RFS: uhub (closes ITP bug, new attempt)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package uhub. This is repeated message. Previous one was 15 days ago. And it took 11 days from the last messages in that thread: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/10/msg00128.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/10/msg00141.html uHub is a server software for Advanced Direct Connect protocol wich uses by client's software like linuxdcpp or eiskaltdcpp (these packages are present in Debian repo for a long time). This package contains small count of source files. So it don't required a lot of time for review. You can look at package rules here: https://github.com/tehnick/uhub-debian Further information about this package can be found here: http://mentors.debian.net/package/uhub Direct link: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/u/uhub/uhub_0.3.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Best regards, Boris -- 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/301211319181...@web68.yandex.ru
Re: berlios closing; where should my projects escape to?
Hello, On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:02:04 -0500 Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: I must move my projects before berlios closes. Any suggestions? i) About GitHub; they seem to have a subversion API, too: https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support ii) Mercurial is very easy to use if you've used Subversion before, so BitBucket may be an option. -- WBR, Andrew signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: berlios closing; where should my projects escape to?
Le Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:55:01AM +0300, Andrew Shadura a écrit : On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:02:04 -0500 Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: I must move my projects before berlios closes. Any suggestions? i) About GitHub; they seem to have a subversion API, too: https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support ii) Mercurial is very easy to use if you've used Subversion before, so BitBucket may be an option. There is also branchable.com, that offers free hosting for open source project. http://www.branchable.com/news/free_hosting_for_Free_Software/ Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20111021084931.gb27...@merveille.plessy.net
Re: Python build dependencies
Hi David, Try to build your package in a clean chroot: you'll probably won't have that message anymore. Thank you. I created a clean chroot, and the python warning disappeared indeed. Best wishes, Guido -- 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/CAMtVZ+uq-0Fw=OJGng_Kv1EmRbNZ7i5B-Vnp_R843T9=d_4...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: spotweb (updated version with dfsg source, please review)
Michael and others, I've again uploaded a new version to mentors. The main reason is that upstream has (on my request) started tagging releases. That makes the version numbering so much nicer... The latest .dsc is at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spotweb/spotweb_20111002+dfsg-1.dsc Could you please have a look at the new version and, if it looks good enough, sponsor its upload? [...] I hope not to have missed anything this time 'round. Package looks fine to me. Built and just uploading. Best, Michael pgpLxxAtMLYrK.pgp Description: PGP signature
call for volunteers: Debian liaisons for Google Code-In
[ Mail-Followup-To: -project ]
TL;DR: I'm looking for volunteers that will act as Debian Project
liaisons (or admins) for the Google Code In initiative [1]. Deadline
for project applications is November 1st; we'll miss it unless we have
the volunteers before that date. Feel free to volunteer either on
-project or by mailing me at leader@d.o.
---
The Google Code In (GCI) initiative [1] is a contest organized by Google
that encourages student participation into Free Software
projects. Compared to the more famous Google Summer of Code (GSOC)
initiative [2], GCI focuses on smaller tasks.
[1] http://code.google.com/gci
[2] http://code.google.com/soc
According to feedback I've received from the Debian liaisons from last
year GCI (thanks a lot, Ana!), GCI students are quite likely to remain
involved into Debian, with higher percentages than GSOC. That outcome is
really valuable for our project.
Additionally, we could use the chance of initiatives like GCI to work on
ways to maintain a list of Debian easy hacks. As recently shown by the
LibreOffice example, such lists can be very effective in attracting new
contributors to a Free Software project. We have tried in the past
similar initiatives using gift tags [3,4], but that has not really
worked out. I think we should try again and make it work, possibly via
different/new technical means.
[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/12/msg00679.html
[4]
http://upsilon.cc/~zack/blog/posts/2008/08/PTS_integrated_with_mentors_and_gifts/
For all the above reasons, I'm calling for volunteers willing to act as
GCI admins. The task / requirements are about:
- having time to devote to the task from the beginning of November to
the beginning of January
- calling for / organizing ways to collect Debian easy hacks, that
will be given out as GCI tasks
- interacting with the students that will take part in GCI
Background material and feedback/proposals on how to make it work
properly in Debian can be found in a slide deck by Ana [5].
