Bug#889697: RFS: zerotier-one/1.2.4+ds-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "zerotier-one" * Package name: zerotier-one Version : 1.2.4+ds-1 Upstream Author : ZeroTier, Inc. * URL : https://www.zerotier.com/ * License :

Bug#889695: RFS: worklog/1.9-1 [ITA] -- Keep Track of Time worked on Projects

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "worklog" Package name: worklog Version: 1.9-1 Upstream Author: Adam Bilbrough URL: https://gitlab.com/atsb/worklog License: Public Domain Section: misc

Bug#889600: closed by Sven Hoexter <s...@timegate.de> (Re: Bug#889600: btrfsmaintenance/0.4-1~exp1 [I maintain the package])

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 08:51:14AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 04:59:27PM -0500, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "btrfsmaintenance". > >

Bug#876043: marked as done (RFS: plibsys/0.0.3~git20170912.7069e03 [ITP])

Your message dated Mon, 05 Feb 2018 22:20:31 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: plibsys/0.0.3~git20170912.7069e03 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #876043, regarding RFS: plibsys/0.0.3~git20170912.7069e03 [ITP] to be marked as done.

Meta-packages ‘python-all’ and ‘python3-all’ (was: Cross-compiling a package that build-depends on Python)

Łukasz Walewski writes: > BTW what is this python-all good for? This expresses “whatever versions of Python 2 are currently supported in the distribution”. Similarly, ‘python3-all’ says the equivalent about Python 3 versions. It is only contingent that, today, ‘python-all’

Bug#877450: RFS: bash-completion/1:2.7-1 [ITA]

Gabriel F. T. Gomes kirjoitti 04.02.2018 klo 23:05: > On 03 Feb 2018, Juhani Numminen wrote: > >> Instead of doing version parsing the hard way, could you perhaps >> include /usr/share/dpkg/pkg-info.mk and use a suitable variable that >> it defines? > > Indeed, but you also made me realize that

Re: Cross-compiling a package that build-depends on Python

On 03.02.2018 14:23, Helmut Grohne wrote: Recently the upstream development introduced a compile step that requires some source files to be pre-processed with a Python script (shipped with the sources). I thus added python-all to my Build-Depends field and the native Why do you use python-all?

Re: /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) on buildds ?

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 11:19:16AM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Right, package builds should very much not care about whatever kernel > they are running (as long as it's a linux). So you don't trust kfreebsd's emulation of linux? Neither do I. :þ -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ The bill with 3 years prison for

Bug#889624: marked as done (RFS: dav-text/0.8.8-1 -- minimal ncurses-based text editor)

Your message dated Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:50:10 +0100 with message-id <20180205125010.zbynmqkuyu5aq...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#889624: RFS: dav-text/0.8.8-1 -- minimal ncurses-based text editor has caused the Debian Bug report #889624, regarding RFS: dav-text/0.8.8-1 -- minimal

Bug#889570: marked as done (RFS: libt3window/0.3.0-1)

Your message dated Mon, 5 Feb 2018 13:38:45 +0100 with message-id <20180205123845.qhglv2jyhfpli...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#889570: RFS: libt3window/0.3.0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #889570, regarding RFS: libt3window/0.3.0-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Re: /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) on buildds ?

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 02:19:37PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:13:49AM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > Could someone please confirm that the config file: > > /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an > > alternate way to grep the

Bug#861649: Newer version uploaded

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo On Tuesday 26 December 2017 21:58:36 CET Tobias Frost wrote: > I was checking your RFS, but I cannot get it compiled... > Please check and then remove the moreinfo tag again... Hello again, Upstream has now released GUDHI 2.1.0 which is compatible with the CGAL

Re: /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) on buildds ?

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:13:49AM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Hi there, > > Could someone please confirm that the config file: > /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an > alternate way to grep the configuration of the running kernel ? Um, this sounds as a

/boot/config-$(shell uname -r) on buildds ?

Hi there, Could someone please confirm that the config file: /boot/config-$(shell uname -r) is not present on buildds ? Is there an alternate way to grep the configuration of the running kernel ?

Bug#881032: RFS: icecc/1.1-2~bpo9+1 NMU

On 03/02/18 14:50, Tobias Frost wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 09:40:41AM +0100, Pablo Saavedra wrote: >> Hello Tobias, thanks for put me in the right direction on this stuff. >> >> After reading again the established process in [1], I understand that >> the recommended process is a bit

Bug#889600: marked as done (btrfsmaintenance/0.4-1~exp1 [I maintain the package])

Your message dated Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:41:40 +0100 with message-id <20180205084140.yplvqwz4yhpfn...@timegate.de> and subject line Re: Bug#889600: btrfsmaintenance/0.4-1~exp1 [I maintain the package] has caused the Debian Bug report #889600, regarding btrfsmaintenance/0.4-1~exp1 [I maintain the

Bug#889570: RFS: libt3window/0.3.0-1

Hi Adam, My apologies for these scripting fails. I've fixed and re-uploaded the package (double checking that this time I didn't mangle the changelog). Best regards, Gertjan Halkes On Sun, 4 Feb 2018 18:37:22 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: >On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 04:57:49PM