On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 13:43 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Neil,
>
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 05:32:31PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > I ask because emdebian-tools isn't intended for Ubuntu either. See [0] -
> > emdebian-tools also depends on server resources provi
from
the apt-cache search results in Ubuntu which only confuses people.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
website-login-combo-to-use-once-and-lose-forevermore -
useless Ubuntu bug tracker. :-(
I do feed info upstream (via yet more website logins), I really can't
add yet another one.
That was the main point of my original blog entry linked from the
previous post. Having to ask the lazy web to sort ou
Alternatively, is there a package that I can list in Conflicts: that is
only present in Debian derivatives? Yes, any mechanism could be abused
but MOTU-people could always file bugs in the BTS about such usage.
[0]
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/archives/122-Migrating-Em
On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 11:57 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Work is ongoing to fold uClibc into Emdebian to reduce installation sizes
> > further.
>
> FYI, uclibc is no longer available in
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 00:45 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> > 1. gtk+2.0 fails to cross-build because the patches now try to build the
> > udeb which comes up against a bug in dpkg-cross. I've uploaded the
> > new version (inclu
ry
> easy to google for. :-) What do we want to do?
Combine apt-get install foo-dbg with apt-get source foo ? Isn't it up to
the debugging tool to correlate one with the other, rather than the
distro?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
e code supporting alternatives - not my
favourite option when the entire OS has to fit into 32Mb (or 64Mb for a
full GUI using glibc).
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 08:33 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Neil Williams
>
> | Just a thought - why use /usr/lib/$ARCH and /usr/include/$ARCH at all
> | when it would (IMHO) be simpler to use /usr/$TRIPLET/ and put the entire
> | package under that, as we do with dpkg-
ng the
> > diversion is uninstalled as now you have conflicting packages.
> > Actually, you already had conflicting packages that just weren't
> > affected yet because of the diversion, which leads to 2).
If the multiarch package can be installed alongside the primary wit
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 21:39 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> Ok, then one problem with it is that as soon as the user will have
> gconf settings in place different from the default, any updates to the
> default wont be visible anymore. It
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:39 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Is this a sane use of dbconfig and gconf?
>
> I might misunderstand what you're doing, but I think you're setting up
> GConf default systme-wide.
Only for
geared more towards Web2.0 type stuff
rather than compiled programs.
[0] http://estron.alioth.debian.org/
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ions postponed during the initial
setup"
> I like "Processing delayed configuration". This is probably slightly
> less precise but really clear of what this thing "Joe User will never
> know about" is.
delayed from when? I think it is better to extend the message an
On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 12:33 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Any comments on how to handle this change in packaging properly?
>
> Maybe upstream could implement a "deprecated" support scheme that allows
> the old routine to be available, puts the new routine under a new
*AND* I can fold all changes
into one SONAME bump. Without deprecated.c, I'd already be on libqof68
or more. As it is, libqof1 in Debian (0.7.5) can pretend to be libqof2
with a mere ./configure switch, at least as far as testing is
concerned.)
--
Neil Williams
=
tween cmake
meta-data and debhelper meta-data. That is the mapping you need.
Give up generating the debhelper meta-data directly and just get
debhelper to understand how cmake expresses the meta-data and help
debhelper process the cmake data accordingly.
Automated package generation is a mugs
CII armoured GPG key file that
would be signed by keys belonging to relevant people - in that respect,
it's not that different to any package. The text file is useless without
being imported into gpg so the integrity checks in gpg provide the
integrity check.
--
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROT
ributions, don't know about dak).
--
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can't check on backports right now - server unresponsive.
--
Neil Williams
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
roperly for this project. That's what I'd do, at
> least; that ensures a clean build without putting artifacts in the
> *.diff.gz.
Got a few other things to do first but yes, I will explore that before
uploading the new upstream version. Thanks both.
--
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 11:45 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
Ignore the CC for #482716 - the CC should be for #471263
[patch-systems]: please no patch-system-but-direct-changes-in-diff for
generated files
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com
On Wed, 2008-05-28 at 11:39 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 14:18:07 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> > If it is just that 'quiet' supports what it does because that is all it
> > has needed to support so far, I'm fine with that. It just
On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 18:06 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 08:40 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> Lots of other packages do this -- one of mine off the top of my head is
> >> xml-security-c.
