* Vincent Fourmond:
> Imagine there is a huge security hole in this package. Do you really
> think the security team will want to use the *problematic* package to
> build a *clean* one ?
The machines we use for building have no untrusted local users, and
only restricted networking.
Of course,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Torsten Werner
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>> You managed to build it at some point. You didn't have it before and
>> you had it after. So you did manage one to work around that. So you
>> should be able to build it without bu
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> You managed to build it at some point. You didn't have it before and
> you had it after. So you did manage one to work around that. So you
> should be able to build it without build-depending on itself, no ?
I had simply put the upstream
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> gcc is a nightmare - it is one of the very few things where you
> can't work around the bootstrapping problem.
Just as a side note, gcc does not directly depend on itself. Or,
rather, gcc-4.3 depends on packages which are produced by g
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> The problem here is that you don't have a complex package: one
> binary, which build-depends on itself. Surely, you can work around
> that, can't you ?
How? Just send me a patch and I'll apply it if it works.
Cheers,
Torsten
--
To UNS
Hello,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Torsten Werner
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>> Maybe I'm interfering here, but I'm pretty sure that such a dirty
>> hack is a no-go for the security team.
>
> that hack in not needed in Debian because the package is i
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> Maybe I'm interfering here, but I'm pretty sure that such a dirty
> hack is a no-go for the security team.
that hack in not needed in Debian because the package is in unstable.
Can you explain what is the problem for the security tea
Hello,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Torsten Werner
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
>> Any advice on how to build this package in pbuilder and/or buildd?
>
> Just add
>
> deb http://people.debian.org/~twerner/ ./
>
> to your sources.list.
Maybe I'm interfering
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
> Any advice on how to build this package in pbuilder and/or buildd?
Just add
deb http://people.debian.org/~twerner/ ./
to your sources.list.
Cheers,
Torsten
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Torsten Werner
wrote:
> Hi Onkar,
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
>> maven-plugin-tools 2.4.3-1 in Debian unstable has build dep on
>> libmaven-plugin-tools-java which is a package created by
>> maven-plugin-tools itself. Can you please fix
Hi Onkar,
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
> maven-plugin-tools 2.4.3-1 in Debian unstable has build dep on
> libmaven-plugin-tools-java which is a package created by
> maven-plugin-tools itself. Can you please fix this circular build
> dependency?
no that is not possible. Ev
Hi,
maven-plugin-tools 2.4.3-1 in Debian unstable has build dep on
libmaven-plugin-tools-java which is a package created by
maven-plugin-tools itself. Can you please fix this circular build
dependency?
Onkar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "u
12 matches
Mail list logo
