On mar, 2009-08-11 at 00:29 +0200, Carl Chenet wrote:
Mardi 18 ça semble bien. Reste à trouver le lieu.
++
Comme je suis un chafouin, et que j'aime bien les threads qui trainent
en longueur sans rien décider, je propose un CHOIX (et ouais !)
- Le (tradditionnel) Trappiste, 4 rue St Denis, M.
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:40:35PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 20090811183800.ge5...@const.famille.thibault.fr you wrote:
Not necessarily. Any sane implementation should just use wchar_t
Which could be UTF16 and therefore still has complicatd length
Giacomo A. Catenazzi, le Wed 12 Aug 2009 07:54:33 +0200, a écrit :
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Gunnar Wolf, le Tue 11 Aug 2009 13:28:08 -0500, a écrit :
while length(str) in any language up to the 1990s was a mere
substraction, now we must go through the string checking each byte to
see if it
Giacomo A. Catenazzi, le Wed 12 Aug 2009 08:03:30 +0200, a écrit :
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:40:35PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 20090811183800.ge5...@const.famille.thibault.fr you wrote:
Not necessarily. Any sane implementation should just use wchar_t
Hello Debian Developers,
I've recently uploaded (thanks to Bart Martens for sponsoring) my first
package and want to adopt the next one. It's cd-discid [1]. Its
debian/control file contains the Conflicts field. This package conflicts
with cdgrab ( 0.7), which is no longer exists in the
Hi,
the question in the subject may sound a bit naive, but I’m starting to
wonder why we still set the Standards-Version in package control files.
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Hi,
the question in the subject may sound a bit naive, but I’m starting to
wonder why we still set the Standards-Version in package control files.
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:56:49AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Giacomo A. Catenazzi, le Wed 12 Aug 2009 08:03:30 +0200, a écrit :
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 09:40:35PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 20090811183800.ge5...@const.famille.thibault.fr you wrote:
Hi,
due to some upcoming changes in the list of supported modules upstream,
the python-gnome2-desktop binary package will be removed soon. Packages
must depend on the individual modules instead.
For example, if the only module used is gnomeapplet, you must depend on
python-gnomeapplet instead.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 07:54:33AM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Gunnar Wolf, le Tue 11 Aug 2009 13:28:08 -0500, a écrit :
while length(str) in any language up to the 1990s was a mere
substraction, now we must go through the string checking each byte to
see if
It's impressing how quickly threads on this list grow big. :-)
I'm not sure, whether a conclusion is already reached.
1. apt-get install mysql
2. enter mysql client
3. create database test; create table test( test char(10) );
Replace mysql with whatever application you like.
What should be the
Russ Allbery wrote:
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
If we use build IDs (and this has quite some advantages, like being able
to do more than just dump the ddebs on a repository), this can lead to
having the same detached debugging symbols in two binary packages, since
sometimes a
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@ubuntu.com
scribes
Python Applications Packaging Team python-apps-t...@lists.alioth.debian.org
scribes (U)
Fixed in trunk.
Cheers,
Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 01:18:12PM +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
I'm not sure, whether a conclusion is already reached.
1. apt-get install mysql
2. enter mysql client
3. create database test; create table test( test char(10) );
Replace mysql with whatever application you like.
What should
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:59:09 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
However I think this approach doesn’t fit the current way we deal with
policy changes. The de facto way of dealing with policy breakages
currently is to directly report serious bugs against packages not
conforming,
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Hi,
the question in the subject may sound a bit naive, but I’m starting to
wonder why we still set the Standards-Version in package control files.
