Hi,
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 09:34:59PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Thanks for the reupload. Unfortunately I now learned that this version
> of ctapi.h is completely different from the one in ctapi-mkt package[1].
Not really. There are really just three function definitions, and a few
constant
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> It was REJECTED; I was asked to reupload after explaining the situation,
> but hadn't gotten around to it yet.
Thanks for the reupload. Unfortunately I now learned that this version
of ctapi.h is completely different from the one in
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:28:03AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Hmmm, I can't find this package in Debian and neither do I at
>
> It was REJECTED; I was asked to reupload after explaining the situation,
> but hadn't gotten around to it yet.
It would be great if you would reupload soon. I'd li
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:17:00AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > I've just uploaded "ctapi-dev" to Debian -- a copy of the package is
> Hmmm, I can't find this package in Debian and neither do I at
It was REJECTED; I was asked to reupload after explaining the situation,
but hadn't gotten
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 01:38:24AM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> I've just uploaded "ctapi-dev" to Debian -- a copy of the package is
Hmmm, I can't find this package in Debian and neither do I at
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
Anything wrong with your upload?
Kind regards
Andreas
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I would strongly welcome this solution - but some upstream has to care
> about this.
Not really.
I've just uploaded "ctapi-dev" to Debian -- a copy of the package is
available at http://people.debian.org/~sjr/ -- which contain
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:51:17AM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> I'm unsure what would be the best solution here. CTAPI is highly
> unlikely to change, so the approach taken by upstream authors to simply
> ship a definition in-tree is not all that bad. The alternative would be
> creating a package
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 07:41:24PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I would like to remember those people involved in the programs /
> packaging that I need some hint to find a reasonable solution. Is there
> any chance that one of the authors might find a different name to
> prevent a name cla
lly need to relay
> > on your expertise in this question. For me ths current solution looks
> > quite confusing and it should be solved in a reasonable way.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> >Andreas.
> >
> > > ----- Forwarded message from Ralf Treinen -
> > &g
> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:25:15 +0100
> > X-Spam_score: -3.6
> > Subject: Bug#557495: libtowitoko-dev and
> > libctapimkt0-dev: error when trying to install together
> >
> > Package: libctapimkt0-dev,libtowitoko-dev
> > Version: libctapimkt0-dev/1.0.1-1
solved in a reasonable way.
Kind regards
Andreas.
> - Forwarded message from Ralf Treinen -
>
> To: sub...@bugs.debian.org
> From: Ralf Treinen
> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:25:15 +0100
> X-Spam_score: -3.6
> Subject: Bug#557495: libtowitoko-dev and
>
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 04:01:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I realised that there are all in all three packages in Debian which
> are acceccing a CT-API and providing a file ctapi.h:
>
> $ apt-file search ctapi.h
> libctapimkt0-dev: /usr/include/ctapi.h
> libopenct1-dev: /usr/include/openct/
Package: libctapimkt0-dev,libtowitoko-dev
Version: libctapimkt0-dev/1.0.1-1
Version: libtowitoko-dev/2.0.7-8+b1
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Date: 2009-11-22
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: sid
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share
13 matches
Mail list logo
