Re: RFS: zynaddsubfx
On Dec 22, 2007 9:38 AM, Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > tim wrote: > > Has anyone pinged Eduardo recently? This is an important package, which > > needs proper maintainance. The upload should probably be sponsored via > > debian-multimedia rather than QA. Opinions, Offers? :) > > Its in no way important, not even near to it. Its priority extra, so > lowest possible priority. I believe tim mean that it was important for music-producing users, rather than important in the sense of package priorities. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: kmfl-keyboards-mywin
On Dec 15, 2007 4:56 AM, Keith Stribley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "kmfl-keyboards-mywin". ---| Stuff that should be fixed before this gets uploaded: scim-kmfl-imengine needs to enter Debian: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/12/threads.html#00100 ---| Other fixes that would be nice Need to close #456317 in the changelog like this: * Initial release (Closes: #456317) Add a homepage: http://wiki.debian.org/HomepageFieldHOWTO Remove commented out parts of debian/rules that are not needed. Don't call dh_* commands that are not needed (dh_examples) debian/README.Debian should be removed since it contains no useful information. Fix these lintian and linda warnings: W: kmfl-keyboards-mywin source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.7.2 (current is 3.7.3) W: kmfl-keyboards-mywin: copyright-contains-dh_make-todo-boilerplate W: kmfl-keyboards-mywin: unknown-section utilities W: kmfl-keyboards-mywin: new-package-should-close-itp-bug W: kmfl-keyboards-mywin; Package's README.Debian seems to be a template. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: kmfl-keyboards-mywin
On Dec 28, 2007 1:34 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 15, 2007 4:56 AM, Keith Stribley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "kmfl-keyboards-mywin". I forgot to say that you may want to register for an account on alioth, request to join pkg-ime and maintain kmfl-keyboards-mywin within the pkg-ime group. http://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-ime http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ime-devel -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: yougrabber
On Dec 23, 2007 2:00 AM, chaica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "yougrabber".
In addition to Raphael's comments;
I tried yougrabber and youtube-dl on these URLs and none of them
worked in yougrabber, but they did in youtube-dl:
http://youtube.com/?v=W3ctTJQ9koc http://youtube.com/?v=uhpuZAqgizI
http://youtube.com/?v=6rjDKyzT4uc http://youtube.com/?v=dVUVxTZWPNQ
Your watch file should use the special syntax for sourceforge - read
the uscan manual page.
Your debian/control doesn't have ${misc:Depends} - best put it in
there in case some debhelper command needs it at some point.
The comments in your changelog are not particularly helpful to people
who might read them. Please read the recommendations in the developers
reference:
http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-debian-changelog
The manual page references /usr/share/doc/yg/yg.conf.example - you
should patch it to reference
/usr/share/doc/yougrabber/examples/yg.conf.example instead.
Warnings to fix:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/yougrabber/usr/bin/yg shouldn't be
linked with libgssapi_krb5.so.2 (it uses none of its symbols).
lintian -I -i:
I: yougrabber source: package-lacks-versioned-build-depends-on-debhelper 5
N:
N: If a package sets debhelper's compatibility version to >= 5, either
N: via DH_COMPAT, or via debian/compat, or via dh_testversion (which is
N: deprecated), it should declare a versioned Build-Depends on the needed
N: version of debhelper.
N:
N: All versions of debhelper back to etch support compatibility version
N: 5, but the debhelper released with sarge did not, so this dependency
N: is still helpful for oldstable backports.
N:
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Dec 28, 2007 1:12 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.4.0-3 > of my package "thailatex". Uploaded, please contact this list for future sponsoring. Question: Where does debian/babel.sty come from? Shouldn't it be generated at build time or something? Please fix the following minor issues in the next version: No need for the final .0 in the standards-version. Slightly improved package description: Description: Thai support for Latex This package provides a Thai language add-on for Latex. It is based on the babel package which comes with the tetex distribution. . This package needs a Thai words separator such as cttex and swath in order for latex to be able to break sentences. In README.Debian: s/Thai texts/Thai text/ s/consult the document/consult the documentation/ Adding blank lines around the command blocks might make it more easy to read. lintian -I: I: thailatex source: package-lacks-versioned-build-depends-on-debhelper 5 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Dec 28, 2007 4:12 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 03:28:15PM +0930, Paul Wise wrote: > > Question: > > > > Where does debian/babel.sty come from? Shouldn't it be generated at > > build time or something? > > It was taken from tetex (now texlive) package, with patching to add > pointer to Thai macro file. Since patching files from other packages are > prohibited, the former maintainer had to divert it to the patched > version. Now that texlive has shipped it in a separate directory, it can > now co-exist. So, it's just patched and installed as-is. What I need to > do is keep it synchronized with texlive. Ah. Perhaps it would be appropriate to ask the upstream texlive people to add the patch in the next version? > > Please fix the following minor issues in the next version: > > > > No need for the final .0 in the standards-version. > > No problem. I just wonder if there is a common convention for this. > I find many packages use the four-digit versions. IIRC, iterations of the 4th digit are meant to be compatible so they don't need to be included. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Dec 28, 2007 5:31 PM, Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have followed the thread (as Debian TeX maintainer) but I was too late > in fetching the package, and now it cannot be found on the mentors > server anymore, and it is not already in the pool of ftp.debian.org. So > no other comments from my side ... Seems it has now passed through http://incoming.debian.org/ and is now at http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/t/thailatex/thailatex_0.4.0-3.dsc > On Fr, 28 Dez 2007, Paul Wise wrote: > > > Ah. Perhaps it would be appropriate to ask the upstream texlive people > > to add the patch in the next version? > > That will not work Thanks for the info. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: freetube
On Dec 29, 2007 8:04 AM, CaStarCo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "freetube". I don't think such a small script (wrapper around youtube-dl and ffmpeg2theora) should be uploaded to Debian, except as part of another package. Perhaps it could be added to youtube-dl? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libhugetlbfs
On Jan 14, 2008 5:27 AM, Mel Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor/reviewer for my package "libhugetlbfs". Since this is a new library package, it would be good if you used the new symbols stuff: http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/01/msg00188.html BTW, debian/substvars should be removed on in the debian/rules clean target. debian/preinst, debian/prerm, debian/postinst look like they don't do anything that isn't done by debhelper and should be removed. debian/libhugetlbfs.7 needs a couple of tweeks. strace.out should definately not be in the package. version.h looks like either belongs upstream or should be removed on clean. IIRC Debian's amd64 port uses /usr/lib rather than /usr/lib64, so I'm not sure why libhugetlbfs_write_dirs_installs is there. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITR: varkon (updated package)
On Jan 18, 2008 8:08 AM, Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could file an RC bug myself to prevent it from migrating into > testing and to let people know that it is going to be flaky on 64bit > archs. Better to run a test suite or otherwise cause an FTBFS on architectures where it is known to build broken or unusable binaries. Not being fully portable isn't an RC bug and will not block testing migration unless it is a regression and there is no good reason to block it from lenny if it only works on 32-bit arches. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: alml 2005.01.01-3
On Jan 20, 2008 8:25 PM, Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Also, the upstream URL seems to have changed to > http://na.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/appuntilinux/ > there also seems to be a new upstream version. > > Is there any indication that anyone is actually using this except for the > upstream author? popcon: 17 inst, 6 vote, 9 old, 2 recent Also, I noticed that upstream distributes a .deb: http://na.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/appuntilinux/software/alml_2008_all.deb Perhaps upstream could be conviced to adopt the package. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Jan 27, 2008 4:37 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.4.2-1 > of my package "thailatex". cttex is no longer in Debian because it was orphaned and had "no users"[1]. Please remove the recommends or re-introduce the package to Debian (starting from the snapshot.d.n package). 1. http://bugs.debian.org/357875 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unidentified subject!
