Hi,
On 07-02-13 16:08, Boris Pek wrote:
Four weeks passed since our discussion. Any progress on this?
A little. I tried to run autoreconf as part of the build process, but
was unable to make it compile. This is quite a serious problem, and
exactly the reason I prefer to have it part of the
Hi,
On 12-10-12 10:00, Andreas Tille wrote:
not that I would specifically interested in this very package (just
stumbled upon it because of the physics keyword) I think you could
enhance your chances to find a sponsor if you would more closely join
the pkg-games team (by for instance
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:05:25PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
Hi Bas,
Hi,
I may have made confusing statement for casual observer...
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 01:09:02PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:06:27AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
In License, you have
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:06:27AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
In License, you have:
LGPL-2+ can also be treated as version 2.1 of GNU Lesser General Public
License. On Debian systems, the complete text may be found in
/usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2.1.
LGPL-2+ can also be treated as version
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 09:32:04PM +0800, LI Daobing (李道兵) wrote:
Dear mentors,
I got a question from the upstream, the source tarball contains GPL
and LGPL code, and this source tarball can generate several packages.
can I release one package in GPL and another in LGPL?
Yes, because the
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 06:41:37PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
If there are binary packages which build solely from LGPL sources (they
do not use any GPL-only sources), those packages can be licensed as
LGPL.
Sorry for replying to my own mail, but I was writing confusing things.
:-)
The packages
Hello,
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 08:59:31AM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
You probably want a custom regex in the -i option to dpkg-source.
Using debuild and DEBUILD_DPKG_BUILDPACKAGE_OPTS in ~/.devscripts is a
good way to prevent the need to add it to the dpkg-buildpackage
command-line
Hi,
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 03:22:52PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
I am working through the bugs of glademm which I recently adopted. There
are some 6-7 years old Bugs that are not reproducible any more while
they clearly have existed once.
I guess simply closing them with an notice about
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:43:05PM +0800, LI Daobing (李道兵) wrote:
a new version 1.0.0-1 uploaded to mentors.debian.net
Looks good, I uploaded it. Please let me know when it passes NEW, so
the new lunar-applet can be uploaded as well.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail
Hello again,
I should have been much faster with this, but better late than never I
guess...
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 10:43:09PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:40 PM, Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- The library version is complex. This is probably upstream's choice
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 09:35:53PM +1000, David Schulberg wrote:
So how can I actually check in my initscript that it is running during
the installation process so I can skip the start of my service at that
time?
Using debhelper I'm not sure if that's possible at all. I would not
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
lunar-applet is chinese calendar applet for gnome environment. it's
version is 2.0-1 in this upload(in sid it's 1.8)
in lunar-applet 2.0, the library part is separated to liblunar by upstream.
I'll look at lunar-applet after
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 01:34:39PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 12:37 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2008-03-05, Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of course is changing SONAMEs in a NMU appropriate if it is appropriate.
That equates to a hostile hijacking.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 11:22:04PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:50:23AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
As a sidestep, I think this target may actually be legally required for
GPL (at least 2 and 3) licenced code. They say
For an executable work, complete source
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 11:00:55PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
It's not just the computing resources required that concern me, it's
also the effort involved in doing it and the disruption that could be
caused, especially if we were to do things like changing autotools
versions underneath the
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 04:23:03PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
is there any procedure to follow in case one needs to revoke his GPG
key (thus creating a new one)?
I mean, I have some packages in Debian, which are signed by my current
key (0x1392B174).
Packages in Debian are signed by a DD
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 05:24:42PM +0100, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
I'd like to convert my very little packages to the
machine-interpretable debian/copyright format described on the Wiki.
Good idea. :-)
In my packages (but I think that this applies to many others) I have
some very little
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:39:29PM -0800, Chris Waters wrote:
But honestly, I think our job is to deliver full source and binaries.
I _don't_ think we necessarily have to exercise every bit of the
source (e.g. the .am files) on every build. In fact, my primary
objections to the java example
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 10:14:24PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
Then I still don't understand your statement above. What is the thing
that you prefer to check outside the normal build process?
That we can regenerate the autotools products.
I answered this in another reply. Sorry for not
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:30:32AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 17.02.2008, 23:58 +0100 schrieb Bas Wijnen:
[..]
The get-orig-source target specifies that it must work from anywhere.
Where do you read this? The policy says, that it [..] may be invoked in
any directory
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:47:41PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 11:55:03PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:29:59PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
If you're willing to do things by forcing a particular version in the
general case then this sounds more like
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:07:59PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 10:53:48AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
This is not true if you simply build the whole package from source.
