Hello,
On Thu, 17 May 2012 16:52:02 +0200
Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Git does have a complete view. What the above does, is tell
> dpkg-source to fold any changes made to the upstream sources into a
> single patch. Since the git tree already has the patches applied
> (with upstream sources on a diffe
Olá debian-devel.lists.debian,
Este programa não permite a visualização de mensagens formatadas (com cores,
imagens e links), portanto solicitamos que você copie o texto abaixo, e cole no
campo "Endereço" do seu navegador.
http://emkt.epd.edu.br/emkt/tracer/?1,846080,c4b71992,b4d8
Para garantir
On Sun, 2012-05-13 at 18:47:01 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Special-casing base packages would be a lot of complexity, let's avoid that
> > if possible -- but still preferred to letting gzip stay.
>
> Base packages can be identified at build time by their priority.
> if ($pri
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 391 (new: 1)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 171 (new: 3)
Total number of packages request
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:47:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Can someone set the default to xz and recompile all of Debian or at
> least base and create a repository from that for install tests?
I tested it a bit, both with bare debootstrap into a chroot, and by
recompressing all debs o
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Smedegaard
* Package name: ciderwebmail
Version : 1.03
Upstream Author : Stefan Seifert
* URL : http://ciderwebmail.org/
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : webmail that suck
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dmitry Borodaenko
* Package name: etk.docking
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Dieter Verfaillie , Arjan
Molenaar
* URL : http://pypi.python.org/pypi/etk.docking
* License : LGPL3+
Programming Lang: Python
Descriptio
On Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:54:15, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:41:37AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > I'm confused concerning the above; the point of a VCS in this context is
> > to track changes to the source package, and the patches are themselves
> > important changes to the
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Remembering the fun that we had during the Squeeze release with trying
> to make single-CD installations work well, it's time to consider what
> we're going to *claim* to support in Wheezy. We've had a history of
> supporting the following single-CD installations:
>
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Miriam Ruiz
* Package name: sankore
Version : 3.1
Upstream Author : Open-Sankoré Developers team
* URL : http://dev.open-sankore.org/
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: C++
Description : interactive digital whi
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nicolas Bourdaud
* Package name: mwrap
Version : 0.33
Upstream Author : David Bindel
* URL : http://www.cs.cornell.edu/~bindel/sw/mwrap/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
Description : Octave/Matlab mex gener
Daniel Leidert writes:
> The html-xml-utils package contains a bunch of small helper programs.
> I've chosen dh 9 compatibility level recently to enable hardening.
> However, I still get lintian warnings for 3 binaries. However all
> binaries are compiled and linked with the same flags. The only
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> ]] Russ Allbery
>> If I were to pick between the enhancements to Debian in this area, none
>> of which I have time to work on and therefore can't vote on via
>> implementation, I'd be way more interested in avoiding the entire
>> source package upload process entirely a
On mar., 2012-05-15 at 14:32 +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi dpkg-* maintainers,
I think you missed the correct mailing list to reach the dpkg-*
maintainers.
--
Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:52:02, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Chris Knadle writes:
> > On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 06:38:49, Adam Borowski wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:10:28AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> >> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> >> > > No, I her
]] Russ Allbery
> If I were to pick between the enhancements to Debian in this area, none of
> which I have time to work on and therefore can't vote on via
> implementation, I'd be way more interested in avoiding the entire source
> package upload process entirely and be able to just push signed
* Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) [120517 19:53]:
> Tollef Fog Heen writes:
>
> > Pushing a signed tag and having source packages and binaries built from
> > that doesn't rely on 3.0 (git), though. «Just» a repository somewhere
> > with hooks that go «oh, a signed tag, let me build a source packa
Tollef Fog Heen writes:
> Pushing a signed tag and having source packages and binaries built from
> that doesn't rely on 3.0 (git), though. «Just» a repository somewhere
> with hooks that go «oh, a signed tag, let me build a source package and
> upload that». Might fire it off as a job to a sep
reassign 481129 debian-policy
merge 481129 671503
thanks
On 2012-05-17 07:48, Michal Suchanek wrote:
Excerpts from Filipus Klutiero's message of Wed May 16 18:44:21 +0200 2012:
Could you clarify how this differs from #481129?
It's 4 years later.
Sorry, forgot that I filed the bug already. It'
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Michal Suchanek
wrote:
> Excerpts from Ian Jackson's message of Thu May 17 14:53:30 +0200 2012:
>> Michal Suchanek writes ("Re: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is
>> not documented"):
>> > Excerpts from Filipus Klutiero's message of Wed May 16 18:44:21
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 03:56:25PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> Hopefully you've got the build-dependencies too. Which, if the source packages
> were split off into other packages, you'd then pull in.
Being able to read the source code can often get you quite far already,
but yes, usually, I want a
Hello Daniel,
[the appended logfile wasn't complete!]
Daniel Leidert wrote on 2012-05-17 17:25:
> So why does lintian give me those warnings and how can it be fixed?
