On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 13:45 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 02/04/2013 01:32 PM, Ma Xiaojun wrote:
b43-fwcutter itself is just a firmware cutter as its name suggests.
http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/b43#Install_b43-fwcutter
The thing is that absolutely nothing happens
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 19:12 +0100, Arno Töll wrote:
On 14.02.2012 13:48, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
Following the discussion in [2] and most importantly [3] it seems
as if the primary UID is not really important as any UID is
acceptable if the real name matches.
I can confirm that. That's
Dear Mentors,
I am currently in the process of transitioning to a new UID that I would like
to use for my Debian related activities, but am unsure how to do this
correctly. There also seems to be a difference between what is documented as
good practice and how the actual implementation would
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 00:53 +0200, Nicolas Delvaux wrote:
And I can't use pbuilder because of another bug
( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=631087 ).
Just use cdebootstrap for now.
--
Wolodja babi...@gmail.com
4096R/CAF14EFC
081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA 36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1
, as it lays the groundwork for
everything that comes afterwards. Are there reasons not to focus on being
up-to-date? Uploading a non-DEP5 package for example just means that the
copyright has to be changed later in order to be policy compliant, doesn't it?
--
.''`. Wolodja Wentlandbabi
:)
--
.''`. Wolodja Wentlandbabi...@gmail.com
: :' :
`. `'` 4096R/CAF14EFC
`- 081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA 36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bonjour Thomas,
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 15:12 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
Le mercredi 6 juillet 2011 14:38:36, Wolodja Wentland a écrit :
First, thanks for posting your git workflow. It is for me very interesting to
see different ways of dealing with upstream also using git
, but something in me says that it is wrong as the
tarballs are not really needed because everything that is needed is already in
the VCS.
Sorry for the many questions -- I certainly owe all of you a dram of Talisker
when we meet ...
--
.''`. Wolodja Wentlandbabi...@gmail.com
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 12:53 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Wolodja Wentland babi...@gmail.com writes:
I've recently started to work on some packages and am not sure if I
follow best practices when packaging software from git repositories with
git-buildpackage.
I do the following
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 14:19 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Wolodja Wentland babi...@gmail.com writes:
How stable is get-orig-source across releases?
For a package where I was using a released tarball for the reasons described
above, I would dispense with this target entirely and just use
in Debian?
Furthermore it also installs application data into
PREFIX/share/foo/data. The data is unlikely to change, but could be
replaced by newer versions whenever the system administrator decides to
do so. Is '/usr/share/foo/data' correct for data like this?
thanks for all the fish
Wolodja
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 20:10 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
Wolodja Wentland wentl...@cl.uni-heidelberg.de writes:
If the distribution is done using Python's Distutils, then this should
be configured by upstream: the configuration of ‘setup.py’ should
include all files for the ‘sdist
12 matches
Mail list logo