&
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 08:40 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 13:19 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> >> If you run autotools at build time you should also ensure that the
> >> changes which autotools ma
e dpkg database which is already too
> > big.
>
> What's an extra few MB plus parsing overhead when "everyone" has
> 250GB HDDs, multi-core 64-bit CPUs and 2+GB RAM?
I am going to assume you are not being serious.
Try 64Mb Flash, ARM5 CPU and 64Mb RAM.
--
Neil Wi
ase remember that the
packages descriptions go into the dpkg database which is already too
big.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 14:01 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 13:19 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 01:07:56PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> >
> > > So I am running the relevant autotools at build time but I still get the
> >
hat can still be parsed by
gettext so that TDebs can read the translation strings from binary .mo
files.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 13:19 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 01:07:56PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> > So I am running the relevant autotools at build time but I still get the
> > warning.
>
> If you run autotools at build time you should also ensure
dsc
I won't upload to ftp-master just yet - I do need to do some more tests
to ensure that other GPE packages build and function correctly so that I
don't inadvertently trigger a transition in over 40 packages.
;-)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
e list of diversion bugs
obtained via SOAP. Lintian doesn't currently do SOAP queries of the BTS
but a QA script should be relatively easy to create. Maybe bts-link
could be drafted in to provide some leverage over pseudo-headers mapping
to an upstream bug tracker.
Lintian could check that the pseudo-header exists.
--
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 18:51 +0100, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 18 May 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Yes - supported by the use of (Fixed: #1234) in
> > debian/changelog, .changes etc. and a revised interface for PTS and DDPO
> > to discriminate between Fixed and Clos
ether that
> particular point is in the upstream bug tracker or the BTS is
> inconsequential. The essential point is that it does exist and it is
> linked from both entry points.
I'm not sure which bug tracker I was thinking of regarding logins but
upstreams that only have private e
ffers) - this sounds like the
patches.d.o idea.
I'll stick to Problem 1. :-)
I think you're right that there are two distinct problems - although I'm
still not convinced that Problem 2 is sufficiently common to require a
whole new bug/patch tracker.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
d in an upstream release, I still see
that the package has bugs that are Fixed but not Closed. bts-link takes
care of updating the tags on the Fixed bugs (because they are also
forwarded) so that when the upstream release is made, I know which
patches are included upstream. I can then remove th
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 15:30 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > 1 - User reports bug with a patch against upstream code
> > [open, patch]
> > 2 - maintainer forwards the patch upstream
> > [confi
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 18:43 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > However, from a bug submitter point of view, I don't think I want to
> > see the bug report kept open (tagged divergence) after it has
> > actually been cl
reason and we get a FTBFS RC bug.
Detecting which files are changed as a by-product of a patch isn't
always particularly obvious.
Incidentally, you can collapse the zgrep into lsdiff -z:
$ lsdiff -z *.diff.gz | grep -v debian
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.or
added upstream (Closes: #1234)
Assuming both refer to the same bug report, I personally prefer the
Fixes: #1234 approach:
foo (0.1.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release
* Remove patch 'patch-file-name' included upstream (Closes: #1234)
-- Neil Williams <[EMAIL PRO
d in the release
phase for Lenny, as a bug submitter I might be a little concerned.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ging bugs for the purposes of tracking forwarded bugs for a
long time.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Call it a feature enhancement if you like but it still ends up in a bug
tracker of one kind or another so might as well call it a bug IMHO.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 13:47 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> >
> > OK, I'm using quiet now so there should be no more CC'd reports to
> > -devel with the next batch of reports. Sorry for the noise.
>
> Why are you f
On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 22:31 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 11382 March 1977, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> > Package: general
> > Severity: normal
> > User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
>
> Yes
Package: general
Severity: normal
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated because the new version fa
Package: general
Severity: normal
$ emsource --status ncurses
Checking the apt-cross cache is up to date for arm.
W: Unable to locate package lib64ncurses5
W: Unable to locate package lib64ncurses5-dev
W: Unable to locate package lib32ncurses5
W: Unable to locate package lib32ncurses5-dev
W: Unabl
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated be
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated be
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated be
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated be
Package: general
Severity: normal
$ emsource --status file
Checking the apt-cross cache is up to date for arm.