[5] http://penta.debconf.org/dc11_schedule/attachments/189_google-code-in.pdf
The deadline for *project* applications in GCI is November 1st. We'll
need to have volunteers before that date, as it'd be pointless to apply
if we aren't sure Debian can participate properly in GCI. According to
feedback from past admins, it'd be wise to have at least 3 volunteers
before deciding to apply.
Many thanks in advance!,
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences .. http://upsilon.cc/zack .. . . o
Debian Project Leader... @zack on identi.ca ...o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: gogglesmm
Hi, Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package gogglesmm. [...] Thanks for updating the package. I've reviewed the changes and uploaded a new version. Best regards, Michael pgpPkF2Esa7SR.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: xz-utils (updated package)
* Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com, 2011-10-20, 21:45: Thanks, this is consistent with my understanding. Could you please update the patch header? [... two other nice suggestions snipped ...] I've put up an uploaded package incorporating your suggestions at - http://alioth.debian.org/~jrnieder-guest/temp/xz-utils_5.1.1alpha+20110809-3.dsc - git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/xz.git master Thanks a lot for your help. Second time's the charm, I hope. ;-) Uploaded, thanks. Lintian emits 2 warnings: W: xz-utils source: package-needs-versioned-debhelper-build-depends 9 W: liblzma5: symbols-declares-dependency-on-other-package liblzma_private_symbols These are false positives, please consider adding overrides for them in the next version. -- 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/20111021101547.ga8...@jwilk.net
Re: Fwd: RFS: kpartsplugin (updated package)
Hi Michele, (added debian-mentors in CC, hope that's ok) Hi I'm forwarding the RFS I sent on debian-mentors for updated kpartsplugin package, as I didn't quite get how the sponsorship works probably, so I'm unsure if i should have written to you as original sponsor for the package, or if it's normal/necessary to write on debian-mentors every time package is updated. [...] I've built and uploaded your package - sorry for taking so long to respond. Yet there is one lintian warning to be addressed in future uploads: W: kpartsplugin source: syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright syntax error in section 4 after the tag license: You may use this file under the terms of the BSD license as follows:\n Thanks a lot for your work, Michael pgpnj9Ytkzq2Z.pgp Description: PGP signature
RFS: spice-protocol (0.8.2-1)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-1 of my package spice-protocol. It builds these binary packages: libspice-protocol-dev - SPICE protocol headers The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spice-protocol/spice-protocol_0.8.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Thanks and Regards, -- Liang Guo http://bluestone.cublog.cn signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: berlios closing; where should my projects escape to?
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:02:04 -0500 Paul Elliott pelli...@blackpatchpanel.com wrote: Perhaps this is offtopic, but there are so many packagers here, perhaps I can find an answer. Berlios is closing, I have two small projects, GPLed, that use subversion and publish tarballs, where should I go? I looked at sourceforge, but they are always sending me adds. Too comercial for my taste. tuxfamily.org provides VCS and web services etc for free software. Pros: * You can use your own domain. * Runs on OSS Cons: * No ready-made web applications, you have to set up your website entirely yourself. Some people may prefer that flexibility though. * No bug tracker and the web hosting doesn't include python, so you can't use trac. flyspray can be used though. -- 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/20111021143117.44922e15@junior
Re: Re: Fwd: RFS: kpartsplugin (updated package)
Hi Michele, (added debian-mentors in CC, hope that's ok) Hi I'm forwarding the RFS I sent on debian-mentors for updated kpartsplugin package, as I didn't quite get how the sponsorship works probably, so I'm unsure if i should have written to you as original sponsor for the package, or if it's normal/necessary to write on debian-mentors every time package is updated. [...] I've built and uploaded your package - sorry for taking so long to respond. Never mind, but thank you for spending your time in checking and uploading the package Yet there is one lintian warning to be addressed in future uploads: W: kpartsplugin source: syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright syntax error in section 4 after the tag license: You may use this file under the terms of the BSD license as follows:\n I didn't get that lintian warning on my system, nor it appears on mentors. I'll check it and correct it as soon as possible. Also, there is another thing I'd like to edit, but I'm unsure how to do so. The package is a plugin that works with some different browsers (Firefox, Opera, Chrome among them). At the moment, though, I've changed the CMakeLists so that the plugin is only installed in Firefox's plugins dir (instead of a generic /usr/lib/nsplugin). What would be the best way to install it for other browsers too? Is it best to install the same file in the correct directories (adding rules to CMakeLists I guess), or to instead use symlinks (and in such a case, should the real file be in /usr/lib/nsplugin, in /usr/lib/mozilla/ or elsewhere?)