On Fri, 28 May 2010, Charles Plessy wrote:
[ Skipping the part that makes no sense to me ]
> With a simple debian/rules target, for instance ‘source’, the conflict about
> the source package formats can be made much milder, because it will be the
> choice of the maintainer to use or not dpkg-dev,
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Charles Plessy wrote:
> * In Debian changes files, Format is currently 1.8; I suppose that it
>defines the meaning and syntax of the other fields. Is there a place were
> the
>history of this file format is defined? Is it a general format number for
> what
>we ca
Le jeudi 27 mai 2010 à 13:38 -0500, Peter Samuelson a écrit :
> It's pretty clear that this is social engineering. The dpkg
> maintainers want to force every package maintainer to _think_ about
> which source format they wish to use. To ensure that, in the long run,
> you no longer have the choic
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Chris Silva
* Package name: marave
Version : 0.7
Upstream Author : Roberto Alsina
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/marave/
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: Python, Python-QT4
Description : A text editor that
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 06:08:43AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm developer of Spacewalk [1,2]. Spacewalk is an open source
> (GPLv2) Linux systems management solution. It is the upstream
> community project from which the Red Hat Network Satellite product
> is derived.
>
> Recently we a
Hi,
I'm developer of Spacewalk [1,2]. Spacewalk is an open source (GPLv2)
Linux systems management solution. It is the upstream community project
from which the Red Hat Network Satellite product is derived.
Recently we added initial support for Debian [3,4]. We even build
packages for Debian
Dear all,
binary packages are built from unpacked sources through a simple interface that
combines targets of the debian/rules file and environment variables, to build
packages whose structure is documented in our Policy. What about applying the
same logic for building source packages?
This would
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 630 (new: 8)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 123 (new: 3)
Total number of packages request
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:47:47PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote:
> How many packages are we talking about here? Is there a way to get the
> number of packages that have the same version in Lenny and Squeeze?
According to a quick query on UDD, there are 3169 source packages which
have the same source
>
> 2) A special case is true: The group is set as the main group of the
>user (in /etc/passwd) while the user is NOT added to his group
>in /etc/groups.
May pam_umask test this, for umask relaxation?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:05:51 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Yes, we're starting a long-term migration that will require every package
> to be modified. [..]
> No, we won't break packages, it's a migration and dpkg-source will be
> switched only when all packages have been modified. There are warn
Am Fri, 28 May 2010 00:15:17 +0200
schrieb "C. Gatzemeier" :
> but now, if we
> activate pam_umask, it will read UMASK 022 from login.defs again (and
> relax it conditionally).
err, that is the case if you keep the UMASK 022 and "usergroups"
option (the defaults). Of course you can set a fixed U
Am Thu, 27 May 2010 11:35:34 +0200
schrieb Wolodja Wentland:
> why not make the decision to use UPG explicit by setting
> "UPG = True"
I would say UPGs are already explicitly used.
If your UPG = True means that newly created users are created with user
private groups, than that is "USERGROUPS=y
Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
> So far this is independent of third packages which is IMHO fine and
> desirable. So far, this could be solved by a postfix-conf.d-snippet
> shipped with the amavis package.
Quite not. You also need to configure the incoming and outgoing ports of
amavis the correct
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Örjan Persson"
* Package name: python-setproctitle
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Daniele Varrazzo
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/py-setproctitle/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description : A se
On Tuesday 25 May 2010, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> 1. If your name is on the list at [2] please check at [3] the .dsc
> file that corresponds to the source packages you co-/maintain,
> review and fix. The .dsc files contain checkbashisms' output.
Do you want to start a list with errors that can b
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:34:32PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:59:25 +0200
> Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:43:36PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > > On 05/24/2010 11:05 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> I think the announcement is wrong, we cannot ever
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
X-debbugs-cc: debia...@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Hi,
I no longer have time and working hardware to maintain and test the package.
I'm therefore looking for somebody who wants to adopt it.
Anyone willing to maintain it please contact the Debia
Joey,
first of all thanks for the data... :)
On 2010-05-27, Joey Hess wrote:
> I wonder if anything can be learned from debhelper's history of
> compatability levels.
