On Tue, 03 Jul 2007, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 03.07.2007, 09:44 -0400 schrieb Anthony Towns:
> > On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 01:44:04PM -0400, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > > > Can someone tell me, why ftp.debian.org is la
Touko Korpela wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The network is started by /etc/rc0.d/S35networking, which starts ntpdate
when eth0 becomes "up". At that time, the local nameserver is not yet
available, it is started by /etc/rc[2345].d/S15bind9. ntpdate cannot
resolve the names of the NTP servers a
On 03/07/07, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Di den 3. Jul 2007 um 23:10 schrieb Josselin Mouette:
> When you talk about the "good old" XMMS, is it the one that cuts the
> sound each time you switch a workspace, or the one that randomly locks
> up when reading files over NFS?
I he
On Monday 02 July 2007 18:24, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Monday 2 July 2007 17:58, Frans Pop wrote:
> > On Monday 02 July 2007 17:45, Bruno Costacurta wrote:
> > > uupdate -u ../secpanel-0.5.2.tar
> > > New Release will be 0.5.2-1.
> > > uupdate: new version 0.5.2-1 <= current version 0.41+0.4.2-3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Di den 3. Jul 2007 um 23:10 schrieb Josselin Mouette:
> When you talk about the "good old" XMMS, is it the one that cuts the
> sound each time you switch a workspace, or the one that randomly locks
> up when reading files over NFS?
I heard this cr
"Paul Cager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, July 3, 2007 8:38 am, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Explain it in debian/copyright, that's the proper place (the
> > source files don't actually need license statement, even though of
> > course it helps transparence and is therefore encouraged).
>
> I
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 03:28:05PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
>> Running debian-rules can always have side effects and can actively
>> rely on them so a "--has-target" can not be implemented cleanly in
>> make.
>
> I am proposing hooking into the logic that ultimately decides that
> there is no su
On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 11:11:04PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> One of the issue is that tools like sbuild and pbuilder which want to
> take advantage of the Build-Depends-Indep split needs to know whether
> dpkg-buildpackage will call debian/rules build or build-arch.
It needs to know no such t
On Jul 04, Touko Korpela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any ideas to fix this? I'm having same problem with ntp+dnsmasq
Hope that some day we will switch to upstart.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> The network is started by /etc/rc0.d/S35networking, which starts ntpdate
>> when eth0 becomes "up". At that time, the local nameserver is not yet
>> available, it is started by /etc/rc[2345].d/S15bind9. ntpdate cannot
>> resolve the names of the NTP servers and fails.
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Eric Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: python-boto
Version : 0.9a
Upstream Author : Mitch Garnaat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/boto/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 03:06:36PM -0600, Art Edwards wrote:
> In testing, kile has been removed.
That doesn't appear to be the case.
> It appears that texlive is undergoing a reorganization. As a result,
> kile's dependencies are at odds with the new organization.
I don't see this in any versio
Le mardi 03 juillet 2007 à 20:57 +0200, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> Unless I am able to find such
> visible problems within minutes, this program is no replacement for the
> good old XMMS.
When you talk about the "good old" XMMS, is it the one that cuts the
sound each time you switch a workspace, or
In testing, kile has been removed. It appears that texlive is undergoing
a reorganization. As a result, kile's dependencies are at odds with the
new organization. When will kile be returned to the distribution?
--
Arthur H. Edwards
Senior Research Physicist
Air Force Research Laboratory
AFRL/VS
* Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070703 20:04]:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep
> > targets for lenny?"):
> >> Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch'
> >> target using 'make -f
* Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:02:50 -0700]:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:31:13PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > * Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:25:11 -0700]:
> > > But at a minimum, yes, the audacious-plugins package should be depending
> > > on
> > > libaudacious by way of shlibd
> Hi
>
> Could you get audacious + audacious-plugins-extra from unstable and tell
> us which formats are supported by xmms but not by audacious ?
>
Is there is a wiki page for this?
Just at a glance, here is what I see. I've pasted the package descriptions for
what I suspect are the most obs
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:31:13PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:25:11 -0700]:
> > But at a minimum, yes, the audacious-plugins package should be depending on
> > libaudacious by way of shlibdeps.
> There is no NEEDED entry in the plugins against libaudacious
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 10:01:47AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > So, an idea: what about checking "make -f /dev/null blah 2>/dev/null" first,
> > for some portability?
>
> What 'blah' are you planning to use that's guaranteed to n
Do you mean having the right audacious-plugins dependency on audacious
wouldn't be enough ?
Adeodato Simó a écrit :
> * Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:25:11 -0700]:
>
>> But at a minimum, yes, the audacious-plugins package should be depending on
>> libaudacious by way of shlibdeps.