? Thanks for help Michele -- 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/2687052.mn3UNS6jZ1@blackbeauty
Re: RFS: jabber-querybot
Dear Dider, mentors, On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:20:09PM +0200, Didier Raboud wrote: Now on for the review: * the debian/copyright file seems to be aspsms-t's . :-) And you should use the versioned shortname for the GPL (e.g. GPL-2+, as in http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#AEN462 ). You can drop the name from the liense paragraph and then copy-paste it to your various debian/copyright files. According to your remarks I fixed: * debian/copyright * debian/changelog * debian/control http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jabber-querybot/jabber-querybot_0.0.2-1.dsc Thx -Marco signature.asc Description: GnuPG Signature
Control file Vcs fields
I'm a bit confused about the Vcs fields in Control files. Many projects have the upstream code and debian packaging maintained separately and I'm not entirely sure what you're supposed to do with the Vcs fields in that case. Should they point to upstream or the packaging? How can tools, such as debcheckout, work properly if they can only fetch the packaging or upstream code, but not both? -- 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/20111021151006.3738626a@junior
Re: Control file Vcs fields
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 03:10:06PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: I'm a bit confused about the Vcs fields in Control files. Many projects have the upstream code and debian packaging maintained separately and I'm not entirely sure what you're supposed to do with the Vcs fields in that case. Should they point to upstream or the packaging? The Packaging[0]. How can tools, such as debcheckout, work properly if they can only fetch the packaging or upstream code, but not both? In many cases, the VCS used for the debian package also contains a copy of the upstream source code whether or not upstream is using a VCS or not, in other cases: from $ man debcheckout --source=never|auto|download-only|always Some packages only place the debian directory in version control. debcheckout can retrieve the remaining parts of the source using apt-get source and move the files into the checkout. Cheers. [0] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-vcs (Sorry for my English) -- Josué M. Abarca S. Vos mereces Software Libre. PGP key 4096R/70D8FB2A 2009-06-17 Huella de clave = B3ED 4984 F65A 9AE0 6511 DAF4 756B EB4B 70D8 FB2A -- 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/20111021143826.GA13112@numenor.numenor
Re: Control file Vcs fields
Tony Houghton h...@realh.co.uk writes: I'm a bit confused about the Vcs fields in Control files. Many projects have the upstream code and debian packaging maintained separately and I'm not entirely sure what you're supposed to do with the Vcs fields in that case. Should they point to upstream or the packaging? How can tools, such as debcheckout, work properly if they can only fetch the packaging or upstream code, but not both? They should point to the packaging. debcheckout will check that out, and if that's not a buildable tree, then debian/README.source MUST describe how to build the package from that checkout. See 6.2.5[1] of the Developer's reference for more information. [1]: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-vcs -- |8] -- 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/87hb322ykc@balabit.hu
Re: Re: Fwd: RFS: kpartsplugin (updated package)
Yet there is one lintian warning to be addressed in future uploads: W: kpartsplugin source: syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright syntax error in section 4 after the tag license: You may use this file under the terms of the BSD license as follows:\n I didn't get that lintian warning on my system, nor it appears on mentors. I'll check it and correct it as soon as possible. Lintian is a moving target. This warning must have been added somewhere between September and October. For more information see: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/10/msg00167.html Best wishes, Guido -- 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/camtvz+tzm9s9cff0xzgkdng3lxbbpgqexalkzjixl7czgvz...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: spice-protocol (0.8.2-1)
