RFS: gbuffy (adopted)

Hi all, I'm looking for a sponsor to upload a new gbuffy version for me. I've decided to adopt the gbuffy package since it is in bad shape, I use it every day and I wouldn't like it to be removed from Debian. The wnpp bug is #242096. This version cleans up the packaging a little and, mo

100% Gua-rantee 0r M0ney Back! vW

Debian-laptop-request Volumizer Doubles, Triples, Quadruples and MORE! ... not just volume of ejaculate, but intensity and power of 0rgasms. " IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BLOW YOUR MIND" Enjoy a bigger, more impressive load of cum ejaculation. Experience orgasms that go on and on..and on! Best sexual ex

RFS: gbuffy (adopted)

Hi all, I'm looking for a sponsor to upload a new gbuffy version for me. I've decided to adopt the gbuffy package since it is in bad shape, I use it every day and I wouldn't like it to be removed from Debian. The wnpp bug is #242096. This version cleans up the packaging a little and, mo

100% Gua-rantee 0r M0ney Back! vW

Debian-laptop-request Volumizer Doubles, Triples, Quadruples and MORE! ... not just volume of ejaculate, but intensity and power of 0rgasms. " IT WILL ABSOLUTELY BLOW YOUR MIND" Enjoy a bigger, more impressive load of cum ejaculation. Experience orgasms that go on and on..and on! Best sexual exp

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > > Thanks for the url. I'm not sure how that solves my problem. As I > > understand you, I need to convince the upstream maintainer to switch > > to LSB style initscript. I can try doing that. The initscript has > > Yes, that was my idea - so everybody

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > > Thanks for the url. I'm not sure how that solves my problem. As I > > understand you, I need to convince the upstream maintainer to switch > > to LSB style initscript. I can try doing that. The initscript has > > Yes, that was my idea - so everybody

Re: Instead of the amd64 GR: rudimentary amd64 support for sarge, need sponsor.

Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Hi, > > given the current sarge deadline and the opinions expressed by some of > the release team a full amd64 port in sarge is not going to happen. So > lets move on. > > > What else can we do for amd64 users? What about maintaining a stable repository for amd64 o

Re: Instead of the amd64 GR: rudimentary amd64 support for sarge, need sponsor.

Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Hi, > > given the current sarge deadline and the opinions expressed by some of > the release team a full amd64 port in sarge is not going to happen. So > lets move on. > > > What else can we do for amd64 users? What about maintaining a stable repository for amd64 o

Instead of the amd64 GR: rudimentary amd64 support for sarge, need sponsor.

Hi, given the current sarge deadline and the opinions expressed by some of the release team a full amd64 port in sarge is not going to happen. So lets move on. What else can we do for amd64 users? We have a fully working i386 port which works on amd64 systems too. What we need most now is suppo

Re: package with more than one license: logwatch

Frank Küster wrote: Willi Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For the general problems associated with different licenses in one package, you might find a look at http://bugs.debian.org/218105 informative. (Although I hope that your package isn't as mixed as ours). Thanks. Can anyone tell me pl

Instead of the amd64 GR: rudimentary amd64 support for sarge, need sponsor.

Hi, given the current sarge deadline and the opinions expressed by some of the release team a full amd64 port in sarge is not going to happen. So lets move on. What else can we do for amd64 users? We have a fully working i386 port which works on amd64 systems too. What we need most now is suppo

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Pierre, * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 18:25]: > > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > > > i read it. it think i read all documentation in the web about cdbs. > >

Re: fixing a woody-only bug?

Hallo Magosányi, * Magosányi Árpád (mag) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:32]: > Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded > version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution > in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades. > But the upload has been

Re: package with more than one license: logwatch

Frank Küster wrote: Willi Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For the general problems associated with different licenses in one package, you might find a look at http://bugs.debian.org/218105 informative. (Although I hope that your package isn't as mixed as ours). Thanks. Can anyone tell me please i

Re: RFTS: irda-utils

hello.. 10 minutes after i sent this, i got my account @debian.org... so forget about the sponsor thing, but you might have a look at it, anyway. :) bye, sebastian * Sebastian Henschel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 16:21 +0200]: > as my current sponsor has to renew his gpg-key and the freeze

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Pierre, * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 18:25]: > > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > > > i read it. it think i read all documentation in the web about cdbs. > >

Re: fixing a woody-only bug?

