RFS: inadyn
Hi Timur, I see that you have a few bugs for inadyn tagged pending and that you have requested sponsorship in the past (RFS mentioned on bug 647703) but the package inadyn is no longer at mentors. Where is it now ? Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121029085829.gl2...@master.debian.org
Re: (Non-)Usefulness of the current for-wheezy and fit-for-wheezy usertags
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Le 26/10/2012 00:55, Michael Gilbert a écrit : Hi, I feel like the current for-wheezy and fit-for-wheezy usertags actually make the sponsorship-requests bug page harder to use than it needs to be. Hi, (I tried answering on Saturday but I believe my e-mail never arrived, or perhaps I sent it only to Michaël. This is a slightly different answer). First of all, you are free to view the bug page with the ordering you prefer. Try using ordering=standard: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=sponsorship-requests;ordering=standard In actuality, any bug tagged ITP and QA should not have either of those tags (since no itp or qa upload is going in until the freeze is lifted unless the qa is rc, and in that case it should be tagged rc), and any bug tagged RC or NMU should have those tags. So, why then are we using an orthogonal system? Why not just have usertags itp, rc, qa, and nmu? There are two orthogonal categorizations, and I'm not sure how that helps. Best wishes, Mike Discussion has started about here: https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/07/threads.html#00030 and the tags are explained here: http://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/BTS http://wiki.debian.org/Mentors/UserCategories The goal of the for-wheezy and not-for-wheezy usertags is to get the maintainer to explicitly state her intent. The goal of the (not-)fit-for-wheezy usertags is mainly to allow for reviews by people who will not sponsor the package themselves (which experienced DMs and some DDs sometimes do). At that time, there was only positive feedback. You are indeed the first person to express reservations. Now that three months have passed, perhaps we can gather some more enlightened feedback on whether the four usertags are useful or whether we should simplify. On the other hand there is some overhead inherent to changing how things work: if you want to introduce the usertags itp, rc, qa, and nmu, it will take some time before people actually use them. I would tend to defer that until after the release, when we will retire (not-)(fit-)for-wheezy any way. Regards, Thibaut. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQjl0QAAoJEJOUU0jg3ChAXGEQAIvetWG/VcmnE1mPi/yWAH77 Ij8a+hbiVPnzrz/3zM+mxpONBUF0ViDS+4sN2TxGZpYhT1tim7u0P0wh33goERBx EI74KTjlotUNHBCYUfz5jQCE4l/zKnVpaesmh4CScoE5MAd2UwPvameQwQfEjq40 q+GOOC4wXaLwnAJvC1PHKE7gTtw+ytA+AfyJEgNDymxm42fWBpGlrUDnjPRSfBB3 kRiapalOH5HyT1zOi7ogOItMwzjBTxTulUOjFkB3zbBxRhnEPwuHV+K9MqhPMe8V H1d0u+xfJjaSJzAVk6el4joCrEuimXUXALP9KLT6ZTv0hw8yR+OLV4/M/XbymfZq fF2UZHQFgBHYpiTPHJb9PVYK3flb+MSweosmFzUmTJWV32GOskj2PVYT0KsQSNoJ G6gPFfehKS8YFQIUcyUOqH5tVFPxJ31QB3oHNV3lGHo6y65Ur3WA2PNHeQtEfRgm /ysGSG5LalFPvBbxrFrq0zmX5WeURMwr3rt1kPQ6R+HAZyXLOa3tod3fUYOftG7b 8xn/ieitMk1S9KVZbUk55CXRiOp5Rl+VUKdWOccbnbbXO/pvMcKQD9XVu72oMfDE iElsLcKKfdTwpalPsxsgffNxPnVI9Rbhv/3Krl57ski4j7qyLYDLRlHVG0WQsHYa RBU10IOCrgm9UUL9y14f =xEog -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/508e5d18.9020...@debian.org
Easy bugfix for roxterm: should it go into wheezy?
A bug has been found in roxterm: https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/bugs/88/. I wouldn't consider it a high priority but the fix is very trivial, just adding a single line of code. Should I release this for wheezy? If so, how do I go about it? Should I open a debian bug and give it a certain priority or tag? Do I have to add anything to my RFS? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121029152445.42a00335@roland
Re: Easy bugfix for roxterm: should it go into wheezy?
