Hi Neil,
Yes you are absolutely right that how many Debain should handle it. As
per my knowledge i have good understanding of debian build process
that is why i have adopted this package.
Yes i do understand that maintaining an build packages is much harder
then other and i have tried to start th
On Feb 11, 2008 8:11 PM, Piotr Ożarowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> I've changed your package a little bit (fixed lintian error, etc., see
> attachment).
>
> Please take a look and disagree if you don't like my changes.
>
> [Mauro Lizaur, 11.02.2008]
> > Btw, i added a few lines to
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1-14
of my package "gliese".
It builds these binary packages:
gliese - Stellar data set from the Third Catalogue of Nearby Stars
Long Description:
This package provides a star catalog which contains approximately
3800 star reco
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.0-13
of my package "yale".
It builds these binary packages:
yale - Stellar data set from the Yale Bright Star Catalog
Long Description:
These data come from the [Yale] Bright Star Catalog, 5th Rev. Ed.
(preliminary), Hoffleit
Ben Finney wrote:
Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 08:37 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
A good policy except that I'd recommend you respond to at least
some of them to say *why* you think they're worth ignoring.
Those who take some time over the prepara
On Feb 11, 2008 8:11 PM, Piotr Ożarowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> I've changed your package a little bit (fixed lintian error, etc., see
> attachment).
>
> Please take a look and disagree if you don't like my changes.
>
> [Mauro Lizaur, 11.02.2008]
> > Btw, i added a few lines to
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 03:19:36PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:21:29AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> Always re-running autoconf and automake would increase the number of
> >> FTBFS's that we'd need to fix.
>
> > Not really
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "vamp-plugin-sdk".
* Package name: vamp-plugin-sdk
Version : 1.1b-1
Upstream Author : Chris Cannam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.vamp-plugins.org/
* License
Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:21:29AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Always re-running autoconf and automake would increase the number of
>> FTBFS's that we'd need to fix.
> Not really.
No, really, I promise it will. :) Each time we upgrade autoconf, it wil
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:21:29AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> > (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not only
> > "generated by the build target), which im
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
> Note that if the upstream's auto-generated files are deleted during
> the clean target, then the source *must* be re-packaged to avoid
> needless clutter in the .diff.gz which is of a "negative" nature.
Not so. Deletions are ignored. Ever tried
Hi Mauro,
I've changed your package a little bit (fixed lintian error, etc., see
attachment).
Please take a look and disagree if you don't like my changes.
[Mauro Lizaur, 11.02.2008]
> Btw, i added a few lines to install the examples in /usr/bin (one of
> them is a mini client)
manpages are mis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Leo "costela" Antunes wrote:
> Székelyi Szabolcs wrote:
>> What's the usual way of handling "preX" upstream version numbers in
>> watch files? I'm having trouble because uscan considers 1.0pre3 newer
>> than 1.0.
>
> Perhaps mangling the upstream versi
Am Montag, 11. Februar 2008 22:18:43 schrieb Johann Rudloff:
> Am Sonntag, den 10.02.2008, 21:39 +0100 schrieb Patrick Winnertz:
> > - remove config.{sub|guess} in clean target
> > - you forgot to mention in changelog that you added a Homepage tag to
> > debian/control
> > - you forgot to mentio
Am Sonntag, den 10.02.2008, 21:39 +0100 schrieb Patrick Winnertz:
> - remove config.{sub|guess} in clean target
> - you forgot to mention in changelog that you added a Homepage tag to
> debian/control
> - you forgot to mention that you removed autotools-dev as Build-Dep
> - you forgot to menti
Il giorno Thu, 7 Feb 2008 10:57:06 +0100
David Paleino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.13 of the package
> "syslog-summary", which I'm also adopting (ITA: #455005).
>
> It builds these binary packages:
> syslog-summary - summar
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.65.3-1
of my package "mailscanner".
It builds these binary packages:
mailscanner - email gateway for virus scanning, spam and phishing detection
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 412883, 4258
* Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080211 15:21]:
> If you care
> and if you want to avoid this: preserve the original config.* scripts
> and put them back in the clean-target. This increases the whole
> debian/rules file for around 4 lines.
much easier: just delete in the clean target and put
Hi Russ,
Russ Allbery schrieb:
> No, you're not allowed to reference /usr/share/doc from maintainer
> scripts. dpkg may be modified to not install /usr/share/doc at all. You
> should ship them in /usr/share/ and add a symlink in
> /usr/share/doc if desired.
>
> See Policy 12.3.
thanks for the
Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not only
> "generated by the build target), which implies "rebuild everything in
> the build target".
[...]
> I'd like to
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:36:03 +0100
Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> On 11/02/2008, David Paleino wrote:
> > Not true:
> > [Snip unrelated logic stuff.]
I can't understand how what I wrote is "unrelated", but let's go on.
