Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: xsltsl
Version : 1.2.2
Upstream Author : Steve Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://xsltsl.sourceforge.net/
* License : LGPL
Description : XSLT Standard Library
?
PLEASE can tar be reverted to 1.15.1dfsg-3 in unstable?
Maybe tar 1.15.91-1 should go into experimental until lintian,
dpkg-buildpackage and linda can all be prepared for the new behaviour.
If lintian functionality isn't restored soon, how can new packages be
uploaded safely?
--
Neil
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: dpkg-view
Version : 0.0.2
Upstream Author : Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://dpkg-view.alioth.debian.org
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: CashUtil
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/cashutil/
* License : GPL
Description : GnuCash
.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpfoge2jNwFI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: pilotqof
Version : 0.0.3
Upstream Author : Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/pilot-qof/
* License : GPL
Description : query Palm
formatted
description on packages.debian.org but a much shorter, more basic
version in the Packages.gz file?
This suggestion is far from complete and should be enhanced.
I think the entire suggestion should be redirected away from the
Packages.gz file.
--
Neil Williams
=
http
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:08:43 +0100
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 19:03 +, Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:45:09 +0100 (CET)
Andreas Tille til...@rki.de wrote:
I tried to find a clear advise how to reasonable format lists inside long
resource machines where the benefits of a 1Mb Packages.gz file are
appreciable.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp3lHY1fDFBt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:32:51 +0100
Michael Banck mba...@debian.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:20:43PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
I'd like to get the longest descriptions out of Packages.gz completely,
so encouraging their retention it not ideal. It's not about whether 2
or 3 spaces
information when specifically called as 'apt-cache search'.
CC:'ing debian-i18n to see if there are problems with this approach.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgprAi03SA6jw.pgp
Description: PGP
by upstream, is just mad.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpEODWdEzXoy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
at it after Squeeze and raise version 2.0
from the ashes.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpVfSlmID6PH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to the maintainer saying that the following couple of lines
should be added at the next upload.
Isn't that an upstream bug?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpoH6LW7yLKn.pgp
Description: PGP
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 12:16:10 +
Noah Slater nsla...@tumbolia.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:35:02AM +, Neil Williams wrote:
IMHO it is about not getting hung up on the process but considering the
reasoning behind the process. AFAICT, there is no good reason to
document every
a huge burden.
It merely imposes a
consistent structure, much like the ‘debian/control’ file, or the
pseudo-header of a Debian BTS report.
Nothing about the proposal is merely anything.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e
that would just
seconds any GR proposal made, even if they plan to vote against.
Then make an amendment that produces a lower requirement for seconding
amendments?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms
place, the need for deriving from it will
be far less.
That does not mean that it is worthwhile reformatting the
debian/copyright file in every single source package across Debian.
Have you any idea how much work that actually involves? Let me give you
a hint - it isn't going to happen.
--
Neil
that breaks the format or not, until I'm
happy that the file contains all information likely to be necessary for
ftp-master.
That's all there is to it AFAICT.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:18:41 +
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
There is nothing in debian/copyright to help with that decision (nor
should there be, before anyone suggests it, because that doesn't scale
either).
Actually, I'm reconsidering that a bit - separate copyright files
that line can
shift according to build options or new versions.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpWmQNAkaBug.pgp
Description: PGP signature
): encountered an error: Identifier removed make: ***
[debian/stamp-scons-build] Error 1 Build killed with signal 15 after
150 minutes of inactivity
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=ardour;ver=1%3A2.7.1-2;arch=s390;stamp=1229659387
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org
.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp2Dd7gpi9X1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to moving forward on implementation.
There probably should have been more on the wiki page about the earlier
discussions. I'll try and update it over the weekend, unless someone
else is able to do it earlier.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:34:23 -0700
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 07:21:15AM +, Neil Williams wrote:
Also, is the new dpkg going to Pre-Depend: on this new install-info
package?
