On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:55:18PM -0700, Gordon Haverland wrote:
> I'm a UN*X dinosaur. I started using UN*X in 1984.
>
> I don't like this idea of folding /bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin into
> /usr/bin.
>
> I think the reasons to segregate /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin
> and anything in /usr/loca
Joey Hess writes:
> Gergely Nagy wrote:
>> At the moment, I have something that works like this:
>>
>> ,
>> | #! /usr/bin/dh-exec-install
>> | # The next one will simply echo it back to dh_install
>> | source-file /dest-dir/
>> |
>> | # This one will copy the file itself, following similar h
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Julien Danjou
* Package name: python-commando
Version : 0.1.1a
Upstream Author : Lakshmi Vyasarajan
* URL : http://github.com/lakshmivyas/commando
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description : simple wrap
Eike Nicklas:
> * Package name: etm
> Version : 883
> Upstream Author : Daniel Graham
> * URL : http://www.duke.edu/~dgraham/ETM/
Hi,
I couldn't find any version control system for this software and the
versioning scheme seems weird. Could you be so kind to work this
also sprach Thomas Koch [2011.12.13.1121 +0100]:
> I couldn't find any version control system for this software and the
> versioning scheme seems weird.
What's weird? Are you missing a dot? All that matters is that it's
increasing. ;)
--
.''`. martin f. krafft Related projects:
: :'
]] (Marco d'Itri)
> On Dec 09, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
> > Maybe we should consider closing those bugs after a while? While I'm
>
> Maybe we should ask the maintainers?
> e.g. ppp still needs a lot of help.
I don't doubt that the packages might still need help, but I don't think
an RFH is g
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Simon Chopin
* Package name: audioread
Version : x.y.z
Upstream Author : Name
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang: Python
Description : Backend-agnostic audio decoding Python package
Hi,
I just made a fool of myself on the simple-build-tool list by claiming that
Debian would build scala without scala. I only checked debian/rules and
debian/control and since scala is in main, I assumed that I must be right.
However scala comes with a bytecode-compiled scala compiler in lib/ w
On Di, Dez 13, 2011 at 13:23:25 (CET), Thomas Koch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just made a fool of myself on the simple-build-tool list by claiming that
> Debian would build scala without scala. I only checked debian/rules and
> debian/control and since scala is in main, I assumed that I must be right.
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sebastian H.
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.16.0
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: C++
Description : collection of desktop tools for
I just stumbled upon this initiative:
http://www.spdx.org/
It is a way to specify the licensing and copyright information (and
more) for software packages. There is some overlap between
debian/copyright file and especially the DEP5 format. Alas, the SPDX
format is XML based, an example for GNU
On 12/13/2011 09:17 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Possibly DEP5-compliant files could be generated from SPDX files.
This has come up in several DEP5 discussions over the past ~year, as
well as several recent mentions:
https://www.google.com/search?q=spdx+site%3Alists.debian.org
--
Kind regards,
Le 13/12/2011 06:51, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
> ]] (Marco d'Itri)
>
>> On Dec 09, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe we should consider closing those bugs after a while? While I'm
>>
>> Maybe we should ask the maintainers?
>> e.g. ppp still needs a lot of help.
>
> I don't doubt that the pac
On 12/13/2011 01:23 PM, Thomas Koch wrote:
>
> So is it ok to ship binaries in the source package that are only
> required during build? Can I do the same with simple-build-tool,
> which requires itself to build?
>
Depends on the need. It is quite common for compilers to have some
binaries to
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:03:55PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 12/13/2011 01:23 PM, Thomas Koch wrote:
> > So is it ok to ship binaries in the source package that are only
> > required during build? Can I do the same with simple-build-tool,
> > which requires itself to build?
> Depends on t
On 12/13/2011 07:26 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:03:55PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>> On 12/13/2011 01:23 PM, Thomas Koch wrote:
>
>>> So is it ok to ship binaries in the source package that are only
>>> required during build? Can I do the same with simple-build-tool,
>
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:29:23PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> > I think the traditional expectation here is that compilers will do
> > their initial bootstrap using an out-of-archive binary, and that once
> > in the archive, they'll be maintained using a self-build-depends
> > instead.
