On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Jiří Paleček wrote:
I forgot to describe the testcase: Try installing it, then remove, then
delete /etc/test/test.conf, then install again.
This has always been a feature. An administrator can remove a conffile
and dpkg should respect this local change (a removal is
On Tue, 09 May 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've made more test. The failure only happens when I execute
dpkg-buildpackage inside fakeroot. As root all works fine.
Please give the version of fakeroot that you're using. But this bug should
most probably be reassigned to fakeroot.
Please
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Bob Tanner wrote:
On Tuesday 27 June 2006 17:04, you wrote:
dpkg-1.13.22$ dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -sa
snip
dh_builddeb -a
dpkg-deb: building package `dpkg' in `../dpkg_1.13.22_i386.deb'.
tar: -: file name read contains nul character
dpkg-deb: building package
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Toni Mueller wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 16.07.2006 at 19:06:58 +1000, Brendan O'Dea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 03:19:45PM +0200, Toni Mueller wrote:
dpkg-genchanges: warning: unknown information field `Xb-Python-Version' in
input data in package's
severity 428507 normal
thanks
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Dmitry E. Oboukhov wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.13.25
Severity: grave
Please don't inflate the severity without good reasons.
If the old version of the package contains symlink, and the new version
tries to save a directory into the
$packagebuilddir = 'debian/tmp';
+
+my $sourceversion;
+my $stdout;
+my $oppackage;
+my $compare = 1; # Bail on missing symbols by default
+my $output;
+my $debug = 0;
+
+sub version {
+printf _g(Debian %s version %s.\n), $progname, $version;
+
+printf _g(
+Copyright (C) 2007 Raphael Hertzog
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Russell Coker wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.13.25
Severity: normal
Below is part of the output of stracing dpkg when installing a package. As
you can see it opens the file without O_SYNC and renames it without calling
fsync() first. This means that a reboot during
= 1; # Bail on missing symbols by default
+my $output;
+my $debug = 0;
+
+sub version {
+printf _g(Debian %s version %s.\n), $progname, $version;
+
+printf _g(
+Copyright (C) 2007 Raphael Hertzog.
+);
+
+printf _g(
+This is free software; see the GNU General Public Licence version 2
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
I would give Raphael commit rights to the repository with the
understanding that he limits himself to the branch integrating his work
for now (I really see no need for technical measures enforcing that, we
are all grown-ups, right?)
Sure, I have
On Thu, 05 Jul 2007, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
FWIW, this is fixed in the new dpkg-shlibdeps that I'm preparing (which
supports per-symbol dependencies). The code is in a branch on SVN:
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dpkg/branches/dpkg-shlibdeps-buxy/scripts/?rev=0sc=0
So wait a bit until
repository.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
From 854f7973ba2ca50123b64ddc60adac04c61bde43 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:18:12 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] dpkg
Hello Egmont,
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, Egmont Koblinger wrote:
During these 2 years no valuable comments arrived from any Debian/Dpkg
developers. I wonder why... Isn't there anyone caring about this bug? (Is
there anyone caring about Dpkg at all?) Or you simply lack developer
resources? (Well,
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
severity 432893 serious
thanks
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 02:42:03AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.7
severity 432893
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
I don't see why I should not change the severity of a report against a
package I'm not maintaining if the severity looks incorrect and the
maintainance team didn't state anything about the severity. If you were
basing that on something, please
Hi,
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
We had to fix some older alternatives breakage from a package we took
over, and used update-alternatives --display to see whether we needed to
do anything. Unfortunately,
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] update-alternatives --display xdvi.bin
xdvi.bin -
On Sun, 13 May 2007, Sam Hartman wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.13.25
Severity: normal
I have an i386 system with both i386 and amd64 libraries in
/etc/ld.so.conf. This is useful because it makes it easier to run
amd64 binaries. Modern ld.so will just skip libraries of architecture
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
All'incirca Mon, 8 Oct 2007 22:16:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sembrerebbe aver scritto:
These don't look like perl errors, but like shell errors. Somehow the
perl script gets executed as shell script. Do you have dpkg-cross
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Sami Liedes wrote:
However, it still fails to do what you describe: The .dsc can be
signed by *anyone* whose key I happen to have in my keyring, not only
by the person in the Maintainer: field, without giving any clue to
whose signature the .dsc has. I can't think what
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Sami Liedes wrote:
Sorry, signature is about making sure you can identify who is the author of
the source package. It's written nowhere than only DD should be able to sign
source packages.
No, but it fails to do that either. It doesn't verify that it's signed
by the
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Ian Jackson wrote:
tags 20471 + patch
thanks
I have prepared and tested a change that fixes this problem.
