Hi,
I'm going to became a Debian Developer and now started to package my
first programm bvi. Now I have a problem which I couldn't solve, because
I don't find the error. I'm getting the following error, when I try to
create the debian-package by calling 'dpkg-buildpackage':
| make[2]: Leaving
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Christian Kurz wrote:
Hi,
I'm going to became a Debian Developer and now started to package my
first programm bvi. Now I have a problem which I couldn't solve, because
I don't find the error. I'm getting the following error, when I try to
create the debian-package by
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Wed, Feb 24, 1999 at 11:57:02AM -0800, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote:
1. tar zxvf upstream_src.tgz
2. Apply the .diff that was generated when I produced 0.26.2 (and get rid
of the files like changelog, control etc.)
I usually extract the new
John == John Travers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John I am porting it to gtk/gnome and gpl-ing it. Shoud i do this
John before i first release it to make it legal, or should i just
John write a note with it describing the circumstances and then gpl
John it. It seems to me that it was meant to be
Turbo Fredriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christian Kurz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|build:
|$(CHECKDIR)
|$(MAKE) linux
Have you edited the make file to have it install in debian/tmp ?
Now, but that shouldn't be the problem.
Just saying so in the rules file, doesn't
Anything I can do to override this? It's on purpose, so that I don't
have to include the whole pike/0.6 tree (the 'pike_0.6.110.orig.tar.gz'
tarball)...
-
dpkg-source: building roxen using existing roxen_1.2.46.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: building roxen in roxen_1.2.46-3.diff.gz
dpkg-source:
On Tue, Feb 23, 1999 at 02:13:43AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
sbin is for STATIC binaries.
Please read section 3.10 of fsstnd (/usr/doc/debian-policy/fsstnd)
before you write something like this...
FSSTND is a Linuxism.
Debian is a Linux.
Whatever the original purpose, even Solaris
Hi,
I'm trying to consolidate emusic into one .deb, and have no problems,
except one - the old packages have a versioned Depends: on one another.
I know that dpkg can't do versioned Provides...suggestions? Since this is
unstable, is it ok if I break them, and make the users manually remove the
On Saturday 27 February 1999, at 18 h 14, the keyboard of Josip Rodin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I usually extract the new one (or apply a patch if that is the method),
gunzip -dc old_version.diff.gz somefile, then edit that 'somefile' and
replace all instances of progdirectory-1.2.0 with
On Sunday 28 February 1999, at 17 h 1, the keyboard of John Travers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. It has no copyright notice. No email contacts and about four names of those
who wrote it. Apparantly it was some sort of university project. Anyway I
cannot contact anyone
I very often have the
Hi Stephane,
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 04:05:43PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Using CVS together with Debian GNU/Linux packages
http://www.debian.org/devel/HOWTO.cvs suggests another solution, based
on CVS. It seems very nice (I use CVS for other projects) but I did not
use it for Debian
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 01:51:58PM +, Ben Bell wrote:
Debian is a Linux.
This is not true. Debian is an operating system distribution. Linux is
just an operating system kernel.
Debian uses Linux, this is true. Currently all released versions
of Debian use Linux, this is true too, but
On 01-Mar-99 Brian Almeida wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to consolidate emusic into one .deb, and have no problems,
except one - the old packages have a versioned Depends: on one another.
I know that dpkg can't do versioned Provides...suggestions? Since this is
unstable, is it ok if I break them,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
In two weeks from today, I start my new job. First task is to build remote
monitoring servers and design workstations. I've already decided I'm going
to do this with Debian Linux. Unsurprisingly, my new employer already
supports unix in general, and Linux like
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 08:55:57AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
I usually extract the new one (or apply a patch if that is the method),
gunzip -dc old_version.diff.gz somefile, then edit that 'somefile' and
replace all instances of progdirectory-1.2.0 with progdirectory-1.2.1.
Then apply that
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 01:10:34PM -0500, Phillip R. Jaenke ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote
In two weeks from today, I start my new job. First task is to build remote
monitoring servers and design workstations. I've already decided I'm going
to do this with Debian Linux. Unsurprisingly, my new
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, John T. Larkin wrote:
Sounds like you have a couple of requrements:
1 - you look over the code yourself (good luck -- so, do you have to
check over the gcc code you'll be compiling everything with? How
about the kernel code?
Hi,
cvs-inject is merely a front end to cvs (specifically:
cvs import -ko ; cvs export; cvs add debian; cvs commit )
cvs-upgrade is merely cvs import.
This is the recommended way of using CVS, AFAIK, and the
problems with deleted files (Attic files, etc), and problems
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 01:59:25PM +0100, Turbo Fredriksson wrote:
Anything I can do to override this? It's on purpose, so that I don't
have to include the whole pike/0.6 tree (the 'pike_0.6.110.orig.tar.gz'
tarball)...
-
dpkg-source: building roxen using existing
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:
On Mon, Mar 01, 1999 at 08:55:57AM +, Jules Bean wrote:
I usually extract the new one (or apply a patch if that is the method),
gunzip -dc old_version.diff.gz somefile, then edit that 'somefile' and
replace all instances of progdirectory-1.2.0
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Using CVS together with Debian GNU/Linux packages
http://www.debian.org/devel/HOWTO.cvs suggests another solution,
based on CVS. It seems very nice (I use CVS for other projects) but I
did not use it for Debian yet (any experiences/war stories?).
I can report a
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
$ cvs co -jupstream_version_3_1415 -jsource-dist foo
will check out the lastest version on the main trunk and merge the
changes made upstream between 3.1415 and 3.14159; here's the catch: if
3.14159 renamed some files (something I've encountered a number of
Christian Kurz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|build:
|$(CHECKDIR)
|$(MAKE) linux
Have you edited the make file to have it install in debian/tmp ?
Just saying so in the rules file, doesn't help... The Makefile
have to understand it to...
--
Noriega SEAL Team 6 KGB $400 million in
23 matches
Mail list logo
