Re: autoconf 2.72 to unstable?

On 2024-06-14 Gürkan Myczko wrote: [...] > Have never done mass bug filings, any easy way, preferably something copy > pastable, > non-interactive. Hej, How about mass-bug(1) in devscripts? cu Andreas

Re: Vendoring an unmaintained library?

On 2024-07-03 Alexandre Rossi wrote: [...] > #1073005 asks for the vendoring back of an unvendored library, arguing > that this particular library is unmaintained upstream, implying that the > vendored fork is better maintained. > My view on this is that if the vendored fork is better maintained,

Re: Removing more packages from unstable

On 2024-08-20 Helmut Grohne wrote: > Hi fellow developers, > (modified resend, as first attempt didn't arrive) > please allow me to open a can of worms. Package removal from unstable. > Deciding when it is time to remove a package from unstable is difficult. > There may be users still and it is

Please test findutils 4.2.4 in experimental

Hello, findutils upstream has taken up lots of speed while I was VAC and has not only managed to declare 4.1.20 stable but also to make a couple of new releases from CVS. The changelog is quite big, closing many bugs and also adding a couple of features (no, -exec {}+ is not there yet). I'd appre

Re: Bug#282742: Move daily find run later

On Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 05:32:20PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Sat, 27 Nov 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> On 2004-11-24 Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Package: findutils [...] >>> It would be nice if the daily find run could be moved behi

Re: Bug#282742: Move daily find run later

On 2004-12-07 Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Andreas Metzler said: >> On Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 05:32:20PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote: >>> On Sat, 27 Nov 2004, Andreas Metzler wrote: >>>> On 2004-11-24 Martin Schulze <

Re: Bug#282742: Move daily find run later

On 2004-12-07 Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 2004-11-24 Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Package: findutils [...] >>> It would be nice if the daily find run could be moved behind the >>> logrotate and sysklogd runs (maybe as zz_find) [zz_find is ugly

Re: binary NMUs and version numbers

Anthony Towns azure.humbug.org.au> writes: > Goswin von Brederlow wrote: [...] > > Another case that should be considered is the existing use of + for > > revisions of a cvs snapshot (e.g. mutt uses a + but always does so): > > 1.2-20041208 "<<" 1.2-20041208+2 "<<" 1.2-20041208+b1 > > Hrm, why i

Re: "Why is package X not in testing yet" - where's the page

Frank KÃster debian.org> writes: > I used to check testing migration with the link > > http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl > > but the host is no longer found. Does anybody know whether this is just > a temporary problem? Or is there an alternative site? Hello, It worked yesterday, and I've

Re: Bug#282742: Move daily find run later

On 2004-12-08 Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler wrote: >> Anyway the solution seems to be overengineered for the problem at >> hand. I have yet to decide whether >> * I'll close the bugreport with "request denied" > Please do

Re: LCC and blobs

Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tim Cutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] >> It's not the driver software depends on the firmware to function; it's >> the hardware that depends on the firmware to function. The software >> dependency is a side-effect. > With the driver software

Re: lintian warning about /usr/X11R6/lib

Neil Roeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One of my packages, xfonts-kapl, installs fonts to > usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts, as it should, according to policy 11.8.5. I > get a lintian warning that nothing should install to /usr/X11R6/lib > unless it uses imake, and that is just reflecting policy 11.8.7.

Re: Linux Core Consortium

Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Why aren't security uploads for testing done as "testing-security > unstable"? Why leave the bug open in sid when fixing it in testing? [...] It is not possible to target more than one distribution (i.e. testing-security and unstable) in one

Re: Help needed with debconf

"Arne Götje" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I need some help with debconf, especially for the config and postinst > scripts. > I tried to craft my own ones for my font package and when I try to > install the package the postinst script exits with status 10. What does > this mean? > Further more, t

Re: transition of htop

Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could someone take a look at htop transition? > > http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?excuse=htop > http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=htop > > Both pages say that my package hasn't been built on m68k yet, but that's > not truth. It

Re: Help needed with debconf

"Arne Götje" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 15 December 2004 16:32, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> postinst: >> #!/bin/sh >> [...] >> if [ "$variant" == "Unicode" ]; then >> That is a bashism which will fail if /bin/sh

Re: Are mails sent to xxxx buildd.debian.org sent to /dev/null ?

Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jay Berkenbilt wrote: >> I've sent messages to various [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses many >> times for various reasons, and they have all always been ignored. > Me too, for values of ignored that include "may have resulted in some > action, but never got a repl

Re: Problems to upload

Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > But what me *really* concerns is why dput and dupload failed in the > first place. Especially the hint to "PASSIV MODE" smells like something > has changed to the situation before. [...] | dput (0.9.2.15) unstable; urgency=low | | * More verbo

Re: partial patches - server application

On 2005-01-06 Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > deb http://merkel.debian.org/~aba/debian sid main contrib non-free > (or any other combination of suites and components you like) > However, there are only the dist files on that place, _no_ downloadable > pool is available there. >

Re: eleventh-hour transition for mysql-using packages related to apache

[Cc ing Frankie as the [EMAIL PROTECTED] addresses appear to be non-functional] On 2005-01-31 Francesco Paolo Lovergine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 02:34:07PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > These four packages also link against both libpam and libmysqlc

Re: master's mail backlog and upgrade time

Andy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 12:48:30PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: >> * Ian Jackson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >>> Stephen Frost writes ("Re: master's mail backlog and upgrade time"): Then bounce it locally. Duh. No reason to force master to deal with

Re: master's mail backlog and upgrade time

Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2005/11/19, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> FWIW he currently does a. Rejecting at SMTP time causes backscatter on >> forwarded mail, as the forwarding host cannot reject because it >> already has accep

Re: master's mail backlog and upgrade time

Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler wrote: >> The real problem with these bounces is not that they fill up the >> forwarding host's queue but that they are usually unwanted. Think Joe >> Job. > This thread is about email that is obviousl

Re: Secret changes for binNMUs

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Meanwhile, I am using this: unversioned depends and two conflicts: (<< > {Upstream-Version}), (>= {Upstream-Version}.1). Depends: foo (>={Upstream-Version}), foo (<< {Upstream-Version}.1) instead should also work without the need for

Re: Secret changes for binNMUs

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [...] >>> Meanwhile, I am using this: unversioned depends and two conflicts: (<< >>

Re: ${Source-Version} without revision

Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is there any variable similar to ${Source-Version} which would allow me to >> use version of the upstream sources in control file? [...] > Use dpkg-parsechangelog along with sed to get the upstream fr

Re: Checking package builds on hppa/arm/m68k?

Andreas Fester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > what is the proper way to > "Please (re)check, if the package can be built by g++ > 3.4 > on [hppa/arm/m68k]"? > Do I simply remove the explicit build dependency on g++, > upload the package and wait if it succeeds (and probably > create another p

Re: Size matters. Debian binary package stats

Gürkan Sengün <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've run some scripts to find out the size of binary pakcages in debian > and how theycould be made smaller, here's the results: > http://www.linuks.mine.nu/sizematters/ Afaict from the webpage 7zip (LZMA) is quite a bit slower bzip2. - Have you perhaps

Re: switching to vim-tiny for standard vi?

Riku Voipio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While I'm a addicted vim user, the build-dependencies of vim(-tiny) > is a bit scary for a base package. While we do not have requirements > of base packages of being easily buildable, changing to vim-tiny > will make bootstrapping a basic debian system agai

Re: switching to vim-tiny for standard vi?

Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > bootstrapping, because it does change _when_ in the process vim is ^ not -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou

Re: Advices, comments? Bug#345651: passwd package should be essential?

Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > I'm wondering if the passwd package should be essential or not. [...] > So, passwd was virtually essential because bash had a > dependency on it, but now it doesn't anymore. > So why do I think passwd needs to be essential? > There are several

Re: How to determine complete reverse dependencies?

Pádraig Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > However when trying it on my ubuntu breezy desktop, > I noticed some missing dependencies. > For e.g. imagemagick isn't reported to depend on libc6 ? > $ whatrequires libc6 | grep imagemagick > $ ldd /usr/bin/convert | grep libc >libc.so.6 =

Re: Looking for a autotools/libtool expert: Unnecessarily linked libraries

Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > and then "cd texk" and your commands, configure fails like this: > [...] > configuring in texk > running /bin/sh ./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-ipc > --disable-multiplatform --enable-shared --without-dialog --without-texinfo > --without-t1util

Re: not starting packages at boot

On 2005-01-25 Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 24-Jan-05, 03:45 (CST), Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Last time I looked, invoke-rc.d was not yet a requirement to be used > > by packages. As far as I remember, it is for sarge, but not for woody > > and thus unuseable on w

Re: library packaging doc...

