On Saturday 10 June 2006 01:10, Steve Langasek wrote:
--cut--
> In contrast, almost all of cdbs is stashed away in /usr/share/cdbs/; almost
> none of what it does is inspectible by looking at the debian/rules and
> using those lines as hooks into the documentation. There is
> /usr/share/doc/cdbs/c
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
> This is my opinion and others will disagree:
> Please don't. CDBS is a major pain to use for those who didn't
> (co-)author it. It's just too much about obfuscation.
Yeah, I and others we disagree! :)
CDBS makes maintenance of some packages damn e
Hi,
first off, I'm neither a DD nor an NM, but I do some packaging work
(thanks to alioth), As most people here argue against CDBS, I think the
benefits of it are missed (if you didn't guess, I use it and I like it).
Am Freitag, den 09.06.2006, 15:10 -0700 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Fri, Jun 0
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> When using debhelper, you (typically) have a single debian/rules makefile
> which lists out all the commands that are invoked for building your package;
> each of those commands primarily uses the contents of other files in debian/
> as input. If you h
also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.10.0852 +0200]:
> But I suspect that implicitely telling Manoj that he thinks
> top-down because he actually likes cdbs will get you into trouble,
It was not my intention.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
Quoting martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.10.0852 +0200]:
> > But I suspect that implicitely telling Manoj that he thinks
> > top-down because he actually likes cdbs will get you into trouble,
>
> It was not my intention.
Of course,
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 02:24:42AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Oh, really? The last time I tried to add a custom command to the install
> rule (well, >> 1 year ago) it was a real PITA. Docs have not told me how
> it works, docs have not told me in an understandable language how to add
> extensions
#include
* Loïc Minier [Sat, Jun 10 2006, 11:08:15AM]:
> Yes, I 100% agree with you. Would I be evaluating an applicant, I
> wouldn't like him to prepare a new source package in CDBS. (But I
> wouldn't request to build a .deb with ar either.)
>
> Is Debhelper our C and CDBS our C++?
No. B
also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.10.1156 +0200]:
> Of course, it was not. I omitted to put smileys because it seems
> that some people around are thinking I'm sometimes too happy or
> saying too much fun things,
and that's negative? We never took you seriously anyway, mus
Coin,
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I tend to agree.
I tend to agree too, every maintainer should be encouraged to understand
the packaging tools he is using. These tools are made to solve _common_
situations, so you have to understand what automatic mechanisms are
involved, a
> by NMU). The CDBS Team does no more exist and Peter is the only one
> working on it and refusing any help, that's a very bad situation.
Hmmm, that sounds weird to my ears as Peter is currently working with
myself, Steve Langasek and Noèl Köthe on the samba packages...and this
team work works p
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmmm, that sounds weird to my ears as Peter is currently working with
> myself, Steve Langasek and Noèl Köthe on the samba packages...and this
> team work works pretty well.
Sounds very strange to me.
I reviewed his first upload, found a regression
Christian, Denis,
I see the localisation infrastructure as a tool of the translator (or
localisation manager for a package in a language). If the translator has
commit right, he can give the tool the data to do automatic commits,
instead of doing them manaully. Only the person that has the rig
Marc Dequènes wrote:
> in a better state now. But this raise another related subject: such an
> important package should be comaintained. Peter refused any cooperation,
> uploaded new versions while i proposed to review his changes with
> another developper
To be fair, debhelper is not co-maintain
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Lex Spoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: scala
Version : 2.1.5
Upstream Author : Martin Odersky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://scala.epfl.ch
* License : BSD-like
(http://scala.epfl.ch/download
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Mario Izquierdo (mariodebian)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: usbvision
Version : 0.9.7-1cvs20060608
Upstream Author : Mario Izquierdo (mariodebian) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://usbvision.sourceforge.net/
* License
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To be fair, debhelper is not co-maintained either.
I never noticed it wasn't, but i do think it should. Fact is you're
taking far much care when integrating changes, that's a major
difference.
--
Marc Dequènes (Duck)
pgpmw2zfDouEZ.pgp
Description: PGP s
Do nbot ignore me please,
I found your email somewhere and now decided tob writbe you.
I am coambing to your place in afew weeks and thought bwe
can meet eacah other. Let me know if you do not mind.
I am a nice pretty girl. Don't reply to this email.
Email me direclty at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Lol...wow this certainly is a bug, we must fix it pronto!On 6/10/06, Kenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do nbot ignore me please,I found your email somewhere and now decided tob writbe you.
I am coambing to your place in afew weeks and thought bwecan meet eacah other. Let me know if you do not mind.
Gentile linux.debian.devel
Per il periodo estivo Telcom Italia sta proponendo una fantastica offerta
in Collaborazione con
Ebai Italia. Quello che ti sta per proporre è di registrarti GRATUITAMENTE
su Ebai (cliccando questo link:
http://clk.tradedoubler.com/click?p=1699&a=1192790&g=16
Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> Hi all, I got an FTBFS bug yesterday;
>
> On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:13:53 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
>
>> Package: lynx-cur
>> Version: 2.8.6dev18-1
>> Severity: serious
>>
>> There was an error while trying to autobuild your package:
>>
> ...
>
>>> install -m 75
Bundling up a few replies here...
On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 10:02:26AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> I'm also debhelper fan ;-) but what makes you think that if you face a
> problematic debhelper script you are not supposed to reimplement that
> particular part of rules by hand as an interim wor
Hi,
should I set in package jed a conflict on a package jed-extra if
jed-extra enhances jed, but jed has changed its API and now jed-extra is
useless, i.e. it must be updated. jed-extra and jed can be installed at
the same time without harm, but jed-extra does not enhance jed anymore,
because it's
Coin,
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> and replace it with a very small shell script. For cdbs, you delete one
> line and have to replace it with your reimplementation of a very large
> makefile...
That's obvious because CDBS does not target at doing little independent
tasks (even
24 matches
Mail list logo