On Jan 30, 2008 4:59 PM, picca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2:0.1.2-1 > of my package "lisaac". Please use a proper subject line next time. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xf86-input-tslib (xserver-xorg-input-tslib)
On Jan 31, 2008 3:16 AM, Wen-Yen Chuang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xf86-input-tslib". > You may think it as "xserver-xorg-input-tslib", a tslib based X server > input device driver. I'd suggest that you join the X Strike Force: http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cttex (updated package)
On Feb 2, 2008 7:55 AM, Prach Pongpanich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.23-2 > of my package "cttex". This package has been removed from debian package > repository, because it was orphaned. Your orig.tar.gz is different from the 1.23-1 one on snapshot.debian.net, why? Looking at the code, it seems you checked it out of CVS again, best just to use the old tarball. debian/substvars should be removed as it is generated dynamically. debian/cttex.1 should be sent upstream, add it to CVS unless you don't have access (Theppitak can probably help with that). I guess it would probably be nice to have a Thai translation for it and now that man-db supports UTF-8 I guess that is possible. You might want to translate the package description to Thai and add it to ddtp.debian.net. You specifiy debhelper compat level 5 but do not build-depend on the right version. debian/copyright needs the copyright section renamed to Licence and a new copyright section written. You may also want to read this proposal: http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat Please commented out dh_* commands and non-useful comments from debian/rules. Please use $(MAKE) instead of make in debian/rules Do you know why install is used instead of $(MAKE) install? Any reason why you don't install the upstream ChangeLog file? The upstream VERSION file says 1.22, any idea why your version is 1.23? Does upstream have a homepage for the software? If so it would be good to add it: http://wiki.debian.org/HomepageFieldHOWTO Please fix these lintian info messages (run lintain -I -i for more info): I: cttex source: package-lacks-versioned-build-depends-on-debhelper 5 I: cttex: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/cttex.1.gz:27 I: cttex: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/cttex.1.gz:30 debian/changelog needs some work: NMU means non-maintainer upload, not new maintainer. Please write " * New maintainer" as the first entry in instead. Not sure what "rebuilt" means, you probably meant rebuild the tarball, which isn't nessecary. You didn't document the other changes you made (debian/compat, bump standards-version, add manpage . Please document changes you make in debian/changelog. You might want to read the developers-reference for more info on changelog standards. In the long term, do you think the cttex functionality belongs in texlive? That might be a good thing to persue if so. I missed out on meeting you last year, I hope we can meet next time I am in Thailand - perhaps at a future Thai Debconf :) -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cttex (updated package)
On Feb 2, 2008 1:20 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your orig.tar.gz is different from the 1.23-1 one on snapshot.debian.net, why? > Looking at the code, it seems you checked it out of CVS again, best > just to use the old tarball. In addition, it seems there is a new upstream version, or a fork or something (I don't read Thai): http://vuthi.blogspot.com/2004/07/cttex.html You might want to figure out what the deal is there. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cttex (updated package)
On Feb 2, 2008 3:48 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In addition, it seems there is a new upstream version, or a fork or > > something (I don't read Thai): > > > > http://vuthi.blogspot.com/2004/07/cttex.html > > > > You might want to figure out what the deal is there. > > It's the upstream author's blog. It seems he has forgotten > the CVS version, leaving me think it has been abandoned. > :-( Vuthichai, perhaps you could start using it again? Or are you using another version control repository? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libthai 0.1.9-2 (updated package)
On Jan 31, 2008 11:19 AM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.1.9-2 > of my package "libthai". A review: Maybe libthai0/libthai-data shouldn't have any docs (README/TODO/etc) in them since those are mostly automatically installed, instead it should go in the -dev package and the -doc package. Good to see you are using a symbols file, mole says you need different symbols files for different arches: http://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/mole/seedsymbols?pkgname=libthai0 I also note that the seedsymbols script indicates that some functions have been removed, but the ABI has not been increased. The -doc package installs stuff to /usr/share/doc/libthai0-doc, shouldn't it be /usr/share/doc/libthai-doc? Your shlibs says >= 0.1.7 but the max version in your symbols file is 0.1.6. I'm not sure what the machine-readable copyright proposal says, but I expected to see copies of the "this is GPL" blurbs from the source code in debian/copyright I don't see filenames in the Licence line in the copyright proposal. I think there are supposed to be commas between the authors and each author should have their own copyright years? Why do you copy config.sub/guess in clean rather than in configure? CFLAGS doesn't seem to be passed to configure? Please rewrite the descriptions considering the audience for each of them. libthai0/libthai-data will always be automatically installed, libthai-dev will sometimes be automatically installed (build-dep) and libthai-doc should be only installed by humans. libthai0/-data could have a one-line description, the amount of info in the -dev and -doc descriptions should reflect who will be looking for them. Tip: $(MAKE) -C foo works too -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Jan 27, 2008 4:37 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.4.2-1 > of my package "thailatex". lintian -I: I: thailatex source: build-depends-without-arch-dep dpkg-dev debian/control: ...based on _the_ babel package... s/Thai words/Thai word/ debian/copyright: I don't see filenames in the Licence line in the copyright proposal. I think there are supposed to be commas between the authors and each author should have their own copyright years? Is fonts/waree simply a copy of Bitstream Vera (which will be removed from debian)? Copyright info for debian/babel.sty is a bit unclear. Including debian/babel.sty alone seems to violate its licence: This file may only be distributed together with a copy of the Babel system. You may however distribute the Babel system without such generated files. Sounds like it is not source code, but a generated file (DFSG #2). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.2-1 (updated package)
A review of your package: debian/control: s/insert/inserting/ debian/copyright: files-in-licence commas-missing-in-copyright blurbs-missing-in-licence debian/rules: nostrip is handled by dh_strip now CFLAGS doesn't seem to be passed to configure h, not sure about make -j2 - isn't there a DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS thing for that? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.2-1 (updated package)
On Feb 5, 2008 9:44 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > blurbs-missing-in-licence > > Done, although thinking equally not-a-bug. Please revert that, sorry for the noise. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libthai 0.1.9-2 (updated package)
On Feb 5, 2008 7:21 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If it's to be changed, I'd rather bump the versions in the > symbols file to 0.1.7 and ignore etch completely. Would > there be any drawback in doing so? Sounds fine given the private symbols stuff. > For the standard "This program is free software..." text, > I think it's equally right to either add or to not add them. > > To be sure, I can add them as you suggest anyway. Reading the proposal, it looks clear that they should not be added, sorry about that. > > I think there are supposed to be commas between the authors and each > > author should have their own copyright years? > > I think we need to clarify what "each copyright holder" in > the proposal means: > > "Suggested format: free content, one line per copyright holder" ... > Isn't that right? I'm sorry that I did not see this, that is fine. > I find this guideline for library description good, although > I don't see an example of such package yet. warzone2100/warzone2100-data is one example of such a pair of descriptions. So, I'll upload once you remove the licence blurb I wrongly asked you to add. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.2-1 (updated package)
On Feb 5, 2008 9:44 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > blurbs-missing-in-licence > > Done, although thinking equally not-a-bug. Please revert that, sorry for the noise. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libthai 0.1.9-2 (updated package)
On Feb 6, 2008 8:30 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > warzone2100/warzone2100-data is one example of such a pair of descriptions. > > Thanks. I hope my similar modification is fine. Yep, it is. > > So, I'll upload once you remove the licence blurb I wrongly asked you to > > add. > > Uploaded: > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libthai/libthai_0.1.9-2.dsc Uploaded. BTW, something I missed until now, are you sure the libthai0 -> libthai-data is OK to leave unversioned? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: thailatex (updated package)
On Feb 6, 2008 4:15 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I got another idea to solve this: just drop babel.sty from > > thailatex, and copy it from texlive-latex-base with edition > > on postinst. Also remove it on prerm. > > Done, and updated with version unchanged: > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/thailatex/thailatex_0.4.2-3.dsc > > Please comment if it still requires additional changes. I'm not so sure if this is OK, what do the texlive Debian people say? The change in the postinst looks fairly simple, perhaps it could be integrated into texlive? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.2-1 (updated package)