>
> numpkgs compat level introduced deprecated
> 1 8 Jun 2010
You really are from the future, then. ;-)
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Steffen Moeller
* Package name: libfsoresource
* URL :
http://wiki.freesmartphone.org/index.php/Implementations/libfsoresource
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : freesmartphone.org resource library
This C lib
Peter Samuelson wrote:
> It's pretty clear that this is social engineering. The dpkg
> maintainers want to force every package maintainer to _think_ about
> which source format they wish to use. To ensure that, in the long run,
> you no longer have the choice to simply ignore the format war.
I w
On 27/05/2010 21:17, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> I wasn't around for the libc5 => libc6 transition, but my understanding
> is it was larger than 20% of the archive. I would guesstimate the
> removal of /usr/X11R6 at being around the 20% mark (including binNMUs
> and all). So while they're uncommon,
Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> There are mostly three possibilities:
> 2) not require the file but choose old format in that case
>-> in case of error people silently get the old deficit format
That problem can easily be avoided by adding deprecation warnings.
Debhelper does this for packages that
]] Steve Langasek
| On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:54:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| > ]] Neil Williams
|
| > | You seem to think that every package is going to be uploaded just for
| > | the sake of an upload.
|
| > | There is no way to guarantee that ALL packages in Debian will be
| > | up
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:54:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Neil Williams
> | You seem to think that every package is going to be uploaded just for
> | the sake of an upload.
> | There is no way to guarantee that ALL packages in Debian will be
> | uploaded again by some point in the fu
[Gerfried Fuchs]
> Requiring the file won't get rid of format 1.0 but will make people put
> 1.0 into debian/source/format. Planing to make the file mandatory might
> indeed make more people think about it, though having the file won't
> make the format 1.0 go away.
It's pretty clear that this i
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ansgar Burchardt
* Package name: libmoosex-types-perl-perl
Version : 0.101340
Upstream Author : Ricardo SIGNES
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/MooseX-Types-Perl/
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+ (like perl)
Programmi
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ansgar Burchardt
* Package name: libcpan-meta-perl
Version : 2.101461
Upstream Author : David Golden ,
Ricardo Signes
* URL : /usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+ (like p
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: chrysn
* Package name: openscad
Version : 2010.05
Upstream Author : Clifford Wolf
* URL : http://www.openscad.org/
* License : GPL-2+ with exception for CGAL (libcgal)
Programming Lang: C++ and own domain specifc OpenS
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ansgar Burchardt
* Package name: libversion-perl
Version : 0.82 (upstream), 0.8200 (Debian package)
Upstream Author : John Peacock
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/version/
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+ (like perl)
On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:08:26 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
[reprepro]
> One think I could not answer was: can it do what mini-dinstalled called
> archive_style = flat
> so that we could cook-up an in-place substitution?
I don't think so.
> The answer seems to be
> "No" and pools have ad
2010/5/26 Joachim Wiedorn :
> Harald Braumann wrote on Tue, 25 May 2010:
>>
>> On simple standard system -- one disk, one kernel in /boot, no fancy
>> stuff -- it works quite well.
>
> This is enough to use grub2 for new installing of Debian.
>
>> On other systems it often breaks miserably. Update
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 07:10:37PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 06:13:13PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> > Colin added himself to the Uploaders field when I requested him to do so,
> > as he's been in charge of Ubuntu's switch to GRUB2 for Ubuntu and after
> > the "dis
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Paul Vojta, le Thu 27 May 2010 00:47:14 +, a écrit :
>> In article ,
>> Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, I don't trust in the future of LILO myself. If there's anything
>>> which only LILO can do, I recommend you start complaining on the
>>> Syslinux and the Gru
On 25 May 2010 at 06:59, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
| Dirk Eddelbuettel writes:
| > Every now and then mini-dinstall throws us a curve ball. Right now I am
| > seeing the errors below on my testing box (which is otherwise current).
