Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-fonts-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package name: ttf-konatuplus-light
Version: 20070104-1
Upstream Author: UTUMI Hirosi
URL: http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html
Descri
On Tue, Mar 24 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 24 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> If the spec is being bruited under the understanding that
>> the flaws do not matter
>
> Who's doing that? Of course the flaws matter.
>
>> So answering criticism
hi mike,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 03:29:59PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> You don't need to do that on initial import. You can use a grafts file
> to create the history you like from these 2 unrelated branches, and
> you can then use git filter-branch to rewrite the master branch to
> have the commi
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> Is there any information on how the typical package is supposed to use this
> new format,
See the dpkg-source manual page and this wiki page:
http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0
> (I'm a little confused on this) is it even in pla
On 25-Mar-2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think where we're at (with get-orig-source) right now is that
> uscan has a feature to run a script after downloading the upstream
> source. That seems like usually the right way of providing
> repackaging for new upstream source releases and I think we shou
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> Brainwave: no need to add a second public key to CRDA itself, the
>> wireless-regdb could install the public key corresponding to the
>> private key it was built with.
>
> Can you elaborate on what you mean? Do you mean for wireless-reg
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>
>> When we do, just adding a second public key to the CRDA pubkeys dir
>> and using the corresponding private key (from outside the package)
>> during the build process of wireless-regdb would
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> When we do, just adding a second public key to the CRDA pubkeys dir
> and using the corresponding private key (from outside the package)
> during the build process of wireless-regdb would be just fine. This
> would mean the maintainer of crda w
Daniel Dickinson writes:
> I kind of got lost in this discussion. Is there a summary and debian
> policy and debian reference patch so that those of us who are just
> looking to do what we're supposed to do know what we are supposed to do
> and how to do it?
I think where we're at (with get-ori
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:42:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Hello developers,
>
> I am hereby proposing the amendement below to the General resolution
> entitled "Enhance requirements for General resolutions".
>
> PROPOSAL START
>
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:18:51 -0400
Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> I'm finding that I can't keep up with devel but I would like to be able
> to see a summary of consensuses (consensii?) that result from the
> discussions, as well a final summaries of best practices (and changes
> to them. Also a neat
Is there any information on how the typical package is supposed to use
this new format, or (I'm a little confused on this) is it even in place
yet? If it's not in place how do we prepare for it?
Regards,
Daniel
--
And that's my crabbing done for the day. Got it out of the way early,
now I ha
I kind of got lost in this discussion. Is there a summary and debian
policy and debian reference patch so that those of us who are just
looking to do what we're supposed to do know what we are supposed to do
and how to do it?
Thanks,
Daniel
--
And that's my crabbing done for the day. Got it ou
(Sending a personal copy because you said that you weren't following
debian-devel easily. Apologies if this was a mistake.)
Daniel Dickinson writes:
> I'm finding that I can't keep up with devel but I would like to be able
> to see a summary of consensuses (consensii?) that result from the
> di
Hi,
I'm finding that I can't keep up with devel but I would like to be able
to see a summary of consensuses (consensii?) that result from the
discussions, as well a final summaries of best practices (and changes
to them. Also a neat changelog of policy changes I should be aware of.
Basically I w
* Kurt Roeckx [Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:52:22 +0100]:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 08:03:46PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > I'd also like to complain about the title text of the initial GR. It is
> > clearly manipulative, as it pretends to be merely describing the proposed
> > changes when in fact it
On Mittwoch, 25. März 2009, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Debbugs/ArchchitectureTags
> I'm not sure renaming-and-redirecting is possible on the wiki; if it is,
> someone please do so (and sorry for this mess).
done :-)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally si
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
Nothing against this but I used the term menu in a different than this
technical meaning. I hope this became clear in my mail.
That was clear, but it bumped up a old idea I had in my head ;)
Please take that idea serious...
To whom do you targeti
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-fonts-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package name: ttf-umeplus
Version: 20090209-1
Upstream Author: UTUMI Hirosi
URL: http://www.geocities.jp/ep3797/modified_fonts_01.html
Description: De
Grammostola Rosea writes:
> Could you comment on this? I think it's the best when Ardour will hit
> Lenny.
New packages are not in scope of the update policy of released debian
versions. So this is not going to happen.
> Second option is as a Lenny backport.
That's more likely. However only p
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
Grammostola Rosea writes:
Could you comment on this? I think it's the best when Ardour will hit
Lenny.
New packages are not in scope of the update policy of released debian
versions. So this is not going to happen.
