Amaya:
Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
Should not be needed. As long as you provide a source package which,
when compiled under alpha (with or without an autobuilder), generates
a binary package that works, everything should be ok.
On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
My next (new for unstable) package, yardradius conflicts with radiusd-cistron and
radiusd-livingston (and provides the same services - radiusd).
Should I open a couple of bug reps for inclusion of the new package
within control files of the
Drew Parsons wrote:
depends-on-essential-package-without-using-version [...]
I can't find much in Debian policy about this, so I'd like to ask, what
does this error mean, and why is it an error?
Many packages have a Depends line similar to this one:
Depends: [...], debianutils (= 1.6)
Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
(b) it's dubious whether another potato point release will be done at all.
How can you be so certain about the dubiousness of that? :-)
We should consider *all* the possibilities, including (but not limited to)
that the release of woody will be delayed and there will be
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Jason Lunz wrote:
I'm packaging a program for multiple distributions that build-depends on
autoconf 2.50. [...]
You might better avoid this if you can. Packages made by autoconf do
not usually depend on autoconf for the build, that's why the configure
script is shipped
Martin Schulze wrote:
Santiago Vila wrote:
James Troup wrote:
The canonical source for the debian keyring _is_[2] kerying.debian.org
(via anon-rsync); period. The package is a convenience, nothing
more[3].
A package which is horribly outdated is everything but a convenience
Martin Schulze wrote:
Santiago Vila wrote:
James Troup wrote:
The canonical source for the debian keyring _is_[2] kerying.debian.org
(via anon-rsync); period. The package is a convenience, nothing
more[3].
A package which is horribly outdated is everything but a convenience
James Troup wrote:
The canonical source for the debian keyring _is_[2] kerying.debian.org
(via anon-rsync); period. The package is a convenience, nothing
more[3].
A package which is horribly outdated is everything but a convenience.
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Jochen Voss wrote:
last week I prepared a new package for the gnome-utils package
and asked for a sponsor. As nobody volunteered this one was
not uploaded to the server.
Now I did some additional fixes (add a man page, ...) and
want to prepare a new package. Should I
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Jochen Voss wrote:
last week I prepared a new package for the gnome-utils package
and asked for a sponsor. As nobody volunteered this one was
not uploaded to the server.
Now I did some additional fixes (add a man page, ...) and
want to prepare a new package. Should I
Adrian Bunk wrote:
Santiago Vila wrote:
Adrian Bunk wrote:
is there a better way to get mails out of the BTS than cutpaste? This
would be especially useful for mails with binary attachments.
Yes, you can send the mail server ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) a message
like this:
send
On Mon, 8 May 2000, Adrian Bunk wrote:
is there a better way to get mails out of the BTS than cutpaste? This
would be especially useful for mails with binary attachments.
Yes, you can send the mail server ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) a message
like this:
send-detail bugnumber
stop
and then it will
On Thu, 4 May 2000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
[...] Then if Ian ever wants to pick up the project again, he has
the option of helping with the current version, or going back to his
old one, with all of the RC bugs still open.
It may be worth to mention that Ian Jackson declared recently that he
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, Chanop Silpa-Anan wrote:
During a debuild of my own package I've this complaint from lintian
Now running lintian...
internal error: dpkg-source didn't report unpack directory
internal error: could not unpack package to desired level: No such file or
directory
N:
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 10:31:06AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 12:17:53PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
The changelog will not appear in all the binary packages produced
since I won't
On Tue, 19 Oct 1999, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
I'm packaging a snapshot of XTide, version 2.2dev dated
1999/10/17. The date matters because the dev version may change
without changing version number before 2.2 is released.
I can't call it xtide_2.2dev19991017-1 because upgrades won't work
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Joe Drew wrote:
Something that's been going through my mind recently is the
following:
Say I had package foo, and all was going well. Then, upstream,
they change the package name to 'bar,' and I decide to go along with
it.
How could I go about making it automated for
The new recode 3.5 now contains a library, so following policy about
shared libraries I have splitted the main package in three: recode,
librecode0 and librecode-dev.