It's available at
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/git/dpkg/dpkg.bugfixes/
as the branch
bug20471
Please either attach a copy of the patch or use
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Ian Jackson wrote:
Ian Jackson writes (policy: postinst abort-remove state.):
prerm remove can be called only from unpacked, config-failed and
installed. So Kurt is correct to say that policy is wrong to say
it remains installed since the package might not be
Hi,
On Thu, 01 Nov 2007, Ian Jackson wrote:
Raphael Hertzog writes (Re: Bug#20471: patch to check rdepends on unpack):
I just did that locally and attached is the corresponding patch (created
by git-format-patch for easy inclusion). I adjusted the commit log, the
changelog and fixed some
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Joey Hess wrote:
Exiting subroutine via last at /usr/share/perl5/Dpkg/Path.pm line 52.
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Joey Hess wrote:
dpkg-gencontrol -plibaa-bin -ldebian/changelog -isp
-Tdebian/libaa-bin.substvars -Pdebian/libaa-bin
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown
severity 452022 wishlist
thanks
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.8
Severity: serious
Huh ?! I know it's important for you, but that doesn't make it RC.
problem: it potentially breaks all unofficial architectures, as the
symbols for those
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Even if it is not important for you that doesn't give you the right to
ignore the problem as you did until now.
We've had only one unconclusive IRC discussion, that's not really ignoring
the problem. And I still believe, you're over exagerating the
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Though it's worth asking ourselves if it would make sense to have an
intermediary fallback between debian/*.symbols.arch and debian/*.symbols
that
would be debian/*.symbols.kernel.
While it will fixes the problem due to the variation of the
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
The issue is that some supplementary symbols are exported due to libtool
working differently with C++ libs for apparently no good reasons. It is not
really armel-specific (except for the fact that armel generated
supplementary symbols that should
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Please read the bug log again. The supplementary symbols are not the
same on the different architectures, which causes some architectures to
have missing symbols compared to some others.
In which case it doesn't make sense to have a common
reassign 452226 kdebase 4:3.96.0-1
retitle 452226 FTFBS due to missing dependency information
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, brian m. carlson wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.9
Severity: serious
File: /usr/bin/dpkg-shlibdeps
Justification: breaks unrelated packages (through
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Riku Voipio wrote:
On armel architecture, the symbol differences have usually been
inlined softfloat symbols being exported. Which is additional symbols
and would thus not break symbol checking (if I understood correctly).
Yes.
What is more worrying is the lack of
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Unfortunately I don't really like this idea because sbuild doesn't keep
environment variables, and I don't really want to patch sbuild every
time I want to update it instead of using the .deb package directly from
debian-admin.
This is surely
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Sebastian Harl wrote:
When running dpkg-shlibdeps (with the -d command line option) from
debian/rules of one of my packages, it aborts with the following error
message:
Undefined subroutine main::capit called at /usr/bin/dpkg-shlibdeps line 62.
Thanks for the report,
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Sune Vuorela wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.9
Severity: normal
When building kdebase - after using quite some time to get
--ignore-missing-info to go thru the build system, I now get a insane
unreadable amount of warnings. The only thing it does is cluttering
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.9
Severity: serious
From my build log:
dh_compress -pkzenexplorer -X .dcl -X .docbook -X -license -X .tag -X .sty -X
.el
dh_fixperms -pkzenexplorer
dh_makeshlibs -pkzenexplorer
dh_installdeb -pkzenexplorer
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
No associated package found for /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4
dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: No dependency information found for libusb-0.1.so.4
(used by debian/kzenexplorer/usr/bin/kzenexplorer).
Looking up shlibs dependency of libusb-0.1.so.4 provided by ''
[ CCing #452511 as I provide an explanation of why we shouldn't change
back to --ignore-missing-info by default without careful consideration ]
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Damn I wanted to answer to that, and forgot: I don't think anyone
wants a revert. I'd expect you to make
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
dpkg-shlibdeps's latest incarnation (as of 1.14.8 and its experimental
predecessors) introduces a performance regression: it runs dpkg
--search once per executable or library being examined, rather than
caching its results any fashion. As each call
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
clone 439979 -1
reassign 439979 dpkg-dev 1.14.5
reassign -1 dpkg-dev 1.14.5
retile 439979 dpkg-buildpackage: support cross-building by setting up the
environment
usertag 439979 dpkg-buildpackage
retitle -1 dpkg-shlibdeps: support cross-building by scanning required
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
I thought Guillem wanted to review the use of /usr/arm-linux-gnu/lib and
/usr/arm-linux-gnu/include ? I do have perl code that solves the problem
(used it to cross build GPE for Emdebian) involving adding search
directories to LD_LIBRARY_PATH but I
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007, Robert Millan wrote:
Please could you move dpkg-architecture from dpkg-dev to dpkg ? It seems that
because of this, it turns out that having the xorg meta-package installed
requires dpkg-dev and hence binutils (because of type-handling).