Second option is as a Lenny backport.
Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
taste they need to be informed what to choose from. It's like a
restaurant
where you choose from a menu. Currently we are lacking a complete
multimedia
"menu" in Debian.
An menu entry for multimedia sounds good to me
(Ubunt
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 07:03:26PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > Now almost a month ago, I asked Don Armstrong to create architecture
> > tags in the BTS. I've always felt that such a thing would be useful,
> > because often porters are unaware of architecture-specific bugs,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:59:25AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 05:30:19PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > I made a short overview of this on the wiki, at
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Debbugs/ArchchitectureTags
>
> Got an extra ch in there?
That was pointed out on IR
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
taste they need to be informed what to choose from. It's like a restaurant
where you choose from a menu. Currently we are lacking a complete
multimedia
"menu" in Debian.
An menu entry for multimedia sounds good to me
(Ubuntu has an menu entry fo
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Actually technically it could be a different person. I maintain crda
> upstream and John maintains wireless-regdb upstream, for example. I
> just need John's pubkey file which is non-binary. CRDA just reads the
> regulatory.bin which wir
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:42 AM, Kel Modderman wrote:
>
>> The DFSG seems to suggest that the source code to the regulatory database
>> should be modifiable and the derived work distributed under the same license.
>
> It is my understanding tha
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:43:51 +0100
Grammostola Rosea wrote:
> Btw. why doesn't Ardour from unstable hit testing? This is normal for
> packages in Sid after some time right? Now there is no Ardour in stable
> AND testing.
All the information is available via the PTS for ardour:
Testing status
taste they need to be informed what to choose from. It's like a
restaurant
where you choose from a menu. Currently we are lacking a complete
multimedia
"menu" in Debian.
An menu entry for multimedia sounds good to me
(Ubuntu has an menu entry for 'multimedia production:
Vincent Danjean wrote:
Grammostola Rosea wrote:
I read this on the Debian multimedia mailinglist:
Unfortunately lenny was already freezed by that time, and although
both of the above updates were really safe (IMO) and despite all the
efforts I and especially Reinhard put into convincing
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Paul Wise wrote:
> debian-volatile isn't an appropriate place for this because many
> stable users don't use volatile and it is fairly important they are
> kept up to date with this, kinda like the timezone database.
AFAIK, volatile.d.o _is_ the proper way to keep the timezone
Russ Allbery wrote:
> debconf-devel(7):
>
> The config script should not need to modify the filesystem at all. It
> just examines the state of the system, and asks questions, and debconf
> stores the answers to be acted on later by the postinst script.
> Conversely, the postinst script should alm
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 03:45:30AM +1000, Kel Modderman wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 March 2009 17:39:03 Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > > Last time I poked them it seemed it was not easy to figure out how to
> > > deal with, if at all, the optio
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 02:32:19PM -0400, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> I cannot. I can say that I opened RC bugs and made sure others from the
> FTP team and from Release and Stable Release were aware of exactly what
> was happening. The uploader was upstream, so upstream was being made
> aware as well
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:42 AM, Kel Modderman wrote:
> The DFSG seems to suggest that the source code to the regulatory database
> should be modifiable and the derived work distributed under the same license.
It is my understanding that:
Debian probably won't need to build the regdb from sourc
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi
>
>> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
>> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup wasn't working yet. Sorry
>> about that.
>>
>> Now almost a month ago, I asked Don Ar
On Thursday 26 March 2009 03:41:30 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Kel Modderman wrote:
> > On Wednesday 25 March 2009 17:51:41 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Paul
Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>> Hi,
>> Hi
>>
>>> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
>>> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup wasn't working yet. Sorry
>>> about that.
>>>
>>> Now
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 03:57:49PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:44:19AM -0400, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> > yes, usually it should. It doesn't always. I have tried to file bugs
> > when I find them in the archive. The citadel related packages are a
> > recent example of thi
Luk Claes (25/03/2009):
> Michael Meskes wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:24:59PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> And while the new package is kept out, the package currently in the
> >> archive might not be suitable at all. In the case of a single binary
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 03:37 +1000, Kel Modderman wrote:
> > And as its probably best to coordinate with Ubuntu, they have a
> > wireless-crda package which combines both into one package. Its
> > shipping for Jaunty.
>
> And that's the only way to sanely package it (by combining the two pieces
>
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup wasn't working yet. Sorry
> about that.
