Hi,
Jörg Sommer jo...@alea.gnuu.de wrote:
Dear mentors,
thanks for your efforts, I've found a sponsor for this package.
Bye, Jörg.
--
Macht besitzen und nicht ausüben ist wahre Größe.
(Friedl Beutelrock)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
unstable main
contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/slgtk/slgtk_0.7.6-1.dsc
You can find all changes here:
http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-jed/slgtk.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/jo-next
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Kind regards
Jörg Sommer
this package for me.
Kind regards
Jörg Sommer
--
Der Wunsch, klug zu erscheinen, verhindert oft, es zu werden.
(Francois de la Rochefoucauld)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
Hi Julien,
Julien Valroff jul...@kirya.net wrote:
The aim is to only update file properties of the changed packages.
To achieve this goal, I need to get the list of changed packages, which
I do in a script invokef through Pre-Install-Pkgs.
The file properties can however only be updated
Hallo Luca,
Luca Niccoli lultimou...@gmail.com wrote:
Souce files of the program I'm packaging contain the following header:
/* fswebcam - Small and simple webcam for *nix */
/*===*/
/* Copyright (C)2005-2006 Philip Heron
Hallo David,
David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:26:33 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Le Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:01:16PM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
Examine the ‘foo.diff.gz’
cat foo.diff.gz | lsdiff, for instance
lsdiff -z foo.diff.gz | grep -v debian/
lsdiff
Hi Alexandre,
Alexandre González [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm searching for a simple project to read the code.
The package hello is such a package
% show hello
Package: hello
Priority: optional
Section: devel
Installed-Size: 588
Maintainer: Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Architecture: powerpc
Felipe Sateler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg Sommer wrote:
Felipe Sateler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg Sommer wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All of mine are simple enough not to need it, but --fail-missing is
the option to dh_install.
But I want to use dh_installman
Hallo Don,
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008, Jörg Sommer wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's why you generally fail your build if there are files in tmp
which do not get installed.
In which of your packages you do so?
All of mine are simple
Hi Felipe,
Felipe Sateler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg Sommer wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008, Jörg Sommer wrote:
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's why you generally fail your build if there are files in tmp
which do not get installed
Hallo Don,
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008, Jörg Sommer wrote:
Colin Watson announced in dda that dh_installman automatically
converts manual pages to UTF‐8 encoding. [1] Installing the manual
pages with the upstream make install doesn't profit from this. I
came
Hi,
Colin Watson announced in dda that dh_installman automatically converts
manual pages to UTF‐8 encoding. [1] Installing the manual pages with the
upstream make install doesn't profit from this. I came to the question if
it is generally better to install all files with debhelper. But than I
Hello Thibaut,
Thibaut Paumard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm packaging an interpreted language, Yorick, and a bunch of add-ons
for that language.
I'd like to provide a wrapper package that would depend on all the
packages in this family present in main and suggest the one that is
in
Hallo C.J.,
C.J. Adams-Collier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 12:32 +, Jörg Sommer wrote:
C.J. Adams-Collier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# Fully qualified paths to required programs
START_STOP_DAEMON=/sbin/start-stop-daemon
CAT=/bin/cat
ECHO=/bin/echo
Why not use
Hallo C.J.,
C.J. Adams-Collier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is there something like a service-common package that provides a helper
script like the following for services to source?
I'm thinking that it would belong somewhere like
/usr/share/service-common/init.sh. I have not tested the
Hallo Florian,
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz:
So in the end I agree that would be sensible to exit with 0, if the
process is not running, cause their might be different errors to occur
when stopping (even though I never met one), but that it would make
Hi,
Nelson A. de Oliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/4/07, Jörg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a little known requirement that packages continue to work after
/u/s/doc is removed. So it's not allowed to install required files
there. You
Hi Justin,
Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a little known requirement that packages continue to work after
/u/s/doc is removed. So it's not allowed to install required files
there. You could do (2) or (3) with links *from* u/s/d though.
Where's this written? In the policy?
Bye,
Hi,
Kapil Hari Paranjape [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Jörg Sommer wrote:
Do *not* get the upstream .tar.gz which may have changed for some
mysterious reason.
I don't think the upstream tar.gz have changed, but your orig.tar.gz is
not the same as the upstream tar.gz
Hi Kapil,
Kapil Hari Paranjape [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got hit by this so I wanted to note it down where it might be of
use to others. It *is* elementary but then ...
Suppose pkg_123.45.orig.tar.gz is already in the Debian archive.
To build a new version pkg_123.45-xxx of the
Hello Joachim,
Joachim Reichel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had the idea to finally separate the build-dependencies between
Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep in debian/control. The criterion is
the
following: put in Build-Depends all those packages that are absolutely
necessary to build
Hello Don,
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007, Jörg Sommer wrote:
I really would like to hear you oppinion about the following matter:
Package A depends on libB. There's a bug in libB. A bug report was files
to package A, because the submitter spotted the bug
Hi,
I really would like to hear you oppinion about the following matter:
Package A depends on libB. There's a bug in libB. A bug report was files
to package A, because the submitter spotted the bug in package A.