On Feb 6, 2008 8:41 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Done and uploaded: > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swath/swath_0.3.2-1.dsc Uploaded, please contact this list for future uploads. > Other changes left? For next time: Well, I just checked the Vcs-* links, they seem to point to upstream rather than the Debian packaging. They also have a debian dir in them that doesn't seem to be updated. Also these lintian -I: I: swath: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/swath.1.gz:69 I: swath: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/swath.1.gz:76 I: swath: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/swath.1.gz:81 I: swath: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/swath.1.gz:87 I: swath: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/swath.1.gz:94 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libthai 0.1.9-2 (updated package)
On Feb 7, 2008 11:03 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A minor follow-up, please. My debian/rules appeared to fail > on arch builds, for example: > > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?&pkg=libthai&ver=0.1.9-2&arch=amd64&stamp=1202305145&file=log > > So, I have moved libdatrie-bin from Build-Depends-Indep to > Build-Depends for the time being, until some configure > option to turn off the check is added upstream: > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libthai/libthai_0.1.9-3.dsc Uploaded. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: Some packages
On Feb 7, 2008 3:00 PM, Kartik Mistry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > chmlib > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/chmlib/chmlib_0.39-7.dsc Uploaded. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: falconpl package (ITP:Bug#460591); source package
Feb 13, 2008 3:53 AM, Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The checks performed by Ubuntu maintainers have been quite extensive > and deep, and the package should be ready as is; so, I am requesting a > sponsor to forward the package in Debian too. I was intrigued by this claim, so here is a review of just the diff.gz: Package descriptions do not need to reference which platforms it is ported to, especially since Debian doesn't yet have GNU/ReactOS or GNU/Darwin ports yet. Package descriptions need some work, please read the developers reference: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-debian-control debian/rules handles nostrip instead of letting dh_strip do it CFLAGS doesn't look like it is being passed to the upstream build system Shouldn't you be using dh_testroot instead of that weird checkroot thing? If not, the clean target should depend on checkroot. Several files have no newlines at the end. Doesn't close any ITP bug in the changelog. The contents of debian/falconpl-dev.manpages shouldn't be nessecary, just put them in debian/falconpl-dev.install. dh_installman is only for manual pages not installed by the upstream build system. Useless comments & extra space in debian/watch Which licence is the "Falcon Programming Language License" derived from? It looks kind of familiar. License proliferation is bad, it would be nice if you chose another one. If you don't want to do that please get the debian-legal list to review it. debian/copyright references /usr/share/common-licenses twice, one correctly, one incorrectly. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tests that take more than ten times build time.
On Feb 13, 2008 7:58 PM, Thibaut Paumard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > how can you find out the position in the queue? Here for one: http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/package.php?p=yorick -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: falconpl package (ITP:Bug#460591); source package
On Feb 14, 2008 4:28 AM, Giancarlo Niccolai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > License proliferation is bad, but it's a lesser evil with respect to > license fuzziness. > > FPL license is derived from Apache2. Among OSI accepted license, > Apache2 was the one covering exactly the needs of Falcon project > except for two aspects. Embedding and scripting. All the other > licenses related to programming languages either state prominent > exceptions with respect to a base license or leave gray areas between > "derived works" and "embedding applications". The aim of FPL is that > to respect the principles of openness by requiring source to be > distributed with derived works, to be released again with the same > license, and defining clearly what applications using Falcon are not > subject to this restriction. Sounds like the FPL just clarifies things/gives extra permissions. Please submit it (in full) to the legal list and state that it is derived from the Apache2 licence. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anonymous delayed queue?
On Feb 14, 2008 1:20 PM, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a minor new upstream release for a package I maintain, but on > the other hand the current build will enter testing tomorrow. I > therefore tried a delayed upload, but as I am a DM, I have no access to > gluck. Is there a possibility to make delayed uploads as a DM ? > (Of course, it is not a big deal, but it helps to make the TODO list > shorter). If you have access to a computer that is up 24x7, then simply copy it there and run something like: $ at tomorrow at> dupload /home/foo/*.changes Ideally the ability to delay uploads would be part of dak though. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis
First, a question: How does lynis compare with bastille (already in Debian)? On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 5:59 AM, Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IANADD so I cannot sponsor your upload. However I think my comments may > be useful for you. CC'ing my AM: Eventually he has additional comments > and/or is willing to sponsor your upload, when everything okay. Additional comments below. > - debian/control > - Misses a homepage header to indicate upstream url. See [1] Another reference: http://wiki.debian.org/HomepageFieldHOWTO Some description changes: s/Security/security/ s/create/creates/ s/professionals/professional/ s/adition/addition/ s/finetunning/fine-tuning/ > - debian/copyright: Please also reference the correct GPL file, there are both GPL-2 and GPL-3 in /usr/share/common-licences. > - debian/rules: > - configure-stamp target misses a touch configure-stamp Removing the configure/configure-stamp targets is another option. Other issues: sed -i -e 's/man page/the manual page/' debian/README.Debian The changes to the lynis script should be moved into a quilt (or dpatch) patch or you could make the changes using sed in the build target like so: build: ... mkdir build cp lynis build sed -i -e 's_PROFILE="default.prf"_PROFILE="/etc/lynis/default.prf"_' build/lynis sed -i -e 's_INCLUDEDIR="include"_INCLUDEDIR="/usr/share/lynis/include"_' build/lynis clean: ... rm -rf build install: ... install -D $(CURDIR)/build/lynis $(CURDIR)/debian/lynis/usr/sbin/ The postrm script is not necessary, dpkg handles removing conffiles on purge and you are using a recent debhelper so files in /etc should be automatically marked as conffiles. default.prf contains a commented out debian-specific security check, is there any reason you didn't enable it? Please run lintian -I in future: I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:14 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:28 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:30 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:32 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:34 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:39 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:43 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:47 I: lynis: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/lynis.8.gz:51 Some remarks to pass upstream: Upstream should be changed so that the patch to the lynis script is not necessary. Same with any potential patch to default.prf. The best way to enable that would be to write a configure script. Upstream should provide a Makefile or script to install lynis so there is no Debian-specific installation. Otherwise other distributions will have to duplicate part of debian/rules. Upstream CHANGELOG file is more of a NEWS file than a ChangeLog. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: removal of unneeded packages installed by pbuilder
On Feb 16, 2008 11:13 AM, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there any equivalent to 'apt-get autoclean' to remove unnecessary > packages installed by pbuilder? I looked in > http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/software/pbuilder-doc/pbuilder-doc.html > but could not find anything. You can make any changes you want to pbuilder's chroot using one of these: pbuilder --login --save-after-login cowbuilder --login --save-after-login -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: nettee