On 2005-01-26 Pierre Ancelot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everyone, i would point to this link : > http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html [...] It is already linked from deveopers reference. cu andreas PS: It is pretty useless to sign messages witho

Re: eleventh-hour transition for mysql-using packages related to apache

On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:03:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: [...] > Over the past six months, the situation has changed significantly. The > mysql maintainer, mysql upstream, and others have admirably worked through > the license issues to get a license exception that meets the needs of the >

Re: eleventh-hour transition for mysql-using packages related to apache

On 2005-01-28 sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 04:36:05PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 05:03:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > [...] > > > Over the past six months, the situation has changed &

Re: eleventh-hour transition for mysql-using packages related to apache

On 2005-01-28 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > It would also probably be a good idea to transition these packages at the > same time: > dovecot-common > exim4-daemon-heavy > libnss-mysql > libnss-mysql-bg > libpam-mysql > libsasl2-modules-sql [...] Hello, These four p

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

On 2005-03-15 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 10:56:51AM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote: [...] > > - there should be at least 2N buildd admins for this architecture. A lot > > of problems with buildds are caused by buildd admins unavailable at the > > same time fo

Re: Building issues on sparc

Søren Boll Overgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/sandbox/xpad/xpad-2.6$ dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -uc > -us > dpkg-buildpackage: source package is xpad > dpkg-buildpackage: source version is 2.6-1 > dpkg-buildpackage: source maintainer is Soeren Boll Overgaard <[EMAIL

Re: Compiling on a Debian machine

Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How do I use a Debian machine, such as bruckner, to test a source > package by compiling for powerpc? I see bruckner has a sarge chroot. > What's the magic command to start the build in this chroot? I know of > pbuilder -- though I haven't used it much adm

Re: PostgreSQL transition ahead

Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > I will upload the new packages to unstable very soon. This has a > reasonably big impact to all packages that depend/build-depend on > PostgreSQL since the package structure changed a bit: > (1) postgresql-dev was split into libpq-dev (for client app

Re: PostgreSQL transition ahead

Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler [2005-06-07 20:03 +0200]: >> Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [...] >> > I will upload the new packages to unstable very soon. This has a >> > reasonably big impact to all packages that

Re: Excuses page showing incorrect dependencies

Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The excuses pages are showing that my vncsnapshot package is being held > back for two reasons. First, it is only 4 of 10 days old, which is > acceptable. Second, because it depends on gcc-4.0, which has RC bugs. > However, I haven't specificed such

Re: GCC 4.0 as the default GCC / C++ ABI change

On 2005-07-05 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Besides the C++ ABI change, all m68k and hppa packages depending on > libgcc1 have to be rebuilt to use libgcc2. [...] Hej, Who is responsible for this? The porters/buildd-maintainers (recompiling just for these architectures and maki

Re: Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools

martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > also sprach Pierre Machard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.01.1501 +0100]: >> snapshot.debian.net (still not-official but very usefull > This is very interesting, especially in the light of version control > for packaging -- which could also make packages

Re: Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools

martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > also sprach Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.01.1907 +0100]: [...] >> I assumed he meant it in the sense that more teams seem to be >> using subversion on alioth than any other RCS. [...] > Yes, and I wanted to know why he thought that is the case.

Re: Status of inetd for etch

Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > * The "system mta" should provide /usr/sbin/sendmail, as well as > mailq, runq, and man pages. The alternative system is able to link > several alternatives. [...] > * The "service mta" should provide a listening socket, on one or more >

Re: Request to mailing list Pkg-qof-maintainers rejected

Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Actually, I was indeed about to say this in this thread ("Reject" > being IIRC the default setting in mailman [...] Not that it matters, just for completeness sake. - The default value is defer. cu andreas -- The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy un

Re: [PROPOSAL] virtual package 'lha' -- a suitable /usr/bin/lha

"Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > LZH is an archive format which is generated by the lha utility (1). > This format is still popular in Japan, but the lha utility is not a free > software. However, some free softwares which use LZH as their > data format (2) and some free GUI a

Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?