| >
| > What can we do to fix the index file? I have removed Pa
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 08:05:32AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> I'm still feeling uneasy about this whole bash->dash thing. We sacrified
> a lot of usability in the name of POSIX compliance (only a minority of
> users care) and a few seconds spared during boot (who cares? I only boot
> my laptop
* Evgeni Golov [100527 11:32]:
> Alternatively, we could modify piuparts not to remove dbconfig-common
> before the tested package isn't gone (or actually: not to try to remove
> any deps before the tested package isn't gone) and thus ignore this
> problem, defining it as "not usual usecase" (who
* Gerfried Fuchs [100527 11:47]:
> Requiring the file won't get rid of format 1.0 but will make people put
> 1.0 into debian/source/format. Planing to make the file mandatory might
> indeed make more people think about it, though having the file won't
> make the format 1.0 go away. There are alre
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Asias He
* Package name: ibus-table-chinese
Version : 1.3.0.20100527
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/ibus/
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: Python
Description : provide chinese input method tables for IBus-Tabl
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 03:44:40PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> * Mike Hommey [2010-05-27 12:00 +0200]:
> > There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
> > when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
>
> Doesn't look like it's impossible:
>
> | dpkg-
* Carsten Hey [2010-05-27 15:44 +0200]:
> * Mike Hommey [2010-05-27 12:00 +0200]:
> > There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
> > when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
>
> Doesn't look like it's impossible:
>
> | dpkg-source: info: source f
* Mike Hommey [2010-05-27 12:00 +0200]:
> There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
> when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
Doesn't look like it's impossible:
| dpkg-source: info: source format `3.0 (quilt)' discarded: no orig.tar file
foun
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
>> Why would you like to go another way with mail servers?
> Because upstream doesn't want a conf.d folder, unfortunately, and that
Well, you can have something equal without upstream support by
concatenating conf.d snippets into one huge con
]] Neil Williams
| You seem to think that every package is going to be uploaded just for
| the sake of an upload.
|
| There is no way to guarantee that ALL packages in Debian will be
| uploaded again by some point in the future.
|
| If a package does not need an upload - e.g. the only "issue" i
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Hi!
It would be very helpful if the dpkg source format 1.0 could also allow
.orig.tar.bz2 packages in the archive. The reason for the request should
be quite obvious - more and more upstream packages are shipped in bzip2
compressed tarballs. Giv
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Wolodja Wentland wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 23:43 +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> > This one time, at band camp, Roger Leigh said:
> > > How will adduser cope with group addition; does it skip UIDs until
> > > it finds an unused unique UID/GID pair?
>
>
Stephen Leake wrote:
> Ludovic Brenta writes:
>> The reason for all this is that when a package libX2-dev Conflicts:
with
>> and Replaces: a package libX1-dev, aptitude does not remove libX1-dev
>> and install libX2-dev; instead, it marks libX1-dev as broken and leaves
>> libX2-dev uninstalled.
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00:47PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:26:02AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > * Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 08:11:36 CEST]:
> > | As far as I understood it, it's not that much about unpacking, because
> > | the format is pretty cle
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:27:40PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00:47PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > Why they want it unfortunately is a wrong reasoning - the actual
> > > pending and still unanswered question is "why it is needed". They
> > > want people to switch t
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 09:05:39 CEST]:
> > But I guess we already determined that automatic detection of various
> > things isn't always the best choice. Making 1.0 non-native and 1.0
> > native explicit wouldn't sound too wrong. :P)
>
> Unfortu
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00:47PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Why they want it unfortunately is a wrong reasoning - the actual
> > pending and still unanswered question is "why it is needed". They
> > want people to switch to 3.0. By forcing to put something into
> > debian/source/format people
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 23:43 +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Roger Leigh said:
> > How will adduser cope with group addition; does it skip UIDs until
> > it finds an unused unique UID/GID pair?
> That certainly is the only approach that makes sense - it has the
> benefit
Ludovic Brenta writes:
> Over the last two weeks I have been testing upgrades of Ada packages
> from Lenny to Sid and Squeeze in a chroot.
Thanks for looking at this.
> ...
> The reason for all this is that when a package libX2-dev Conflicts: with
> and Replaces: a package libX1-dev, aptitude
On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
> There is one possible benefit: impossibility to create a native package
> when the .orig.tar.gz is missing, which happens much too often.
in my world (which doesnt consist entirely out of Debian main on
ftp.debian.org) this is a regression.
sig
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:26:02AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> * Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 08:11:36 CEST]:
> | As far as I understood it, it's not that much about unpacking, because
> | the format is pretty clear then, but about packing (or in this case
> | repacking) the source p
Hi!
