Christian Perrier wrote:
> The latter should probably be quite conservative and only detect
> something like:
>
> "^ +[Hh]ome *[Pp]age:.*"
>
> in the package description.
/^\s+(web|home)\s*(site|page)\s*(:| at| is).*/i
seems to catch more (5087 hits) with few false positives.
Also, matching http
Quoting Faidon Liambotis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Christian Perrier wrote:
> > The latter should probably be quite conservative and only detect
> > something like:
> >
> > "^ +[Hh]ome *[Pp]age:.*"
> >
> > in the package description.
> /^ (web|home)( *)?(site|page) *(:| at| is).*/i
> seems to catch
Christian Perrier wrote:
> The latter should probably be quite conservative and only detect
> something like:
>
> "^ +[Hh]ome *[Pp]age:.*"
>
> in the package description.
/^ (web|home)( *)?(site|page) *(:| at| is).*/i
seems to catch more (1905 hits)
Regards,
Faidon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 9/22/07, Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could some knowledgeable people propose some possible patches? I can
> coordinate that stuff, but proposing patches is better left to Those
> Who Know...
I offered to update the lintian patch I submitted years ago for
checking for a prope
Changes to lintian/linda are often mentioned in that discussion.
Roughly speaking, we need these tools to:
- no longer complain about "Homepage:" being an unknown field
- warn people currently using the trick of mentioning the Home Page in
the package's description and suggest th
ning.
it could parse the changelog entry and try to detect if the upload is
for stable-(security|proposed-updates).
If not, and "APT prefers stable" (stolen from reportbug), lintian/linda
could give a warning. This requires lintian/linda to run in the same
enviroment than the pack
[Alexander Schmehl]
> Curently it's quite easy to run unstables lintian, debootstrap and
> pbuilder on system running stable for the other packages. So I don't
> see a big problem creating and testing packages on a stable system.
It would make more sense to me to run lintian *inside* pbuilder, t
Hi,
* Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-11 23:41]:
> Op vr, 11-11-2005 te 15:28 +0100, schreef Nico Golde:
> > So what about a special exception which provides updated
> > lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
>
> Doesn't sound like
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:28:31PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
[...]
> So what about a special exception which provides updated
> lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
> Is it technical possible? I mean becaused it should be
> fixed.
That's imho wrong idea be
Op vr, 11-11-2005 te 15:28 +0100, schreef Nico Golde:
> So what about a special exception which provides updated
> lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
Doesn't sound like a particularly good idea to me. You need no just
unstable's linda/lintian; you
Hi!
* Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05 15:28]:
> So what about a special exception which provides updated
> lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
> Is it technical possible? I mean becaused it should be
> fixed.
Curently it's quite ea
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 03:28:31PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> So what about a special exception which provides updated lintian &
> linda packages for the stable distribution? Is it technical possible?
> I mean becaused it should be fixed.
It might not be necessary as an exception
Re: Nico Golde in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So what about a special exception which provides updated
> lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
> Is it technical possible? I mean becaused it should be
> fixed.
This doesn't make sense. You need unstable to
about a special exception which provides updated
lintian & linda packages for the stable distribution?
Is it technical possible? I mean becaused it should be
fixed.
If not it would be great to add some kind of Warning to the
source code which checks the Debian versions and warns the
user
Josselin Mouette([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2005-04-12 09:20:
> Why? When you don't know Perl, and you feel like improving a software in
> Perl is like eating oysters with skiing gloves,
LOL
> rewriting the software in Python so that you can work on it seems
> like the best solution.
An even better solu
Hello Josselin,
* Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-12 11:53]:
> Le mardi 12 avril 2005 à 08:31 +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > The reason: "I just rewrite an application because the language it is
> > written in." sounds a very stupid reason to me.
>
> Why? When you don't know Per
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 09:20:28AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 12 avril 2005 à 08:31 +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> > The reason: "I just rewrite an application because the language it is
> > written in." sounds a very stupid reason to me.
>
> Why? When you don't know Perl, and you
Hello Emanuele,
* Emanuele Rocca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-12 07:53]:
> * [ 11-04-05 - 22:03 ] Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 22:00]:
> > > Why are there Vi and Emacs?
> > > Why are there Perl and Python?
> > [...]