However, I had the bright idea of taking advantage of the fact that
recode depends on librecode0 by making /usr/doc/recode to be a
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
Debstd always modifies postinsts. Can't be turned off.
Regarding suidmanager support, I think if you create an empty suid
file, no automatic scan for setgid/setsid binaries would be made.
Thanks.
--
75d356ebefdbd8d8bc673df8c907b517 (a truly random sig)
There are two different things to be considered here:
1. dpkg-source supports pristine source. Is Eloy aware of this? (I'm not
completely sure when he says that samba_2.0.3.orig.tar.gz must untar in
samba-2.0.3.orig).
2. A CVS artifact inside a tarball is ugly. A source which is not
pristine is
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, MortenI wrote:
The mails from debian-mentors in /var/spool/mail,
can I autosort them in some way, or do I have to
sort them by hand?
Please read /usr/doc/procmail/QuickStart. It says:
If you have to refilter an old mail folder according to your current
On Sat, 13 Mar 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
It is technically possible to make package A to conflict with releases of
B earlier than p and also with all releases of B between r and s
but not with release q of B (where p q r s)?
Thanks.
Could you not simply say that your package
Question for dpkg gurus:
It is technically possible to make package A to conflict with releases of
B earlier than p and also with all releases of B between r and s
but not with release q of B (where p q r s)?
Thanks.
--
022212d3917d9cc0dac13e25739e814a (a truly random sig)
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
Question for dpkg gurus:
It is technically possible to make package A to conflict with releases of
B earlier than p and also with all releases of B between r and s
but not with release q of B (where p
It is technically possible to make package A to conflict with releases
of
B earlier than p and also with all releases of B between r and s
but not with release q of B (where p q r s)?
AFAIK, dpkg can't even do 'all releases between r and s' without naming
each one
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
I'm interested in learning how to package pine. I've posted some
experimental packages to http://ompages.com/debian/pkgs/pine/pine.html.
I'm aware of the licensing issues, and, since I'm a law student, have
begun correspondence with UW, joined
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:
VDK library which I'm packaging has 2 documentation files distributed
separately as ps.gz. How am I supposed to package those files ? There's
no tar.gz, just 2 compressed postscript files.
You may just create an .orig.tar.gz for them and that's all.
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:
The licence is:
Copyright (C) 1998 Mario Motta
Permission is granted to make and distribute verbatim copies if this
manual provided that the copyright notice and this permission notice are
preserved in all copies.
Permission is granted to copy and
On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Joey Hess wrote:
Peter S Galbraith wrote:
After making my mh-book package, I got a lintian _warning_ that
scripts in /usr/doc were executable. I checked the upstream
tar.gz and the scripts were, in fact, set executable.
So I changed my rules file to do just that,
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Andrew Feinberg wrote:
Also, my package is on multiple platforms. If I'm building a package for
i386, how would I build it for the others if I don't have access to
those types of boxen?
This is a good question.
The answer is that there are already people in Debian
On Fri, 18 Dec 1998, Joseph Carter wrote:
On Fri, Dec 18, 1998 at 12:19:10PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
Note that deb-make is deprecated. Have a look at the debhelper and
dh-make packages instead.
Don't say that where Santiago can here you.. = He's rather defensive
about
Hi.
FYI: According to the changelog, debstd already passes -isp option to
dpkg-gencontrol since version 3.5.12 (wishlist bug #23720).
Thanks.
--
d4d0135f848bca314003534bb89f657f (a truly random sig)
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
The upstream sources for xplot contain a pre-compiled i386 binary (in
case users don't want to compile themselves). The binary is not relevant
to Debian:
$ ldd xplot
libforms.so.0.81 = /usr/local/lib/libforms.so.0.81 (0x4000b000)
On Thu, 17 Dec 1998, Ionutz Borcoman wrote:
as the original Makefile runs ldconfig. How can I correct this ?
Just modify the Makefile so that it does not run ldconfig.
