Re: problems in creating .deb using dpkg-buildpackage!!!

[Michelle Konzack]

Am 2005-01-10 06:23:39, schrieb TIFR students:
> Hi,

> dpkg-buildpackage: source package is php
> dpkg-buildpackage: source version is 5.0.2-1
> dpkg-buildpackage: source maintainer is root
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Never make Packages as "root"...

> dpkg-buildpackage: host architecture is i386
>  fakeroot debian/rules clean

...using "fakeroot" is enough.

> Please help
> thanks.

Greetings
Michelle

-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ 
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917  ICQ #328449886
   50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/3/8845235667100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)


signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature

Re: Packages that *can* provide essential services (but not always)

[David Given]

On Sunday 09 January 2005 18:53, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * David Given:
> > Is there a correct way of tackling this kind of thing?
>
> Does citadel provide the /usr/lib/sendmail interface?

It does, yes, although it needs a bit of setting up; which makes it a good 
candidate for the citadel-server-smtp package, right? Is there anything 
similar I should be aware of for the pop3 and imap4 servers?

-- 
+- David Given --McQ-+ "Why should we put ourselves out of our way to
|  [EMAIL PROTECTED]| serve posterity? For what has posterity ever done
| ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | for us?" --- Sir Boyle Roche
+- www.cowlark.com --+ 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFS: mocp -- music on console player

[Nico Golde]

Hello Michal,

* Michal Jeczalik Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-11 11:52]:
>  * Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > we need the diff.gz a debian source package contains the
> > diff.gz, the orig.tar.gz and the dsc file. the deb is
> > useless. please upload.
> 
>  I have uploaded it, http://www.orora.org/michalj/debian/mocp/

the package has no revision number. it should be -1. change
the changelog file.
THe short descriptopn in the control file shouldnt start
with a capital letter.

check the files with linda and lintian.

but nice program i think. i hope that someone will sponsor
it as soon as the package is clean.
regards nico
-- 
Nico Golde - [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 1024D/73647CFF ,'"`.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.ngolde.de   (  grml.org
VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps`._,'   
and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

RFC and RFS: latex-svninfo

[Adrian von Bidder]

[not subscribed to tetex-maint, so please cc: me if replying there.]

Yo!

I created a quick package of Achim Brucker's svninfo latex Package.


Status:
 - worksforme(tm) on a *very* quick test.
 - latex2html support completely untested, as I don't use that! I just drop 
the svninfo.perl in a directory in /usr/share/latex2html.
 - google did find a mail (from 2003, though) indicating that no latex 
package packaging policy exists, so I haven't looked further.
 - Lintian complains of a hardlink - in a file that I copy into the package 
with dh_installdocs, so I'm not exactly sure how to get rid of that.
 - I didn't check the build-depends properly (I've reasoned them out from 
the Makefile, but have not tested in an empty chroot), and I've not tested 
on a purely unstable machine (my machine is mix between 
woody/sarge/sid/experimental.)

Madduck: you're my sponsor so far - willing to take that, too? (If NM 
continues in its present pace, I expect my account by the time sarge 
releases :-)  I'd obviously add you as uploader if you do.


cheers
-- vbi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFC and RFS: latex-svninfo

[Justin Pryzby]

Your .diff, please?

On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 04:26:13PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> [not subscribed to tetex-maint, so please cc: me if replying there.]
> 
> Yo!
> 
> I created a quick package of Achim Brucker's svninfo latex Package.
> 
> 
> Status:
[...]
>  - I didn't check the build-depends properly (I've reasoned them out from 
> the Makefile, but have not tested in an empty chroot), and I've not tested 
> on a purely unstable machine (my machine is mix between 
> woody/sarge/sid/experimental.)
Have you used pbuilder?  Its quite nice (though necessarily a bit slow
on my laptop).

Justin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFC and RFS: latex-svninfo

[Frank Küster]

Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:

> I created a quick package of Achim Brucker's svninfo latex Package.
> 
>
>  - google did find a mail (from 2003, though) indicating that no latex 
> package packaging policy exists, so I haven't looked further.