That is, run autotools during build, remove all generated files,
including Makefile.in, configure
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 11:15:20AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Autoconf is pretty stable,
This has not been the experience of many of us. I haven't had a lot of
trouble fixing things for newer releases of Autoconf, but I definitely
have seen issues
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 09:29:59PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 08:08:47PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
The fact that there exist packages which work properly without
recompiling from source doesn't mean it's a good default. IMO the
default should be to always compile
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 11:30:42PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
Il giorno Sun, 17 Feb 2008 13:59:51 -0500
Andres Mejia [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto:
On Sunday 17 February 2008 11:37:54 am David Paleino wrote:
Why not using $(CURDIR)? It should give you the dir where debian/ is
located
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 04:43:52PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 10:53:48AM +0100, 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
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 04:02:41PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A workaround could be to not regenerate the files. This is how it is
usually done now. IMO that is incorrect, because the compiler for every
generated file must be in Debian. The current
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 implies rebuild
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
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), which implies
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 target
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 had, except that it
Hi,
Sorry for the delay. I'll have a look at these, hopefully today. If
anyone is faster, don't wait for me, though. ;-)
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 10:04:39PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:0.4.1-1
of my package qterm.
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:25:15PM +0100, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package zerofree.
I have several other packages waiting for me at the moment, so I'm
afraid I can't do that (at least not soon).
Note that I have set the Dm-Upload-Allowed field. This
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:46:31PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2008 16:30 schrieb Jean Parpaillon:
Hi,
I intend to package HPL benchmarks. Copyright file contains the
following statements:
--
1. Redistributions of source code must
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:37:36PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
Hi folks,
Hi Barry, :-)
I've uploaded a version of imlib that fixes an important and RC bug. If
someone has time to review/sponsor.
I'll try to have a look at it tomorrow.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 01:20:45AM +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
If I add findstring like:
@if [ -f $(GRADM_PAM) ] ; then \
echo Installing gradm_pam... ; \
$(INSTALL) -m 4755 $(GRADM_PAM) $(DESTDIR)/sbin ; \
ifeq (,$(findstring
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 07:35:48PM +, tim hall wrote:
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Its in no way important, not even near to it. Its priority extra, so
lowest possible priority.
Sorry, wrong terminology. It's a very useful multimedia application, which
many people use and would expect to find
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:19:23AM +0100, Richard van Roy wrote:
I'm a programmer with at least abdicate understanding of C++ and a long
time Debian user. At the moment I have a lot of free time and I wish to
spent this productively by aiding Debian in development.
Great, welcome. :-)
I
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:39:18PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
The last upstream version has some license issue(relicense GPL code as
LGPL), and this version have fix this problem. please help upload it,
thanks.
I'll have a look at it.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send encrypted
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:39:18PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
The last upstream version has some license issue(relicense GPL code as
LGPL), and this version have fix this problem. please help upload it,
thanks.
Some comments:
Upstream appearantly changed the license headers. That's good.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:01:30PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
Barry deFreese wrote:
I am CC'ing Debian QA because this fixes an RC bug and the maintainer may
be MIA.
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2.1-4.1
of my package zynaddsubfx.
OK, I have uploaded another version
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 11:03:48AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Erik Schanze [EMAIL PROTECTED] [071215 20:09]:
I created the cunit.commands and signed it by:
$ gpg --clearsign cunit.commands
$ mv cunit.commands.asc cunit.commands
What's wrong?
You forgot the magic --list-options
Hello,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 06:54:06PM +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
I'm the maintainer of SQLite3 packages. Upstream used to ship the
sources and documentation in one tarball. Now this is changed, source
still ships in a tarball, but docs is separeted to a zip file. What
would be the
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:44:39PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:04:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think the best way is to include the license text in
debian/copyright just like any other license that is not in
common
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:09:21PM +0100, Gilles Filippini wrote:
I've uploaded yesterday to mentors.d.n a new release of my package nted.
The upload seemed successful but I didn't received any confirmation mail
and the package doesn't show up on the mentors.d.n web site.
Here is the
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:04:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think the best way is to include the license text in debian/copyright
just like any other license that is not in common-licenses.
We probably don't really want to include a copy of the GPLv1 in every Perl
package.
If the
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:21:41PM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
Bas Wijnen wrote:
RMS does this, in his attempts to move people to use the newest version
of the GPL. He has a point, but if Debian would fully agree with it, I
suppose we would relicense all GPL works as GPL version 3
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 03:06:27PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
And yes, if you refer to the GPL today, it certainly means GPL3.
Not at all. Well, at least not completely. ;-) GNU GPL 3 itself says
about this (section 14):
If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:53:45AM -0600, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
The new dpkg-shlibdeps is giving me tons of messages of the form
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol ui_node_remove_node used by
debian/liferea/usr/lib/liferea/libliscrlua.so found in none of the
libraries
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 05:20:32PM +0100, David Bremner wrote:
Can someone point me to policy about file headers?