dpkg-architecture is perl and the
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007, Matthias Klose wrote:
The gcj-4.X packages fail to build with this version of dpkg:
dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: no dependency information found for
/usr/lib64/libgcj_bc.so.1 (used by
debian/gcj-4.3/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.3/ecj1).
dh_shlibdeps: command
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
+my @shlibdeps=();
+# ARCH for some awkward builds
+my $crossprefix = Dpkg::Arch::debarch_to_gnutriplet($ENV{ARCH}) if
($ENV{ARCH});
What's the role of $ARCH ? And why shall we consider that we're
crossbuilding only because this variable is set ?
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007, Matthias Klose wrote:
Hum, /usr/lib64 is scanned after /usr/lib so it means that
debian/gcj-4.3/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.3/ecj1 has a RPATH pointing
to /usr/lib64 ...
Is that true ? Is there a good reason for this ?
maybe not; but this kind of thing is
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 00:01:22 +0100
Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
+my @shlibdeps=();
+# ARCH for some awkward builds
+my $crossprefix = Dpkg::Arch::debarch_to_gnutriplet($ENV{ARCH
retitle 454379 obsolete conffiles are not deleted on purge
thanks
Hi,
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
reassign 454379 dpkg
Bug#454379: libzvbi0 -- Doesn't purge all files after piuparts
Install+Upgrade+Purge test
Bug reassigned from package `libzvbi0' to `dpkg'.
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 00:01:22 +0100
Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
+my @shlibdeps=();
+# ARCH for some awkward builds
+my
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007, Colin Watson wrote:
Perhaps dpkg-shlibdeps should ignore libm.so.6 for binaries also linked
against libstdc++.so.*?
Yeah, I agree. A fix has been committed to the git repo.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
I'm ok with a
supplementary specific check for building of a cross-compiler, but not
with a generic check like testing the ARCH environment variable.
OK, I have a solution for that - replace $ARCH with $GCC_TARGET.
I've tested with this change
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Adeodato Simó wrote:
I can see how the recent change of sorting the Depends field can be
useful. However, I would very much like to ask that if a package:
Depends: foo (= 1.1), foo ( 1.2)
that the final order is kept like that, because reading sequentially:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
Fine by me. But do you think this calls for a bug against those
packages which unnecessarily depend on atlas due to this change? I can
file wishlists against those, and they surely should not need atlas,
as they have been without it earlier.
It makes
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, Simon Richter wrote:
the attached patch adds a new variable DEB_VARIANT to the build
environment, which can be used to build different binary packages out of
the same source package in different circumstances.
I like the idea of standardizing on a variable name to detect
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
-#DEPRECATED: 1.1.6# [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.1.3
-#DEPRECATED: 1.1.6# [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.1.3
+#DEPRECATED: 1.1.6-1# [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.1.3
+#DEPRECATED: 1.1.6-1# [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.1.3
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.1.3
-effects to this change.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
commit e1cc494b6e8811fd4fc9fed2a7d458ae8849ccdd
Author: Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed Dec 26 14:47:50 2007 +0100
dpkg-source: fix
forcemerge 453885 457833
thanks
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
When building wine on amd64 we get the following error:
dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: no dependency information found for
/usr/lib32/libxml2.so.2 (used by debian/libwine/usr/lib/wine/msxml3.dll.so).
The problem is that
On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Riku Voipio wrote:
__exidx_end and __exidx_start are arm eabi internal symbols from
libgcc. I suggest blacklisting them in SymbolFile.pm:
Thanks I added those symbols to the blacklist. Will be in dpkg-dev
1.14.15.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007, A. Costa wrote:
Found some typos in '/usr/share/man/man1/dpkg-gensymbols.1.gz',
'/usr/share/man/man1/dpkg-shlibdeps.1.gz',
'/usr/share/man/man1/dpkg-source.1.gz',
and '/usr/share/man/man5/deb-symbols.5.gz',
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
It would be useful in some cases if dpkg-gencontrol could read
substitution variables from multiple files. So letting -T
options accumulate rather than overwrite each other would be nice.
What is this use case precisely?
Given that you can add
Hi,
a long mail with some IRC discussion of the problem.
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
dpkg-shlibdeps misses some symbols and thus prints warnings about not
using symbols from a library even when doing so.
[...]
