Bug#703394: RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an interface to various online weather-services

[Prach Pongpanich]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "php-services-weather"

 * Package name: php-services-weather
   Version : 1.4.2-4
   Upstream Author : Alexander Wirtz 
 * URL : http://pear.php.net/package/Services_Weather/
 * License : BSD-3-clause
   Section : web

  It builds those binary packages:

php-services-weather - acts as an interface to various online 
weather-services

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/php-services-weather


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-services-weather/php-services-weather_1.4.2-4.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  php-services-weather (1.4.2-4) experimental; urgency=low

  * Now using PKG-PHP-PEAR team as maintainer and
add myself as uploader (Closes: #529687).
  * Switching to pkg-php-tools and dh 8 sequencer
- Add pkg-php-tools to Build-Depends and drop {dh-make-php,cdbs}.
- Add php-pear in Build-Depends-Indep.
- Add ${misc:Depends} to Depends.
- Rewrite debian/rules.
  * Update copyright file to version 1.0 format.
  * Update debian/watch, thanks to Bart Martens.
  * Add Vcs-* fields in debian/control.
  * Add debian/gbp.conf.
  * Switching to 3.0 (quilt) source format.
  * Bump debhelper compat to level 9.
  * Bump Standards-Version: 3.9.4.

  I ignore a new upstream version, please see [1]

  [1] http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=19860

  Regards,
   Prach Pongpanich


-- 
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/20130319072054.gb22...@gmail.com

Bug#691577: marked as done (RFS: neverball/1.5.4-6 -- 3D floor-tilting game)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:14:21 +
with message-id 
and subject line closing RFS: neverball/1.5.4-6 -- 3D floor-tilting game
has caused the Debian Bug report #691577,
regarding RFS: neverball/1.5.4-6 -- 3D floor-tilting game
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
691577: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=691577
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for "neverball" team upload (as in
Debian Developer's Reference ch 5.11.7).

 * Package name: neverball
   Version : 1.5.4-6
   Upstream Author : Neverball contributors
 * URL : http://neverball.org/
 * License : GPLv2+
   Section : games

It builds those binary packages:

 neverball  - 3D floor-tilting game
 neverball-common - data files for Neverball and Neverputt
 neverball-data - data files for Neverball
 neverball-dbg - debugging information for Neverball and Neverputt
 neverputt  - 3D miniature golf game
 neverputt-data - data files for Neverputt

To access further information about this package, please visit the following
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/neverball

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/neverball/neverball_1.5.4-6.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

neverball (1.5.4-6) unstable; urgency=low

  * Team upload
  * libpng15 transition: Build-depend on libpng-dev instead of
libpng12-dev (Closes: #662445)
  * Fix neverball not launching if previously used video mode is
not available (Closes: #677409)
Thanks to Fabian Greffrath for patch.
  * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.3, no changes needed
  * Fix non-working Vcs-Browser field in control (400 Bad Request)
with a working one
  * Implement hardening

 -- Juhani Numminen   Sat, 15 Sep 2012 12:19:46
+0300

Regards,
Juhani Numminen
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package neverball has been removed from mentors.--- End Message ---

Bug#703070: marked as done (RFS: autoconf-archive/20130202-1)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:14:22 +
with message-id 
and subject line closing RFS: autoconf-archive/20130202-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #703070,
regarding RFS: autoconf-archive/20130202-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
703070: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=703070
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "autoconf-archive"

 * Package name: autoconf-archive
   Version : 20130202-1
 * License :   see debian/copyright mainly permissive license
   Section : devel

  It builds those binary packages:

autoconf-archive - Autoconf Macro Archive

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/autoconf-archive


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/autoconf-archive/autoconf-archive_20130202-1.dsc
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package autoconf-archive version 20130202-1 is in experimental now.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/autoconf-archive--- End Message ---

Bug#703144: marked as done (RFS: php-net-dime/1.0.2-1 [ITA] -- PHP implementaion of DIME encoding and decoding)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 19 Mar 2013 07:14:24 +
with message-id 
and subject line closing RFS: php-net-dime/1.0.2-1 [ITA] -- PHP implementaion 
of DIME encoding and decoding
has caused the Debian Bug report #703144,
regarding RFS: php-net-dime/1.0.2-1 [ITA] -- PHP implementaion of DIME encoding 
and decoding
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
703144: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=703144
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "php-net-dime"

