On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Godfrey Chung wrote:
I sent the e-mail to Secure Testing Team at home tonight. Hope that they can
receive my e-mail. Thanks!
I've added your changes to SVN.
If yourself or anyone else wants to get involved in tracking security
issues in Debian, please take a
On 01/21/2012 03:02 PM, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
On 01/20/2012 06:28 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Alex Mestiashvilia...@biotec.tu-dresden.de, 2012-01-16, 20:16:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
The changelog says debian/control added
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package python-gnatpython.
* Package name: python-gnatpython
Version : 54-1
Upstream Author : AdaCore sa...@adacore.com
* URL : http://forge.open-do.org/projects/gnatpython
* License : GPL-2+ and GPL-3+
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:24 AM, Joseph R. Justice wrote:
wouldn't it be more reasonable to use 3.0.y as the next Debian stable
release's kernel?
I mean, sure, if many of the other major Linux distributions, the ones
which
Hi there,
what are the chances to get packages into debian main that contain
(mainly) Flash code? Its mostly ActionScript 3 code which cannot
compiled with tools from debian main (mtasc is only capable of AS2),
flex-sdk is not in debian at all. The source would be included (and
GPL, MIT or BSD)
Sounds like a very bad idea. How would you compile it then?
how would you port it to some crazy system, for example itanium who knows?
mike
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Christian Welzel gaw...@camlann.de wrote:
Hi there,
what are the chances to get packages into debian main that contain
Christian Welzel gaw...@camlann.de writes:
what are the chances to get packages into debian main that contain
I doubt that, everything in main needs to be buildable with tools in
main. What tools can build this?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
Am 28.01.2012 13:41, schrieb Mike Dupont:
Sounds like a very bad idea. How would you compile it then?
how would you port it to some crazy system, for example itanium who knows?
swf run in the Flash-Browser-Plugin and are not tied to some
architecture of some crazy machine. As long as there is
Am 28.01.2012 13:47, schrieb Timo Juhani Lindfors:
I doubt that, everything in main needs to be buildable with tools in
main. What tools can build this?
flex-sdk would be able to build this - ITP: 602499
There is no way to build swf from ActionScript 3 in debian, but many (if
not most)
Hi,
has someone a working debian/watch for files on code.google.com?
My old lines do not work anymore since an longer time, e.g.:
version=3
http://code.google.com/p/videocut/downloads/list \
http://videocut.googlecode.com/files/videocut_(.*)\.tar\.gz
--
/*
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind
Hi Patrick,
For libgoogle-gson-java I use
version=3
http://code.google.com/p/google-gson/downloads/list?can=1 \
.*/google-gson-(\d[\d\.]*)-release\.(?:zip|tgz|tbz2|txz|tar\.gz|tar\.bz2|tar\.xz)
On 28.1.2012 14:25, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Hi,
has someone a working debian/watch for files on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01/28/2012 02:25 PM, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
Hi,
has someone a working debian/watch for files on code.google.com? My
old lines do not work anymore since an longer time, e.g.:
version=3 http://code.google.com/p/videocut/downloads/list \
Am 28.01.2012 14:25, schrieb Patrick Matthäi:
has someone a working debian/watch for files on code.google.com?
My old lines do not work anymore since an longer time, e.g.:
Take a look at this:
http://googlecode.debian.net/
--
MfG, Christian Welzel
GPG-Key:
Hi,
I looked at your package and there are still some problems:
- python-gnatpython does not have Privides: ${python:Provides}, it
would be good to have it for packages depending on python-gnatpython
and one version of python
- doc package has this: Suggests: gnatpython, i guess it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/01/12 19:23, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:24:56 +, Jonathan McCrohan wrote:
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote:
Please don't change the -dev package name.
All of the packages except one have versioned
We are not just talking about running here.
people need to have the freedom to change the code, and not be tied to
some vendor.
we need to have all the sources needed to be able to compile all the
tools needed to change the code.
I will not support any debian package that can only be changed on
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Mike Dupont
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
We are not just talking about running here.
people need to have the freedom to change the code, and not be tied to
some vendor.
For Debian Main, not non-free.
we need to have all the sources needed to be
Dear Kilian
Finally, my package acsccid 1.0.3-1 had been reviewed by Paul and I had
modified the package according to his comment.
You may be busy at this moment. Please take a look of my package as soon as
possible. I would be glad if you uploaded my package for me.
Regards
Godfrey
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Christian Welzel gaw...@camlann.de wrote:
Am 28.01.2012 16:01, schrieb Mike Dupont:
I hope that is clear, this idea will not get far. Proprietary software
has very short legs around here.
Neither ActionScript 3 (ECMAScript) nor flex-sdk nor the tools i have
On 2012-01-28 17:14:46 +0100 (+0100), Christian Welzel wrote:
[...]
flex-sdk is licensed unter MPL 1.1
[...]
It's actually the above assertion which is in question and in the
process of being verified, based on my reading.
The problem is, that the MPL-licensed flex-sdk is not (yet) packaged
Hi Jakub,
Thanks, I like the new .orig.tar more. I do wonder however, what
happened to debian/dmaths.patch.
Good!
This patch changes seem unnecessary: If not running, nothing happens.
The elimination is in debian/changelog
Are these files
mini_memo_dmaths_1.5.odt
memo_OOo_dmaths_1.5.odt
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 08:24, The Fungi fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2012-01-28 17:14:46 +0100 (+0100), Christian Welzel wrote:
[...]
flex-sdk is licensed unter MPL 1.1
[...]