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 03:24:45PM +, Tony Houghton wrote: A bug has been found in roxterm: https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/bugs/88/. I wouldn't consider it a high priority but the fix is very trivial, just adding a single line of code. Should I release this for wheezy? If so, how do I go about it? Should I open a debian bug and give it a certain priority or tag? Do I have to add anything to my RFS? If you wouldn't consider it a high priority then it would probably not match the freeze policy. http://release.debian.org/wheezy/freeze_policy.html Regards, Bart Martens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121029160602.ga10...@master.debian.org
Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
* Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com, 2012-10-28, 23:06: Anselm got sprop a place in dl.suckless.org so I reverted copyright to its original format and modified create_orig_source to refer dl.suckless.org. I can't build source package anymore: | dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are: | git/sprop/.hg_archival.txt | dpkg-source: info: you can integrate the local changes with dpkg-source --commit .hg_archival.txt is no longer in sprop tarball, so it should be removed from the repository, too. -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121029165946.ga7...@jwilk.net
Bug#691014: marked as done (RFS: swftools/0.9.2+ds1-3 [RC])
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, Le 22/10/2012 16:38, Christian Welzel a écrit : The package was uploaded. Looks like it wasn't. Regards David -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJQjutVAAoJELgqIXr9/gnycZEP/RCPsGHG6p+9Vd2ooHkQQIRV 7EqY4/OgkZawcIzQrB38BazPp/urQ59vQ5wUUUnw/atlw02SGYJoPJZ7V0QC1xdf 5NbTuCEjf7+IkmFvyA6Fd+p4JgcNSzFDOBFrD5NIMZyMFaa0X2qSDQlDD2CDihNm YOwBQzbTHOSylQ81gmFjP+zYKKXDp5HBGrOgRWwzWurX92I7Om4LcByoPk1368Eu 2tEutVW9DO42QqFQ7rRpGHShUmHs8d7XekTWi0Yqz7zc9hi1RzKDutEedJPPSkIF H/Q6vAAz1oy+iMOC3uu85mq4KvPVJzD5QSzgfgIgVxd11AJBUwPca+eozFlIOFjF v51aEPqUPuyN0zv2tXc2aQpP8Y6lDShNdyTZ8104zIXXtaAClqei+615sg1Giu3Z wKc2wo1g/yDtENqAUMPLNrQ1TWOWCrSNTnNPFbcddwkjzcNDLXvzpUCF2kezM6e4 Yh564NfbYJDTU2xmqsQ5XVVVjwZWDU8mWXNUdq5mNplTMcMKrIStWpyx5MzOC4en r+llzRAmaJ1GfMDWtyFHMFlkgcd0Uk/BJrDS2MMhnA9xcCqi1ytxQkgWKoPYGuXS UzAh3D5JrrD0My8SBaXYRSOaCb+sThOuo2OpuGDpIl8iSKq4BbqX2kADRsHt3xWz MtBC0LVDXLPGCeDGD4+r =J1HE -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/508eeb56.5070...@debian.org
Bug#691014: marked as done (RFS: swftools/0.9.2+ds1-3 [RC])
Am 29.10.2012 21:47, schrieb David Prévot: The package was uploaded. Looks like it wasn't. It was: http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/swftools.html But its currently waiting for its 10 days quarantine to be over. -- MfG, Christian Welzel GPG-Key: pub 4096R/5117E119 2011-09-19 Fingerprint: 3688 337C 0D3E 3725 94EC E401 8D52 CDE9 5117 E119 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/508ef5ab.9020...@camlann.de
uscan and git.gnome.org tags
Hey Is there any way to make a watch-file look for git tags on git.gnome.org? I am preparing a package for a QA upload (for after the freeze of course) for a package that I have a hard time finding a way to make a watch file for the releases - it uses a wordpress blog as homepage, where it has put the latest release, where I have no luck making uscan get it, and uses gnome git for version handling. I have found there is a few redirectors for various hosting pages like sourceforge and similar - is there something for git.gnome.org and the tags from there? -- Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.se gus...@gusnan.se signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: uscan and git.gnome.org tags
Hello, I'm looking at the 'nautilus' package, and this is the contents of the file 'debian/watch': version=3 http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/nautilus/([\d\.]+)/ \ nautilus-(.*)\.tar\.xz Nautilus, being a GNOME project, keeps its code in git.gnome.org ( http://git.gnome.org/browse/nautilus/) as well as uploading it to the FTP above. By looking at one of the projects on git.gnome.org, I can see that the format of the tag is: http://git.gnome.org/browse/project/tag/?id=tagname However, I don't see any tarballs available to download from there. Perhaps, if you give us the name of the package you're working on, I could help you further and better. Sincerely, kroq-gar78 On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.sewrote: Hey Is there any way to make a watch-file look for git tags on git.gnome.org? I am preparing a package for a QA upload (for after the freeze of course) for a package that I have a hard time finding a way to make a watch file for the releases - it uses a wordpress blog as homepage, where it has put the latest release, where I have no luck making uscan get it, and uses gnome git for version handling. I have found there is a few redirectors for various hosting pages like sourceforge and similar - is there something for git.gnome.org and the tags from there? -- Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.se gus...@gusnan.se