 * Package name: php-net-dime
   Version : 1.0.2-1
 * URL :  http://pear.php.net/package/Net_DIME
 * License : BSD-3-clause
   Section : web

  It builds those binary packages:

php-net-dime - PHP implementaion of DIME encoding and decoding

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/php-net-dime


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-net-dime/php-net-dime_1.0.2-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

php-net-dime (1.0.2-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * New upstream release.
  * Switching to 3.0 (quilt) source format.
  * Update debian/watch, thanks to Bart Martens.
  * Switching to pkg-php-tools and dh 8 sequencer
- Add pkg-php-tools to Build-Depends and drop {dh-make-php,cdbs}.
- Add php-pear in Build-Depends-Indep.
- Add ${misc:Depends} to Depends.
- Rewrite debian/rules.
  * Add Vcs-* fields in debian/control.
  * Update copyright file to version 1.0 format.
  * Add debian/gbp.conf.
  * Bump debhelper compat to level 9.
  * Update Description field.
  * Now using PKG-PHP-PEAR team as maintainer and
add myself as uploader (Closes: #529680).
  * Bump Standards-Version: 3.9.4.

Regrads,

-- 
 ปรัชญ์ พงษ์พานิช
 Prach Pongpanich
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package php-net-dime version 1.0.2-1 is in experimental now.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/php-net-dime--- End Message ---

Bug#703395: RFS: spacefm/0.8.7-1 ITP

[Mateusz Łukasik]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "spacefm"

 * Package name: spacefm
 * Version : 0.8.7-1
 * Upstream Author : IgnorantGuru 
 * URL :  http://ignorantguru.github.com/spacefm/
 * License :  GPL
 * Section : utils

  It builds those binary packages:

spacefm- A multi-panel tabbed file manager with built-in VFS,  
udev-based


  To access further information about this package, please visit the  
following URL:


  http://mentors.debian.net/package/spacefm


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x  
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spacefm/spacefm_0.8.7-1.dsc


  More information about hello can be obtained from  
http://ignorantguru.github.com/spacefm/



  Regards,
Mateusz Łukasik


--
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/op.wt6m8w0hifijsr@laptop

Bug#703399: FS: udevil/0.4.1-1 ITP

[Mateusz Łukasik]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udevil"

 * Package name: udevil
 * Version : 0.4.1-1
 * Upstream Author : IgnorantGuru 
 * URL :  http://ignorantguru.github.com/udevil/
 * License : GPL-3+
 * Section : utils

  It builds those binary packages:

udevil - Mounts and unmounts removable devices and networks  
without a


  To access further information about this package, please visit the  
following URL:


  http://mentors.debian.net/package/udevil

  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x  
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/u/udevil/udevil_0.4.1-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

It's Initial upload.


  Regards,
Mateusz Łukasik


--
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/op.wt6o77lmifijsr@laptop

Re: Bug#703399: FS: udevil/0.4.1-1 ITP

[Sven Hoexter]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 09:15:33AM +0100, Mateusz Łukasik wrote:

Hi,

> 
> udevil - Mounts and unmounts removable devices and networks
> without a

I've to admint that I didn't follow the current way of mounting removal
devices in desktop enviroments but I'm still wondering what's the advantage
of udevil over tools like pmount?


Beside that the short description should start in lower case.
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-pkg-synopsis

Sven
-- 
We are what you say
We are not what you think
   [ Dead Sara - We are what you say ]


-- 
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/20130319091737.GB4547@garkbit

Debian Preseeding: prevent particular package from being installed

[Konrad Vrba]

I am using Debian preseeding for automated installations (from PXE)

in my preseed config file, I have the following line, to install only
the minimum number of packages:
  tasksel tasksel/first multiselect
  d-i base-installer/install-recommends boolean false

This however still installs some packages which I don't want. My question is:
  how does the installation script decide which packages will be installed?
  how can I modify this list?
  can I prevent specific package to be installed

or, is there some other Debian mailing list, which would be more
appropriate for my question?


