Agustin Henze writes:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>
>Package name: libjs-jquery-slides
> Version: 1.1.9
> Upstream Author: Nathan Searles
> URL: http://nathansearles.com
> License: Apache-2.0
> Description:
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:05:46PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> - Private dependencies, as they leak to rdeps. When a library uses
>> another library privately this dependency gets linked in directly
>> in all other rdeps,
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 03:54:06PM +0100, Steffen Vogel wrote:
> Package name: sun
> Version : 0.1
> Upstream Author : Steffen Vogel
> URL :
> http://www.steffenvogel.de/2012/12/23/cron-jobs-fur-sonnenauf-untergang/
> License : GPL
> Programming Lang: A
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:28:52AM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > Package name: sun
> > Description : sun calculates the sun's rise/set times, the solar noon
> > and the daylight time duration
>
> This package apparently shares functionality with the redshift package
> already in De
* Wouter Verhelst:
> Strictly speaking, if you're only using static libraries this is not
> really true; once you've compiled something against a static library,
> the static library might change in whatever way it sees fit, the
> compiled binary will continue to work, with or without recompilatio
Hi Reinhard,
Reinhard Tartler writes:
> Consider this from the application perspective: Say an application
> links against a library libfoo.a. At some point, libfoo decides to
> include compression support, and requires functionality from libz. No
> problem for the library package maintainer; he
On 2013-01-03 08:41, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:05:46PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
>>> - Private dependencies, as they leak to rdeps. When a library uses
>>> another library privately this dependency ge
Hi Florian,
Florian Weimer writes:
> My main worry is that, for example, a fix in another, otherwise
> unrelated dependency prompts a rebuild, and this picks up behavioral
> changes which haven't been visible before, but lingering in the static
> library. Essentially, we end up with non-reproduc
* Michael Stapelberg:
> Florian Weimer writes:
>> My main worry is that, for example, a fix in another, otherwise
>> unrelated dependency prompts a rebuild, and this picks up behavioral
>> changes which haven't been visible before, but lingering in the static
>> library. Essentially, we end up w
On 2013-01-03, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> (1) pkg-config files for libraries, in particular all those that ship
> static libs, to be a
> release goal for jessie.
rather get rid of static libs.
> It would be useful / interesting if pkg-config information could be used
> to generate dependencies
* Sune Vuorela:
> On 2013-01-03, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>> (1) pkg-config files for libraries, in particular all those that ship
>> static libs, to be a
>> release goal for jessie.
>
> rather get rid of static libs.
We might want to extend static libraries with LTO data one day.
(We could eve
Hi Florian,
Florian Weimer writes:
>> Could you provide an example please? I don’t understand how this is
>> different with static linking than with dynamic linking yet.
>
> With dynamic linking, you pick up the behavior change along with
> "apt-get upgrade", so I expect that we get much more tes
* Michael Stapelberg:
> Hi Florian,
>
> Florian Weimer writes:
>>> Could you provide an example please? I don’t understand how this is
>>> different with static linking than with dynamic linking yet.
>>
>> With dynamic linking, you pick up the behavior change along with
>> "apt-get upgrade", so I
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> One might argue that the static case is actually better because it is
> more predictable, but our post-release support model is heavily
> dependent on minimal changes (because we cannot do full QA
> post-release). Such minimal changes are im
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 general
Bug #697270 [kernel-image] PC 32-bit programs fails to work on amd64
Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image'
Bug reassigned from package 'kernel-image' to 'general'.
No longer marked as found in versions 3.2.0.
Ignoring request to alter fixed vers
+++ Franz Zinn [2013-01-02 14:42 +]:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build a cross version of binutils (Squeeze version
> 2.20.1) using the directions in debian/README.cross with the command
> line
>
> TARGET=sparc fakeroot debian/rules binary-cross
Hmm. I use TARGET=sparc dpkg-buildpackage
the bi
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Hideki Yamane
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-ruby-extras-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Package name: ruby-spoon
Version: 0.0.2
Upstream Author: Charles Oliver Nutter
URL: https://github.com/headius/spoon
Paul Wise writes:
> With Built-Using, we get a way to rebuild packages that embed parts of
> other packages:
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-built-using
>
> Not sure if the buildd stuff will automatically schedule rebuilds or
> if we will notice due to britney k
Hi Gergely,
if you take the effort to reassign to general, why dont you lower the severity
as well?