If not, what does this /usr/sbin/install-info wrapper script do when
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:06:35 -0400
Filipus Klutiero chea...@gmail.com wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
Primary Motivations (in order):
1. Updates to translations should not require source NMU's.
I guess that means avoiding to NMU with new diff.gz -s? If so, what are
the underlying
apparently can't use it and I would simply prefer to actually get
things done without having to fight it.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpqF28fIeSlJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 18:46:48 +0100
Ian Jackson i...@davenant.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Neil Williams writes (Re: DEP-4: The TDeb specification.):
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:06:35 -0400
Filipus Klutiero chea...@gmail.com wrote:
What is the purpose of creating a new binary package format
. ;-)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpJDNVi4uJc7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
format per se,
I don't understand your reasoning.
Other tools may need to support the locale roots in the .tdeb - these
changes will be easier if the tool can rely on these only existing in
a .tdeb instead of occurring in random .debs but not in others.
--
Neil Williams
=
http
is just a different string for the same thing, except that will require
additional parsing for tdeb vs udeb.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpyIJpOI03ny.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:57:30 -0400
Filipus Klutiero chea...@gmail.com wrote:
(Could you add a blank line between the quoted reply and your content?
It makes the content easier for me to read. Thanks.)
Neil Williams wrote:
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 01:13:19 -0400
Filipus Klutiero chea...@gmail.com
. Is there *evidence* and *proof* that
this is the case?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpmZq9zaevbJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
be expected to have any source code. In this case, as
we have a declaration that source code was involved, that doesn't apply
here.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpn2fA5X43nO.pgp
Description: PGP
to be a balance here - there is no good reason for
debian/copyright to list thousands of email addresses. There is even
less reason for that list to be precisely and accurately broken down to
email addresses per source code file.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
/share/emdebian-tools/dpkg-gentdeb test scripts.
My git foo is very poor so if there are people willing and able to help
with the git-ness problems, take a look at the repo and tell me
*precisely* what commands I need to fix stuff. ;-)
More on that on planet.debian.org soon.
--
Neil Williams
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:27:33 +1000
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
This seems a useful summary:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Does Files: *.c mean that everything below applies equally to all
files that match the pattern or does it mean that the statement
statements.
Collation is desirable, subject only to differences between licences.
There is no useful purpose in subdividing the copyright statements in
debian/copyright - anyone who wants that information needs to Read The
Source.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:29:17 +0200
Bill Allombert bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:49:53AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
If replying from the -policy list, please keep either me or -devel
CC'd. I'm subscribed to both -devel and -i18n. Thanks.
I've
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:04:14 +0200
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org (14/04/2009):
This is where the Draft TDeb Specification, created at the
ftp-master/i18n meeting in Extremadura, will be developed and improved.
Motivation
1. Updates
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:10:16 +0200
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org (14/04/2009):
Any reason not to make that “sourceful uploads”?
Well, the maintainer will be making the initial TDeb upload
(effectively +t0) so the restriction does normally only
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:42:30 +0200
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org (14/04/2009):
http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep4/#index9h2
You probably need to clarify in your DEP what “initial” means.
This section covers part of that:
http
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:10:12 +1000
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Because it's a useless waste of time to make a spurious distinction
where none needs to exist.
We seem to largely be talking past each other.
Unless the files
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:50:58 +1000
Ben Finney ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Consensus can also be gleaned from the common practice of packages
already in main. It is extremely common to find debian/copyright
contains a single list
Just because a package is old or dead upstream doesn't mean it is
necessarily removable from Debian - there has to be a problem with the
package on a release architecture (as there is on amd64 currently) or
building from source or using an old lib like gtk1.2 etc.
--
Neil Williams
Should source packages need to build-depend on debug packages?
(See python-gtk2 for one example. python-all-dbg is small but
python-numpy-dbg is 15Mb!)
Just curious - is it only python packages that do this?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
On Wed, 06 May 2009 18:39:32 +0200
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org wrote:
Le mercredi 06 mai 2009 à 17:35 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
Should source packages need to build-depend on debug packages?
When it is needed.
(See python-gtk2 for one example. python-all-dbg is small
will modify it
based on suggestions.
Debian QOF packaging team pkg-qof-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
qof
I'll fix that in the next upload, no need for a bug report.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http
or lower?