-- 
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/CAF2Nc0z0TPqrKTZD_JdLTHXSOe=dbwpomhldjyeashbsnpm...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#702072: RFS: tilda/1.1.4-1 [ITA] New upload

[Sebastian Geiger]

I just uploaded the package again. I have added a comment explaining 
that I have run blhc to confirm that the hardening warning override in 
lintian is justified and also removed some commented out lines from 
debian/rules to make it more clean. Also I have commited all the changes 
to the git repository, to get it in sync with the actual source package. 
I would say the package is ready to be uploaded to experimental.


Kind Regards
Sebastian


--
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/51487cad.5060...@gmx.net

Build-Depends versioning and binary Depends versioning

[Antonio Ospite]

Hi,

for a package I am working on, I am setting versioned Build-Depends, to
avoid using newer libav versions which would break compilation, e.g.:

libavcodec-dev (<< 6:9)

Compilation under pbuilder for Sid goes fine, but the binary packages
are still allowed to be installed with newer libav binary packages:

 libavcodec53 (>= 6:0.8.3-1~) | libavcodec-extra-53 (>= 6:0.8.5)

As you can see I can still install the package on a system which has
libavcodec53 9.3-1 from experimental, as the binary dependency is
just greater than, the strictly minor one from the Build-Depends didn't
propagate to the binary packages.

Thinking about it I can see why this is happening: I specified the
Build-Depends for the -dev packages, not for the corresponding
libraries, but naively I thought the build system can figure out the
relationship between the two.

Should I restrict the Depends for the binary packages by hand in
debian/control? For example adding:

libavcodec53 (<< 6:9)

to the binary package I am interested in restricting?

For reference this is the debian/control file of the package:
http://git.ao2.it/libam7xxx.git/blob/6d2d8613958e1f0ef011e9d848426086caafe9db:/debian/control

The doubt is about the libam7xxx-bin package.

Tell me if you need more details or if I was not clear enough.

Thanks,
   Antonio

-- 
Antonio Ospite
http://ao2.it

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?


-- 
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/20130319161557.4c0f48a793d44da3f581b...@studenti.unina.it

Re: Build-Depends versioning and binary Depends versioning

[Andrey Rahmatullin]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0100, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> Compilation under pbuilder for Sid goes fine, but the binary packages
> are still allowed to be installed with newer libav binary packages:
> 
>libavcodec53 (>= 6:0.8.3-1~) | libavcodec-extra-53 (>= 6:0.8.5)
Of course, because it is expected that a binary built with a given library
version will work with all newer versions of that library having the same
soname.

> As you can see I can still install the package on a system which has
> libavcodec53 9.3-1 from experimental, as the binary dependency is
> just greater than, the strictly minor one from the Build-Depends didn't
> propagate to the binary packages.
Of course it didn't, there is no such mechanisms because there is no need
for them.

> Thinking about it I can see why this is happening: I specified the
> Build-Depends for the -dev packages, not for the corresponding
> libraries, but naively I thought the build system can figure out the
> relationship between the two.
It cannot and it would be strange if it did.

> Should I restrict the Depends for the binary packages by hand in
> debian/control?
Do you have any reasons to do that? Are you sure that the package will not
work with newer versions?

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Build-Depends versioning and binary Depends versioning

[Russ Allbery]

Antonio Ospite  writes:

> Should I restrict the Depends for the binary packages by hand in
> debian/control? For example adding:

>   libavcodec53 (<< 6:9)

> to the binary package I am interested in restricting?

Yes.  The shared library dependency information otherwise comes from
shlibs/symbols, which won't take into account restrictions on the build
dependency.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)   


-- 
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/87a9pziack@windlord.stanford.edu

Bug#703399: FS: udevil/0.4.1-1 ITP

[Justin B Rye]

Sven Hoexter wrote:
>> udevil - Mounts and unmounts removable devices and networks without a

Without... a safety net?  Oh, "without a password", via SUID.
 
> I've to admint that I didn't follow the current way of mounting removal
> devices in desktop enviroments but I'm still wondering what's the advantage
> of udevil over tools like pmount?
> 
> Beside that the short description should start in lower case.
> http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-pkg-synopsis

DevRef also recommends that it should be a noun phrase - in other
words something that could complete the sentence "The package udevil
provides a/an/the/some ..."

