On 09/05/07 17:55 +0530, Y Giridhar Appaji Nag said ...
> I filed a lintian wishlist bug (#527363) requesting a I/W tag when non
> documentation packages recommend documentation packages.
>
> With Install-Recommends being the default, many packages pull in a lot of
> associated documentation. The
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I still think Build-Options-Supported is fundamentally the wrong way
>> to implement that. You have to modify every package to add it
>> anyway, in which case you can just as easily support it in the
>> package's debian/rules
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > If you refer to the fact, that dpkg-buildpackage cleans and rebuilds
> > everything and that it can take a lot of time, then please stop using
> > arguments that do not hold at all. you can call arbitrary debian/rules
> > targets with dpkg-buildpacka
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
>
> > BTW, just to make things clear. It's likely that those Makefile
> > snippet (if we decide to go that way) become quite more elaborated as
> > we try integrating support for things like hardening-wrapper (see
> > #489771). E
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag wrote:
> Hi debian-devel,
>
> From policy 7.2 Binary Dependencies - Depends, Recommends, Suggests, Enhances,
> Pre-Depends
>
> Recommends
>
> This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency.
>
> The Recommends field should list packages that would be found tog
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 09:59:36AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > A read-only / should work out of the box just like a read-only /usr. I
>> > haven't installed a fresh one in a long while though so if you kn
Ben Finney dijo [Wed, May 06, 2009 at 04:31:02PM +1000]:
> [no answers for this yet on ‘debian-mentors’, so trying here]
>
> Howdy all,
>
> I have an upstream for a package who has started using a VCS hosting
> site for publishing the code. It's possible they will continue to make
> tarball relea
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 04:38:59PM +0100, Roger Leigh
wrote:
> There's a patch for /etc/mtab elimination; it's totally unneeded nowadays.
More than unneeded, it is absolutely irrelevant when using mount namespaces.
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dominik George
* Package name: twittare
Version : 0.7.42
Upstream Author : TabaréCaorsi
* URL : http://www.twittare.com/
* License : GPL-3+
Programming Lang: C++
Description : A Twitter client for Linux written
* Simon Josefsson , 2009-05-11, 15:06:
What about msmtp? http://msmtp.sourceforge.net/
AFAIK msmtp does not support local mail delivery.
I suspect that is part of the design goal of msmtp. Local mail delivery
can be handled by other tools, can't it? Generally, it seems like a
good idea to s
Intel and Nokia are pleased to jointly announce the oFono project
(http://ofono.org), an open source project for developing an open source
telephony solution.
oFono.org is a place to bring developers together around designing an
infrastructure for building mobile telephony (GSM/UMTS) applications.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mikhail Lukyanchenko
* Package name: python-django-djapian
Version : 2.2.1
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/djapian/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Search API for Django with Xapian
--
T
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 03:43:41PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> You are a very special case: a developer since very long time, with a
> enormous knowledge of debian policy (and dpkg internal).
> But I really think that most people outside DD use dpkg-buildpackage
> because it is the easier
"Giacomo A. Catenazzi" writes:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> The only builds Debian supports are not just the buildd ones. As
>> members of the free software community, we should also cater to end
>> users building, tweaking, and rebuilding our software.
> You are a very special case: a
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> BTW, just to make things clear. It's likely that those Makefile
> snippet (if we decide to go that way) become quite more elaborated as
> we try integrating support for things like hardening-wrapper (see
> #489771). Expect stuff like "if debian/control has
> Build-Optio
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 09:20:44AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, May 11 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> >
> >> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>> > A separate /usr *is* the way to go if you don't want any writes in
> >>>
On Mon, May 11 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I would prefer Debian to remain a full fledged member of the free
>> software community, and continue to not let build behaviour diverge
>> whether or not dpkg-buildpackage was used -- which can
On Mon, May 11 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
>
>> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> > A separate /usr *is* the way to go if you don't want any writes in
>>> > that filesystem 99.9% of the time (i.e. when you're not doing an
>>> > upgrad
On Fri, 8 May 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote in [1]:
Those tasks are read from the Packages files (the Task: field that some
entries have). I'm not sure how this field is managed.