Checking status of file in /opt/emdebian/trunk/f/file/trunk/
4 emdebian patch files
0 debian patch files
Checking emdebuild status in /opt/emdebian/trunk/f/file/trunk/
build log:
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
$ emsource --status e2fsprogs
Checking the apt-cross cache is up to date for arm.
W: Unable to locate package libuuid1-udeb
W: Unable to locate package libblkid1-udeb
W: Unable to locate package e2fsprogs-udeb
Checking status of e2fsprogs i
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that block the use of packages that
crossbuild successfully.
$ emsource --status curl
Checking the apt-cross cache is up to date for arm.
Check
Package: general
Severity: normal
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that fail to crossbuild successfully, despite
building successfully in the past. i.e. where an existing package in
Emdebian cannot be updated because the new version fa
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that block the use of packages that
crossbuild successfully.
$ emsource --status avahi
Checking the apt-cross cache is up to date for arm.
Chec
Package: general
Severity: normal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that block the use of packages that
crossbuild successfully or fail to cross build themselves after an
update in Debian.
$ emsource --status cu
Package: general
Severity: normal
This bug is in preparation for a buildd.emdebian.org pseudo-package.
This is not a bug in gpe-clock because gpe-clock is doing what is
required by CDBS - it is a bug in buildd.emdebian.org because
Emdebian needs to be able to build as many packages as possible wi
Package: general
Severity: normal
libgpewidget includes documentation files required by Debian Policy and
is unable to remove these using the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="nodocs" option
due to a lack of support for this option in debhelper.
Documentation needs to be removed when preparing Emdebian packages
Package: general
Severity: normal
In preparation for a pseudo-package, buildd.emdebian.org, I'm filing
status bugs about packages that block the use of packages that
crossbuild successfully.
libldap-2.4.2 fails to cross build:
configure: error: crossing compiling: use
--with-yielding_select=yes|
Package: general
Severity: wishlist
This is filed against general in advance of a buildd.emdebian.org
pseudo-package becoming available. See #480408
Emdebian has a set of prebuilt binary packages which allow an 80%
reduction in the total installation size of the final Debian system,
acheived thro
in/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[2] http://www.emdebian.org/bugs.php (parses the same tags)
[3] http://wiki.debian.org/EmdebianPolicy
[4] http://www.emdebian.org/packages/search.php
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 19:10 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 18:02:28 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> > I would suggest that this bug should be closed, it certainly does not
> > appear to be a "general" bug because only one package creates that
&g
lf would show some
> sign of activity. Maybe he has a mail configuration problem ?
and maybe he's just busy, like many of us.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
sed and you need to reset
the current umask for the root user.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--- Please fill out the fields below. ---
Package name: estron
Version: 0.7.0
Upstream Authors: Neil Williams, Linas Vepstas
URL: http://estron.alioth.debian.org/
License: LGPL
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soci
Version : 2.2.0
Upstream Author : Maciej Sobczak, Stephen Hutton, David Courtney,
Pawel Aleksander Fedorynski, Rafal Bobrowski, Mateusz Loskot
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 22:12 +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:12:45PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> >
> > > What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
> > >
> &g
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 17:23 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> First of all, I skipped a large part of this thread, so I'm sorry if
> this has come up before.
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 03:53:03PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > And by this definition, it is the package
epend on pkg-config *if* they need
that to work with other libraries. (That's the usual case - most
applications will end up running pkg-config so most applications will
end up with a Build-Depends: pkg-config, )
--
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 19:15 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> >
> >> What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
> >>
> >&
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 16:12 +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> > What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
> >
> > 1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS and / or
> > FOO_CFLAGS
ication then I have cause to worry about your ability to
maintain a library in Debian in the first place. It doesn't give me any
confidence in you or in DMs in general.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
ame for NEW anyway, hence I think it should stay as-is.
Dropping this merely for the convenience of DM's when the real problem
is delays in NM is trying to fix the wrong problem in the wrong place,
IMHO.
> But I don't
> think you will be able to. In fact, most people might w
stream are busy with other things, solve the problem yourself and
make the upload - ask the security team for help with that side if you
are unsure.
Solve the problem - if upstream come back to you with a different fix
later, you can always migrate to that fix.
--
Neil Williams
=
-Depends on pkg-config in the source
package.
