Luk Claes a écrit :
> Charles Plessy wrote:
>> Le Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :
>>> Unless your proposal is just for unstable but doesn't want to change the
>>> policy for testing migration?
>> Hi,
>>
>> Testing migration works the way it should: if a package is
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> I don't think it's good to waste buildd time on failing to build packages.
> I also don't think anyone is stopped from setting up a service that
> allows source-only uploads as a go-between.
Do you mean set up an unofficial upload queue
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:47:33AM +0100, Jean-Christophe Dubacq wrote:
> > If your package FTBFS on some architecture, then that is a bug. A bug
> > that was already there, it just was not noticed yet. In most cases the
> > bug is rather easy to fix, even for non porters as most of the
> > archite
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>
> I think one would be surprised how many packages get used on 'exotic'
> architectures. Most users don't specifically search for a piece of
> software, they want to have some specific task done by using a specific
> package. Not providi
On 2009-11-18, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Well, I do not think that you can do gene sequencing or number crunching
> on current mobile phones. So there are really programs which are not
> needed on all architectures and even if you find a binary package which
> claims to do the job it is just useless
Hi!
First of all, thanks for this great roundup. There are just some few
questions that popped up in my mind that I hope haven't asked yet
(wasn't able to check all the responses completely ...). Sorry if there
are duplications, a reference to the answer for easier tracking would be
appre
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tiago Bortoletto Vaz
* Package name: pyflag
Version : 0.87-pre1
Upstream Author : Michael Cohen and David Collett
* URL : http://www.pyflag.net
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: C, Python
Description : An adv
Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:42:47AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>
> I beg to differ. This sounds like a maintainer that is not
> providing the support for their package, and needs to orphan that
> package; not building on some architecture is often a symptom of
> problems elsewher
Package: wnpp
Owner: Jonathan Yu
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libalgorithm-diff-xs-perl
Version : 0.04
Upstream Author : Audrey Tang
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Algorithm-Diff-XS/
*
Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:54:18AM +, Philipp Kern a écrit :
> there might not be clusters of arm yet but I saw offers for clusters of mips.
Hi Philipp
I also saw this cluster and got quite curious until I realised that most
programs I package are not parallelised…
The day we are contacted
On Wed, Nov 18 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 12:42:47AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
>>
>> I beg to differ. This sounds like a maintainer that is not
>> providing the support for their package, and needs to orphan that
>> package; not building on some archi
On Wed, Nov 18 2009, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I don't think it's good to waste buildd time on failing to build packages.
>> I also don't think anyone is stopped from setting up a service that
>> allows source-only uploads as a go-between.
>
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:40:52PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> If we mean to attract such users, I do not think that the best strategy would
> necessarly be having a pre-existing MIPS support of bioinformatics, which I
> think is completely beyond our reach and expertise. I think that what woul
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Patrik Fimml
* Package name: abiword-docs
* Version : 2.8.1
* Upstream Author : Dom Lachowicz
* URL : http://www.abisource.com
* License : to be clarified, most likely GPL
* Description : documentation for the abiword wo
Package: wnpp
Owner: Jonathan Yu
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libpod-coverage-trustpod-perl
Version : 0.092830
Upstream Author : Ricardo SIGNES
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Pod-Cover
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I think one would be surprised how many packages get used on 'exotic'
>> architectures. Most users don't specifically search for a piece of
>> software, they want to have some specific task done by using a specific
Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I don't think it's good to waste buildd time on failing to build packages.
>> I also don't think anyone is stopped from setting up a service that
>> allows source-only uploads as a go-between.
>
> Do you mean set up
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> First of all, thanks for this great roundup. There are just some few
> questions that popped up in my mind that I hope haven't asked yet
> (wasn't able to check all the responses completely ...). Sorry if there
> are duplications, a reference to the answer fo
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:54:18AM +, Philipp Kern a écrit :
>
>> there might not be clusters of arm yet but I saw offers for clusters of mips.