What would you, as maintainer of package A, do?
What do you think about leaving the
bussy and I should better ask in d-m for a sponsor.
So, remove the line and place your name there, if you like.
Kind regards,
Jörg Sommer
--
Der Mensch hat die Atombombe erfunden.
Keine Maus der Welt käme auf die Idee, eine Mausefalle zu konstruieren.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hello Matthias,
Matthias Julius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Having a simple and straghtforward patch system would lower the bar for
new packagers, as well as open the way to have .diff.gz files which
would only touch the debian directory, instead of
Hi Charles,
Charles Plessy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 11:31:06AM -0700, Brandon Philips a écrit :
I moved to debian/patches with dpatch. Is this a reasonable solution?
use what you like. I usually find quilt simpler, but really, I care
much about you beeing
Hello Russ,
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the linitan warning info-document-has-wrong-extension refers to Policy
12.2, but I can not find anything about the name scheme in this section.
Where is said, that a file in /usr/share/info must be named
Hi,
the linitan warning info-document-has-wrong-extension refers to Policy
12.2, but I can not find anything about the name scheme in this section.
Where is said, that a file in /usr/share/info must be named info*.gz?
Bye, Jörg.
--
Die beste Tarnung ist die Wahrheit. Die glaubt einem keiner!
Hello Yaroslav,
Yaroslav Halchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would, of course, prefer a solution with the lsb functions. What
I want is to know when fail2ban started and when I accidentally
tried to start it while the daemon was already running.
BTW - it seems that /etc/init.d/skeleton does
Hi,
I've a report for a bug that I can't reproduce. #235001 The submitter of
the report does not use Debian anymore. I marked it “unreproducible
moreinfo” one month ago, but nobody provided any infos.
I will close this bug, but I don't know which version I should put into
the version header to
Hello Russ,
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thibaut Paumard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Which leads us to this question: do *-doc packages belong in section
doc, or in whatever the main package is (science, in this case)?
I prefer putting them in the same section as the main package so
repository: deb-src http://www.minet.uni-jena.de/~joergs/debian/ ./
- dget http://www.minet.uni-jena.de/~joergs/debian/xindy_2.2~beta2-1.dsc
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Kind regards
Jörg Sommer
--
Manchmal denke ich, das sicherste Indiz dafür, daß anderswo im Universum
Hallo martin,
martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also sprach Jörg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.07.29.1918 +0100]:
It builds these binary packages:
xindy - index generator for structured documents like LaTeX or SGML
xindy-rules - index generator for structured documents like LaTeX
://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xindy
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main
contrib non-free
- dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xindy/xindy_2.1.99+2.2-beta2-1.dsc
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Kind regards
Jörg
Hallo Ben,
Ben Hutchings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jörg Sommer wrote:
Hallo Goswin,
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just make sure to use a version that sorts lower than a future actual
2.2 release. Optimaly 2.2~beta2 would be used but I think the DAK
still doesn't accept
Hallo Frank,
Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- According to the README file,
Which README file? /usr/share/doc/xindy-rules/README?
xindy is distributed as
,
| -- the xindy scripts and modules in source form
| -- the xindy kernel in binary form
| -- the xindy run time
Hallo Goswin,
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just make sure to use a version that sorts lower than a future actual
2.2 release. Optimaly 2.2~beta2 would be used but I think the DAK
still doesn't accept those. 2.1.99+2.2-beta might be a good choice.
Good objection. I've changed
Hi,
I've created a package for Xindy (#362584) on the basis of a not released
upstream source, because the upstream maintainer told me that the old
source tree should be replaced and the old source didn't build really
fine.
Nearly one month ago I've asked the maintainer to release the source,
Hi,
I would like to see my package xindy (#362584) is uploaded to unstable.
My package is here:
deb-src http://www.minet.uni-jena.de/~joergs/debian ./
* Package name: xindy
Version : 2.2-beta2-1
Upstream Author : Joachim Schrod [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL :
Hallo Nelson,
Nelson A. de Oliveira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
On 6/4/06, Jörg Sommer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, my question is: Can I release a package that bases on not-released
sources? If so, I request for an sponsor. Otherwise, what should I do?
Wait?
Well... you can.
I saw
Drew Parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
wishes to leave the symbols in?
Why you not provide a -dbg version of your package? If someone has an
error and want to report this, he can install the -dbg version to get
non
Drew Parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
wishes to leave the symbols in?
Why you not provide a -dbg version of your package? If someone has an
error and want to report this, he can install the -dbg version to get
non
42 matches
Mail list logo