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 19:25, Liang Guo bluestonech...@gmail.com wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-1 of my package spice-protocol. Uploaded. Since I have sponsored several no-change uploads of this package, I have added DMUA this time (as you are a DM). Please feel free to ask when you encounter any problem in future development. -- Regards, Aron Xu -- 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/CAMr=8w5=o6pdnomzgypjtkqv4v7uorperb41cufng3tpmo5...@mail.gmail.com
Watch file not present - warning message
Hi all, I uploaded my package to mentors for my mentor to review. The package page on mentors [1] shows me a warning saying that *A watch file is not present* but my package does contain a watch file! Is this a bug in DebExpo? [1] http://mentors.debian.net/package/kiwix Best Regards -- Vasudev Kamath http://blog.copyninja.info copyni...@frndk.de (Friendika) vasu...@joindiaspora.com (Ostatus) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: Fwd: RFS: kpartsplugin (updated package)
Hi, [...] Also, there is another thing I'd like to edit, but I'm unsure how to do so. The package is a plugin that works with some different browsers (Firefox, Opera, Chrome among them). At the moment, though, I've changed the CMakeLists so that the plugin is only installed in Firefox's plugins dir (instead of a generic /usr/lib/nsplugin). What would be the best way to install it for other browsers too? Is it best to install the same file in the correct directories (adding rules to CMakeLists I guess), or to instead use symlinks (and in such a case, should the real file be in /usr/lib/nsplugin, in /usr/lib/mozilla/ or elsewhere?)? [...] I'm by no means an expert on browser plug-ins; but you will definitively want to use symlinks. For the primary location it's probably best to take a look at other cross-browser plug-ins. Best, Michael pgpREBTcMBcMN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: cherrytree (2nd try)
Vincent Cheng vincentc1...@gmail.com wrote on 2011-10-20 20:55: cherrytree - hierarchical note taking application I have tested you package: I have created a package for Debian Squeeze (stable) from your source package without any problems. Then I installed and started cherrytree. And I am fascinated about this new program - full functional, it seems without any bugs, and with very good translations. Cherrytree is comparable with Zim (Desktop Wiki) but gives much more features and looks much more professional than Zim. Thank you for packaging this software for Debian. I would be very glad if someone would upload this very good package into Debian repository! --- Have a nice day. Joachim (Germany) -- 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/20111021210335.5327f...@jupiter.home
Re: Watch file not present - warning message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Vasudev, On 21.10.2011 19:14, Vasudev Kamath wrote: I uploaded my package to mentors for my mentor to review. The package page on mentors [1] shows me a warning saying that *A watch file is not present* but my package does contain a watch file! I didn't see any obvious problem. Could you please file a bug so we don't forget? I have no time to work on Expo currently, so I may have a look at some point in the future. Of course I happily accept patches too :) - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOocc0AAoJEMcrUe6dgPNt0joQAMNMhQV8J0iG6/2IA97DZyfb hqO0aAmZmOF22R5eXZD/5VHRQlwsqoA16lfJmsIS3sqgdXb5yju6j5ZJJTKqstsf p258R5xNtKuVhiGxn8pKkEf3mMHn+PvcGMG0yMiqT1+ENtiGsirG0bFK7y0i5zZD lMaJ6XNBO1AYpHL1xfBj9IuTigU9EjLDGVKatFKWzX+6Q3nbyi/5qVYNoXqzUBCI RDfJTUTkzROCDPh1qbVkOTL2q675hOTt7rQjC+URET6i6Pt+izBz92oC2krJORuY JnRMx+gePuQ6EmUxjynab7mVlmLMuvILfHxISmYkmOl64rElKX+r5eracRWaVxC1 O620uluHoibpZu7IrQB1rSGtwbj2zLT7QtmVs0xeOEG2QWr63+eEoBBwbfWuqaj0 sYR6G9HSStbtOvDrJ4azQnEb0oAru7vKIvEkcEN9t4AJjX7Wslv4AB5pWFBGysra FdeM+AL85CO1p6kL/tf5ykT3ZNyr4cY28U97zcn4XjhHQ5ZYZ9ADf7EF999i5Kqo bOd59K87iIauat45ed/CiJvEC2CZCIBDSg7jR6hq0n7m9ZK9wFI+Wjg+9sQD59Q1 ItKw9cdxRdPkWJ2lFLSlxyUytE3hewzQK3owI8/dkOH6PfVK2VfAVCuIWz561A/N OEym9AmdLhb4c7rf7GT+ =YLut -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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/4ea1c734.70...@toell.net
git-buildpackage and tarballs
Hi, For those of you using git-buildpackage (gbp), I have a question I hope you can answer. I've got a source tree for which I am the upstream author, it is under version control using git. It seems like it should be possible to use gbp to build the package without having an actual tar ball. However, it appears that it is not. I'm thinking of some pseudo commands such as the following: git tag 1.0 git checkout debian git-buildpackage --using-tag 1.0 I know that gbp does not have the 'using-tag' option, but again, is there a reason that it cannot exist? I'd rather not have to create a tarball just to check it in with pristine-tar just to build the package. Anyhow, thanks for setting me straight! :) -mz -- 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/CAOLfK3VsrXJeCCafvDBHFZ8Pr0L9dEAu1RyW2kio=2-5mvf...@mail.gmail.com