>
> Ther
* Steve Langasek [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 12:25:11 -0700]:
> But at a minimum, yes, the audacious-plugins package should be depending on
> libaudacious by way of shlibdeps.
There is no NEEDED entry in the plugins against libaudaciousX. Do you
mean hardcoding the dependency instead? (Which, true, solves
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 08:46:45AM +0200, "Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)" wrote:
> I really hate circular depency and I'm not sure it's the better way. In
> fact, audacious is broken in testing for ages and forcing a build of mcs
> on mipsel would fix all that crap...
I wonder why audacious and audacio
#include
* Josselin Mouette [Tue, Jul 03 2007, 09:37:55AM]:
> Le mardi 03 juillet 2007 à 08:18 +0200, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> > Audacious, like many other players, has this stupid concept of reading
> > every file from the filelist to get the metadata. Not really realistic
> > when acting on slow
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > So, an idea: what about checking "make -f /dev/null blah 2>/dev/null" first,
> > for some portability?
>
> What 'blah' are you planning to use that's guaranteed to not have broken
> side-effects in some cases on Debian packages?
How about: "blah
Am Dienstag, den 03.07.2007, 09:44 -0400 schrieb Anthony Towns:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 01:44:04PM -0400, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > > Can someone tell me, why ftp.debian.org is lacking behind?
> > Apparently it's out of disk :(
>
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't have much to contribute to a discussion (other than to say that
> the idea seems reasonable), but I would like to register my interest in
> being a pair of eyeballs for whatever spec you come up with for this.
> Currently, maintainers that use d
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 06:40:37PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> Ian and I have chatted a few times about diversions in packages. It
> seems like it would be easier to look for packages that should divert
> (and don't), or do (and perhaps shouldn't :)) if the diversions were
> declared in the pack
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Heh, I was very much in favor of Homepage as a debian/control field; my
> objections to this use of Build-Options is not to the addition of this
> field (which also has other benefits), but to this particular use of it
> to declare information that must
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 10:54:07AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep
> > targets for lenny?"):
> >> Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch'
> >> target usi
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 06:07:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep
> targets for lenny?"):
> > Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch'
> > target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'.
> Why
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep
> targets for lenny?"):
>> Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch'
>> target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'.
> Why are we so resistant to
On 01/07/07, Vincent Fourmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
upstream source ships with HTML-only form of the octave's texinfo
documentation, which is licensed under GPL. This documentation is
actually not installed in any binary package (for many reasons).
Am I misunderstanding what you're saying?
Steinar H. Gunderson writes ("Re: RFC: declaritive diversions"):
> if ! dpkg --assert-declarative-diversions 2>/dev/null; then
> dpkg --divert etc.
> fi
I would prefer to do this in dpkg-divert. Eg
dpkg-divert --also-declaratively-declared ...
> Given that we already seem to have such a
Steve Langasek writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets
for lenny?"):
> Attached is a patch to dpkg which implements a check for a 'build-arch'
> target using 'make -f debian/rules -qn build-arch'.
Why are we so resistant to the new debian/control field ? That
doesn't req
Simon Richter writes ("Re: Bug#229357: Can we require build-arch/indep targets
for lenny?"):
> The entire issue circles around not being able to reliably detect
> whether the target is present using a simple script. But who said it has
> to be a script?
We want the package to _declare_ whether
Vincent Fourmond writes ("Source package containing HTML-only form of texinfo
doc"):
> I am currently reviewing the qtoctave package (#430731) before
> sponsoring it. The package is now in a pretty good shape, excepted with
> a problem for which I would like to have some advice: the qtoctave
> u
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I believe the attached patch has the following characteristics:
> > - Behavior on systems where 'make' is not GNU make is undefined.
> > Specifically, on such a sys
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 04:06:11PM +0100, Paul Cager wrote:
> On Tue, July 3, 2007 8:38 am, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Explain it in debian/copyright, that's the proper place (the source
> > files don't actually need license statement, even though of course it
> > helps transparence and is therefore
On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:06:11 +0100 (BST)
"Paul Cager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, July 3, 2007 8:38 am, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Explain it in debian/copyright, that's the proper place (the source
> > files don't actually need license statement, even though of course it
> > helps transpare
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 04:19:15PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ideally the setup should allow the same packages to declare diversions
> both ways. This would make the transition a lot easier.
if ! dpkg --assert-declarative-diversions 2>/dev/null; then
dpkg --divert etc.
fi
Given that we
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:50:52AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> This check would fail many packages that can still be built twice in a
> >> row (any package that runs autotools during the build process without
> >> doing a complicated dance to
Robert Collins writes ("RFC: declaritive diversions"):
> I don't have a proposed syntax at this point, but I was thinking a
> control file in the source such as debian/PACKAGENAME.diversions would
> be a good starting point - if thats able to record everything thats
> needed, even if the binaries s
On Tue, July 3, 2007 8:38 am, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Explain it in debian/copyright, that's the proper place (the source
> files don't actually need license statement, even though of course it
> helps transparence and is therefore encouraged).