Re: uscan and git.gnome.org tags
Hi - (No need to CC me, I am subscribed to the list.) I am working on the devilspie package - which has a release mentioned and linked in the last entry on Ross Burton's blog - http://www.burtonini.com/ I do however have problems getting a watch-file reading the folder where the tar.xz is. It does however have the git repository at http://git.gnome.org/browse/devilspie/ where the source (and the tags) can be found. So, either getting the watchfile to work through the http://www.burtonini.com/computing/ folder, or through the git tags - I have had no luck with neither method, and help would be much appreciated. best /Andreas On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:17:48 -0500 Aditya Vaidya kroq.ga...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm looking at the 'nautilus' package, and this is the contents of the file 'debian/watch': version=3 http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/nautilus/([\d\.]+)/ \ nautilus-(.*)\.tar\.xz Nautilus, being a GNOME project, keeps its code in git.gnome.org ( http://git.gnome.org/browse/nautilus/) as well as uploading it to the FTP above. By looking at one of the projects on git.gnome.org, I can see that the format of the tag is: http://git.gnome.org/browse/project/tag/?id=tagname However, I don't see any tarballs available to download from there. Perhaps, if you give us the name of the package you're working on, I could help you further and better. Sincerely, kroq-gar78 On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.sewrote: Hey Is there any way to make a watch-file look for git tags on git.gnome.org? I am preparing a package for a QA upload (for after the freeze of course) for a package that I have a hard time finding a way to make a watch file for the releases - it uses a wordpress blog as homepage, where it has put the latest release, where I have no luck making uscan get it, and uses gnome git for version handling. I have found there is a few redirectors for various hosting pages like sourceforge and similar - is there something for git.gnome.org and the tags from there? -- Andreas Rönnquist mailingli...@gusnan.se gus...@gusnan.se signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: uscan and git.gnome.org tags
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:40:30 +0100, Andreas Rönnquist wrote: I am working on the devilspie package - which has a release mentioned and linked in the last entry on Ross Burton's blog - http://www.burtonini.com/ I do however have problems getting a watch-file reading the folder where the tar.xz is. So, either getting the watchfile to work through the http://www.burtonini.com/computing/ folder, or through the git tags - I have had no luck with neither method, and help would be much appreciated. The following seems to work for me: version=3 http://www.burtonini.com/ .*/computing/devilspie-([\d.]+)\.tar\.xz Cheers, gregor -- .''`. Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Bruce Springsteen: Born In The U.s.a. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: uscan and git.gnome.org tags
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:04:03 +0100 gregor herrmann gre...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:40:30 +0100, Andreas Rönnquist wrote: I am working on the devilspie package - which has a release mentioned and linked in the last entry on Ross Burton's blog - http://www.burtonini.com/ I do however have problems getting a watch-file reading the folder where the tar.xz is. So, either getting the watchfile to work through the http://www.burtonini.com/computing/ folder, or through the git tags - I have had no luck with neither method, and help would be much appreciated. The following seems to work for me: version=3 http://www.burtonini.com/ .*/computing/devilspie-([\d.]+)\.tar\.xz Excellent - Thanks! I guess I need more practise making watchfiles... /Andreas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Jakub Wilk jw...@debian.org wrote:
I can't build source package anymore:
| dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the modified files are:
| git/sprop/.hg_archival.txt
| dpkg-source: info: you can integrate the local changes with dpkg-source
--commit
.hg_archival.txt is no longer in sprop tarball, so it should be removed from
the repository, too.