Hallo Magosányi, * Magosányi Árpád (mag) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:32]: > Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded > version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution > in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades. > But the upload has been

RFTS: irda-utils

hi folks... as my current sponsor has to renew his gpg-key and the freeze for sarge is about to happen in the foreseeable future, i hereby put a request for a temporary sponsor for the package irda-utils. some important things have changed from -4 to -5, so i believe to need a couple of uploads to

Re: RFTS: irda-utils

hello.. 10 minutes after i sent this, i got my account @debian.org... so forget about the sponsor thing, but you might have a look at it, anyway. :) bye, sebastian * Sebastian Henschel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 16:21 +0200]: > as my current sponsor has to renew his gpg-key and the freeze

Re: problems with cdbs

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include > * Pierre HABOUZIT [Tue, Jul 27 2004, 11:19:22PM]: > > > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > I think, CDBS restrict

Re: problems with cdbs

#include * Pierre HABOUZIT [Tue, Jul 27 2004, 11:19:22PM]: > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS I think, CDBS restricts too much, simply dangerous hocus pocus. For example, I still don't see how t

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wednesday 28 July 2004 12.55, Chirag Kantharia wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:57:02AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > Thanks for the url. I'm not sure how that solves my problem. As I > understand you, I need to convince the upstream maintainer to switch > to LSB styl

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

This one time, at band camp, Chirag Kantharia said: > Hi! > > I'm packaging netdump for Debian. The package comes with it's own > initscripts, which are RedHat specific. I had used the Debian template > for initscript, in my first attempt to package netdump. Using the > RedHat version of the inits

RFTS: irda-utils

hi folks... as my current sponsor has to renew his gpg-key and the freeze for sarge is about to happen in the foreseeable future, i hereby put a request for a temporary sponsor for the package irda-utils. some important things have changed from -4 to -5, so i believe to need a couple of uploads to

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

Chirag Kantharia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Because of this, I have, now, two copies of initscripts (RedHat and > Debian), which my sponsor, thinks, is redundant. The initscripts > differ quite a bit, and I am not sure, if one format can be converted > to another, using simple commands (and th

Re: problems with cdbs

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 12:41:58PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote: > Hallo Pierre, > > * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > i read it. it th

Re: problems with cdbs

Le mercredi 28 juillet 2004 à 12:43 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit : > thats the problem i mean. do you have an idea how to fix it? my skills > on autoconf are not so high i think. Apparently it worked because the debian/rules used make install prefix= instead of DESTDIR= I'll have a look on the bui

Re: problems with cdbs

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 03:22:19PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > #include > * Pierre HABOUZIT [Tue, Jul 27 2004, 11:19:22PM]: > > > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > I think, CDBS restrict

Re: problems with cdbs

#include * Pierre HABOUZIT [Tue, Jul 27 2004, 11:19:22PM]: > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS I think, CDBS restricts too much, simply dangerous hocus pocus. For example, I still don't see how t

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wednesday 28 July 2004 12.55, Chirag Kantharia wrote: > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:57:02AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > Thanks for the url. I'm not sure how that solves my problem. As I > understand you, I need to convince the upstream maintainer to switch > to LSB styl

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

This one time, at band camp, Chirag Kantharia said: > Hi! > > I'm packaging netdump for Debian. The package comes with it's own > initscripts, which are RedHat specific. I had used the Debian template > for initscript, in my first attempt to package netdump. Using the > RedHat version of the inits

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:57:02AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: | Current prerelease of the LSB 2.0 spec has something on | , | but I'd have to read and understand it really well, and also look at

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Sebastien, * Sebastien Bacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the > > makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable. > > Then it tries in make install to install .mo-files in /usr/ instead of > > $(DESTDIR)/usr > > >

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Pierre, * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS i read it. it think i read all documentation in the web about cdbs. sebastian said, that the

Re: CDBS warning

Hallo Andreas, * Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good. > > but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning: > > /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a > > deprecated var

Re: CDBS warning

Hallo Sebastien, * Sebastien Bacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:30]: > > i saw other packages build with cdbs, which had these warning too? > > does anyone know, what it is? > > No idea on the warning, but afaik they are here for all my packages and > I don't have a problem to build them.