Re: git-buildpackage and tarballs
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:53:31 -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote: Hi, Hello Matt, (CCing you, I don't know whether you're subscribed or not). [..] It seems like it should be possible to use gbp to build the package without having an actual tar ball. However, it appears that it is not. I think your problem might be that your upstream branch is not called upstream, which is what gbp expects. I suggest you to create a debian/gbp.conf with the following contents: [DEFAULT] upstream-branch = yourname debian-branch = debian Then it will probably work :) (not tested though) I'm thinking of some pseudo commands such as the following: git tag 1.0 git checkout debian git-buildpackage --using-tag 1.0 I know that gbp does not have the 'using-tag' option, but again, is there a reason that it cannot exist? gbp has something similar already. In the gbp.conf above, you can add: [git-buildpackage] upstream-tree = tag This way, gbp will look for a tag named the same as the version you have in debian/changelog. Probably you will have to tweak the upstream-tag option too. Have a look at /etc/git-buildpackage/gbp.conf , it's a nice reading ;) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git-buildpackage and tarballs
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:53:31 -0500 Matt Zagrabelny mzagr...@d.umn.edu wrote: Hi, For those of you using git-buildpackage (gbp), I have a question I hope you can answer. I've got a source tree for which I am the upstream author, it is under version control using git. Same situation as in some of my projects: http://git.ao2.it/kboot-utils.git/ http://git.ao2.it/kinect-audio-setup.git/ It seems like it should be possible to use gbp to build the package without having an actual tar ball. However, it appears that it is not. It is possible, you just have to tell gbp where to get the upstream code, this is my debian/gbp.conf: ---[ BEGIN gbp.conf] --- [DEFAULT] debian-branch = debian upstream-branch = master upstream-tag = v%(version)s ---[ END ]-- I'm thinking of some pseudo commands such as the following: git tag 1.0 BTW, it is recommended to create annotated tags, e.g: git tag -a v1.0 -m Description of the release git checkout debian after that you need to merge the new upstream version in the debian branch, assuming you keep the upstream in master, and you are in the debian branch: git merge master git-buildpackage --using-tag 1.0 Just run git-buildpackage and that's it, the gbp.conf from above will use the latest tag to create the .orig.tar.gz I know that gbp does not have the 'using-tag' option, but again, is there a reason that it cannot exist? I'd rather not have to create a tarball just to check it in with pristine-tar just to build the package. Anyhow, thanks for setting me straight! :) -mz Regards, Antonio -- Antonio Ospite http://ao2.it PGP public key ID: 0x4553B001 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? pgpwS4tNHHuvG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: git-buildpackage and tarballs
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:22:37 +0200 Antonio Ospite osp...@studenti.unina.it wrote: On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:53:31 -0500 Matt Zagrabelny mzagr...@d.umn.edu wrote: [...] upstream-tag = v%(version)s ---[ END ]-- [...] Just run git-buildpackage and that's it, the gbp.conf from above will use the latest tag to create the .orig.tar.gz Ah right, like David says the upstream release number will be taken from debian/changelog, and combined with the upstream-tag format in gbp.conf to get the actual tag from git. Regards, Antonio -- Antonio Ospite http://ao2.it PGP public key ID: 0x4553B001 A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? pgplFhjxCo8pC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: git-buildpackage and tarballs
Le Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 04:53:31PM -0500, Matt Zagrabelny a écrit : For those of you using git-buildpackage (gbp), I have a question I hope you can answer. I've got a source tree for which I am the upstream author, it is under version control using git. It seems like it should be possible to use gbp to build the package without having an actual tar ball. However, it appears that it is not. Dear Matt, if as an upstream author you are not using tarballs, you can use the format ‘3.0 (native)’. It will make a source package where everything is included in a single tarball. (As a side note, you can consider to use xz instead of gzip to compress that tarball). Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- 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/20111022013605.ga11...@merveille.plessy.net
