On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> dpkg "knows" about them the same way it "knows" about debs, AFAICS.
> Why, then, the .ddeb suffix? Why are these not just .debs, with
> a specific naming schema?
At least they shouldn't clash with maintainer-defined ones, IMHO, as they
are create
Hi,
I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of tomcat to utf-8
after reinstalling a server.
Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat, I want to ask (and invite to
discuss) shouldn't utf8 be the default character set everywhere? So when
installing a package from Debian
Hi all,
I working on packaging eiskaltdc - direct connect client (see #540458).
This program have extra licence information (you can see it on
http://rootshell.be/~ice/tmp/COPYING) wich installed by default in
/usr/share/eiskaltdc/COPYING. This produced lintian warning
(W: eiskaltdc: extra-licen
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 13:09 +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of tomcat to utf-8
> after reinstalling a server.
> Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat, I want to ask (and invite
> to
> discuss) shouldn't utf8 be the defa
Hi Andrey,
Such questions are better suited for the debian-mentors list.
Andrey Tataranovich schrieb:
> What should I do to satisfy DEBIAN policy?
>
> a) rename/move this file another place and patch code
> b) add lintian override
I would go for b).
Best regards,
Alexander
signature.as
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>> dpkg "knows" about them the same way it "knows" about debs, AFAICS.
>> Why, then, the .ddeb suffix? Why are these not just .debs, with
>> a specific naming schema?
>
> At least they shouldn't clash with
Thomas Koch wrote:
Hi,
I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of tomcat to utf-8
after reinstalling a server.
Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat, I want to ask (and invite to
discuss) shouldn't utf8 be the default character set everywhere? So when
installing
Hi,
I've been tasked as part of the release team of finalising and pushing
through the Webapps Policy, whcih can be found at
http://webapps-common.alioth.debian.org/draft/html/
The source for this is at
http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/webapps-common/webapps-common/trunk/doc/Webapps-Policy-Manual-DR
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 01:48:55PM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Andrey Tataranovich schrieb:
>
> > What should I do to satisfy DEBIAN policy?
> >
> > a) rename/move this file another place and patch code
Depends on the license. If it was (L)GPL you could use
/usr/share/common-l
Hi
Dne Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:09:21 +0200
Thomas Koch napsal(a):
> I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of tomcat to utf-8
> after reinstalling a server.
> Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat, I want to ask (and invite
> to
> discuss) shouldn't utf8 be the defa
Le lundi 10 août 2009 à 14:06 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi a écrit :
> But let to concentrate to the first task: having a good UTF-8 support
> in all programs/terminals/etc.
This task should have been completed for etch.
Now we could concentrate on removing from the archive programs without
proper
Hi!
Rene Engelhard schrieb:
>>> a) rename/move this file another place and patch code
> Depends on the license. If it was (L)GPL you could use
> /usr/share/common-licenses/...
GPL with OpenSSL permission. No default template for that.
But yes, that would be option c) wich doesn't work in this c
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Patrick Winnertz
* Package name: gamessq
Version : 1.1
Upstream Author : Brett Bode
* URL : http://www.msg.chem.iastate.edu/GAMESS/GamessQ/
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: C
Description : gamess scheduling fr
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 07:37:10PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> > dpkg doesn't know about filenames AFAICS. So you can't coinstall
> >> > foo_1.0-1_i386.deb and foo_1.0-1_i386.ddeb, right? So we do want the
> >> > -ddeb suffix.
> >> If we are going to enshrine ddebs into policy, w
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 06:48:47AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > The main point is probably that they shouldn't live in the main
> > archive due to space reasons. Of course we could also filter out
> > '*-ddeb*' or '*-dbgsym*' as long as it's not '*-dbg*', which should be
> If automa
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 03:37:23PM +0200, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
> * Package name: gamessq
> Version : 1.1
> Upstream Author : Brett Bode
> * URL : http://www.msg.chem.iastate.edu/GAMESS/GamessQ/
> * License : GPLv3
> Programming Lang: C
> Description
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:42:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion on whether ddebs should be documented in
> > policy, but I certainly don't agree with requiring dpkg to understand
> > them as a prerequisite for implementing a general purpose, public
> > archive for au
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:33:58AM +0800, Paul Wise a écrit :
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
>>
>> > The dh_make template for debian/copyright induces many developers to put
>> > their
>> > packaging work under the
retitle 485330 Allow context diff in debian/patches/ in 3.0 (quilt) format
thanks
On Thu, 06 Aug 2009, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> That said, yes, using non-unified diff is as laughable as using RCS or
> SCCS nowadays. Though I consider it a bug if dpkg refuses to apply a
> patch that patch(1) (that
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 06:48:47AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > The main point is probably that they shouldn't live in the main
>> > archive due to space reasons. Of course we could also filter out
>> > '*-ddeb*' or '*-dbgsym*' as long as it's n
On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Most -dbg packages *shouldn't* live in the archive, but maintainers
>> keep adding them by hand anyway, and we don't have anywhere else to
>> put them.