On Feb 18, 2008 9:28 PM, Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - dget > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nettee/nettee_0.1.8-3.dsc Some additional comments: > Now to your package: > > - debian/changelog s/rewrited/rewritten/ > - debian/copyright Please move onto a line on its own and remove the weird angle brackets. The software is GPL2 only, not GPL2 or later. > - debian/README.Debian: Hm. I'm unsure if the content is suited for > README.Debian. Why? Because it seems like it has no documenting > character, more beeing an advertising on how enthusiastic you are > about the tool ;) I would like to hear other opinions about this, > however. I agree, perhaps this could be placed in the upstream README? > - debian/rules: You don't build it with -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE, why is that? It would be good if there were a commented out DH_VERBOSE line in there to enable easy debugging of debian/rules. It would be good if you could write a Makefile with the following targets and send it upstream: all or build, clean, install, dist. Be sure to support CFLAGS, PREFIX and DESTDIR in your Makefile since debian/rules will need them. For extra points it should support checking for solaris and compiling appropriately (see the comments in nettee.c). > - debian/watch is missing, but highly recommended. it enables tracking of > new upstream versions via your QA page and even a mail notification if > you want. See [4] for more information. debian/docs: No need to distribute empty files nor a HTML copy of the manual page. If you want to distribute the pdist scripts, you should at least customize them by using the right path to nettee. You can do this with either sed or a patch system like quilt. Upstream includes the binary in the tarball, please ask them to fix that. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: ee (updated package)
On Feb 20, 2008 6:27 AM, Mauro Lizaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It builds these binary packages: > ee - An "easy editor" for novices and compuphobics What are compuphobics? Sounds like a word that should not be in a short description. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Feb 19, 2008 2:44 AM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xiterm+thai/xiterm+thai_1.07-1.dsc Some comments: Unless you need new features of debhelper compat 6, please leave it at the latest compat level available in stable. Description suggestion: Description: X terminal program with Thai languague support xiterm+thai is an X terminal emulator program with Thai language support. It has built-in Thai keyboard input support. You could also use the X11 XKB extension to input Thai characters. . A Thai font is needed to display Thai characters. Probably don't need README installed since it is about building, I'm guessing README.thai too. Same for COPYRIGHT.HISTORY (copied in debian/copyright), doc/README.rxvt.greek - Thai != greek :), and maybe the README.xvt too. Perhaps README.thai should be reencoded in UTF-8? What is the reason for having two entries in the menu file? Also, it would be good to add a desktop file to support GNOME since by default it now doesn't show the Debian menu IIRC. The README.Debian needs to be checked and maybe rewritten. txiterm manual page: This isn't really needed "This manual page documents briefly the txiterm command". OPTIONS section needs filling out. Very nice changelog entry, good work on the package :) Shame the package got removed, thanks for working on getting it back in. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis
On Feb 20, 2008 8:53 AM, Francisco García <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have made the changes that you suggest me. I think > the package is better now. Uploaded, thanks for your contribution to Debian. Please take care of the lintian -I messages about unescaped hyphens in the manual page in the next upload. For future sponsoring please contact this list and I will upload if I am able. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: RFS: fluid-soundfont -- Fluid (R3) General MIDI SoundFont
On Feb 20, 2008 11:08 PM, Toby Smithe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you check the fluid-soundfont package, you will find it only has > four files outside of the Debian directory. There has to be an > authoritative original source that we trust, and in this case the > original source is at [0]. I'm not sure where the quibble is: each of > the four files is Copyright (C) Frank Wen (and unless this is > disproven by a court, surely remains so), and each file is MIT > licensed. > > [0] http://tsmithe.users.ubuntustudio.org/fluid-soundfont_r3.tar.gz Are the two binary files in there prebuilt, or are they what you would edit if you wanted to change the soundfont? I'm thinking of DFSG #2 here. Which package would I edit them with? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: fluid-soundfont -- Fluid (R3) General MIDI SoundFont
On Feb 21, 2008 12:01 AM, Toby Smithe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are the two binary files in there prebuilt, or are they what you would > > edit if you wanted to change the soundfont? I'm thinking of DFSG #2 > > here. Which package would I edit them with? > > No, the sf2 format is the preferred modification form: you could use a > package such as "swami" to edit the files. Please leave a note about this in debian/changelog or debian/copyright for the ftpmasters. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: fluid-soundfont -- Fluid (R3) General MIDI SoundFont
On Feb 21, 2008 12:28 AM, Toby Smithe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What made you choose /usr/share/sounds/sf2 for installing the > > soundfont? I notice that freepats uses /usr/share/midi for this. > > This is the directory that awesfx, the SoundFont loader for emu10k1 > cards, defaults to. Perhaps suggest that package too? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: fluid-soundfont -- Fluid (R3) General MIDI SoundFont
On Feb 21, 2008 12:04 AM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please leave a note about this in debian/changelog or debian/copyright > for the ftpmasters. What made you choose /usr/share/sounds/sf2 for installing the soundfont? I notice that freepats uses /usr/share/midi for this. debian/README.Debian-source says "fluid-soundfont for Ubuntu". I'd suggest these descriptions: Description: Fluid General MIDI SoundFont (GM) This is a GM SoundFont, for use with MIDI synthesisers; hardware like the emu10k1 sound card, or software like FluidSynth. Description: Fluid General MIDI SoundFont (GS) This is a GS SoundFont, for use with MIDI synthesisers; hardware like the emu10k1 sound card, or software like FluidSynth. Otherwise the packaging looks fine. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 1:46 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> - - dget > >>> > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xiterm+thai/xiterm+thai_1.07-1.dsc > > To whom may download this package before, please re-download for the > > update by the comments below: > >> Description suggestion: > > > >> Description: X terminal program with Thai languague support > >> xiterm+thai is an X terminal emulator program with Thai language > >> support. It has built-in Thai keyboard input support. You could > >> also use the X11 XKB extension to input Thai characters. > >> . > >> A Thai font is needed to display Thai characters. > > > > Already fixed. You missed "use the X11" rather than "use X11". > >> Perhaps README.thai should be reencoded in UTF-8? > > > > Convert and install as README.thai-UTF-8 > > In debian package install both README.thai and README.thai-UTF-8 which > > README.thai can open in xiterm+thai (can not open UTF-8 because it is > > TIS-620 environment) and README.thai-UTF-8 can open in the terminals > > environment that support UTF-8. iconv isn't in libc6 on all architectures: http://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=contents&keywords=%2Fusr%2Fbin%2Ficonv&mode=path&suite=unstable&arch=any I think you can just drop the build-dep on libc6 because the right C library will always be present. > >> What is the reason for having two entries in the menu file? Also, it > >> would be good to add a desktop file to support GNOME since by default > >> it now doesn't show the Debian menu IIRC. > > > > Drop unneeded additional menu title="xiterm" as your comment. > > Create desktop and icon files for GNOME. You should run dh_icons too. > >> txiterm manual page: > > > >> This isn't really needed "This manual page documents briefly the > >> txiterm command". > > > >> OPTIONS section needs filling out. > > > > Rewrite too. I'd suggest these minor fixes for the DESCRIPTION: txiterm is a wrapper around the xiterm+thai(1) program that invokes the latter program with Thai support and also loads the Thai font. All arguments to txiterm are passed to xiterm+thai without processing; the -fn option should not be specified because it is used by the wrapper. See the xiterm+thai manual page for more information on xiterm+thai-options. Note: txiterm needs nectec18 - an X Thai font from the xfonts-thai-nectec package to allow the program to render the proper Thai text in the terminal. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Description suggestion: > > > > > >> Description: X terminal program with Thai languague support > > >> xiterm+thai is an X terminal emulator program with Thai language > > >> support. It has built-in Thai keyboard input support. You could > > >> also use the X11 XKB extension to input Thai characters. > > >> . > > >> A Thai font is needed to display Thai characters. > > > > > > Already fixed. > > You missed "use the X11" rather than "use X11". And also "A Thai font is needed" rather than "Thai font is needed" -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
Woops, forwarding to the list. On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:13 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Uploaded the package. Please contact this list for future uploads. > > Please investigate and fix these warnings for the next upload: > > There are lots of GCC warnings. > > dpkg-shlibdeps: > > warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked > with libSM.so.6 (it uses none of its symbols). > warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked > with libICE.so.6 (it uses none of its symbols). > warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked > with libXpm.so.4 (it uses none of its symbols). > > lintian -I: > > I: xiterm+thai: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/txiterm.1.gz:32 > I: xiterm+thai: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key > /usr/share/applications/xiterm+thai.desktop:3 Encoding > > > > -- > bye, > pabs > > http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise > -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise http://wiki.synfig.com/PaulWise http://pabs.zip.to -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: list of public usertags?
