Tomas Fasth:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> I sent you an answer 7th of May, see below.
>
> Regards, Tomas
I'm sorry. Please accept my appologies for this false alarm!
Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:14:49PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
> biarch/triarch can finally go away.
> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?
zlib is rather low
Le Tue, May 22, 2012 at 04:01:29PM +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:25:21PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > Ben Hutchings dixit:
> >
> > >> > Eventually (wheezy+2? +3?) we would stop building a kernel package for
> > >> > i386.
> > >>
> > >> As in drop the i386 arch?
Greetings,
[ I already asked this on d-dpkg, but go no response, so am "re-posting"
this question to -devel. The original report along with full log is in
#671711 ]
On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 10:37:53AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> […]
> Hi,
>
> during a test with piuparts I noticed your pa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Koch skrev 2012-05-22 09:18:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not sure, whether I should ask here. I already wrote a mail to
Tomas Fasth
> some weeks ago (I believe, can't find it anymore). I'd like to fix some
of the
> issues in the termit package.
>
> But there
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:30:30PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> The correct solution here is that the MTA that supports 8BITMIME
> itself and wants to send an 8-bit message to another MTA that
> doesn’t offer it in the EHLO dialogue (or doesn’t support EHLO)
> *must* convert the message to QP an
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 08:51:17PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 09:18:21PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > On 2012-05-22 20:40 +0200, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > On 22/05/12 19:24, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > >
> > >> and anything that uses libx86 won't work either (#492470).
..
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 08:08:29PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Hm, 2035 or thereabounds sounds good. ;-) Then let’s talk again.
Are you volunteering to maintain the i386 architecture until 2035, or
volunteering Ben to do it? ☺
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.or
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Chow Loong Jin
* Package name: tinyxml2
Version : 0~git20120518.1.a2ae54e
Upstream Author : Lee Thomason
* URL : http://www.grinninglizard.com/tinyxml2/
* License : zlib/libpng
Programming Lang: C++
Description :
Ben Hutchings dixit:
>> >> As in drop the i386 arch?
>> >
>> >No, keep i386 userland only.
>>
>> Oh, definitely not! Please keep this runnable on at least
>> machines such as Soekris (486-compatible), Pentium-M, etc.
>
>For ever and ever and ever?
Hm, 2035 or thereabounds sounds good. ;-) Then l
Guillem Jover dixit:
>> Ah, no, don’t use ar to create .deb files.
>>
>> http://www.mirbsd.org/permalinks/wlog-10_e20110818-tg-g10046.htm
>
>Using binutils' ar should be considered supported, and works fine with
>dpkg-deb and dpkg, the accepted format is documented in deb(5). I'd
The problem is t
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 09:18:21PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2012-05-22 20:40 +0200, Simon McVittie wrote:
>
> > On 22/05/12 19:24, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >
> >> and anything that uses libx86 won't work either (#492470).
> >
> > Is this the right bug? According to the reporter's reportbug Sys
On Sun, 2012-05-20 at 14:03:35 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > On 2012-05-20 11:27 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > > Slightly OT but I wanted to mention it for its similarity:
> > >
> > > One thing that should be tested and then do
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 12:47:01 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Guillem Jover dixit:
> > the archive override. And if we have to keep changing the packages
> > anyway to make sure they match changing priorities, we might as well
> > just set the compressor (to gzip) explicitly for base packages.
>
On 2012-05-22 20:40 +0200, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On 22/05/12 19:24, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> and anything that uses libx86 won't work either (#492470).
>
> Is this the right bug? According to the reporter's reportbug System
> Information, he's running libx86/i386 on one of the i386 kernel
> flav
On 22/05/12 19:24, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 07:27:21PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>>> We have still some software that doesn't work with 64-bit kernel,
>>> and (worse!) some maintainers claiming it's not a bug.
> The most prominent example is probably virtualbox (#456391)
That
Quoting Joe Dalton (joedalt...@yahoo.dk):
> pages doesn't seem to have been updated since may 2 ?
This has been fixed on i18n.debian.org as of yesterday and the l10n
web pages have been refreshed with this data.
And, of course, here comes the bad news:
- mysql-5.5 has two fuzzies because of triv
On 2012-05-22 20:03 +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 07:27:21PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>> * Ben Hutchings , 2012-05-20, 03:16:
>> >5. Installer for i386 prefers amd64 kernel on any capable machine
>> >(that's a one-line change!) and adds amd64 as secondary
>> >architecture i
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 12:44:02 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Adam Borowski dixit:
> >using the attached script.
>
> Ah, no, don’t use ar to create .deb files.
