Bug#741731: RFS: osmpbf/1.3.3-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "osmpbf" Package name: osmpbf Version : 1.3.3-1 Upstream Author : Scott A. Crosby URL : http://github.com/scrosby/OSM-binary License : LGPL-3+ Section : java It builds those binary packages: libosmpbf-dev - C headers for OpenStreetMap PBF file format libosmpbf-java - Java access library for OpenStreetMap PBF file format osmpbf-bin - OpenStreetMap PBF file format library - tools To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/osmpbf Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/osmpbf/osmpbf_1.3.3-1.dsc More information about OSMPBF can be obtained from http://github.com/scrosby/OSM-binary. Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release. * Build depend on openjdk-7-jdk or java6-sdk. Java 6 or higher is required to support @Override for interface methods, Java 5 only supports @Override for methods overriding a superclass method. Regards, Sebastiaan Couwenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140316120754.12202.72154.report...@osiris.linuxminded.xs4all.nl
Bug#733578: hwinfo/21.0-1 needs updates / FTBFS of libx86emu
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 05:53:41PM (+0100), Tomasz Buchert wrote: […] > I pushed the restricted version of libx86emu to the git repository. > > Both libx86emu and hwinfo build lintian-clean in my jessie pbuilder (well, > excepting debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature, to be fair). Hwinfo > debian/control > must be updated if you agree what I said above. Hi, I completely agree with you Tomasz! I've just uploaded a new version of libx86emu on mentors. It build fine in sid: $ curl http://pub.sebian.fr/pub/libx86emu_1.4-2_amd64-20140316-1301.build @Johann or @Vincent, if you agree, can you sponsor this upload ? Thanks in advance! Seb -- Sebastien Badia -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140316122241.ga23...@sebian.fr
Bug#741857: RFS: cmatrix/1.2a-5
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cmatrix" * Package name: cmatrix Version : 1.2a-5 Upstream Author : Chris Allegretta. * URL : http://www.asty.org/cmatrix/ * License : GPL Section : misc It builds those binary packages: cmatrix - simulates the display from "The Matrix" cmatrix-xfont - X11 font for cmatrix To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cmatrix Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cmatrix/cmatrix_1.2a-5.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Corrected package description. Closes: #711724 * Update Standards-Version to 3.9.5. Regards. -- Diego F. Durán | http://www.goedi.net GPG: C225 945F A4D2 D853 556A 0B40 93AD BF5D FA33 2496 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
pbuilder, convert svg->png
hi,
when setting up pbuilder on a sid VM as mentioned here:
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/build.en.html#pbuilder
and then running [1]:
$ gbp buildpackage -us -uc
followed by:
$ BUILDER=pbuilder git-pbuilder
Question 1:
I learned these commands by heart. Is there a good tutorial/blog/... for
running any chroot (pbuilder, cowbuilder, sbuild...) from a git repo
(using git-buildpackage toolset), so that I understand this?
When the build calls:
convert -background none -geometry !48x48 \
freeplane_framework/script/freeplane.svg 48x48/freeplane.png
it fails most probably because librsvg2-bin is not installed (it
contains /usr/bin/rsvg-convert:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/librsvg2-bin/filelist):
-
mkdir 48x48
convert -background none -geometry !48x48
freeplane_framework/script/freeplane.svg 48x48/freeplane.png
convert.im6: delegate failed `"rsvg-convert" -o "%o" "%i"' @
error/delegate.c/InvokeDelegate/1065.
convert.im6: unable to open image `/tmp/magick-EQZwa67o': No such file or
directory @ error/blob.c/OpenBlob/2638.
convert.im6: unable to open file `/tmp/magick-EQZwa67o': No such file or
directory @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/583.
convert.im6: no images defined `48x48/freeplane.png' @
error/convert.c/ConvertImageCommand/3044.
make: *** [build] Error 1
-
Question 2:
- why is librsvg2-bin not installed on sid?? They contain the same
imagemagick version, and both have librsvg2-2 2.40.0-1 installed which
"Suggest" librsvg2-bin
=> I guess the solution is to add librsvg2-bin to build-depends?