> [..]
>
> Now, moving that to a Makefile:
> ,
On 11/02/2008, David Paleino wrote:
> Not true:
> [Snip unrelated logic stuff.]
Yes, true. Functionally, you want foo => bar. Check (assuming here foo
is absent):
,
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ [ ! -f foo ] && echo "Doing bar 1"
| Doing bar 1
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ [ -f foo ] && echo "Doin
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 02:17:54PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 10:54 +0100 schrieb David Paleino:
> > Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:53:48 +0100
> > Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean targe
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:55:04 -0500
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> A set -e shell script doesn't terminate if a nonzero return value is a
> part of a conditional/test. However in a makefile, the exit status of
> the shell can be nonzero even if it was a due to a test "faili
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:42:34PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:19:08 +0100 Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ha scritto:
>
> > Copy the config.* scripts after the clean target has been called (e.g.
> > in the config.status target) then they are simply not part o
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my updated package "tcpser".
* Package name: tcpser
Version : 1.0rc12-1
Upstream Author : Jim Brain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.jbrain.com/pub/linux/serial
* License : GPL
Section : net
It build
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:50:33 +0100
Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> On 11/02/2008, David Paleino wrote:
> > This seems to me more hackish than it should; is there a cleaner way
> > to do it (maybe I'm just complicating myself and don't see The Easy
> > Way [1])?
>
> You co
On 11/02/2008, David Paleino wrote:
> This seems to me more hackish than it should; is there a cleaner way
> to do it (maybe I'm just complicating myself and don't see The Easy
> Way [1])?
You could have a look at how cdbs does it, which might help.
> [1] I know that using "[ ! test ] || ..." is
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:23:46 +0100
Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> Sorry, I broke the subject with my last post. I wanted to adjust it, but
> forgot finish the subject line. Really sorry.
...and I read this post a second later having sent my reply. Please fix the
subject o
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:19:08 +0100
Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> Copy the config.* scripts after the clean target has been called (e.g.
> in the config.status target) then they are simply not part of the
> diff.gz. Of course they would be after a second build run. If you
Sorry, I broke the subject with my last post. I wanted to adjust it, but
forgot finish the subject line. Really sorry.
Regards, Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 14:45 +0100 schrieb David Paleino:
> Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:17:54 +0100
> Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
>
> > We simply copy config.sub and config.guess into the build directory for
> > some years now and I never observed any problem with this.
>
Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 14:17 +0100 schrieb Daniel Leidert:
> Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 10:54 +0100 schrieb David Paleino:
> > Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:53:48 +0100
> > Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> >
> > > I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:17:54 +0100
Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> We simply copy config.sub and config.guess into the build directory for
> some years now and I never observed any problem with this.
>
> I'm really wondering why you want to make the situation complicated?
Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 02:23 +0100 schrieb Székelyi Szabolcs:
> What's the usual way of handling "preX" upstream version numbers in
> watch files? I'm having trouble because uscan considers 1.0pre3 newer
> than 1.0.
IMO you have two options:
1) Ignore the pre-versions by a rule like
http://
Am Montag, den 11.02.2008, 10:54 +0100 schrieb David Paleino:
> Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:53:48 +0100
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
>
> > I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> > (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not on
On Feb 10, 2008 11:57 PM, Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just an upload to set QA to maintainer and bring standards, et al up to
> date. Package should really probably be removed but we can see if
> someone adopts it first I suppose.
>
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/m
Hello,
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> Secondly, when the clean target removes all generated files, they are
> ignored when generating the diff.gz, so it doesn't actually clutter it.
> It does produce some warnings during make clean, but those are not a
> problem IMO.
Oops. I'd forgotten
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 05:40:58PM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> > (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not only
> > "generated by the build target), whi
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not only
> "generated by the build target), which implies "rebuild everything in
> the build target".
>
> With the current w
Le Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 01:26:55PM -0500, Joey Hess a écrit :
> Riku Voipio wrote:
> > I think the short term solution to this dilemma is to compile a list
> > of attributions needed to be included in advertizment material.
> > Also a list should be compiled attributions needed n documentation
> >
Il giorno Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:53:48 +0100
Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ha scritto:
> I suggest to mandate "remove all generated files in the clean target"
> (formulated in a way which includes "generated by upstream", not only
> "generated by the build target), which implies "rebuild everything
On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 03:48:20PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Quoting the Debian Policy, section 4.9 Main building script:
> > debian/rules[1]
> >
> >> clean
> >>
> >> This must undo any effects that the build and binary targets may
> >> have h
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 23:25 -0500, Andres Mejia wrote:
> On Sunday 10 February 2008 10:13:50 am Neil Williams wrote:
> > Just a note for everyone - I will now ignore any RFS that does not
> > include the long description for the package.
> >
> > It doesn't matter how many times you "ping", without
44 matches
Mail list logo
