Bug#608930: Merging DPKG::Log into dpkg codebase

2011-03-01 Thread Patrick Schoenfeld
Hi, On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:38:24AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 01 Mar 2011, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > > Well, I've written DPKG::Log because I had a need for it and thought > > it could be useful for others. Merging it into the dpkg codebase is > > probably a good idea a

Bug#229357: debian-policy: require build-arch and build-indep targets

2011-03-01 Thread Jonathan Nieder
user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org usertags 604397 + normative discussion quit (please consider dropping policy Bug#604397 or dpkg-buildpackage Bug#229357 from replies) Hi, Roger Leigh wrote: [out of order for convenience] > Just for the record, I've implemented support in debhelper's dh > c

Bug#612472: dpkg: Ubuntu ppc64 optimisation defaults

2011-03-01 Thread Colin Watson
On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:20:15AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 08 Feb 2011, Colin Watson wrote: > > We're considering bringing up a ppc64 port of the Ubuntu server, and it > > appears to be best to build it with -O3 rather than -O2. (I realise > > that this would be unusual in Debian a

Bug#608930: Merging DPKG::Log into dpkg codebase

2011-03-01 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Hi, On Tue, 01 Mar 2011, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > Well, I've written DPKG::Log because I had a need for it and thought > it could be useful for others. Merging it into the dpkg codebase is > probably a good idea and so I'm revisiting that idea with this mail. > I see one problem, however. > My

Bug#608930: Merging DPKG::Log into dpkg codebase

2011-03-01 Thread Patrick Schoenfeld
[.. Resending the mail as it seemingly did not reach the list and BTS ..] Hi dpkg maintainers, in a reply to my blog post about DPKG::Log, Raphael Hertzog, commented: > I would suggest you to submit Dpkg::Log to dpkg > itself... to be included in libdpkg-perl. > > I wonder why you did not ask in

Bug#612472: marked as pending

2011-03-01 Thread Raphaël Hertzog
tag 612472 pending thanks Hello, Bug #612472 reported by you has been fixed in the Git repository. You can see the changelog below, and you can check the diff of the fix at: http://git.debian.org/?p=dpkg/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=e02f4f5 --- commit e02f4f5bba696d270b3b82158794f5859a09f507 Aut

Processed: Bug#612472 marked as pending

2011-03-01 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 612472 pending Bug #612472 [dpkg] dpkg: Ubuntu ppc64 optimisation defaults Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 612472: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612472

Bug#612472: dpkg: Ubuntu ppc64 optimisation defaults

2011-03-01 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Tue, 08 Feb 2011, Colin Watson wrote: > Hi, > > We're considering bringing up a ppc64 port of the Ubuntu server, and it > appears to be best to build it with -O3 rather than -O2. (I realise > that this would be unusual in Debian and that there are more obstacles > to this than just dpkg-buildf