There is a draft at http://people.debian.org/~frank/Debian-TeX-Policy/,
but it's really just a draft. Some things are not yet completely
consistent, and some things are simply dreams, unimplemented as yet.

So in practice, it's a good thing to have the tetex maintainers look
over it, and to stick what other packages did. Do you have an URL?

Regards, Frank
-- 
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Re: RFS: mocp -- music on console player

[Michal Jeczalik Jr]

 * Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> I have uploaded it, http://www.orora.org/michalj/debian/mocp/
> the package has no revision number. it should be -1. change
> the changelog file.

 Fixed.

> THe short descriptopn in the control file shouldnt start
> with a capital letter.

 Most of short descriptions in debian packages starts with capital
 letter, so what is the rule?

Debian policy, 5.1:
,, Field names are not case-sensitive, but it is usual to capitalize
   the field names using mixed case as shown below.''

> check the files with linda and lintian.

 No errors, no warnings.

aarcia% for i in *.(deb|dsc|changes); do echo $i; linda $i; lintian $i; done
mocp_2.1.4-1.dsc
mocp_2.1.4-1_i386.changes
mocp_2.1.4-1_i386.deb

-- 
::)^|^(:: Michal Jeczalik Jr, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.salvador.eu.org
:(:\:/:): GPG: 1024/2A3BD1C6, E593 52AA F6D4 BF34 B464 5994 9C47 BF44 2A3B D1C6


pgp42I2PYafvf.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: RFS[2]: cpufrequtils (comments on packaging also welcome)

[Achim Bohnet]

On Friday 07 January 2005 22:03, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> this is the second call for sponsors for cpufrequtils, a useful (hint,
> sponsor me - sponsor me :)) package with utilities to deal with cpufreq
> interface (it contains command line utilities and a shared library).

I really like cpufreq-info -f ;)

> Hopefully many of the existing cpufreq related daemons will soon use
> the provided library (cpufreqd is migrating at least).

Any comment from the cpudyn upstream yet?
> 
> i386 bins and sources available here:
> deb http://oioio.altervista.org/debian binary/
> deb-src http://oioio.altervista.org/debian source/
> 
> The original ITP is 278767.
> 
> Last but not least comments on packaging are welcome. :)

o why not libcpufreq0-dev as suggested at 
  http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html
  At least with libcpufreq1 you will need something like libcpufreq1-dev
  otherwise one can't build pkg depending on libcpufreq0 interface anymore

o AUTHOR, NEWS file isn't included.  Btw. AUTHOR file and upstream in
  debian/copyright do not match.  You are too humble ;)

o -dev pkg should depend on the libcpufreq0 (= ${Source-Version})

o just wondering: tarball comes precompiled .mo files.  Are they
  cpu architecture independent?

o cpufreq.h is GPL 'V2 or later' no only GPL V2.  Is just
  'Licensed under the terms of the GNU GPL License version 2' in .c
  files enough?

thx for pkging!

Achim
> Thanks
> -- 
> mattia
> :wq!
-- 
  To me vi is Zen.  To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is
  a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated.
  You discover truth everytime you use it.
  -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Adopting an orphan

[Pierre Ancelot]

Hi, i am adopting  a package to maintain.
As it is my very first package, i'm reading many things actualy.
i sent a mail to adopt it to the control server and set it as ITA

I chosen this package since i have skills in hardware programming and C 
programming in general and i wish to help in debian.

though, as it is my first package, i wish to be sure to have done things the 
right way and so i ask here for this.
The bug report is the number 211921 which orphans hwtools.

the server sent me back this mail :






Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> package hwtools
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: hwtools

> retitle 211921 ITA
Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
management
Changed Bug title.

> owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug number 211921 belongs to package wnpp, skipping.