>
> Hi Philipp
>
> I also saw this cluster and got quite curious until I realised that most
> programs I package are not par
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John M Collins
* Package name: gnuspool
Version : 1.6
Upstream Author : John M Collins
* URL : http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuspool
* License : GPL (>=3)
Programming Lang: C, (and some python in a sub-package)
Descr
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 08:18:57PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> > There are architectures for different issues. There are issues which
> > allways need the fastest available architecture and there are other
> > needs which are targeting at low power consumption etc. We should
> > probably not put a
Luk Claes wrote:
You apparently fail to see that building the packages on mips uncovers
bugs that would otherwise be there, but take a longer time to uncover on
the 'mainstream' platforms.
This is not generally true. There are are classes of bugs that appear on
different platforms _due to bein
Executive summary: If you use Mercurial and pbuilder for package
maintenance you should try out mercurial-buildpackage in
http://people.debian.org/~jps/squeeze/ .
I have spent some time on making an improved version of
hg-buildpackage, which turned out to become a complete rewrite now
called mercu
On 2009-11-18, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> This is not generally true. There are are classes of bugs that appear on
> different platforms _due to being different platforms_, not just because
> they were latent bugs waiting to be discovered. I presume that packages
> that require as much efficiency as
On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
> for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
Basicalyl, the turnaround time is too long if we have to wait for manual
buildd signings.
For example, when we u
Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:49:46PM +, Mark Brown a écrit :
>
> The flip side of this is that it's just inviting maintainers to decide
> they can't be bothered with porting effort and leaving ports as second
> class citizens.
It seems that the trend this year is to not trust the maintainers fo
On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:05:41 -0200
Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote:
> * Package name: pyflag
> Version : 0.87-pre1
> Upstream Author : Michael Cohen and David Collett
>
> * URL : http://www.pyflag.net
> * License : GPL-2
> Programming Lang: C, Python
> Descript
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
* Package name: gtkhotkey
Version : 0.2.1
Upstream Author : Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
* URL : https://launchpad.net/gtkhotkey
* License : LGPL-3
Programming Lang: C
Description : Gtk hotkey shar
On Wed, Nov 18 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:49:46PM +, Mark Brown a écrit :
>>
>> The flip side of this is that it's just inviting maintainers to
>> decide they can't be bothered with porting effort and leaving ports
>> as second class citizens.
>
> It seems that t
(Note: I am not a porter, so please correct anything wrong I say
below)
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 08:29:53AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> How about the porters responsability towards the project ? For instance, hppa
> is blocking the testing migration of a couple of my packages, and probably the
>
Russ Allbery writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow writes:
>
>> I mentioned before that there are a lot of packages that violate
>> Policy 8.2 Shared library support files:
>
>> | If your package contains files whose names do not change with each
>> | change in the library shared object version, yo
Andreas Tille writes:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>>
>> I think one would be surprised how many packages get used on 'exotic'
>> architectures. Most users don't specifically search for a piece of
>> software, they want to have some specific task done by using a s
Felipe Sateler writes:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> You apparently fail to see that building the packages on mips uncovers
>> bugs that would otherwise be there, but take a longer time to uncover on
>> the 'mainstream' platforms.
>
> This is not generally true. There are are classes of bugs that appea
Sune Vuorela writes:
> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
>> for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>
> Basicalyl, the turnaround time is too long if we have to wait for manual
> buildd s
Jens Peter Secher writes:
> Executive summary: If you use Mercurial and pbuilder for package
> maintenance you should try out mercurial-buildpackage in
> http://people.debian.org/~jps/squeeze/ .
>
> I have spent some time on making an improved version of
> hg-buildpackage, which turned out to bec
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009, Steffen Joeris wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:04:28 pm Carlo Segre wrote:
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The current "winning" opinion is to go with the source+throw away
binaries route. We are close to being able to achieve this, it is
simply that it has not ye
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Sune Vuorela writes:
>
>> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>>> I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
>>> for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>> Basicalyl, the turnaround time is too long if we
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:16:41PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> > I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
> > for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>
> Basicalyl, the turnaround time is too lon
38 matches
Mail list logo
