Hi Simo,
The debian package files are in
http://www.mediasitomo.com/debian-swftools/
Thanks for your work! I've reviewed the package.
* debian/copyright does not seem to list that most of the contents of
the lib/ dir are licenced under the LGPL.
* debian/compat: Since you depend on
Hi Warren,
The new packages are at [1].
The newest packages remove the libnetcdf++4 package as I don't think it's
needed.
Because of the soversion change, I agree with you that the libnetcdf++4
package (even as a dummy) is unneeded, since nothing at all depends upon it.
Please check out
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Goirand wrote:
I don't want that it's possible to have them both at the same time. Once
again, my package1 and package2 are the same, only dependencies are not.
So can I write:
Package: package1
Conflicts: package2
Replaces: package2
[...]
Package: package2
Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
So can I write:
Package: package1
Conflicts: package2
Replaces: package2
[...]
Package: package2
Conflicts: package1
Replaces: package1
Provides: package1
That should work quite well. If any third-party packages want to depend
on either of your packages, they
Hi Thijs,
Thanks very much for your comments.
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 05:37:28PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
* debian/copyright does not seem to list that most of the contents of
the lib/ dir are licenced under the LGPL.
- Added the mention about libart being LGPL to the debian/copyright
On Friday 02 February 2007 11:01, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
I do want to caution that because of the upcoming release, it may be
best not to upload them to Debian right now. If they make it into Sid,
because of the soversion change it will become impossible for any more
netcdf packages (or any
Warren Turkal wrote:
I plan on maintaining these packages outside of Debian until Etch. If you
think it would be useful to upload to experimental, what do I need to change?
I would assume that the changelog needs to say experimental instead of
unstable. Is there anything else?
I am pretty
On Friday 02 February 2007 13:49, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
Uploading to experimental could be useful in two ways: it would help
ensure that the packages can be autobuilt (experimental now is autobuilt
for several arches), and it would make the packages a canonical part of
Debian for any people
Warren Turkal wrote:
You have convinced me, I will reroll the packages at version
3.6.2-beta6~pre1-1 so that the original source is uploaded as well. The
current version scheme I used doesn't allow a proper -1 release. Or do you
have a suggestion?
I'm not quite sure whether you want the
9 matches
Mail list logo