> > But thats
On Mon, April 11, 2005 22:26, Emanuele Rocca said:
> Well some differences came out:
> - linda has proper l10n strings for most errors (in German)
> - different output formats
> - different test sets
> - linda is faster
So, linda is better than lintian? Faster and localized, that sound like
good
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
It doesn't for me after I heard, that foo was orhpaned. None
volunteered to adopt it, but someone volunteered to write something,
that does work in his prefered language. Sometimes it is easier to
restart from scratch than to try to adopt an foreign t
* Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050412 08:31]:
> >Guess some people have preferences for either languages or other.
> The reason: "I just rewrite an application because the language it is
> written in." sounds a very stupid reason to me.
It doesn't for me after I heard, that foo was orhpaned.
Le mardi 12 avril 2005 à 08:31 +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> The reason: "I just rewrite an application because the language it is
> written in." sounds a very stupid reason to me.
Why? When you don't know Perl, and you feel like improving a software in
Perl is like eating oysters with skiing g
xchat?
Why are there whois and gwhois?
Don't know enought about these.
Why are there dupload and dput?
Very good question! The only example which falls in the lintian / linda
category. Oh no - it is even more stupid ...
Why are there KDE and GNOME?
Different taste of users - valid reason.
Wh
* [ 11-04-05 - 22:03 ] Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 22:00]:
> > Why are there Vi and Emacs?
> > Why are there Perl and Python?
> [...]
> But thats not my problem. The programs etc. you showed are very
> different in using, look etc
* Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 22:00]:
> Nico Golde wrote:
> > There is another thing that I don't understand often. Why
> > are there linda and lintian?
> > In my opinion this makes things difficulter. Both have to
> > coordinate themselves and keep their policy rules up to
> > d
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> There are some but in my opinion this is *not* the way open
> source works in general. The program is designed for users
> and users in most cases don't recognize in which language
> the program is written.
No open source is not about the user it is abou
Nico Golde wrote:
> There is another thing that I don't understand often. Why
> are there linda and lintian?
> In my opinion this makes things difficulter. Both have to
> coordinate themselves and keep their policy rules up to
> date.
Why are there Vi and Emacs?
Why are there Perl and Python?
Why
Hello Marc,
* Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 15:08]:
> Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Sometimes there is the case that major design decisions are
> > too different from the original source so there is no other
> > way. but is this the case with lintian and linda
Hello Bernd,
* Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 15:09]:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > Everybody agrees here, but (AFAIK) this is not the situation we are
> > discussing. No 'Better Ideas' in linda.
>
> You have to see that in the context. Linda was written while l
Hello Bernd,
* Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-11 15:07]:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > Sure, but only if two projects have at least some differences; in 'The
> > Cathedral and the Bazaar' popclient becomes fetchmail.
>
> There are a lot differences between linda an
On Monday 11 April 2005 06:39 am, Steve Kowalik wrote:
> 1) Proper English descriptions, rather than tags.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% linda /var/cache/apt/archives/abiword_2.2.7-1_i386.deb
>
> E: abiword; No manual page for binary AbiWord-2.2.
-i.
Daniel
--
/--- Daniel Burr
On Monday 11 April 2005 03:14 am, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Then why was aptitude written? Why not send patches against apt-get
> and dselect?
The correct question is why not send patches against console-apt, which you
youngsters might not remember ;-). In fact, I did exactly that -- I sent
about
Hi Lars,
* [ 11-04-05 - 13:25 ] Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ma, 2005-04-11 kello 13:19 +0200, Emanuele Rocca kirjoitti:
> > It would be very nice to add these to linda's description.
> > This way, every user can decide to install linda rather than lintian if
> > they need thes
ma, 2005-04-11 kello 13:19 +0200, Emanuele Rocca kirjoitti:
> It would be very nice to add these to linda's description.
> This way, every user can decide to install linda rather than lintian if
> they need these specific features.
Given that the two tools have different sets of tests, even if man
Hi Steve,
* [ 11-04-05 - 12:39 ] Steve Kowalik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:45:04 +0200, Emanuele Rocca uttered
> > Everybody agrees here, but (AFAIK) this is not the situation we are
> > discussing. No 'Better Ideas' in linda.
> Speak for yourself.
I obiouvsly speak
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:45:04 +0200, Emanuele Rocca uttered
> Everybody agrees here, but (AFAIK) this is not the situation we are
> discussing. No 'Better Ideas' in linda.