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Amaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Justin Pryzby wrote: > > Does there exist a list of "public" usertags in use? I'd like to see > > a big list of these, probably a good use of the wiki. > > It's funny, I was wondering this myself just now :) > Any pointers? >From #debbugs dondelelcaro: is this something that the bts itself provides? http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/03/msg00011.html pabs: iirc, you can get them all via rsync pabs: and if you know the user, you can of course see them all rsync seems to be documented here: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Access -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 4:25 AM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > Hi Maintainer, > > > > rejected, your debian/copyright file is incomplete and misses > > (C)holders/license data. You have to include all such differences. > > > > Like that of the grkelot code. > > Sorry, it is my mistake. > > Now, to whom may download this package before, please re-download to > update the new change in debian/copyright which included all > (C)holders/license data. OK, now there is a real problem, most of the licences mentioned are non-free and cannot be put into main. Essentially all the files that are not copyright Vuthichai Ampornaramveth or Theppitak Karoonboonyanan are non-free and need to be removed or relicenced. Alternatively the package can be put in non-free instead of main. Please read the DFSG to see why the code is non-free: http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > OK, now there is a real problem, most of the licences mentioned are > > non-free and cannot be put into main. Essentially all the files that > > are not copyright Vuthichai Ampornaramveth or Theppitak > > Karoonboonyanan are non-free and need to be removed or relicenced. > > Alternatively the package can be put in non-free instead of main. > > Pardon? The doc/COPYRIGHT.HISTORY clearly states: > > -8<- > xvt original copyright was "Do what you want, but can't make money on it." . > Rxvt had the same copyright since it was based on xvt . > xiterm moved to GPL with autorization from xvt's original author. > -8<- > > I suppose Guylhem Aznar, who relicensed xiterm, has > already got authorization from previous authors to release > the whole package under GPL-2. Missed that bit, was just looking at debian/copyright. In that case the old licences in debian/copyright need to be removed and an explanation of the history added so that the ftpmasters are convinced it is free. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bits from the DMs/NMs/AMs?
Hi all, [Please CC me in all replies, or reply only to me] We've had bits from the DPL[1][2], bits from the release team[3], bits from the listmasters[4] and bits from other people and groups within Debian[5][6][7][8][9]. Since new contributors are important for Debian (or any free software project), I'd like to see a "Bits from the DMs/NMs/AMs" on d-d-a. I also had the thought of separate emails for debian-private and DAM/FD/AMs. So, I'm gathering your thoughts for these mails. If you are in NM, a DM, an AM, just having packages sponsored by DDs or maybe recently became a DD, I'd love to hear from you. When replying, tell me anything you want to, but if you can't think of anything, here are some ideas to get you started: What cool packages are you working on or sponsoring? Did you buy your AM a beer at DebConf, or have one bought for you? Are you working on improving a general area of Debian (games, science, servers, hardware)? Are you helping interesting people to get through the NM process? Are you excited about finishing NM? How has the process been so far? What made you commit to becoming a member of the Debian community or helping others do so? What do you think about DM, what does the DM change indicate about Debian to you? What are your plans for Debian stuff in the future? Do you feel you've learnt from the NM process? What is your assessment of DM so far, what cool stuff have you done with it? Did your Debian wishlist for 2007 come true? What is your Debian wishlist for 2008? What does Debian mean to you? In what ways do you or do you intend to contribute to Debian and free software in general? How can we help you to contribute to Debian or free software in general? In your replies, please indicate which parts are for d-d-a, d-p, just for DAM/FD/AMs. Please also indicate if you would like to remain anonymous, want your comments attributed to you or don't care either way. I'll read all public and private replies and make summaries for d-d-a, d-p and DAM/FD/AMs. Depending on the number of replies and my RL situation, it might take a while to write up, so please be patient. I'm unfortunately monolingual, so if you would like to translate this post and translate replies from NMs/etc to English and send them to me, please feel free to post it to the non-English mentors/devel lists. 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/02/msg9.html 2. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/11/msg0.html 3. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg00015.html 4. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/10/msg4.html 5. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/01/msg1.html 6. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/01/msg2.html 7. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/02/msg7.html 8. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/01/msg1.html 9. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2008/01/msg2.html -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: NMU: orange -- extracts CAB files from self-extracting installers
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is another one of my way too intrusive NMUs that closes RC bug > #465633 and bug #400257 as well as quite a bit of package cleanup, > standards update, etc. > > If someone has time to review and/or upload I would appreciate it. > Package hasn't seen an upload since 2005. Neither orange in the archive nor the result of your NMU even work for zip files (with unzip installed) nor other files where it should work. >From strace, it looks like it is acually extracting stuff, but then deletes the files instead of copying them to the output directory. It would be nice if this could be fixed too. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: NMU: orange -- extracts CAB files from self-extracting installers
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Neither orange in the archive nor the result of your NMU even work for > > zip files (with unzip installed) nor other files where it should work. > > >>From strace, it looks like it is acually extracting stuff, but then > > deletes the files instead of copying them to the output directory. It > > would be nice if this could be fixed too. > > Paul, is that realistic for the NMU? This isn't an orphaned package, it > isn't a hijack, this is an NMU to get orange into Lenny. Fixing an extra RC bug (package doesn't work) is realistic for an NMU, even if it isn't filed in the BTS. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Requests for sponsors to upload NMUs
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 23:37 +, Neil Williams wrote: > > > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rcalc/rcalc_0.5.0-1.3.dsc > > http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rcalc/news/20080303T143226Z.html > > This NMU seems to introduce more changes than allowed via NMU. So I > agree with Neil Williams on his call to debian-mentors to follow the NMU > rules. That NMU was approved by the maintainer IIRC. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just update the debian/copyright which included the quotes from > doc/COPYRIGHT.HISTORY and doc/LSM. > > The text which show that Guylhem Aznar relicensed the xiterm with > authorization from the author was added to clarify each (C) holder/license. I think something like this would be more appropriate: It was downloaded from ftp://linux.thai.net/pub/thailinux/software/xiterm+thai/ xvt original copyright was "Do what you want, but can't make money on it." Rxvt had the same copyright since it was based on xvt. xiterm was relicensed to GPL-2 by Guylhem Aznar with authorization from the xvt's original author and xiterm+thai is based on that. Files: debian/* Copyright: (c) 1999-2008 Chanop Silpa-Anan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (c) 2008 Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2+ Files: * Copyright: (c) 1992 John Bovey, University of Kent at Canterbury, License: GPL-2 Files: src/debug.c, src/debug.h, src/graphics.*, src/Xtensions/*/graphics.*, src/screen.*, src/Xtensions/*/screen.*, src/xdefaults.*, src/Xtensions/graphics/rxvtgrx.h Copyright: (c) 1994 Robert Nation <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2 Files: src/default.h, src/feature.h, src/Xtensions/*/feature.h, src/misc.*, src/scrollbar.*, src/Xtensions/menubar+graphics/menubar.* Copyright: (c) 1995,1996 Mark Olesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2 Files: src/grkelot.* Copyright: (c) 1994,1995 Angelo Haritsis License: GPL-2 Files: src/netdisp.c Copyright: (c) 1996 Chuck Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2 Files: src/*thai*.* Copyright: (c) 1999 Vuthichai Ampornaramveth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2 Files: src/thaikb.* Copyright: (c) 1999 Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> License: GPL-2 On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License, version 2, can be found in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: NMU: orange -- extracts CAB files from self-extracting installers
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Neither orange in the archive nor the result of your NMU even work for > zip files (with unzip installed) nor other files where it should work. > From strace, it looks like it is acually extracting stuff, but then > deletes the files instead of copying them to the output directory. It > would be nice if this could be fixed too. As pointed out by tomv_w, I didn't read the package description closely enough; it only extracts a certain kind of cabinet file from various other archives. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bits from the DMs/NMs/AMs?