A tracker like you describe would just be ignored in many cases, I
don't see how that would help anyone.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpvmks7ErrDV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, I begin to wonder if 'cron' and 'at' cannot simply be
told to use a log file if no MTA exists. Alternatively, create a
dummy-mta that converts MTA requests into log files without all the
mail headers.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com
is the reight way to go.
lintian is probably the best option - a lintian check can also
probably handle the distinction between a library -dev package and an
application package and the 'Certainty' functionality can deal with
corner-cases.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org
it happen that
the documentation is completely written, and the user (developer or
buildd) just needs the runtime.
Umm, we have a lot of people writing and building software
documentation in things like docbook
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
On Fri, 8 May 2009 12:33:15 +0200
Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at wrote:
On Fr, 08 Mai 2009, Neil Williams wrote:
TeX docs should only be installed on systems where users need to write
TeX - any dependencies that bring in TeX docs merely to support
Come on. That we do NOT install
-Recommends turned off. I
don't see why texlive makes that impossible.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpxxA3V4zIx4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
(not recommend)
texlive-doc-base.
What's the problem with that package?
Emdebian Grip drops Recommends so the problem goes away entirely - at
least it would if the resulting package was legal and would work as a
build dependency.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org
at this stage but I haven't started hacking it
around yet. :-)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpFOme6DAcyE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-4.2
However, to get any further, the mere filename collision needs to be
checked to see if these really are the same files or have the same
functionality.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpzv8H5CQx8M.pgp
be good if we could have a way of doing this, it's about time
we could get cross-compilers into Debian longterm without adding yet
more binary packages to the existing gcc workload.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is
On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:18:40 +0100
Chris Lamb la...@debian.org wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
A better approach:
[..]
You have searched for paths that end with nusoap.php in suite sid,
all sections, and all architectures. Found 7 results. File
Packages
An even better approach
gpsim
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpIOak9WJ6lX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to be a public facing mail domain, we all get a little
less spam in our inbox, and the service becomes easier to administer.
Maybe a list of packages that do use it and an address to email for
those who want to start using it at a later date?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data
as well as
the symbol itself existing in libqof1 {Lenny} as well as the new
libqof2 {sid}.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp0cYg0sB7QI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
attr
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpth2LLtucSJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
.
Is this just an aberration (because the icon concerned is - visually -
identical to the gthumb icon) or some new feature?
(For the fix itself, I'm going to migrate those manual install rules
into a gpe-gallery.install file and cut out all the extra stuff in
debian/rules, then add the PNG.)
--
Neil
upstream release every single time.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgp2zSIit5kwN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
be sensible
to mandate it for large upstream teams.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpSSna8mmsoF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
nothing to fix. I'm curious to know how other
maintainers have addressed such cases in BTS.
Nothing to fix? close the bug. I don't see we need two different ways
to close a bug. Invalid would still close the bug.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:05:09 -0300
Tiago Bortoletto Vaz ti...@debian-ba.org wrote:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 05:45:24PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:24:48 -0300
Tiago Bortoletto Vaz ti...@debian-ba.org wrote:
#531002 made me bring this to -devel. It seems Debian BTS
to the upstream) but whether it can be ported to Gtk3.0 is
another matter. I may start with an ordinary bug against libgtkada2 and
see if there is interest in rebuilding it without gtk+extra2 and with
Gtk3.0.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http
On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 17:31:17 +0200
Ludovic Brenta ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/05/msg00627.html
One month on and I've heard nothing from the other maintainers with
packages that depend on gtk+extra2
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:56:30 +0200
Ludovic Brenta ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
OK, there is a bug report already asking for libgtkada to not
build-depend on gtk+extra2 (#534872) but I don't see how using an
embedded copy is going to solve
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:19:45 +0100
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
gtk+extra2 will FTBFS as soon as the functions that will be removed in
GTK+3.0 become deprecated in GTK+2.0. GTK+2.0 doesn't have to be
removed from Debian for gtk+extra2 to break. Yes, that isn't how
things *should
on this thread
monitors debian-devel by now.
OK. (I'm subscribed to -devel too. Sorry for the extra CC's, I wasn't
sure who was subscribed.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpapzs9puUJW.pgp
Description
-maintainer.html#mentors
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgpf0e1eQTqqX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
the requirement of a
make hashbang for the debian/rules file. Why actually is this?
