On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 12:37:37PM +0700, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan wrote:
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Done.
Best Regards,
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
--
http://v7w.com/anibal
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On 2006-07-01, George Danchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks correct... a couple of extra things you may want to correct anyway:
- since nothing goes to usr/{s}bin you don't need the debian/dirs file, so
you
can safely remove it.
Removed.
- also remove the last two commented lines in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 7/2/06, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 12:37:37PM +0700, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan wrote:
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Done.
Thank you very much for your quick help. I
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my packages pootle and python-jtoolkit,
which pootle depends on.
* Package name: pootle
Version : 0.9-1
Upstream Author : David Fraser, translate.org.za
* URL : http://translate.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
George Danchev wrote:
Looks good.
No, unfortunately it does not. I made the mandatory all vs. any mistake.
Btw, you do not need to build-depend on perl, since debhelper will
drag it for you anyway.
I do not think that is a proper
Hello Harri,
Is there a changelog of the Debian policy online?
Actually I would have expected a pointer on
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/, but maybe
I am too blind to see.
That depends on what information you need. If you're refering to the
packaging of the policy, that URL's have
LI Daobing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/30/06, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LI Daobing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These two files were not added by me. they are in the original
source[1]. so I think I have to repackage the source if I want to clear
the warnings.
Ah, I wasn't
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package rawstudio.
* Package name: rawstudio
Version : 0.2-1
Upstream Author : Anders Kvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anders Brander [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.rawstudio.org
License : GPL
Hi mentors,
I'd like to package quilt-el and submitted ITP[1] about two months ago.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=364611
Now I have a problem with it. I can't decide which version I should package.
Firstly, its stable release version[2] is quite old and has many bugs.
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:18:39PM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
1. package stable release version
2. package developing version and don't apply any extra patches
3. package developing version and apply bug fix patch
4. wait for upstream to apply bug fix patch and release stable release
5.
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:28 +0200, Soren Hansen wrote:
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:18:39PM +0900, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
1. package stable release version
2. package developing version and don't apply any extra patches
3. package developing version and apply bug fix patch
4. wait for
Hello Mr. Fenski
As the maintainer of the package calcurse (at least until yesterday) I
was surprised, both good and bad, this morning to check my email and
find that a new version of calcurse has been uploaded to Debian.
I was surprised in a good way because the upload of version 1.4 was
* Sun 2006-07-02 Satoru Takeuchi nqm08501 AT nifty.com
* Message-Id: 87d5coks3k.wl%nqm08501 AT nifty.com
Hi mentors,
I'd like to package quilt-el and submitted ITP[1] about two months ago.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=364611
Now I have a problem with it. I can't
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Hello Harri,
Is there a changelog of the Debian policy online?
Actually I would have expected a pointer on
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/, but maybe
I am too blind to see.
That depends on what information you need. If you're refering to the
packaging of
tony mancill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
packaging of the policy, that URL's have passed by now. But what I guess
you mean is the changes between policy versions, i.e. what you need to
change to upgrade a package's standards-version. That information is
in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Uploaded.
tony
Jari Aalto+mail.linux wrote:
* Sat 2006-07-01 jari.aalto AT cante.net (Jari Aalto+mail.linux)
I'm looking for sponsor for followin package. Details below.
ITA: ace-of-penguins -- Solitaire-games with penguin-look
-BEGIN PGP
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has NOT been forwarded to the package
maintainers, but will accompany the original report in the Bug
tracking system. Please ensure that you yourself have sent a copy of
the additional information to any
* Satoru Takeuchi [Sun, 02 Jul 2006 23:18:39 +0900]:
1. package stable release version
2. package developing version and don't apply any extra patches
3. package developing version and apply bug fix patch
4. wait for upstream to apply bug fix patch and release stable release
5. something
* Ryan Coyner [Sun, 02 Jul 2006 12:11:36 -0400]:
However I must admit that I'll think twice about packaging software in
the future if there is indeed a policy where a DD can simply take over
maintainence of a package without even sending me a courtesy email.
No, there isn't such policy. To
On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 12:11:36PM -0400, Ryan Coyner wrote:
Hello Mr. Fenski
Hi.
As the maintainer of the package calcurse (at least until yesterday) I
was surprised, both good and bad, this morning to check my email and
find that a new version of calcurse has been uploaded to Debian.
I
[Note that this request doesn't quite follow the mentors template...
CC'ing anibal, who uploaded a similar package by the same upstream author]
I am looking for a sponsor for my package pmplib.
* Package name: pmplib
Version : 0.11-1 (actually it's a 0.12 pre-release, see below)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
Scenario. Package is new (no version uploaded yet). Dependences is
determined: dpkg-depcheck and pbuilder was used. But these tools not
help task determine dependences version. So, what best practices for
dependencies version in this package?
Thomas Leonard wrote:
But, there also seems to be python-support (dh_pysupport) and
python-central. Would using one of these make my package more likely to be
accepted? I'm not keen on using python-central because most of the apt-get
failures I've had recently with other packages seem to be
Hi,
I am building some multi-binary packages. The packages contain libraries
that other packages in the same build will depend on. Because the
packages I am building potentially conflict with some already in the
repository I have renamed them all with an extenstion denoting their
purpose. In the
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:02:24PM +1000, Nikolai Lusan wrote:
Once I install the libpq4-hw package dpkg will still complain:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] # dpkg -i postgresql-client-8.0-hw_8.0.7-1_i386.deb
Selecting previously deselected package postgresql-client-8.0-hw.
(Reading database ... 22134
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 12:15 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:02:24PM +1000, Nikolai Lusan wrote:
Versioned dependencies cannot be satisfied by Provided packages, AFAIK.
Great :)
Does anyone know how I can fix this one?
I strongly suspect that You're Stuffed. For
On Sunday 02 July 2006 23:53, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
--cut--
From the bug reports you've filed against calcurse it's clear to me that
you probably are the perfect person to maintain it, so in the final
analysis I have no issue with you becoming the maintainer. But like I
said, I
On 7/2/06, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LI Daobing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/30/06, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LI Daobing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These two files were not added by me. they are in the original
source[1]. so I think I have to repackage the source
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:32:53PM +1000, Nikolai Lusan wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 12:15 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
I strongly suspect that You're Stuffed. For this sort of thing, I typically
just create my own packages with the same name and cross my fingers that
they don't get into
postgresql-client-8.0-hw depends on libpq4 (= 8.0.4); however:
shouldn't it be libpq8 really? or am I missing something?
--
.-.
=-- /v\ =
Keep in touch// \\
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 13:04 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
looks like I remove the ${shlibs:Depends} from the control file and
put them in by hand, praying I don't leave something out. :)
Since all you'll be doing is putting in manually what shlibs:Depends would
have added, I don't think
Felipe Sateler wrote:
Thomas Leonard wrote:
But, there also seems to be python-support (dh_pysupport) and
python-central. Would using one of these make my package more likely to
be accepted? I'm not keen on using python-central because most of the
apt-get failures I've had recently with
32 matches
Mail list logo