Hello, It has been pointed out to me in http://bugs.debian.org/387699 that syvinit is going to move /var/run to a tmpfs to solve a long-standing issue, having some place to store state information before partitions are checked and mounted. (I do not know how they are going to handle the fact that

Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?

In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyway, it would be useful if you didn't have to login on merkel to be > able to see your list. I suggest you either submit those files to the > BTS, or put it on people.debian.org or something. http://people.debian.org/

Re: 2.4 vs. 2.6

Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Well, if there are really packages that demand on 2.6, they just can > depend on kernel-image-2.6, this is no problem at all. [...] No, they cannot. Kernel version requirements cannot be expressed in package dependencies because a) You can

Re: bts behaviour - versioning issue?

Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > When I look at , I'm confused at the > information for #309511, which is listed as outstanding (wishlist), > but "Done" and "Archived". > Can anybody tell me why? The version tracking code uses branches. The b

Re: Free flash player for your browser

Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 28/09/2006 Miriam Ruiz wrote: >> --- Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: [...] >> Are you using some kind of OpenGL acceleration? It seems that CPU gets too >> loaded if not, upstream is working in that. > I don't use any acceleration at all. I

Re: Making SELinux standard for etch

James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > If you have exim installed, you must either install postfix or write an > exim policy, as none currently exists. > Is this still the case? [...] Yes it is. #387327 #390179 Neither Marc nor me are using selinux and therefore we do not have the k

Re: gids assigned non-deterministically

Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have started working with transitioning a network to LDAP. I am still > experimenting with this at home before implementing it "for real." This > brings me to my concern. It appears that many groups are added to the > system "willy-nilly." By th

Re: incoming locked?

Toni Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I uploaded a version of my roundup package some two days ago which > cleans up important bugs. The package page shows the upload on > 2006-10-11, but when searching for it on w.d.o/packages, I get only an > older version which *has* bugs. Any chance that th

Re: Can someone explain : " wmaker (0.92.0-6) is newer than that in Debian!"

Fabrice Lorrain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > $ reportbug wmaker [...] > Getting status for wmaker... > Checking for newer versions at packages.debian.org... > Your version of wmaker (0.92.0-6) is newer than that in Debian! Do you > still want to file a report [y|N|q|?]? > H, how come ? [...]

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy

In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Firstly, should we be pointing to the SuS instead of POSIX > (there is work going on a new version of the SUS), since it is open, > and readily available on th 'net, and people can readily see it (as > opposed

Re: Accepted update-manager 0.42.2ubuntu22-6 (source all)

Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 06:33:10AM -0800, Gustavo Noronha Silva <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Version: 0.42.2ubuntu22-6 > Why do we need ubuntu version numbers in debian ? Ubuntu is upstream for this package afaict from debian/copyright. And 0.42.2ubunt

Re: BTS Question

Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I go to: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?which=maint&data=bam%40debian.org&archive=no&version=&dist=unstable > The first bug listed in the "Outstanding section" is bug > #347813. However, this bug has been closed. > I suspect that this is

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy

In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 18:15 -0500, Clint Adams wrote: >> A builtin ls might be a good idea for disaster recovery shells, >> though zsh-static does not have it. posh is not intended to be >> such a shell, nor to b

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy

Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > ...and where is SuSv3 in Debian (which package?). [...] Nonfree. http://packages.debian.org/susv3 cu andreas -- The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal vision of the emperor's, and its inclusion in this work does

Re: Question about "Depends: bash"

Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Regarding the discusion about POSIX and sh I have a grave problem. > My scripts (or better programs) are using #!/bin/bash because I use > BASH specific extensions. > You say: "BASH must not be a Depends: since it is Essential." > Oops my $USERS comp

Re: BTS: Why no "invalid" or "notabug" tag?

Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 12:56:27 -0800, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>On Fri, 08 Dec 2006, Marc Haber wrote: >>> On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 16:51:26 -0800, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >$ GET http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control|grep bloc

Re: BTS: Why no "invalid" or "notabug" tag?

Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Out of curiousity, what _did_ you expect the blocking tag to >> do? [...] > The one thing that I really wanted to have happen and was surprised didn't > happen was that I wanted a blocking annotation

Re: db.debian.org (and related infrastructure) updates

Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:34:28AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote: >> * Mail greylisting > What happens with a mail which is delivered to an user with greylisting > enabled and one with it disabled? >> * Mail whitelist >> * Mail RBL list >>

Re: db.debian.org (and related infrastructure) updates

Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le samedi 30 décembre 2006 à 05:34 -0800, Ryan Murray a écrit : [...] >> The exim4 config has been updated to make use of these new fields, >> giving developers the ability to: >> * disable their @debian.org email address entirely with a >>

Re: FSG Packaging Summit in Berlin

Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm boycotting feeding any useful information to LWN anymore until they >> retract their latest blanket insult of all DD's and stop being so biased. [...] > Honestly, I don't see what the problem is here. The text in question is > (p

Re: Not depending on shlibs because of plugins?

Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm packaging a database wrapper library (http://oss.devit.com/yada/). > Its purpose is to provide one single API to a program and let the user > configure if the database used is actually postgres/mysql/sqlite. The > actual interfacing with the databases

Re: Not depending on shlibs because of plugins?

On 2007-01-05 Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 07:33:56PM +0100, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > You could move the plugin's additional dependencies into Recommends, > > using "dpkg-shlibdeps -vRecommends&q

Re: Not depending on shlibs because of plugins?

Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > You could move the plugin's additional dependencies into Recommends, > using "dpkg-shlibdeps -vRecommends" [...] -v is a typo, -d is the correct thing, e.g this dpkg-shlibdeps /usr/bin/xine \ -dRecommends

Re: Bug#359662: libpcre3-dev doesn't install libpcre.pc, so pkg-config can't find libpcre

On 2006-03-28 Christian Ohm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: libpcre3-dev > Version: 6.4-1.1 > Severity: important > Hello, > Like the subject says: The file libpcre.pc isn't installed (though it's > generated during the build), so any package searching for libpcre via > pkg-config can't fin

Re: new su behaviour & exit status

Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > because of the new su behaviour its no longer possible to > get any exit status from a command executed with su -c. [...] > Does anyone knows a fix for this or have any useful links on > how to "workaround" this behaviour? You could simply use start-

Re: Proper way of closing *old* bugs

Stephen Samuel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It seems to me that, in this case (and correct me if I'm wrong), the > package hasn't been updated from upstream for a long time, and so the > difference between the old version and the new version fixes the stack > of old bugs (( even though it wasn't

System users that receive mail in /var/mail/systemuser?

Hello, system users like proxy, sshd or identd usually do not receive any mail at all. And system-users that _do_ receive mail are usually redirected to a real user by /etc/aliases. I do wonder whether it would be safe to reject any mail for system-accounts (uid <1000 || uid >63434) unless it is r

Re: System users that receive mail in /var/mail/systemuser?

Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler wrote: >> Hello, >> system users like proxy, sshd or identd usually do not receive any >> mail at all. And system-users that _do_ receive mail are usually >> redirected to a real user by /etc/aliases. >&g

Re: System users that receive mail in /var/mail/systemuser?

Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 12:25 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: [...] >> And now I am wondering whether this will break existing packages. > Maybe not *packages*, but possibly non-Debian software. non-Debian software, running in the Debian sy

Re: System users that receive mail in /var/mail/systemuser?

Christoph Berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Re: Andreas Metzler 2006-04-09 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> #1 sane packages redirect mail via /etc/aliases >> #2 un-aliased mail to systemusers (e.g. spam) is not accepted and >> dumped into /var/mail/systemuser but reje

Re: System users that receive mail in /var/mail/systemuser?

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 09, 2006 at 07:53:44PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 12:25 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: >> [...] >>>> And now I am won

Re: GPG signing of debian packages

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Dear experts, >I am trying to build my own debian packages with GPG signature. I set > up gnupg, ran gpg and gpg --gen-key and also filled the variable > default-key with my generated keyID in ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf. I thought that > this is all I have to do, since Debi

Re: Lintian package-has-a-duplicate-relation

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is there a way to force a specific library version known in > ${shlibs:Depends} ? > Using "Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}" is not really fine, if I want to > force the library to be upgraded when the primary binary package is > updated. Why would you want to do that?

Re: Guidelines for packaging projects on Alioth

Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > I'd say upload-binary should be sent to the maintainer. It helps seing > when stuff are built and uploaded, [...] Hello, Eh no. I am not interested at all that the gazillion of build-daemons grab my package and upload it to Debian.[1] For me that's ju

Re: openssl will block bacula into etch?