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Timur Birsh wrote:
Hello Debian Developers,
I've recently uploaded (thanks to Bart Martens for sponsoring) my first
package and want to adopt the next one. It's cd-discid [1]. Its
debian/control file contains the Conflicts field. This package conflicts
with cdgrab (
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:59:09 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
However I think this approach doesn’t fit the current way we deal with
policy changes. The de facto way of dealing with policy breakages
currently is to directly report
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Timur Birsh wrote:
Hello Debian Developers,
I've recently uploaded (thanks to Bart Martens for sponsoring) my first
package and want to adopt the next one. It's cd-discid [1]. Its
debian/control file contains the Conflicts field. This package
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Timur Birsh wrote:
Hello Debian Developers,
I've recently uploaded (thanks to Bart Martens for sponsoring) my
first package and want to adopt the next one. It's cd-discid [1]. Its
debian/control file contains the
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Romain Beauxisto...@rastageeks.org wrote:
Le lundi 10 août 2009 09:58:04, Jonathan Yu a écrit :
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Charles Plessyple...@debian.org wrote:
Le Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33:58AM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:20
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 08:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release, by
forbidding the
Roger Leigh, le Wed 12 Aug 2009 11:30:50 +0100, a écrit :
The default is UTF-32 or UTF-16, whichever corresponds to the width of
wchar_t.
This documentation is bogus BTW. It should read UCS-4 or UCS-2.
It's strictly correct according to the standard.
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 08:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release,
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:22:17 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
In many cases, wouldn't such a relationship be better expressed by a
dependency on a package that implemented the new behaviour? Often it's
dpkg and many of those situations are already handled via just such a
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
What would you think of deprecating this header?
This would be bad, since when someone looks at the package, they
would not know easily what they have to look for to update the
package. The Standards
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 08:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions are supported,
Hi,
Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
I think that as long as the package (cdgrab, in this case) is
not longer in stable, the conflicts line may be removed (we support
partial upgrades from stable, as far as is possible). In this case,
apparently cdgrab is not anywhere, so the conflicts
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Neil Williamscodeh...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
What would you think of deprecating this header?
This would be bad, since when someone looks at the package, they
would not know
On Aug 12, Josselin Mouette (j...@debian.org) wrote:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 08:16 -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
What would you think of deprecating this header?
This would be bad, since when someone looks at the package, they
would not know easily what they have to look
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:22:17 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
In many cases, wouldn't such a relationship be better expressed by a
dependency on a package that implemented the new behaviour? Often it's
dpkg and many of those
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:10:43AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:22:17 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
In many cases, wouldn't such a relationship be better expressed by a
dependency on a package
Hi!
On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 13:03:13 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Open questions:
* Can we require a one-to-one correspondance between binary package names
and debug package names that provide symbols for that binary package? I
think we should; I think it would make the system more
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
The only /real/ use for the standards version is using it as a starting
point for upgrading to the current standards version, and that's already
making the (rather naïve) assumption that it was already fully conforming
with Policy to
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 16:40:44 -0400, Ryan Kavanagh wrote:
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:23:43PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
I hope the packages uploaded won't have a «project» binary in the
PATH?
At the moment yes, Turnin-NG provides /usr/bin/project since that's what the
original turnin /
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:10:43AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:22:17 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
In many cases, wouldn't such a relationship be better
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Javier Uruen Val j...@warp.es
* Package name: libtext-dhcpleases-perl
Version : 0.9
Upstream Author : Carlos Vicente cvice...@cpan.org
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Text-DHCPLeases/
* License : (Perl Artistic)
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 11:06 -0400, Neil Roeth a écrit :
I've had some packages for years during which policy was changed and required
corresponding changes in my packages. In that case, the previous developer
was me, so I'm pretty confident that the previous developer did at least as
Josselin Mouette wrote:
Hi,
the question in the subject may sound a bit naive, but I’m starting to
wonder why we still set the Standards-Version in package control files.