--
f9a072977084bf277db216f33cb45100 (a truly random sig)
On Mon, 14 Dec 1998, Fernando Sanchez wrote:
I'm packaging ocaml, a ml-type language interpreter and compiler,
and everything works ok but I have two questions, I hope quite easy to
answer:
First, to compile ocaml I need to call make install (in 'rules' file) in
the following way for
On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, Mitch Blevins wrote:
An upstream author has changed a supporting script that only
affects systems using a configure option for BSD-style systems.
Should I upload a new .deb based on his new version number, even
though the binary .deb will be exactly the same (except for
On 19 Nov 1998, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Why not, but why does debstd provide the possibilitry of modifying :
- /etc/aliases
- /etc/syslog.conf
- /etc/inetd.conf
- /etc/services
- /etc/inittab
- /etc/protocols
- /etc/profile
Hi.
Policy says:
Only packages that are tagged conflicting with each other may specify
the same file as conffile. A package may not modify a configuration
file of another package.
Since I have to modify debstd so that it does not support modifying
configuration files for other packages
Any help/patch/comments?
As a work-around, you may use dpkg-buildpackage -sa.
--
a422c7f4f958e0c30f8f9a55b6a9b97d (a truly random sig)
Hi.
No, slink has not been frozen yet.
Better that way, because it is greatly broken.
Brian, what are your plans with respect to slink?
I'm glad that it has not been frozen yet. Could we please continue in the
unstable stage until some of the more broken packages are properly fixed?
--
On Fri, 16 Oct 1998, Mitch Blevins wrote:
If an upstream author provides a man page, which includes
info about paths or install scripts that will not be present
in the debianized version, should I modify the man page?
Yes, because documentation should ideally match the real program.
--
On Thu, 15 Oct 1998, Chris Leishman wrote:
I am about to upload a package that also requires the source to be
uploaded (a new package). How do I go about uploading the source
(the .orig.tar.gz) file? I did a test run of dupload, but this didn't
seem to notice the .orig file.
I don't know
On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Martin Schulze wrote:
Debmake was never 100% policy conforming. Due to this lack Joey wrote
the debhelper that reflects our policy 1:1. Thus debhelper is to be
preferred against the other tool. However I'm not sure how much
orphaned debmake is since I saw a recent
On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Shaleh wrote:
debhelper is the one under active development.
Mmm, is TeX under active development? I heard that the latest version is
still 3.14159, is 4.0 being to be released soon? :-)
Maybe we should stop using it just because of that? ;-)
No, I don't want to open again
On 1 Oct 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Hi,
Martin == Martin Bialasinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin I want to make a programm version 2.0, but I want to release some
Martin betas before this. What version scheme should I use for the betas, so
Martin that dpkg recognises the 2.0
On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Sven wrote:
do we really need that some people make money of the free software for
it to be successful ?
I think this is not the issue. The issue is that if we do not allow people
to make money from it, then it is not free software.
--
fc87384466a193d616da72deeadea0fd
On Fri, 11 Sep 1998, Philip Thiem wrote:
Hey I would wondering if by change there is a program that can make
another program think that the root directory is another directory??? I
have a program, I'm packaging, that has some wrapper program, that are
compiled, but these get hardcoded value.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Luis Francisco Gonzalez wrote:
Hi, what was it that we decided to do about bugs that were solved in new
versions of packages only in unstable? Did we ever implement a priority
fixed in the BTS or should I just go ahead and close it?
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998, Shaleh wrote:
Help! My bug reports have gone AWOL. The BTS does not display the
correct number of bugs, nor does it show all of my bugs.
Something similar happened to me with pine packages.
Please, download the file Maintainers in the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Frederic Peters wrote:
Express should go in project/experimental, what's the way to upload there ?
Just put the word experimental in the changelog (instead of unstable).
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: latin1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 19 Jun 1998, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
1)
debmake or debhelper/dh_make?
Hi. This is not a dichotomy but a trichotomy between debmake,
debhelper or none of them.
It seems that most people think that debhelper is better than debmake.
Other people think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 11 Jun 1998, Ted Whalen wrote:
This bug is assigned to my package, wm2, but as far as I can tell, it
has nothing to do with my package. Nor can I determine which package
it belongs to. Should I close it?
