On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 14:58 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> You can set DEB_VENDOR=Debian and be done with that problem. Furthermore,
> in theory, all operations should be done on a Debian chroot, even a simple
> source build.
Yeah, it's certainly possible, but is a non-obvious step.
> There's ce
On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 02:58:47PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On irc, Colin pointed out that reusing Closes: in a different manner for
> each distributions is asking for troubles so I'll back that out and add a
> dpkg-genchanges hook so that you can add your Launchpad-Bugs-Fixed: field
> autom
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009, James Westby wrote:
> Consider an Ubuntu developer that wishes to make a QA upload to Debian.
> They can prepare the package and request sponsorship for an upload to
> Debian. Most will build the source package on Ubuntu, and then test in
> a Debian chroot. Under the current
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 17:13 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> This change will also make the Closes: field of .changes files in Ubuntu
> references Launchpad bugs instead of Debian bugs. AFAIK nothing uses
> Closes on the Ubuntu side so this doesn't break anything and instead might
> help in the futu
On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 17:13 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> This change will also make the Closes: field of .changes files in Ubuntu
> references Launchpad bugs instead of Debian bugs. AFAIK nothing uses
> Closes on the Ubuntu side so this doesn't break anything and instead might
> help in the futu
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008, Colin Watson wrote:
> I've attached an updated version of the patch Ian sent, adjusted for the
> changes in dpkg-source in the intervening time and with a stricter check
> on DEBEMAIL before promoting this from a warning to an error.
Thanks. I didn't want to include it directl
Colin Watson writes ("Re: Bug#426752: Ubuntu-specific Maintainer: field
processing, safety check"):
> I've attached an updated version of the patch Ian sent, adjusted for the
> changes in dpkg-source in the intervening time and with a stricter check
> on DEBEMAIL befo
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 06:27:11PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 03:32:59PM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > On Wed May 30 2007 12:42:07 pm you wrote:
> > > If you have any comments regarding our approach we'd of course be
> > > happy to hear about them.
> >
> > I don't thi
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 03:32:59PM -0600, Bruce Sass wrote:
> On Wed May 30 2007 12:42:07 pm you wrote:
> > If you have any comments regarding our approach we'd of course be
> > happy to hear about them.
>
> I don't think it is a good idea to hard-code "downstream" specific bits
> into the source
On Wed May 30 2007 12:42:07 pm you wrote:
> If you have any comments regarding our approach we'd of course be
> happy to hear about them.
I don't think it is a good idea to hard-code "downstream" specific bits
into the source...
How about creating a framework for hooking code into the build proc
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.4
Severity: wishlist
As requested by Debian, Ubuntu nowadays changes the Maintainer: field
of Ubuntu-modified source packages so that the original Debian
maintainer is no longer listed - the Debian maintainer's details are
put into XSBC-Original-Maintainer.
This does i
11 matches
Mail list logo
