On Fri, 8 May 2015 14:43:45 +0200 Bill Allombert
wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 09:36:26AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Altogether, the wording was not restrictive as I thought.
> >
> > Nevertheless, what would people think of adding a bit more explanation on
> > the
+ If your package includes the scripts prgnconfig.sub/prgn and
+ prgnconfig.guess/prgn, you should arrange for the versions
+ provided by the package packageautotools-dev/package be used
+ instead (see packageautotools-dev/package documentation for
+
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 02:43:45PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 09:36:26AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Altogether, the wording was not restrictive as I thought.
Nevertheless, what would people think of adding a bit more explanation on
the
purpose of replacing
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 09:36:26AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Altogether, the wording was not restrictive as I thought.
Nevertheless, what would people think of adding a bit more explanation on the
purpose of replacing these files ? Not all readers will have
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 09:42:23AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:46:53PM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit :
/p
+ p
+ If your package includes the scripts prgnconfig.sub/prgn and
+ prgnconfig.guess/prgn, you should arrange for the versions
On 12 July 2014 19:50, Bill Allombert ballo...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 09:42:23AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:46:53PM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit :
/p
+ p
+ If your package includes the scripts prgnconfig.sub/prgn and
+
Le Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:46:53PM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit :
+ p
+ If your package includes the scripts prgnconfig.sub/prgn
and
+ prgnconfig.guess/prgn, you should arrange for the versions
+ provided by the package packageautotools-dev/package
Le Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 04:46:53PM +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit :
/p
+ p
+ If your package includes the scripts prgnconfig.sub/prgn and
+ prgnconfig.guess/prgn, you should arrange for the versions
+ provided by the package packageautotools-dev/package be
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:36:34PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and every time someone starts a new
port he has to patches way too many packages to get config.guess
and config.sub updated.
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 05:02:00PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 01:34:05AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 04/30/2014 10:36 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and every time someone starts a new
port he has to patches way too many packages to get config.guess
and config.sub updated.
I would like that we say that at least config.guess and
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 10:36:34PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and every time someone starts a new
port he has to patches way too many packages to get config.guess
and config.sub updated.
On 04/30/2014 10:36 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and every time someone starts a new
port he has to patches way too many packages to get config.guess
and config.sub updated.
Do you have
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 01:34:05AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 04/30/2014 10:36 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
Package: debian-policy
It seems that a lot of packages do not use something like
autoreconf during build, and every time someone starts a new
port he has to patches way too many
14 matches
Mail list logo