> Well, right now there is nowhere to put the .ddebs either, and
> they are really just .debs w
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:42:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> > I don't have a strong opinion on whether ddebs should be documented in
>> > policy, but I certainly don't agree with requiring dpkg to understand
>> > them as a prerequisite for implemen
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 07:37:10PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> >> > dpkg doesn't know about filenames AFAICS. So you can't coinstall
>> >> > foo_1.0-1_i386.deb and foo_1.0-1_i386.ddeb, right? So we do want the
>> >> > -ddeb suffix.
>
>> >>
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Why is it not trivial?
Because it requires editing the rules file for each such package?
(debhelper using packages all get tweaked in a single shot.)
Don Armstrong
--
All my dreams came true.
I just didn't think them through.
-- a softer world #
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> Why is it not trivial? I have such a hook in my pakages, and it
>> is not rocket science.
>>
>> If you think that adding stuff like
>> --8<---cut here---start->8---
>> file
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 04:28:33PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Most -dbg packages *shouldn't* live in the archive, but maintainers
> >> keep adding them by hand anyway, and we don't have anywhere else to
> >> put them.
> > Well, right now there
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Now we could concentrate on removing from the archive programs without
> proper UTF8 support.
There are, sadly, some very useful programs with no adequate replacement
that don't have UTF-8 support. tf5, for instance.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Why is it not trivial?
>
> Because it requires editing the rules file for each such package?
> (debhelper using packages all get tweaked in a single shot.)
Rubbish. I suspect all cdbs using packa
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 13:09 +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of tomcat to
> > utf-8
> > after reinstalling a server.
> > Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug
On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Of course there's a penalty for certain operations. But UTF-8 is about
> as compact as an extended encoding is going to get.
Rubbish. You know why in Japan and other Asian countries UTF8 is not
so common? Because many of their glyphs need 4 (four!) bytes,
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Why is it not trivial?
> >
> > Because it requires editing the rules file for each such package?
> > (debhelper using packages all get tweaked in a single
On 2009-08-10, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> Of course there's a penalty for certain operations. But UTF-8 is about
>> as compact as an extended encoding is going to get.
> Rubbish. You know why in Japan and other Asian countries UTF8 is not
> so common? Beca
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 19:53 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 01:45:40PM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> > While utf-8 covers the broadest set of character glyphs possible, it
> > suffers from size as well as performance penalties. Characters no
> > longer are guaranteed to fit
On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
> >> Of course there's a penalty for certain operations. But UTF-8 is about
> >> as compact as an extended encoding is going to get.
[...]
> make UTF-8 bad per se to call it "rubbish".
I didn't call utf-8 itself rubbish, I am myself a strong proponent for
u
Andrey Tataranovich wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I working on packaging eiskaltdc - direct connect client (see #540458).
> This program have extra licence information (you can see it on
> http://rootshell.be/~ice/tmp/COPYING) wich installed by default in
> /usr/share/eiskaltdc/COPYING. This produced lin
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 02:06:44PM +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote:
> Thomas Koch wrote:
> >I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of
> >tomcat to utf-8 after reinstalling a server.
> >Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat, I want to ask
> >(and invite to discuss) s
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:50:07PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> c) patch it to display /usr/share/doc/$package/copyright ?
That would be against policy.
No package is supposed to rely on /usr/share/doc/$package for doing stuff.
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:49:34PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 10 Aug 2009, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > >> Of course there's a penalty for certain operations. But UTF-8 is about
> > >> as compact as an extended encoding is going to get.
> [...]
> > make UTF-8 bad per se to call it "rubbish
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:52:23AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:42:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > I don't have a strong opinion on whether ddebs should be documented in
> > > policy, but I certainly don't agree with requiring dpkg to understand
> > > them as a pr
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 07:52:23AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:42:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> Or even just -dbg, since aren't the existing debug packages basically
>>> .ddebs, modulo bugs?