Is that suitable as a Policy clause? (probably needs a few tweaks for
clarity and examples in clause 1). It may well cause a few packages to
depend or build-depend on pkg-config even though another dependency also
requires it but duplication of depen
t
but it does make life easier and it does solve some problems inherent in
other methods. (It brings in one or two problems of its own too.)
(In terms of cross-building / debian-xcontrol, Simon, it's a
Build-Depends-Tool.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-free
be done to have at least simple bugs resolved fast.
Well, maybe you could help with d-i rather than just point out the
negative?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp47Yva2wtZc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 2008-03-17 at 12:16 -0300, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please can this 'trend' be stopped here and now?
> >
> > The Packages.gz file is already enormous (especially
er possible for all such metadata - maybe even
migrate some existing data in debian/control to debtags.
This specific request, IMHO, is probably best done via links on the
Homepage URL anyway.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com
/www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting
This isn't the kind of thing that generally needs discussion on
debian-devel.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 12:28 +, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 13:06 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > gtk-doc-tools is not being picked up as a build depends during port
> > > builds, despite it being lo
On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 13:06 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
> > gtk-doc-tools is not being picked up as a build depends during port
> > builds, despite it being located during normal debuild, pdebuild and
> > pbuilder checks on m
l
Debian box without implementing sbuild?
(This is also holding up my own upstream work which needs a fix in this
version of libgda3-3.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This i
is also in experimental and therefore
builds of your package try to use this experimental version which then
fails because experimental is not a complete distribution.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 19:19 +, Neil Williams wrote:
One little note on these bugs:
1. All bugs below have patches attached that have been carefully tested
with your package to avoid any changes in the Debian packages. As such,
the patches can be applied without you needing to worry about
451281
newt 465105
openssl465248
pam 284854
popt 282913
procps 451812
psmisc 465226
readline5 465237
rxvt 465214
tcp-wrappers 451854
udev 465156
wget 451285
xdemineur 465117
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
fcashobjects0 ...
(with -dev, -dbg etc. as normal)
Applications then mix-and-match object libraries (and/or their own
objects) at compile time and call routines in libqof1|2 to dynamically
load the backend module as requested by the user.
The transition is the perfect time to change the names of t
discussions on xmms and
audacity. Such "fuzzy" relationships are best done with tags, IMHO.
(Also, let's not add yet more lines to the Packages.gz file?)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libgtkstylus
Version : 0.3
Upstream Author : Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/download/source/
* License : LGPL
Program
u seeing it as "resolved"? It's still listed as outstanding
> on
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=edac-utils;dist=unstable
>
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=edac-utils
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gpe-tetris
Version : 0.6.4
Upstream Author : David Necas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/projects/
* License : GPL
Program
Looks OK now - maybe just a delay?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
/minor bug in apt to request a clearer error message but
I don't see that it is a bug in amarok.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpzYgfd9EKtF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ibdmalloc-dev
> Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libqwt-dev
> Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>liballegro-dev
> Ondřej Surý <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libpoppler-glib-dev
>libwnck-dev
> Akira TAGOH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libgtk1.2-dbg
> Debian GSS Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libgss-dev
> Marcio Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libiec61883-dev
> Aaron M. Ucko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>libncbi6-dev
(Just a sample of the -dbg and -dev packages)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpedfHiptBOC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: gpe-announce
Version : 0.13
Upstream Author : Joe McCarthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nils
Faerber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/download
project could help with that but a full text search
would be v.useful. The hardest thing to do right now is work out if
someone has already filed an ITP or RFP when preparing an ITP myself.
There are so many that my eyes just glaze over when browsing the WNPP
list and in-browser text search isn't
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:25:17 +0100
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le mercredi 09 janvier 2008 à 13:54 +0000, Neil Williams a écrit :
> > GnomeVFS is used by GNOME but it does not require GNOME itself. It
> > isn't a "part of GNOME"
>
>
ays it could be called GVFS to
indicate a relationship with libglib2.0-0 (used by all GNOME libraries
and lots of none-GNOME ones).
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp2vahjJHpF4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
gt; I want netconf to eventually replace ifupdown and thus become part
> of Debian's base system.
Maybe if 'ifupdown' becomes an optional package instead of netconf
rather than losing ifupdown completely?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://w
801 - 900 of 1111 matches
Mail list logo
