Hi Tobias:
I'll sponsor it.
Carlo
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Tobias Stefan Richter wrote:
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package nexus
* Package name: nexus
Version : 4.3-svn1863-1
Upstream Author :
Hello All:
I recall that there was a script which permits one to compare package
version names to determine which one is greater. I just can't remember
the name of the script. Any clues?
Carlo
--
Carlo U. Segre -- Professor of Physics
Associate Dean for Graduate Admissions, Graduate
Hi All:
I am intending to hijack xournal. The current version has been NMUed for
almost 1 year and the maintainer's (Mathieu Bouchard) email bounces.
There is some urgency to this because the newest version of GTK in sid
breaks the ability of xournal to read PDF files for annotation. This
Hi Charles:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
Thanks a lot for your action.
Any chance to hijack into an existing packaging team ?
I have no objection to comaintaining this, or even handing it off to a
team. I am not sure I want to join another team though as I am a bit
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Craig Small wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 06:13:40PM +0100, tombs wrote:
I'm trying to work with a package that was already debianized before. But
nothing more than that.
The first question to ask is, is the packaging done by the previous
maintainer ok? If it is more or
Hi Pietro
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Pietro Battiston wrote:
Anyway, I'm starting to think that the effort of this autopsy is
bigger than it's worth: I have nearly finished a new package for it,
license and documentation seem to be ok, I hope I've avoided the problem
the former maintainer had,
hi Pietro:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Pietro Battiston wrote:
Since I started to repackage it, I maybe found a possible solution to
the dilemma: do you think that the license [2] (in particular the third
condition) is not enough free?
Notice that if this is the problem, I could try to contact
Hi Richard:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Richard Hurt wrote:
I am just getting started in Debian package building and I need to know if
this idea is valid or if there is a better way. It's my understanding that
building Debian packages is best done in a Sid environment. Since I'm not
running Sid
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, Carlo Wood wrote:
I mailed about this before here. I was pointed to an old archived post
that seemed to be the only data on how to do to get non-free to autobuild
anyway (because there is no legal issue). I did what it said - and it's
still not autobuilding. Why not? Sorry,
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, Neil McGovern wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.devel.mentors/browse_thread/thread/b0fc0de21553819f
Actually that thread is a bit different since it is about building contrib
packages when they require non-free dependencies.
The post that relates to
Hello All:
I am continually running into a problem with one of my contrib packages
(ifeffit). Unfortunately it depends on two non-free packages to build
(pgplot5, latex2html). Some of the buildd machines build this package
without problems if they have the non-free sources in sources.list.
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Talk to aba (Andreas barth) who manages the non-free buildds.
Actually, I suggested to the non-free buildd admins that they allow
selected contrib packages to be built on the non-free network but I have
not gotten a response back yet. That
Hi Anibal:
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Anibal Avelar wrote:
SF.net has a special domain for this.
In your case should be (I think I didn't test):
http://sf.net/fityk/fityk-([\d\.]+).tar.bz2
Thanks. Cyril pointed out that the uscan manual has this and I should
have looked there first.
Hi All:
Up to recently, I have been using the following watch file URL in the
fityk package which is hosted on sourceforge.
ftp://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/f/fi/fityk/fityk-(.*)\.tar\.bz2
As of a short time ago, this no longer works and results in a broken watch
file. Does anyone know if
Hi Thibaud:
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
So, should all science software really go under Education??? Or should I use
both Graphics;3DGraphics;Viewers *and* Science;Astronomy;DataVisualization?
The consensus on the debian-science list is no. Education is simply not
the
Hi All:
I know that it is possible to add a second binary architecture .deb to an
upload. I just can't seem to find it documented anywhere. I need this
because the package I am building is non-free and usually does not get
autobuilt (yes, I have set the control line and informed the proper
Hi All:
One of my packages uses the boost headers and distributes them in the
original tarball. I have been modifying the configuration scripts to
ignore the local copy and use the libboost-dev dependency instead. Since
these are headers and not real libraries, would it violate policy for
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Carlo Segre wrote:
Upstream prefers to
continue distribution in the tarball and it would avoid having to
continually patch the configuration scripts.
Maybe you could convince upstream of providing a --with-system-boost option
to use either
I appreciate your comments
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 14:10:39 -0500 (CDT)
Carlo Segre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of my packages uses the boost headers and distributes them in the
original tarball. I have been modifying the configuration scripts
Hi Michelle:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Salut Margarite,
Thanks for this explanation...
The problem is that I have some Apps for customers which should work
on all three releases but if the will be pushed into Debian, I have
trouble...
