Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> James Troup wrote:
> > Actual .udebs + source:
> >
> > [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001.dsc
> > [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001.tar.gz
> > [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001_i386.udeb
> >
> > Packages.gz + Sources.gz:
> >
>
James Troup wrote:
> Actual .udebs + source:
>
> [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001.dsc
> [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001.tar.gz
> [..]/pool/m/main-menu/main-menu_0.001_i386.udeb
>
> Packages.gz + Sources.gz:
>
> [..]/dists/unstable/main/debian-installer/i386/Packag
Thanks James!
James Troup wrote:
> [..]/dists/unstable/main/debian-installer/i386/Packages.gz
>
> The last ("debian-installer/$arch") is pretty much random choice of
> various possibilities that have been suggested. It is of course
> changeable to anything similar and sensible that you guys
Hi,
I've added .udeb support to 'da-katie' and tested it (with a test
.udeb from Joey). I'm waiting for Jason to fix apt-ftparchive to
handle .udeb's but that (like the alterations to 'da-katie') is
trivial and shouldn't take long. Just to reiterate, here is how
things will look:
Actual .ude
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 07:12:10PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Having looked at where d-i is upto, and how far it's got to go, I'm
> > inclined to think that aiming for d-i to be the installer for woody (for
> > all architectures, for all environments) isn't completely unreasonable.
> > We'll prob
Anthony Towns wrote:
> - struct package_t *p = (struct package_t **)nodep;
> + struct package_t *p = (struct package_t *)nodep;
Hm, I thought I tried that.
> Assuming _tree_Free is actually not segfaulting as written.
Nope, it looks weird, but it's correct.
>
Erik Andersen wrote:
> Is your package source available? I would like to have a look to your .udeb
> producing changes so I get get busybox properly .udeb'ed as well. I looked in
> boot-floppies CVS and didn't see anything -- but I expected that since that is
> potato only...
It's the debian-in
On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 05:40:27PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> I'm happy to report that the main menu for the debian install
> seems to be almost done. I have just two items on my TODO list:
> * Fix the one warning at compile time.
--- tree.c 2000/10/28 22:58:30 1.6
+++ tree.c 2000
On Sat Oct 28, 2000 at 05:40:27PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> I'm happy to report that the main menu for the debian install
> seems to be almost done. I have just two items on my TODO list:
>
> * Fix the one warning at compile time.
> * Figure out how to handle configuring only one virtual pac
I'm happy to report that the main menu for the debian install
seems to be almost done. I have just two items on my TODO list:
* Fix the one warning at compile time.
* Figure out how to handle configuring only one virtual package (pick off
of a menu?) if the menu item depends on a virtual
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> What version of dpkg-dev do we need to make them build-depend on,
> Wichert?
That would be 1.7.0
Wichert.
--
/ Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \
| [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sat Oct 28, 2000 at 11:00:43AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> I think we need to get cvs commit messages from
> debian-boot/debian-installer cvs flowing to this mailing list (or some
> other list) again. I'm particularly interested in debian-installer
> commit of course; Aj and Randolph are hacking
I think we need to get cvs commit messages from
debian-boot/debian-installer cvs flowing to this mailing list (or some
other list) again. I'm particularly interested in debian-installer
commit of course; Aj and Randolph are hacking away on cdebconf and I
want to keep up..
So the log_accum stuff i
** Original Message **
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>Previously Joey Hess wrote:
>
>> FWIW, the following patch allows my .udeb package to build all the way:
>
>
>
>I don't seen any harm in that patch, applied.
>
>
>
>Wichert.
>
>
>
>--
>
> __
** Original Message **
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>Previously Joey Hess wrote:
>
>> FWIW, the following patch allows my .udeb package to build all the way:
>
>
>
>I don't seen any harm in that patch, applied.
>
>
>
>Wichert.
>
>
>
>--
>
> __
** Original Message **
Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>Previously Joey Hess wrote:
>
>> FWIW, the following patch allows my .udeb package to build all the way:
>
>
>
>I don't seen any harm in that patch, applied.
>
>
>
>Wichert.
>
>
>
>--
>
> __
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> > FWIW, the following patch allows my .udeb package to build all the way:
>
> I don't seen any harm in that patch, applied.
Yay, I guess we get to use udebs after all!
What version of dpkg-dev do we need to make them build-depend on,
Wiche
Previously Joey Hess wrote:
> FWIW, the following patch allows my .udeb package to build all the way:
I don't seen any harm in that patch, applied.
Wichert.
--
_
/ Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool
18 matches
Mail list logo