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I do not have a strong opinion about this, apart from the fact
that it must be present in the sources when someone is looking to
update the package, and it should be accessible before downloading all
the sources. So having it in the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* Package name: GT.M
Version : V5.3-004A
Upstream Author : K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* URL : http://fis-gtm.com
* License : AGPL v3
Programming Lang: C with some modules in x86
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* Package name: VistA
Version : To be determined
Upstream Author : K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* URL : http://worldvista.org/AboutVistA
* License : Public domain, GPL v2, AGPL v3
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* Package name: WorldVistA EHR
Version : VOE/ 1.0
Upstream Author : K.S. Bhaskar ks.bhas...@fnis.com
* URL : http://worldvista.org/World_VistA_EHR
* License : GPL v2
Programming Lang:
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
This assumes that the previous developer has correctly updated the
package according to the stated Standards version. Which is, in the
general case, wrong.
No, it assumes that the previous developer tried to update the package
according to the stated
On Aug 12, Josselin Mouette (j...@debian.org) wrote:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 11:06 -0400, Neil Roeth a écrit :
I've had some packages for years during which policy was changed and
required
corresponding changes in my packages. In that case, the previous
developer
was me,
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort poch...@gmail.com writes:
I'd be in favour of making it optional or deprecating it if we (as in
the project) were good in adding checks to lintian for changes in the
policy or reporting bugs where it's not possible (or in addition to the
checks).
I already attempt to
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
In which case all we need is the existing lintian check and for
Standards-Version to be ignored by dpkg-dev so that it doesn't get into
the .dsc, it doesn't get into the Sources.gz and it is finally OK to get
rid of all these pointless messages in
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Matthew Johnson wrote:
On Tue Aug 11 10:12, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
Personally I don't think we should do a GR to recommend a freeze or release
date.
We already used the DPL election to push a release, when it was *long* due,
but
I don't think we should push a
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 à 14:17 -0400, Neil Roeth a écrit :
If people don't have time to handle all their packages properly, they should
reduce the number of packages they maintain.
I’ve seen this kind of arguments again and again, and every time it
looks more stupid to me. If you don’t have
On 11826 March 1977, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
The proposal is (very briefly) to make dak accept .ddeb packages (containing
debugging symbols using build-ids), and to then modify helper tools to
automatically generate them and add them to the changes file. I've written
down
the details
Hello.
I'm creating my first package, after reading the debian policy and
others mails in 'debian-mentors' list I want to delete the ITP Bug
#539568 in order to create a new one with the same library but with
other name .. How can I do that?
Thanks
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte
Hello Leinier,
first of all, this question is more fit for debian-mentors that for
-devel, so I'm adding the list to CC (please follow up there, removing
-devel).
2009/8/12 Leinier Cruz Salfran salfra...@ipigto.rimed.cu:
Hello.
I'm creating my first package, after reading the debian policy and
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:03:30 +0100
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 01:18:12PM +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
I'm not sure, whether a conclusion is already reached.
1. apt-get install mysql
2. enter mysql client
3. create database test; create table test(
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
* updated Standards-Version (no changes needed)
Firstly, you do not ahve to put that into the changelog, and,
secondly, one should
On 08/12/2009 03:01 PM, David Claughton wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
* updated Standards-Version (no changes needed)
Firstly, you do not ahve to put that into
Daniel Moerner dmoer...@gmail.com writes:
I don't think that anyone was every seriously defending that people do
uploads just to bump the Standards-Version, I think the objection was
more that bumping the Standards-Version needlessly clutters the
changelog and wastes space. I'll admit I don't
Daniel Moerner wrote:
On 08/12/2009 03:01 PM, David Claughton wrote:
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:16:14 -0500
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org wrote:
* updated Standards-Version (no changes needed)
Firstly, you do
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:07:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Any thoughts? We could have such a vote over and done in about two weeks,
with the DPL's consent, and it'd seem a lot more inclusive and less
cabal-tastic than how things seem to be working atm...
