Bug#829205: RFS: btrfs-progs/4.5.3-0.1

On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 09:42:10AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > control: owner -1 x...@debian.org Sounds more like "close" to me... > >lowNMU is not meant for hostile takeovers of the package, ok?! =) > > sure, this is why only one NMU was done on your package :) I'd guess the

Re: wrong version number ?

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 08:01:03PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > I guess a filename containing ":" character might be problematic in linux > (not techically problematic, but better to avoid escapes) : is AFAIK supported by all Linux filesystems, although in some cases it comes at the cost

Bug#829205: RFS: btrfs-progs/4.5.3-0.1

Hi! On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 08:16:14AM -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for this update of "btrfs-progs". Have you coordinated with Dimitri? When the regular maintainer is active, NMUs are appropriate for urgent changes, not for regular work. Ie, instead of random

Bug#829692: RFS: libu2f-host/1.1.2-0.1 [NMU] -- library for Universal 2nd Factor

On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 01:59:59PM +0200, Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote: > > I am looking for a sponsor for a NMU to the package libu2f-host. > > * Package name: libu2f-host >Version : 1.1.2-0.1 > The proper maintainer of the package seems unresponsive, and 2 RC bugs > (FTBFS)

Re: Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 02:28:30PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 05 July 2016 01:17:39 Jakub Wilk wrote: > > Did you need to do any packaging changes to update S-V? > > I wouldn't recommend updating S-V in an NMU. > > Well, Debian has in archives very old (maybe prehistoric) version of >

Bug#826063: RFS: libu2f-host/1.0.0-2 [NMU] [RC] -- U2F host communication library

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 04:06:28PM +0200, Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote: > Note that the version number changed: it was following a previous > UNRELEASED version, which could have led to it being preferred to > a later release from the maintainer. I'm afraid that your upload removes data about an

Re: Bug#827700: RFS: cplay/1.50-1 [NMU]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 06:54:38AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > >The changes I have quoted above are not usually appropriate for NMUs. > > > >In this case, it looks like those package maintainers are inactive (no > >uploads since 2005). You should contact the MIA team to have the >

Bug#826986: marked as done (RFS: faba-icon-theme/4.1.2-1 ITP)

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:46:26PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote: > I've corrected the Vcs fields in our budgie-remix debian source repo - > https://github.com/budgie-remix/faba-icon-theme/tree/debian > > If you want me to-do another RFS/ITP happy to-do so. Alternatively when > the upstream

Bug#827487: bytes-circle_2.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 09:38:46AM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote: > Hi Adam, > It appears as just amd64, when it's marked "any", but I don't know if it'll > be compiled for other architectures or I'm just too impatient :-) It will, you can watch the current progress, failures and logs at:

Bug#826769: RFS: arc-theme/20160605-1 ITP

Control: owner -1 ! Control: tags -1 +moreinfo On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:05:54PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "arc-theme" > > * Package name: arc-theme >Version : 20160605-1 Two minor issues: W: arc-theme:

Bug#826974: RFS: moka-icon-theme/5.3.2-1 ITP

Control: owner -1 ! Control: tags -1 +moreinfo On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 08:18:12PM +0100, foss.freedom wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "moka-icon-theme" > > * Package name: moka-icon-theme >Version : 5.3.2-1 > > moka-icon-theme - Moka Icon Theme First,

Bug#826986: marked as done (RFS: faba-icon-theme/4.1.2-1 ITP)

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 03:00:05AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Looks good, uploaded. One minor issue I noticed too late: the Vcs-Browser field should point to a repository containing the Debian packaging, rather than just the upstream code. The latter may be put into

Bug#827487: bytes-circle_2.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 07:34:54PM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote: > I've updated license in source code and > also at github.com to match it, with "GPL v3 or higher". Where may I get the updated package? I see nothing on mentors.debian.net. > I'd update the man page with very few mathematical

Bug#827487: bytes-circle_2.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 08:00:20AM +, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > Hi Roberto, > > shouldn't the license be only GPL-3 instead of GPL-3+? At least the > file headers and the website say so .. As you're the sole author, I guess it'd be better to change the headers instead, to say "version 3 or

Bug#827487: RFS: circle/2.2-1 [ITP]