I didn't realise that. I had assumed that each source
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 01:44:04PM -0400, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > Can someone tell me, why ftp.debian.org is lacking behind?
> Apparently it's out of disk :(
This is now fixed. Thanks for the report.
Cheers,
aj
signature.asc
D
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 04:45:41PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 03:16:11PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
> > I think more packages, and the wiki itself, could benefit
> > if this procedure could become a bit more standardised.
>
> Can someone upload an example of a wikipage, exp
Adeodato Simó a écrit :
* "Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)" [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:46:45 +0200]:
Hi Steve,
(My name is not Steve.)
Wasn't talking to new or mistake.
I really hate circular depency and I'm not sure it's the better way.
Well, do as Joss said and tighten the audacious-pl
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 06:40:37PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> Ian and I have chatted a few times about diversions in packages. It
> seems like it would be easier to look for packages that should divert
> (and don't), or do (and perhaps shouldn't :)) if the diversions were
> declared in the pack
* "Adam Cécile (Le_Vert)" [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 08:46:45 +0200]:
> Hi Steve,
(My name is not Steve.)
> I really hate circular depency and I'm not sure it's the better way.
Well, do as Joss said and tighten the audacious-plugins dependency in
audacious, *and* introduce tight dependencies against aud
* Josselin Mouette [Tue, 03 Jul 2007 09:34:19 +0200]:
> And the sane way to fix it is to make the plugins link to the library.
> This way audacious-plugins will depend on libaudacious5 and testing
> won't be broken again.
Yah, and what happens when the application (linked against
libaudacious4) d
Hi,
On Monday 02 July 2007 17:45, Jon Dowland wrote:
> Can someone upload an example of a wikipage, exported as
> docbook and post-processed? I'm interested to see e.g. what
> happens to links etc.
try
http://wiki.skolelinux.no/Dokumentasjon/ITIL/Samleside?action=format&mimetype=xml/docbook
o
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tomaz Solc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: z80dasm
Version : 1.0.0
Upstream Author : Tomaz Solc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.tablix.org/~avian/blog/articles/z80dasm
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
De
Joseph Neal a écrit :
Most of this packages are xmms plugins. Maintainers will need to port
them to xmms2 or bmpx, or they should be removed.
Other packages just depend on xmms as a mere multimedia player, and
therefore we recommend the maintainers to adjust their dependencies to
bmpx, xmms2 or
> Most of this packages are xmms plugins. Maintainers will need to port
> them to xmms2 or bmpx, or they should be removed.
>
> Other packages just depend on xmms as a mere multimedia player, and
> therefore we recommend the maintainers to adjust their dependencies to
> bmpx, xmms2 or audacious.
>
Ian and I have chatted a few times about diversions in packages. It
seems like it would be easier to look for packages that should divert
(and don't), or do (and perhaps shouldn't :)) if the diversions were
declared in the package rather than being done by turing complete
code :).
This is a long-p
* Paul Cager ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070702 23:04]:
> I'm packaging a couple of Java libraries where the source files do not
> have any license declarations. This is being fixed in upstream's svn
> repository.
>
> I still want to package upstream's latest *release* rather than the head
> of svn, so i
On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 09:26:23PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I believe the attached patch has the following characteristics:
> - Behavior on systems where 'make' is not GNU make is undefined.
> Specifically, on such a system dpkg is likely to either conclude that
> /all/ packages support '
Le mardi 03 juillet 2007 à 08:18 +0200, Eduard Bloch a écrit :
> Audacious, like many other players, has this stupid concept of reading
> every file from the filelist to get the metadata. Not really realistic
> when acting on slow filesystems. But this is something that made XMMS so
> much superiou
Le mardi 03 juillet 2007 à 00:40 +0200, Adeodato Simó a écrit :
> > windlord:~> audacious
> > Failed to load plugin (/usr/lib/audacious/Input/libaac.so):
> > /usr/lib/audacious/Input/libaac.so: undefined symbol:
> > vfs_buffered_file_new_from_uri
>
> Files in audacious-plugins are dlopened by au
58 matches
Mail list logo
