Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

Dear Debian mentors I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been removed since and the bugs closed. However, this

laptop-mode-tools seeking sponsor

Hi there, I'm seeking a new sponsor for laptop-mode-tools. My previous sponsor has decided to reduce his workload, so I'm currently sponsorless. The amount of work required is small, there's one or two uploads every month. -- Bart Samwel [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL

Automatisch antwoord bij afwezigheid: {Virus!} Document

Vanwege vakantie ben ik afwezig van 4-15 oktober. Voor dringende zaken m.b.t. studieadvies/examencommissie kunt u contact opnemen met de opleidingsdirecteur dhr. Van Lieshout [EMAIL PROTECTED] Afspraken m.b.t. studieadvies via het secretariaat 053-4894320. Voor dringende zaken m.b.t.

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:45:34AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Magnus Therning [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.16.2359 +0200]: Ah, cool. I am not sure why, but for some reason I thought dh-make was the deprecated one. I just made an attempt at packaging a python lib, and I failed

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2031 +0200]: That isn't an accurate description of debmake, as should be clear from its package description. The debmake package contains debstd, which is a monolithic program occupying roughly the same space as debhelper, and deb-make,

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 09:35:32PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2031 +0200]: That isn't an accurate description of debmake, as should be clear from its package description. The debmake package contains debstd, which is a monolithic

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

#include hallo.h * martin f krafft [Sun, Oct 17 2004, 11:45:34AM]: And about dh-make... stop using it anyway. Either switch to using cdbs, or get a hang of packaging so that you don't have to call this I disagree. cdbs sucks when it comes to some advanced extensions that its creators did not

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

also sprach Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2004 +0200]: Do you really think that deleting dh_ calls (instead of commenting them) is wise? Did I say delete dh_* calls? I said to delete *.ex files. Apart, yes, why not delete dh_* calls? -- Please do not CC me when replying to

Re: Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

* Andree Leidenfrost [Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:33:28 +1000]: I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been removed since

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

* Eduard Bloch [Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:04:21 +0200]: Do you really think that deleting dh_ calls (instead of commenting them) is wise? then a huge flame may be in place, since it's what is always recommended here in d-mentors: remove commented and unused calls to dh_*. -- Adeodato Simó

RFS: gaim-encryption -- encryption plugin for gaim

Hi, I'm looking for a sponsor for my gaim-encryption package. Gaim-encryption is a plugin for gaim that provides strong end-to-end encryption. http://gaim-encryption.sourceforge.net/ The package is lintian/linda clean. Please find the source packages at:

Re: RFS: gaim-encryption -- encryption plugin for gaim

begin quotation of Chris Vanden Berghe on 2004-10-18 00:45:58 +0200: I'm looking for a sponsor for my gaim-encryption package. Does you package differ substantially from Leo Costela's? [1] I believe he was waiting to have a gaim-dev package before uploading it to the archvie. In any case,

Re: Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

I demand that Andree Leidenfrost may or may not have written... I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 11:59:50PM +0200, Magnus Therning wrote: Ah, cool. I am not sure why, but for some reason I thought dh-make was the deprecated one. I just made an attempt at packaging a python lib, and I failed miserably. :-) I'll just forget about debmake's existance from now on then.

Growth hormone accelerates wound healing

we care about your health Feel the Energy and Recapture your youth For many, this is a powerful second chance go here to read how this can change your life http://ivls.iK.benefitproductshall.com/i/ Restoring my former levels of fitness and energy with this product. Also have noted that my hair

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

also sprach Magnus Therning [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.16.2359 +0200]: Ah, cool. I am not sure why, but for some reason I thought dh-make was the deprecated one. I just made an attempt at packaging a python lib, and I failed miserably. :-) I'll just forget about debmake's existance from now on

Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

Dear Debian mentors I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been removed since and the bugs closed. However, this

laptop-mode-tools seeking sponsor

Hi there, I'm seeking a new sponsor for laptop-mode-tools. My previous sponsor has decided to reduce his workload, so I'm currently sponsorless. The amount of work required is small, there's one or two uploads every month. -- Bart Samwel [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Automatisch antwoord bij afwezigheid: {Virus!} Document

Vanwege vakantie ben ik afwezig van 4-15 oktober. Voor dringende zaken m.b.t. studieadvies/examencommissie kunt u contact opnemen met de opleidingsdirecteur dhr. Van Lieshout [EMAIL PROTECTED] Afspraken m.b.t. studieadvies via het secretariaat 053-4894320. Voor dringende zaken m.b.t.

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 11:45:34AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Magnus Therning [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.16.2359 +0200]: Ah, cool. I am not sure why, but for some reason I thought dh-make was the deprecated one. I just made an attempt at packaging a python lib, and I failed

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2031 +0200]: That isn't an accurate description of debmake, as should be clear from its package description. The debmake package contains debstd, which is a monolithic program occupying roughly the same space as debhelper, and deb-make,

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sun, Oct 17, 2004 at 09:35:32PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2031 +0200]: That isn't an accurate description of debmake, as should be clear from its package description. The debmake package contains debstd, which is a monolithic

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

#include hallo.h * martin f krafft [Sun, Oct 17 2004, 11:45:34AM]: And about dh-make... stop using it anyway. Either switch to using cdbs, or get a hang of packaging so that you don't have to call this I disagree. cdbs sucks when it comes to some advanced extensions that its creators did not

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

also sprach Eduard Bloch [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.10.17.2004 +0200]: Do you really think that deleting dh_ calls (instead of commenting them) is wise? Did I say delete dh_* calls? I said to delete *.ex files. Apart, yes, why not delete dh_* calls? -- Please do not CC me when replying to

Re: Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

* Andree Leidenfrost [Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:33:28 +1000]: I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been removed since

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

* Eduard Bloch [Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:04:21 +0200]: Do you really think that deleting dh_ calls (instead of commenting them) is wise? then a huge flame may be in place, since it's what is always recommended here in d-mentors: remove commented and unused calls to dh_*. -- Adeodato Simó

RFS: gaim-encryption -- encryption plugin for gaim

Hi, I'm looking for a sponsor for my gaim-encryption package. Gaim-encryption is a plugin for gaim that provides strong end-to-end encryption. http://gaim-encryption.sourceforge.net/ The package is lintian/linda clean. Please find the source packages at:

Re: RFS: gaim-encryption -- encryption plugin for gaim

begin quotation of Chris Vanden Berghe on 2004-10-18 00:45:58 +0200: I'm looking for a sponsor for my gaim-encryption package. Does you package differ substantially from Leo Costela's? [1] I believe he was waiting to have a gaim-dev package before uploading it to the archvie. In any case,

Re: Advice sought regarding binaries in upstream source

I demand that Andree Leidenfrost may or may not have written... I am the co-maintainer for packages mindi and mondo which had bugs #233606 and #233605 filed a while ago. These bugs where about the packages containing binaries in the upstream source. This was true, the binaries have been

Re: debmake or dh-make, what should I use?

On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 11:59:50PM +0200, Magnus Therning wrote: Ah, cool. I am not sure why, but for some reason I thought dh-make was the deprecated one. I just made an attempt at packaging a python lib, and I failed miserably. :-) I'll just forget about debmake's existance from now on then.