When trying to track down the origin of the task column in UDD[1] I learned
that it is just copied from the task field
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Sun, May 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:37:46PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On Sunday 10 May 2009 13:56:04 Steve Langasek wrote:
I thought it was generally recognized that it's a Bad Idea to implement
config files using your interpreter
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Simon Josefsson , 2009-05-11, 12:55:
> +1 for ssmtp
I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths from memory.
>>>
>>> Please not ssmtp. If I recall it correctly I found no way to get it
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 09:59:36AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > A read-only / should work out of the box just like a read-only /usr. I
> > haven't installed a fresh one in a long while though so if you know of
> > problems speak up
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Holger Levsen writes:
Hi,
On Sonntag, 10. Mai 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
With the include approach, we lack this feature and bad/broken local
overrides can't be detected if we only have the build log at hand.
which reminds me that we dont have build logs for pro
Il giorno lun, 11/05/2009 alle 15.06 +0200, Marco d'Itri ha scritto:
[...]
> > With 2.6 kernels, we may use the "bind" option in order to mount
> > a /etc/hylafax on /var/spool/hylafax/etc. So, I am finally moving to
> > this new configuration, but I have a few concern that I would like to
> > shar
On May 11, Giuseppe Sacco wrote:
> delivering packages that do not work with kernel 2.4. Now I believe that
> 2.4 kernel is no more supported.
This has been true since lenny.
> With 2.6 kernels, we may use the "bind" option in order to mount
> a /etc/hylafax on /var/spool/hylafax/etc. So, I am f
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> A read-only / should work out of the box just like a read-only /usr. I
> haven't installed a fresh one in a long while though so if you know of
> problems speak up so bugs can be filed and packages can be fixed.
Last time I tried it, /etc was a pr
* Simon Josefsson , 2009-05-11, 12:55:
+1 for ssmtp
I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths from memory.
Please not ssmtp. If I recall it correctly I found no way to get it
to send mail to a exim-based smarthost vi
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > A separate /usr *is* the way to go if you don't want any writes in
>> > that filesystem 99.9% of the time (i.e. when you're not doing an
>> > upgrade).
>>
>> A read-only / does the trick just as well. And
Travis Crump wrote:
> Daniel Burrows wrote:
>> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 02:58:56PM -0700, Russ Allbery
>> was heard to say:
I think that lintian warning is the right way to do it.
>>> I don't -- I think there are too many false positives for a lintian
>>> warning given the thread. I also thin
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > A separate /usr *is* the way to go if you don't want any writes in
> > that filesystem 99.9% of the time (i.e. when you're not doing an
> > upgrade).
>
> A read-only / does the trick just as well. And if you don't want
> writes to /usr you proba
Philipp Kern writes:
> On 2009-05-11, Brian May wrote:
>> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Jens Peter Secher wrote:
>>> +1 for ssmtp
>> I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
>> generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths from memory.
>
> Please not s
Hi all,
I am packaging the new hylafax version, 6.0. Now that Lenny has been
released I am taking squeeze as base distribution, but I would also give
support to older distribution. Starting from sarge, all users where
strongly advised to update to 2.6 kernel; etch and lenny started
delivering packa
On 2009-05-11, Brian May wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Jens Peter Secher wrote:
>> +1 for ssmtp
> I found ssmtp couldn't cope with mail my various systems were
> generating, something about fixed maximum buffer lengths from memory.
Please not ssmtp. If I recall it correctly
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Erik de Castro Lopo
* Package name: haskell-bzlib
Version : 0.5.0.0
Upstream Author : Duncan Coutts
* URL :
http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/bzlib
* License : BSD-style
Programming Lang: Has
On Monday 11 May 2009 09:49:31 Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 11 May 2009, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Well, debuild calls dpkg-buildpackage most of the time, unless you give a
> > specific target (which would again possibly be of interest to those who
> > are interested in calling debian/rules b
On Monday 11 May 2009 07:45:02 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Changing defaults with a large installed base begs the
> question: Why? Random churn for churns sake is not the answer.
But upgrades would (should?) keep exim installed. A new default would only
affect new installations.
--
To
36 matches
Mail list logo