>
> Now almost a month ago, I asked Don Armstrong to create architecture
> tags in the BTS. I've always
On Wednesday 25 March 2009 17:51:41 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Last time I poked them it seemed it was
Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:24:59PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
>>> Yes, there have definately been times when packages are rejected from
>>> NEW that only got there becuase of a package addition. I'd say its
>> ...
>> And while the new pack
On Wednesday 25 March 2009 17:39:03 Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>
> > Last time I poked them it seemed it was not easy to figure out how to
> > deal with, if at all, the optional but recommended RSA signature stuff
> > [1] with the DFSG.
> >
> > [1
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Kel Modderman wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 March 2009 17:51:41 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 05:30:19PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup wasn't working yet. Sorry
> about that.
>
> Now almost a month ago, I asked Don Armstrong to create arch
Lucas Nussbaum writes:
> On 25/03/09 at 09:06 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> There was a clear need for a clarification. Why we had to vote on the
>> clarification after Ganneff made it clear that it wasn't his intent to
>> implement prior to consensus is still highly perplexing to me.
> Joerg J
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 08:50:29AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Personally, my first instinct would be to call that an RC bug, but I may
> be missing some case where config needs to modify the file system.
Given that one of the original goals of all this was to allow the config
to be done on a di
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:24:59PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
> > Yes, there have definately been times when packages are rejected from
> > NEW that only got there becuase of a package addition. I'd say its
> ...
> And while the new package is kept out, the packag
On 25/03/09 at 09:06 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Romain Beauxis writes:
> > For 2008_002 in particular, there was a clear need of such a decision,
> > since the previous announce had been made as if it was about to happen
> > while there was apprently no consensus for it.
>
> There was a clear n
Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
> [...] we are having trouble keeping up with the NEW queue wihtout
> doing all of the source checks of packages not in the queue as you
> seem to be suggesting we should possibly be doing.
Actually, that's not what I meant to suggest. :) I've been wondering for
a whil
Romain Beauxis writes:
> Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 16:45:59 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
>> FWIW, it is not at all clear to me that there was any need for either
>> of those GRs (particularly 2008_002, which did indeed strike me as a
>> waste of the GR process).
> Well, even if I would agree
2009-03-25 (수), 11:13 -0400, Mike O'Connor:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 06:18:00PM +0900, Changwoo Ryu wrote:
> > OTH, do we really need a manual check for SONAME bump? Was there any
> > upload rejection in the past on new binary package addition cases?
>
> Yes, there have definately been times wh
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:44:19AM -0400, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> yes, usually it should. It doesn't always. I have tried to file bugs
> when I find them in the archive. The citadel related packages are a
> recent example of this. Unfortunately they don't always get filed. In
> my mind it would
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 16:45:59 Russ Allbery, vous avez écrit :
> > There was clearly a need for those GR, so raisong the number of
> > seconders would just have the consequence to prevent us from voting on
> > important topics.
>
> FWIW, it is not at all clear to me that there was any need for
Peter Palfrader writes:
> This raises some questions:
> - should config scripts be allowed to create/touch/modify files
>(I think the answer here is no)
debconf-devel(7):
The config script should not need to modify the filesystem at all. It
just examines the state of the system, a
Romain Beauxis writes:
> Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 04:57:39 Gunnar Wolf, vous avez écrit :
>> This proposal does not come from an abuse to the GR process, but to
>> generalized frustration about the way 2008_002 and specially 2008_003
>> were handled.
> I understand the furstration about them,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:24:59PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
> > Yes, there have definately been times when packages are rejected from
> > NEW that only got there becuase of a package addition. I'd say its
> > common, even. If a package passes through new, then
On 2009-03-25, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> As a hint. When this happens, respond to the REJECT email you get when
> you re-upload so that we know that there is a package we have already
> checked, so that we know you are re-uploading and addressing our
> concerns.
If you want this, please be more pu
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 16:18:46 Mike O'Connor, vous avez écrit :
> > I have several very small ocaml packages waiting in NEW for several weeks
> > now. I am upstream on these packages, and, honnestly, it takes few
> > minutes to check them (only 3 files of code in tarball).
>
> Of course, keep
Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
> Yes, there have definately been times when packages are rejected from
> NEW that only got there becuase of a package addition. I'd say its
> common, even. If a package passes through new, then the maintainer
> uploads without really paying attention to what they ar
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:32:23PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
>
> I have several very small ocaml packages waiting in NEW for several weeks now.
> I am upstream on these packages, and, honnestly, it takes few minutes to
> check
> them (only 3 files of code in tarball).