>> There are a few significant exceptions, suc
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 01:55:51PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > nor for keeping the packages separate from the main archive (if the size
> > of the Packages file is an issue, can't they just go in a separate debug
> > section/component?)
>
> The Packages file lists all
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:42:18PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:49:34PM +0200, Norbert Preining wrote:
> > I didn't call utf-8 itself rubbish, I am myself a strong proponent for
> > utf-8, only your quote that it is "about as compact as an extended encoding
> > is going to
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Don Armstrong wrote:
>> Also, It is indeed trivial to add that to non-helper-package using
>> packages, it just requires some editing (just like modufying helper
>> packages will need editing).
>
> Since it's trivial, I look forward to seeing patches from you to
> implement p
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Could we not just use a "-ddbg" suffix for "detached debug" information,
> perhaps with a new archive section to match? This will not conflict
> with existing practice for -dbg, so could go into Policy without
> violating any prexisting namespace conventi
On 2009-08-10, Roger Leigh wrote:
> That's what I meant (just not sure of the correct dak terminology).
> Would this present problems for the ftp-masters, since TTBOMK currently
> source and binary packages are restricted to the same area? i.e. would
> work on projectb/dak be required to implemen
On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I would also add that the debug symbols should live in
> "/usr/lib/debug/" . /full/path/to/lib_or_binary, blessing the current
> practice.
You are missing the new features of build-id as written earlier by
insisting on this.
/Sune
--
To UNSUB
This one time, at band camp, Manoj Srivastava said:
> On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
> > Could we not just use a "-ddbg" suffix for "detached debug" information,
> > perhaps with a new archive section to match? This will not conflict
> > with existing practice for -dbg, so could go int
Stephen Gran writes:
> The only reason I can see for an extension like .ddeb is that it would
> signal that they're like more like .udebs than .debs (not for regular
> user consumption, may not have all the files under /usr/share/doc, may
> have some funky layout based on this build-id idea, what
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:17:45AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > There is a namespace issue here, that falls in scope for Policy because it
> > impacts interoperability; if there are going to be limits placed on the
> > names of packages in the main archive, that almost certainly *does* belong
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:20:17AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Or even just -dbg, since aren't the existing debug packages basically
> >> .ddebs, modulo bugs?
> > There are a few significant exceptions, such as libc6-dbg and libqt4-dbg,
> > where the packages contain complete alternate deb
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:50:07PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> c) patch it to display /usr/share/doc/$package/copyright ?
>
> That would be against policy.
> No package is supposed to rely on /usr/share/doc/$package for doing stuff.
if [ -f $file ]; then cat $f
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 09:46:49PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Reading through this thread, I don't see a compelling reason for using
> a .ddeb extension given that they are just regular .debs, nor for
> keeping the packages separate from the main archive (if the size of the
> Packages file is an i
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2009-08-10, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I would also add that the debug symbols should live in
>> "/usr/lib/debug/" . /full/path/to/lib_or_binary, blessing the current
>> practice.
>
> You are missing the new features of build-id as written e
On Mon, Aug 10 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:17:45AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > There is a namespace issue here, that falls in scope for Policy because it
>> > impacts interoperability; if there are going to be limits placed on the
>> > names of packages in the
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:45:40 +0200
Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 13:09 +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've an issue, that I forgot to set the character encoding of
> > tomcat to utf-8 after reinstalling a server.
> > Now, before I report a wishlist(?) bug to tomcat,
Harald Braumann, le Tue 11 Aug 2009 01:33:58 +0200, a écrit :
> Or do you mean the user pays the price, because if the encoding is set
> to UTF-8 then performance would suffer? In that case, I'd love to see
> some real life numbers. I doubt the difference would be noticeable.
Google utf-8 grep pe
Package: wnpp
Owner: Ryan Niebur
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libcarp-always-perl
Version : 0.09
Upstream Author : Adriano R. Ferreira
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Carp-Always/
* License : Artistic | GPL
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 05:39:23AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:28:58PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> > About freeze timing we think that DebConf should definitely not fall
> > into a freeze
> > We noticed that releases in the first quarter of the year
> > worked out quite
Le Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:07:33PM +1000, Anthony Towns a écrit :
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:28:58PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>
> > > We'll be consulting all key teams within Debian to see how their plans
> > > and schedules can fit into a new timeline. Before the end of August we
> > > hope to
59 matches
Mail list logo