>
Speak for yourself. Here are three (off the top of my head) that
spring to mind that lintian can't do, and I feel better serv
Emanuele Rocca wrote:
> * [ 11-04-05 - 09:14 ] Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ISTM that the good reason for writing-from-scratch duplicate
> > functionality is if you have a Better Idea (better data structures,
> > better interfaces, extra functionality, etc, etc) that are so
> > f
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Everybody agrees here, but (AFAIK) this is not the situation we are
> discussing. No 'Better Ideas' in linda.
You have to see that in the context. Linda was written while lintian was
not-so-good maintained. And of course if somebody decides to pick up a
* [ 11-04-05 - 09:14 ] Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ISTM that the good reason for writing-from-scratch duplicate
> functionality is if you have a Better Idea (better data structures,
> better interfaces, extra functionality, etc, etc) that are so
> fundamental that You Can't Get Th
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Ron Johnson wrote:
Then why was aptitude written? Why not send patches against apt-get
and dselect?
I just use apt-get so I'm not completely competent to answer this question.
But IMHO aptitude was written to *replace* dselect. If we agree that a
certain application can not b
On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 07:36 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
[snip]
> > Which is if course a big point if you consider
> > programmers can only help in one but not the other.
> Hmmm - I wonder whether rewriting an application wouldn't take more time than
> d
On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
There are a lot differences between linda and lintian, especially the
programming language.
A very important difference. This might result in several further applications
doing the very same job (more or less) for several other programming languages
(Rub
On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 11:33:24PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
[mjp: I sure didn't write this, but that's how it's been attributed...]
> > Whenever someone submits an ITP for the software A, whose functionality
> > is already provided in Debian by B, t
Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sometimes there is the case that major design decisions are
> too different from the original source so there is no other
> way. but is this the case with lintian and linda?
Yes. linda is written in Python and lintian in Perl. That's a major
difference and
Hi Bernd,
* [ 10-04-05 - 23:33 ] Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are a lot differences between linda and lintian, especially the
> programming language.
We would like to know which are these differences. :)
Nico's original question was "why are there linda and lintian?".
ht
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Sure, but only if two projects have at least some differences; in 'The
> Cathedral and the Bazaar' popclient becomes fetchmail.
There are a lot differences between linda and lintian, especially the
programming language. Which is if course a big point if
On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 11:26:43PM +0200, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Sure, but only if two projects have at least some differences; in 'The
> > Cathedral and the Bazaar' popclient becomes fetchmail.
> >
> > Whenever someone submits an ITP for the software A, whose functionality
> > is already provided
Hallo Emanuele,
* Emanuele Rocca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-10 23:01]:
> * [ 10-04-05 - 20:28 ] Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > > Ok thats a reason. But why not merge these projects now? I
> > > really recommend this because in my
Hello Bernd,
* Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-10 22:17]:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > Ok thats a reason. But why not merge these projects now? I
> > really recommend this because in my opinion this are two
> > projects which do the same job twice which is in my eye
Hi Bernd,
* [ 10-04-05 - 20:28 ] Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > Ok thats a reason. But why not merge these projects now? I
> > really recommend this because in my opinion this are two
> > projects which do the same job twice which is
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Ok thats a reason. But why not merge these projects now? I
> really recommend this because in my opinion this are two
> projects which do the same job twice which is in my eyes
> contraproductive.
Actually that is how open source works. I often also feel
Hallo Emanuele,
* Emanuele Rocca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-10 19:21]:
> * [ 08-04-05 - 15:38 ] Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There is another thing that I don't understand often. Why
> > are there linda and lintian?
> > In my opinion this makes things difficulter. Both have to
>
* [ 08-04-05 - 15:38 ] Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is another thing that I don't understand often. Why
> are there linda and lintian?
> In my opinion this makes things difficulter. Both have to
> coordinate themselves and keep their policy rules up to
> date.
[...]
> The on
Hallo Mads,
* Mads Lindstrøm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-04-08 14:08]:
> I am writing this email as I think there could be done more to
> automatically test Debian packages. This would improve quality, as
> discovering errors is the first step in correcting them. I am not a
> Debian maintainer, but
> That would be one of the things that maintainers have gotten wrong in the
> > past, yes.
>
> Would it be possible to code a check for lintian/linda how much space is used
> by the package in /usr/share and report an error when crossing a threshold
> (100kb? 500kB?) for Arch !=
yes.
Would it be possible to code a check for lintian/linda how much space is used
by the package in /usr/share and report an error when crossing a threshold
(100kb? 500kB?) for Arch != all?
Regards, David
--
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommuniz
56 matches
Mail list logo
