Hi, Mickaël Raybaud-Roig wrote: > > I'm currently using awesome and ratpoison -- and packaging a > > non-tiling window manager myself which I prefer when a tiling doesn't > > do the job (think Gimp). > > Yeah, Gimp (<= 2.6) is a problem with almost every tiling window manager > I had the same problem, that's why i switched to Gimp 2.7.
Haven't tried Gimp in a while and Squeeze has 2.6. > I never tryed Ratpoison, It's basically the same keybindings as with GNU Screen on the console, just for X and with Ctrl-T instead of Ctrl-A by default (and no detach feature :-) -- so if you know Screen, you can immediately use it and be productive. Which IMHO is quite an impressive feature in the tiling window manager world. > but i used Awesome for a while, and i ended up with a 800 lines long > rc.lua. 1800 lines here... :-/ > > I tried to look at > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmfs/wmfs_2~beta201206-3.dsc > > and > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmfs/wmfs_2~beta201206-3.dsc > > but those upload seems incomplete: > > > > dpkg-source: error: File ./wmfs_2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz has size 53492 > > instead of expected 296604 > > dpkg-source: error: File ./wmfs_2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz has size 53492 > > instead of expected 53512 JFTR: I get the same issue on some other box. > In fact, the `debian' folder i created for the package is now in the > WMFS git repository, so when i want to build it, i create a > .orig.tar.xz file with the following command: > > tar --xz -cvf ../wmfs2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz --exclude=debian Should do it. IIRC with source format 3.0, for non-native packages, dpkg-source ignores any debian directory which is in the .orig tarball. > ... and then i build the package with `debuild' and i upload it with `dput'. > > So i think i forgotten to run `make clean' before archiving and there > is probably some binaries inside, which whould explain the error > message :-/ That would explain different expected size above. Is it possible that you tried to fix this by manually uploading a "corrected" wmfs_2~beta201206.orig.tar.xz after having used dput? That would at least explain the problems above. (I though would have expected that mentors catches such cases in some way.) > If you want to try WMFS, you can still use the source: > > git clone git://github.com/xorg62/wmfs.git > cd wmfs && debian/rules binary-all Will do. But probably won't dig too much into it before the freeze. > As i said in the previous message, i'm currently at work and i go back > home only Friday evening, so i can't fix the problem with the orig > file till then... No stress. I'm quite busy currently, too. > Apart from that, i am wondering if it's better to call the package > `wmfs' with the version number `2~beta<date>', as i did, or if i > should rather call it `wmfs2' with version number `<date>', as WMFS > was been completely rewritten since the version 1 ... As long as you don't want to have both versions installed in parallel via package, I'd prefer just "wmfs" as package name and the "2" into the version. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, http://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE `- | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120627111726.gk3...@sym.noone.org