Question 3:
- why does a local build on sid ("gbp buildpackage -us -uc") work in
this case? I guess my pbuilder setup is broken?
Many Thanks and Best Regards,
--
Felix Natter
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87k3bu6s0s@bitburger.home.felix
Bug#741641: marked as done (RFS: qgis/2.2.0-1~exp2)
Your message dated Sun, 16 Mar 2014 16:30:59 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: qgis/2.2.0-1~exp2 has caused the Debian Bug report #741641, regarding RFS: qgis/2.2.0-1~exp2 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.) -- 741641: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=741641 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 "qgis" Package name: qgis Version : 2.2.0-1~exp2 Upstream Author : qgis-develo...@lists.osgeo.org URL : http://qgis.org/ License : GPL-2+ Section : science It builds those binary packages: libqgis-analysis2.2.0- QGIS - shared libraries (libqgis-analysis) libqgis-core2.2.0- QGIS - shared libraries (libqgis-core) libqgis-gui2.2.0 - QGIS - shared libraries (libqgis-gui) libqgis-networkanalysis2.2.0 - QGIS - shared libraries (libqgis-networkanalysis) libqgisgrass2.2.0- QGIS - shared libraries (libqgisgrass) libqgispython2.2.0 - QGIS - shared libraries (libqgispython) libqgissqlanyconnection2.2.0 - QGIS - shared libraries (libqgissqlanyconnection) libqgis-dev - QGIS - development files python-qgis - Python bindings to QGIS python-qgis-common - Python bindings to QGIS - architecture-independent files qgis - Geographic Information System (GIS) qgis-api-doc - QGIS API documentation qgis-common - QGIS - architecture-independent data qgis-mapserver - QGIS mapserver qgis-plugin-globe- OSG globe plugin for QGIS qgis-plugin-globe-common - OSG globe plugin for QGIS - architecture-independent data qgis-plugin-grass- GRASS plugin for QGIS qgis-plugin-grass-common - GRASS plugin for QGIS - architecture-independent data qgis-providers - collection of data providers to QGIS qgis-providers-common- collection of data providers to QGIS - architecture-independent files qgis-sqlanywhere - QGIS sql anywhere plugin and provider To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/qgis Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qgis/qgis_2.2.0-1~exp2.dsc More information about QGIS can be obtained from http://qgis.org/. Changes since the last upload: * Add patches for changes from upstream release_2.2 branch. * Disable doxygen during build, run doxygen in build-indep target. * Don't install world.tif, symlink the osgEarth file instead. Regards, Sebastiaan Couwenberg --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package qgis version 2.2.0-1~exp2 is in experimental now. http://packages.qa.debian.org/qgis--- End Message ---
Re: Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source
not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still need my input. >> Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53: > A local adt-run using an unstable chroot or qemu works, whether run from the > built or unbuilt source tree. But the tests fail on ci.debian.net; as far as > I can tell it doesn't try to build the source package before running the > tests, so they fail (see > http://ci.debian.net/data/unstable-amd64/packages/libe/libevdev/2014-03-14.log > for the last run). This is related to the way that the version of debci on ci.debian.net invokes adt-run. I am about to deploy a new version that does The Right Thing (TM) and should probably fix the issue you are seeing. That said ... > Jakub Wilk >> ==> debian/tests/control <== >> Tests: check >> Restrictions: needs-root build-needed rw-build-tree >> Depends: @builddeps@ > > It's probably unrelated to the problem you're observing, but this > Depends is certainly incorrect. The specification says that “tests > must test the INSTALLED version of the program”, but there is nothing > in Depends to ensure that the program is in fact installed. ... this is an important point. You have to make sure that the any tests will run against the code that is _installed_ and not against the code that was just built. Also, it would be really nice on the test infrastructure if you could build strictly the bits you need to the tests instead of building everything. e.g. the ideal would be build _only_ the unit test files (assuming they need to be built) and not all the other code (since you are supposed to run the tests against the installed version of the package) HTH -- Antonio Terceiro signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#741857: RFS: cmatrix/1.2a-5
* Diego Fernández Durán , 2014-03-16, 16:41:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cmatrix/cmatrix_1.2a-5.dsc
What does it mean that it "can scroll lines all at the same rate"?