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 09:15:41PM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "bytes-circle" > > Package name: bytes-circle > Version : 2.2-2 Hi! Looks almost good, I found just three minor issues. None of them is a show-stopper, but let's have the

Bug#827487: RFS: circle/2.2-1 [ITP]

Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:50:02PM +0200, Roberto S. Galende wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "circle" > > Package name: circle > Version : 2.2-1 > URL : http://wp.me/p2FmmK-96 > > circle - Show byte statistics as an ascii

Bug#827397: RFS: vlc/2.0.3-5+deb7u3

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 06:53:49AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi Adam, > (answering in general, not in this particular situation) > > > >I've reviewed the upload, but I'm not sure if you coordinated it > >with the LTS team. I find a contradition: > >

Bug#827398: RFS: pkg-kde-tools/0.15.21~bpo8+1

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:08:59PM +0200, Mateusz Łukasik wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pkg-kde-tools" > > * Package name: pkg-kde-tools >Version : 0.15.21~bpo8+1 >Upstream Author : Copyright © 2007-2008 Sune Vuorela > I'm not

Bug#827397: RFS: vlc/2.0.3-5+deb7u3

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 08:03:28PM +0200, Mateusz Łukasik wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "vlc" > > * Package name: vlc >Version : 2.0.3-5+deb7u3 > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/vlc/vlc_2.0.3-5+deb7u3.dsc > > Changes since the last upload: >

Re: how to build packages with a specific complier ?

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 12:16:05PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > >It appears that some tests fail for one of my package (gmp-ecm) on one > >architecture (s390x): > >after some investigation, it appears that it is a compiler issue: building > >with gcc-6 (instead of gcc-5) > >causes no

Bug#826063: RFS: libu2f-host/1.0.0-2 [NMU] [RC] -- U2F host communication library

control: tags -1 moreinfo On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:31:02AM +0200, Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: important > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my upload for the libu2f-host package. > It fixes the following RC bug: > #820686: FTBFS

Re: When to use "Replaces"?

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 05:13:14PM +1000, Scott Leggett wrote: > On 2016-05-30.21:22, gregor herrmann wrote: > > On Mon, 30 May 2016 20:25:56 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > > > > c) Something else ...? > > > As both unclutters provide generally the same f

Re: When to use "Replaces"?

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 01:06:57AM +1000, Scott Leggett wrote: > I've just filed an ITP for "unclutter-xfixes"[0]. This package is a > rewrite of the "unclutter" package. It provides the same functionality > (hiding your mouse pointer after some period of inactivity), but uses a > different API

Bug#820488: RFS: roadfighter/1.0.1269-1 [ITP] -- Drive a car in a death race

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 02:07:39AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > I'm worried about fonts/*.ttf. If these fonts are packaged in Debian they > shouldn't be shipped in the binary package. Otherwise, there is no info > that they are free, no license, no canonical name etc. In any case > shipping

Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 12:09:14PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > On 21-05-2016 11:59, Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:31:49PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > >> But I don't think I need to write a documentation how to setup > >> the config file is easy

Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:31:49PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > On 14-05-2016 20:45, Adam Borowski wrote: > > Only upon checking the syslog I see: > > May 15 00:30:37 umbar lsm[12853]: no targets found in config file > > yet according to comments in /etc/lsm/lsm

Bug#824262: RFS: gnustep-make/2.6.8-1 [RC] -- GNUstep build system

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 03:04:37AM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote: > Le 15/05/2016 02:46, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote: > >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gnustep-make" > >> &

Bug#824262: RFS: gnustep-make/2.6.8-1 [RC] -- GNUstep build system

Hi! On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 12:39:16PM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gnustep-make" > > * Package name: gnustep-make >Version : 2.6.8-1 > > dget -x >

Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 01:45:32AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > Too bad, when actually trying to install the package: > > [] Starting Link Monitor.: lsminvoke-rc.d: initscript lsm, action "start" > failed. > dpkg: error processing package lsm (--install): >

Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 12:22:13AM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote: > On 13-05-2016 11:46, Adam Borowski wrote: > >> On 10-05-2016 02:43, Lucas Castro wrote > >>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lsm" > >>> > >>> dget -x > >