I had the same problem with fox1.6. Please check your build log file
wether "-fstack-protector" is really inside.
I had found th
On 2012-05-17 17:25 +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> The html-xml-utils package contains a bunch of small helper programs.
> I've chosen dh 9 compatibility level recently to enable hardening.
> However, I still get lintian warnings for 3 binaries. However all
> binaries are compiled and linked with
Hi,
The html-xml-utils package contains a bunch of small helper programs.
I've chosen dh 9 compatibility level recently to enable hardening.
However, I still get lintian warnings for 3 binaries. However all
binaries are compiled and linked with the same flags. The only
difference I see is, that th
Chris Knadle writes:
> On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 06:38:49, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:10:28AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> > > No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0
>> >
>> > I'm hoping we can revi
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:10:55PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
> If you say "download some, and ignore the others in most cases", please
> consider that in the case you really find out that you need the source,
> you'll most likely be offline, and cannot do much about it (Murphy's
> laws apply gener
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:41:37AM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> I'm confused concerning the above; the point of a VCS in this context is to
> track changes to the source package, and the patches are themselves important
> changes to the source package. If you have Git ignore the patches then Git
On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 06:38:49, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 10:10:28AM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:17:17PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > > No, I hereby start saying good by to 3.0
> >
> > I'm hoping we can revisit 3.0 (git) post-squeeze, my
Excerpts from Ian Jackson's message of Thu May 17 14:53:30 +0200 2012:
> Michal Suchanek writes ("Re: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is
> not documented"):
> > Excerpts from Filipus Klutiero's message of Wed May 16 18:44:21 +0200 2012:
> > > Could you clarify how this differs from #481
Hello,
On 2012-05-17 13:48, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> Admittedly there is no text in social contract about using
> Debian-proprietary formats. And a format only defined by "apt can read
> that" is definitely Debian-proprietary there is no better term for that.
>
> I'd say it's slightly discriminat
Michal Suchanek writes ("Re: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is not
documented"):
> Excerpts from Filipus Klutiero's message of Wed May 16 18:44:21 +0200 2012:
> > Could you clarify how this differs from #481129?
>
> It's 4 years later.
>
> Sorry, forgot that I filed the bug already.
James McCoy writes:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
>> Unpatching the sources *before* the build process was cleaned up makes
>> no sense to me at all. Could you provide a use case for that?
> As was described in #649531:
>
> vcs clone
> cd repo
> ... tweak
Excerpts from Filipus Klutiero's message of Wed May 16 18:44:21 +0200 2012:
> Could you clarify how this differs from #481129?
It's 4 years later.
Sorry, forgot that I filed the bug already. It's quite some time.
Given there is no feedback in 4 years I guess it is futile reporting
this.
Admitte
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 17/05/12 11:39, James McCoy a écrit :
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 08:21:23AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
>> Le 17/05/12 00:25, James McCoy a écrit :
>>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
Unpatching the sources *befo
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 07:54:17AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2012 04:36:40 +0200
> Adam Borowski wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:47:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > > Can someone set the default to xz and recompile all of Debian or at
> > > least base and cre
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 05:53:11PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Would it be possible to have somewhere on the Debian servers for storing
> > such
> > files so that they can be referenced in a README file or something rather
> > than
> > sent
On 17.05.2012 07:54, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2012 04:36:40 +0200
Adam Borowski wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:47:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
wrote:
> Can someone set the default to xz and recompile all of Debian or
at
> least base and create a repository from that for ins
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Koichi Akabe
* Package name: glog
Version : 0.3.2
Upstream Author : Google Inc.
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/google-glog/
* License : BSD-3-clause
Programming Lang: C++
Description : logging library for C++
T
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 08:21:23AM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> Le 17/05/12 00:25, James McCoy a écrit :
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:23:05PM +0200, Olе Streicher wrote:
> >> Unpatching the sources *before* the build process was cleaned up
> >> makes no sense to me at all. Could you provide a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Koichi Akabe
* Package name: ceres-solver
Version : 1.1.1
Upstream Author : Google Inc.
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/ceres-solver/
* License : BSD-3-clause
Programming Lang: C++
Description : nonlinear least s
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 02:20:48PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Unfortunately, swfupload *cannot* be packaged in Debian because we have no
> ways of building it (unless the situation changed with adobe tools... in
> which case, I would really like to hear about it!). The only thing you could
> pa
On mer., 2012-05-16 at 19:45 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> I just downloaded the source to Wordpress from Squeeze, it's got a 14M
> .debian.tar.xz which is mostly sources for things that are included in the
> upstream tarball. The build process appears to only use the upstream tarball
> code so
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Unfortunately, swfupload *cannot* be packaged in Debian because we have
> no ways of building it (unless the situation changed with adobe tools... in
> which case, I would really like to hear about it!). The only thing you could
> package
>
43 matches
Mail list logo