Of course, keep in mind
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 06:18:00PM +0900, Changwoo Ryu wrote:
> 2009-03-25 (???), 16:55 +0800, Deng Xiyue:
>
> > IMHO, except package with just SONAME bump, packages in NEW queue are
> > better processed in a FIFO manner. Just my two cents.
>
> OTH, do we really need a manual check for SONAME bu
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> What about:
> General Resolution sponsorship requirements
sounds like package sponsorship requirements to me. therefore i suggest
to be extra clear and change it to 'Requirements for General Resolution
Sponsorship'.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:18:20PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> This raises some questions:
It might also explain why someone found sbuild-createchroot was
running apt-get upgrade on the host system.
> - should config scripts be allowed to create/touch/modify files
>(I think the answer he
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 02:13:42PM +, Roger Leigh
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 08:44:55PM +0100, sean finney wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 09:52:28AM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
> > > > find . -type f -name 'foo*.dsc' | sort (or similar tools, make sure
> > > > they're
> > > > sorted
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Francesco Paolo Lovergine
* Package name: dans-gdal-scripts
Version : 0.14
Upstream Author : Dan Stahlke
* URL : http://www.gina.alaska.edu/projects/gina-tools
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
Description :
Le Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:39:12PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa a écrit :
>
> Most of the REJECTs are very trivial, so any peer review helps to spot
> them. I'd say that 90% of the REJECTs are simple "the package contains
> license X files but X isn't listed in debian/copyright." Spotting
> these before t
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 08:44:55PM +0100, sean finney wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 09:52:28AM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
> > > find . -type f -name 'foo*.dsc' | sort (or similar tools, make sure
> > > they're
> > > sorted in a way as dpkg would sort the versions) | while read i; do
> > > git-
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:37:37PM +0100, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
> > >> Why only in 64studio and not in plain Debian?
> > What's good for Debian is good for us :-) but the Debian project may
> > not want to tweak the kernel or the FireWire stack just for the
> > benefit of FFADO users. In the
2009/3/25 Julien Cristau
> On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 12:58 +0100, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
>
> > Why is such a core app and also beautiful app as Ardour is, not even in
> > Debian stable or testing? This is a big problem imo and it should be
> > solved as soon as possible. I can't imagine that there
Grammostola Rosea wrote:
> I read this on the Debian multimedia mailinglist:
>> Unfortunately lenny was already freezed by that time, and although
>> both of the above updates were really safe (IMO) and despite all the
>> efforts I and especially Reinhard put into convincing the release
>> managers
Sven Luther dijo [Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 07:01:17AM +0100]:
> > This proposal does not come from an abuse to the GR process, but to
> > generalized frustration about the way 2008_002 and specially 2008_003
> > were handled.
>
> But the reason for this are in no way related with the number of
> secon
On Wednesday 25 March 2009, Frans Pop wrote:
> dpkg-preconfigure is part of the debconf package, and gets called using
> the following configuration setting:
> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/70debconf:
> DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs {"/usr/sbin/dpkg-preconfigure --apt || true";};
You can probably just remove this
On Wed, Mar 25 2009, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ke, 2009-03-25 kello 01:32 +, Noah Slater kirjoitti:
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:39:46AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> > I'm curious... What do you think *is* the "Debian way of doing things
>> > like this" ?
>>
>> Manoj's email strongly implie
> o Is the fact that the config script is run on the host a bug in
> apt-get, dpkg, debconf, or apt-utils?
dpkg-preconfigure is part of the debconf package, and gets called using
the following configuration setting:
/etc/apt/apt.conf.d/70debconf:
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs {"/usr/sbin/dpkg-pr
I was requested to forward the following mail by Sven Luther:
- Forwarded message from Sven Luther -
From: Sven Luther
To: Gunnar Wolf , listmas...@debian.org
Cc: Romain Beauxis , debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
debian-v...@lists.debian.org
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 07:01:17 +0100
S
On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 12:32 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> My personal experience is not consistent with this.
>
> I have several very small ocaml packages waiting in NEW for several weeks now.
> I am upstream on these packages, and, honnestly, it takes few minutes to
> check
> them (only 3 file
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Could you elaborate a bit? From what I gather (after reading the docs and
skipping through the pages you have referenced), all I see are tasks (enhanced
with metapackages with Recommends), and a nice web frontend. I'm pretty sure
I'm missing something h
Grammostola Rosea writes:
> Shouldn't plain Debian also support those Pro audio Firewire devices,
> the ones the FFADO team are making drivers for?
