Title: Untitled Document
Title: Untitled Document
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:40:28PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
> (seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
> considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
> though), but they
Please read the libtool info files. Library versions != Source versions.
Library versions are dependent on binary-compatibility, or should be,
and this is fully documented in the package 'libtool-doc' in the
section on Versioning. And then forward the information to
upstream so that they know, as
I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
(seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
though), but they *still* haven't heard about library versioning, so
compiling the new
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:40:28PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
> I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
> (seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
> considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
> though), but they
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 09:46:24PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
>
> > That's correct, except dh_movefiles will look for debian/files whether you
> > want it to or not... if there's no debian/mainpackage.files it will try
> > debian/files which will be pres
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
> That's correct, except dh_movefiles will look for debian/files whether you
> want it to or not... if there's no debian/mainpackage.files it will try
> debian/files which will be present after a build and will cause problems on
> the next build...
Hmm. O
Please read the libtool info files. Library versions != Source versions.
Library versions are dependent on binary-compatibility, or should be,
and this is fully documented in the package 'libtool-doc' in the
section on Versioning. And then forward the information to
upstream so that they know, a
I have a library package at version 2.01, and the soversion in it is 0.0.0
(seems upstream hadn't heard about library versioning). Now, I'm
considering packaging a new upstream version (2.3.4, still in prerelease
though), but they *still* haven't heard about library versioning, so
compiling the ne
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 08:04:24PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
>
> > I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
> > ".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
> > appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-genchanges, whi
Hi,
Thanks for all the helpful replies.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 05:49:17PM +0200, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> Hi Hussain,
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 04:18:38PM +0100, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
> > program (babel) w
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
> I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
> ".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
> appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-genchanges, which clobbers
> debian/files with some information about the built package
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 09:46:24PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
>
> > That's correct, except dh_movefiles will look for debian/files whether you
> > want it to or not... if there's no debian/mainpackage.files it will try
> > debian/files which will be pre
Hi,
I think I've found a problem with debhelper... I don't see it in the bug
tracking system, so I want to run it past someone...
I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-genc
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
> That's correct, except dh_movefiles will look for debian/files whether you
> want it to or not... if there's no debian/mainpackage.files it will try
> debian/files which will be present after a build and will cause problems on
> the next build...
Hmm.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 08:04:24PM +0200, Ove Kaaven wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
>
> > I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
> > ".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
> > appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-genchanges, wh
Hi,
Thanks for all the helpful replies.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 05:49:17PM +0200, Uwe Hermann wrote:
> Hi Hussain,
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 04:18:38PM +0100, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
> > program (babel)
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 at 18:05:58 +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 06:29:22PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm very glad to hear that work's being done on dpkg-source that should
> > (if I understand it correctly) obsolete this hack.
>
> my i ask you what is the work on dp
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 06:29:22PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
[snip]
> I'm very glad to hear that work's being done on dpkg-source that should
> (if I understand it correctly) obsolete this hack.
>
my i ask you what is the work on dpkg-source you are talking about?
> --
> Colin Watson
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> The license for babel is:
>
>
> This software is provided on an "as is" basis, and without warranty of
> any kind, including but not limited to any implied warranty of
> merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
>
> In no event
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Brett Cundal wrote:
> I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
> ".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
> appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-genchanges, which clobbers
> debian/files with some information about the built packag
Hi Hussain,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 04:18:38PM +0100, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> Hi,
> I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
> program (babel) whose license is a bit vague, at least to me.
> I intend to create binary for babel from the babel source in a sub
> The license for babel is:
>
>
> This software is provided on an "as is" basis, and without warranty of
> any kind, including but not limited to any implied warranty of
> merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
>
> In no event shall the authors or the University of Arizona be li
Hi,
I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
program (babel) whose license is a bit vague, at least to me.
I intend to create binary for babel from the babel source in a sub
directory of my package.
I have e-mailed the authors of this program (babel) about my ITP
Hi,
I think I've found a problem with debhelper... I don't see it in the bug
tracking system, so I want to run it past someone...
I'm using dh_movefiles, which uses a package file called
".files", or "files" which applies to the main package only. This
appears to conflict with (I think) dpkg-gen
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 10:27:21AM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
>
> Until the crypto in main stuff settles down, I'm setting up sendmail to
> build either SSL or non-SSL... All that works fine...
>
> The problem comes when the user replaces the non-ssl with the ssl
> version (or visa versa):
Niall Young wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$ dpkg-genchanges
> -fdebian/Device-SerialPort.files
> dpkg-genchanges: error: badly formed line in files list file, line 1
>
> whose contents is:
>
> etc
> etc/Device
> usr
> usr/lib
> usr/lib/perl5
> usr/lib/perl
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 at 18:05:58 +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 06:29:22PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm very glad to hear that work's being done on dpkg-source that should
> > (if I understand it correctly) obsolete this hack.
>
> my i ask you what is the work on d
On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 06:29:22PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
[snip]
> I'm very glad to hear that work's being done on dpkg-source that should
> (if I understand it correctly) obsolete this hack.
>
my i ask you what is the work on dpkg-source you are talking about?
> --
> Colin Watson
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> The license for babel is:
>
>
> This software is provided on an "as is" basis, and without warranty of
> any kind, including but not limited to any implied warranty of
> merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
>
> In no even
Hi Hussain,
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 04:18:38PM +0100, Muhammad Hussain Yusuf wrote:
> Hi,
> I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
> program (babel) whose license is a bit vague, at least to me.
> I intend to create binary for babel from the babel source in a su
> The license for babel is:
>
>
> This software is provided on an "as is" basis, and without warranty of
> any kind, including but not limited to any implied warranty of
> merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
>
> In no event shall the authors or the University of Arizona be l
Hi,
I have an ITP for a program (gdis, which is GPL) which requires another
program (babel) whose license is a bit vague, at least to me.
I intend to create binary for babel from the babel source in a sub
directory of my package.
I have e-mailed the authors of this program (babel) about my ITP
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 10:27:21AM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote:
>
> Until the crypto in main stuff settles down, I'm setting up sendmail to
> build either SSL or non-SSL... All that works fine...
>
> The problem comes when the user replaces the non-ssl with the ssl
> version (or visa versa):
Niall Young wrote:
> niall@host:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$ dpkg-genchanges
>-fdebian/Device-SerialPort.files
> dpkg-genchanges: error: badly formed line in files list file, line 1
>
> whose contents is:
>
> etc
> etc/Device
> usr
> usr/lib
> usr/lib/perl5
> usr/lib/perl5/5.005
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:16:19AM +0800, Niall Young wrote:
> I'm packaging up Device::SerialPort from CPAN (for my own
> use), and have been banging my head against this wall:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$
> dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
> ...
> dpkg-genchang
Niall Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm packaging up Device::SerialPort from CPAN (for my own
>use), and have been banging my head against this wall:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$ dpkg-buildpackage
>-rfakeroot
>...
> dpkg-genchanges
>dpkg-genchanges: failure:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 11:16:19AM +0800, Niall Young wrote:
> I'm packaging up Device::SerialPort from CPAN (for my own
> use), and have been banging my head against this wall:
>
> niall@host:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$ dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
> ...
> dpkg-genchanges
> dpkg
Niall Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm packaging up Device::SerialPort from CPAN (for my own
>use), and have been banging my head against this wall:
>
>niall@host:~/Device-SerialPort/Device-SerialPort-0.10$ dpkg-buildpackage
>-rfakeroot
>...
> dpkg-genchanges
>dpkg-genchanges: failure: cannot
40 matches
Mail list logo
