On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 06:57:50AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
The usefulness of supporting --as-needed isn't because of Ubuntu. It's
because switching --as-needed on across the board
I think it would be better send all our upstreams patches for their
build systems than to work around
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Colin Watson wrote:
Linking in the correct order is not a workaround; it's being correct.
I wasn't talking about link-order stuff but about dependency
inflation; binaries linking against libraries that aren't used by the
binaries linking against them. IIRC this
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
I wasn't talking about link-order stuff but about dependency inflation;
binaries linking against libraries that aren't used by the binaries
linking against them. IIRC this is the purpose of --as-needed and what
it works around.
To clarify further, I think
Hi,
WTF?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
- d/p/01_fix_makefile: $LIBS need to come after $SRC while linking to
fix
On 25.10.2013 08:23, Rene Engelhard wrote:
A NMU for a MINOR bug is NOT something which should be done.
I quietly accepted the dbs one, but this is over the line.
I can understand your rage, but to be clear: I only submitted the bug
and patch, I didn't ask for it to be nmu'ed and was as
Hello,
On 25 October 2013 07:23, Rene Engelhard r...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
-
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:46:09AM +0200, Andreas Moog wrote:
As you can see from
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/away/0.9.5+ds-0+nmu1ubuntu1 I did
fix it in Ubuntu. Please direct your rage at the person who took the
patch, created a false changelog and uploaded it to Debian.
This may be
On 25/10/13 10:09, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
...
I sponsored Andreas' patch as NMU, on my own initiative.
I don't think it's appropriate to consider a patch in the BTS to be a
request for sponsorship. In future please take responsibility for the
decision
+++ Rene Engelhard [2013-10-25 08:23 +0200]:
Hi,
WTF?
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:18:18AM +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
Changed-By: Andreas Moog am...@ubuntu.com
[...]
away (0.9.5+ds-0+nmu2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Non-maintainer upload
- d/p/01_fix_makefile: $LIBS
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:32:55AM +0100, Wookey wrote:
Really? This is boring stuff that needs doing. I would be grateful if
someone did it for me on one of my packages, assuming they didn't break
anything.
Updating to new upstream versions for tiny packages like this is also
boring. You
[Not defending the rather odd NMU practice here, but ...]
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:57:24PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Until then there's no action needed to make it work in Debian. Debian is
not Ubuntus development platform, so why should one NMU stuff for this
when it's not needed in
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Colin Watson wrote:
The usefulness of supporting --as-needed isn't because of Ubuntu. It's
because switching --as-needed on across the board
I think it would be better send all our upstreams patches for their
build systems than to work around all the bugs in
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:51:41AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Colin Watson wrote:
The usefulness of supporting --as-needed isn't because of Ubuntu. It's
because switching --as-needed on across the board
I think it would be better send all our upstreams
13 matches
Mail list logo