Upstream describes it as a "hassle-free replacement for udisks", which
would fit, though it's unclear to me what "hassle" there is in using
udisks.  Or for instance you could copy the synopsis for udisks and
make it something like:
 "udevil - alternative storage media interface"

-- 
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package


-- 
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/20130319171019.ga25...@xibalba.demon.co.uk

Re: Build-Depends versioning and binary Depends versioning

[Jakub Wilk]

* Antonio Ospite , 2013-03-19, 16:15:
for a package I am working on, I am setting versioned Build-Depends, to 
avoid using newer libav versions which would break compilation, e.g.:


libavcodec-dev (<< 6:9)

Compilation under pbuilder for Sid goes fine, but the binary packages 
are still allowed to be installed with newer libav binary packages:


 libavcodec53 (>= 6:0.8.3-1~) | libavcodec-extra-53 (>= 6:0.8.5)


A well-behaved shared library package won't break binary compatibility 
without changing package name. In fact, the package name has changed to 
libavcodec54. So nothing wrong with the dependency as far as I can tell.


--
Jakub Wilk


--
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/20130319175126.ga5...@jwilk.net

Bug#703394: [pkg-php-pear] Bug#703394: RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an interface to various online weather-services

[Thomas Goirand]

On 03/19/2013 03:20 PM, Prach Pongpanich wrote:
> dget -x 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-services-weather/php-services-weather_1.4.2-4.dsc

Uploaded.

Though I have noticed one tiny remaining glitch from the past.
debian/control Section: should be updated from web to php (which is the
new section for such a package).

Thanks for your contribution, salvaging old package like that that fell
into the QA team is really appreciated.

Cheers,

Thomas


-- 
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/5148ab0d.8040...@debian.org

Bug#703394: [pkg-php-pear] Bug#703394: RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an interface to various online weather-services

[Prach Pongpanich]

> Uploaded.
>
> Though I have noticed one tiny remaining glitch from the past.
> debian/control Section: should be updated from web to php (which is the
> new section for such a package).
>
> Thanks for your contribution, salvaging old package like that that fell
> into the QA team is really appreciated.

Thanks a lot, I will check more careful next time.

Cheers,

Prach


-- 
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/CAF=n8MJ+=tmjq-wqpxna7wz9wsuo2he+dpj4k4vrsfjfiwg...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#702072: RFS: tilda/1.1.4-1 [ITA] New upload

[Anton Gladky]

Hi Sebastian,

I asked you to clean debian/rules. See an attachment.

Anton

On 03/19/2013 03:56 PM, Sebastian Geiger wrote:
> I just uploaded the package again. I have added a comment explaining
> that I have run blhc to confirm that the hardening warning override in
> lintian is justified and also removed some commented out lines from
> debian/rules to make it more clean. Also I have commited all the changes
> to the git repository, to get it in sync with the actual source package.
> I would say the package is ready to be uploaded to experimental.
> 
> Kind Regards
> Sebastian
> 



tilda_1.1.4-1.debian.tar.gz
Description: application/gzip


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Build Debian packages for multiple architectures

[Andrii Senkovych]

Niels, Adam, thanks.

Do I understand correctly that the following workflow is sufficient?

1) developer uploads source package (generated with dpkg-buildpackage -S)
2) binary packages with together arch=all is performed on a single
architecture (using dpkg-buildpackage -b)
3) binary-only packages are built for other architectures (dpkg-buildpackage -B)
4) if the package builds successfull on all architectures — merge
*.changes file into a single one (using mergechanges) and all files
are uploaded to the repository

Thanks, I didn't know about mergechanges script.

-- 
Best regards,
Andrii Senkovych

2013/3/18 Niels Thykier :
> On 2013-03-18 18:15, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:17:01PM +0200, Andrii Senkovych wrote:
>>> Hello, debian-mentors
>>>
>>> I'm sorry in advance if this is the wrong list to ask.
>>>
>>> TL;DR: how to build and upload properly packages that provide
>>> both arch=all and arch=any binary packages without conflicts like
>>> "file already exists with different checksum" during upload
>>> stage?
>>
>>> 1) upload source package ond binary packages for one arch (this
>>> upload seems to include the packages with 'all' arch as well) 2)
>>> upload binary packages for all other architectures
>>
>>> So, the question is: how should I build packages for multiple
>>> architectures without such problems?
>>
>> dpkg-buildpackage -B
>>
>> This runs only the binary-arch target but not the rest.
>>
>
> Also, see mergechanges(1) from devscripts, which can you from signing
> several changes files.
>
> ~Niels
>
>
>
> --
> 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/51474d14.5040...@thykier.net
>


--
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/CAMS_SF+N7Vm4kOjC27i978dob7vK1xOp5f=zyÛSj_KsTXU=q...@mail.gmail.com

Bug#703460: RFS: cmyktool/0.1.6~pre1-1 [ITP]

[Markus Wanner]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cmyktool"

 * Package name: cmyktool
   Version : 0.1.6~pre1-1
   Upstream Author : Alastair M. Robinson (Black Five Imaging) 

 * URL : 
http://www.blackfiveimaging.co.uk/index.php?article=02Software%2F05CMYKTool
 * License : GPL-3
   Section : graphics

It builds those binary packages:

  cmyktool - colour-managed conversion of images between RGB and CMYK

To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

http://mentors.debian.net/package/cmyktool


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cmyktool/cmyktool_0.1.6~pre1-1.dsc

More information about CMYKTool can be obtained from 
http://www.blackfiveimaging.co.uk/.

Lintian gives a single warning about the missing manpage. I asked upstream 
about that.

Regards

Markus Wanner



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#702072: RFS: tilda/1.1.4-1 [ITA] New upload

[Lanoxx]

Hi Anton,

thanks a lot, that works very well. I had to remove the mkdir in the 
override_dh_auto_install though, otherwise I was getting an error.


When I build the package with pbuilder I get the following warning:

dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: package could avoid a useless dependency if 
debian/tilda/usr/bin/tilda was not linked against libatk-1.0.so.0 (it 
uses none of the library's symbols)
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: package could avoid a useless dependency if 
debian/tilda/usr/bin/tilda was not linked against libcairo.so.2 (it uses 
none of the library's symbols)
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: package could avoid a useless dependency if 
debian/tilda/usr/bin/tilda was not linked against libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 
(it uses none of the library's symbols)
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: package could avoid a useless dependency if 
debian/tilda/usr/bin/tilda was not linked against libcairo-gobject.so.2 
(it uses none of the library's symbols)


Do you know how to fix that?

Kind Regards
Sebastian

On 19/03/13 21:14, Anton Gladky wrote:

Hi Sebastian,

I asked you to clean debian/rules. See an attachment.

Anton

On 03/19/2013 03:56 PM, Sebastian Geiger wrote:

I just uploaded the package again. I have added a comment explaining
that I have run blhc to confirm that the hardening warning override in
lintian is justified and also removed some commented out lines from
debian/rules to make it more clean. Also I have commited all the changes
to the git repository, to get it in sync with the actual source package.
I would say the package is ready to be uploaded to experimental.

Kind Regards
Sebastian




--
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/5148e5fe.2090...@gmx.net

Re: Build Debian packages for multiple architectures

[Adam Borowski]

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:06:55PM +0200, Andrii Senkovych wrote:
> Niels, Adam, thanks.
> 
> Do I understand correctly that the following workflow is sufficient?
> 
> 1) developer uploads source package (generated with dpkg-buildpackage -S)
> 2) binary packages with together arch=all is performed on a single
> architecture (using dpkg-buildpackage -b)
> 3) binary-only packages are built for other architectures (dpkg-buildpackage 
> -B)
> 4) if the package builds successfull on all architectures — merge
> *.changes file into a single one (using mergechanges) and all files
> are uploaded to the repository

You don't need mergechanges when uploading to an own reprepro repository:
you can put architectures in as they build.

-- 
ᛊᚨᚾᛁᛏᚣ᛫ᛁᛊ᛫ᚠᛟᚱ᛫ᚦᛖ᛫ᚹᛖᚨᚲ


-- 
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/20130320011440.gb20...@angband.pl

Bug#703394: marked as done (RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an interface to various online weather-services)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 20 Mar 2013 04:22:30 +
with message-id 
and subject line closing RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an 
interface to various online weather-services
has caused the Debian Bug report #703394,
regarding RFS: php-services-weather/1.4.2-4 [ITA] -- acts as an interface to 
various online weather-services
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
703394: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=703394
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "php-services-weather"

 * Package name: php-services-weather
   Version : 1.4.2-4
   Upstream Author : Alexander Wirtz 
 * URL : http://pear.php.net/package/Services_Weather/
 * License : BSD-3-clause
   Section : web

  It builds those binary packages:

php-services-weather - acts as an interface to various online 
weather-services

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/php-services-weather


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-services-weather/php-services-weather_1.4.2-4.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  php-services-weather (1.4.2-4) experimental; urgency=low

  * Now using PKG-PHP-PEAR team as maintainer and
add myself as uploader (Closes: #529687).
  * Switching to pkg-php-tools and dh 8 sequencer
- Add pkg-php-tools to Build-Depends and drop {dh-make-php,cdbs}.
- Add php-pear in Build-Depends-Indep.
- Add ${misc:Depends} to Depends.
- Rewrite debian/rules.
  * Update copyright file to version 1.0 format.
  * Update debian/watch, thanks to Bart Martens.
  * Add Vcs-* fields in debian/control.
  * Add debian/gbp.conf.
  * Switching to 3.0 (quilt) source format.
  * Bump debhelper compat to level 9.
  * Bump Standards-Version: 3.9.4.

  I ignore a new upstream version, please see [1]

  [1] http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=19860

  Regards,
   Prach Pongpanich
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package php-services-weather version 1.4.2-4 is in experimental now.
http://packages.qa.debian.org/php-services-weather--- End Message ---

Bug#703473: RFS: php-cache-lite/1.7.15-1 [ITA] -- Fast and lite data cache system

[Prach Pongpanich]

Package: sponsorship-requests
  Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "php-cache-lite"

 * Package name: php-cache-lite
   Version : 1.7.15-1
   Upstream Author : Markus Tacker, Fabien Marty
 * URL : http://pear.php.net/package/Cache_Lite
 * License : LGPL-2.1+
   Section : php

  It builds those binary packages:

php-cache-lite - Fast and lite data cache system

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/php-cache-lite


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-cache-lite/php-cache-lite_1.7.15-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

php-cache-lite (1.7.15-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * New upstream release (Closes: #620255)
  * Now using PKG-PHP-PEAR team as maintainer and
add myself as uploader (Closes: #569465)
  * Switch to pkg-php-tools and dh-sequencer
- Add pkg-php-tools to Build-Depends
- Add php-pear to Build-Depends-Indep
- Add php-pear and ${misc:Depends} to Depends
- Drop phpapi-* in Depends
- Drop debian/dirs
- Rewrite debian/rules
  * Switch to section 'php' instead of 'web'
  * Update copyright file to version 1.0 format
  * Add Vcs-* fields in debian/control
  * Add debian/gbp.conf
  * Update debian/watch file
  * Bump debhelper compat to level 9
  * Bump Standards-Version: 3.9.4


  Regards,
   Prach Pongpanich


-- 
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/20130320045113.ga21...@gmail.com

Re: Debian Preseeding: prevent particular package from being installed

[Charles Plessy]

Le Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:56:19AM +0100, Konrad Vrba a écrit :
> I am using Debian preseeding for automated installations (from PXE)
> 
> in my preseed config file, I have the following line, to install only
> the minimum number of packages:
>   tasksel tasksel/first multiselect
>   d-i base-installer/install-recommends boolean false
> 
> This however still installs some packages which I don't want. My question is:
>   how does the installation script decide which packages will be installed?
>   how can I modify this list?
>   can I prevent specific package to be installed
> 
> or, is there some other Debian mailing list, which would be more
> appropriate for my question?

Hi Konrad,

on the debian-b...@lists.debian.org there are people who are the most likely to
be able to answer your question, but before asking there it may be useful to
ask first on a debian user mailing list, where there may be people experienced
with preseeding as well.

I am not sure if it will work, but have you tried d-i base-installer/excludes ?

Have a nice day,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
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/20130320060449.ge30...@falafel.plessy.net