Hello,
On Thu, 08 Apr 2021, Bastian Blank wrote:
> How do you export changes? And no, creating separate patches breaks as
> soon as the history is not linear, like after merging a new upstream
> release. Sure, you could rease, but that is not an automatic process.
As Mattia pointed out, the
On Fri, 09 Apr 2021, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> "debian-single-patch" option (that you can put in debian/source/options)
"single-debian-patch", sorry
https://manpages.debian.org/buster/dpkg-dev/dpkg-source.1.en.html#Format:_3.0_(quilt)
Cheers,
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Raphaël Hertzog
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:42:22AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> As Mattia pointed out, the "3.0 (quilt)" format supports the
> "debian-single-patch" option (that you can put in debian/source/options)
> which makes it behave like source format 1.0 and auto-generates/updates a
> single patch in
Afin de voir votre message, cliquez sur le lien:
http://link.news-sarouty.ma/v/443/de86ac2aa9610f17e008e8922ca060c193b2665fc349b5b3
Hi Adam,
On 09/04/21 at 12:33 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 10:42:22AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > As Mattia pointed out, the "3.0 (quilt)" format supports the
> > "debian-single-patch" option (that you can put in debian/source/options)
> > which makes it behave like
Hello Lucas,
On Wed 07 Apr 2021 at 02:03PM +02, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> - source format 1.0 with direct changes in .diff.gz (no patch system)
There are still some reasons to use this source format, and so I think
if we mandated this all that would happen is people would switch to 1.0
(native)
Source: varmon
Version: 1.2.1-2
Dear Maintainer,
your package depends on makedev, which itself is long obsolete.
Please replace this dependency.
Thanks,
Chris
binary:libwbxml2-1 is NEW.
binary:libwbxml2-1 is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient.
Packages are routinely
wbxml2_0.11.7+dfsg-1~exp1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
wbxml2_0.11.7+dfsg-1~exp1.dsc
wbxml2_0.11.7+dfsg.orig.tar.gz
wbxml2_0.11.7+dfsg-1~exp1.debian.tar.xz
libwbxml2-1-dbgsym_0.11.7+dfsg-1~exp1_amd64.deb
libwbxml2-1_0.11.7+dfsg-1~exp1_amd64.deb
On 2021-04-08 18:02 +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 03:53:06PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 02:58:14PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> > 166 1.0, quilt
>>
>> I don't see what's wrong with these.
>
> Nothing *wrong* as the hard meaning of that
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 06:53:12PM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > right, so the severity of these bugs should be wishlist or maybe normal,
> > but I don't think important would be justified, and serious seriously not.
> Yes, totally. I don't think anybody ever talked about the severity of
> any
On 09/04/21 at 19:49 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> The X Strike Force is still sticking to format 1.0, with one of the main
> reasons being that it makes it easier to cherry-pick one or several
> upstream commits. In the 3.0 format you have to create a separate patch
> and later remove it when
On 2021-04-09 21:02 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 09/04/21 at 19:49 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> The X Strike Force is still sticking to format 1.0, with one of the main
>> reasons being that it makes it easier to cherry-pick one or several
>> upstream commits. In the 3.0 format you have to
13 matches
Mail list logo