> stop
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)





On the bug page it's set as ITA but it still appears in the orphan page, how 
come ? Did i do something wrong or forget a point ?

Thanks





pgplQoSpfSPoV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Matthew Palmer]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:22:14AM +0100, Pierre Ancelot wrote:
> > package hwtools
> Ignoring bugs not assigned to: hwtools

This is causing the problem with the 'owner' command -- although the bug
refers to the hwtools package, it's actually reported against the "Work
Needed and Prospective Packages" pseudo-package.

> > retitle 211921 ITA
> Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
> management
> Changed Bug title.

This actually shows a bug in debbugs -- it should have failed to allow you
to change this bug title...

> > owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Bug number 211921 belongs to package wnpp, skipping.
> 
> > stop
> Stopping processing here.

But apart from those minor problems, it looks like your manual reading has
paid off nicely.

> On the bug page it's set as ITA but it still appears in the orphan page, how 
> come ? Did i do something wrong or forget a point ?

If you're referring to the orphan page on the QA site, I think that only
gets updated daily or something.  The orphans page may also keep ITA
packages on there for reference, but that's less likely.

- Matt


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Adeodato Simó]

* Matthew Palmer [Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:19:46 +1100]:

> > > retitle 211921 ITA
> > Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
> > management
> > Changed Bug title.

> This actually shows a bug in debbugs -- it should have failed to allow you
> to change this bug title...

  Also: Pierre, note that the 'retitle to ITA' expression means that you
  change the "O" bit by "ITA", not that you change the full title to ITA
  (if you do so, you can no longer know the name of the package from the
  title). So, it would be:

retitle 211921: ITA: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
management

  Cheers,

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
 
When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look
like a nail.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Pierre Ancelot]

> This is causing the problem with the 'owner' command -- although the bug
> refers to the hwtools package, it's actually reported against the "Work
> Needed and Prospective Packages" pseudo-package.

Not sure, does it mean i can't adopt it ?

owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]   <---  this syntax seems good to me


Thank you and sorry to bother you with those newbie questions



On Wednesday 12 January 2005 04:19, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:22:14AM +0100, Pierre Ancelot wrote:
> > > package hwtools
> >
> > Ignoring bugs not assigned to: hwtools
>
> This is causing the problem with the 'owner' command -- although the bug
> refers to the hwtools package, it's actually reported against the "Work
> Needed and Prospective Packages" pseudo-package.
>
> > > retitle 211921 ITA
> >
> > Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware
> > management
> > Changed Bug title.
>
> This actually shows a bug in debbugs -- it should have failed to allow you
> to change this bug title...
>
> > > owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Bug number 211921 belongs to package wnpp, skipping.
> >
> > > stop
> >
> > Stopping processing here.
>
> But apart from those minor problems, it looks like your manual reading has
> paid off nicely.
>
> > On the bug page it's set as ITA but it still appears in the orphan page,
> > how come ? Did i do something wrong or forget a point ?
>
> If you're referring to the orphan page on the QA site, I think that only
> gets updated daily or something.  The orphans page may also keep ITA
> packages on there for reference, but that's less likely.
>
> - Matt


pgpJgKCfc3nHZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Pierre Ancelot]

Thank you to tell me, i sure was wrong on this i won't forget next time.



On Wednesday 12 January 2005 04:30, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>   Also: Pierre, note that the 'retitle to ITA' expression means that you
>   change the "O" bit by "ITA", not that you change the full title to ITA
>   (if you do so, you can no longer know the name of the package from the
>   title). So, it would be:
>
> retitle 211921: ITA: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level



Excellent one :)
> When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look
> like a nail.


pgpATQhD7St1F.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Anibal Monsalve Salazar]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 02:19:46PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:22:14AM +0100, Pierre Ancelot wrote:
>>>package hwtools

If you use that line, your 'owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]' will
fail, unless you use 'package wnpp' before 'owner 211921
[EMAIL PROTECTED]'.

