Hi,
On 8/16/24 23:24, Andreas Tille wrote:
I tried to express: I'm more than willing to convert all packages where
I'm Uploader (most preferably) if DEP14 is accepted.
Would it make sense to try and convert a few packages to DEP14 first, to
see if this can actually be done and where the pitf
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kathara Sasikumar
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-beanie
Version : 1.26.0
Upstream Contact: Roman Right
* URL : https://github.com/BeanieODM/beanie
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Francisco Vilmar Cardoso Ruviaro
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org,
vil...@debian.org
* Package name: golang-github-florianl-go-nfqueue
Version : 2.0.0
Upstream Contact: Florian Lehner
* URL
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kathara Sasikumar
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-lazy-model
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Contact: Roman Right
* URL : https://github.com/roman-right/lazy_model
* License : Apache-2.0
Pro
On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 11:15:33 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> So accepting DEP14 would mean a lot of work for me (at least
> testing the suggested scripting solutions[4] carefully)
[…]
> Are there any blockers to accept this DEP which I might have missed?
> [4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 04:54:02PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
Quite. If nothing else, I think the code actually in the Debian archive
that relies on the old path ought to be changed _first_, e.g. via an
MBF. I see a bunch of cases that are relatively subtle and might suck a
lot of other people'
Hi Timo and Paul,
On 16/08/2024 18:10, Timo Röhling wrote:
Hi Alec,
* Alec Leamas [2024-08-16 17:46]:
/usr/include/c++/14/bits/atomic_futex.h:278:(.text+0x16dc): undefined
reference to
`std::__atomic_futex_unsigned_base::_M_futex_notify_all(unsigned int*)'
/usr/bin/ld:
/usr/include/c++/14/b
> "Andreas" == Andreas Tille writes:
Andreas> Are there any blockers to accept this DEP which I might
Andreas> have missed?
Honestly, the git-buildpackage default layout is good enough, and dep-14
involves change that doesn't feel like it brings enough value to me.
I.E. I think t
Hi Alec,
* Alec Leamas [2024-08-16 17:46]:
/usr/include/c++/14/bits/atomic_futex.h:278:(.text+0x16dc): undefined reference
to `std::__atomic_futex_unsigned_base::_M_futex_notify_all(unsigned int*)'
/usr/bin/ld: /usr/include/c++/14/bits/atomic_futex.h:278:(.text+0x29d8):
undefined reference to
Hi,
On 16-08-2024 17:46, Alec Leamas wrote:
All other builds are OK. Has anyone a hint about what might be going on here?
https://release.debian.org/testing/arch_qualify.html armel column.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:21:38PM +0200, Philip Hands wrote:
> I think it probably was just a coincidence, since it looks like the
> change was made in order to fix #1064795 which was reported on
> 25 Feb 2024.
Ah, good to know, thanks. I didn't notice that since it wasn't
mentioned in the iprou
Dear list,
Still trying to maintain opencpn. Now looking at an error in the armel
build [1]. The core is a bunch of messages like
/usr/include/c++/14/bits/atomic_futex.h:278:(.text+0x16dc): undefined reference
to `std::__atomic_futex_unsigned_base::_M_futex_notify_all(unsigned int*)'
/usr/bin
Colin Watson writes:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:14:41PM +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 12:30:22PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>> > At 2024-08-15T13:20:02-0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> > > It's just so depressing that this is how debian works now. We used to
>> > > t
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Gabriel
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: lomiri-sync-monitor
Version : 0.6.0
Upstream Contact: UBports Developers
* URL :
https://gitlab.com/ubports/development/core/lomiri-sync-monitor
* License
Hi Andrey,
Am Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 07:17:52PM +0500 schrieb Andrey Rakhmatullin:
> > > pristine-tar isn't the default either, so you need debian/gbp.conf if your
> > > team uses it.
> >
> > That's correct but the teams I'm working in recommend something like:
> >
> > Add the following to the
Hi Jonas,
Am Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 02:12:21PM +0200 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:
>
> Quoting Andreas Tille (2024-08-16 11:44:38)
> > I prefer having no debian/gbp.conf at all in case the repository
> > layout would fit team policy.
>
> I understand that it would be lovely if git-buildpackage support
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 03:59:07PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Am Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 02:58:40PM +0500 schrieb Andrey Rakhmatullin:
> >
> > pristine-tar isn't the default either, so you need debian/gbp.conf if your
> > team uses it.
>
> That's correct but the teams I'm working in recommend som
Am Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 02:58:40PM +0500 schrieb Andrey Rakhmatullin:
>
> pristine-tar isn't the default either, so you need debian/gbp.conf if your
> team uses it.
That's correct but the teams I'm working in recommend something like:
Add the following to the configuration file ~/.gbp.conf
Please stop cross-posting to both bugtracker and d-devel.
Quoting Andreas Tille (2024-08-15 11:15:33)
> considering that it makes sense to settle with DEP14[1] first before we
> can decide about DEP18 I wonder what is finally needed to accept DEP14.
> I think its cruxial to make git-buildpackage s
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Bastien Roucariès
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: node-webpack-stream
Version : 7.0.0
Upstream Contact: https://github.com/shama
* URL : https://github.com/shama/webpack-stream
* License : Expa
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Martin
* Package name: meta-exwm
Version : none
Upstream Author : Debian
* URL or Web page : https://salsa.debian.org/emacsen-team/meta-exwm/
* License : GPL3+
Programming lang: none
Description : Full EXWM Desktop Environmen
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:44:38AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > In #829444 it has been proposed the addition of a new "layout" option to
> > gbp.conf, which would tell git-buildpackage which layout to follow,
> > allowing for a graceful migration.
> >
> > I've been thinking about a different ap
Hi,
Am Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:09:58AM +0200 schrieb Andrea Pappacoda:
>
> In #829444 it has been proposed the addition of a new "layout" option to
> gbp.conf, which would tell git-buildpackage which layout to follow,
> allowing for a graceful migration.
>
> I've been thinking about a different
Hi all,
On Fri Aug 16, 2024 at 10:31 AM CEST, Guido Günther wrote:
> It's never been a lack of motivation (I use DEP-14 in about all
> projects). More a lack of time to figure out a proper migration path.
In #829444 it has been proposed the addition of a new "layout" option to
gbp.conf, which wou
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 09:01:30AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Otto,
>
> Am Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 01:43:40PM -0700 schrieb Otto Kekäläinen:
> > Yes to finalizing DEP-14 soon, but first I think we need to complete the
> > technical work to have git-buildpackage use DEP-14 branch names by de
Hi Otto,
Am Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 01:43:40PM -0700 schrieb Otto Kekäläinen:
> Yes to finalizing DEP-14 soon, but first I think we need to complete the
> technical work to have git-buildpackage use DEP-14 branch names by default.
Well, this is what I meant as a hen-egg-problem. It might support
DE
26 matches
Mail list logo