Debian as a whole probably not. However interested contributors are
strongly encouraged to help the debian kernel maintainers to integrate
that patc
* Paul Wise [Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:29:10 +0900]:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > I’m told libbfd.so is a private/internal library of binutils that should
> > not be dynamically linked against. A static version exists (libbfd.a),
> > and packages should be using that AFAI
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> I’m told libbfd.so is a private/internal library of binutils that should
> not be dynamically linked against. A static version exists (libbfd.a),
> and packages should be using that AFAIK.
>
> Cc'ing -devel in case there’s a reason it should
Hi,
part of the debconf stuff in our packages is the config script. This
script's purpose is to ask the sysadmin questions via debconf. The
action should then happen in the postinst maintainer script.
The way our buildds work right now is that the host apt and host dpkg
are asked to install the
On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 12:58 +0100, Grammostola Rosea wrote:
> Why is such a core app and also beautiful app as Ardour is, not even in
> Debian stable or testing? This is a big problem imo and it should be
> solved as soon as possible. I can't imagine that there is a real
> problem, cause I know
Romain Beauxis writes:
> I have several very small ocaml packages waiting in NEW for several
> weeks now. I am upstream on these packages, and, honnestly, it takes
> few minutes to check them (only 3 files of code in tarball).
There are currently 46 packages in NEW which have been there for more
Hi,
Now we're talking about improving Debian for multimedia, realtime
kernels and the like, I thought let's make some work on more things to
overcome some dissadvantages of Debian for audio production compared to
other distro's.
Why is such a core app and also beautiful app as Ardour is, not
Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, nescivi wrote:
Given that there are several audio oriented distributions based on
Debian
(e.g. 64studio and pure:dyne) that would benefit from this, and I am
sure
their teams may be interested in helping to support it too.
IMHO it makes perfectly se
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 11:08:28 Stefano Zacchiroli, vous avez écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:03AM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> > > Most of the time this is the case. But, if you upload a large, complex
> > > package, that might get passed by for a while so that several small,
> > > eas
Hello,
> Looks like oprofile needs a rebuild .
> $ opreport
> opreport: error while loading shared libraries: libbfd-2.18.0.20080103.so:
> cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
> $ dpkg -L binutils | grep libbfd-
> /usr/lib/libbfd-2.19.1.so
I’m told libbfd.so is a private
Andreas Tille wrote:
>> After reading the documentation, I still don't know if a blend is useful for
>> us. Blends seem to be some kind of cooler tasks, is that true?
>
> Well, the terminology was taken over from tasksel at some former point
> in time - but it is a little bit more.
Could you ela
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:03AM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> > Most of the time this is the case. But, if you upload a large, complex
> > package, that might get passed by for a while so that several small,
> > easy packages might be processed in the same time.
>
> Obviously this is causing sta
On Mittwoch, 25. März 2009, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Munin ... does not
> support alerting
It does. Directly or via nagios.
regards,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Is the NEW queue going to get processed any time soon? There are 215
> packages waiting [1] about half of which have been there 3 or more
> weeks.
It might be worthwhile reflecting upon what purpose the queue has. In
a simple model, if
Jonathan Wiltshire writes:
> I enquired previously about whether we might have some developers
> assist the ftpmasters by pre-assessing packages and reporting
> appropriately, which might ease the process. I don't know if this would
> actually help them or just duplicate work, since they need to b
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:11:03AM +0100, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> Obviously this is causing starvation. Maybe one ftpmaster should always work
> from the back of the queue, or they should make sure to always process one
> package from the back of the queue for every three from the front?
That's not
2009-03-25 (수), 16:55 +0800, Deng Xiyue:
> IMHO, except package with just SONAME bump, packages in NEW queue are
> better processed in a FIFO manner. Just my two cents.
OTH, do we really need a manual check for SONAME bump? Was there any
upload rejection in the past on new binary package additio
Le Wednesday 25 March 2009 04:57:39 Gunnar Wolf, vous avez écrit :
> > I agree. I fail to see where the GR process was abused. Since that seems
> > the main argument in favour of this change, I fail to see the motivation
> > for it.
>
> This proposal does not come from an abuse to the GR process, b
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:02:18PM +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > IMHO, except package with just SONAME bump, packages in NEW queue are
> > better processed in a FIFO manner. Just my two cents.
>
> Most of the time this is the case. But, if you upload a large, complex
> package, that might get
Deng Xiyue writes:
> IMHO, except package with just SONAME bump, packages in NEW queue are
> better processed in a FIFO manner. Just my two cents.
Most of the time this is the case. But, if you upload a large, complex
package, that might get passed by for a while so that several small,
easy pack
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