Probably not, because then the bug would be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 4 Jun 1998, tmancill wrote:
Do I compile twice and generate .debs for both releases with the same
version number?
No. There is a README in bo-unstable explaining the numbering scheme.
If you read it, you will see that it is well thought, and allows
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Fri, 22 May 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
[ ... ]
the basic problem is that when the program was written it was set to
store truetype fonts for the server in /usr/ttfonts
[ ... ]
Question: Are these fonts generated (like TeX's pk fonts) or will they
be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sat, 23 May 1998, Bart Warmerdam wrote:
Where do i upload it? /home/Debian/ftp/private/project/Incoming
because of the freeze of hamm? [...]
Yes, but not because of the freeze of hamm :-), but because that is the
upload directory for *all* uploads. An
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 7 May 1998, Shaleh wrote:
/etc/shells is not yours to mess w/. You are right there. Perhaps a
update-shells or something?
This would be great for slink. Maybe for hamm is too late. I don't know.
My /etc/shells contains many shells I have never
On Fri, 1 May 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
The upstream Makefiles in all of the the dict packages have a
line in the distclean target that removes Makefile and configure.
That would make it necessary to run autoconf after make distclean in
order to compile again. The Makefiles do _not_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Wed, 29 Apr 1998, Bob Hilliard wrote:
Is unstable/non-free the proper distribution in the top line of
the changelog for a non-free package to go into slink?
As far as I know, unstable is the distribution (to be put in the
changelog) and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Michael Borella wrote:
This worked. Great. But isn't this an ugly fix? Perhaps
there is a problem with debstd.
If you think it is a problem with debstd, please investigate and submit
a bug against debmake.
-BEGIN PGP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Wed, 8 Apr 1998, Jeff Shilt wrote:
I'm working on packaging FPK-pascal compiler, and I was was
wondering what exactly is meant by the original source. The sources for
fpc come with source for linux, dos, amiga, etc. Plus, the makefiles in
the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 8 Apr 1998, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
Here's the debian/rules from my GIMP packages. It should clear up
your confusion. It uses debhelper judiciously; I'd recommend using
debhelper to save your sanity. :)
#!/usr/bin/make -f
# First, we build the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 9 Apr 1998, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
For the GIMP packages, it is required; they ship with a libtool
that is incompatible with Debian policy. I have to run
automake/aclocal/autoconf every single time the package builds
to remove all vestiges of the old
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote:
[problem with PGP signing ]
How do I get around this?
Possible work-around: Copy /usr/bin/dpkg-buildpackage to /usr/local/bin
and remove the -u $maintainer part in function signfile().
-BEGIN PGP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Joel Klecker:
deb-make creates rules files that use debstd, which doesn't offer much
control over what it does (not to mention that it sometimes violates
policy).
Please report all debstd policy violations through the bug system.
I do not advocate for the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 21 Mar 1998, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote:
Lintian didn't report any errors' though.
Lintian is designed for checking binary (.deb) packages.
Problem was that this package didn't have a source, so I tried to
package it as a binary-only package.
It
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Sun, 8 Mar 1998, Richard A Nelson wrote:
To build sendmail, I used: dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot from my
normal id (cowboy).
Everything seemed to go fine except for a few items:
1) Needing root to rm debian/tmp (everthing was owned by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 9 Mar 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
look at similar packages:
mirror is in net
lftp (which has a mirror command) is in net
wget (which can _also_ mirror with ftp) is in web
Mmm, maybe wget should be in net also :-)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pen~a wrote:
the opportunity to check them in few environments. They are available at
ftp://dat.etsit.upm.es/pub/vrml/browsers/Vrwave/vrwave-0.8-1.deb
and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, Luis Francisco Gonzalez wrote:
Hi,
I have the folowing problem. I am using debstd to build two pacakges,
dmalloc1 and dmalloc1-dev out of one source. Now the source pacakge is
called dmalloc.
When called, debstd uses dmalloc rather
101 - 169 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