It's actually the above assertion which is in question and in the
process of being verified, based on my reading.
Am 28.01.2012 17:24, schrieb The Fungi:
your package might be suitable for contrib until such time as
flex-sdk enters main. It would probably make more sense to just wait
If the packages cannot build their swf from source in lack of flex-sdk
they can be uploaded to contrib, as long as all
On 2012-01-28 08:50:32 -0800 (-0800), Joey Parrish wrote:
[...]
As it stood from Adobe, you had to get the source from SVN, but it
was full of 1) binaries, 2) forked versions of standard Java libs,
and 3) outdated versions of standard Java libs. All of these
things were required in some mix to
Well in general I would opposed including any sources that cannot be
built using free and approved tools, that is basically saying there is
no source, or no means to get from source to binary.
lets imagine that you have rebol, a language that has no specification
and no source code, you can
Hi,
(see #657720 for the background details and rationale)
to one of my binary packages I want to add a dependency like
Depends: foo (= ${source:Upstream-Version}), foo (
${source:Next-Upstream-Version})
The question: how to achieve that given that
${source:Next-Upstream-Version} does not exist
Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
also, we are on the mentors list, are we really going to mentor non-free
software and use up our time resources for helping people package non
free software?
Yes, some of us do, when it's something useful. I like having video
drivers for my
On 01/28/2012 02:09 PM, Christian Welzel wrote:
A free runtime would be gnash.
If swf is AS3 (AVM2), runtime can't be gnash cause it plays AS2 (AVM1)
only. Your player would be lightspark if able.
http://wiki.gnashdev.org/FAQ#What_should_gnash_play
By the way, besides flex-sdk, you might try
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor to upload this NMU, fixing the RC bug #652700.
The changes are on a mininum invasive bases, so only the bug is fixed and the
standard bumped as there were no changes necessary.
Monty Taylor, the current
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Joachim Reichel joachim.reic...@gmx.de wrote:
to one of my binary packages I want to add a dependency like
Depends: foo (= ${source:Upstream-Version}), foo (
${source:Next-Upstream-Version})
I usually rely on:
package ( ${source:Upstream-Version}+1~),
* Tobias Frost t...@coldtobi.de, 2012-01-28, 19:52:
* Update standards version to 3.9.2, no changes required
No, no, no. We don't do such things in NMUs.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
severity 657783 important
Bug #657783 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: haildb 2.3.2-1.1 [NMU] [RC] -- Library
implementing InnoDB-like database
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need
Hi,
On 01/28/2012 08:03 PM, Alessio Treglia wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Joachim Reichel joachim.reic...@gmx.de
wrote:
to one of my binary packages I want to add a dependency like
Depends: foo (= ${source:Upstream-Version}), foo (
${source:Next-Upstream-Version})
I usually
Hi!
* Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com [120128 19:14]:
Well in general I would opposed including any sources that cannot be
built using free and approved tools, that is basically saying there is
no source, or no means to get from source to binary.
lets imagine that you have rebol,
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package unetbootin.
* Package name: unetbootin
Version : 568-1
Upstream Author : Geza Kovacs geza0kov...@gmail.com
* URL : http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPLv2
Section : utils
It
Am 28.01.2012 21:20, schrieb Alexander Reichle-Schmehl:
That's also the stance of the ftp team: swf-files, even their source is
available and licendes under a DFSG-free license, are consider not
suitable for main. We regularily reject packages because of that.
Is it because of they cannot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 28.01.2012 22:33, Christian Welzel wrote:
Is it because of they cannot be build by tools in main or because of
other reasons?
just that. Refer to the Debian Policy 2.2.1 [1]. Packages in main must
not require a package outside of main for
* Stephen M. Webb stephen.w...@bregmasoft.ca, 2012-01-27, 21:26:
* debian/rules: add --with autoreconf to regenerate autoconfigury
A typo, though I'm not sure which word you had in mind. :P
I don't see the typo. I added --with autoreconf to regenerate the
autoconfigury (config.guess,
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Samuel Bronson naes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote:
Samuel, thanks for doing this. However, I'm trying to get gcc-4.5 removed
from unstable soonish, so I would like to see this for gcc-4.6 (and 4.7 as
Am Samstag, den 28.01.2012, 20:12 +0100 schrieb Jakub Wilk:
* Tobias Frost t...@coldtobi.de, 2012-01-28, 19:52:
* Update standards version to 3.9.2, no changes required
No, no, no. We don't do such things in NMUs.
--
Jakub Wilk
Fine with me, reverted uploaded.
--
To
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Christian Welzel wrote:
what are the chances to get packages into debian main that contain
(mainly) Flash code? Its mostly ActionScript 3 code which cannot
compiled with tools from debian main (mtasc is only capable of AS2),
flex-sdk is not in debian at all.
This is great, I have joined the fight
http://occupyflash.org/
mike
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
As someone who has worked on Flash stuff in Debian (I maintain mtasc,
flasm), I say Flash needs to die in a fire.
--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre
Hi Paul,
On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:13:34 Paul Wise wrote:
I say Flash needs to die in a fire.
If you have upstreams who have Flash components, please spend your
time working on transitioning them to JavaScript, the new HTML5 tags
(audio, video, canvas etc) and other new web technologies (like
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
By the way, do you think SVG worth attention?
Definitely, historically it wasn't well supported in web browsers,
that seems to be improving though.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
44 matches
Mail list logo