I will use -1+b1
You want to make
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Margarita Manterola wrote:
On 1/12/07, Carlo Segre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will use -1+b1
sarge -1~sarge1
etch-1
This can perfectly (and more clearly, from my point of view) be achieved by:
sarge: -1
etch: -1+b1
sid: -1+b2
So that when lenny
Hello All:
If a new version of a package drops a dependency on a previously required
package, should an install-time reminder be given to the user? I don't
really want to add debconf clutter for such a trivial matter but it is
probably not good to leave a potentially orphaned package
Sounds like a good idea. Thanks,
Carlo
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Hi Carlo!
On 12/30/06, Carlo Segre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If a new version of a package drops a dependency on a previously required
package, should an install-time reminder be given to the user? I
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Linas virblis wrote:
Why do you care about this anyway? Packages constantly change (add/drop)
their dependencies. The information that package foo dropped dependency
on package bar does not tell you much. So what if it did? You cannot
simply remove it, because other
Hi Ryan:
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Ryan Finnie wrote:
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package anaconda.
* Package name: anaconda
Version : 11.1.0.50-1
Upstream Author : Jeremy Katz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
Hi Zak:
Given the significant number of perl packages that you are adopting, would
you consider putting them in the Debian Perl repository and joining the
group. Generally once the packages are in there it is easy to get them
uploaded by DD members of the group.
All it takes is getting an
Hi!
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006, Kit Peters wrote:
New Release will be 20060805-1.
Symlinking to pristine source from mss-library_20060805.orig.tar.bz2...
-- Untarring the new sourcecode archive mss-library-20060805.tar.bz2
uupdate: could not find diffs from version 20060804-2 to apply!
This is
Look at:
http://www.debian.org/devel/
http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
There is lots of information there to help you get started. The first
thing you could do is read the New maintainer's guide and then find a
package which needs help...
Carlo
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Deepak Kumar
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Am Montag, 3. Juli 2006 23:33 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:43:50PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
I am trying to use xvfb-run to permit pbuilder to build some packages
which need to connect to X.
If you're aiming to get the package
Hi Steven:
On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Steven Hill wrote:
I have been reading the literature on debian packages, and I am trying
to figure out how to tell the package installer to automatically use
apt-get install to satisfy a dependency at installation time - is
there any way to do that? As far as
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006, Adeodato Simó wrote:
Since nowadays non-free is supposed to be autobuilt, I think the
reasonable thing to do befor #1 or #2 would be to contact the
maintainers of this buildd network to see if pgplot5 needs some manual
pushing so that is seen by these autobuildders. See
Hello All:
I have started to help maintain pgplot5. It is in non-free but is,
unfortunately, the only option for many Fortran programs which need to
plot to and interact with X. The upstream source is very stable and does
not change often at all but because of the X.org transition and
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Are there any suggestions or can anyone point me to a package that
successfully uses xvfb under pbuilder?
In theory, it should work, though I have not really tried recently.
Does your chroot have /tmp/.X11-unix ?
That is it, I guess. I have a
Hello All:
I am trying to use xvfb-run to permit pbuilder to build some packages
which need to connect to X. In both cases, if I do a local build with
dpkg-buildpackages, the connection to the xvfb server works fine, however
it fails in pbuilder. In one case, it is a perl-tk module which
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:43:50PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
I am trying to use xvfb-run to permit pbuilder to build some packages
which need to connect to X.
If you're aiming to get the package uploaded, this isn't allowed. You
can't assume an X11
On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
You've just answered your own question, no?
If you really think you have other users, use an epoch. It's ugly,
but it works.
If you don't have other users, go through the changelog and prepend
0.0. to all existing versions. :)
Had to do some
hello All;
I am planning ot upload a package which I have been maintaining for a
local archive for several years already. I intended to keep the old
changelogs as a record of the work that has been done on the package,
however there is one problem. During the time I have been packaging
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
Hello,
my package does not build on ia64 due to what seems to be dependency
problems:
/usr/bin/sudo /usr/bin/apt-get --purge $CHROOT_OPTIONS -q -y install
debhelper libapt-front-dev libqt4-dev qt4-dev-tools docbook-to-man pkg-config
Dear Robert:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006, robert jennings wrote:
Hello!