>
> http://www.mirbsd.org/permalinks/wlog-10_e20110818-tg-g10046.htm
Using binutils' ar should be considered supported, and works fine
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 07:27:21PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Ben Hutchings , 2012-05-20, 03:16:
> >5. Installer for i386 prefers amd64 kernel on any capable machine
> >(that's a one-line change!) and adds amd64 as secondary
> >architecture if this is selected.
>
> We have still some software th
* Ben Hutchings , 2012-05-20, 03:16:
5. Installer for i386 prefers amd64 kernel on any capable machine
(that's a one-line change!) and adds amd64 as secondary architecture if
this is selected.
We have still some software that doesn't work with 64-bit kernel, and
(worse!) some maintainers clai
* Dmitry Nezhevenko , 2012-05-16, 11:57:
I'm trying to package a ReviewBoard package that depends on
django-pipeline module. Unfortunately there is already another package
named python-pipeline in debian that uses same python module name
(pipeline). This another package is orphaned for a year:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 01:25:21PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Ben Hutchings dixit:
>
> >> > Eventually (wheezy+2? +3?) we would stop building a kernel package for
> >> > i386.
> >>
> >> As in drop the i386 arch?
> >
> >No, keep i386 userland only.
>
> Oh, definitely not! Please keep this ru
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Villa Alises
Package name: python-commodity
Version : 0.20120514
Upstream Author : David Villa Alises
URL : http://bitbucket.org/arco_group/python-commodity
License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Descript
Philipp Kern dixit:
>I also assume that Exim does send 8bit mails to non-8bit compliant MTAs (i.e.
>not advertising 8BITMIME). I don't know if that's some sort of violation.
It does, and it’s a violation, yes. I’ve cursed often enough
about that (deliberately running an MTA stripping bit7, for
s
Ben Hutchings dixit:
>> > Eventually (wheezy+2? +3?) we would stop building a kernel package for
>> > i386.
>>
>> As in drop the i386 arch?
>
>No, keep i386 userland only.
Oh, definitely not! Please keep this runnable on at least
machines such as Soekris (486-compatible), Pentium-M, etc.
>> > h
Jon Dowland dixit:
>The stuff is things such as "minified" js. The wordpress source contains the
>minified copies, and you can get the originals in separate tarballs from the
>wordpress site.
Eh, I’d call that RC. People have been told off for not including the
corresponding source in the .orig.t
Guillem Jover dixit:
>the archive override. And if we have to keep changing the packages
>anyway to make sure they match changing priorities, we might as well
>just set the compressor (to gzip) explicitly for base packages.
Pseudo-essential packages are going to be a problem though.
What if a (hy
Adam Borowski dixit:
>using the attached script.
Ah, no, don’t use ar to create .deb files.
http://www.mirbsd.org/permalinks/wlog-10_e20110818-tg-g10046.htm
What you can do is:
$ paxtar cAf foo.deb debian-binary control.* data.*
It’s in wheezy already.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
[...] if maybe ext3f
Andrey Rahmatullin (22/05/2012):
> > Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> > packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?
> What are you talking about?
Probably that:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/z/zlib.html
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/z/zli
Adam Borowski dixit:
>if udebs switched to xz (unpacking takes ~10MB memory).
-2 takes only 3 MiB, which is about 2 MiB more than gzip,
since that number is rounded.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
you introduced a merge commit│ % g rebase -i HEAD^^
sorry, no idea and rebasing just fscked │ Segme
Carsten Hey dixit:
>IIRC bzip2 had a better compression. Compressing dpkg's changelog on
>stable seems confirm this:
xz’s default compression level -6 is not good for files
smaller than 8 MiB. Try -2 instead, maybe -2e (slower).
Besides, it decompresses a lot faster than bzip2, so even
in case o
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:14:49PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Just curious…
>
> I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
> biarch/triarch can finally go away.
>
> Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
> packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away
Roger Leigh dixit:
>Possibly a stupid question here but: Given that we are now autosigning
>builds, why can't the slower arches use gzip, and then after upload
>they could be recompressed with xz (and resigned) on a faster arch?
xz -2 is fast enough on m68k (IIRC, compresses not worse than bzip2
Just curious…
I thought one is supposed to use Multi-Arch now, and that
biarch/triarch can finally go away.
Seeing the trouble broonie has with zlib, why are those
packages still built anyway? Can’t they please go away?
bye,
//mirabilos
--
“It is inappropriate to require that a time represented
On 05/21/2012 09:09 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
>
>> Does LSB matter?
>
> LSB is irrelevant to me personally since I'm mostly not interested in
> running proprietary software on Linux systems.
>
> I guess LSB must be relevant to Debian since we ha
Hi,
I'm not sure, whether I should ask here. I already wrote a mail to Tomas Fasth
some weeks ago (I believe, can't find it anymore). I'd like to fix some of the
issues in the termit package.
But there's no sign of life of him.
Regards,
Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
37 matches
Mail list logo