Ah yes! I forgot to delete it will do it tonight
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
copyninja@{frndk.de|vasudev.homelinux.net}
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/CAK+NOPWm9MKyd2N8tc998HRBCoxnKtXJqZTC90b+Wra=qzv...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#677052: marked as done (RFS: zipper.app/1.4-1 [ITA])
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:20:29 +
with message-id e1tt3jv-0003b9...@quantz.debian.org
and subject line closing RFS: zipper.app/1.4-1 [ITA]
has caused the Debian Bug report #677052,
regarding RFS: zipper.app/1.4-1 [ITA]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
677052: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677052
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
---BeginMessage---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package zipper.app.
This upload would fix #454456 (wnpp bug).
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/z/zipper.app/zipper.app_1.4-1.dsc
Changes since the last upload:
zipper.app (1.4-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release.
* debian/control (Maintainer): Adopt the package on behalf of the
GNUstep team (Closes: #454456).
(Uploaders): Move Gürkan here and add myself.
(Section): Change to `gnustep'.
(Build-Depends): Remove librenaissance0-dev and gnustep-make. Require
debhelper (= 8) and relax libgnustep-gui-dev. Add dpkg-dev (=
1.16.1~), for hardening support. Add imagemagick for the icon
conversion.
(Homapage): Change to the new GAP home.
(Vcs-Git, Vcs-Browser): New fields.
(Depends): Add ${misc:Depends}.
(Recommends): Demote to Suggests.
(Conflicts, Replaces): Remove.
(Description): Extend.
(Standards-Version): Claim compliance with 3.9.3 as of this release.
* debian/compat: Bump to 8.
* debian/patches/gcc-4.7.patch: Remove; fixed upstream.
* debian/patches/series: Update.
* debian/rules: Avoid gs_make. Enable verbose builds and hardening, add
support for noopt.
(d_app): Define for convenience.
(build-stamp): Convert the app icon in XPM format.
(clean): Delete the generated icon.
(install): Use dh_prep instead of the deprecated `dh_clean -k'. Don't
invoke dh_installdirs. Install the XPM icon.
(binary-arch): Don't install the lintian override, move Resources to
/usr/share.
* debian/lintian-override:
* debian/dirs: Delete.
* debian/menu: Add icon and longtitle.
* debian/Zipper.desktop: Make it valid, use full path for the icon, add
Bulgarian translation.
* debian/watch: Amend for the new upstream location.
* debian/preinst: New file.
* debian/copyright: Rewrite for format 1.0 and new copyright/license.
---End Message---
---BeginMessage---
Package zipper.app has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Bug#677144: marked as done (RFS: fisicalab.app/0.2.2-1 [ITP])
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:20:29 + with message-id e1tt3jv-0003bf...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: fisicalab.app/0.2.2-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #677144, regarding RFS: fisicalab.app/0.2.2-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 677144: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677144 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist I'm looking for a sponsor for my package fisicalab.app. * Package name: fisicalab.app Version : 0.2.2-1 Upstream Author : Germán Arias ger...@xelalug.org * URL : http://www.nongnu.org/fisicalab/ * License : GPL-3.0+ (program), GFDL-1.3+ (manual) Section : education Programming Lang: Objective-C It builds these binary packages: fisicalab.app - Educational program for Physics fisicalab.app-common - Educational program for Physics (arch-independent files) fisicalab.app-dbg - Educational program for Physics (debugging symbols) fisicalab.app-doc - Educational program for Physics (user manual) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fisicalab.app/fisicalab.app_0.2.2-1.dsc ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package fisicalab.app has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Bug#677081: marked as done (RFS: mpdcon.app/1.2-1)
