Re: 'RFP', 'wnpp', 'ITP',...
Hi! On 14.10.2005, at 15:50, Rakotomandimby Mihamina wrote: I saw many advices to use ITP, wnpp, RFP,... http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/#l1 describes longly what does those terms stand for. Must I use them? Please do so. As you are preparing yum without an ITP somebody else might also start packaging it. Best practice is filing a wnpp ITP Bug when starting to prepare a new package for debian. This way maybe you'll get comments about package descriptions, license troube and so on. cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 f: +49 89 1488 262248 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITA: zed -- Powerful, multipurpose, configurable text
hello sergio! On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 04:40:08PM +0200, Sergio Suarez wrote: > I have a new package for zed (1.0.5-9) here: > > htpp://80.34.20.197 > > and I need a sponsor for check it and upload it --19:45:26-- http://80.34.20.197/zed_1.0.5.orig.tar.gz => `zed_1.0.5.orig.tar.gz' Connecting to 80.34.20.197:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden you should fix the permissions first :) cu, ms -- ---------- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - --
Re: RFS: sponsor for pftp package.
Hi Francisco! On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 12:12:56AM +0100, Francisco García wrote: > The debian package called pftp is actually orphan, > (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=206119). > > I have package this software, and i'm looking for a sponsor for it. i just looked at your url below and have some things to complain: - don't build it as a native package, use orig.tar.gz and diff.gz - use Standards-Version: 3.6.1 instead of 3.5.8 - fixup debian/copyright +It was downloaded from http://www.pfpt.de s/pftpt/pftpd/ - fixup debian/init.d +# skeleton example file to build /etc/init.d/ scripts. well.. you know + #reload) you know that too - fixup debian/rules +# dh_installpam remove anything you don't need why didn't you use pftp-1.1.6-0.1 from pool/main/p/pftp as base? what's about bug #110358 ? does the bug exist? is the patch valid? why not using it? > I hope that someone wants to sponsor it. well.. in this current state.. probably not. fix up the stuff above and i'll take another look on it. > Thank you. welcome. btw: take a closer look on the new-maintainer-guide. there are a lot of hints about things you got a little bit wrong. btw2: a name like '.orig-1.tar.gz' should ring bells awaking tut-anch-amun or someone old like him :) btw3: if you need a further hint for some of the things above go ahead and write me on- or offlist, just as you like. cu, ms -- -- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgpKAzwr77AbP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: pdfmerge
Hi Philipp! On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:33:39AM +0100, Philipp Gortan wrote: > >The proper place for the script (after doing things right) is > >ghostscript upstream. Take a look at pdf2ps and try to get your program > >next to that. There's no reason to produce packages for a one liner. > ok, so we know the opinion of Thomas, what does the rest of you think? > Should it go into gs-common and the like? yes. > Or is it package-able on its own? well.. a 1 line shell-script doesn't require an own package IMO even i wouldn't come up with the gs-commandline i don't think pdfmerge should be handled a different way than ps2pdf and the other oneliners. cu, ms -- ---------- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgpJRLfPh0iPO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS(3): aespipe -- encryption tool
Hi Max! On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 11:56:07PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote: > I'm still trying to find a sponsor for aespipe, a small encryption > tool that understands the format of loop-aes encrypted disk images. > It can decrypt these images and encrypt existing partitions for use > with loop-aes. It's also useful as a generic crypto pipe. > > deb http://hinterhof.net/~max/debian ./ --10:19:34-- http://hinterhof.net/%7Emax/debian/aespipe_2.2b-2_i386.changes => `aespipe_2.2b-2_i386.changes' Resolving hinterhof.net... 80.190.104.25 Connecting to hinterhof.net[80.190.104.25]:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden I'll sponsor you for aespipe. Send me a private mail when the .changes file is wgetable. cu, ms -- ------ - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgpWDSb3dgTLf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: atool (outdated, unmaintained)
Hi Stephane! On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:51:44PM +0200, Stephane Jourdois wrote: > My gpg key is already signed by a debian dev. Fine. > So I'm looking for a sponsor to help me in the new-maintainer process. I'll sponsor your 'atool'. Send it to me via private mail. cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi Kevin! On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 08:18:29PM -0400, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > I am seeking a sponsor for viewglob. Send me private email. I'll sponsor you. Remarks: - md5sum of orig.tar.gz you provide differs from upstream tar.gz [1] e8ffcb70a2635d88dd93505a877d31fe viewglob-0.8.4.tar.gz - W: viewglob: menu-command-not-in-package /usr/lib/menu/viewglob:2 x-terminal-emulator - I: viewglob: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/viewglob.1.gz:40 - diff.gz please use dpatch to manage paches on upstream source 1. http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/viewglob/viewglob-0.8.4.tar.gz -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 07:26:56PM +0200, Nicolas Boullis wrote: > >please use dpatch to manage paches on upstream source > Since when is the use of dpatch mandatory? It was never and hopefully will never be. I simply like dpatch. cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi! On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 07:04:52PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > ... or indeed any such obfuscated patching system ... Why do you call dpatch 'obfuscated' ? Before I used it for one of my packages i quickly checked the code and it simply works. No big fancy stuff etc. Did I miss a part? cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688
