On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 7:58 PM Sudip Mukherjee
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 10:17 AM Sudip Mukherjee
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:53 PM Christian Barcenas
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I just noticed that your packaging repo is currently empty.
> > > Would you be able to push your
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 10:17 AM Sudip Mukherjee
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:53 PM Christian Barcenas
> wrote:
> >
> > I just noticed that your packaging repo is currently empty.
> > Would you be able to push your current progress to Github
> > so that it's easier to review the source
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 09:39:29 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 06.02.20 um 09:22 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> > On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > But, if I am correct, the source could be using a version without epoch
> > > and only use the epoch in the binary package (which can be
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:53 PM Christian Barcenas
wrote:
>
> I just noticed that your packaging repo is currently empty.
> Would you be able to push your current progress to Github
> so that it's easier to review the source package?
Pushed now. Its without any epoch in the version. I will add
I just noticed that your packaging repo is currently empty.
Would you be able to push your current progress to Github
so that it's easier to review the source package?
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:34 PM Sudip Mukherjee
wrote:
> So, do we also use epoch or shall I try the way which Paul suggested
>
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:07 AM Sudip Mukherjee
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:39 AM Michael Biebl wrote:
> >
> > Am 06.02.20 um 09:22 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> > > On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > >>> On Wed,
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:39 AM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Am 06.02.20 um 09:22 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> > On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5,
Am 06.02.20 um 09:22 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
wrote:
> Because this
On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote:
Hi,
On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
wrote:
Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
(libbpf-dev and libbpf0
Hi,
On 06-02-2020 00:07, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
>> wrote:
>>> Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
>>> (libbpf-dev and libbpf0 currently are at 5.4.13-1 in
On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 22:42 +, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
> wrote:
> > Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
> > (libbpf-dev and libbpf0 currently are at 5.4.13-1 in sid) to libbpf
> > version numbers (0.0.6-1), the
On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 10:22 PM Christian Barcenas
wrote:
>
> Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
> (libbpf-dev and libbpf0 currently are at 5.4.13-1 in sid) to libbpf
> version numbers (0.0.6-1), the epoch needs to be incremented to 1 I
> believe.
I had this doubt
Because this changes the versioning scheme from kernel releases
(libbpf-dev and libbpf0 currently are at 5.4.13-1 in sid) to libbpf
version numbers (0.0.6-1), the epoch needs to be incremented to 1 I
believe.
CC'ing debian-devel for discussion/consensus, per Debian Policy Manual 5.6.12.
13 matches
Mail list logo