And, if you explain how this is a user error, why dont you close it straight
away?
cheers,
Holger
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Your message dated Thu, 3 Jan 2013 16:32:54 +0100
with message-id <201301031632.56423.hol...@layer-acht.org>
and subject line Re: Processed: Re: Bug#697270: PC 32-bit programs fails to
work on amd64
has caused the Debian Bug report #697270,
regarding PC 32-bit programs fails to work on amd64
to be
Hi Gergelzz :-)
On Donnerstag, 3. Januar 2013, Gergelzz Nagy wrote:
> Because I haven't slept this year yet, and I forgot to change the Cc: to
> -done@, and there's been about 5 minutes between the Control: header and
> the rest of my mail, during which I completely forgot about th
Holger Levsen writes:
> Hi Gergely,
>
> if you take the effort to reassign to general, why dont you lower the
> severity
> as well?
>
> And, if you explain how this is a user error, why dont you close it straight
> away?
Because I haven't slept this year yet, and I forgot to change the Cc: to
User error? Huh ?
No ! This is a Debian Bug !
Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DOES EXIST.
This is a 100% proof of Debian bug.
--
-Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub
Please keep in mind, that I have wasted 4 hours of my personal time on
this Debian bug, and do you think this is reasonable ?
--
-Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.d
+++ Wookey [2013-01-03 12:42 +]:
> Franz Zinn wrote:
> Hmm. I use TARGET=sparc dpkg-buildpackage
I tried this (with 2.23.1) and found a bug - --target in configure is set to
'sparc'
rasther than sparc-linux-gnu which means it builds for sparc-sunos.
This may well be due to my modifications
On 01/04/2013 01:02 AM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> Please keep in mind, that I have wasted 4 hours of my personal time on
> this Debian bug, and do you think this is reasonable ?
>
It all depends.
How did you even install Firefox 32 bits? We don't have such a
package in Debian. It's rebranded as "ic
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> on a 64 bits arch Debian, when really, you'd better just do:
> apt-get install iceweasel
>
> and use your newly installed browser in 64 bits mode...
Not, because my job requires the latest FireFox (latest-and-greatest).
And the standard Fi
Alexey Eromenko writes:
> User error? Huh ?
> No ! This is a Debian Bug !
> Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DOES EXIST.
> This is a 100% proof of Debian bug.
That's the error message that you get when the dynamic loader for a binary
doesn't exist. I think that's be
But having 32-bit LSB compliance will help people a _LOT_.
--
-Alexey Eromenko "Technologov"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/CAOJ6w=H9b9+paJGv5h0_Lp
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>
>> on a 64 bits arch Debian, when really, you'd better just do:
>> apt-get install iceweasel
>>
>> and use your newly installed browser in 64 bits mode...
>
> Not, because my job requ
On 01/04/2013 01:31 AM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> on a 64 bits arch Debian, when really, you'd better just do:
>> apt-get install iceweasel
>>
>> and use your newly installed browser in 64 bits mode...
> Not, because my job requires the lates
Alexey Eromenko writes:
> User error? Huh ?
It is, I'm afraid.
> No ! This is a Debian Bug !
No, it is not.
> Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DOES
> EXIST.
It does not. However, the file the message is referring to is not the
file you think it refers to: it is mi
Alexey Eromenko writes:
> But having 32-bit LSB compliance will help people a _LOT_.
Debian provides LSB compliance via the lsb set of packages. Not everyone
wants to have all LSB packages installed or particularly cares about LSB
compliance. If you do:
aptitude install lsb
will install
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> But having 32-bit LSB compliance will help people a _LOT_.
>
This does not mean you can't run 32bit application under a 64bit
Debian installation, it's because the support is not added into
default installation as the feature isn't consider
Le jeudi, 3 janvier 2013 18.44:59, Alexey Eromenko a écrit :
> But having 32-bit LSB compliance will help people a _LOT_.
By the way:
* Debian is not LSB-certified
* ... but the lsb-* packages try to provide a working implementation.
No work has been attempted to provide Multi-Arch lsb packages (
Ubuntu has done some poor decisions but it has done some other that are
okay. We should consider merging some of them back.
Im thinking about the 6 months release thing. Without further ado, here's
the proposal pre-draft:
_Proposal_:
Add a new release stage between stable and testing. Called usabl
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>
> release and lsb-base being Architecture: foreign). Patches are welcome to make
> Wheezy+1 more suitable to your needs.
How about changing it from a kernel bug to tasksel feature ?
I recommend: "tasksel" to install 32-bit libraries b
clone 697270 -1
retitle -1 misleading error message when ELF interpreter does not exist
reassign -1 bash
severity -1 normal
merge -1 609882
retitle 697270 i386 multiarch not enabled and ia32-libs not installed by
default on amd64
severity 697270 minor
tags 697270 +wontfix
thanks
Hi Alexey,
2013-
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> clone 697270 -1
Bug #697270 {Done: Holger Levsen } [general] PC 32-bit
programs fails to work on amd64
Bug 697270 cloned as bug 697299
> retitle -1 misleading error message when ELF interpreter does not exist
Bug #697299 {Done: Holger Levsen } [g
Timo Weingärtner writes:
> 2013-01-03 um 18:32:28 schrieb Russ Allbery:
>> Alexey Eromenko writes:
>>> User error? Huh ?
