.2-1 Upstream Author : Voker57 voke...@gmail.com * URL : http://bitcheese.net/wiki/QMPDClient * License : GPL-2+ Section : sound [...] This package looks ok, although it would be nice if upstream could add license and copyright information to a number of source files missing such information. Two more issues to be addressed in forthcoming uploads: - The binary lacks a man page. - The package description could include some text about mpd in general. Package built, signed, and uploaded. Best, Michael pgptCEqN40SHx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: xxxterm
Hi, I am looking for a sponsor for my package xxxterm. * Package name: xxxterm Version : 1.518-1 Upstream Author : Several (Marco Peereboom ma...@peereboom.us) * URL : http://opensource.conformal.com/wiki/XXXTerm * License : ISC, MIT, BSD-4-clause, BSD-3-clause, BSD-2-clause, CC-BY Section : web [...] The package looks mostly fine, except for one major error (as also reported by lintian): E: xxxterm: menu-icon-not-in-xpm-format usr/share/xxxterm/xxxtermicon32.png If that could be fixed, the package should be ready to be uploaded. Best, Michael pgpN8qfsiTfZD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: experimental or unstable
Hi! * Tony Houghton h...@realh.co.uk [110903 17:32]: There's a new release ready; should I switch back to unstable for it? Well, ask yourself this question: Do you think the upcoming release is fit to be part of a stable release? If the answer is yes upload to unstable. If the answer is No, but I'd like to have pacakges ready for testing anyway upload to experimental. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903190152.gb1...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: spotweb (third version)
Hi Michael, Thanks for your review. On 09/03/2011 06:17 PM, Michael Tautschnig wrote: [...] I've taken a look at your package and have the following comments: - debian/compat says 5 but your require debhelper 8 in debian/control. Fixed. This remark caused me to read up in the Policy manual about the meaning of debian/compat. I'd have expected lintian to catch this, by the way. - I don't see where you migrated to debhelper from cdbs!? Somewhere in history - not important now. - Please try to convince upstream to produce release tags - using git SHA1 in version numbers means that essentially you can only do a single release on any given date. I've asked, no response yet (I asked 5 minutes ago...) Other than the above, your package looks pretty ok. In your changelog, however, you indicate that this packaging is preliminary. I suppose the next version will be a releasable one!? As far as I'm concerned, yes. The new version is on mentors, the .dsc is at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spotweb/spotweb_0~20110903+gitab1d95b4-1.dsc By the way, I'm a Maintainer, and I've set the DM-Upload-Allowed flag on this package. Hope you agree to that. Thanks again for taking the time to look at the spotweb package! Kind regards Jan-Pascal signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: spotweb (third version)
Hi Jan-Pascal, [...] As far as I'm concerned, yes. The new version is on mentors, the .dsc is at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spotweb/spotweb_0~20110903+gitab1d95b4-1.dsc By the way, I'm a Maintainer, and I've set the DM-Upload-Allowed flag on this package. Hope you agree to that. [...] That's fine. Package reviewed, built, signed, and uploaded. Best, Michael pgpGILD3TAk7x.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: spotweb (third version)
Hi Michael, On 09/03/2011 09:31 PM, Michael Tautschnig wrote: [...] That's fine. Package reviewed, built, signed, and uploaded. Thanks! Jan-Pascal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e6291d4.8040...@vanbest.org
Re: Cannot install paraview package
paraview_3.10.1-5 has just been uploaded and building. It should fix an issue. Anton On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote: Sounds like you got bitten by a transition: http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libav.html Until it gets rebuilt you will need to have testing added to your sources.list. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/calf6qjkop7nbvfdcywss+fi8nze-yvgq41nhqnqwwnvekk4...@mail.gmail.com
Re: experimental or unstable
On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 09:01:52PM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: * Tony Houghton h...@realh.co.uk [110903 17:32]: There's a new release ready; should I switch back to unstable for it? Well, ask yourself this question: Do you think the upcoming release is fit to be part of a stable release? If the answer is yes upload to unstable. If the answer is No, but I'd like to have pacakges ready for testing anyway upload to experimental. I kind of fail understand the logic here. If the changes are incremental and the releases are believed to work well, the only cost of multiple uploads is a bit of bandwidth and a bit of buildd time -- ie, machine work. And if you upload to experimental, that cost is paid anyway. On the other hand, it is a lot easier to fix problems if the changes come in smaller pieces. Plus, bugs introduced in the first piece will be reported earlier, giving a better chance they'll be fixed. So, shouldn't multiple uploads be discouraged only if they require unnecessary transitions or are of questionable quality? -- 1KB // Yo momma uses IPv4! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903221850.ga17...@angband.pl
