Sigh.
On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 12:59:23PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
Using packages to support upstream development is a common problem and
this is exactly where things get awkward.
No, it is not a *problem*; it is a *method* of doing things.
It is not your place (nor mine) to question
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.16.10
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
Before the 3.0 formats came out, there were several patch system
thingies that used similar concepts of having a debian/patches directory
in which individual patches were stored.
I never touched the things, because the packages I
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 04:33:13PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
Hi!
On Sat, 2001-09-15 at 15:24:22 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
(i.e., over a decade ago -- time sure flies).
reopen 112325
severity 112325 wishlist
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Wouter
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:04:00AM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi Bernd,
Am Donnerstag, den 14.06.2012, 10:32 +0200 schrieb Bernd Zeimetz:
I would like to see more flexibility in dpkg-source as to where the
effective build depends come from. My use case are (as you might guess)
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 02:00:04PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Hi,
it seems that my idea is not well received; point taken, and I do like
the alternative about debian/rules creating debian/control in the clean
target.
Do. Not. Do. That.
Ever.
if you do, you risk all kinds of problems,
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 11:20:03AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
It has been suggested on IRC that having dpkg-source switch back to
native mode if it can't find the .orig tarball was probably a bad idea
from the beginning and that it tends to confuse people. However,
with the addition of new
On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 03:27:04PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Yep, this was already known and is the reason of the quick 1.14.14 upload..
Oops -- sorry.
--
Lo-lan-do Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.10
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Hi,
The recent change to check missing shlibdeps files and to error out if
not makes some packages insta-buggy where they otherwise wouldn't be. A
good example is in libm; there is no shlibdeps file for libm, which
makes
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 11:11:04PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
One of the issue is that tools like sbuild and pbuilder which want to
take advantage of the Build-Depends-Indep split needs to know whether
dpkg-buildpackage will call debian/rules build or build-arch.
It needs to know no such
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 03:28:05PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
Running debian-rules can always have side effects and can actively
rely on them so a --has-target can not be implemented cleanly in
make.
I am proposing hooking into the logic that ultimately decides that
there is no such target
10 matches
Mail list logo