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

Chirag Kantharia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Because of this, I have, now, two copies of initscripts (RedHat and > Debian), which my sponsor, thinks, is redundant. The initscripts > differ quite a bit, and I am not sure, if one format can be converted > to another, using simple commands (and th

Re: RFS: Folding@home

Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If there any sane way to autodetect a network connection? I'm strongly > adverse to hassling anybody with extra debconf questions. > > I'll agree to a debconf question for it only if there's no good way to > handle online and offline cases automatically. (

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wednesday 28 July 2004 10.09, Chirag Kantharia wrote: [init scripts] Hi, You may want to have a look at the LSB spec - I bet it does say something about init scripts. I haven't looked myself, yet, but it is on my TODO list - I have written a Debian-specific init script for postgrey, but I t

Re: problems with cdbs

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 12:41:58PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote: > Hallo Pierre, > > * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS > > i read it. it th

Re: problems with cdbs

Le mercredi 28 juillet 2004 à 12:43 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit : > thats the problem i mean. do you have an idea how to fix it? my skills > on autoconf are not so high i think. Apparently it worked because the debian/rules used make install prefix= instead of DESTDIR= I'll have a look on the bui

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:57:02AM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: | Current prerelease of the LSB 2.0 spec has something on | , | but I'd have to read and understand it really well, and also look at |

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Sebastien, * Sebastien Bacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the > > makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable. > > Then it tries in make install to install .mo-files in /usr/ instead of > > $(DESTDIR)/usr > > >

Re: problems with cdbs

Hallo Pierre, * Pierre HABOUZIT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation" > > https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS i read it. it think i read all documentation in the web about cdbs. sebastian said, that the

Re: CDBS warning

Hallo Andreas, * Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:31]: > > i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good. > > but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning: > > /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated > > var

Re: CDBS warning

Hallo Sebastien, * Sebastien Bacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-28 12:30]: > > i saw other packages build with cdbs, which had these warning too? > > does anyone know, what it is? > > No idea on the warning, but afaik they are here for all my packages and > I don't have a problem to build them.

Debian vs RedHat init script

Hi! I'm packaging netdump for Debian. The package comes with it's own initscripts, which are RedHat specific. I had used the Debian template for initscript, in my first attempt to package netdump. Using the RedHat version of the initscript (maintained upstream), I edited Debian template, to match

Re: RFS: Folding@home

Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If there any sane way to autodetect a network connection? I'm strongly > adverse to hassling anybody with extra debconf questions. > > I'll agree to a debconf question for it only if there's no good way to > handle online and offline cases automatically. (

Re: Debian vs RedHat init script

On Wednesday 28 July 2004 10.09, Chirag Kantharia wrote: [init scripts] Hi, You may want to have a look at the LSB spec - I bet it does say something about init scripts. I haven't looked myself, yet, but it is on my TODO list - I have written a Debian-specific init script for postgrey, but I t

Re: fixing a woody-only bug?

On 2004-07-28 "Magosányi Árpád (mag)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded > version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution > in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades. [...] No, "stable". Afaict from developer

Re: fixing a woody-only bug?

On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 07:36:43AM +0200, Magosányi Árpád (mag) wrote: > Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded > version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution > in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades. > But the upload has been rejected b

Debian vs RedHat init script

Hi! I'm packaging netdump for Debian. The package comes with it's own initscripts, which are RedHat specific. I had used the Debian template for initscript, in my first attempt to package netdump. Using the RedHat version of the initscript (maintained upstream), I edited Debian template, to match

fixing a woody-only bug?

Hi! Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades. But the upload has been rejected bu Katie: Rejected: Unknown distribution `woody-proposed-updates'. Thank