Re: binNMU safe and ${binary:Version} or ${source:Version}

2006-10-13 Thread Guillem Jover
[ Found this today on the web archives. ] Hi, On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:11:23 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote: The documentation for this probably belongs in debian-policy; current versions of policy seem to mention Source-Version, though, not the new substvars, and I'm not sure if anyone has

Re: binNMU safe and ${binary:Version} or ${source:Version}

2006-10-16 Thread Guillem Jover
On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 10:01:08 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 04:13:07AM +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 15:11:23 -0700 Steve Langasek wrote: The documentation for this probably belongs in debian-policy; current versions of policy seem to mention

Bug#670195: RFS: lierolibre/0.1-1

2012-04-24 Thread Guillem Jover
On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 01:50:59 +0200, Martin Erik Werner wrote: On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 10:14 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: I note many files don't have copyright/license headers: http://tieguy.org/blog/2012/03/17/on-the-importance-of-per-file-license-information/ I'm aware, I have taken to

Re: PearPC Section (contrib or main)

2004-10-11 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:15:47PM +0200, Ramón Rey Vicente wrote: Leo Costela Antunes wrote: | PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be | fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for example, so, does it need | to stay in contrib? And, whats about dosemu?

Re: PearPC Section (contrib or main)

2004-10-11 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 08:15:47PM +0200, Ramón Rey Vicente wrote: Leo Costela Antunes wrote: | PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be | fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for example, so, does it need | to stay in contrib? And, whats about dosemu?

Re: package pynmea2

2017-11-25 Thread Guillem Jover
On Tue, 2017-11-14 at 12:13:55 -0200, Herbert Fortes wrote: > There was a ITP-RFS for pynmea2. But python-nmea2 already > exists. > > https://packages.qa.debian.org/p/python-nmea2.html > > I asked the contributor (2017-11-12) to close the bugs with > an n-d...@bugs.debian.org but he sent

Re: How to determine the filename for dlopen()

2017-11-25 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Mon, 2017-11-13 at 13:23:01 +0100, Ferenc Wágner wrote: > I'm packaging a program which wants to dlopen() some library. It finds > this library via pkg-config (PKG_CHECK_MODULES). How to best determine > the filename to use in the dlopen() call? It should work cross-distro, > for

Re: How to find Multi-Arch path(s)

2017-11-25 Thread Guillem Jover
On Sat, 2017-11-25 at 11:36:27 +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes: > > The point is that the Multi-Arch concept in Debian is all about the > > interfaces. How packages and files interface with each other, and > > what is possible

Re: How to find Multi-Arch path(s)

2017-11-24 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Fri, 2017-11-24 at 09:52:23 +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > I want to package a software, "iraf" (with extensions) that uses some > system dependent binaries internally. Some of the extensions will be > available in 32 bit only, so this is a good use case for > Multi-Arch. That means, that

Re: How to find Multi-Arch path(s)

2017-11-24 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Fri, 2017-11-24 at 13:59:40 +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> writes: > > On Fri, 2017-11-24 at 09:52:23 +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > >> So, how can I canonically (ideally from C) retrieve a sorted list of > >> supp

Re: Sharing a script between two "Multi-Arch: foreign" packages

2019-09-26 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 16:45:09 +0200, Jens Reyer wrote: > Both build and install a "wineserver" binary, which we install as > /usr/lib/wine/wineserver32 or wineserver64. We call that binary from a > script [2] /usr/lib/wine/wineserver which currently is in pkg:wine > (arch:all), which is

Bug#950760: RFS: libbpf/0.0.6-1 -- eBPF helper library (development files)

2020-02-07 Thread Guillem Jover
On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 09:39:29 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 06.02.20 um 09:22 schrieb Adam D. Barratt: > > On 2020-02-06 08:12, Paul Gevers wrote: > > > But, if I am correct, the source could be using a version without epoch > > > and only use the epoch in the binary package (which can be

Re: Prevent dpkg-buildflags from overwriting any (or at least some) flags during compilation

2023-07-22 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sat, 2023-07-22 at 13:12:28 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > [ This feels more like a packaging question than one for dpkg development, > please redirect further replies to debian-mentors(?) now on Cc. :) ] [ Sorry noticed the typo in the mentors list address just when I was s

Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.

2024-01-18 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Thu, 2024-01-18 at 23:14:49 +, Aidan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 6:30 PM David Kalnischkies wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 02:35:40PM +, Aidan wrote: > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dpkg-buildenv": > > > > Similar to my recent "veto" of apt-verify in

Bug#1061111: RFS: dpkg-buildenv/1.0.0 [ITP] -- Builds debian packages in a docker container.

2024-01-19 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Fri, 2024-01-19 at 14:13:07 +, Aidan wrote: > On Fri, 19 Jan 2024, 00:08 Guillem Jover, wrote: > > …regardless of whether this is or not the last blocking issue, I'd > > still very much appreciate if you could rename the project and tool > > upstream. :) >

Re: Debian versioning question

2023-11-16 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sat, 2023-11-11 at 03:28:21 +, Wookey wrote: > On 2023-11-10 23:44 +0100, Preuße, Hilmar wrote: > > On 10.11.2023 03:10, Wookey wrote: > > > I think your options are > > > 1) add an epoch (which exists to deal with this sort of problem) > > > > > Well, would like to avoid it, if