Personally, I think the last thing
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:17:55PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Quantity of .ddebs:
Usually there should only be one .ddeb per source. Of course there are
always exceptions from the rule, so Maintainers may chose to have one
per binary package. This should only be taken when the size of the
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:17:55PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Quantity of .ddebs:
Usually there should only be one .ddeb per source. Of course there are
always exceptions from the rule, so Maintainers may chose to have one
per binary package. This should only be taken when
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Harald Braumann wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:03:30 +0100
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 01:18:12PM +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
I'm not sure, whether a conclusion is already reached.
1. apt-get install mysql
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort poch...@gmail.com writes:
Roger Leigh wrote:
This fails to address the rather valid concern brought up about having
different versions of libraries and binaries installed from the same
source package. Having one .ddeb per binary would solve this
elegantly.
Except
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:58:45 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
If that bothers you, you can use the share we plan to provide.
I'd like to still be able to debug offline, thank you very much. So far
you've avoided answering the question, though: why one ddeb per source
instead of per
Russ Allbery wrote:
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort poch...@gmail.com writes:
Roger Leigh wrote:
This fails to address the rather valid concern brought up about having
different versions of libraries and binaries installed from the same
source package. Having one .ddeb per binary would solve this
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 02:58:45AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Roger Leigh wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:17:55PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Quantity of .ddebs:
Usually there should only be one .ddeb per source. Of course there are
always exceptions from the rule, so
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:03:43 +0100
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Harald Braumann wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:03:30 +0100
Roger Leigh rle...@codelibre.net wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 01:18:12PM +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
I'm
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort poch...@gmail.com writes:
Russ Allbery wrote:
Except that in that case, the old library will be NBS and thus I see
no point why you would want to keep it installed. The only reason
would be if it was meant to stay around, but in that case I'm sure the
source package
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
There will still be a repository with all the .ddebs.
And aptitude and dpkg will know how to install ddebs, somehow?
and synaptic, etc?
But also we will have a share that will ship all the debugging symbols
in a build id file
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Manoj Srivastavasriva...@debian.org wrote:
I too am wondering if we should defer the polivy change until
the details get shaken out with a partial deployment of the scheme.
Full deployment already happened (in Ubuntu).
--
bye,
pabs
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Manoj Srivastavasriva...@debian.org wrote:
I too am wondering if we should defer the polivy change until
the details get shaken out with a partial deployment of the scheme.
Full deployment already happened (in
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Russ Allberyr...@debian.org wrote:
As .ddebs? What's the policy about what can go in them and how are they
integrated with the packaging tools? And could you point me at the Ubuntu
share for the debugging information so that I can see what protocols it's
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
Not having anything to do with Ubuntu, I don't know anything about the
details, but they have had automatic debug packages and automated
crash report stuff for quite a while, a couple of years IIRC. The
specs for that are here:
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 04:59:09, Josselin Mouette a écrit :
AIUI, this header is here to indicate which version of the policy the
package is supposed to conform to. This way, we have a way to enforce
which policy versions are supported, e.g. in a stable release, by
forbidding the too old
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Manoj Srivastavasriva...@debian.org
wrote:
I too am wondering if we should defer the polivy change until
the details get shaken out with a partial deployment of the scheme.
Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org writes:
But there could be another use of this field, which would fit into the
test- driven workflow. What about a tool that displays the changes in
the policy based on the declared supported version and the latest
version ?
