On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 05:16:06PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 08:23:57 -0800
> Tyler MacDonald wrote:
>
> > "An obscure french DD". Wow, what a way to describe a person. Did that
> > person kill your pet squirrel or something? :-)
>
> Christian is referring to himself. He m
Am 09.02.2013 19:01, schrieb Philipp Kern:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 11:16:30PM +0800, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
>> On 09/02/2013 08:38, Russ Allbery wrote:
>>> The proposal made in the Policy bug, which seems quite reasonable to
>>> me, is that we should only annotate packages with Built-Using if ther
[ targeted for jessie, not for wheezy ]
PIL/python-imaging didn't see any updates for a long time; this
did now change with the "PIL friendly" Pillow fork, introducing
support for Python3.
Pillow is now installed as a python package, not using the PIL
approach anymore to install many toplevel mod
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sukhbir Singh
* Package name: hunspell-en-med
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : R Robinson
* URL : http://www.e-medtools.com/Hunspel_openmedspel.html
* License : GPL
Description : English medical dictionary for hunsp
Matthias Klose writes:
> But it is ok to insist on using the exact binary version for
> build-depending on source packages when it's not needed? This only seems
> to be driven by the current dak implementation.
That does matter if the included source is GPL, and I suspect part of the
problem is
Hi Zack,
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 06:28:29PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> - The long standing issue of writing a proper (outbound) trademark
> policy for Debian marks has been completed. I've reviewed on -project
> outstanding items from the last discussion, and documented how they've
>
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 03:01:21PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> But it is ok to insist on using the exact binary version for build-depending
> on source packages when it's not needed? This only seems to be driven by the
> current dak implementation.
That doesn't make sense to me. Where did someb
Stefano Zacchiroli writes:
>
> - The long standing issue of writing a proper (outbound) trademark
> policy for Debian marks has been completed. I've reviewed on -project
> outstanding items from the last discussion, and documented how they've
> been implemented in a new policy draft [5]. Lat
Am 10.02.2013 23:31, schrieb Philipp Kern:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 03:01:21PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> But it is ok to insist on using the exact binary version for
>> build-depending on source packages when it's not needed? This only seems
>> to be driven by the current dak implementation.
On 24 January 2013 04:56, Paul Johnson wrote:
> This is a multiarch issue I had not considered before. Have you seen
> it? I never wanted to be a "cross compiler", I really only want to
> build amd64. But I have some i386 libraries for a particular program
> (acroread).
>
I recently had to build
]] Steve Langasek
> (/etc/aliases on master mentions it going to leader@, but this entry
> is commented out.)
Use exim -bt $address on master to find out. It goes to leader@ + an
archive. (I agree it should probably go on the org page too.)
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just
11 matches
Mail list logo