[sent to -devel for a wider audience] On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 11:54 +0900, Paul Wise wrote: > [Please CC me in all replies, or reply only to me] > > We've had bits from the DPL[1][2], bits from the release team[3], bits > from the listmasters[4] and bits from other people and groups within > Debian[5][6][7][8][9]. > > Since new contributors are important for Debian (or any free software > project), I'd like to see a "Bits from the DMs/NMs/AMs" on d-d-a. I also > had the thought of separate emails for debian-private and DAM/FD/AMs. > So, I'm gathering your thoughts for these mails. > > If you are in NM, a DM, an AM, just having packages sponsored by DDs or > maybe recently became a DD, I'd love to hear from you. I only got 8 replies to this, and none from AMs. I would really like quite a few more responses if I'm actually going to do the summary. So, if you are an AM, or a sponsor, it would be great if you could send a response and get your NM(s) and sponsee(s) to also send a response. The original email for those who missed seeing it: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/03/msg00030.html -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFH: liblicense: dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: couldn't find library
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Asheesh Laroia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You have dh_makeshlibs commented out in your debian/rules file. You have > > to run dh_makeshlibs when building shared libraries. Otherwise, you don't > > get a shlibs file, which means that the shared library package won't work > > right and dh_shlibdeps can't find it when setting shared library > > dependencies. > > Thanks - that fixed that problem! Since you are packaging a shared library, please also support symbols files: http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps dpkg-gensymbols(1) They will help ensure the minimally correct dependencies in programs using the library and help detect ABI breakage when symbols dissappear. See also the DPKG_GENSYMBOLS_CHECK_LEVEL environment variable. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITA/RFS: libupnp -- Intel Universal Plug And Play SDK and linux-igd -- UPnP Internet Gateway Device
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Nick Leverton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've read up on the shlibs question I posted yesterday, and I'm satisfied > that removing debian/libupnp3.shlibs in favour of using dh_makeshlibs > and dh_shlibdeps does the right thing for this package. Thanks to Russ > Allbery for providing the hints when he answered another packager ;) Since you are packaging a shared library, please also support symbols files: http://wiki.debian.org/UsingSymbolsFiles http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps dpkg-gensymbols(1) They will help ensure the minimal version numbers in dependencies in programs using the library to ease upgrades and help detect ABI breakage when symbols dissappear. See also the DPKG_GENSYMBOLS_CHECK_LEVEL environment variable. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry, I'm late. After I buy the new computer and quickly install debian. > > Change the debian/copyright file as your comment and also upload to > mentors.debian.net. Uploaded, thanks for your contribution to Debian! Please fix these lintian -I warnings in your next upload: I: xiterm+thai: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/txiterm.1.gz:32 I: xiterm+thai: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key /usr/share/applications/xiterm+thai.desktop:3 Encoding Please pass the many gcc warnings and these dpkg-shlibdeps warnings upstream: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked with libSM.so.6 (it uses none of its symbols). dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked with libICE.so.6 (it uses none of its symbols). dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/xiterm+thai/usr/bin/xiterm+thai shouldn't be linked with libXpm.so.4 (it uses none of its symbols). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: QA Upload: mined - Powerful text editor with extensive Unicode and CJK support (updated package)
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 4:39 AM, Mauro Lizaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > originally (i.e. ~ 20 years ago), we took mined from the Minix > operating system which was a free academic project, > and the mined.doc file did not mention a copyright. > So no, I do not think the original author could claim a copyright. > Also he is not reachable on the net, I had already tried that > a few years ago. > But about the copyright with no copyright, i got no answer, what > should i do in this case? These days copyright is automatic, I imagine it was 20 years ago too. It doesn't matter if you claim copyright or not. Copyright is opt-out only (IIRC some countries do not have opt-out) and the fair use provisions most probably do not allow what the DFSG requires. So, if the original Minix version was not freely licenced, then basically mined needs to be removed from Debian and upstream needs to rewrite the code from the minix version that is still present in the current version. I think that 20 years ago the GPL v2 wasn't yet out, so at a minimum, the debian/copyright is missing information about the licence of the parts of the source code that are from the original minix version. Also, there are some rules that make govt works public domain, perhaps the original mined falls under that? As for contacting the original author, perhaps the people at minix3.org can help. Also, minix is BSD licenced these days, perhaps it still includes mined? Please bring some more details up on debian-legal where there are more knowledgable people. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.3-1 (updated package)
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3.3-1 > of my package "swath". Please fix this GCC warning, after that I will upload: /tmp/buildd/swath-0.3.3/src/wordseg.cpp:244: warning: the use of `tmpnam' is dangerous, better use `mkstemp' Have you considered applying for DM? http://wiki.debian.org/Maintainers -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.3-1 (updated package)
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This may be better done by a new upstream release. Indeed. > In fact, using mkstemp() instead of tmpnam() means quite substantial > change to the program logic, because the temp files are actually > created deep in different functions in different branches, using > the generated temp names from a single place. Changing that behavior > would mean internal API changes. > > I will come up with a new upstream version soon, then. Ah, hopefully it will not be too much work. > > Have you considered applying for DM? > > > > http://wiki.debian.org/Maintainers > > Yes, I'll apply soon, but probably not before this upload. > I would like to have the regression fixed sooner. Fair enough. > BTW, do you think I should raise the urgency from low to medium, > although it does not fix any RC bug in Debian BTS? The regression > was reported upstream, not in Debian BTS, but it must have been a > grave bug had it been filed. It's a total loss of functionality. I think that would be acceptable. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: swath 0.3.3-1 (updated package)
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, I have uploaded a new package with raised urgency. Please find it > at the old place: > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swath/swath_0.3.3-1.dsc > > debian/changelog timestamp: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 09:30:59 +0700 Uploaded. Please ping me on IRC/XMPP when the new upstream version is ready. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2nd RFS/RFC vrr: dynamic vector graphics with TeX text
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 3:40 AM, David Bremner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "vrr". This is my second > post, essentially unchanged. Since last time I added icons and a > .desktop file. ... > Vcs-Svn: svn://svn.debian.org/pkg-science/vrr/ > Vcs-Browser: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-science/vrr Any particular reason you didn't CC the debian-science list? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: urbanterror-data
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Chris Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Goneri Le Bouder wrote: > > > I wonder if it's not a better solution to provide a script in the > > urbanterror package that download urbanterror files. > > Please don't do this. :( The ftpmasters (specifically Ganneff) suggested it be done with a download script. Mainly this was because it is non-free anyway. 700 Mb .deb plus 700 Mb duplicated in the orig.tar.gz isn't acceptable IMO. We need a way to have a .deb in the archive without an orig.tar.gz before we can have such hge packages. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: qstardict
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Alexander Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for update my package "qstardict". Did you read my earlier comments and questions? http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/11/msg00171.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/11/msg00173.html > Version : 0.12-1 > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qstardict/qstardict_0.08-1.dsc These two versions don't match, why? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: qstardict
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 12:55 AM, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I cannot find the .dsc file mentionned in the RFS. ... > If not, they seems important enough *not* to upload the package. > And I cannot check it since the link is broken.. Mentors deletes packages once they get announced on debian-devel-changes IIRC. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: winhardware
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 11:14 AM, Joel Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "winhardware". Firstly, your package is a native package (dsc + tar.gz), instead of a normal package (dsc + diff.gz + orig.tar.gz). Please fix that. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: winhardware
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Joel Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm sorry but i think that it is already a native package like you can > see in http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/winhardware/. What > is wrong? It should be a normal package unless there is any specific reason for it to be a native package, and there is no reason for it to be a native package since it isn't Debian-specific. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: rush 0.2-1 (initial upload)
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Michael Schutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm looking for a sponsor to upload the first revision of my "rush" > package. The source package can be downloaded from: I don't know ruby, here are some comments: Have you sent the patches and manual pages to upstream? Is it appropriate to have .gbp.conf in the source package? The postinst/prerm looks like they can be removed. Package looks good otherwise, you might want to get the Debian ruby people to take a look: http://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/ Also: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/03/msg00030.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2008/03/msg02475.html -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Helmut Grohne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lynis/lynis_1.0.9-1.dsc > > 1) Remove unneeded example files please. > > Can someone explain what debian/control.org is? Does it belong there? Where do you see that? It seems to be gone now. > 2) Please have a look at the last two lines of debian/copyright and >remove them after doing so. Please explain why that should be done. > 4) Please remove the menu-command-not-in-package lintian override. That >*was* (read: it is fixed) a bug in lintian. Please also document the removal in the changelog. Did you send your patch to the manual page to upstream? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: QA Upload: eterm-themes -- Themes for Eterm, the Enlightened Terminal Emulator
