, although I don't actually think
that's a good idea either.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
to keep the
cross-binutils and cross-gcc packages in sync.
these bugs ? It seems to me that it would be easy to come up with a
workflow that allowed Matthias to usertag these kind of bugs and hand
them over to the cross teams.
Sounds reasonable to me. Asking Wookey whether he would like
+++ Helmut Grohne [2014-11-01 10:38 +0100]:
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 01:46:48AM +, Wookey wrote:
To me that sounds like this method is actually the
current de-facto default in Debian - it is certainly at least on a par.
I don't think that a feature being de-facto default is a good
that it was not
invented for escalation in the war between makefiles and command
arguments.)
The 4.9.2-1 gcc 4.9 upload adds the override directive.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ
was not the only problem there: missing work on britney and
wanna-build means they wouldn't have migrated in time independently of
this issue and I was not able to persuade the release team to make a
special exception on 'release goal' grounds.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http
rules. IMHO it makes a lot more sense to maintain it in gcc packagig
where it already is rather than do it outside as a big quilt stack,
but that won't work if the maintainer doesn't apply patches. I
just filed 770413, for example.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http
-buildable at all and whose cross-build-deps are installable:
(e.g. test on 100 packages here:
http://people.linaro.org/~wookey/buildd/testing/sbuild/latest/status.html
)
Yes there is plenty of stuff that doesn't cross-build but that's not
because these toolchains are particularly 'incomplete
to understand it, and still claiming that he is able to
simplify it.
I'm not sure who you are referring to here, but just to clarify: the
mentors for that project were Hector Oron and Marcin Juszkiewicz, not me.
Earlier this year, and last time at the bootstrap sprint in Paris,
Wookey committed to work
+++ Matthias Klose [2014-12-04 20:41 +0100]:
So in the last email Wookey enumerates a lot of things what he did
during the last months. Maybe he should have mentioned his
ballerina lessons used for his performances during the DebConf talks
too. However ever all of these have in common
, but I've gone on long enough already :-)
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org
+++ Ben Longbons [2014-12-18 12:23 -0800]:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Wookey woo...@wookware.org wrote:
MA-built vs in-arch
---
I guess an interesting question is 'what does the cross-compiler
actually _use_ the foreign arch libc for'? Does it need its own
+++ Don Armstrong [2015-09-10 09:57 -0500]:
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2015, Wookey wrote:
> > Well, maybe. Maybe there were discussions to that effect I didn't see.
> > In that case fair enough. The impression given was of a somewhat slow
> > process and members not having time to rev
it gives a little external perspective.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
+++ Steve Langasek [2015-09-09 12:17 -0700]:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 05:30:03PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
>
> > So what I learned from this is that, as currently operating, the
> > committee is incapable of making quick 'overrule unreasonableness'
> > decisions.
e've done a lot in the last few years
to improve that situation. I invite the TC to reflect on how this
would have played out if global had had a different maintainer. This
is (or should be) about attitude, responsiveness, and helpfulness, at
least as much as the technical (htags) debate.
Wookey
with, but asking the TC to rule seems like a
more correct way to try and unbung this situation.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d.
only 2 files generated:
GPATH
GTAGS
global 6.5.4 (upstream release) works on both.
( I also found 844330 in the process, which is just a packaging update issue )
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
lude details of the known issues in one of the
'please can we have a new version' bugs. I think it's more useful to
have the current state of play avalable than for me to keep messing
with it privately.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 2016-11-16 06:02 +1030, Ron wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 04:55:06PM +0000, Wookey wrote:
> > On 2016-10-25 07:29 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > >
> > > FWIW, it worked fine in a test run I just did (on linux-4.9 rc 1), and
> > > last time I used it
y package without
> reverse dependencies. I'm really afraid that a side-effect of the TC
> discussion will be yet-another release without an up-to-date src:global.
Thank you for some sanity on this matter.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
On 2016-12-01 22:56 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Wookey <woo...@wookware.org> writes:
> > On 2016-11-30 16:56 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >
> >> > And this last bit (integration with system web server) is the
> >> > functionality that had securit
s safe but the same
shoddy code in v6 cannot be let out. Did htmake+htconfig stop people
entering $pattern in the form?
> It is what we now have enabled in the package that Wookey uploaded to
> experimental.
Indeed. Bugs (and even better patches) are welcome.
> > Also, for people tha
accepted :-)
> Wookey: if you want the complete git history, right back to the very first
> package in 1999, you can grab it from the Vcs-Git URL in the sid package.
> I'm not going to go Full Bruce and rage delete it, but eventually I should
> decruft alioth and remove it from there,
On 2016-12-09 11:58 +0900, Shigio YAMAGUCHI wrote:
> Hello all,
> 2016 19:05:55 +, Wookey wrote:
> > The .cgi scripts are generated from .in files which are correctly
> > parameterised with @PERLPATH@ and @GLOBALPATH@ etc. Upstream
> > unhelpfully ships pre-generated
On 2016-12-08 17:03 +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Sorry missed this in all yesterday's mail.
> Wookey, Vincent, Punit: would any of you be willing to receive the 'global'
> package maintainer hat? (which would of course come with the possibility to
> share and change the maintain
On 2016-12-08 17:33 +, Wookey wrote:
> On 2016-12-08 23:32 +1030, Ron wrote:
> > But it also outputs a .htaccess enabling execution in the directory
> > where the output is generated, whether you want to use it from there
> > or not (and adds a second CGI, and a bunch of
- Reaffirm Ron Lee as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
> > - Option B - Declare Wookey as 'global' maintainer (§6.1.2)
> > - Option C - Decline to rule, consider case closed
> > - Option FD - Further discussion
The package was offered for adoption, and Punit and I have adopted
it. 6.5.5
ment that the debian
packaging shouldn't either.
I certainly don't think that the fact that this was done once is a
good reason to stop packaging new releases.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ionality that had security concerns raised by Ron [etc.]
>
> So, to be clear, it is this functionality which is dropped in the
> package that you and Wookey uploaded to experimental/delayed ?
Said package is available as of today:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=global=experimen
-dependency at the same version is much more of a
problem than self-dependency at older versions).
Anyway, Pirate - I suggest you ask about this on debian-devel where we
can have a pulic discussion about policy and whether there is anything
special about this case which makes it not sui
ut I'd just like to say
that everything Wouter said makes a whole lot of sense to me.
We know how to do this sort of transition, and yes it takes some time,
but that's OK. Using usrmerge to try and shortcut this, producing the
awkward 'dual-state' issues does not seem to me to be a good way to go.
le thing has been the opportunity for whichy
wordplay :-)
Cheers
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ckage to another does not need to be printed on
every usage of that binary. Indeed it is actively unhelpful to do so.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2021-10-24 19:08 +, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 02:33:44PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> > I think causing build failures is enough reason to say this. I don't
> > suppose that mine is the only one. Yes those builds are buggy and
> > should not do this, and w
sure Ian is right that there is a trend towards git from tarballs
and dscs, but I just question whether we know it is 'the vast
majority'? Are there really now very few maintainers using the
'classic tooling'? How do we know?
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
sign
t if it's not done we are just stuck.
Wookey
--
Principal hats: Debian, Wookware, ARM
http://wookware.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
36 matches
Mail list logo