Bug#824271: RFS: primesieve/5.6.0+ds-2 [Refreshment] - fast prime number generator C/C++

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 04:08:31PM +0100, Jerome Benoit wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the package primesieve, an efficient C/C++ > library to generates the prime numbers. This versy package is mainly a > Debian material refreshment. > > [1]

Bug#823895: RFS: lsm/1.0.4-1

> On 10-05-2016 02:43, Lucas Castro wrote > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lsm" > > > > * Package name: lsm > > Upstream Author : Mika Ilmaranta > > * URL : http://lsm.foobar.fi/ > > > > dget -x > >

Bug#817005: RFS: aseqjoy/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 09:55:47AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > unfortunately I'm not sure this is enough for ftpmasters... > > I'm afraid we need an official tarball with the fixed licenses, otherwise > they won't be coherent license-wise. > > this seems to be a blocker for now.

Bug#817005: RFS: aseqjoy/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:31:50PM -0300, Fernando Toledo wrote: > El 29/04/16 a las 18:31, Adam Borowski escribió: > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 08:45:27PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > >> licensecheck * > >> shows the license of some files as GPL-2+ not GPL-2 >

Bug#817005: RFS: aseqjoy/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 08:45:27PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > >Fixed. Is possible to have upstream => gpl2 and debian/* => gpl3, true? > > this means that it will be impossible to forward patches upstream without > manually > relicensing them. > > I personally don't prefer, because

Re: Bug#822728: RFS: libtcod/1.6.0~pre1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- graphics and utility library for roguelike developers

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:40:59PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl>, 2016-04-27, 12:02: > >>>export DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=`grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo|wc -l` > >>Refuse the temptation to parse /proc/cpuinfo. Use nproc(1) instea

Bug#822728: RFS: libtcod/1.6.0~pre1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- graphics and utility library for roguelike developers

Control: owner -1 ! On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 09:45:18AM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Adam, do you plan to sponsor the package? in this case can I set you as > owner? :) Sure, can do. I did most of the review already, and if we decide otherwise wrt 1.6-pre1, can always unset. > Fabian,

Re: Bug#822728: RFS: libtcod/1.6.0~pre1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- graphics and utility library for roguelike developers

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:40:47AM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl>, 2016-04-27, 05:27: > >export DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=`grep ^processor /proc/cpuinfo|wc -l` > > Refuse the temptation to parse /proc/cpuinfo. Use nproc(1) instead. Oh,

Bug#822728: RFS: libtcod/1.6.0~pre1+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- graphics and utility library for roguelike developers

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:22:32PM +0200, Fabian Wolff wrote: > * Package name: libtcod I'm afraid that it builds only on 64-bit architectures (I tried amd64 and arm64), on 32-bit ones (x32 armhf i386) it fails with: dpkg-gensymbols: warning: some new symbols appeared in the symbols file:

Re: Package maintainers, I feel like such an outsider

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 07:54:32PM +, Wayne Booth wrote: > Recently, I found that one of the libraries I use has just dropped off the > Debian repositories ( > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=751916). This kills the > USP for my application. I can provide a .deb to my users

Re: Bug#816542: RFS: connman/1.31-0.1 [RC]

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 02:19:59PM +0200, Mateusz Łukasik wrote: > Pong back. > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/connman/connman_1.21-1.3.dsc > > I was tested it on Ubuntu 16.04 and all is fine. But alas, it doesn't build on current unstable. #822393 which looks like a problem

Re: Bug#818974: packaging

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:06:26AM +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote: > You can also try "cme update dpkg-copyright". > > See > https://github.com/dod38fr/config-model/wiki/Updating-debian-copyright-file-with-cme > for instructions, Bad advice, I'm afraid. Here's a typical result of using cme:

Re: Bug#821270: RFS: firefox-branding-iceweasel/0.3.0 [ITP] -- Preserves Iceweasel branding for new Firefox packages

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:42:04AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Mon, 2016-04-18 at 14:31 +, nord-stream wrote: > > > Technically a Firefox extension cannot change this. It's a .desktop > > file's job, I assume. But can we replace a .desktop file from another > > package? Adding extra files to

