Hi there,
TL;DR: ok to distribute GPLv3 code with license key check for an existing build
configuration
that does not have that license check?
ultracopier's source code has a license check when built in ultimate mode.
However the
source code is readily available, licensed under GPLv3 and I
Le jeudi 17 janvier 2013 00:04:08, José Manuel Santamaría Lema a écrit :
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
Hi José,
recently an user reported a bug against kmess which in my opinion is
serious because makes kmess unusuable to have a conversation of more than
Note to potential sponsor:
There is no need to review this package right now. Indeed, I already sent
Mélodie an email with a list of things to improve for this package. I took the
responsability to mentor and sponsor Mélodie so there is no need for help now.
However, when everything is fixed,
.
I think there is a tool for it.
* Does the watch file work (if any)
This requires network access but can be tested automatically, isn't it?
Indeed, since the PTS can report such failure.
Thomas Preud'homme
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Le vendredi 7 octobre 2011 22:41:05, Rodolfo kix Garcia a écrit :
Hi,
I have a problem with dpkg-buildpackage. I have three patches in the
debian folder. All apply fine using quilt, but using dpkg-buildpackage I
get an error:
dpkg-source: info: using options from
Le samedi 8 octobre 2011 00:43:07, Rodolfo kix Garcia a écrit :
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 00:05:42 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le vendredi 7 octobre 2011 22:41:05, Rodolfo kix Garcia a écrit :
Hi,
I have a problem with dpkg-buildpackage. I have three patches in the
debian folder. All
Le mardi 16 août 2011 13:31:34, Hamish a écrit :
Hi,
it is been a while since our last review of the OpenCPN
packaging, and the stable release we were working towards
has now shipped. Our .deb packaging efforts await further
instructions.
source tarball:
,
Thomas Preud'homme
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Le samedi 6 août 2011 16:51:20, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
* Thomas Preud'homme robo...@celest.fr, 2011-08-06, 16:42:
BTW, is there a tool I can use to check that debian/copyright is in
good shape?
None that I know of. Sorry.
config-edit -ui none -application dpkg-copyright from the
libconfig
-copyright -ui none seems happy with it
* Package don't FTBFS.
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
Kind regards
Vincent Cheng
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Le lundi 11 juillet 2011 06:52:58, Ben Finney a écrit :
Gary Briggs chu...@icculus.org writes:
[SNIP]
1) Obviously not appropriate in the general case, but I could do a
major new release, since I've added a couple of big features since the
last deiban package.
A new release of the same
package,
something like xnoise-plugins. It would move some of the Depends out of
the main package, so that users are not forced to install them all if
not needed. You may then Suggests or Recommends it from the main
package.
[SNIP]
Best regards.
Thomas Preud'homme
signature.asc
Le vendredi 8 juillet 2011 11:13:53, Arno Töll a écrit :
Hi Karl,
On 08.07.2011 05:49, Karl Goetz wrote:
- The -I and --pedantic options should always be used.
Why is that? the manual entry for --pedantic says
Pedantic tags are Lintian at its most pickiest and
Le vendredi 8 juillet 2011 12:55:52, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
[SNIP]
Don't get me wrong, in my opinion (some of) these things are good. But
making a big fuss about them is not helping anybody. It only distracts
attention from things that are important, and creates false impression
that they
Le mercredi 6 juillet 2011 14:38:36, Wolodja Wentland a écrit :
Hi all,
Hi Wolodja,
First, thanks for posting your git workflow. It is for me very interesting to
see different ways of dealing with upstream also using git.
[SNIP]
I know that I could just download the tarball from github and
.
You're welcome.
Best regards.
Thomas Preud'homme
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Le mercredi 6 juillet 2011 20:31:02, Joey Hess a écrit :
Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 03:12:41PM +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Does pristine-tar work if the upstream branch contains files which have
been removed during repack?
Unfortunately the directory
Le lundi 4 juillet 2011 10:12:49, Charles Plessy a écrit :
Le Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 09:16:20AM +0200, Kilian Krause a écrit :
CDBS is no longer preferred.
Hi Kilian,
Hi Charles
I think that it is quite a bold statement. At least, there is not formal
archive-wide of deprecation of CDBS.
Hi Markus,
I'm not a DD but I took a look at your package. I'm not very familiar with
source for kernel module but my assumptions were that the .in files are for the
binary package which will be created from the source included in your package.
and here are my remarks:
* Switch to source
there was some changes outside the
debian/ directory. Note that I didn't look at your source package so this is
pure speculation.
Hope this helps,
Matteo
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
Le jeudi 23 juin 2011 10:03:15, Stefan Denker a écrit :
Hello there,
I got the following situation:
Upstream of a software package releases only a .zip-File containing only
both source and binaries. So, I need to build my own orig.tar.gz .
Now, if i build my orig-Tarball and exclude the
Le jeudi 23 juin 2011 11:44:17, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl a écrit :
Hi!
* Thomas Preud'homme robo...@celest.fr [110623 11:37]:
Now, if i build my orig-Tarball and exclude the binaries, do I have to
append something to the version string to mark that I modified the
source tarball
Le vendredi 10 juin 2011 00:38:12, David Bremner a écrit :
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:40:54 -0700, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
On Debian, you should always install into lib and never use lib64.
(Eventually, you may want to use the multiarch directory, but it will
still not be lib64.)
23 matches
Mail list logo