Thus those symbols are actually needed. (They are variables with
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.14
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: dpkg-gensymbols
Matthias Klose suggested me to support wildcards in symbols files. The
idea is that the maintainer could then create the symbols files this way:
libc.so.6 libc6 #MINVER#
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.0
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008, Steve Langasek wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2
[...]
Perhaps to limit the possibilities of abuse, wildcards should only be
supported in symbol names if there's an accompanying symbol version (with no
wildcard expansion)?
What do you mean exactly ?
I don't plan to allow
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Peter Karlsson wrote:
Don't use 'soft'. It's broken.
Removing it makes no difference. The build still fails.
To ensure it wasn't something weird with the build paths, I copied the
files to another directory (still NFS), and the build still fails. If I
copy the files
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, Benjamin M. A'Lee wrote:
Package: dpkg
Followup-For: Bug #31352
Since the Debian project apparently intends to continue distributing
non-free software, should this bug be marked as wontfix?
Added to this is the fact that an APT frontend generally makes no
assumptions
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, Christian Perrier wrote:
Since the Debian project apparently intends to continue distributing
non-free software, should this bug be marked as wontfix?
The point is not even wanting to distribute non-free software or
not. Even if Debian wasn't distributing non-free
forcemerge 459815 460037
thanks
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Devin Carraway wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.15
Severity: normal
On upgrading to dpkg 1.14.15 without upgrading dpkg-dev (APT held it
back because of the implied install of lzma), package builds began
failing thusly:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Stephen Gildea wrote:
When using the -v flag of dpkg-gencontrol to set the version number
of the binary package being built, the subst variable binary:Version
fails to be set correctly. Instead of getting the value specified with
the -v, it gets the version of the source.
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Clint Adams wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:35:57AM +0100, arno renevier wrote:
zsh-doc upgrade did not work today.
I tried to uninstall, and reinstall, and it looks like package is
uninstallable. Here is the output I get with aptitude install zsh-doc:
This is bug
Package: dpkg-dev
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: dpkg-parsechangelog
The merge of the parsechangelog branch has added several features to the
program (see its usage screen) but they are not yet documented in
dpkg-parsechangelog(1).
It's even more needed since one of the option refer to the
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Matthias Klose wrote:
afaiu the rationale for having symbols files was to get smoother
dependency information for shared libraries. This still can be done
with the wildcard approach. The check of dropped symbols could be done
by maintaining a database of symbol files for
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
$ dpkg -S /usr/bin/editor
non-packaged symlink to /etc/alternatives/editor: /usr/bin/editor
non-packaged symlink to /usr/bin/vim: /etc/alternatives/editor
non-packaged symlink to /etc/alternatives/vim: /usr/bin/vim
non-packaged symlink to /usr
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Toby Speight wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.7
Severity: important
File: /usr/sbin/update-alternatives
/[ update-alternatives --help ]
| Options:
| --test don't do anything, just demonstrate.
\
But when I tried using --test
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.13
forcemerge 330256 454628
Bug#330256: delete obsolescent not-locally-changed conffiles
Bug#454628: obsolete conffiles are
Hello,
FWIW I rebased the patchs. Please find them attached. It looks like 2 pretty
minor bugfixes that should be safe to apply.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
From
FWIW, I just rebased Ian's patch and fixed the small conflict. It only
needs some further tweaking for the 0 = NULL changes in theory.
(But I did no tests by myself)
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
From
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 09:17:21PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
Per policy 7.6, build-deps must be available for clean; pbuilder
calls dpkg-buildpackage -S to generate a source suitable to be copied
into the build environment; by default, this
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 08:38:03AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
tags 354999 + pending
What change are you making? I just checked (after realizing that my
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
Package: dselect
Version: 1.14.7
Severity: normal
Tags: d-i
dselect's priority was recently dropped from required to important
(#452652), but important is still a much-inflated priority (so is
standard -- optional would be ok). dselect is not the kind
On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
1) Build-Options field
As pointed out this doesn't scale very well and there is no real way to
make it default behaviour one day. This would be the way to go though if
it only needs to be specified for few packages (either because we think
that
-buildpackage anyway)
Frank, any comments or is it safe to commit?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
From 1b77732a7ab316ca7d71f8db62b5079aa5915adc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date
2001
From: Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:55:01 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] dpkg-checkbuilddeps: add -d and -c options to override build-depends/conflicts
* scripts/dpkg-checkbuilddeps.pl: Add support of options -d and -c to use
build dependencies/conflicts given
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
We have the -j command now, so it's much less useful. Still I have created
another patch that implements what I explained above: it offers a -R
option to replace debian/rules by whatever you want.