For license information, there is no Debian policy, because this is not
up to Debian to change. The copyright holder may distribute code with a
license. How she does that is up to
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 11:35:31PM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
2007/12/2, Patrick Schoenfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
1) Copyright / license issues: By removing important information from
the previous packaging you might insult the packaging license.
Redistribution in Debian might therefore be
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 10:27:21AM +0100, Bart Martens wrote:
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
I'd suggest that the copyright file
should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 05:53:04PM -0200, Eriberto wrote:
Ok. But in my package I chose the GPL as license (debian/copyright file).
You can do that, and it sort of makes sense if you want to release your
packaging only under the GPL. However, you can still allow the other
options for the users
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 08:22:06PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 03:24:40PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
I don't know much about java, but if those are just compilations of
things for which the source is also in the tarball, there is no need to
repackage. You can remove
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 09:10:11AM -0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:
The background is that I already have to repackage upstream tarball,
because they contain compiled jars.
I don't know much about java, but if those are just compilations of
things for which the source is also in the tarball, there is
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:50:20AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If I understand things correctly, we are discussing the NMU of grig by
Cyril (#444509).
No, not really. The post you replied to stated explicitly that it
wasn't talking about any specific event, just about general procedure.
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:20:06AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have just one question about this part:
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
#include grun2.xpm
#if defined (HAVE_GETTEXT) || defined (HAVE_CATGETS)
#include libintl.h
+#define UTF8
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:52:33AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it ok with you if I upload it with a string literal instead of a
define?
Yes, no problem. Thanks for the review.
One more thing, the package failed to build a second time
:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 04:02:28PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:52:33AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it ok with you if I upload it with a string literal instead of a
define?
Yes, no problem. Thanks
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:41:27PM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for a 7 days delayed NMU of package grun.
I was a bit busy, and expected someone else to look at this before me,
but appearantly that didn't happen. It seems like a serious problem, so
I didn't read the discussion before, but I think I know what it's about
anyway, and I'd like to say something about it. :-)
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 07:51:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Bernd Zeimetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] (09/10/2007):
I could have stripped these parts from the diff, but they
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 03:25:22PM +0200, David Bremner wrote:
Epoch added, off-list suggestions of Bas incorporated. New version
1:0.2-27-3 uploaded to mentors.
It looked good, so I uploaded it. You should be getting some e-mail
about it being NEW. If there are any problems, please let me
Hi,
First of all, I'm going to take a look at the package and upload it if
it's ok (I'll look at the next version you announced :-) ). So if
others were planning to do the same, please let me know.
First comment: The ITP says there are problems with the copyright
notices. From the RFS I
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 08:03:44PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote:
I'm considering applying for maintainer of a couple packages, and I
wondered if Debian had some policy on preferring professional or
personal email addresses for maintainers.
In Debian, we do things Right(tm). :-) That includes
Uhm, ok, someone else uploaded this package in the meantime. The points
I raised in the previous e-mail are still worth fixing in the next
upload.
And I'd still like answers to:
- There is a lintian override installed, which isn't documented in the
changelog. Why is it needed? (In other
Hi,
I'm taking a look at this. An extra note/feature request for the
mentors template: please write what has changed with respect to the
previous version.
Thanks,
Bas
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:39:33AM +0100, Marco Rodrigues wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new
Hi,
Here's a list of things I found in the package:
- The second '*' in debian/changelog is indented incorrectly.
- About XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: I almost don't dare to say it, but I'd
like to have it added again. ;-) Perhaps it's better to wait until
Miriam is back from her break, and leave
Hi Jens,
I uploaded the package. I still have some comments (see below), but
they weren't enough reason to not upload.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:20:11AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
this is a GPL without version claim, which according to the GPL
means any version is acceptable. I
It's
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:13:21PM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
What I meant is that if you consider license information of any value to
the reader of the manual page, it should contain a link to the actual
license text (it can be on the internet as well). In fact, I expect it
not to add
Hi,
I'm taking a look at it, and see that Sam is in the Uploaders. Should I
upload the package (if it's good), or does he normally do that?
Thanks,
Bas
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:15:04AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.0.20070315-5
Hello again,
I have some questions before uploading the package:
- You have specified Priority: extra. According to policy, This
contains all packages that conflict with others with required,
important, standard or optional priorities, or are only likely to be
useful if you already know
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 03:40:01AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I would like to create something like the Ubuntu Personal Package
Archive (PPA), but for Debian.
I don't know that, so I'm only responding to your description.
It's written in Django (Python) and my idea is to have a
Hi Miriam,
It might take a few days before I get to it, but I'd be happy to sponsor
(and co-maintain, if you want) SDCC for/with you.