>>> No ! This is a Debian Bug !
>>> Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DOES EXIST.
>>> This is a 100% proof of Debian bug.
> I guess it is bash tel
Hallo Russ Allbery,
2013-01-03 um 19:26:46 schriebst Du:
> Timo Weingärtner writes:
> > 2013-01-03 um 18:32:28 schrieb Russ Allbery:
> >> Alexey Eromenko writes:
> >>> User error? Huh ?
> >>>
> >>> No ! This is a Debian Bug !
> >>> Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DO
Timo Weingärtner writes:
> Hallo Russ Allbery,
>> I think that's asking quite a lot of bash. Wouldn't it have to open
>> the binary and parse the ELF headers, extracting the INTERP header, in
>> order to verify that? Does it really make sense to encode
>> understanding of ELF binary layout form
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 10:26:46AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> That's the error message that you get when the dynamic loader for a
> >> binary doesn't exist. I think that's been the case for as long as
> >> Linux has existed.
> > That's already reported as bug #609882.
> I think that's askin
On 01/03/2013 02:16 PM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
>>
>> release and lsb-base being Architecture: foreign). Patches are welcome to
>> make
>> Wheezy+1 more suitable to your needs.
>
> How about changing it from a kernel bug to tasksel fea
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 02:01:26AM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> > But having 32-bit LSB compliance will help people a _LOT_.
> >
>
> This does not mean you can't run 32bit application under a 64bit
> Debian installation, it's because the support
On 03/01/13 19:18, alberto fuentes wrote:
> Request for comments!
AFAIK there is already an ongoing effort to provide an usable updated
rolling release of Debian.
http://joeyh.name/code/debian/cut/
http://cut.debian.net/
Isn't this (more or less) what you are asking for?
signature.asc
Descr
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013, Alexey Eromenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> >
> > release and lsb-base being Architecture: foreign). Patches are welcome to
> > make
> > Wheezy+1 more suitable to your needs.
>
> How about changing it from a kernel bug to tasksel fe
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 10:26:46AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >>> Debian clearly says: "File does not exist", while in fact it DOES EXIST.
> >>> This is a 100% proof of Debian bug.
>
> > I guess it is bash telling you that.
>
> >> That's the error message that you get when the dynamic loader fo
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Koch
Control: block 697193 by 622928
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
* Package name: libandroid-json-org-java
Version : 20090211 (to mimick the last json.org version)
Upstream Author : The Android Open Source Project
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:59:02PM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> You installed a 32-bit application on a 64-bit system. That will only
> work if you also install the 32-bit supporting libraries, including the
> dynamic linker. This is not a bug in Debian.
>
> And no, installing 32-bit libraries by
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:18:27 +0100, alberto fuentes wrote:
> The only ways to prevent this if you are running the more or less
> up-to-date testing are:
> * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> the pinning sy
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:45:45PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> > - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> > the pinning system works
>
> No and yes.
>
> No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nic
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tanguy Ortolo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
* Package name: fonts-opendyslexic
Version : 20121109
Upstream Author : Abbie Gonzalez
* URL : http://dyslexicfonts.com/
* License : CC-BY-3.0
Description
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 05:12:03 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > > * Pin packages with RC bugs on upgrade. This is:
> > > - Non trivial: it makes you understand how bad the bug is and know how
> > > the pinning system works
> > No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nice interface so
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 519 (new: 1)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 141 (new: 1)
Total number of packages request
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 10:35:43PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:59:02PM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> > You installed a 32-bit application on a 64-bit system. That will only
> > work if you also install the 32-bit supporting libraries, including the
> > dynamic linker. Th
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 12:43:56AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The problem to be solved is that ISVs provide binaries for Linux i386
> and our users want to run them on amd64. LSB, x32 and ARM are
> completely irrelevant - the important thing is to make it easy to
> install whatever libraries th
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 09:41:15AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:05:46PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> >> - Private dependencies, as they leak to rdeps. When a library uses
> >> another library priv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01/03/2013 08:15 PM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> http://cut.debian.net/
>
>
> Isn't this (more or less) what you are asking for?
Isn't this (more or less) dead?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: U
On 01/03/2013 06:32 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 05:12:03 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
No, because apt-listbugs exists and provides a nice interface so users
don't have to care about pinning details for themselves.
Can apt-listbugs do anything more than abort the entir
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 7:18 PM, alberto fuentes wrote:
> _Proposal_:
> Add a new release stage between stable and testing. Called usable or
> whatever name we find fit for it
>
> stable <- <- testing <- sid
>
> Migrate packages after a period* in testing without RC bugs.
> *a 2-4 weeks seems reas
61 matches
Mail list logo