>>Ignoring bugs not assigned to: hwtools
>
>This is causing the problem with the 'owner' command -- although the bug
>refers to the hwtools package, it's actually reported against the "Work
>Needed and Prospective Packages" pseudo-package.
>
>>>retitle 211921 ITA
>>Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
>>management
>>Changed Bug title.
>
>This actually shows a bug in debbugs -- it should have failed to allow you
>to change this bug title...

It may failed because it refused to change it to an empty ITA. It
should have been:

retitle 211921 ITA: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware

The above line should be sent as a sigle line.

>>>owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Bug number 211921 belongs to package wnpp, skipping.

See above.

>>>stop
>>Stopping processing here.
>
>But apart from those minor problems, it looks like your manual reading has
>paid off nicely.
>
>>On the bug page it's set as ITA but it still appears in the orphan page, how 
>>come ? Did i do something wrong or forget a point ?
>
>If you're referring to the orphan page on the QA site, I think that only
>gets updated daily or something.  The orphans page may also keep ITA
>packages on there for reference, but that's less likely.
>
>- Matt

Anibal Monsalve Salazar
--
 .''`. Debian GNU/Linux
: :' : Free Operating System
`. `'  http://debian.org/
  `-   http://v7w.com/anibal


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Justin Pryzby]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 04:22:14AM +0100, Pierre Ancelot wrote:
> Hi, i am adopting  a package to maintain.
> As it is my very first package, i'm reading many things actualy.
> i sent a mail to adopt it to the control server and set it as ITA
Its good that you want to help, and this will be a good practice.  If
you fix any of the bugs
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=hwtools), you should
try to have a developer make an upload for you (I don't know if it
will have to be one of the QA members or not).

> > retitle 211921 ITA
> Bug#211921: O: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware 
> management
> Changed Bug title.
> 
[...]
Check the syntax we use for ITP titles at these bugs:

  http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged

> On the bug page it's set as ITA but it still appears in the orphan page, how 
> come ? Did i do something wrong or forget a point ?
That's a static page that gets updated periodically, check the footer
timestamp.

Justin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Pierre Ancelot]

On Wednesday 12 January 2005 04:40, Anibal Monsalve Salazar wrote:



Oh, okay, seemed logical to me that hwtools was the package hwtools...

> If you use that line, your 'owner 211921 [EMAIL PROTECTED]' will
> fail, unless you use 'package wnpp' before 'owner 211921
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]'.




> It may failed because it refused to change it to an empty ITA. It
> should have been:
>
> retitle 211921 ITA: hwtools -- Collection of tools for low-level hardware

Yes, okay, well thank you anibal and thank you all of you, seems i've done 
everything the wrong way :/


I'll do it that way, hehe, that's crazy, an other answer that comes, i thought 
at first sight this list was sleepy heh

Thanks


pgpscKoSgsWZK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Adopting an orphan

[Adeodato Simó]

* Pierre Ancelot [Wed, 12 Jan 2005 04:55:36 +0100]:

> Yes, okay, well thank you anibal and thank you all of you, seems i've done 
> everything the wrong way :/

  In fact you didn't. You did the very first right thing to do, which is
  to read documentation and get to know the procedures. If only
  everybody did that...

  And then, everybody makes mistakes. ;-)

  Good luck,

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
Listening to: Carlos Berlanga - En el volcán
 
Any life, no matter how long and complex it may be, is made up of a
single moment: the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all,
who he is.
-- Jorge Luis Borges


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFC and RFS: latex-svninfo

[Adrian von Bidder]

On Tuesday 11 January 2005 16.26, you wrote:
> [not subscribed to tetex-maint, so please cc: me if replying there.]

> I created a quick package of Achim Brucker's svninfo latex Package.
> 

... and of course, I have it online. Arrgh!



(Frank: thanks for your pointer, will have a look. Likely not before the 
weekend, though.)

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
La malicia, hace sucias las cosas limpias.


pgp0RqsMPqWIv.pgp
Description: PGP signature