Like:
zcat
Le mercredi 12 août 2009 23:22:45, Russ Allbery a écrit :
Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org writes:
But there could be another use of this field, which would fit into the
test- driven workflow. What about a tool that displays the changes in
the policy based on the declared supported
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org (12/08/2009):
zcat /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz \
| sed /`grep Standards-Version debian/control | awk '{ print $2 }'`/Q
? I just use zless on that file and stop reading when I get to the
current Standards-Version of the
On Wed, Aug 12 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
Not having anything to do with Ubuntu, I don't know anything about the
details, but they have had automatic debug packages and automated
crash report stuff for quite a while, a couple of years IIRC. The
specs for
Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org (12/08/2009):
Is it foolish to propose this as a lintian check ? Hey, standards version
is outdated, here are the changes that ought to be done
checks/standards-version.desc
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Le Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:44:26PM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
IIRC, there is a plan for splitting Descriptions out of the Packages files
For the curious, there is some extra information here:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-l10n-devel/2009-August/000507.html
In my experience,
Le jeudi 13 août 2009 00:09:09, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org (12/08/2009):
Is it foolish to propose this as a lintian check ? Hey, standards
version is outdated, here are the changes that ought to be done
checks/standards-version.desc
Please, pretty
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Romain Beauxisto...@rastageeks.org wrote:
What I mean is that we can use the information contained in the standards-
version tag and display at this place the list of changes that were done since
3.7.0
That makes a difference in the sense that it helps to
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I do not have a strong opinion about this, apart from the fact
that it must be present in the sources when someone is looking to
update the package, and it should be accessible before downloading all
the sources.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:46:19 +0200
Source: monit
Binary: monit
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1:5.0.3-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Stefan Alfredsson a...@debian.org
Changed-By: Stefan Alfredsson a...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:13:08 +0200
Source: gst-plugins-good0.10
Binary: gstreamer0.10-plugins-good-doc gstreamer0.10-esd
gstreamer0.10-pulseaudio gstreamer0.10-plugins-good
gstreamer0.10-plugins-good-dbg
Architecture: source all amd64
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:57:32 -0600
Source: ctsim
Binary: ctsim ctsim-help ctsim-doc
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 5.1.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kevin M. Rosenberg k...@debian.org
Changed-By: Kevin M.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:20:46 +0200
Source: gst-plugins-bad0.10
Binary: gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad-doc gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad
gstreamer0.10-sdl gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad-dbg
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 0.10.13.2-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:57:03 +0200
Source: reportbug
Binary: reportbug python-reportbug
Architecture: source all
Version: 4.6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Reportbug Maintainers reportbug-ma...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:40:00 +0200
Source: goto-fai-progress
Binary: goto-fai-progress
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GOsa packages mainteners group gosa-...@oss.gonicus.de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:34:00 +0200
Source: ldap2zone
Binary: ldap2zone
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.1-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GOsa packages mainteners group gosa-...@oss.gonicus.de
Changed-By: Cajus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 17:59:41 +0800
Source: docbookwiki
Binary: docbookwiki
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.9.1cvs-11
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Jeremy Malcolm termi...@debian.org
Changed-By: Jeremy Malcolm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 15:58:49 +0200
Source: zope2.10
Binary: zope2.10 zope2.10-sandbox
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 2.10.9-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Jonas Meurer m...@debian.org
Changed-By: Jonas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:00:28 +0200
Source: zope2.11
Binary: zope2.11 zope2.11-sandbox
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 2.11.4-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Jonas Meurer m...@debian.org
Changed-By: Jonas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:23:50 +0200
Source: kaffeine
Binary: kaffeine kaffeine-dbg
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.0~pre2-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Fathi Boudra f...@debian.org
Changed-By: Fathi Boudra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:34:42 +0200
Source: gnunet
Binary: gnunet gnunet-client gnunet-common gnunet-dbg gnunet-server gnunet-dev
gnunet-tools
Architecture: source all i386
Version: 0.8.0c-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:28:25 +0200
Source: spell
Binary: spell
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.0-23
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Giacomo Catenazzi c...@debian.org
Changed-By: Giacomo Catenazzi c...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:44:55 +0300
Source: padre
Binary: padre libwx-perl-dialog-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.42-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Damyan Ivanov d...@debian.org
Changed-By: Damyan Ivanov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:56:51 +0200
Source: libcitadel
Binary: libcitadel2 libcitadel2-dbg libcitadel-dev
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 7.61-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Citadel Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:27:24 +0200
Source: polyglot
Binary: polyglot
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.4.36b-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Oliver Korff o...@xynyx.de
Changed-By: Oliver Korff o...@xynyx.de
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo
