On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:42:03PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:39:20PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > I checked, and dh currently doesn't support build-arch and build-indep
> > at all internally (you need to add the rules yourself). I've made a
> > patch to add proper sup
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:39:20PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> I checked, and dh currently doesn't support build-arch and build-indep
> at all internally (you need to add the rules yourself). I've made a
> patch to add proper support which I'll submit once I've tested it.
FWIW, the current progre
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:03:39PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>
> >> Now why does it only list 8k sources if it matches the required
> >> "build:" target? Are 50% of all sources already d
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > Output at http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/build-rule-check.bz2
>> > I haven't had time to analyse this, if someone else wants to,
>> > that would be cool.
>> >
>> > Done on lintian.debian.org using t
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Output at http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/build-rule-check.bz2
> > I haven't had time to analyse this, if someone else wants to,
> > that would be cool.
> >
> > Done on lintian.debian.org using the following:
> >
> > #!/bin/
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> > In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
>> > Holschuh
>> > wrote:
>> > >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Step
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> > Holschuh
> > wrote:
> > >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > >> >
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> Holschuh
> wrote:
> >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> >> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
> >
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." writes:
> In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> Holschuh
> wrote:
>>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>>> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
>>> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to
In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
>> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to "build%:" and dpkg-buildpackage
>> >could us
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to "build%:" and dpkg-buildpackage
> >could use build-arch/indep targets instead of build. Aparently that is
> >too much to ask.
>
> I v
Le Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:30:00PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. a écrit :
>
> I volunteer to make /this/ fix to any package that is unmaintained or whose
> maintainer is unresponsive, *if* Debian will change policy to /require/ build-
> arch/indep and make dpkg-buildpackage use them instead of b
In <87y68p6tcx@frosties.localnet>, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>Roger Leigh writes:
>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> David Kalnischkies writes:
>>> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> David Kalnischkies writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >>> And as disc
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> David Kalnischkies writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>> And as discussed before policy disagrees
David Kalnischkies writes:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>>
>> Would you please elaborate ?
>
> Goswin likely refers
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>
> Would you please elaborate ?
Goswin likely refers to this thread: Buildd & binary-indep
http://lists.de
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>
---end quoted text---
Would you please elaborate ?
--
أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
Digital design engineer
GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7
GPG Fingerprint
anatoly techtonik writes:
> Hello,
>
> I've described situation around Build-Depends-Indep at
> http://wiki.debian.org/Build-Depends-Indep
> I hope it will be useful for people who are looking for description of
> this field. However, I am not expert in packaging, and some
> information is obviou
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> anatoly techtonik wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
>>
>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
>>> clean target.
>>
>> What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Inde
anatoly techtonik wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, أحمد المحمودي
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
>> clean target.
>
> What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Indep" then? Dependencies
> that are required to build package
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
> clean target.
What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Indep" then? Dependencies
that are required to build package, but from which "clean" rule is
indep
Hello,
I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
clean target.
--
أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
Digital design engineer
GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7
GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7
signature.asc
Description: Digital signa
Hello,
I've described situation around Build-Depends-Indep at
http://wiki.debian.org/Build-Depends-Indep
I hope it will be useful for people who are looking for description of
this field. However, I am not expert in packaging, and some
information is obviously missing. If you can fill the blanks,
24 matches
Mail list logo
