> Honestly, I don't care about SVN or GIT. What I do care about is that you
> provide me a usable tarball and you don't do that currently. At least
> GitHub can build tarball on the fly for me... but only when I want
> everything in the repository.
Ok, I'm sorry for the trouble. The ground has sh
Hi,
On Mon, 14 Sep 2015, Tim wrote:
> Could you actually just try using subversion? I may be mirroring it
> on GitHub, but that doesn't mean I use git. I'm not convinced I even
> like git. Far too complex for simple projects.
>
> Anyway, I'm just pushing a mirror of my SVN repo to GitHub right
> - then the package fails to build for us with "scons" 3.6 that is present
> in unstable... somehow it tries to install the library in the target
> where we are trying to build it. I did not understand why...
Ok, so I'm not sure what you're running into here. I cleaned out all
build artifact
Hi guys,
Just got back from vacation myself.
> So we tried to update the package but failed rather miserably:
> - first your version number generator is broken since it tries to embed a
> SVN revision number that no longer exists now that you migrated on
> GitHub (we worked around that by dr
Hello Tim,
sorry for the delay of my answer but August was DebConf and vacation...
On Fri, 07 Aug 2015, Tim wrote:
> I finally had a chance to take another crack at this. I've attempted
> to address all of the items listed above. I integrated your guys' soname
So we tried to update the package
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2015, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > we just tried the trunk. It's better but there are still multiple
> > problems:
> > - LDFLAGS is not used when you link the executables (it's only used when
> > you link libregfi)
> > - the default value for LDFLAGS is wrong, "-z relro" is an opti
Hi Raphael,
> You can now base your work on this updated package:
> http://http.kali.org/pool/main/r/reglookup/reglookup_1.0.1+svn282-0kali2.dsc
Thanks much for putting this together.
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2015, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > we just tried the trunk. It's better but there are still mult
Control: tag -1 + patch
Hi,
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, Eriberto Mota wrote:
> I can update reglookup. However, I need 10 days, because I am
> traveling now and I can't use my GPG key.
You can now base your work on this updated package:
http://http.kali.org/pool/main/r/reglookup/reglookup_1.0.1+svn282-
Hello Tim,
we just tried the trunk. It's better but there are still multiple
problems:
- LDFLAGS is not used when you link the executables (it's only used when
you link libregfi)
- the default value for LDFLAGS is wrong, "-z relro" is an option for "ld" but
when you pass it through gcc you nee
Hi,
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, Tim wrote:
> Ok, that makes sense. Right now the python library installation is
> all lumped in with the "install" target. You could build binaries
> without interference, but once you tried to install just certain
> pieces, the python wrappers will always install, which
> I don't have a good reference either, but I just found this:
> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Program-Library-HOWTO/shared-libraries.html#AEN95
>
> At least it gives you the command line to use to define the SONAME
> of the library.
>
> You want your library to have a SONAME of libregfi.so.1 installed i
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, Tim wrote:
> > * The library is not versioned, you need to have proper SONAME management
> > for libraries packaged in Debian.
> > https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide#Libraries
> > (this is really important for us, only versioned libraries can be
> > represented in th
Hi Raphael,
> We started working on this update but there are multiple problems:
Ok, so this is the kind of feedback I've been hoping to hear for some
time.
> * The library is not versioned, you need to have proper SONAME management
> for libraries packaged in Debian.
> https://wiki.debia
Hi Tim,
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Jun 2015, Tim wrote:
> > Yeah, it's sad. I need some one to *help* me package it and take
> > ownership of the packaging. There's very little maintenance at this
> > point, since there's not really any active feature development an
Hi,
I am trying update all 'abandoned' packages in Forensics Team. I
started this work in December 2014.
I can update reglookup. However, I need 10 days, because I am
traveling now and I can't use my GPG key.
Cheers,
Eriberto
2015-06-05 7:25 GMT-03:00 Raphael Hertzog :
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 03 Ju
Hi,
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015, Tim wrote:
> Yeah, it's sad. I need some one to *help* me package it and take
> ownership of the packaging. There's very little maintenance at this
> point, since there's not really any active feature development and
> infrequent releases. It's just a matter of getting
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 07:54:31AM -0700, Tim wrote:
> Yeah, it's sad. I need some one to *help* me package it and take
I have this same problem currently. I would be very happy to upload other new
versions too in forensics-area and also fix bugs. Mika can probably sponsor our
uploads. Not sure i
> 4 years later Debian still has 0.12 :-(
>
> If you can prepare an updated package, I might look at sponsoring it.
Yeah, it's sad. I need some one to *help* me package it and take
ownership of the packaging. There's very little maintenance at this
point, since there's not really any active fe
Hello,
On Sat, 01 Oct 2011, Tim wrote:
> I released 1.0.1 today. Since 0.99.0, RegLookup has included Python wrappers
> that are now used by third-party projects, including Registry Decoder and DFF.
> It would help those projects' packaging efforts a lot if a recent version of
> RegLookup were in
Package: reglookup
Version: 0.12.0-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: upstream
I released 1.0.1 today. Since 0.99.0, RegLookup has included Python wrappers
that are now used by third-party projects, including Registry Decoder and DFF.
It would help those projects' packaging efforts a lot if a recent ver
20 matches
Mail list logo