I don't mind if someone else is faster in sponsoring this time. :-)
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:22:55AM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
SDCC is a C
Hi,
This is slightly off-topic, for which I apologise. It's just that I
learned about symbol versioning during my NM process, and nobody outside
Debian seems to understand what it is. :-(
I have a library, which I want to package for Debian. I felt it would
be a good idea to use symbol
. :-)
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and advice on this,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:34:05AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
minor). Is there a way to tag it as such? Or should I just add a message
to the report (I
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 03:00:40PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
Hi,
Hello,
My question is:
Currently knentstats is at version 1.6.1.
How would I repackage knetstats when version 1.6.2 is released ?
There are several ways. Personally, I just get the new upstream tarball,
unpack it,
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:43:14AM -, Paul Cager wrote:
What is the recommended approach here?
(1) Ignore the problem - it is only an *informational* message,
and previous releases have ignored it.
(2) Patch as recommended in msg01481.html; send patch to upstream author.
(3)
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 08:13:38AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 03:30:50PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard a ?crit :
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
* free packages which require [...] packages which
On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 09:57:57PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
Marco Amadori wrote:
This seems to be against DFSG n# 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
[0]
You're absolutely right.. for main, but not for non-free.
This is a matter for -legal, but anyway.
No, he's not right. The
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Markus Schulz wrote:
After a package upgrade i want to check if the generated config file was
modified by user with a md5sum and ask the user if i can override the
existing config file (only if different) with the new generated
version.
But a read
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:06:08PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 04:33:49 -0700, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you
shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so
there's
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:59:05PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
Packages aren't moved out of essential.
So you can guarantee that bash will always be essential?
Certainly not. :-) I'm saying that we don't plan to ever make it
non
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:52:01AM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Arvind kumar wrote:
First thing I need is access to latest CVS code for craft package
(only read permission will do ). As far as I could make out from
debian.org , there is some strict guide line and
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 07:52:04AM +0100, Gouki wrote:
I contacted the author (2 times) and asked his permission to create a
Debian package of his application before I started. Days passed and I
decided to go ahead. Maybe I would hear from him during the process.
Since the package is almost
).
Thanks for your interest in helping to improve Debian!
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, not as HTML
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 12:44:17PM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
[1] I need to override because the error could only be *fixed* by
repackaging the .orig.tar.gz, which I don't want to do for so little a
thing, when the problem can be adequately worked around.
While I fully agree that
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 03:36:41PM +0300, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
Bas Wijnen -- 10.10.2006 12:09 --:
Then again, looking at the warning there's something wrong with the check as
well. That is, assuming you did remove the files in the clean target, the
hint about that suggests that they don't
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:57:51AM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
I would like to know what happen with him?
I don't know anything about Stan, but AFAIK these sort of queries should be
sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], so they don't show up on google. It's not a nice
thing to have your name mentioned
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:14:36AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:33:46AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
OK, thanks all for your answers. I will mention the problem in the
README. How can I give a message only to the users who upgrade from the
previous version? I do
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 12:00:52PM +0200, Luca bedogni wrote:
W: webcam-server source: native-package-with-dash-version
N: Native source packages are sometimes created by accident. In most
N: cases the reason is the location of the original source tarball.
N: dpkg-source searches for this in
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:23:21PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
I think that I will provide a PDF, and ship the .doc files (as I they
are the source...).
If the only reason you ship them is that they are source, be sure to not ship
them in the binary package, but only in the source package
On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 09:48:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've seen many recommendations that the 'debian/' directory should not
be part of the 'foo_X.Y.orig.tar.gz' tarball but should always be added
by the 'foo_X.Y-Z.diff.gz', even in the case of
, and the plugin.
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:08:29PM +0200, Andreas Fester wrote:
* Package name: subcommander
* License : GNU/GPL
I didn't really look at the package, just at the copyright file. The reason
is that you said GNU/GPL, which is incorrect. GNU/Linux means a
combination of the GNU
and
source. So even a pure documentation package with only text files in it is
called a binary package. The library packages you talk about are binary
packages as well (and of course they also have a source package).
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:34:20AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
shc (3.8.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
^^^
This is the wrong version number for an NMU anyway.
True. Fixed as -0.1. Hm, it would be nice if lintian and linda warn if
changelog claims Non-maintainer upload
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:31:22PM +0200, Ricardo Mones wrote:
That also should be catched and warned, since an NMU done by a
maintaner makes no sense.
It's not very common, but it does: the NMU is prepared by another
non-DD and the package maintainer sponsors it.
I remember a thread
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:57:26AM -0400, Charles Fry wrote:
So please, please, please do fix (remove) the rpath in the package.
I would appreciate any tips on how to go about fixing this. My package
is courierpassd, currently only available in unstable. It depends on
courier-authlib which
1 - 100 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