So that builds can be done in sections whilst testing and/or debugging
and a variety of other requirements:
$ fakeroot debian/rules binary
Follow up questions to debian-mentors please.
--
Neil Williams
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the emdebian-tools package.
For my reasons, see:
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/archives/178-Why-I-missed-DebConf9.html
For background, see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-embedded/2009/08/msg5.html
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
I request assistance with maintaining the apt-cross package.
For my reasons, see:
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/archives/178-Why-I-missed-DebConf9.html
For background, see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-embedded/2009/08/msg5.html
and
It could be made optional - only set if there is a reason to set it.
(Quite what those reasons would be, I have no idea but someone will
probably come up with one or two.)
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk
be left in the .diff.gz
somewhere as a comment or left in the .changes file for the PTS to
pick up on.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpnh4KdWZxRl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
these pointless messages in debian/changelog.gz:
* updated Standards-Version (no changes needed)
If people really want a way of scanning the Standards-Version from
outside the source, it could be added as a field in the PTS, reading
from the .diff.gz.
--
Neil Williams
=
http
size of each string and the number of strings in total makes updating
and maintaining those translations into quite a burden.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpO8z9oQ7bPT.pgp
Description: PGP
to fill the
gaps. It leads to mixed manpages, yes, but some English paragraphs is
better than either the outdated translation or a gap.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpccvP5rbrlT.pgp
Description: PGP
, these things
should be easier to describe in bugs and easier to test potential fixes.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpfucOj4hQNJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
po/Makefile.in
config.status: executing depfiles commands
shift: 2368: can't shift that many
make[3]: *** [stamp-it] Error 2
A full build log can be found at:
http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=mipselpkg=gpe-expensesver=0.1.7-2+b1
Help?
--
Neil Williams
=
http
.
528194: Add multiarch support
Package: libselinux
Reported by: Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 10:00:08 UTC
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Found in version 2.0.71-1
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http
- - -=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpFeVEGTuGH5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/main/
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgppzZrer0fJw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 19:27:17 +
Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On ti, 2007-04-03 at 16:28 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
With regards to Debian Policy, you need to read section 10.7.
That's why I'm changing the existing method (which does simply append
data to /etc/apt/sources.list
On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:43:43 +0200
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Neil Williams:
Finally, if this is done in postinst, presumably the changes will
have to be removed in postrm or can dpkg be persuaded to do this
for me? (Could I ship a sources.list file in the package and move
mirror needs to be added
to /etc/apt/sources.list.d/emdebian.sources.list, I'm not sure ucf is
necessary - ucf isn't relevant in a debootstrap chroot.
Options, options . . .
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk
Apt::Architecture=
$arch pkgnames gcc` which requires that apt-get update has been run
or can be run - doesn't that mean I'll need to pre-depend on apt?
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk
the specific libraries for this purpose.) If the code isn't used, it
should be trivial to create a patch that simply comments it out or
removes it entirely. Or to prevent a SONAME bump, replace the function
definition with a no-op/error.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: gpe-timesheet
Version : 0.31
Upstream Author : Philip Blundell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/download/source/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
in the corresponding unstripped object.
(Thanks to Josh Triplett)
I'd like to add something on -doc to that proposition but haven't
decided how just yet.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpHWFVDMN4uP.pgp
Description
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:02:37 +0200
Hendrik Sattler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Sonntag 22 April 2007 21:39 schrieb Neil Williams:
Apart from those limitations, is there a *technical* reason why -dbg
packages should not be available? Is it worth taking to -policy?
You essentially need
them.
But the -dbg package only depends on the same version of the library -
the library won't depend on the -dbg so those who need the -dbg are the
only ones who would download and install them.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:14:04 -0500
Steve Greenland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 22-Apr-07, 14:39 (CDT), Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to see all library source packages having a minimum of 4
binary packages required by Policy: the SONAME, the -dev, the -dbg
and a -doc
documentation is trivial to generate when using POD.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgp2tEz4LwxUV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
not need separate -doc packages.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgppwRToTm8D3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:39:26 +0100
Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After reading the responses so far, the -doc element of my original
idea needs modification.
I'd like to see all library source packages having a minimum of 4
binary packages required by Policy: the SONAME, the -dev
1 - 100 of 1926 matches
Mail list logo