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:20:30 + with message-id e1tt3jw-0003bu...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: mpdcon.app/1.2-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #677081, regarding RFS: mpdcon.app/1.2-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 677081: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=677081 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package mpdcon.app. http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpdcon.app/mpdcon.app_1.2-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: mpdcon.app (1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release. * debian/control (Build-Depends): Add libmpdclient-dev, pkg-config and dpkg-dev (= 1.16.1~). (Vcs-Arch, Vcs-Git, Vcs-Browser): Switch from Arch to Git. (Homepage): Update for the new home at GAP. (Standards-Version): Bump to 3.9.3 (no changes needed). * debian/source/format: Switch to 3.0 (quilt). * debian/patches/libmpdclient-fix.patch: New; workaround for the old version of libmpdclient in Debian. * debian/patches/link-libs.patch: New; fixes FTBFS with ld --no-undefined. * debian/patches/series: New file. * debian/preinst: Delete. * debian/rules: Enable hardening. (install): Don't cater for GNUSTEP_INSTALLATION_DIR; variable removed upstream. Remove the executable bit for files under Resources. (binary-arch): Remove GS_USE_FHS conditional. * debian/watch: Update for the new upstream location. * debian/copyright: Update and remove info about the bundled libmpdclient. ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package mpdcon.app has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Bug#691022: marked as done (RFS: gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg/4.4.7-1)
Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:37:15 +0800 with message-id 508f678b.1090...@gmail.com and subject line gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg (4.4.7-1) uploaded to sid has caused the Debian Bug report #691022, regarding RFS: gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg/4.4.7-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 691022: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=691022 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal User: sponsorship-reque...@packages.debian.org Usertags: for-wheezy Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg * Package name: gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg Version : 4.4.7-1 Upstream Author : FSF * URL : http://gcc.gnu.org/ * License : GFDL-1.2+ (with invariant sections, and front/back cover text) Section : doc This upload brings documents up to date with gcc-4.4 package, and stops to build gcc-doc-base package, as it's provided by src:gcc-4.7-doc now. It builds those binary packages: cpp-4.4-doc - documentation for the GNU C preprocessor (cpp) gcc-4.4-doc - documentation for the GNU compilers (gcc, gobjc, g++) gcj-4.4-doc - documentation for the GNU Java tools (gcj, gij) gfortran-4.4-doc - documentation for the GNU Fortran Compiler (gfortran) gnat-4.4-doc - documentation for the GNU Ada 95 Compiler (gnat) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/non-free/g/gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg/gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg_4.4.7-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: gcc-4.4-doc-non-dfsg (4.4.7-1) unstable; urgency=low * Updated to upstream version 4.4.7. * Took many changes from gcc-4.6-doc, thanks to Samuel Bronson. - Use version-free names for debhelper config files. - Use 3.0 (quilt) source format. - Set debhelper compat level to 7. - Added extract-doc-tarball-from-upstream, a script behind get-orig-source. - Added a gbp.conf. - Build gnat_ugn the way it's built upstream, using the xgnatugn preprocessor, and update debian/extract-doc-tarball-from-upstream to include the needed files in .orig tarballs. - Updated README.source. * Synced patches with gcc-4.4 4.4.7-3. - removed debian/patches/from-debian-gcc-gcc-atom-doc.diff, - removed debian/patches/from-debian-gcc-cell-branch-doc.diff, - added debian/patches/from-debian-gcc-gold-and-ld-doc.diff, - and updated other patches. * Added a patch, alpha-ieee-doc-clarification.diff, to state that changes in from-debian-gcc-alpha-ieee-doc.diff are specific to the alpha architecture. * debian/control: - Removed gcc-doc-base (default version is 4.7 now). - Added myself to uploaders. - Bumped policy version to 3.9.4. - Added git repo urls in Vcs-*. - Build-depends: dropped dpatch, updated debhelper to = 7.0.50~, and added gnat-4.6 | gnat - Added Homepage. - Use Breaks instead of Conflicts, gcc-4.4-doc now breaks gcc (= 2.7.2.3-4.3) and gcc-docs ( 2.95.2). * Added watch file. * Updated copyright file, based on gcc-4.6-doc's copyright. * Improved README.source, and added a helper script, check_gcc_patches. Cheers, Guo Yixuan signature.asc Description: Digital signature ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Uploaded by myself. GUO Yixuan---End Message---
