Bug#837798: RFS: libcgicc/3.2.16-0.1 NMU --

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, having been unsuccessful in contacting the maintainer of this package and after having consulted m...@debian.org, I am looking for a sponsor for the package "libcgicc" * Package name: libcgicc Version : 3.2.16-0.1

Re: update .preinst file

Hi, > Due to the way dpkg-maintscript-helper is implemented, the symlink > created with dh_installdocs is ignored, so dpkg-maintscript-helper will > create it for you. The manpage for dpkg-maintscript-helper also contains > an explanation of why 'just removing the directory in preinst' can cause

Bug#837792: marked as done (RFS: python-hdf5storage/0.1.14-1)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:40:20 + (UTC) with message-id <935688972.2003560.1473871220...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837792: RFS: python-hdf5storage/0.1.14-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #837792, regarding RFS: python-hdf5storage/0.1.14-1 to be marked as done.

Bug#837704: marked as done (RFS: usbguard/0.5.14+ds1-2)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:33:35 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: usbguard/0.5.14+ds1-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #837704, regarding RFS: usbguard/0.5.14+ds1-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#837792: RFS: python-hdf5storage/0.1.14-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-hdf5storage" * Package name: python-hdf5storage Version : 0.1.14-1 Upstream Author : Freja Nordsiek * URL :

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1-1 [ITP]

Hey Ben, thanks for your help! On 14/09/2016 03:17, Ben Finney wrote: > * When removing code, just remove it. You are tracking the work in a > VCS, there is generally no reason to commit changes that comments out > lines of code. > > So, in ‘debian/patches/’, the >

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1-1 [ITP]

On 14/09/2016 04:51, Ben Finney wrote: > On Wed, 2016-09-14 11:17 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: >> Here are some comments I have for improving the packaging work: > > Further: > > * The source package should ideally not contain non-source forms of the > work. > > I see that

Re: schroot: 20copyfiles: cp: cannot create regular file '.../etc/resolv.conf'

Hello Daniel, On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 07:17:10AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > I think that the current stable sbuild is meant to be able to build > for unstable (pretty common use case), so if you can reproduce it, a > stable update might be in order. Sorry for a second e-mail, but I just

Re: schroot: 20copyfiles: cp: cannot create regular file '.../etc/resolv.conf'

Hello Daniel, On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 04:46:02AM +, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > I still don't know why the stable sbuild didn't work, though. (Or > whether upgrading sbuild was the fix: perhaps something changed in the > archive since Friday.) Should I file a bug about that? It's more likely

Bug#837408: RFS: partimage/0.6.9-1 new upstream build partimage-0.6.9

Hi Andrew, 2016-09-14 9:15 GMT-03:00 Andrew Worsley : > Good points - I guess it is not worth making a new package to fix > these items you mention - but the next one I should consider them. See > below for more details However, I can't upload the package without "QA

Bug#837408: RFS: partimage/0.6.9-1 new upstream build partimage-0.6.9

Good points - I guess it is not worth making a new package to fix these items you mention - but the next one I should consider them. See below for more details On 11 September 2016 at 23:18, Eriberto Mota wrote: > Contol: tag 837408 moreinfo > > Hi Andrew, > > I have some

Bug#837748: RFS: kpmcore -- KDE Partition Manager Core (ITP: 810063)

Hi, >Please review my new package for kpmcore, ok >thanks for any tips or advice! using mentors would be so appreciated review: 1) grep copyright . -Ri missing copyrights 2) usr/lib/*/libkpmcore.so.2* usr/lib/*/libkpmcore.so.3 why are you installing both SONAMEs? 3) dpkg-gensymbols is

Bug#837749: marked as done (RFS: forge/0.9.0-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2016 10:07:58 + (UTC) with message-id <1900664498.1506785.1473847678...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837749: RFS: forge/0.9.0-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #837749, regarding RFS: forge/0.9.0-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that

Bug#836215: RFS: phalanx/25-1 [ITA]

Hi >Thanks for reviwing! I must say I've addressed most of your points but >testing the new version (25), I've found that it doesn't work as >expected in Scid. Scid has a feature to play versus Phalanx (tactical >game) but it needs a special version. The package in sid works well >while new

Bug#837609: marked as done (RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.7-1)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2016 09:48:31 + (UTC) with message-id <1942153070.1470241.1473846511...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#837609: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.7-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #837609, regarding RFS: budgie-desktop/10.2.7-1 to be marked as done. This

Re: update .preinst file

Hi, On 13/09/16 18:37, Herbert Fortes wrote: > I have to update 4 debian/*.preinst files. > > Right now the files are like here[0]: > > > if dpkg --compare-versions "$2" lt "1.2.4+dfsg1-7" ; then >rm -rf /usr/share/doc/bogofilter || true > fi > > > [0] - >

Bug#837704: RFS: usbguard/0.5.14+ds1-2

Hi >because there is still some stuff to sort out with the new usbguard 0.6 >release, i fixed the bugs in the already uploaded release and made a new >debian revision. I hope that approach is oke. simple is better! sponsored G.

Bug#836381: marked as done (RFS: couchapp/1.0.2+dfsg1-1)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Sep 2016 09:01:29 + (UTC) with message-id <248477810.1407785.1473843689...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#836381: RFS: couchapp/1.0.2+dfsg1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #836381, regarding RFS: couchapp/1.0.2+dfsg1-1 to be marked as done. This means

Bug#837749: RFS: forge/0.9.0-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "forge": * Package name: forge Version : 0.9.0-1 Upstream Author : ArrayFire * URL : https://github.com/arrayfire/forge * License : BSD Section

Bug#837748: RFS: kpmcore -- KDE Partition Manager Core (ITP: 810063)

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, Please review my new package for kpmcore, * ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810063 * Git clone: https://gitlab.com/highvoltage/kpmcore-packaging.git * Git

Re: EFL/1.18, Enlightenment/0.21 updates

Hi, >Upstream has opted to merge the source packages together to ease >building and distribution. Didn't see a benefit to reversing that. > >I meant: is there anything extra a good source package should do when it >absorbs another? usually nothing, just provide the new binaries from the new