-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
For that, you will have to ask the ftp masters and the security team. I
am not in a position to speak to their official stance in terms of what
requirements they might have for software like opera to be in Debian and
the
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 01:55:05PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
For that, you will have to ask the ftp masters and the security team. I
am not in a position to speak to their official stance in terms of what
requirements they might have for software like opera
On Sunday 09 September 2007 19:19, David Given wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:
[...]
It would behoove you to at least put significant effort into
what everyone here agrees would be the best way to get Opera working
well with Debian and other free software operating systems.
I'd take issue with
Edward Welbourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bernd:
if opera would be come open-source, I'd be willing to co-maintain
and check packages - it would be worth the work. But I'm not
willing to spend my free time on closed source if there's no
really good reason to do so.
I'm afraid this
On Friday 07 September 2007 11:18:18 Edward Welbourne wrote:
Can we still hope that there are requests from the Opera developers that
a certain set of LGPL libraries are out there that should be distributed
with Debian (which they are currently not or in a wrong version or
missing patches)
Can we still hope that there are requests from the Opera developers that a
certain set of LGPL libraries are out there that should be distributed with
Debian (which they are currently not or in a wrong version or missing
patches) that would help to further reduce the footprint of the
One thing which would help is if you made use of the Bugs: filed in
debian/control. That is you do something like this:
Bugs: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ah ! OK, thanks for that ... packaging script revised :-)
This allows people to send bug reports to you directly using the
reportbug
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:54:06AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
This allows people to send bug reports to you directly using the
reportbug tool,
I'd sort of assumed Maintainer was used for that !
It is, but not in a way that is useful to you, only useful for
packages in Debian proper (or
On Friday 07 September 2007 08:10:47 Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:11:24AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
Lionel Mamane:
[...]
This was written under the assumption that you statically-linked to
LGPL libraries, not only Qt. As you now inform me this is not the
case, my
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:11:24AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
Lionel Mamane:
Roberto Sánchez:
One possible solution would be for Opera to produce a source
package of unlinked binary object files. This would allow relinking
against new versions of the libraries (at least in most cases)
I am not seeking for a violation of some license.
I didn't think you were.
It is missed opportunities for optimisation that I am after.
That's what I understood you to mean.
You have the source, you seek for them :o)
I really don't think there's anything that fits the bill.
Please consider
you can at least use linda and lintian (-iI) to check your packages,
that should help a lot.
Indeed - I've been using lintian, and linda's on my set of things to
try during my next binge of package work.
Eddy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 10:21:14AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
you can at least use linda and lintian (-iI) to check your packages,
that should help a lot.
Indeed - I've been using lintian, and linda's on my set of things to
try during my next binge of package work.
How about amd64
(Explicitly CCing Edward in the assumption he's not subscribed to this
list. The message I'm answering to is at
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/09/msg00145.html . I'd like
to be CCed an followups, although subscribed.)
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 09:38:14AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:27:25PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
(Explicitly CCing Edward in the assumption he's not subscribed to this
list. The message I'm answering to is at
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/09/msg00145.html . I'd like
to be CCed an followups, although
Lionel:
(Explicitly CCing Edward in the assumption he's not subscribed to this
list.
Thank you - I am, indeed, not subscribed.
It would actually be best if you could address me as
[EMAIL PROTECTED], so that various of my colleagues see the
discussion, too.
... The message I'm answering to is
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:11:24AM +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
These are roughly the arguments I've used in the past to avoid
pressure to simplify our packaging by changing to static linking
(which would save us having to address issues of compatibility with
diverse versions of
Hi debian-devel,
The web of trust gave me Mr Johan Herland as the only member of strong set
and I took the freedom to place him on the CC line.
Johan forwarded you to me. For reference, dpkg -s, or the package's
control file, would have told you:
Maintainer: Opera Packaging Team [EMAIL
Dear Edward,
many thanks for joining in.
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 13:23:46 Edward Welbourne wrote:
Opera could offer an apt repository for the .deb
We already do :-)
Here's the line from my /etc/apt/sources.list:
deb http://deb.opera.com/opera/ testing non-free
I was pointed to it
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 03:16:07PM +0200, Steffen Moeller wrote:
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 13:23:46 Edward Welbourne wrote:
I'm confused. Pierre appears to be saying static is bad, Bruce
closed must be static. We have both static and shared packages, so
you can take your pick,
Hi,
So, the Debian community would have someone (and sadly only one) who can
inspect your source and fix issues that arise. The benefit I see for Opera is
a further decreased footprint.
if opera would be come open-source, I'd be willing to co-maintain and
check packages - it would be
Zitat von Roberto C. Sánchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dynamic linking is what the security team likes since it means that you
only update the code once for the whole system. However, in the event
that there is an update which makes the library non-binary compatible,
then there is another problem.
Steffen:
So, the Debian community would have someone (and sadly only one) who can
inspect your source and fix issues that arise. The benefit I see for Opera
is
a further decreased footprint.
Bernd:
if opera would be come open-source, I'd be willing to co-maintain and
check packages - it
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 04:43:09PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Zitat von Roberto C. Sánchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dynamic linking is what the security team likes since it means that you
only update the code once for the whole system. However, in the event
that there is an update which makes
Hi,
That's one of the (too many) things I've got on my todo list - get
myself trained as a proper Debian developer. For the moment, I just
have some scripts (mostly inherited, I've only had time to clean them
up so far) that do the packaging mostly right; the scripts know more
about Debian
25 matches
Mail list logo
