Patrick Matthäi wrote:
I hope it's now all better, I tried to fix all your tips.
there are a few things left:
* if the package was not previously available in a repository where
users could have installed it, we normally upload the first package
with revision -1. you have revision -5.
Am Dienstag, den 16 Januar hub A Mennucc folgendes in die Tasten:
Hi!
I tried it ;
I uploaded a package (using dput) ;
the first line in debian/changelog was
gpr (0.11deb.etch1) testing-proposed-update; urgency=low
~~~
The dist is called
Daniel Baumann schrieb:
Patrick Matthäi wrote:
I hope it's now all better, I tried to fix all your tips.
there are a few things left:
* if the package was not previously available in a repository where
users could have installed it, we normally upload the first package
with
Daniel Baumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
If you take a look at some other sponsors,
you will see that if they have some criticism on a package, they will
often include *why* it is a problem, and/or how to solve it. This
doesn't have to be long.
this would take me
Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Thanks for all your good tips! I'm sorry, this is my first package :)
welcome :)
I fixed it and uploaded it again to mentors as 0.2-1.
good, uploaded.
if you need/want further sponsoring, contact me off-list:
On Tuesday 16 January 2007 19:52, Jari Aalto wrote:
As to comes to removing # dh_* comments we agree to disagree on
this. I have no problem with
[name omitted]
considering that a good
practice, but I hope that all understad that developers may have
other views that may be equally valid.
Daniel Baumann schrieb:
Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Thanks for all your good tips! I'm sorry, this is my first package :)
welcome :)
I fixed it and uploaded it again to mentors as 0.2-1.
good, uploaded.
if you need/want further sponsoring, contact me off-list:
Hi,
Chris Bannister wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package gexec.
Hi,
is this still the case?
Yes, it is.
I fixed the things you mentioned and uploaded the new package to
mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gexec
- Source repository:
Johann Rudloff wrote:
Yes, it is.
good :)
I fixed the things you mentioned and uploaded the new package to
mentors.debian.net:
good, but please do also these additional things here:
* your build-depends are wrong. you depend on libgtk2.0-0 instead of
libgtk2.0-dev and libglib2.0-dev
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 09:27:27AM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
For over 3 years now I help out on a multimedia-project named MMS
... we realy would like to see it as part of debian, as we think it's stable,
tested and well documented.
I started packaging (with the help of the web
Dear Debian Developers, Mentors, Womens, Contributors and Users,
first of all Happy new Year and may this new year bring us many new ideas
and continuing best GNU/Linux distribution of the world.
Now, some of you know me already and for those who do not know me:
My Name is Michelle Konzack, I
hi
(CC: to d-mentors : I need some help here)
Steve Langasek ha scritto:
I think in conclusion I would prefer t-p-u for this.
I tried it ;
I uploaded a package (using dput) ;
the first line in debian/changelog was
gpr (0.11deb.etch1) testing-proposed-update; urgency=low
but I got this
A Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Langasek ha scritto:
I think in conclusion I would prefer t-p-u for this.
I tried it ;
I uploaded a package (using dput) ;
the first line in debian/changelog was
gpr (0.11deb.etch1) testing-proposed-update; urgency=low
It's -update*s*.
Marc
--
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt ha scritto:
It's -update*s*.
:-
I was thinking about an exoteric explanation,
kinda I had uploaded into the wrong queue ...
:-
---
thanks Marc and Max :-)
a.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 17:09:45 +0100, A Mennucc wrote:
hi
(CC: to d-mentors : I need some help here)
Steve Langasek ha scritto:
I think in conclusion I would prefer t-p-u for this.
I tried it ;
I uploaded a package (using dput) ;
the first line in debian/changelog was
gpr
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
I started packaging (with the help of the web and some maintainers of VDR)
but
am new to packaging at all ;)
...
Please send the URL to your source package's .dsc file so I can have a
look at it.
seems to be online
few notes on what I spot
since first thing of all was to check copyright file -- there seems to
be a copyright holder missing for the software itself.
there is no sense to keep config.log in .diff -- employ proper clean
procedure in debian/rules (may be the other .log files as well can
be
Hi,
I hope it's correct now, but I've one little question:
* your build-depends are wrong. you depend on libgtk2.0-0 instead of
libgtk2.0-dev and libglib2.0-dev
I added both, but is the dependency on libglib2.0-dev really neccessary?
Since libgtk2.0-dev depends on it, I think that
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 07:21:51AM +0100, Johann Rudloff wrote:
I hope it's correct now, but I've one little question:
* your build-depends are wrong. you depend on libgtk2.0-0 instead of
libgtk2.0-dev and libglib2.0-dev
I added both, but is the dependency on libglib2.0-dev really
19 matches
Mail list logo