Re: Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 07:20:50PM +0200, Tomasz Buchert wrote: > > ] Architecture: amd64 arm64 ppc64el s390x > > > > But why would you artificially restrict this to just these? > > > > 2.0.3-1 successfully built also on: > > alpha kfreebsd-amd64 mips64el ppc64 sparc64 x32 > > > > Of these,

Re: Any reason to keep libsdsl in experimental (Was: Please help creating shared *and* static library with cmake)

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 05:52:29PM +0200, Tomasz Buchert wrote: > On 09/04/16 18:31, Andreas Tille wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 04:47:35PM +0200, Tomasz Buchert wrote: > > > the only reason is that it doesn't build on most architectures. The > > > upstream devel version build, I think, on

Re: Seeking Sponsors for my package - roadfighter

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 09:45:35PM -0300, Carlos Donizete Froes wrote: > > > However, there's a wee little problem: > > > [~]$ roadfighter > > > Segmentation fault (core dumped) It looks like it _does_ work when ran from the build dir, fails otherwise. (Sorry for the delay, I was, uhm, making

Re: Seeking Sponsors for my package - roadfighter

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 08:44:24PM -0300, Carlos Donizete Froes wrote: > I'm looking for a sponsor my game package roadfighter [Road Fighter > Remake]. > > http://mentors.debian.net/package/roadfighter The packaging itself looks good. You might want to ask debian-l10n-english for a proofreading

Re: Program upgrade directly from upstream

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 12:41:02AM -0300, Paulo wrote: > I'm packaging the package Selektor (ITP) [1] that has a particular > behavior that I have doubts. > > When program runs it checks for new version from upstream. When there are > new version, it suggests and download a new version directly

Re: Bug#818505: sortmerna FTBFS on !x86

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 05:32:31PM +0200, Gert Wollny wrote: > On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 14:49 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > You're not allowed to use -msse2 on i386 either, unless for a code > > path that's run conditionally on runtime. > > Actually, "not allowed&qu

Re: Bug#818505: sortmerna FTBFS on !x86

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 07:31:23AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 05:04:21PM +, Jurica Stanojkovic wrote: > > Package sortmerna FTBFS on archs not in x86 group (amd64, i386, x32, etc. ) > > with following error: > > gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-msse2' >

Bug#818724: RFS: task-spooler/0.7.6-1

On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 12:04:12PM +0300, Alexander Inyukhin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 05:40:59AM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > and btw, having debian/* GPL-2+ technically makes upstream unable to > > pull patches from debian/patches/*, as GPL-2+ is incompatible with > > GPL-2 (only).

Re: Request for sponser

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 02:24:52PM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: > Le 16/02/2016 04:50, Adam Borowski a écrit : > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:00:24AM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: > >> Could a mentor have a look on this RFS please? > >> http://bugs.debian

Re: Request for sponsor

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:06:31AM +0100, Ksamak wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 04:50:18AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > * please build-depend on libjpeg-dev rather than libjpeg8-dev, while the > > latter exists in unstable we really don't want anything to depend on > >

Re: Request for sponser

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 03:00:24AM +0100, MENGUAL Jean-Philippe wrote: > Could a mentor have a look on this RFS please? > http://bugs.debian.org/722451 Why do you rename an ITP to RFS? Please file a separate bug. > We try to include Compiz again in Debian, from the Knoppix alioth > project.

Bug#812922: closing 812922

close 812922 thanks The package is now in NEW. If an update is needed, please reopen the RFS or open a new one.

Re: reason not to upload new versions as fast as possible to unstable? (expect attempt to migrate to testing )

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 01:21:06PM +0100, toogley wrote: > the wicd package currently has version 1.7.3 in unstable and testing, but > 1.7.4 is already imported. Generally speaking it seems to me very reasonable > to try to upload versions as fast as possible into unstable and testing, so > I'm

Bug#812922: RFS: classic-theme-restorer/1.4.7-1 [ITP] -- customize the new Iceweasel look

On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:58:57PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > * Package name: classic-theme-restorer In the copyright file, you wrote: License: MPL-2.0 This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this

Bug#814235: RFS: swi-prolog [ITA] -- ISO/Edinburgh-style Prolog interpreter

On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 05:13:50PM +0500, Lev Lamberov wrote: > I would like to take care of swi-prolog in Debian. > > [2] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/swi-prolog.git/ Alas, I'm afraid the package ships a minified sourceless copy of jquery, both in the source and in