> You mea
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 13.12.2011, 19:29 +0100 schrieb Mehdi Dogguy:
> You mean having a circular build-dependency? That isn't great :/
> I've seen some packages doing that (don't recall which right now) but
> didn't like it, tbh.
ghc does, for instance.
Greetings,
Joachim
--
Joachim "nomeata"
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:45:21AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:29:23PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> > > I think the traditional expectation here is that compilers will do
> > > their initial bootstrap using an out-of-archive binary, and that once
> > > in the archive,
On 12/13/2011 07:26 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:03:55PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>> On 12/13/2011 01:23 PM, Thomas Koch wrote:
>
>>> So is it ok to ship binaries in the source package that are only
>>> required during build? Can I do the same with simple-build-tool,
On 2011-12-13, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 13.12.2011, 19:29 +0100 schrieb Mehdi Dogguy:
>> You mean having a circular build-dependency? That isn't great :/
>> I've seen some packages doing that (don't recall which right now) but
>> didn't like it, tbh.=20
> ghc does, for instance.
Hi folks,
The above have been mentioned a few times during the course of the
year, but we're now at the point where all the prerequisites have
been satisfied, and there are no blockers present to proceed.
I've put a proposed set of packages at
http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/sysvinit/
which I
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:30:22PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> But then I don't see how you could avoid circular build-dependencies
> with compilers written in their own language. fpc/fp-compiler does the
> same.
You can avoid it by having a bootstrap compiler written in another
suitable languag
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:54:14PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> If you have a few minutes to spare, some testing of the packages
> would be appreciated, so make sure there are no corner cases we've
> missed. Upgrading initscripts should result in /etc/mtab being
> switched to a symlink at the next
Le 13/12/2011 21:30, Philipp Kern a écrit :
> But then I don't see how you could avoid circular build-dependencies
> with compilers written in their own language. fpc/fp-compiler does the
> same.
OCaml, F# (and Scala, it seems) do that by targetting a bytecode for
which there exists an independen
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:08:10PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:54:14PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > If you have a few minutes to spare, some testing of the packages
> > would be appreciated, so make sure there are no corner cases we've
> > missed. Upgrading initscr
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:32:40PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:08:10PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:54:14PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > If you have a few minutes to spare, some testing of the packages
> > > would be appreciated, so mak
Hi,
I'm writing a transitional package to handle a software name change.
The transitional package 'depends' on the new package, which itself
'replaces' the old package and takes over some of its control files.
All other control files still belong to the transitional package after
an upgrade.
I ha
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Philip A. Ashmore"
* Package name: v3c-2.4.0-01
Version : 2.4.0
Upstream Author : Philip Ashmore
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/v3c/
* dsc file :
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/v3c/v3c_2.4.0-01-1
Philip A. Ashmore (13/12/2011):
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: "Philip A. Ashmore"
>
> * Package name: v3c-2.4.0-01
Certainly that's not the package name?
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
So, recently it came to my attention that CDBS is not behaving very nicely
with dpkg-buildflags, which is causing problems for us to meet the release
goal of getting more packages built with compiler hardening enabled:
https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/SecurityHardeningBuildFlags
Notably,
Hi,
On 11-12-13 at 03:10pm, Kees Cook wrote:
> Hi,
>
> So, recently it came to my attention that CDBS is not behaving very
> nicely with dpkg-buildflags, which is causing problems for us to meet
> the release goal of getting more packages built with compiler
> hardening enabled:
> https://wik
Package: general
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.1.1
My understanding of the FHS would be that if a library is a dependency of a
binary in /bin or /sbin, then such library belongs in /lib, not
/usr/lib. (If
for some reason the library is also desired in /usr/lib then a sym link from
/li
Zachary Harris writes:
> My understanding of the FHS would be that if a library is a dependency
> of a binary in /bin or /sbin, then such library belongs in /lib, not
> /usr/lib. (If for some reason the library is also desired in /usr/lib
> then a sym link from /lib to /usr/lib, but not the other
34 matches
Mail list logo