Okay, so I read the fine manuals and examples from
many many places and maybe I'm just alittle tired
after I successfully created my first .deb package
(binary) but when I went to install it, the dpkg -i
xxx.deb installed all
Hello All:
We are working on package of a data acquisition control system (called
mx) which has an executable called motor which has a completely
different function (it is a java editor). This executable conflicts with
an executable of the same name in the package motor [0]. Since this
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Adeodato Simó wrote:
procedure is described in the first paragraph of Policy §10.1.
Ah, that's where it was. I was looking for it but not thoroughly enough,
I suppose.
Carlo
--
Carlo U. Segre -- Professor of Physics
Associate Dean for Special Projects, Graduate
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Matthew Palmer wrote:
Is motor generally useful, or is it just used as an internal component of
mx? (not a good name itself, BTW) If the latter, consider putting motor
into /usr/lib/mx.
It is a generally used program for data acquisition and control. The name
motor
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 08:42:39PM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
Is motor generally useful, or is it just used as an internal component of
mx? (not a good name itself, BTW) If the latter, consider putting motor
into /usr/lib/mx.
It is a generally used
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Actually, if I stay with the one-package-per-plugin approach, I was
thinking of providing a virtual package that would pull out yorick and
all the plugins (except perhaps the most specialised). Would that make
sense? In that case, I also need to think
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, David Liontooth wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I would just put those into the debian/rules. There is not enough there
to justify a full-blown makefile in my mind.
OK, that's good news, but I need a bit more help -- where do I add them to
rules?
CFLAGS = -Wall -g
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 09:45:02AM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006, David Liontooth wrote:
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
I would just put those into the debian/rules. There is not enough there
to justify a full-blown makefile in my mind
This seems to be sort of a modified BSD. Looks DFSG compliant.
Carlo
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Daniel Knabl wrote:
Hi,
please have a look at the following license. In my eyes it is not a
true BSD license, but also no Artistic license. But, I may be wrong.
This would not be the first time :-/
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
Mario Iseli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
debian/changelog:
* Initial Debian Release (Closes: 333680)
This makes no sense, it is a debian package so the debian can be
ommited, the rest is ok.
If Adriaan previously published deb packages in his local
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 09:18 -0600, Carlo Segre wrote:
This raises a question. If I have been packaging some software for some
time and finally decide to get it into Debian, should I wipe out the
entire changelog, remove any epochs that might have
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Justin Pryzby wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 11:00:47PM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
You might consider using the -v 0.2.2.1 option in dh_make to
convert this to a compliant version number. The second -1 will still be
there in the final
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
An excellent point. I imagine that it would also be permissible to
repackage the .orig.tar.gz file so that it is gone from there as well.
-Roberto
True, but then there is an additional step to taking a new tarball release
and making a
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, François-Denis Gonthier wrote:
On 28 September 2005 14:07, Justin Pryzby wrote:
When I make a new upstream package for Erlang, I need to extract the upstream
tar.gz file, which is named otp_src_[version].tar.gz, rename the created
directory to a Debian friendly name and
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
Hi
I am new to packaging and I am trying to package gnuplotfortran whose
upstream is located at http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplotfortran . The
upstream source is called gnuplotfortran-0.2.2-1.tar.bz2 . I downloaded this
to /tmp .
Then
How do you invoke dpkg-buildpackage? Do you use the -k option?
Carlo
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Guanglei Xiong wrote:
As the uploading packages need to be signed by my private key. I have trouble
to sign with dpkg-buildpackage. That is the story. My private key use the
address
Guanglei
Alexander:
You don't show the initial commands that you use to start the build. I
usually sit in a directory where there are the *.dsc, the *.orig.tar.gz
and the *.diff.gz files. Then I invoke:
pbuilder build fityk_0.5.1-1.dsc
That starts by unpacking the chroot, then moving the source
I believe that this happens when dpkg-buildpackage cannot find an
appropriately names original tarball. It then assumes that the package is
a native Debian package which should not have a revision number by policy.
This is usually dealt with by specifing the source tarball when running
Yes, you need to keep the *.orig directory until you have built the
package once. THis is what it uses to make the diff file.
Carlo
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Bastian Venthur wrote:
Bas Wijnen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 11:32:01PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote:
Ok but one question
Dear Jarle:
I suggest you look into apt-move, apt-ftparchive or dpkg-scanpackages.
The former will help maintain a tree sucha as in the main Debian archive.
The other two will work on whatever tree organization you might want to
set up for yourself.
I also suggest that you build using
It then becomes a native debian package with no -# revisions.
C.S.
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
Hi,
The author of one of the packages I was packaging for
my own use has asked me to be the maintainer of the
debian's package. The problem that I found is that in
latest versions he includes
59 matches
Mail list logo