Bug#812824: RFS: tiny-initramfs/0.1-1 [ITA] - Minimalistic initramfs implementation

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:40:33AM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "tiny-initramfs" Looks good to me. There's just a few minor nits: codespell: ./tiny_initramfs.c:89: moduels ==> modules manually noticed: configure.ac:66: alternativ => alternative

Re: Bug#810572: marked as done (RFS: twinkle/1:1.9.0+dfsg-3 -- Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) SIP Phone)

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:54:05AM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Note for future: in debian/rules you have this line: > > ifeq (,$(filter $(DEB_HOST_ARCH),kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 hurd-i386)) > > You need to have $(DEB_HOST_ARCH) properly defined (dpkg-buildpackage does > this

Re: Bug#808538: RFS: corebird

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 01:11:52PM +0100, Iain R. Learmonth wrote: > When I asked before about this, although this was a while ago, I was told > the buildds would only use one core per build anyway so I didn't think this > would be useful. I guess this has changed now. Let's take a look at

Bug#808613: RFS: re2c/0.15.3-1 [ITA] -- tool for generating fast C-based recognizers

> Package name: re2c Alas, the new version failed to build on five architectures. Even worse, the build logs contain no meaningful output: .-- make check-TESTS make[2]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' make[3]: Entering directory '/«PKGBUILDDIR»' FAIL: run_tests.sh PASS: testrange

Re: Bug#809199: RFS: gap-guava/3.12+ds1-3 [unrep fix] [dbg] -- coding theory library for GAP

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 07:35:13PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 08:23:39PM +0100, Jerome BENOIT wrote: > > I play with the bpo version on my every day box, > > but, since debhelp is the Jessie version, no extra/hidden -dbgsym > > is generated. > > You should build your

Bug#808231: RFS: mkcast/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:57:56PM +0530, 55abhil...@openmailbox.org wrote: > * Package name: mkcast > * URL : https://github.com/KeyboardFire/mkcast > mkcast - A tool for creating GIF screencasts of a window, with key > presses > >

Bug#782847: endless-sky: uploaded

Hi! I've became a DD today. Thus, as promised, I've just uploaded endless-sky to Debian. It will spend some times in the "NEW" purgatory where the ftpmasters review it. There were two issues with what you uploaded to mentors.debian.net: * the package was versioned 0.8.8-2 with no 0.8.8-1 * the

Bug#782847: RFS: endless-sky/0.8.0-1 [ITP]

Hi! On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:22:56AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:50:23PM -0400, Michael Zahniser wrote: > > * Package name: endless-sky I see you've just made a new release, 0.8.8-1. I reviewed it. Too bad, almost all points I described in my previo

Bug#782847: RFS: endless-sky/0.8.0-1 [ITP]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 02:05:04PM -0500, Michael Zahniser wrote: > The issue with libjpeg is that I'm relying on the JCS_EXT_BGRA extention in > libjpeg-turbo to decode JPEGs in the proper byte order for on-screen > display. The ordinary libjpeg does not provide that extension. Right, that's

Re: Package gresolver don't go to package list

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 01:25:37PM -0200, Paulo wrote: > I adopted the package gresolver recently, in my first upload to mentors my > sponsor discovery that > even a package is in perl, architecture in d/control was defined as "any" and > suggests me to change to "all". > > So I changed

Re: Best practices for downloader packages

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:29:12PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: * Since the download code if DFSG-Free, the downloader goes to contrib, independently of the copyright of the data, right? Right. which is a bit pity, since the package *is* actually DFSG-free, including the downloaded

Re: RFS: cl-launch (updated package)

On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 11:22:09AM -0400, Faré wrote: - Copyright years are not up to date Interestingly, lawyers at $BIG_COMPANY_EMPLOYER have recently opined that the year the software was started is the only one needed on copyright statements. Strictly speaking, it will make a difference

Re: Are the build-arch and build-indep targets required?