(the other patches were meant for the old
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 11:07:20PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Though I think that -d and -c can be interesting, so I wrote a new patch
to support them (it's attached). I'll apply it for dpkg 1.14.17.
You really should add a option to set
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
Raphael Hertzog writes (Bug#456332: dpkg could use an elevated pre-depends
or depends on lzma):
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Ian Jackson wrote:
IMO the lzma binary package should Provide a new virtual package name,
lzma-deb-support or some such. Packages
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Tino Keitel wrote:
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.14.15
Severity: normal
Hi,
recent versions of dpkg-dev cause failures with dpkg-buildpackage. With
1.14.15 it works fine.
It if works with 1.14.15 don't report the bug against 1.14.15 as you did.
Take care to put the
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.16.2
Severity: critical
Hello,
since the last updates on the dpkg package, I noticed that all start
scripts which are using the start-stop-daemon with the '--retry 60'
option no longer works on stopping them.
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Andreas Påhlsson wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.13.25
Severity: important
Tags: patch
Lighttpd often dies when rotating the logs. Trying to reproduce the error
manually I got the following error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# /etc/init.d/lighttpd reload
* Reloading web
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
libvorbis does not build on armel:
| dpkg-gensymbols: warning: some new symbols appeared in the symbols file.
| dpkg-gensymbols: warning: debian/libvorbisfile3/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't
match completely debian/libvorbisfile3.symbols
|
| ---
Hi,
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Matthias Klose wrote:
Currently dpkg-shlibdeps emits wrong-leading warnings for packages
linked against libgcj_bc.so:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/ecj-gcj/usr/bin/ecj-gcj shouldn't be linked
with libgcj_bc.so.1 (it uses none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
Yes, but if the decompressor packages are reorganised at all, or we
decide to change again how it is implemented in dpkg, all of those
packages will become broken.
Given that this will be a pre-depends and will be in a large number of
packages, I
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
How do we expect to choose which packages will use which compressors ?
Right now, maintainers choose that by adding the right -Z option in the
dh_builddeb call (which forwards the option to dpkg-deb -b). So they put
it directly in the rules file.
Ideally
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Ian Jackson wrote:
Raphael Hertzog writes (Bug#456332: dpkg could use an elevated pre-depends
or depends on lzma):
The debian/control field is the only viable option IMO. It would be
somewhat similar to the Package-Type: header which has no real use except
influencing
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 04:02:56PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Alternatively, we could make it display a warning and not actually exit.
And this warning can itself warn that in the future it might fail at that
point if -d is not passed
Hello,
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Riku Voipio wrote:
Is there a easy way to generate .symbols files for all library packages
for a selected arch? I presume mole has some code to do that but the
sources hide from me. This would make it possible to do a exhaustive
search of arch-specific symbols.
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Matthias Klose wrote:
Currently dpkg-shlibdeps emits wrong-leading warnings for packages
linked against libgcj_bc.so:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/ecj-gcj/usr/bin/ecj-gcj shouldn't be linked
with libgcj_bc.so.1
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008, Joey Hess wrote:
libzlui-gtk depends on libzlcore (= 0.8.12-3). I have both installed. If
I tell dpkg to upgrade to a new 0.8.13 version of libzlcore, it does so,
leaving libzlui-gtk with a broken dependency. At no point does dpkg
complain about that dependency being
Hi Ian,
since you wrote the patch that Joey has been testing, can you look what's
wrong with it ?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
---BeginMessage---
I haven't checked, but this sounds very similar to
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:39:21AM +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:25:13AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
Granted my perl-fu is not that strong, and looking at the documentation,
I might have exaggerated the extent of this
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Adam Heath wrote:
Undefined subroutine Dpkg::Version::_g called at
/usr/share/perl5/Dpkg/Version.pm line 204.
If I use Dpkg::Gettext, the problem goes away.
Thanks for spotting this, the fix has been committed. It will be in
1.14.17.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.16.6
Severity: normal
The check target in scripts/Makefile.am does not tweak PATH which means when
it executes `dpkg`, it grabs it from PATH instead of src/dpkg in the build
directory. This patch should fix things:
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usertag 466971 dpkg-query
severity 466971 wishlist
retitle 466971 dpkg-query -L should sort the file list
thanks
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Jari Aalto wrote:
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.14.16.6
Severity: minor
Please adjust the option -L so that the listing is presented
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le vendredi 22 février 2008 à 00:07 +0100, Frank Lichtenheld a écrit :
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 09:47:21PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
debchange simply parses the output of dpkg-parsechangelog(1) in order to
derive the changes. dpkg-pc is
1 - 100 of 801 matches
Mail list logo