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is a QA upload for eterm-themes with basically just updating the > maintainer to QA Group, bump standards, etc. Perhaps the pkg-e team would like to take it? Or request its removal or something? Anyone contacted them? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: rush 0.2-1 (initial upload)
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 2:05 AM, Michael Schutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Package looks good otherwise, you might want to get the Debian ruby > > people to take a look: > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-ruby/ > > Judging from their archives, it seems to be unusual to get packages > checked there. Since there are no problems building it, I think > contacting them is unnecessary. Considering there have been only two posts this month, I'm sure your post wouldn't be unwelcome. I suggested it since more people there know ruby and would be able to check the code. Hmm, it might be nice to form a ruby-apps team like python in Debian has. > Would you prefer to leave it at these comments, or do you also consider > uploading my work? I don't know anything about Ruby apart from that it is big in Japan, so I can't really do a proper review of rush (nor upload it). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: winhardware
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Joel Franco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now its a normal package like you have suggested. > > Please give a loot at it. I've read the discussion on the ITP bug and I agree that a new package is not needed for a small script such as this. Please reassign the ITP to wmi-client and retitle it to "please add winhardware script", hopefully they will add you to the Zenoss team too. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: NMU: conglomerate -- user-friendly XML editor
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is an NMU to fix conglomerate double-build bugs. Geert looks inactive on his 3 packages, despite being active on the lists & bts. Might be a good idea to prod him about orphaning conglomerate/p3nfs and removing himself from uploaders on gnome-phone-manager. Geert, what do you think? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: suggestions for the new maintainer's guide
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:39 AM, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to make 2 suggestions for the new maintainer's guide. Please file bugs on the maint-guide package: http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Helmut Grohne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have no clue what package of mine you might be talking about. Could > you rephrase that? I imagine he was talking about a link to the email you mentioned. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Francisco M. García Claramonte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I mean that your lynis package is not in mentors.debian.net, and I would > like review it. So please, can you send me your package, or a link > to download it? Helmut was giving you suggestions for how to improve your package, not saying that he has created a lynis package. Also, please don't CC people, especially when they set mail-followup-to headers to the list: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: Installing BNFC(a non-native Debian)package
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Zainab Rehman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We are using GUI-based Debian,we have explored "Synaptic Package Manager" > the tool used in debian for package management. It is showing two type of > packages "installed" and "not installed" and the package we want to use i.e > BNFC isn't visible in any of the categories. Based on this I assume you are using the testing distribution: http://packages.debian.org/bnfc Based on this, it looks like bnfc was removed from testing because it no longer builds, possibly due to a change in the haskell compiler: http://packages.qa.debian.org/b/bnfc/news/20080229T233910Z.html It looks like there is a patch available, but the maintainer has not uploaded a fixed version: http://bugs.debian.org/460386 > We have downloaded bnfc_2.2.orig.tar, bnfc_2.2-3.diff and bnfc_2.2-3.dsc, > but dont know what to do next. The package needs a new maintainer since the current one has not fixed a release critical bug for a couple of months. If you would like to ensure bnfc reaches lenny and thus the next release, please contact the maintainer and get them to fix the bug. If you cannot contact them, please follow these processes: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-beyond-pkging.en.html#s-mia-qa http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-adopting While you are doing that, have a look at the debian-mentors FAQ and the new maintainers guide: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ If you don't want to do any of this, just download the package from sid and install it: http://packages.debian.org/sid/bnfc If that doesn't work, try rebuilding it the package: dpkg-source -x bnfc_2.2-3.dsc cd bnfc-2.2 dpkg-buildpackage -b -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why is sun-java6-jdk at 6.04
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Michael Rasmussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Someone knows what is holding sun-java6-jdk at 6.04 while the rest of > the sun-java6 packages are upgraded to 6.05? This situation prevents > upgrades of all java packages. Your question is off-topic here. Short answer is that it hasn't yet built on i386 since the maintainer uploaded amd64 binaries. Please be patient. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: libgpiv, gpiv and gpivtools
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:24 PM, Gerber van der Graaf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor of the following packages. Older packages of > this software are already in Debian. It concerns here new upstream > releases: You might want to ask people on the science list, join the pkg-science team and maintain the package collaboratively there. http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/ http://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-science -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: pydance
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 3:12 AM, Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor so I can adopt the package "pydance." It is > a dancing simulator, much like the ones in the arcades, such as Dance > Dance Revolution. It is programmed in python. It is published under the > GNU General Public License v2. Upstream has not released anything in > quite some time. Perhaps you would like to join the debian games team and maintain the package in our repository? http://wiki.debian.org/Games -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: ext3grep
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:10 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ext3grep". You might want to join the forensic software packaging team and maintain your package there: http://alioth.debian.org/projects/forensics/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: cs46xx-firmware
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Mikko Rapeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "cs46xx-firmware". > > * Package name: cs46xx-firmware > Version : 0.1-1 > Upstream Author : Jaroslav Kysela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cirrus Logic > * URL : ftp://ftp.kernel.org > * License : unclear, but binary blob has been distributed with GPLv2 > Section : non-free/base Errr, GPL without source code is not distributable. Please get upstream to fix the licence, or preferrably release source code. Or is this yet-another-downloader-package like the flashplugin package? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: cs46xx-firmware
[daniel CCed since he offered to integrate this non-distributable firmware into firmware-nonfree] On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Mikko Rapeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This firmware has been distributed with Linux kernel sources since ages, A shame. > but has now been dropped in Debian. Good to hear. > Dann Frazier has asked Cirrus Logic > to consider fixing the licence and even releasing the sources. The > kernel firmware page http://wiki.debian.org/KernelFirmwareLicensing and > bug report #464197 contain more info on licencing and history. Good to hear. > From what I know, things are unclear. I'm just hoping that this firmware > package in non-free would fill the gap for users like me who'd like to > use Debian and the cs46xx audio chips on machines like the Thinkpad T20. I think it is fairly clear: no licence is available for the firmware, therefore it is being illegally distributed by netbsd CVS, kernel.org and the alsa people. > The source package contains sources to the program to strip the firmware from > upstream Linux kernel sources or from the copied sound/pci/cs46xx sources > taken > from 2.6.24 within the package. It also contains a pre-made firmware image, > since the (modified ) sound/pci/cs46xx driver in kernel expects it to be in > 32-bit little endian format. Since the firmware is not distributable you should remove the pre-built image. Then make the scripts check all known places for downloading the firmware and extract from whichever is available in case they get removed. Also try to find where cwcealdr1.zip originally came from so that if the alsa folk remove it then there is still a source for it. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modifications to included libs
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 12:20 AM, Jan Hauke Rahm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm working on a package that includes some php libs (e.g. pear > packages). Some of those are already packaged for debian so it'd be > better at all if I'd set a dependency on it and don't ship the code > again, right? It is better that absolutely none of the embedded php libs are included/used/shipped in the .deb. If they are not packaged separately, the security team will not be happy at all. > First of all my question is how to do that. Can I just create a symlink > to the other package or must I modify the upstream source to look at the > right place (without using links)? I'd suggest reading the draft debian webapps policy and asking about this on the debian webapps list. I imagine your app has a config.php in which you can set the default php include path. > And the next question is: what can I do if upstream uses a modified > version of that lib? Is there a proper way to ship just the > modifications and for the rest use the files of the lib package? There is no proper way to ship embedded forks. Instead the fork should be merged upstream or dropped. Fix your app upstream so that it does not need the modifications, or get the php lib upstream to include the modifications and get that into Debian. The most acceptable hacky way to do it would be to create a libfoo-modified-php package that build-depends on the original version (libfoo-php), copy and apply a patch at build time, then ship the patched version in the libfoo-modified-php binary package. Then your webapp can depend on libfoo-modified-php. If there is *any* code duplicated in the source/binary package from other software, the security team must be notified of the situation so they can fix security issues properly. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.08-1 > of my package "xiterm+thai". Please try to fix the many GCC warnings in the next upstream release. > The package appears to be lintian clean. I see several warnings with lintian -I, please fix them and I will upload: W: xiterm+thai: debian-changelog-line-too-long line 16 I: xiterm+thai: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/txiterm.1.gz:32 I: xiterm+thai: desktop-entry-contains-encoding-key /usr/share/applications/xiterm+thai.desktop:3 Encoding -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: teeworlds
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's the zlib license (http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_license.html)
> with an extra clause forbidding some kind of commercial usage
> ("Neither this software nor any of its individual components, in
> original or modified versions, may be sold by itself"). I'm not really
> sure that it is DFSG-compliant. I'm CCing debian-legal to get other
> opinions on that.
That is a similar clause to the one in the Open Font Library. Fonts
using the OFL have been accepted into Debian, so presumably the
ftpmasters would accept this licence.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: teeworlds
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is a similar clause to the one in the Open Font Library. Fonts > using the OFL have been accepted into Debian, so presumably the > ftpmasters would accept this licence. s/Library/Licence -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: teeworlds
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Jack Coulter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've spoken again to matricks, he's stated that in the next release, he'll > be changing the license slightly, it will still remain free, but he's going > to clarify the last point. Please ask him to just drop it, since it is useless and isn't in the spirit of free software. Also licence proliferation is bad. > Aside from that, is this package suitable for inclusion? Are there any > changes I need to make? I suggest joining the Debian Games Team, adding your package there and helping out with other games (we need more contributors). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: teeworlds
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Jack Coulter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After having a heated debate with matricks and another developer void_ on > the teeworlds IRC channel, they are unwilling to change/remove point 4, but > brought up (as it has been here) that there are already packages in main > with similar clauses. I guess clause 4 is influenced by this situation: http://teeworlds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=942 In any case, the licence is better now than it used to be (no modifications before): http://mrcopilot.blogspot.com/2008/02/osggfg-31-tee-wars.html http://www.fsdaily.com/EndUser/Open_Source_Gamers_Guide_to_Free_Gaming_3_1_TeeWars_Review http://www.teewars.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=479 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Francisco García <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.1-1 > of my package "lynis". Sorry I missed the previous version, some comments: #474020 should not have been closed with a -done message, instead you should have closed it in the changelog of the new version. Leave it as-is for now though. Please use quilt (or dpatch) to patch the manual page and please send the changes to upstream. What is the reason for adding the dnsutils suggests? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 5:22 AM, Francisco García <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El mar, 15-04-2008 a las 22:32 +0800, Paul Wise escribió: > > #474020 should not have been closed with a -done message, instead you > > should have closed it in the changelog of the new version. Leave it > > as-is for now though. > > Yes, but since It wasn' a lynis bug, I decided to close it with a email. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough; there are two issues in that bug report: 1) please package the latest upstream of lynis (1.0.9 at the time) 2) the warning due to a broken sources.list, which was marked as a "side note" by the bug reporter #1 is still valid and #2 was invalid at the time. The appropriate action would have been to leave the bug open and add something like this to the changelog: * New upstream release (Closes: #474020) No need to do this now though for just a wishlist bug, something to keep in mind for the future though. > > What is the reason for adding the dnsutils suggests? > > I add dnsutils suggests because in /include/tests_networking script, it > runs "dig" command, and this is included in dnsutils package. > The dependency is not absolute or strong. > So, according to Helmut Grohne suggestion, I decided to add a suggest > dependency. Makes sense to me. Should I upload your 1.1.1 package now or do you want to switch to quilt (or dpatch). -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
Now I get a FTBFS due to not depending on libxt-dev for X11/Intrinsic.h, which is used by main.h and xdefaults.h. Not sure what changed since the other day, but please add libxt-dev to the Build-Depends. Strangely the configure script did not fail, the upstream Makefile did not fail and as a result the build only failed because chown could not find the binary. Please get upstream to check for X11/Intrinsic.h in the configure script and investigate why the build doesn't fail when it isn't present. It looks like the return value from make in the src subdir isn't getting passed out to the top-level make process somehow. Also, I think this line is wrong: cd doc ; mv -f xiterm.1 xiterm+thai.1 It should be this instead since you don't rename it in clean: cd doc ; cp -f xiterm.1 xiterm+thai.1 Also, when closing bugs that were fixed in an upload that was already done, please use a Version pseudo-header. Sending a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] without the Version pseudo-header is equivalent to marking the bug as invalid. I've fixed this by sending "fixed 438296 1.07-1" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:16 AM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see several warnings with lintian -I, please fix them and I will upload: Also, I about the lintian override about xiterm+thai being a setgid binary, please ask the security audit people to look at it: http://www.debian.org/security/audit/ http://blog.steve.org.uk/adopt_a_less_marital_tone.html http://blog.steve.org.uk/when_the_day_is_through.html When they have done the audit, please indicate that it has been audited in the lintian override file and if possible add a link to the audit. Since xiterm+thai is in etch, if any issues are found you may need to do a security update, more info about that is in the developers reference: http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-bug-security > PS: Sorry that I'm late, just the water festival in Thailand (April, > 13-15), a long holiday, a good time for the family :P Looks fun :) -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> for X11/Intrinsic.h in the configure script and investigate why the
> build doesn't fail when it isn't present. It looks like the return
> value from make in the src subdir isn't getting passed out to the
> top-level make process somehow.
Looks like this in the upstream makefile:
all allbin alldoc tags clean:
@for I in ${subdirs}; do (cd $$I; ${MAKE} $@ || exit 1); done
Should be replaced with this:
all allbin alldoc tags clean:
@for I in ${subdirs}; do (cd $$I; ${MAKE} $@) || exit 1; done
Same for the other targets in the Makefile.in that have a similar construct.
Switching to automake is another option since it gets this right and
also deals with make -k correctly.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Francisco M. García Claramonte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Should I upload your 1.1.1 package now or do you want to switch to > > quilt (or dpatch). > > Well, If you agree with me, I would like you upload the package, and I > send my changes to upstream. Anyway if It is necesary in next release, > I'll make the changes with dpatch. Uploaded. Please do try out quilt, it is so much better than dpatch/cdbs-simplepatchsys. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: RFS: wordpress
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 12:21 AM, Andrea De Iacovo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I recently adopted the wordpress package and now I'm looking for a sponsor. > The old sponsor (Lionel Elie Mamane) apparently doesn't want to > sponsor it anymore. Are you in contact with the security team to fix the security issues still present in etch? http://security-tracker.debian.net/tracker/source-package/wordpress -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: buildd is not building my package.
There is a simpler way this could be fixed: Pick a clearly-DFSG licence (GPL/BSD/etc) and just upload to main. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > in the meantime I'm searching the informations for the security issue > about the setuid/setgid which this package done, for now I found the > security audit tools which I can do the basically tests. > But I still don't know how to contact the security team > (mailing-list? I just subscribe but never recieve any mails, > is it still active?) > and how to beg them to review my package. There haven't been any mails on the list for the last two days: http://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2008/04/maillist.html I think just mail Steve Kemp about it, since he is the main person behind the audit stuff. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.09-1 > of my package "xiterm+thai". Uploaded. For future reference, please mention changes like the security issue in the RFS. Please remember to prepare a security update for etch and forward to the stable security team, more details are in the developers-reference. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: xiterm+thai (updated package)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Neutron Soutmun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.09-1 > of my package "xiterm+thai". Uploaded. For future reference, please mention changes like the security issue in the RFS. Please remember to prepare a security update for etch and forward to the stable security team, more details are in the developers-reference. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