John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 02:55:39AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: [...] >> Any source that builds udebs is always frozen (openssl builds >> libcrypto0.9.8-udeb). Udebs have to be moved into testing manualy and >> without the freeze the source+deb and ud

Re: Real Life hits: need to give up packages for adoption

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (gmane.linux.debian.devel.general) you wrote: > On (29/05/06 21:29), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] >> * gnutls, gcrypt, libtasn1, libksba >> (security-critical, some work required, having a team for these >> packages

Re: CDBS and dh_install

Jean Parpaillon altern.org> writes: > I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS. > In the .install files, path are not prefixed by "debian/tmp" so > the building fail. > It seems that I can correct this in 2 ways: > - either I prefix the paths with debian/tmp > - or I can set a special variabl

Re: CDBS and dh_install

martin f krafft debian.org> writes: [...] > also sprach Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org> [2006.06.09.1337 +0200]: >> I am using >> DEB_DH_INSTALL_SOURCEDIR = debian/tmp >> for that purpose. > This is old. Why not switch to debhelper compatibility level 5, &

Re: GCC 4.1 now the default GCC version for etch

can be found in 1600 packages [4]; they are: >> [4] http://people.debian.org/~tbm/logs/pointer/ > Here is a list of maintainers and their packages which exhibit such > warnings: [...] > Andreas Metzler > gnutls12 1.2.9-2.1 Seems to still apply to 1.2.11. - However I'll l

Re: FTWCA Policy Section 7.6 (Build-Depends/Build-Depends-Indep)

Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Section 7.6[1] is an often misunderstood/forgotten part of the Policy > that explains how Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep are used to > build a package. Here is almost a copy&paste: > The dependencies and conflicts they define must be satisfied

Re: GCC 4.1 now the default GCC version for etch

On 2006-06-07 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > We did pick two compiler warnings and scanned the build logs of one > archive rebuild on alpha (64bit), where wrong code may be generated. [...] > - cast from pointer to integer of different size >cast to pointer from integer of d

Re: GCC 4.1 now the default GCC version for etch

Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> On 2006-06-07 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> We did pick two compiler warnings and scanned the build logs of one >>> archive rebuild on alp

Dropping indirect dependencies from libgnutls-config --libs

Hello, currently "libgnutls-config --libs"' output looks like this, -L/usr/lib -lgnutls -L/usr/lib -ltasn1 -lgcrypt -lgpg-error listing both direct (-lgnutls) and indirect dependencies. - Its output can be used for static linking. I am pondering (and have now been asked by bts) on changing this to

Re: Dropping indirect dependencies from libgnutls-config --libs

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: [making foo-config a wrapper around pkg-config] > If you started using pkg-config you'd have introduced a > build dependancy on a GPL'd program in a BSD licenced package, not > exactly a good idea. [...] That is something I hadn't thought about, gnutls is LGPL. Thank

Re: Dropping indirect dependencies from libgnutls-config --libs

Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Andreas Metzler said: >> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: >> [making foo-config a wrapper around pkg-config] >> > If you started using pkg-config you'd have introduced a >> > build dep

Re: Transfer Maintainership From MIA Maintainer

Jason Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The listed maintainers for the Webmin package > (http://packages.debian.org/stable/admin/webmin) and the associated > packages like webmin-core, Usermin, etc. are MIA. They are not fixing > bugs or responding anymore. Which is why they had asked to rrmove th

Re: exim4

Alexander Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > AFAIK, debian maintainers are volunteers and they became maintainers to > make Debian better. What the reason for maintainer to _reject_ > improvements? Another reason is this one: # Compiling Exim with experimental features. These are documented

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > The point was about mailers sending mail to debian. If they receive a > 4xx they have to queue the mail and retry later. It's cheap for > debian, but expensive for everyone else. > A far more reasonable solution is to only greylist mail wit

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

Thomas Bushnell BSG becket.net> writes: > martin f krafft debian.org> writes: [...] > It assumes, for example, that the remote MTA will use the same IP > address each time it sends the message. [...] eh no. Standard greylisting practise nowadays (it already was standard when sarge was release

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On 2006-07-10 Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Thomas Bushnell BSG becket.net> writes: > >> martin f krafft debian.org> writes: > > [...] > >> It assumes, for example, that th

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >