Re: Help with watch file for OBS?
On Sat, 14 Apr 2012 15:56:19 -0500, Paul Elliott wrote: My current watch file reads: version=3 opts=filenamemangle=s/(.*)\?rev=.*/$1/ \ https://build.opensuse.org/package/files?package=libreoffice-converterproject=LibreOffice:Unstable \ https://api.opensuse.org:443/public/source/LibreOffice:Unstable/libreoffice-converter/libreoffice-converter-(\d\.\d)\.tar\.bz2 It does not find a match. Add \?rev=.* at the end. Also, I would suggest to simplify the filenamemangle: s/\?rev=.*// Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: NMU and delayed
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 23:08:25 +0200, Tomasz Muras wrote: A Debian developer has uploaded a NMU (moodle 1.9.9.dfsg2-5.1) to DELAYED/7-DAY [1]. I have incorporated his changes, and added a new release (moodle 1.9.9.dfsg2-6) - the changelog now looks like [2]. Is there any reason I should wait for that NMU to get processed in DELAYED queue? Or can I go ahead and upload a newer package with his and my changes? Just upload it. The NMU will then be rejected as soon as it clears the DELAYED queue, since it has a version number less than the one currently in sid :) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Matching mono architectures in d/control
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:00:01 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
All,
[..]
Quick question, gdcm is setup the following way:
$ cat control
...
Package: libgdcm-cil
Section: cli-mono
Architecture: i386 lpia kfreebsd-i386 powerpc amd64 kfreebsd-amd64
ia64 arm armeb armel sparc s390
...
Isn't there something easier such as ${mono:Architecture} ? Or do I
need a source upload each time there is a change in mono source ?
Since mono 2.10.1-2 there is /usr/share/mono/mono-archs.make which
includes 2 variables:
DEB_MONO_ARCHS and DEB_MONO_SGEN_ARCHS which can be used to get a list
of all mono arches.
[..]
Probably Mirco forgot to say it (or I just can't see the reason for including
the mono arches in packages of software developed in Mono languages) but...
aren't CIL packages intended to be Arch:all ?
Kindly,
David
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: rhinote (new upstream version)
Ciao Andrea, On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 22:36:12 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package rhinote. * Package name: rhinote Version : 0.7.4-1 Upstream Author : Marv Boyes greysp...@tuxfamily.org * URL : http://rhinote.tuxfamily.org/ * License : GPL-2+ Section : x11 It builds those binary packages: rhinote- virtual sticky-notes for your desktop Uploaded, thanks for your contribution to Debian! Buona serata, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: git-buildpackage and tarballs
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:53:31 -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote: Hi, Hello Matt, (CCing you, I don't know whether you're subscribed or not). [..] It seems like it should be possible to use gbp to build the package without having an actual tar ball. However, it appears that it is not. I think your problem might be that your upstream branch is not called upstream, which is what gbp expects. I suggest you to create a debian/gbp.conf with the following contents: [DEFAULT] upstream-branch = yourname debian-branch = debian Then it will probably work :) (not tested though) I'm thinking of some pseudo commands such as the following: git tag 1.0 git checkout debian git-buildpackage --using-tag 1.0 I know that gbp does not have the 'using-tag' option, but again, is there a reason that it cannot exist? gbp has something similar already. In the gbp.conf above, you can add: [git-buildpackage] upstream-tree = tag This way, gbp will look for a tag named the same as the version you have in debian/changelog. Probably you will have to tweak the upstream-tag option too. Have a look at /etc/git-buildpackage/gbp.conf , it's a nice reading ;) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Python build dependencies
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:43:35 +0200, Guido van Steen wrote: Dear list, I maintain a package called fizsh. Fizsh only depends on zsh. [..] If I build the package with dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -uc -us I get the following warning: dh_pysupport: This program is deprecated, you should use dh_python2 instead. Migration guide: http://deb.li/dhs2p; It is not completely clear to me why get this warning. Why do I do not need Python to build the package? Is python needed for debhelper? In that case should python not be included as a build-depend as well? Don't worry: dh_pysupport is run automatically by dh -- if you're not installing things in PYTHONPATH, it does nothing. And no, you won't get a python dependency with it :) http://deb.li/dhs2p recommends that I add --with python2 to my ./debian/rules. Is that enough, or should I include python as a build-depend in ./debian/control as well? Where can I read about what should be listed as a build-depend, and the reasons why? You shouldn't add --with python2, and your Build-Depends is perfectly fine. Try to build your package in a clean chroot: you'll probably won't have that message anymore. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: dh_python2: error: no such option: --with
On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 11:23:27 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: Dear mentors, I am trying to use the new dh for the gdcm package, as seen at: http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-med/trunk/packages/gdcm/trunk/debian/rules?view=markup [..] dh $@ --parallel --with=cli --with=python2 --with options go right after the target -- and they can be grouped together. So either: dh $@ --with cli --with python2 --parallel or: dh $@ --with cli,python2 --parallel -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: dh_python2: error: no such option: --with
On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 12:04:59 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: %: dh $@ --with cli,python2 --parallel Unknown option: with dh_icons: warning: ignored unknown options in DH_OPTIONS dh_perl -O--parallel Unknown option: with dh_perl: warning: ignored unknown options in DH_OPTIONS dh_python2 -O--parallel Usage: dh_python2 -p PACKAGE [-V [X.Y][-][A.B]] DIR [-X REGEXPR] dh_python2: error: no such option: --with make: *** [binary] Error 2 dpkg-buildpackage: error: fakeroot debian/rules binary gave error exit status 2 Then it's (probably) a bug in dh_python2 in how it handles unknown options. This is a drawback of dh7, IIRC: the same options are passed to all dh_* helpers, and they should cope with them. See how dh_icons and dh_perl handle the unknown (for them) option --parallel. David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Downloading of test data
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 13:09:57 +0200, Antonio Valentino wrote: My question is: is it sane to download data at package build time? It's not possible, buildds don't have network access. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Version number adjustment needed?
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 11:37:18 +0200, Thomas Preud'homme wrote: Le jeudi 23 juin 2011 10:03:15, Stefan Denker a écrit : 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? Usually we use upstreamversion+dfsg1-1. That means you changed the tarball for DFSG compliance. If that's not the case, I'd suggest +ds1 (Debian Source). Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: obdgpslogger [ITP #580176] [updated version]
On Mon, 30 May 2011 15:51:38 -0400, Gary Briggs wrote: Dear mentors, A while ago I was working on packaging my pet project, obdgpslogger, for Debian. David Paleino generously uploaded it for me, but it failed the FTP masters due to a PDF without source code. [PDFs are now all gone] Uploaded. :) -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: gambas3
On Sun, 29 May 2011 14:17:08 +1000, Ian Haywood wrote: Dear mentors, Hello Ian, I am looking for a sponsor for my package gambas3. [..] I had used Gambas in the past, and would be happy to sponsor it (didn't review it yet). However, gambas2 is maintained by José. Have you talked to him about gambas3? Why not forming a Debian Gambas Team? I'd be glad to join it :) If you and José agree, I can create a pkg-gambas team :) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What to do after forgetting to close a bug
On Fri, 27 May 2011 15:50:46 +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: I forgot to close #610981 when I released roxterm 1.21.4-1. I guess I should fix this by sending a message to 610981-done@b.d.o but I'm not 100% sure what to do about debian/changelog. I think I should add (Closes: #610981) retrospectively to the old change description which applies to this bug. Is that correct? It's not needed. Just send a mail to 610981-done@b.d.o, as you said, with a Version: 1.21.4-1 pseudo-header. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: 0ad
On Sat, 2 Apr 2011 21:59:59 -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package 0ad. * Package name: 0ad [..] My motivation for maintaining this package is: Even though 0 A.D. is still in Alpha, it is still playable (and also very fun if you like RTS games). I would like to package and maintain 0 A.D. so that fellow Debian users can also enjoy this game as well. I haven't checked the package, but given I'd like to play it, I tried to build it, and it FTBFS because of libenet. It seems like it wants libenet0 (1.2.*), but in Debian we have libenet1a (1.3*). The parallel jobs make it a bit difficult to find the error, since it's buried by tons of other successful compilations, but here it is: g++ -g -O2 -MMD -D LIB_STATIC_LINK -D INSTALLED_BINDIR=/usr/games -D INSTALLED_DATADIR=/usr/share/games/0ad -D INSTALLED_LIBDIR=/usr/lib/games/0ad -D NDEBUG -D CONFIG_FINAL=1 -D USING_PCH -I /usr/X11R6/include/X11 -I /usr/X11R6/include -I /usr/include/X11 -I ../../../source/pch/simulation2 -I ../../../source/ -I ../../../libraries/spidermonkey-tip/include-unix/release -g -O3 -Wall -Wno-switch -Wno-reorder -Wno-invalid-offsetof -Wextra -Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wunused-parameter -Wredundant-decls -Wnon-virtual-dtor -Wundef -fstack-protector-all -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fstrict-aliasing -fpch-preprocess -msse -fno-omit-frame-pointer -march=i686 -fvisibility=hidden -MF obj/simulation2_Release/Simulation2.d -MT obj/simulation2_Release/Simulation2.o -o obj/simulation2_Release/Simulation2.o -c -include obj/simulation2_Release/precompiled.h ../../../source/simulation2/Simulation2.cpp In file included from ../../../source/network/NetServer.cpp:29:0: ../../../source/lib/external_libraries/enet.h:33:2: error: #error The game currently requires ENet 1.2.x. You are using a newer version, which has an incompatible API and network protocol. Please switch to an older version. ../../../source/network/NetServer.cpp: In member function 'bool CNetServerWorker::SetupConnection()': ../../../source/network/NetServer.cpp:118:52: error: too few arguments to function 'ENetHost* enet_host_create(const ENetAddress*, size_t, size_t, enet_uint32, enet_uint32)' /usr/include/enet/enet.h:498:21: note: declared here make[3]: *** [obj/network_Release/NetServer.o] Error 1 make[2]: *** [network] Error 2 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs I could suggest either maintain a separate libenet0, or try to port 0ad to the newer libenet (preferred, I'd say). Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: subprocess installed pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:28:29 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: Dear all, I am working on the dcmtk package. I get a bizarre behavior when trying to uninstall it: [..] Stopping DCMTK Central Test Node: dcmqrscpdpkg: error processing dcmtk (--remove): subprocess installed pre-removal script returned error exit status 1 configured to not write apport reports Starting DCMTK Central Test Node: dcmqrscp. Errors were encountered while processing: dcmtk E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) What do you have in your debian/*prerm ? Now as soon as I change set -e into set -x in /etc/init.d/dcmqrscp, I can uninstall it properly: [..] That's because of the behaviour of set -e (from help set): -e Exit immediately if a command exits with a non-zero status. i.e. something in your prerm is returning non-zero, and isn't properly handled. By not setting -e (i.e. changing it into -x, or deleting it, or...), you simply disable this behaviour, which is discouraged. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: subprocess installed pre-removal script returned error exit status 1
Hello Mathieu, On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 19:03:30 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: if [ -x /etc/init.d/dcmqrscp ]; then if [ -x /usr/sbin/invoke-rc.d ]; then invoke-rc.d --quiet dcmqrscp stop else /etc/init.d/dcmqrscp stop fi fi # Automatically added by dh_installinit if [ -x /etc/init.d/dcmqrscp ]; then invoke-rc.d dcmqrscp stop || exit $? fi # End automatically added section This is duplicate code. I suppose you wrote the first manually -- I suggest you to remove it, since dh_installinit is taking care of it already. Also, the error seem to be caused by this code. To find out, please add a set -x to the top of /etc/init.d/dcmqrscp, to find where it breaks. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:49:38 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: [..] For info about library packaging, check out libpkg-guide but note its two deficiencies: http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html Recommends using libfooX-dev (where X is the SONAME/ABI number) instead of libfoo-dev. Doesn't mention anything about symbols files, more info here: http://manpages.debian.net/man/1/dpkg-gensymbols http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles FWIW, there is a NM applicant which is working on updating libpkg-guide, helped by his AM, me and another DD. So libpkg-guide should soon be up-to-date again :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Non standard tar-ball.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:05:36 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:00 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: FWIW, there is a NM applicant which is working on updating libpkg-guide, helped by his AM, me and another DD. So libpkg-guide should soon be up-to-date again :) Great to hear! I wonder if it should move to the website like maint-guide etc: http://www.debian.org/doc/libpkg-guide/ I think yes, that'd be its natural location :) -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Build-Dep: libqtwebkit-dev
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:42:50 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: Dear all, Does anyone knows how I can Build-Dep to libqtwebkit-dev ? I tried: Build-Depends: libqtwebkit-dev [amd64 i386] Maybe I didn't understand the question, but why not: Build-Depends: libqtwebkit-dev ? :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Build-Dep: libqtwebkit-dev
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:03:24 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:59 PM, David Paleino da...@debian.org wrote: On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:42:50 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: Dear all, Does anyone knows how I can Build-Dep to libqtwebkit-dev ? I tried: Build-Depends: libqtwebkit-dev [amd64 i386] Maybe I didn't understand the question, but why not: Build-Depends: libqtwebkit-dev ? :) http://packages.debian.org/sid/libqtwebkit-dev It is only available in: - unstable ...and? :) - on amd64/i386 I see it on sparc and ia64 as well. And I expect it to be available on other architectures too :) I need to specify something like: B-D on libqtwebkit-dev only if libQt4-dev does not provide libqtwebkit-dev No, you don't need. Packages should be targetted to unstable, and current unstable has libqtwebkit-dev. The unavailability of libqtwebkit-dev on other arches is a bug (see the two FTBFS filed against it), and should be fixed by its maintainers, not certainly workarounded by downstream maintainers ;) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: b43-fwcutter (updated package)
On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:25:24 +0100, Alessandro Ghedini wrote: On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 10:34:00PM +0100, Fabrizio Regalli wrote: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/b/b43-fwcutter/b43-fwcutter_013-4.dsc The package FTBFS: make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/b43-fwcutter-013' install -d -o 0 -g 0 -m 755 /usr/local/bin/ install -o 0 -g 0 -m 755 b43-fwcutter /usr/local/bin/ install: cannot create regular file /usr/local/bin/b43-fwcutter: Permission denied make[1]: *** [install] Error 1 Why is it installing under /usr/local, anyway? In the upstream Makefile you should replace PREFIX ?= /usr/local with PREFIX ?= $(DESTDIR)/usr That fixes both the issues. See maint-guide §3.3 [0]. How are you compiling that package? It doesn't FTBFS here. David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: SF redirector does not work for itext
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:49:32 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, I intend to package iText Java library and tried to write a watch file. The files section is specifying several releases at http://sourceforge.net/projects/itext/files/iText/ but if I look at the redirector page as recommended at http://lintian.debian.org/tags/debian-watch-file-should-use-sf-redirector.html I get an error page for http://sf.net/itext Any idea what might went wrong here? Nothing. sf.net gets rewritten by uscan to http://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/. So what you're trying to access is really http://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/itext/. There you find all the tarballs :-) So, let's say, you want http://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/iText-src-5.0.6.tar.gz . The line for debian/watch is: http://sf.net/itext/iText-src-(\d+.*)\.tar\.gz Have a nice day :), David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: tintii (updated package)
Hello Daniel, On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:47:16 -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2.3-3 of my package tintii. In your RFS, you should've stated you're adopting the package :) However, this is kind of a bad timing. Uploads to unstable are discouraged, because we're in freeze, and if a RC bug pops up, you'd be forced to upload to testing-proposed-updates (which should be considered a last-resort). If you rebuild the package targetting it to experimental (just edit debian/changelog, and rebuild), I'll be happy to check and sponsor it. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: ClipIt -- Clipboard manager
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 00:40:25 +0200, Cristian Henzel wrote: Hello, I am working on a cliboard manager for GTK (the project is forked from parcellite) [..] Just FTR, I just sponsored it. Thank you Cristian for your contribution to Debian, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libgis - virtual globe library
Hello Andy,
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 09:00:06 +, Andy Spencer wrote:
- Joined the pkg-grass group:
Great!
- Debian files are now hosted at:
http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-grass/libgis.git
You forgot to push everything. Please do:
$ git push --all ; git push --tags
- Use libgis-dev.examples for gis-demo instead of libgis-bin
- Update Recommends/Suggests
- Add debian/clean to delete some generated files
- Fixed a bug that caused a crash when using Mesa
Everything seems fine. Just one small thing: you're suggesting libgis-doc (=
${binary:Version}). libgis-doc is an Arch:all package, and binary:Version
doesn't apply there. I suggest to entirely drop the version, since it's
documentation, and there's no need of a strict dependency.
After fixing this (just do a commit with that change), and pushing the
remaining branches/tags, I'll upload it.
Kindly,
David
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: svn-buildpackage with pbuilder
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:07:04 +0200, anatoly techtonik wrote: I am trying to use svn-buildpackage with pbuilder to check my dependencies. pbuilder documentation mentions that it automatically satisfy the build-dependencies inside chroot, but this doesn't happen. I execute $ svn-buildpackage --svn-ignore-new --svn-builder='pdebuild' and get the error message: ... dpkg-checkbuilddeps: Unmet build dependencies: python-all cdbs docbook-xsl W: Unmet build-dependency in source ... How can I make pbuilder fetch these required dependencies? That happens because also a simple debuild clean needs the dependencies satisfied. Try passing also --svn-dont-clean , and see if it fixes that. David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libgis - virtual globe library
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 06:24:01 +, Andy Spencer wrote: Thanks for the comments so far, I've posted an updated set of packages to mentors.debian.net, here's a quick list of changes (I may be forgetting a few): [..] I also set up a git repository on my local machine for storing the Debian files using git-buildpackage. As David suggested, I would like to host them as part of the pkg-grass project and am looking into getting a repository on Alioth. If you want it to be in Debian GIS, a couple more changes are needed. In debian/control, please set Debian GIS Project pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org as Maintainer, and put yourself in Uploaders field. Unrelated to Debian GIS: always in debian/control, libgis-doc Recommends libgis0. I know someone suggested it on this list, but why? Recommends are installed by default, and that package is meant to provide documentation, so I'd rather Suggest libgis-dev. That's IMHO though. Also, you have changes stored in debian/patches/debian-changes-0.4.2-1 . Please make so that patch doesn't appear. Usually, you want to avoid direct changes to the upstream source, but rather you want to use quilt(1). (Tip: that patch creates two autotools-related files. If you want to get rid of them, add them to debian/clean, and they'll be removed during the clean target) You have an examples/ directory. Why don't you install them? I'd put it in debian/libgis-dev.examples . Also, a symbols file is missing. Did you choose not to include one, or just forgot it? :-) To generate one, I'd suggest using (after a fakeroot debian/rules install): $ dpkg-gensymbols -plibgis0 | sed -e 's/0.4.2-1/0.4.2/' | patch -p0 And then move the new_symbols_file to debian/libgis0.symbols. After compiling it, I see that only a gis-demo is present in libgis-bin. I thought at something more... useful? :-) It might make sense to drop that binary package at all, and put the sources of this gis-demo in libgis-dev.examples. Quoting your other mail: Also, this is slightly unrelated, but do you know why I get a lot of errors of the form: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libfoo.so.0 could be avoided if debian/libgis0/usr/lib/libgis0/map.so ... were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols). I've tried using -Wl,--as-needed hopping it would prevent these warnings, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Those are generally harmful. You should check what's actually being linked, and if you're using any function from those libraries (i.e. check what -l... are being passed to gcc). This is only reflected in the generated dependencies. While it should really be fixed, it's not a showstopper. After the installation, trying to run it causes a segfault: $ gis-demo ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: new - (null), (null) ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: class_init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: new - Trying GIS defaults ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: new - Unable to load key file `/home/neo/.config/libgis/config.ini': No such file or directory ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPrefs: new - using /home/neo/.config/libgis/config.ini ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisPlugins: new - dir=(null) ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisOpenGL: new ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisViewer: class_init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisOpenGL: class_init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisViewer: init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisOpenGL: init ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aaf600 edge=90,00,0,00,90,00,0,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aaf6e8 edge=90,00,0,00,180,00,90,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aaf7d0 edge=90,00,0,00,-90,00,-180,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aa93a0 edge=90,00,0,00,0,00,-90,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aa9488 edge=0,00,-90,00,90,00,0,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aa9570 edge=0,00,-90,00,180,00,90,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aa9658 edge=0,00,-90,00,-90,00,-180,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: RoamSphere: new - 0x8aa9740 edge=0,00,-90,00,0,00,-90,00 ** (gis-demo:23376): DEBUG: GisOpenGL: on_configure Segmentation fault $ Here's the gdb backtrace so that you can check: http://www.hanskalabs.net/tmp/libgis-gdb.txt Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libgis - virtual globe library
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:01:32 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 06:24:01 +, Andy Spencer wrote:
Thanks for the comments so far, I've posted an updated set of packages
to mentors.debian.net, here's a quick list of changes (I may be
forgetting a few):
[..]
[..]
I was forgetting. In libgis-doc, I can't see the use of a versioned
Recommends. If you really want it, please use (= ${source:Version}).
Have a nice day,
David
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libgis - virtual globe library
Hello Andy, apart from Benoît's remark, which is correct, here are some comments: On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 07:19:39 +, Andy Spencer wrote: * Package name: libgis Version : 0.4.1-1 Upstream Author : Andy Spencer (myself) * URL : http://lug.rose-hulman.edu/code/projects/libgis/wiki * License : GPL-3+ Section : science It builds these binary packages: libgis - A Virtual Globe library libgis-bin - Example programs for libgis libgis-dev - Development files for libgis libgis-doc - HTML documentation for libgis IMHO, the name of your project is rather too generic (libgis). It should be changed to something more descriptive, but that's your choice as upstream at the end. Apart from this, you're very welcome to maintain it under the Debian GIS Team umbrella. To join us, please join the pkg-grass [0] project on alioth.debian.org. [0]: https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-grass/ Here are some comments: - In debian/control, you misinterpreted the meaning of Vcs-* fields. Those should point to the location where the Debian packaging is kept, while you pointed at the upstream repository. You can choose to maintain the debian/ dir there as well, or host it on Alioth within the Debian GIS Team (which would be better for team-maintainance). - Library packaging in Debian has to follow certain policies. The binary package you're producing should be named libgisSONAME (i.e. libgis0, or similar). This ensures that any dependant package depends on the correct version of the library. - Why is libgis-doc an arch:any package? I didn't check its contents, but I suspect it should be arch:all. ;) - You might want to use DEP-5 format for your debian/copyright. Read more at http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ . It's entirely optional, and it won't be a stopper if you leave it like it is now. - In libgis-dev.install , please avoid installing *.a files. We (as Debian) are deprecating them, and installing them in a brand new package is a bad thing. - Your package doesn't seem to be lintian clean ;-) -- you pasted lintian's output in debian/lintian.txt, and there it clearly says to a) close an ITP bug and b) use a proper name for the binary (point 2 of my comments). Next time please read it ;) - Always in the lintian warning, it says you're missing a symbols file. Since it's a C project, I strongly suggest you to make one (I personally dislike C++ symbols files, but that's just me). Please read more at http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles Please re-ping me once you fixed all this, or if you have any doubt/question. Thank you for your work, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libgis - virtual globe library
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 19:20:23 +, Andy Spencer wrote: On 2010-11-13 10:58, David Paleino wrote: IMHO, the name of your project is rather too generic (libgis). It should be changed to something more descriptive, but that's your choice as upstream at the end. Apart from this, you're very welcome to maintain it under the Debian GIS Team umbrella. To join us, please join the pkg-grass [0] project on alioth.debian.org. [0]: https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-grass/ I've never been good with names :) I agree that it is a little generic, but I would rather leave it the way it is. I can't find any conflicts in Contents-i386 and googling for libgis seems to indicate that it's a fairly unique name, apart from a subsection of GRASS. Maintaining it under the Debian GIS Team would be nice. That website looks pretty GRASS-specific though, would it be suitable for a non-GRASS related package? Yes. The team is named pkg-grass mainly for historical reasons, now it maintains all sorts of GIS-related software -- from GRASS to OpenStreetMap things. - In debian/control, you misinterpreted the meaning of Vcs-* fields. Those should point to the location where the Debian packaging is kept, while you pointed at the upstream repository. You can choose to maintain the debian/ dir there as well, or host it on Alioth within the Debian GIS Team (which would be better for team-maintainance). Oops, I've removed the links for now and will add proper links once version control is set up for the debian files. Alioth seems like a good place, I'll look into how that works. If you join pkg-grass, you could ssh into alioth and do: $ cd /git/pkg-grass/ $ ./setup-repository libgis 'some description' After that, you can use git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/libgis.git as remote in your packaging repository. Most (if not all) of the packages there use the git-buildpackage layout -- you might want to read about git-import-origin, git-import-dsc and git-buildpackage. [..] - Your package doesn't seem to be lintian clean ;-) -- you pasted lintian's output in debian/lintian.txt, and there it clearly says to a) close an ITP bug and b) use a proper name for the binary (point 2 of my comments). Next time please read it ;) The first lintian file I generated was actually much bigger ;) a) Fixed now (per Benoît's email) #603393 for reference b) I wanted to discuss this one a little further before trying to correct it. (See below) Ack. Another point of interest is that mentors.debian.net says: intian warnings: none intian errors: none Even though there were some warnings. I copied the `lintian clean' message from the template it generated, but I'm not sure if it generated the `lintian clean' part or if that was hard coded. Well, no. AFAICT, mentors.debian.net doesn't use sid's lintian -- while a maintainer should always use that one. - Library packaging in Debian has to follow certain policies. The binary package you're producing should be named libgisSONAME (i.e. libgis0, or similar). This ensures that any dependant package depends on the correct version of the library. - Always in the lintian warning, it says you're missing a symbols file. Since it's a C project, I strongly suggest you to make one (I personally dislike C++ symbols files, but that's just me). Please read more at http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles (I wanted to address these comments together) Personally, I'm not too concerned with the symbols file, or library versioning at all for that matter. Now, I had better clarify before someone bashes me with the libtool manual ;) Yeah. Such statements don't usually pass unpunished :-) As I mentioned in my initial email, libgis was developed to support another program called AWeather. Since AWeather is the only program that currently uses libgis and it depends on the latest version anyway, I don't expect there to be very many issues with library versioning. That being said, if/when I hear about other people wanting to use libgis in their own programs (which I hope they will) I will start caring much more about library versioning, a stable API, etc. Uploading a library in Debian, you're giving other users the chance to use it, and link against it. Even for private (as in not-published) projects. And breaking users' software for no reason isn't good ;) Anyway, I suspect some library versioning will be required, but I think doing as little as possible would (for now) be the most efficient way to go. Does this sound correct for package names, or can I do without the 0.4? - libgis-0.4-0 - libgis-0.4-dev - libgis-0.4-bin - libgis-0.4-doc Nope. What's required in the package name is the SONAME, which in your case is 0. So the packages should look like: - libgis0 - libgis-bin - libgis-dev - libgis-doc Why the SONAME is only on the shared library package? Because it's
Re: RFS: wicd-kde
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 19:33:24 +0100, Iker Salmón San Millán wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package wicd-kde. [..] Uploaded. Thank you for your contribution to Debian, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: wicd-kde
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010 19:33:24 +0100, Iker Salmón San Millán wrote: Dear mentors, Iker, I am looking for a sponsor for my package wicd-kde. * Package name: wicd-kde Version : 0.2.1-1 Upstream Author : Anthony Vital anthony.vi...@gmail.comyesmic...@gmail.com * URL : http://gitorious.org/wicd-client-kde * License : GPL-v3 Section : kde It builds these binary packages: wicd-kde - Wired and wireless network manager - KDE client There was no need to make a new RFS. I'll have a look and sponsor it, as I already told you ;-) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: wicd-client-kde
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:03:17 +0100, Iker Salmón San Millán wrote: El 3 de noviembre de 2010 13:05, Iker Salmón San Millán sha...@esdebian.org escribió: I am still wainting upstream response about changing the name to wicd-qt, but till then i would be glad if someone makes a new review of the package. Here is the response: Well technically this is a KDE App, which heavily depends on the KDE libs, not only on Qt, and is designed to integrate in the KDE desktop. If you call it wicd-qt, it might be misleading if someone doesn't want any kdelibs dependencies for whatever reason. So I do not recommend using wicd-qt for the package name, but instead wicd-kde, like your potential mentor said, for consistency. wicd-kde is fine then. About the binary name, I don't plan to change it to wicd-kde, because it doesn't contains/substitute the wicd daemon, I think it's important that the users understand it's just a client for the daemon. So the package wicd-gtk depends on gtk (and not GNOME) and provides the wicd-client binary. The wicd-client binary is just a wrapper, that runs wicd-curses or wicd-gtk, depending on whether X is available or not. wicd-gtk is really a separate client, /usr/bin/wicd-gtk . Also /usr/bin/wicd-curses is a client, and /usr/bin/wicd-cli is another. I see /usr/bin/wicd-client-kde failing being consistent here :-) Anthony, would it be possible for you to reconsider this decision, and call it /usr/bin/wicd-kde? That makes sense to me. I don't know what to do now. I have to correct the description of the package just to make clear that not only depends on qt it also depends on kdelibs Yes, please, correct the package description. Other than this, the package seemed fine to me earlier today. I'll have a more careful check as soon as the binary name issue is solved. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: wicd-client-kde
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 17:29:00 +0100, Anthony Vital wrote: [..] Put it that way, it indeed makes more sense to call the binary wicd-kde. So I can do that upstream, but I haven't planned a new release anytime soon because I just released a new one a couple of days ago. But if needed, I can make a patch and Iker could use it? Sure, not a problem. I'll wait for a new package from Iker :-) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: packagekit
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:31:41 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Before you complain about this after review: Do you know a way to disable the automatic patch creation which was introduced with the 3.0 deb format? PackageKit updates the documentation and other files during build. This is not undone in make distclean, so debhelper creates a huge patch in debian/patches, which is really ugly. Is there a workaround for this or do I have to live with it? You could just use format 1.0 :) Or disable the documentation-update-on-build, or bash upstream until they provide already-updated documentation ;) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: buildbot
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 22:53:28 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Andriy Senkovych jolly_ro...@itblog.org.ua wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for my package buildbot. ... buildbot-master - a system to automate the compile/test cycle buildbot-slave - a system to automate the compile/test cycle Since we are now in a freeze period, splitting the package up is not appropriate, nor is a new upstream version that is not-preapproved by the release team. Why? Testing is the one frozen, not unstable. And testing-proposed-updates is there for a specific reason, if needed :) (i.e. I'm all for continuing development in sid during the freeze) My 2c, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: buildbot
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:20:15 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: David Paleino wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 22:53:28 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: Since we are now in a freeze period, splitting the package up is not appropriate, nor is a new upstream version that is not-preapproved by the release team. Why? Testing is the one frozen, not unstable. And testing-proposed-updates is there for a specific reason, if needed :) To not interfere with current transitions and freeze exceptions. The freeze announcement also mentions it. This package has no rdepends, how could it affect current transitions and freeze exceptions? Also, in the announcement I see: /--- | We don't ask you not to make changes in unstable, but we do ask that you be | aware of the effects your changes can have -- especially if you maintain a | library. \--- Have a nice day, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: re-RFS: obdgpslogger [ITP #580176]
Hello, On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 00:23:35 -0400, Gary Briggs wrote: Package name : obdgpslogger Upstream author : Gary Briggs chu...@icculus.org [me] URL : http://icculus.org/obdgpslogger License : GPLv2+ [..] I would greatly appreciate it if a mentor could take a look at this package with the goal of uploading it. Uploaded. Thank you for your contribution to Debian :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: php-fpdf - watch and epoch trouble
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:52:02 +0200, Alessandro De Zorzi wrote: anyway I suppose next relase will be 1.61 and the problem will disappear, If you already uploaded it, the epoch will stay there. -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Help for watch file
On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:48:52 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: David Paleino wrote: On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 16:02:13 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu wrote: I wonder how I might get a watch file for code.google.com working. Sounds like Google changed their HTML again, which broke the redirector too: http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedform/ Please do not continue spreading the use of that redirector. Just because there's one for sourceforge it doesn't mean it is okay to have one for other hosting services. We ideally want *none*. Also, I never saw a reply to Iustin Pop's email (basically saying nobody had actually contacted google code.) I don't really remember such a mail, I must've missed it. Going to look back into the archives. Neither a +1 or something to the ticket[1] opened by somebody else. [1] http://code.google.com/p/support/issues/detail?id=4042 I replied to #581622 though. However, trying to stay safe on the right side, I added a comment now. I would've had tons of emails from angry users asking why it didn't work, if the redirector was actually broken :) 16 packages use it, there should be none. I'd say patches welcome, but I'm not the uscan maintainer. Only when uscan will support googlecode out of the box, or Google says it's not a desired thing, I'll shut the service down. If Google changes again, I find it better to change code in one place than in tons of debian/watch files. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Help for watch file
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:53:20 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org wrote: Le mardi 13 juillet 2010 15:48:52, Raphael Geissert a écrit : http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedform/ Please do not continue spreading the use of that redirector. Just because there's one for sourceforge it doesn't mean it is okay to have one for other hosting services. We ideally want *none*. (...) I would've had tons of emails from angry users asking why it didn't work, if the redirector was actually broken :) 16 packages use it, there should be none. May I ask why ? It should be pretty obvious: less work for Debian and others: less work for Debian nameservers Than explain me why we have wesnoth.*, tinc.*, meetbot.*, joy.* and others. I don't care for them, but since you believe nameservers are having a hard time keeping up.../ironic ;) [..] It does mean more work for Google since they have to inform every engineer working on the download stuff of the need to keep URL schemes useful for autodownloaders. Not true, a redirector is meant to change and adhere to the upstream website. This is, if Google changes again, I'll change the redirector (instead of maintainers changing debian/watch files). There 3 redirectors curently (sf, github, and google code) and all of them have been around for a while, googlecode.debian.net has been around for a bit more than one month, I wouldn't say that's anything comparable to the time sf and github ones have been up. I'm skeptical that any of these systems are going to change for us any time soon. Probably the best way to deal with that is to add code to uscan to do add the right opts rather than creating redirect sites. It looks like even sf.net could now be automatically scanned with the right downloadurlmangle and filenamemangle options. Are you volunteering to make a patch for uscan? ;) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Help for watch file
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 09:43:36 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 09:31:26AM +0200, David Paleino wrote: If Google changes again, I find it better to change code in one place than in tons of debian/watch files. Well, 16 (+1 in NEW queue now ;-)) are not really tons. From Apache's access.log files (access_concat is the concatenation of all the rotated log files): $ grep GET /p/ access_concat.log | \ sed -n 's...@.* GET /p/\([^/ ]*\).*HTTP/.* 200 @\1@p' | \ sort -u | wc -l 88 (I only get URLs which return a 200 HTTP-code, i.e. the package exists in GoogleCode). Maybe 16+1 uploaded, and others ready in repositories tracked by PET. Also, it's being used by Ubuntu folks (I have some uscans with Ubuntu versions in the log). It's a hack, but I believe it gives the correct result. I should make some better stats, I know :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Help for watch file
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 16:02:13 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu wrote: I wonder how I might get a watch file for code.google.com working. Sounds like Google changed their HTML again, which broke the redirector too: http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedform/ Nope, it works. You have a typo there: http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedforms/ I would've had tons of emails from angry users asking why it didn't work, if the redirector was actually broken :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Help for watch file
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 22:35:40 +0200, David Paleino wrote: On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 16:02:13 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Andreas Tille andr...@an3as.eu wrote: I wonder how I might get a watch file for code.google.com working. Sounds like Google changed their HTML again, which broke the redirector too: http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedform/ Nope, it works. You have a typo there: http://googlecode.debian.net/p/freemedforms/ (yes, I know, I should make a friendlier Project not found page :)) -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: twms -- tiny web map service
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:50:20 +0100, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 09:55:30AM +0300, Andrew O. Shadoura wrote: It builds these binary packages: twms - tiny WMS service What is a web map service? It's a common technology used in the GIS world -- it lets you download georeferenced images from a server given coordinates, image format and other parameters. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Map_Service . I don't believe the acronym should be expanded, since it's a very technical package, not for the everyday-user. David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Asking for DMUA: Yes while seeking first sponsor
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:14:54 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl toli...@debian.org wrote: I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors while asking for setting the DM-Upload-Allowed: yes flag at the very same time. This isn't the only misuse of DMUA that exists, some people set it in their package instead of asking the sponsor to set it. It's our duty to check if DMUA is set or not. Never, EVER, review a package only based on a changelog. If I am unhappy with DMUA for a specific maintainer+package pair, I talk to the maintainer, and tell her I can upload only without DMUA because I don't believe she is ready for unattended uploads. If she agrees, I simply drop that line from debian/control and upload the package -- otherwise she just goes and looks for another sponsor. If we all agree on being stricter about DMUA, she just won't get that flag, even when asking someone else. I don't see any flaw in the current process. Sponsors already take the burden of many things when uploading a package (license issues and dfsg-freeness come to mind), and checking DMUA is just one of them. Others go further and do not mention that in debian/changelog nor in their RFS mail. One of those sponsoring rules I try to enforce to people asking for uploads is: add a DMUA set in debian/changelog, and possibly something like ACKed by dapal. Checking the changelog is, once again, still our duty -- people looking for sponsors tipically are: 1) newbies -- and they don't know what to do, someone must instruct them on best practices -- that's why we're also mentors, 2) experienced packagers with no upload rights -- being experienced, just tell a word and they'll understand. So, there really is no flaw in the current process, IMO. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: uwsgi
Hello Leonid,
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 18:36:27 +0200, David Paleino wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:04:44 +0300, Leonid Borisenko wrote:
* Package name: uwsgi
Version : 0.9.5.1-1
Upstream Author : Roberto De Ioris robe...@unbit.it
* URL : http://projects.unbit.it/uwsgi/wiki
* License : GPL-2+
Section : web
I'm going to review it ASAP.
While I'm interested in the package, I can't really sponsor it -- I have almost
no knowledge of CDBS to help you there.
However, here are a couple of things you should fix :)
- in debian/rules you're using some bashisms, like using *.{o,pyc}. You should
avoid this, by expanding those yourselves, i.e. *.o *.pyc.
- you should remove debian/DEBIAN/ from the package
- in debian/control, instead of build-depending on python{2.5,2.6} and
python{2.5,2.6}-dev, you should use python-all-dev. You should keep
python3.1-dev though, since it's not in the -all- package yet.
- debian/control: the package uwsgi-various should be better named IMHO,
maybe uwsgi-extra? This is to stay consistent with other packages in Debian
- debian/control: some packages have the same long description. Please fix
this. (uwsgi-plugin-lua, uwsgi-plugin-psgi)
- debian/control , package uwsgi. Why are you hardcoding the dependency to
uwsgi-python2.5 ? I suggest you use:
uwsgi-python2.5 | uwsgi-python2.6 | uwsgi-python3.1
, drop the Provides: uwsgi-any from other uwsgi-python* packages, and fix
the dependency of plugins from uwsgi | uwsgi-any to uwsgi. It should work
the way you intended it :)
- debian/control: libapache2-mod-uwsgi, does it work only with
apache2-mpm-worker, apache2-mpm-prefork and apache2-mpm-itk? Doesn't it work
with other MPMs?
You might want to give one default, and add an alternative to apache2-mpm.
Example:
apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm
So you get all other MPMs for free, and you still get the default one you
chose (if no other is installed) :)
I hope I didn't miss anything :)
Have a nice day,
David
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: uwsgi
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:08:20 +0300, Leo Borisenko wrote: Hello David Hello Leo, I'll be looking for another sponsor; but if I'll not found any, may I (after getting rid of cdbs and reverting to plain debhelper) address my request personally to you once again? Sure you can :) [..] - you should remove debian/DEBIAN/ from the package I use source package format '3.0 (quilt)'. As I read on Debian wiki [1] with this format debian directory from upstream tarball is automatically replaced by content of Maintainer debian directory at tarball unpack time. So manual removing of upstream debian directory is unnecessary. But I'll send to upstream request to delete debian directory from official tarball in following releases. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0 Ok, I've been hit by unexpected behaviour :) You're right, source 3.0 replaces the debian/ directory if present in the original tarball. What I missed is: I imported your package under git, so I had a debian/DEBIAN/ left there (git cannot track empty directories) after the replacement process. So, no real problem here, but good to read you contacted upstream. - debian/control: libapache2-mod-uwsgi, does it work only with apache2-mpm-worker, apache2-mpm-prefork and apache2-mpm-itk? Doesn't it work with other MPMs? You might want to give one default, and add an alternative to apache2-mpm. Example: apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm So you get all other MPMs for free, and you still get the default one you chose (if no other is installed) :) I believe that mod_uwsgi works with any MPM. So I understand that it's a helpful advice, but when I took it, I've got problems. MPM for Apache are mutually exclusive, so if I choose only one of them as dependency, I've take a decision, that may conflicts with user decision. Even dependency on apache2-mpm virtual package doesn't help. The dependency on the virtual package is satisfied if the user already has any package providing it. So, for instance, let's say you use apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm, and you have apache2-mpm-prefork installed, that dependency is fulfilled. I don't know why, but on my system (Debian unstable), when I have apache2-mpm-prefork installed, then installing of libapache2-mod-uwsgi with dependency on (apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm) or even just on virtual package (apache2-mpm) conflicts with apache2-mpm-prefork. This is strange. I just created a test-package with equivs, with a dependency on apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm. I have -prefork installed. Look: $ dpkg --info equivs-dummy_1.0_all.deb | grep Depends Depends: apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm $ LANG=C sudo dpkg -i equivs-dummy_1.0_all.deb Selecting previously deselected package equivs-dummy. (Reading database ... 330409 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking equivs-dummy (from equivs-dummy_1.0_all.deb) ... Setting up equivs-dummy (1.0) ... $ Seems to work fine to me :) And apache2-mpm-prefork is popular as dependency of libpache2-mod-php5. If I change (apache2-mpm-worker | apache2-mpm) to (apache2-mpm-prefork | apache2-mpm), then it will conflicts with apache2-mpm-worker etc. So I decide to make libapache2-mod-uwsgi Depends on (apache2) instead of (apache2-mpm*). While the situation you're describing is a bit strange, you probably found an alternative solution -- congrats :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
ITR: uwsgi
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:04:44 +0300, Leonid Borisenko wrote: * Package name: uwsgi Version : 0.9.5.1-1 Upstream Author : Roberto De Ioris robe...@unbit.it * URL : http://projects.unbit.it/uwsgi/wiki * License : GPL-2+ Section : web I'm going to review it ASAP. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Use of DM-Upload-Allowed field
Paul Wise wrote: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:03 AM, Joachim Wiedorn ad_deb...@joonet.de wrote: How is the actual status of using the DM-Upload-Allowed field/bit? Initially the plan was for DMUA to be set on package X only by sponsor Y after they are satisfied with the quality of uploads of package X by maintainer Z. These days DMUA seems much more casually added, often by the DM rather than the DD. Well, I remember some sponsors asking me to remove DMUA (or they removed it themselves) before uploading, when I was a DM. -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 -- 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/ho37ih$qf...@dough.gmane.org
Re: RFS: gtkhash (2nd try)
Alessio Treglia wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package gtkhash. Uploaded :) David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: On patching bts_webui
Ciao Luca, Luca Niccoli wrote: [..] --- diff -ru bts-webui/bts_webui/amancay/bugs.py bts_webui.new/bts_webui/amancay/bugs.py You did a patch for Amancay, which is not what is currently running at bugs.debian.org. Federico Ceratto and me are working on a rewrite of it (we started on Amancay itself, but decided to write it from scratch using another framework). It's called Hedgehog (I'm not yet revealing the URL because it's not yet ready for public test). If you want more info, please join us at #debian-it on freenode, and contact me (hanska) or Federico (federico2). We're also on #amancay on OFTC, you could reach us there as well. Ciao :), David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: How to detect 32 or 64 bit at build time?
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 12:32:27 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, Hello Andreas :) the new version of arb I want to package requires to set a variable ARB_64=0/11=compile 64 bit version to specify whether it will be compiled on 32 or 64 bit architecture. Is there any safe way to set this variable automatically from environment? I expected dpkg-architecture to provide this information but it does not. Am I missing something? Doesn't dpkg-architecture do this? $ dpkg-architecture | grep BITS DEB_BUILD_ARCH_BITS=32 DEB_HOST_ARCH_BITS=32 (and I'm on i386). $ apt-cache policy dpkg | grep \* *** 1.15.4 0 Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: package sponsored and uploaded, then how to update it ?
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:55:51 +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: Hi, i wish to update the package spawn-fcgi to correct a bug. but i can't upload it to debian mentors : it's been removed from my package list (probably because it's now in the debian archive) and mentors refuses packages not starting with -1 version. mentors.d.n refuses packages not having an .orig.tar.gz. Just pass -sa to debuild (or dpkg-buildpackage, or whatever tool you use), or edit the .changes file manually to include the orig.tar.gz. Hope this helps, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: kernelcheck
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:22:24 -0400, Master Kernel wrote: Theoretically speaking, [..] As already replied in private mail, please read the thread on debian-devel: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/06/msg00601.html Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:13:40 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote: Dne Tue, 2 Jun 2009 16:30:38 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): However, if this is a blocker for sponsoring, I'll happily change my debian/copyright. :) No it's not blocker, uploaded. Thank you! David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 15:01:19 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote: Hi Hello Michal, Dne Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:34:10 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): X-Comment: on Debian systems, [..] For second (pedantic) warning, why did you use X-Comment field? To point to copies of licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses/, without violating the RFC. Neither DEP-5 nor the wiki page seems to mention this field. DEP-5: [..] But this does not explain why do you use extra field. All examples in DEP-5 have link to license in License field. In DEP-5 I clearly see: License * [..] * First line: licence name(s) in abbreviated format (see Short names section). If empty, it is given the default value ‘other’ * Remaining lines: either copy the full text of the license(s), indicate a link to it (or them), or leave this part empty for using standalone License section(s) that matches the license short name(s) (see the Standalone License Section section). I'm leaving those remaining lines empty, in favour of standalone license section. And there's no example on how to point to files in /u/s/common-licenses/ in a standalone section. However, if this is a blocker for sponsoring, I'll happily change my debian/copyright. :) It's just a matter of establishing a format, and I'm pretty sure ftpmasters wouldn't bother whether I add a X-Comment or not ;) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
DEP-5 drafting (was: Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin)
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 23:09:31 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Good catch. The DEP-5 is still in a pre-draft state, however. I think that the examples should be fixed in the following way: [..] Please, remember to also support standalone License sections :) [..] Comment: On Debian systems the full text of the GNU General Public License version 2 can be found in the ‘/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2’ file. Also, if you edit the DEP, make sure you state that Comment should be specified once at most, and is not mandatory. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
On Sat, 30 May 2009 18:41:12 +0200, David Paleino wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin. * Package name: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin Version : 0.0.1 Upstream Author : David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com * URL : none yet * License : GPL-3+ Section : mail It builds the binary package: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin - Claws-Mail plugin to report spam in Debian mailing lists I was missing the ITP bug, sorry: #526993 David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 11:44:57 +0200, Michal Čihař wrote: Hi Hello Michal, thanks for the review. Dne Sat, 30 May 2009 18:41:12 +0200 David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com napsal(a): The package is lintian clean (just debian-watch-file-is-missing, but since I don't have a homepage yet...) The package can be found on Alioth: http://alioth.debian.org/~hanska-guest/apt/unstable/claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin_0.0.1-1.dsc Few comments: - please remove commented out parts of debian/rules I suppose the one in the clean target, done. - debian/dirs and debian/install seem to be extra (make install works, so why you install things manually?) Because only the .so should be installed. I fixed this - debian/copyright misses link to format specification Yes, that slipped off while writing it, thank you. (I really should've checked it before RFSing...) - lintian slightly complains, but as you have no homepage, it is not fixable: I: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin: no-homepage-field Will fix those as soon as I publish the code somewhere :) P: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL This lintian warning is wrong here: :) X-Comment: on Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License version 3 can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3', while the latest version can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL'. That whole paragraph is right. Since the code is GPL-3+, I'm both pointing to the minimum version (GPL-3) and the latest (+, GPL) -- they just happen to be the same at this time. For second (pedantic) warning, why did you use X-Comment field? To point to copies of licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses/, without violating the RFC. Neither DEP-5 nor the wiki page seems to mention this field. DEP-5: Extra fields. Extra fields can be added to any section. Their name starts by X-. Also in RFC822: 4.7.5. USER-DEFINED-FIELD Individual users of network mail are free to define and use additional header fields. Such fields must have names which are not already used in the current specification or in any definitions of extension-fields, and the overall syntax of these user-defined-fields must conform to this specification's rules for delimiting and folding fields. Due to the extension-field publishing process, the name of a user- defined-field may be pre-empted Note: The prefatory string X- will never be used in the names of Extension-fields. This provides user-defined fields with a protected set of names. Once you will address these, I can upload it. .dsc available at the same url as before: http://alioth.debian.org/~hanska-guest/apt/unstable/claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin_0.0.1-1.dsc Thank you, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin. * Package name: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin Version : 0.0.1 Upstream Author : David Paleino d.pale...@gmail.com * URL : none yet * License : GPL-3+ Section : mail It builds the binary package: claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin - Claws-Mail plugin to report spam in Debian mailing lists The package is lintian clean (just debian-watch-file-is-missing, but since I don't have a homepage yet...) The package can be found on Alioth: http://alioth.debian.org/~hanska-guest/apt/unstable/claws-mail-debian-spam-plugin_0.0.1-1.dsc Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: nautilus-image-converter (updated package)
On Sun, 24 May 2009 13:33:34 +0200, Julien Lavergne wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3.0-3 of my package nautilus-image-converter. It's mostly an upload to unstable of the package for now in experimental, following GNOME migration. This package was maintained by me. I'm replying just to confirm it's not an hijack, but a change of maintainership :) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 10:19:19 +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: Hi, The Debian Multimedia Team likes to have packages on git.debian.org, http://git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/ . Here's how to have a git repository [0] created by the Alioth admins: http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git [0] not quite true, they create a directory where *you* must create repositories. I have no experience with git or svn at all. Then why did you choose git? Any particular reason? You can find tons of git/svn tutorials out there, just google! :) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 5 Apr 2009 11:17:22 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 10:37:40AM +0200, David Paleino wrote: On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 10:19:19 +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: The Debian Multimedia Team likes to have packages on git.debian.org, http://git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/ . Here's how to have a git repository [0] created by the Alioth admins: http://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/Git Yes, but the only situation where they have to get involved is a directory for a repository for a new project; if you intend to put it in pkg-multimedia, you need to: [..] Ahah, I misunderstood the request of the OP... I thought that the pkg-multimedia people _wanted_ a Git repo, not that they prefer hosting packages in Git :) Sorry for the noise, then. David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 17:34:17 +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote: In most cases I think a setup-repository script exists in /git/projectname. I know it does for pkg-cli-* and collab-maint. It only exists on collab-maint, and copied multiple times over /git/*/. It was me who adapted it for pkg-cli-* ;) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 12:16:55 +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: Chow Loong Jin wrote: The thread was regarding pkg-multimedia to begin with, and it has a setup-repository =) So I can use such a script for pkg-multimedia? Why is it useful and how to use it? It lets you create a repository with: ssh git.debian.org cd /git/pkg-multimedia/ ./setup-repository package.git Description of the repository instead of: ssh git.debian.org cd /git/pkg-multimedia/ mkdir package.git cd package.git git init --bare --shared=all echo Description of the repository description Bye, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 18:16:34 +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote: The following have it: bash-completion/setup-repository [*] collab-maint/setup-repository [ ] pkg-boinc/setup-repository [ ] pkg-cli-apps/setup-repository [*] pkg-cli-libs/setup-repository [*] pkg-games/setup-repository [ ] pkg-multimedia/setup-repository[ ] pkg-perl/setup-repository [ ] pkg-pnet/setup-repository [*] pkg-xorg/setup-repository [ ] Those marked with * have been copied there by me *g* :P -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: upload to git.debian.org
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 18:25:38 +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote: alioth:~$ cd /git/pkg-multimedia alioth:/git/pkg-multmedia$ ./setup-repository reponame description alioth:/git/pkg-multimedia$ ^D local:~$ git clone ssh://usern...@git.debian.org/git/reponame.git local:~$ cd reponame I tend to avoid including usernames into URLs. :) this is better, IMHO: $ cat END ~/.ssh/config Host git.debian.org User foo-guest END $ $ git clone git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/reponame.git $ cd reponame :) This way, if one ever becomes DD, or changes username for whatever reason, you don't have to reclone everything -- just edit ~/.ssh/config Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Best way to solve a file conflict between packages?
Ciao Davide, On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:08:41 +0200, Davide Puricelli wrote: Summarizing, new mono packages introduced a /usr/bin/csc file that conflicts with /usr/bin/csc I used to ship into chicken-bin, so now there's a conflict between these two packages. I'm a bit biased here, since I'm part of the Debian Mono Team :), but I'll try to make my point. Discussion is _very_ welcome. I think there're at least three possible ways to fix it: 1) changing the name of my version of /usr/bin/csc to something else, but then I'll have to rename all the references to it in docs, other executables and, last but not the least, users know the Chicken Scheme Compiler as /usr/bin/csc since ages. Agreed. And, as seen in the bugreport, using alternatives is not Policy-compliant here. 2) just putting a Conflicts between mono-devel and chicken-bin, but I think it's not a good solution for users. Right, I'm full against it. 3) well, mono-devel came second, they introduced the problem and they should fix it, renaming their file. Point for you. I'm not a big fan of their my popcon count is bigger than yours, I just know that we're using that name since a lot of time, while probably Mono users would be not so disappointed by a new name. The fact is: Mono upstream changes the compiler name according to which runtime version it compiles code to. So we have: mcs - Mono CLI 1.0 gmcs - Mono CLI 2.0 smcs - Mono CLI 3.0 (really 2.1) Now, csc stands for C Sharp Compiler -- it's also used by the .NET framework on Microsoft Windows systems, and is widely recognized in the CLR community. But, well, nothing prevents us from using mono-csc. Yes, that would need another transition on our side (oh, my.), but we wouldn't uselessly need to Conflicts: chicken-bin (thus putting everything mono- and chicken- related into extra), or those hackish approaches proposed in the report. Really, we also called it csc to let people use _other_ CLI compilers (I'm personally working on Portable.NET) through the alternatives mechanism, so that would better be named cli-csc, or similar. I prefer the solution #3, but I'm not really impartial, I know, so, what do you think? I'm *NOT* talking in behalf of the Debian Mono Group, but I really think we shouldn't break existing scripts/programs/workflows/whatever, and call our binary as cli-csc. I'm including pkg-mono-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org in the loop, please keep it. Ciao, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: libnet - orphaning libnet
retitle 516222 O: libnet -- library for the construction and handling of network packets thanks Hello, libnet has been in RFA (Request for Adoption) for more than a month now, and I'm hereby orphaning it. Someone please pick it up, as it's an important piece of software in Debian. Sam Roberts (CCed) is taking over upstream development, please contact him when adopting libnet. Also CCing one listed Uploader, even though he completely missed from development, bugfixing, anything. To mentors: would someone please upload the package? (sid-lintian clean) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libnet/libnet_1.1.2.1-5.dsc Thank you. Ciao, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: libnet - orphaning libnet
F/up set, please respect it (I forgot setting it in my first mail, sorry.) On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:05:21 +0200, Stefanos Harhalakis wrote: Hello, Hello Stefanos, On Friday 27 March 2009, David Paleino wrote: retitle 516222 O: libnet -- library for the construction and handling of network packets thanks Hello, libnet has been in RFA (Request for Adoption) for more than a month now, and I'm hereby orphaning it. Someone please pick it up, as it's an important piece of software in Debian. Sam Roberts (CCed) is taking over upstream development, please contact him when adopting libnet. I'm willing to maintain it. Great! I'm not familiar with libnet source code but I'm with its subject and I can package it whenever a new version becomes available or when a new package is needed. From what you say, I guess that the homepage[1] will change in the near future. Is there another one ? [1] http://www.packetfactory.net/libnet/ Not yet, Sam Roberts is working on it in a github repository: http://github.com/sam-github/libnet/tree/master I see that you use git. Is it madantory to use git? (I'm not familiar with it). No. You (or whoever is going to maintain it) may use whichever $VCS you want. There's some old-ish SVN repository for libnet (I migrated it to git recently, so the history there is not that old -- if you meant to use SVN, that is) http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/collab-maint/deb-maint/libnet But please note that the SVN repo is quite broken [0] -- you may want to remove it and start it all over again (maybe re-importing it from git?) [0] i.e. I wasn't very comfortable with SVN branches, so I just did all the changes in trunk/, and there's a beta version packaged there, which I completely dropped from the Git repo. Also, Sam Roberts seems to have merged bits from there into 1.1.3 (which he's working on), so I'd warmly suggest not to use the existing SVN repo at all. Ciao, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: lintian complaining about modified files
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:52:08 +0100, Andreas Tscharner wrote: I did that, but config.guess and config.sub are still changed during the build process. What could go wrong? Which files doI need to have a close look at? Remove them in the clean target in debian/rules. The .diff.gz cannot represent file deletions. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: dpatch and .diff.gz files
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:26:33 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: Le Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:01:16PM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit : Examine the ‘foo.diff.gz’ cat foo.diff.gz | lsdiff, for instance lsdiff -z foo.diff.gz | grep -v debian/ That's what I do :-) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: dekiwiki
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:51:17 -0800, Mathieu OUDART wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package dekiwiki. [..] It builds these binary packages: dekiwiki - a powerful opensource wiki which runs on Mono I haven't looked at the package, but you might be interested in joining us in the Debian CLI Applications Team (a.k.a pkg-cli-apps). You can find us on OFTC at #debian-mono, and read about us at http://pkg-mono.alioth.debian.org Kindly, David Paleino -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: clamtk (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.04-1 of my package clamtk. It builds these binary packages: clamtk - graphical front-end for ClamAV The package appears to be lintian clean. My usual sponsor (CCed) is rather busy now, so I believe he can't sponsor this package. The package is targetted at experimental, since this is the preferred way of doing new uploads for Squeeze. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/clamtk/clamtk_4.04-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards David Paleino -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: clamtk (updated package)
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:43:51 +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote: On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 22:33, David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.04-1 of my package clamtk. Well done, uploaded! Thanks for your contribution to Debian, Grazie Sandro! :) -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Library Packaging
On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:16:47 -0400, Jonathan Steel wrote: Hi I'm trying to create a package of a shared library and I can't figure out how to do it. I can do it for a normal binary using dh_make and debuild. You already tried with dh_make -l, right? -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Building package,
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:03:40 -0500, Elías A. M. wrote:
Hi,
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
Try passing -Wl,--as-needed into LDFLAGS to the compiler (in debian/rules,
configure target usually). Be warned that this might break your package
unexpectedly!
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
You can safely ignore this warning.
Kindly,
David
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [Bulk] Re: Advice about first package building (from sources)
Hello Laurent, On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:01:06 +0200, Laurent Guignard wrote: I'll build a chroot environment with deboostrap with unstable. I'll have to build the new libnet1 package of David Paleino from all files he upload on mentors.debian.net (with Debian unstable dependencies). After, I'll can build my package from source. Didn't I tell you to wait a bit? :) The new libnet1, with the applied patches is now in unstable. You don't need to get anything from mentors, just do: # apt-get update # apt-get -t unstable install libnet1 libnet1-dev Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Advice about first package building (from sources)
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:41:17 + (GMT), Laurent Guignard wrote: On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:01:06 +0200, Laurent Guignard wrote: I'll build a chroot environment with deboostrap with unstable. I'll have to build the new libnet1 package of David Paleino from all files he upload on mentors.debian.net (with Debian unstable dependencies). After, I'll can build my package from source. Didn't I tell you to wait a bit? :) Yes you did ! ;) But i would like to learn about how Debian packaging tools are working. Well, this is great, but why would you need to build a package on your own, if that's available via apt-get? :) It is only curiosity to improve my technical skills and observing the procedure to submit a package for sponsoring help to understand what files to provide, where to upload them, and anything interesting for newbies... It is the fearlessness of the youth ! ;) Ahahahah :) Don't worry, it'll take a bit, but you'll make perfect packages! Sorry, i doesn't want to disturb or irritate anyone. You didn't do that! Didn't you notice my :) after the question? :) Didn't I tell you to wait a bit? :) ^^ The new libnet1, with the applied patches is now in unstable. You don't need to get anything from mentors, just do: I am fine to hear this. The only thing i have to do now is to build a package and that will be a great adventure for me ;) Again, sorry for my impatience. Don't worry :) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: deb/debian suffixes in packages
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:14:04 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: Hi -mentors! Hello, IANADD, nor a mentor :) I failed to find the correct meaning of deb/debian suffixes in some version strings of packages in Debian archive. Are they stand for seriously modified code? I found 292 examples in Debian unstable. (aptitude search ?version(deb) --display-format=%p - %V --disable-columns | wc -l) Usually, these prefixes are mostly used: debian ds dfsg $vcs (i.e. svn, bzr, cvs, ...) The first two usually mean that the original tarball has ben repacked not for license issues: stale files, build-generated files, .svn/CVS/.bzr/$vcs directories, [..] dfsg is appended when the original tarball is repacked with the removal of files which cannot be distributed by Debian, or, at maintainer's choice, non-free files (i.e. suitable for non-free), but not absolutely needed by the program itself so, instead of making the whole package non-free, just those bits are dropped, and the whole package con go to main/contrib. $vcs is added when... well, when it's a snapshot from a repository :) There might be other suffixes used, but these are the first coming to mind. HTH, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: deb/debian suffixes in packages
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:32:58 +0300, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: Thank you for answer. You're welcome, that's what -mentors is for! May be, it's reasonable to add this info (after formatting) to devreference? Sure it would help new packagers :) File a bug to develeopers-reference (reportbug developers-reference), if you wish. However, I'd wait for someone more experienced to reply :) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: deb/debian suffixes in packages
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:45:11 +0400, Al Nikolov wrote: Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: Thank you for answer. May be, it's reasonable to add this info (after formatting) to devreference? I believe it's not a policy but a somewhat common used practice. And, in fact, I believe adding the most common suffixes to the devref shouldn't be a policy but, as you said, a common used practice. And, well, that's called Developers' *Reference*, not Policy :) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: deb/debian suffixes in packages
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:07:00 +0400, Al Nikolov wrote: Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: Shouldn't devreference describe common used practices? It's not a policy, after all. OTOH, devreference is not a collection of common used practices (what is may be sad), but a overview of the recommended procedures and the available resources IMHO, whict is more suitable for such things inclusion into is Debian Wiki. AFAICT, using the proper suffix to describe *why* the upstream source tarball has been repacked *should* be in the *recommended* procedures. But, well, that's IMHO. David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: libnet (adopted and updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.2.1-3 of the package libnet, which I'm adopting (ITA #483710). It builds these binary packages: libnet1- library for the construction and handling of network packets libnet1-dbg - debugging symbols for libnet libnet1-dev - development files for libnet libnet1-doc - developers documentation files for libnet The package would go through NEW because of libnet1-dbg and libnet1-doc. The package is not lintian clean: the upstream tarball contains CVS directories, and I didn't want to repack it just for this reason. Otherwise, it seems clean (unstable lintian -iI). The upload would fix these bugs: 418249 - [PATCH] libnet_build_ntp broken in libnet 1.1.2 418975 - libnet1: Buffer overrun in libnet_pblock_coalesce 418979 - libnet1: libnet_pblock_coalesce() leaks on error 457506 - libnet: FTBFS on hurd-i386 497909 - patch needed for dhcp_probe These bugs are also blocking other bugs: 418975 417835: heartbeat: IPv6addr fails on etch 497909 495959: RFP: dhcp_probe -- Discover rogue DHCP-servers on your lan The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libnet/libnet_1.1.2.1-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards David Paleino -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:54:06 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:38:22AM -0500, Luca Bruno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:04:19 +0200 Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I bet this thing builds using libtool, right ? libtool is known to be reordering gcc arguments, and with -Wl,--as-needed, that breaks everything, as it puts it at the end, making it useless. Exactly. The problem is that I don't know how to put --as-needed before $AM_LDFLAGS from the configure script. Should I create a patch to fix the makefiles? The only way I found to fool libtool is to set CC to gcc -Wl,--as-needed. Another way is to patch libtool... See #347650 for a patch [1] to ltmain.sh provided by Josselin Mouette. That works for me most of the time. :) David [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=60;filename=00_as-needed.patch;att=1;bug=347650 -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
Don't CC me, thanks.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:16:27 -0500, Luca Bruno wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:06:49 +0200
David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See #347650 for a patch [1] to ltmain.sh provided by Josselin Mouette.
That works for me most of the time. :)
Nice patch thanks.
Prego :)
I had to modify it a little to match the changed ltmain.sh.
I've uploaded the new package, now I'm getting only one warning:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libpthread.so.0 could be avoided
if debian/syx-gtk/usr/lib/syx/gtk/libsyx-gtk.so.0.0.0 were not
uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
I believe this one is unavoidable.
Other warnings still persist.
What do you have in debian/*.post{inst,rm}? (Sorry, no time to dget the
package :()
Ciao,
David
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 10:20:19 -0500, Luca Bruno wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for my package syx. * Package name: syx Version : 0.1.7-1 Upstream Author : Luca Bruno [EMAIL PROTECTED] You might ask your omonymous to upload the package for you! :) Luca Bruno [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ciao, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:52:22 -0500, Luca Bruno wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:46:58 +0200
David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you have in debian/*.post{inst,rm}? (Sorry, no time to dget the
package :()
In this package there's libsyx0, and some plugins (syx-gtk, syx-readline,
syx-x11). The warning says there's no need to call ldconfig from
postinst/postrm because the plugins are not in /usr/lib. This is true.
Are they in /usr/lib/something/?
The problem is that the postinst/postrm of these plugins are auto generated
by debhelper that automatically call ldconfig.
You might want to use dh_makeshlibs --no-scripts, but I don't really know if
that's ok for private libraries (probably someone could also suggest you to
remove dh_makeshlibs at all...)
David
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:40:05 -0500, Luca Bruno wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 17:07:31 +0200 David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might want to use dh_makeshlibs --no-scripts, but I don't really know if that's ok for private libraries (probably someone could also suggest you to remove dh_makeshlibs at all...) There's no --no-scripts option but I catched what you meant. man dh_makeshlibs: -n, --noscripts Do not modify postinst/postrm scripts. $ dpkg -l debhelper | grep ^ii ii debhelper7.0.13 helper programs for debian/rules $ David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: syx
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:02:18 -0500, Luca Bruno wrote: On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:28:03 +0200 David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: man dh_makeshlibs: -n, --noscripts Do not modify postinst/postrm scripts. $ dpkg -l debhelper | grep ^ii ii debhelper7.0.13 helper programs for debian/rules $ I'm really sorry. I looked for no-scripts instead of noscripts, my bad. This fixed those warnings, thanks very much for your help. Prego :) Now these warnings are left: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol syx_string_class used by debian/syx-readline/usr/lib/syx/readline/libsyx-readline.so.0.0.0 found in none of the libraries. (many other warnings like this) Plugins use symbols of libsyx0. How can I tell shlibdeps to find symbols also in the newly created libsyx? You could try this: dh_shlibdeps -l/usr/lib/syx/ But, in theory, newer versions of dpkg-shlibdeps shouldn't need this. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Dealing with get-orig-source and md5sum
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:05:31 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
David Paleino wrote:
VERSION=$(shell parsechangelog | grep ^Version | awk -F: '{print $$2}' |
cut -d- -f1) REV=$(shell echo $(VERSION) | awk -F~svn '{print $$2}')
GOS_TMP=$(CURDIR)/get-orig-source-tmp
AFAIK, get-orig-source shouldn't rely on other files to do it's job. I have
always hardcoded the version or date to make the checkout from, to ensure that
only debian/rules is used, and that it can be used from anywhere
(eg, ../src/package/debian/rules get-orig-source).
Uhm... that was meant to be one code to fit them all -- I believe I'll
hardcode those things as well, thanks.
[..]
get-orig-source:
rm -rf $(GOS_TMP) mkdir $(GOS_TMP)
svn co -r $(REV) svn://anonsvn.mono-project.com/source/trunk/Mono.Nat
$(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION)
You can use svn export and skip the next instruction.
find $(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION)
-name .svn -type d | xargs rm -rf
Doh :)
I didn't think to svn export, thanks for the hint.
cd $(GOS_TMP) tar zcf
mono-nat-sharp_$(VERSION).orig.tar.gz mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION)/ mv
$(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp_$(VERSION).orig.tar.gz $(CURDIR)/../ rm -rf
$(GOS_TMP) echo The original source tarball is located at $(CURDIR)/../ .
Policy 4.9 says it should be left at the current directory.
Ok, I just missed that part, thanks.
Now, the fact is that the resulting tarball has very different md5sums at
each run -- and I found no way to have the same exact md5sum of the
.orig.tar.gz that would be uploaded to Debian:
[..]
I thought that this could be related to timestamps -- but I found no option
in `man tar` to remove timestamps from archived files (I thought that,
removing timestamps, the files would have been all the same).
I can also confirm that the files in the archives are always the same
(checked with `tar -tf` and diffing the lists).
What can I do here?
AFAIK the problem is not tar, but gzip. If I read correctly man gzip, your
solution would be to use tar first, and then gzip -9n.
-n... I'll try that, thanks :)
David
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: Dealing with get-orig-source and md5sum
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:24:09 +0200, David Paleino wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:05:31 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: David Paleino wrote: Now, the fact is that the resulting tarball has very different md5sums at each run -- and I found no way to have the same exact md5sum of the .orig.tar.gz that would be uploaded to Debian: [..] I thought that this could be related to timestamps -- but I found no option in `man tar` to remove timestamps from archived files (I thought that, removing timestamps, the files would have been all the same). I can also confirm that the files in the archives are always the same (checked with `tar -tf` and diffing the lists). What can I do here? AFAIK the problem is not tar, but gzip. If I read correctly man gzip, your solution would be to use tar first, and then gzip -9n. -n... I'll try that, thanks :) Great, it worked :) Many thanks, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Dealing with get-orig-source and md5sum
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:29:37 +0200, David Paleino wrote: On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:24:09 +0200, David Paleino wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:05:31 -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: David Paleino wrote: Now, the fact is that the resulting tarball has very different md5sums at each run -- and I found no way to have the same exact md5sum of the .orig.tar.gz that would be uploaded to Debian: [..] I thought that this could be related to timestamps -- but I found no option in `man tar` to remove timestamps from archived files (I thought that, removing timestamps, the files would have been all the same). I can also confirm that the files in the archives are always the same (checked with `tar -tf` and diffing the lists). What can I do here? AFAIK the problem is not tar, but gzip. If I read correctly man gzip, your solution would be to use tar first, and then gzip -9n. -n... I'll try that, thanks :) Great, it worked :) No, it didn't... I md5sum'ed the same file before... :( I'm open to other suggestions, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: disk-manager
Hello, my usual sponsor doesn't have the time right now to sponsor this, so I'm asking here. I've prepared a new package to be included in Debian: disk-manager (ITP #486699 [1]). It is a graphical filesystem configurator written in pygtk2, and allows normal users (i.e. those who are «scared» by a console) to edit /etc/fstab. A plus is that it logs everything: it's easy then to go back if something goes wrong. Here's the long description: Disk-Manager is a simple filesystem configurator that allows you to: * Automatically detect new partitions at startup. * Fully manage configuration of filesystem. * Enable/disable write support for NTFS (needs ntfs-3g installed). And this is the homepage: http://flomertens.free.fr/disk-manager/ . You can see some nice screenshots at http://flomertens.free.fr/disk-manager/features.html You can get the source at m.d.n.: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/disk-manager/disk-manager_1.0.1-1.dsc Thanks, David [1] I've mistakenly filled the Copyright line with LGPL-2, because the COPYING file in the root directory stated that. Digging into the source revealed that most of the files are GPL-2+, while only two are LGPL-2.1+. I've correctly completed debian/copyright, so that shouldn't be a problem. -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: disk-manager
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:08:21 -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: Hi David! Hello Nelson :) (no need to CC me, thanks!) On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:55 PM, David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've prepared a new package to be included in Debian: disk-manager (ITP #486699 [1]). It's missing some dependencies to build: libxml-parser-perl and python-gtk2 Can you verify this? Sure -- probably I missed to run a pdebuild before uploading to mentors... :( You can get the updated package at the usual URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/disk-manager/disk-manager_1.0.1-1.dsc Thanks for reviewing, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: disk-manager
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:26:40 -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:18 PM, David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can get the updated package at the usual URL: Uploaded. Thank you! Thanks for sponsoring me (once again!) :) Regards, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Dealing with get-orig-source and md5sum
Hello mentors,
I'm packaging a svn snapshot of a Mono assembly, for which no released tarball
is present.
As per Policy 3.8.0, I wrote in debian/README.Debian-source how to get a
tarball to start the build, i.e. ./debian/rules get-orig-source.
This is my get-orig-source target (please tell me if and how it can be
improved), with some variables defined in the very beginning of the makefile:
---8---
VERSION=$(shell parsechangelog | grep ^Version | awk -F: '{print $$2}' | cut
-d- -f1)
REV=$(shell echo $(VERSION) | awk -F~svn '{print $$2}')
GOS_TMP=$(CURDIR)/get-orig-source-tmp
[..]
get-orig-source:
rm -rf $(GOS_TMP) mkdir $(GOS_TMP)
svn co -r $(REV) svn://anonsvn.mono-project.com/source/trunk/Mono.Nat
$(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION)
find $(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION) -name .svn -type d | xargs
rm -rf
cd $(GOS_TMP) tar zcf mono-nat-sharp_$(VERSION).orig.tar.gz
mono-nat-sharp-$(VERSION)/
mv $(GOS_TMP)/mono-nat-sharp_$(VERSION).orig.tar.gz $(CURDIR)/../
rm -rf $(GOS_TMP)
echo The original source tarball is located at $(CURDIR)/../ .
---8---
Now, the fact is that the resulting tarball has very different md5sums at
each run -- and I found no way to have the same exact md5sum of the .orig.tar.gz
that would be uploaded to Debian:
$ date -R
Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:12:36 +0200
$ debian/rules get-orig-source /dev/null
$ md5sum ../mono-nat-sharp_0.1~svn106158.orig.tar.gz
2826da659bb5a5ab5867c8ca11b6f7fe ../mono-nat-sharp_0.1~svn106158.orig.tar.gz
$ debian/rules get-orig-source /dev/null
$ md5sum ../mono-nat-sharp_0.1~svn106158.orig.tar.gz
54db2bdb1131f7b3e5a1a73d495bd737 ../mono-nat-sharp_0.1~svn106158.orig.tar.gz
$ date -R
Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:13:06 +0200
$
I thought that this could be related to timestamps -- but I found no option in
`man tar` to remove timestamps from archived files (I thought that, removing
timestamps, the files would have been all the same).
I can also confirm that the files in the archives are always the same (checked
with `tar -tf` and diffing the lists).
What can I do here?
Thanks for any help,
David
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: thailatex 0.4.2-4 (updated package)
Hi Theppitak, hi Norbert, On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 09:06:53 +0700, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan wrote: It builds these binary packages: thailatex - Thai support for Latex IANADD, and the package has already been uploaded (that's why I'm CCing Norbert), but that should really be LaTeX, not Latex (as Norbert noted also for Tex = TeX) Take this as a suggestion for future revisions of the package :) Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFS: webkit-sharp
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package webkit-sharp. My usual sponsor (Bart Martens bartm) won't be able to upload any package in the next few weeks. * Package name: webkit-sharp Version : 0.2~svn105589-1 Upstream Author : Everaldo Canuto [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://anonsvn.mono-project.com/viewcvs/trunk/webkit-sharp/ * License : MIT Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libwebkit-sharp - webkit bindings for Mono WebKit is a web content engine, derived from KHTML and KJS from KDE, and used primarily in Apple's Safari browser. It is made to be embedded in other applications, such as mail readers, or web browsers. . This package provides Mono bindings for WebKit libraries. The package is lintian (sid) clean. The upload would fix the ITP #485806, and would let me proceed with the packaging of galaxium (ITP #476959) The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/webkit-sharp/webkit-sharp_0.2~svn105589-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Regards, David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
