On 29/12/15 10:09, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
The following citation from the very link you provided is far from the
definition I know of "must":
"If you have several shared libraries built
On 29-12-15 11:54, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> should I fix the spelling and reupload now or wait for the NEW queue.
I'd fix it in git now, and wait for the next upload until it passes the
NEW queue.
Kind Regards,
Bas
--
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146
Quoting Ghislain Vaillant :
On 29/12/15 10:09, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
The following citation from the very link you provided is far from
the definition I know of "must":
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages]
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "otb"
* Package name: otb
Version : 5.2.0+dfsg-1
Upstream Author : cont...@orfe-toolbox.org
* URL :
Hi Rashad,
Thanks for working on packaging the ORFEO toolbox to Debian.
I am wondering about the usefulness of having so many binary packages. I
guess this reflects the fact that OTB is nicely modularized, but even
toolkits like VTK / ITK are packaged with a reduced number of binary
packages
On 12/29/2015 11:46 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
Hi Rashad,
Thanks for your work on otb. I've sponsored the upload.
lintian did report a new spelling error, please fix this as part of the
next upload:
I: libotb-apps: spelling-error-in-binary
Hi Ghislain,
debian policy for shared library says each library must be in a seperate
package [1].
OTB is well modularaized since 5.0.0. This allows external apps or
libaries to use have some of the otb libs not all
For instance,
monteverdi required only a small subset of libs:
7 matches
Mail list logo