* Raphael Hertzog [2010-05-27 10:05:51 CEST]:
> Yes, we're starting a long-term migration that will require every
> package to be modified. The reasons are that the dpkg maintainers
> consider the format 1.0 to no longer be a desirable default for
> dpkg-source given the availability
* Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 09:05:39 CEST]:
> But I guess we already determined that automatic detection of various
> things isn't always the best choice. Making 1.0 non-native and 1.0
> native explicit wouldn't sound too wrong. :P)
Unfortunately, dpkg doesn't support that - thus adding
debian/
Hi,
piuparts has discovered a problem with one of my packages [1] and while
analyzing it, Holger and I came to the result, that piuparts *may* be
working wrong here - it removes the depends before purging my
(the tested) package.
Thus we are seeking for your opinion and suggestions.
For those who
Hi!
* Philipp Kern [2010-05-27 08:11:36 CEST]:
| As far as I understood it, it's not that much about unpacking, because
| the format is pretty clear then, but about packing (or in this case
| repacking) the source package. There you should be explicit in what
| you mean because future ve
On 05/26/2010 11:07 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Environment variables do not override variable definitions in a makefile.
You can't believe how messy upstream stuff can be. Messing with $(LDFLAGS) and
$${LDFLAGS} and simmilar stuff just happens
--
Bernd ZeimetzDe
Le mercredi 26 mai 2010 à 23:19 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> I realise that, but it's not default in various web browsers. (Well,
> most I've used seem to support both C-PgUp/C-PgDn and C-TAB/C-S-Tab).
> This is probably the major gripe for me each time I end up using
> epiphany for anything.
Hi,
On Wed, 26 May 2010, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > * dpkg-dev provides a new script called dpkg-buildflags that packages
> > should use in debian/rules to retrieve the default value of various
> > compilation flags. Bug #578597[1] has been submitted against
> > debian-policy. When gen
In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Stephen Powell wrote:
> But like lilo it stays out of unallocated (and therefore not backed up)
> sectors. The boot block of extlinux is installed in the boot sector
> of a partition, and the second stage loader occupies a file within the
> partition. It does
On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:12:24 +0200
Iustin Pop wrote:
> Data packages are a good point, to which I reply: how will they take
> advantages of new compression formats?
No need - just because these are data packages doesn't mean they are
even tens of kilobytes in size. These are source packages, not
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ihor Kaharlichenko
* Package name: python-django-photologue
Version : 2.2
Upstream Author : Justin Driscoll
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/django-photologue/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Python
Description
Neil,
am Thu, May 27, 2010 at 08:04:25AM +0100 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> dpkg should not abort - that will cause a FTBFS through no fault of the
> package. First thing dpkg-buildpackage does is pack up the unpacked
> source.
no, it does not for '-B', which is what our infrastructure uses.
On 05/27/2010 08:54 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Just one question: why /boot/extlinux/ ? Why can't it be
> placed directly to /boot, so that all kernel images may be
> referenced using relative paths?
there's more than one file used for the config, so putting them into an
own directory is bette
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:54:03AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:44:52 +0200
> Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > There is nothing wrong with a source package that glides through
> > > several stable releases without needing a rebuild, especially if it
> > > only builds an Arch:all bin
On 2010-05-27, Neil Williams wrote:
>> No, it doesn't. It is now but at some point there won't be any
>> default, meaning that if you don't have debian/source/format, dpkg
>> will error out. Nothing wrong with that.
> If, eventually, dpkg fails with an error when debian/source/format does
> not ex
On Thu, 27 May 2010 06:11:36 + (UTC)
Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-05-26, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > On Mittwoch, 26. Mai 2010, Philipp Kern wrote:
> >> ETOPIC. You have to specify the format in the package.
The lack of debian/source/format should be a de facto declaration of
source format
26.05.2010 22:32, Daniel Baumann wrote:
[]
how about adding your parameters to EXTLINUX_PARAMETERS in
/etc/default/extlinux? then they will be used for all images in the
config automatically.
in case that's not what you were looking for: as stated in another mail,
i've added update-extlinux/extl
71 matches
Mail list logo