On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:04:10PM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote: build-arch (required), build-indep (required) but a couple of paragraphs later is also says: Both binary-* targets should depend on the build target, or on the appropriate build-arch or build-indep target, *if

Re: Bug#782847: RFS: endless-sky/0.8.0-1 [ITP]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:50:23PM -0400, Michael Zahniser wrote: * Package name: endless-sky I'm afraid it fails to build in sbuild, because the first alternative in libjpeg-turbo8-dev | libjpeg62-turbo-dev is notexistant, and sbuild ignores everything but the first, per the buildd policy.

Re: dh --buildsystem=none?

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 04:34:04PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: So, the debian/rules file is simple ---8-- #!/usr/bin/make -f %: dh $@ ---8-- However, for some reason dh tries to run configure etc., which ofcourse fails. How can I explicitely specify a build

Re: Bug#778729: Try 2: Bug#778729: RFS: git-tools/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 11:49:08PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: Thus, it would feel odd to have a package named git-tools that contains only two tools of some note. OK, stick with git-restore-mtime as the binary package then. I'm wondering if it would be better to call the source package

Re: Bug#778729: Try 2: Bug#778729: RFS: git-tools/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

On Sun, Mar 08, 2015 at 04:20:08PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 23:52:15 +0100, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 02:53:52AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: * Package name: git-tools * URL : https://github.com/MestreLion/git

Re: shlib symbolic link to optional lib in libfoo-dev ?

On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 10:45:36AM +0100, Václav Ovsík wrote: On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 11:03:33AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: Could you mention how the debug variant differs from the normal variant? The debug variant is compiled with -O1 (the normal/optimized variant with -O2) and the debug

Try 2: Bug#778729: RFS: git-tools/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 02:53:52AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: * Package name: git-tools * URL : https://github.com/MestreLion/git-tools It builds those binary packages: git-restore-mtime - set timestamps to the date of a file's last commit Hi guys again! Lemme ping you

Bug#778729: RFS: git-tools

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 02:09:49AM +, Chris Lamb wrote: Actually, the upstream project name is git-tools as there's a bunch more utilities included. I dropped three that were obsolete or redundant, and bundled three others, yet the package name I used reflects only what I consider to

Bug#778729: RFS: git-restore-mtime/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Hi folks! I am looking for a sponsor for my package git-restore-mtime. * Package name: git-restore-mtime Version : 1.0.0-1 Upstream Author : Rodrigo Silva (MestreLion) li...@rodrigosilva.com * URL :

Bug#776534: RFS: 3270font/1.2-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Hi folks! I am looking for a sponsor for my package 3270font. * Package name: 3270font Version : 1.2-1 Upstream Author : Ricardo Bánffy rban...@gmail.com * URL : https://github.com/rbanffy/3270font * License :

Re: Bug#769673: RFS: lletters/0.1.95+gtk2-4 [ITA, RC]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:37:04PM +0200, Dmitry Borisyuk wrote: I looked at everything once more, and decided not to adopt lletters. Sorry for wasting your time. Perhaps the package (both lletters and letters-media) should be RMed instead? * dead upstream since 2001 * not quite the best

Re: Bug#767588: RFS: 2048/1.0-3 [ITP] Simple number game for the text console

On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 06:50:08PM +0100, Gabriel Pérez-Cerezo wrote: Speaking of source, how was the .orig.tar generated? I don't see any tarballs on the upstream homepage. The tarball was generated with `make dist` on the source in the git repository. The .orig.tar.gz on m.d.n doesn't

Re: Bug Severity Help

On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 11:40:53PM -0400, Bill Blough wrote: In my opinion, people *shouldn't* be running untrusted stylesheets any more than they should run untrusted shell scripts or other code. If we conveniently ignore that sometimes people do things that are unwise, then I would say the

Re: Build-depending on non-free package

On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 02:20:59PM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: We want to provide a binary distribution to our end users, and we want to have best possible experience, right? We want to provide a libre / *free* distribution to our end users. Anything else is just tolerated / hosted.

Bug#759796: RFS: gemrb/0.8.1-1

On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 04:13:45PM +0200, Beren Minor wrote: * Package name: gemrb When attempting to build: . CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:211 (MESSAGE): Looking for Glew: not found! CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:212 (MESSAGE): Please install the Glew library and headers first!