Re: RFS(3): aespipe -- encryption tool
Hi Max! On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 11:56:07PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote: > I'm still trying to find a sponsor for aespipe, a small encryption > tool that understands the format of loop-aes encrypted disk images. > It can decrypt these images and encrypt existing partitions for use > with loop-aes. It's also useful as a generic crypto pipe. > > deb http://hinterhof.net/~max/debian ./ --10:19:34-- http://hinterhof.net/%7Emax/debian/aespipe_2.2b-2_i386.changes => `aespipe_2.2b-2_i386.changes' Resolving hinterhof.net... 80.190.104.25 Connecting to hinterhof.net[80.190.104.25]:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden I'll sponsor you for aespipe. Send me a private mail when the .changes file is wgetable. cu, ms -- ------ - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: atool (outdated, unmaintained)
Hi Stephane! On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:51:44PM +0200, Stephane Jourdois wrote: > My gpg key is already signed by a debian dev. Fine. > So I'm looking for a sponsor to help me in the new-maintainer process. I'll sponsor your 'atool'. Send it to me via private mail. cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi Kevin! On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 08:18:29PM -0400, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > I am seeking a sponsor for viewglob. Send me private email. I'll sponsor you. Remarks: - md5sum of orig.tar.gz you provide differs from upstream tar.gz [1] e8ffcb70a2635d88dd93505a877d31fe viewglob-0.8.4.tar.gz - W: viewglob: menu-command-not-in-package /usr/lib/menu/viewglob:2 x-terminal-emulator - I: viewglob: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/viewglob.1.gz:40 - diff.gz please use dpatch to manage paches on upstream source 1. http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/viewglob/viewglob-0.8.4.tar.gz -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 07:26:56PM +0200, Nicolas Boullis wrote: > >please use dpatch to manage paches on upstream source > Since when is the use of dpatch mandatory? It was never and hopefully will never be. I simply like dpatch. cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: RFS: viewglob -- A graphical display of directories referenced at the shell prompt
Hi! On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 07:04:52PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > ... or indeed any such obfuscated patching system ... Why do you call dpatch 'obfuscated' ? Before I used it for one of my packages i quickly checked the code and it simply works. No big fancy stuff etc. Did I miss a part? cu, ms -- n: Michael Schiansky (geek / nerd / dd) e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] m: +49 163 49 33 688 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITA: zed -- Powerful, multipurpose, configurable text
hello sergio! On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 04:40:08PM +0200, Sergio Suarez wrote: > I have a new package for zed (1.0.5-9) here: > > htpp://80.34.20.197 > > and I need a sponsor for check it and upload it --19:45:26-- http://80.34.20.197/zed_1.0.5.orig.tar.gz => `zed_1.0.5.orig.tar.gz' Connecting to 80.34.20.197:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden you should fix the permissions first :) cu, ms -- ---------- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: sponsor for pftp package.
Hi Francisco! On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 12:12:56AM +0100, Francisco García wrote: > The debian package called pftp is actually orphan, > (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=206119). > > I have package this software, and i'm looking for a sponsor for it. i just looked at your url below and have some things to complain: - don't build it as a native package, use orig.tar.gz and diff.gz - use Standards-Version: 3.6.1 instead of 3.5.8 - fixup debian/copyright +It was downloaded from http://www.pfpt.de s/pftpt/pftpd/ - fixup debian/init.d +# skeleton example file to build /etc/init.d/ scripts. well.. you know + #reload) you know that too - fixup debian/rules +# dh_installpam remove anything you don't need why didn't you use pftp-1.1.6-0.1 from pool/main/p/pftp as base? what's about bug #110358 ? does the bug exist? is the patch valid? why not using it? > I hope that someone wants to sponsor it. well.. in this current state.. probably not. fix up the stuff above and i'll take another look on it. > Thank you. welcome. btw: take a closer look on the new-maintainer-guide. there are a lot of hints about things you got a little bit wrong. btw2: a name like '.orig-1.tar.gz' should ring bells awaking tut-anch-amun or someone old like him :) btw3: if you need a further hint for some of the things above go ahead and write me on- or offlist, just as you like. cu, ms -- -- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: pdfmerge
Hi Philipp! On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 12:33:39AM +0100, Philipp Gortan wrote: > >The proper place for the script (after doing things right) is > >ghostscript upstream. Take a look at pdf2ps and try to get your program > >next to that. There's no reason to produce packages for a one liner. > ok, so we know the opinion of Thomas, what does the rest of you think? > Should it go into gs-common and the like? yes. > Or is it package-able on its own? well.. a 1 line shell-script doesn't require an own package IMO even i wouldn't come up with the gs-commandline i don't think pdfmerge should be handled a different way than ps2pdf and the other oneliners. cu, ms -- ---------- - Michael Schiansky - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