This change is undocumented:
--- cmatrix-1.2a/debian/source/format 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ cmatrix-1.2a/debian/source/format 2014-03-16 19:21:23.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+1.0
This change is also undocumented:
-Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
+Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
This change is undocumented and wrong:
-Depends: ${misc:Depends}
+Depends: ${misc:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
Have you forwarded Debian patches upstream?
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140316185411.ga7...@jwilk.net
Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:41:15 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still > need my input. Noted, thanks for noticing :-). > >> Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53: > > A local adt-run using an unstable chroot or qemu works, whether run from > > the built or unbuilt source tree. But the tests fail on ci.debian.net; as > > far as I can tell it doesn't try to build the source package before > > running the tests, so they fail (see > > http://ci.debian.net/data/unstable-amd64/packages/libe/libevdev/2014-03-14.log > > for the last run). > > This is related to the way that the version of debci on ci.debian.net > invokes adt-run. I am about to deploy a new version that does The Right > Thing (TM) and should probably fix the issue you are seeing. Excellent! > > Jakub Wilk > >> ==> debian/tests/control <== > >> Tests: check > >> Restrictions: needs-root build-needed rw-build-tree > >> Depends: @builddeps@ > > > > It's probably unrelated to the problem you're observing, but this > > Depends is certainly incorrect. The specification says that “tests > > must test the INSTALLED version of the program”, but there is nothing > > in Depends to ensure that the program is in fact installed. > > ... this is an important point. You have to make sure that the any tests > will run against the code that is _installed_ and not against the code > that was just built. Also, it would be really nice on the test > infrastructure if you could build strictly the bits you need to the > tests instead of building everything. e.g. the ideal would be build > _only_ the unit test files (assuming they need to be built) and not all > the other code (since you are supposed to run the tests against the > installed version of the package) Indeed, thanks to Jakub for pointing that out. I've reworked the upstream tests to build using the installed package. Your point concerning building only the required bits effectively means that we shouldn't use "build-needed" in the tests/control "Restrictions" field, but manually control the build only for the purposes of running the tests, am I right? Regards, Stephen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: > On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:41:15 -0300, Antonio Terceiro > wrote: > > not subscribed to debian-mentors, please Cc: me explicitly if you still > > need my input. > > Noted, thanks for noticing :-). Thanks to Jakub for pinging me on IRC about your email. :) > > >> Stephen Kitt , 2014-03-15, 14:53: > > > A local adt-run using an unstable chroot or qemu works, whether run from > > > the built or unbuilt source tree. But the tests fail on ci.debian.net; as > > > far as I can tell it doesn't try to build the source package before > > > running the tests, so they fail (see > > > http://ci.debian.net/data/unstable-amd64/packages/libe/libevdev/2014-03-14.log > > > for the last run). > > > > This is related to the way that the version of debci on ci.debian.net > > invokes adt-run. I am about to deploy a new version that does The Right > > Thing (TM) and should probably fix the issue you are seeing. > > Excellent! > > > > Jakub Wilk > > >> ==> debian/tests/control <== Tests: check Restrictions: > > >> needs-root build-needed rw-build-tree Depends: @builddeps@ > > > > > > It's probably unrelated to the problem you're observing, but this > > > Depends is certainly incorrect. The specification says that “tests > > > must test the INSTALLED version of the program”, but there is > > > nothing in Depends to ensure that the program is in fact > > > installed. > > > > ... this is an important point. You have to make sure that the any > > tests will run against the code that is _installed_ and not against > > the code that was just built. Also, it would be really nice on the > > test infrastructure if you could build strictly the bits you need to > > the tests instead of building everything. e.g. the ideal would be > > build _only_ the unit test files (assuming they need to be built) > > and not all the other code (since you are supposed to run the tests > > against the installed version of the package) > > Indeed, thanks to Jakub for pointing that out. I've reworked the > upstream tests to build using the installed package. > > Your point concerning building only the required bits effectively > means that we shouldn't use "build-needed" in the tests/control > "Restrictions" field, but manually control the build only for the > purposes of running the tests, am I right? most probably, yes. It's always a compromise. Sometimes it's reasonably easy to patch the upstream test suite to make it not expect locally-built binaries, not use local includes etc. Sometimes it may be a lot harder, so YMMV. -- Antonio Terceiro signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#741857: RFS: cmatrix/1.2a-5
I've uploaded again the package to mentors solving this issues:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/cmatrix
New changelog:
* Corrected package description. Closes: #711724
* Update Standards-Version to 3.9.5
* Add ${misc:Depends} to cmatrix binary package Depends
* Set source format to 1.0
> What does it mean that it "can scroll lines all at the same rate"?
>
I've changed the whole description to be clearer.
> This change is undocumented:
>
> >--- cmatrix-1.2a/debian/source/format1970-01-01 01:00:00.0
> >+0100
> >+++ cmatrix-1.2a/debian/source/format2014-03-16 19:21:23.0
> >+0100
> >@@ -0,0 +1 @@
> >+1.0
Documented.
>
> This change is also undocumented:
>
> >-Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
> >+Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
>
Documented.
> This change is undocumented and wrong:
>
> >-Depends: ${misc:Depends}
> >+Depends: ${misc:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
>
Deleted duplicate entry.
> Have you forwarded Debian patches upstream?
>
I haven't done any change to the original source code. Every change is
to Debian control files that were not present upstream. Must I summit a
patch of these upstream?
Thanks.
--
Diego F. Durán | http://www.goedi.net
GPG: C225 945F A4D2 D853 556A 0B40 93AD BF5D FA33 2496
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#741857: RFS: cmatrix/1.2a-5
* Diego Fernández Durán , 2014-03-16, 22:16: Have you forwarded Debian patches upstream? I haven't done any change to the original source code. Maybe not you, but somebody did: $ lsdiff -z --exclude '*/debian/*' cmatrix_1.2a-5.diff.gz cmatrix-1.2a/cmatrix.1 cmatrix-1.2a/cmatrix.c I know that cmatrix upstream isn't particularly active, but I would try poking them anyway. (I recently prodded an upstream whose last release was in 2003. And it turned out they are alive, and promised to make another release soon. Who would have thought?) -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140316220509.ga1...@jwilk.net
Re: DEP8 tests using the built package source
(Hi Ian, I'm adding you to the discussion since I'm talking about changes to DEP8. I've snipped the exchanges but I hope you can get the gist of it without needing to spend time looking anything else up!) On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:39:20 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: > > On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 15:41:15 -0300, Antonio Terceiro > > wrote: > > > ... this is an important point. You have to make sure that the any > > > tests will run against the code that is _installed_ and not against > > > the code that was just built. Also, it would be really nice on the > > > test infrastructure if you could build strictly the bits you need to > > > the tests instead of building everything. e.g. the ideal would be > > > build _only_ the unit test files (assuming they need to be built) > > > and not all the other code (since you are supposed to run the tests > > > against the installed version of the package) > > > > Indeed, thanks to Jakub for pointing that out. I've reworked the > > upstream tests to build using the installed package. > > > > Your point concerning building only the required bits effectively > > means that we shouldn't use "build-needed" in the tests/control > > "Restrictions" field, but manually control the build only for the > > purposes of running the tests, am I right? > > most probably, yes. > > It's always a compromise. Sometimes it's reasonably easy to patch the > upstream test suite to make it not expect locally-built binaries, not > use local includes etc. Sometimes it may be a lot harder, so YMMV. Right, and in this particular instance it's not particularly difficult. What bothers me is that the current DEP8 spec says that packages can rely on having their source tree in the built state by stating "Restrictions: build-needed", but effectively that imposes too much of a burden on the testing infrastructure. (That's not a complaint, I don't think we should require another buildd network to run tests, at least not until we've got as much test code as binary-targeted source code.) It's the kind of expectation that makes sense in a "traditional" CI setting (e.g. Jenkins with Maven for Java projects, where the project is built and its tests run in the same environment), but with DEP8's aim of testing the installed binaries it seems less useful to me. Wouldn't it make sense to change DEP8 to encourage building whatever is strictly required for the tests, and perhaps drop "build-needed" altogether? Regards, Stephen signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: pbuilder, convert svg->png
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Felix Natter wrote:
> Question 1:
> I learned these commands by heart. Is there a good tutorial/blog/... for
> running any chroot (pbuilder, cowbuilder, sbuild...) from a git repo
> (using git-buildpackage toolset), so that I understand this?
There are several guides that use git, perhaps one of them covers what
you want. In general, git packaging workflows are widely varied and
completely orthogonal to how you build using
pbuilder/cowbuilder/sbuild. If you can generate a source package from
your git repository then you will be compatible with all the chroot
building systems and if you can't then you won't be compatible with
Debian at all.
https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit
https://wiki.debian.org/GitPackaging
https://wiki.debian.org/GitPackagingWorkflow
https://wiki.debian.org/?action=fullsearch&value=Git&titlesearch=Titles
> Question 2:
>
> - why is librsvg2-bin not installed on sid?? They contain the same
> imagemagick version, and both have librsvg2-2 2.40.0-1 installed which
> "Suggest" librsvg2-bin
> => I guess the solution is to add librsvg2-bin to build-depends?
The correct thing to do is to build-depend on librsvg2-bin since your
package uses it during the build.
> Question 3:
> - why does a local build on sid ("gbp buildpackage -us -uc") work in
> this case? I guess my pbuilder setup is broken?
I guess you have librsvg2-bin already installed on your main system
but nothing installed in the chroot depends on it.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/caktje6erd-rv70vnwjj8rpit1rvo59m4e-j04r12een17aw...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#741731: marked as done (RFS: osmpbf/1.3.3-1)
Your message dated Mon, 17 Mar 2014 04:25:28 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: osmpbf/1.3.3-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #741731, regarding RFS: osmpbf/1.3.3-1 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.) -- 741731: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=741731 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 "osmpbf" Package name: osmpbf Version : 1.3.3-1 Upstream Author : Scott A. Crosby URL : http://github.com/scrosby/OSM-binary License : LGPL-3+ Section : java It builds those binary packages: libosmpbf-dev - C headers for OpenStreetMap PBF file format libosmpbf-java - Java access library for OpenStreetMap PBF file format osmpbf-bin - OpenStreetMap PBF file format library - tools To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/osmpbf Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/osmpbf/osmpbf_1.3.3-1.dsc More information about OSMPBF can be obtained from http://github.com/scrosby/OSM-binary. Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release. * Build depend on openjdk-7-jdk or java6-sdk. Java 6 or higher is required to support @Override for interface methods, Java 5 only supports @Override for methods overriding a superclass method. Regards, Sebastiaan Couwenberg --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package osmpbf version 1.3.3-1 is in unstable now. http://packages.qa.debian.org/osmpbf--- End Message ---
Bug#728105: marked as done (RFS: libharu/2.2.1-2)
Your message dated Mon, 17 Mar 2014 04:25:30 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: libharu/2.2.1-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #728105, regarding RFS: libharu/2.2.1-2 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.) -- 728105: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=728105 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libharu" * Package name: libharu Version : 2.2.1-2 Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : http://libharu.org/ * License : zlib Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libhpdf-2.2.1 - C library for generating pdf files libhpdf-dev - C library for generating pdf files (development files) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/libharu Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libh/libharu/libharu_2.2.1-2.dsc Changes since previous version in the archive: libharu (2.2.1-2) unstable; urgency=low [ Johan Van de Wauw ] * Bump standards version * Fix copyright file formatting * Support huge fonts (Closes: #726069) * Autoreconf to support recent architectures(Closes: #727409) -- Johan Van de Wauw Sun, 27 Oct 2013 18:07:05 +0100 Or check in git: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/libharu.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/debian Regards, Johan Van de Wauw --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package libharu has been removed from mentors.--- End Message ---
Re: pbuilder, convert svg->png
Felix Natter writes: > When the build calls: > convert -background none -geometry !48x48 \ > freeplane_framework/script/freeplane.svg 48x48/freeplane.png Since imagemagick is just calling it anyway, suggest upstream use rsvg-convert directly, avoiding a gratuitous Build-Depends: imagemagick. rsvg-convert --width 48 --height 48 --output $@ $^ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87a9cpxqgf@gmail.com