Re: Bug#754260: RFS: terminology/0.6.0-1 [ITP]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:27:40PM +0100, bofh80 wrote: Thanks for the feedback, I've uploaded 0.6.1 with an extra depends. I've checked in a vm without e17 installed this time to make sure it works first. If you'd be so kind as to check the new version and let me know? The new version

Re: Bug#754260: RFS: terminology/0.6.0-1 [ITP]

On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 09:57:20AM +0100, Anthony F McInerney wrote: * Package name: terminology It fails to start, with the following output: CRI20400:elementary elm_win.c:2858 _win_constructor() Software X11 engine creation failed. Trying default. ERR20400:elementary elm_win.c:2994

Re: Please help reproducing / fixing #751277 on architectures mips*, powerpc and s390x

On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 07:11:05PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: Don't be afraid! :-) Fixing most portability doesn't require deep knowledge about the architecture. It's often enough to be aware about the basic differences between them, like endianness, bitness, or whether unaligned access is

Re: Starting an application on login

On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:07:25AM +0100, Daniel Lintott wrote: currently BuildNotify needs to be started/running to access the configuration GUI. What about this: make the menu entry call a script that: * checks if the BuildNotify daemon is running * if not, starts it (as the user) * then

Bug#748882: RFS: hashalot/0.3-6 (updated, resend)

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Hi guys! It would be nice if someone could upload hashalot for me (a tool for securely reading a passphrase). This upload fixes a must requirement of the policy. The package can be dgetted from:

Re: What do you do when your sid development system stops working?

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 09:33:58PM -0500, Paul Elliott wrote: I like to do my packaging under sid, because that is where the packages will first have to run, so I can test them there. But what do you do when your sid system stop work after doing an apt-get dist-upgrade? X11 stopped working

Re: DFSG and assembler code

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:36:12PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:01:29AM +0200, Andreas B. Mundt a écrit : To be able to compile the program with standard tools, the pre-compiled code of the ROM-dumpers is included in the source. This code needs to be removed

Re: DFSG and assembler code

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:55:12PM +0200, Andreas B. Mundt wrote: It contains so-called ROM-dumpers in assembler code which have been removed for DFSG reasons on the older versions of this package, and I followed that example and removed them from the version in sid as well. However, as

Re: Packaging for multiarch i386 sse2/non-sse2

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 10:39:12PM +0200, Fabien Givors (Debian) wrote: As this can be expected, this library rely on sse2 instruction set. However, most of the features (except for software video rendering) are available (sometimes in a degraded mode, eg. the sound part might be slower) for

Bug#719652: RFS: hashalot/0.3-6

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Hi folks! I'm looking for a sponsor for an update to hashalot. This includes a fix for missing build-{arch,indep}, which are supposed to become RC soon (already a must clause of the policy). Otherwise, though, this just a regular cleaning for a

Re: RFS: fio 2.11

On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 08:52:47PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 04:57:41PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: a) Is it worth to switch to xz for this package? b) Is it a good idea to force the compression-level to 9? For a) I think maybe for b) I guess buildd maintainers

Re: Bug#718323: RFS: hyperrogue/3.7+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- non-euclidean graphical rogue-like game

On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 01:21:26PM +0200, chrysn wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:39:13AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: If the player grinds long enough, he will gain access to an unfinished land that doesn't work yet. In game.cpp, you'd want to comment out the following lines

Re: Bug#718323: RFS: hyperrogue/3.7+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- non-euclidean graphical rogue-like game

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:23:54AM +0200, chrysn wrote: * Package name: hyperrogue Why do you use ttf-bitstream-vera? fonts-dejavu-core is a superset, and is installed on about every X-capable Debian system thanks to existing dependencies. Upstream wants an ASCII-only font for a smaller

Bug#716905: ITP missing for package goodbye with RFS 716905 with ITP in title

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:16:59AM +0200, Mònica Ramírez Arceda wrote: According to [0], goodbye has not its corresponding ITP bug, despite 716905 title. Please, could you file this ITP bug? #636016, from two years ago. I guess your check didn't match it as it had been renamed to RFP for

Re: Bug#716905: RFS: goodbye/0.3-1 [ITP]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:42:41PM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl writes: Let's add some WTF to FTPmasters' day! :) This package is a perfect fit for a personal archive, but if anyone wants to upload it: you're in for a race for the fastest REJECT ever. I'm

<    2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >