On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 05:46:55PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
>
> Now if you feel advantous, repack as many package on the source mirror
> with gzip --rsyncable and notice the difference.
Exactly how is this going to help? I can only see this as being
useful when the files change. Files should nev
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 08:29:16PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The problem is not the autobuilder infrastructure per se. It is that
> > testing and unstable are largely in sync (!). This, combinded with the
> > fact that testing must not
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:13:11PM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a webpage that shows the current queue of packages in Needs-Build
> state? igloo's pages are great, but they only let you know the position in
> the queue of a package, not what's before or after it (out of curiosit
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 01:20:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look
> > redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not
> > include the full licence text needed to be distributeable. Especially
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 03:46:50PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 05:31:03AM +0100, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > My package works as designed, but let me know if you can design
> > > something better.
> >
> > Oh, so it's udev that's responsible for what II
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:47:28PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> It would be better to set up a arch-indep
> autobuilder (on a FAST machine that can handle pbuilder's unpacking of
> chroots, so that chroot crappage won't happen so often) and file FTBFS
> automatically.
We build all b
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 01:38:36PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> adduser has two bug reports open where people are asking for user name
> rules to be relaxed. One report wants "." to be allowed in user names,
> another wants usernames to start with numbers.
>
> May I ask for your opinion bef
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 01:14:09AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 10:33:53PM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
> > It was brought up on IRC, a couple of weeks ago (my apologies, but I don't
> > recall who brought it up, nor do I have a log) that it is now possible
> > to strip debugg
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 02:05:56PM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote:
>
> *) The standard way of doing this today is to have a -dev package which
> needs libc headers Depend on 'libc6-dev | libc-dev' to avoid the situation
> of having only a pure-virtual package.
Why does that rule exists anyway? It's al
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 05:53:02PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Upstream of a library package that I maintain changed function prototypes
> in the followinf way:
>
> >
> > -int mailpop3_retr(mailpop3 * f, uint32_t index, char ** result,
> > +int mailpop3_retr(mailpop3 * f, un
Hi,
gcc-3.3 3.3.5-9 was build with the configure option
--disable-__cxa_atexit instead of --enable-__cxa_atexit. This
causes it to have a different C++ ABI.
This was fixed in the 3.3.5-10 which should be available soon.
I've made a list of source packages that might have been build
with the 3.3
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:45:23PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> (Cc to -devel, because this might be of general interest).
>
> Hello,
>
> on Tuesday I got a mail from katie that tetex-bin_3.0-1 was accepted,
> but the files don't seem to be in the archive.
There was a problem with katie stopping
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 12:04:59PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > - Putting autoconf-generated files in the source package is nearly as
> > fragile as generating them at build time. If there are changes in
> > autoconf which break the configure.
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 02:02:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Kurt Roeckx
>
> > And how can you know you can actually build it if you
> > never tried it?
>
> That's the point, actually: If I build-depend on autoconf, I *cannot*
> know that it wi
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 09:44:33AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 11:17:52PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > Because we want packages in base to be preferred, as well as packages in
> > libs.
>
> I think I slightly misunderstood the "ordering by section" bit -- I was
> assu
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 02:43:14PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > * Use Debian's libtool.
>
> kmldonkey links with the following libraries: -lkdeui -lkio. As shipped,
> libtool expands that to every library under the sun. The new libtool
> indeed reduces this to /usr/
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 11:48:37PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> I've trimmed the configure scripts to avoid this, leaving me with the
> link commands for the two binaries being:
>
> g++ -Wall `"/usr/bin/wx-config" --cxxflags` -I/usr/include -I/usr/include
> -I/usr/include -g -O2 -o tqsl tq
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:43:15PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Vincent Sanders wrote:
> > [1] http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/architecture.php?a=arm
>
> taking a "random" (end of alphabet) sample from maybe-failed:
>
> twinkle: requeue (probably libccrtp was stuck in NEW)
Ju
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 11:51:00AM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> hotkey-setup: might also work on amd64 ia64 (depends on dmidecode)
> OTOH, maintainer usually seems to know what he's doing...
Also see #331280. Afaik, there is no reason this couldn't be
changed to work on
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 05:55:23AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > Indeed, for practical buildd maintainance purposes, the distinction is
> > not that important -- though 'Failed' is known to not benefit of a
> > requeue, while 'Building:Maybe-Failed' might or might not, it's unkown,
> > most a
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:56:08PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Nathanael Nerode [Sun, 11 Dec 2005 07:35:41 -0500]:
>
> > To work out which libraries you're linked to which you don't actually
> > need,
> > ldd -u is invaluable.
>
> This seems like not the case _at all_ to me (the "inva
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 05:02:15PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:56:08PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > * Nathanael Nerode [Sun, 11 Dec 2005 07:35:41 -0500]:
> >
> > > To work out which libraries you're linked to which you don't actual
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
>
> [1]: As I write this 79 NEW packages, 85 total.
Then ftp-master must be really busy, since it's now 64, total 69.
Also note that most of those packages in new aren't even a week
in it, alot aren't even a day old.
I think they're
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:10:11PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> It is my understanding that an urgency='low' upload defines a 10 day
> delay in testing propogation, unless overridden by hints.
>
> However, yesterday's gtk+2.0 upload indications only a 5 day delay.
> Why?
>
> http://packages.qa.d
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >
> > Six months is a lot of time; and experimental should provide you with
> > the space and machine power to handle the rebuilding.
>
> I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against
> build-dependencies in e
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 09:54:34AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against
> >> build-dep
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 04:12:23PM +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed that directory
> debian/dists/experimental/main/binary-i386 is empty.
> Where is new "experimental" repository?
-rw-r--r-- 1 mirror mirror 1288427 2005-12-29 21:14 Packages
drwxr-sr-x 2 mirror mirror
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 04:48:06PM +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free
So why do you use ftp.debian.org and not ftp.pl.debian.org for
experimental?
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 03:09:34PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 06 janvier 2006 à 14:28 -0600, Alejandro Bonilla a écrit :
> > /usr/lib/libgconf2-4/gconf-sanity-check-2: error while loading shared
> > libraries: libpangocairo-1.0.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such
> > fil
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:19:58PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Samuel Thibault, le Fri 20 Jan 2006 23:15:11 +0100, a écrit :
> > Maybe the debian policy should require
> > -Werror-implicit-function-declaration in CFLAGS so as to avoid such
> > issue?
>
> Or buildds could check for "implicit de
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:30:16AM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> A grave bug has been file against a package I maintain pointing out
> that the package does not work on AMD64 and in fact never has, even
> though it builds on AMD64. Since it turns out this package has never
> worked on AMD64, this b
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:32:25AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote:
>
> There are still a few packages in sarge which fail to build from source
> on amd64. Those packages will not be part of the amd64 release of sarge.
I've made a list list on saterday too which included all patched
versions in the
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 07:36:36PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
>
> Does that mean amd64 installer come without a mailer by default? Or will the
> amd64 installer install a different mailer?
The problem is that the old version of libmysqlclient-lgpl was
build before we switched to an nptl onl
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:44:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>
> 1. apt-get install aptitude
> 2. change the /etc/apt/sources.list to point to "stable"
> 3. aptitude update
> 4. aptitude install aptitude dpkg
> 5. aptitude -f --with-recommends dist-upgrade
0. change the /etc
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 04:05:42PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> My ggobi package recently made it from non-free/math to math (as the AT&T
> license was replaced by the CPL, same as for graphviz). However, as shown by
> igloo's script, buildds are not picking it up:
>
> http://people
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:24:06PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Martin Pitt:
>
> > (2) PostgreSQL 8.0 brought a new SONAME for libpq (libpq4), which
> > removed a few symbols which were only intended for internal use,
> > but were used nevertheless by some client apps (like "psql").
>
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 08:11:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
>
> > > >4) buildd software issues(pbuild,sbuild,wanna-build,etc)
>
> > > It looks like this software could use some redesign to put less work
> > > on the buildd maintainers and scale better to more buildds.
>
> > Do you have some
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:08:28PM +0200, Ivo Timmermans wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm orphaning these packages:
>
> dutch (bug #314839)
>
> dutch should probably be adopted by someone who speaks Dutch.
I'm willing to adopt this package is nobody else wants it.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E
On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 03:52:07PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> The only time I've ever removed entries from
> known_hosts is when I know that a specific host's key has changed, and
> 'ssh-keygen -R' deals with that just fine.
That options seems to be undocumented. It's not in the man page
or the
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:47:13AM +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>
> This issue has been blocking the Ada transition (19 source packages,
> 11 RC bugs) for about 3 weeks now, and I'd really like to be able to
> proceed.
I don't see how this can be blocking a transition. Please just
do it for the
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> A number of packages (at least three, but possibly more) fail to build
> with the error:
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394
> Can someone investigate why this is the case. I've put built logs
> (mbox file) at http://people.d
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 09:20:00PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > A number of packages (at least three, but possibly more) fail to build
> > with the error:
> > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394
> >
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 06:54:05PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> 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 chec
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 02:21:19PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Kurt Roeckx]
> > Afaik, Ubuntu is already using this. As a result, I've actually got a
> > bug against my package submitted because it didn't handle it. My
> > package now recreates the dire
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 09:55:46AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [Mario Holbe]
>
> >> So, as long as the Debian policy doesn't handle this,
>
> > I agree that we should update the policy to document this fact.
>
> It would be quite nice to have
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Copying the debian-policy list, since this conversation is basically about
> that.
>
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a polic
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 04:26:16PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > > # libtool --version
> > > ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 1.5.22 Debian 1.5.22-4 (1.1220.2.365 2005/12/18
> > > 22:14:06)
> >
> > That's what you have installed in /usr/bin, try:
> > ./ld10k1/libtool --version
>
> ltmain.sh (GNU l
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
>
> You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la
> KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they
> KBM> link in.
>
> Will this problem disappear i
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 02:40:49PM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>
> One thing I noticed is that there are a lot of "problems" (in your
> terminology) caused by unneeded dependencies on libgcc1
> (/lib/libgcc_s.so.1). From my quick investigation, it appears that the
> C++ and Fortran compilers (
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>
> In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs
> available on the web page for "problems" and found the libraries that
> are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty
> offenders, li
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 04:17:39PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >
> >The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires
> >as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary
> >infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.)
>
> Ok, the reduces the libs
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version
> >of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904
>
> Well, th
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 11:40:04AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> A number of packages currently fail to build with:
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lglib-2.0
>
> Can someone please investigate whether this is a bug in those packages
> or some underlying problem and file bugs. I've put some bui
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 02:34:11PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I have started to wonder a bit about 'missing days' - a thing that is
> especially importaint now when we are heading for a total freeze.
>
> >From http://packages.qa.debian.org/u/udev.html:
> Too young, only 1 of 10 days old
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:03:11AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Next, I removed clauses that said that all the requirements of
> policy must be met for a package to be in main or contrib; we know
> that is not true.
>
> I have replaced some uses of the word must when it was
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:49:03PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >
> > - Packages involving shared libraries should be split up into
> > + Packages involving shared libraries ought to be split up into
> > several binary packages. This section mostly deals with how
> > this se
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:36:56PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:02:41 -0800, Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >>We have a SA rule for this run now, but sending such hints to
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] will g
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 12:52:03PM +0100, Joey Schulze wrote:
>
> Maybe one improvement would be to reduce the number of links in this
> directory to one per certificate. Currently for each certificate
> provided by ca-certificates the certificate has a link to /usr/share/..
> and the hash has a
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 02:30:54PM +0100, Joey Schulze wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 12:52:03PM +0100, Joey Schulze wrote:
> > >
> > > Maybe one improvement would be to reduce the number of links in this
> > > directory to one
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 01:02:06AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Thinking of changing the default behaviour of the devscripts "bts show"
> (aka "bts bugs") command, and want to ask for opinions before I do so.
[...]
> It now resolves to:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cg
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 03:50:46AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Some other thing it does now is that if I file a bug against a
> > package before the bts knows about it, it shows up as "in other
> > versions" or something.
>
> You should be hard pressed to be able to actually install packages
>
On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 03:50:46AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > When using "bts show package" or going to
> > "http://bugs.debian.org/package"; we get that behaviour, and I find
> > both of them annoying.
>
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 11:24:34AM -0800, Richard A Nelson wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, John Kelly wrote:
>
> >I don't need NFS with sendmail. Surely flock() is not *still* broken
> >in 2.6 kernels?
>
> I doubt that flock is *still* broken - that was quite some time ago...
>From the flock manp
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 06:27:13PM +, John Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 19:09:33 +0100, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Anyway, from the linux/Documentation/locks.txt file:
> >1.2.1 Typical Problems - Sendmail
> >
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 07:03:00PM +, John Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 19:54:13 +0100, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >I actually see no good reason to want to use flock() over fcntl().
>
>
> Maybe because the fcntl()
>
> >
On Sun, Nov 19, 2006 at 09:05:08PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Nov 19, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I'd like to receive comments about:
> > > - shipping /etc/networks in netbase
> > > - adding 169.254.0.0 to it
> > The second makes sense to me.
> I am not sure. For a start,
On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 04:50:29PM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Martin Zobel-Helas]
> > gpg --recv-keys A70DAF536070D3A1 && (gpg --export -a A70DAF536070D3A1 |
> > apt-key add -)
>
> Uh, don't forget the part about verifying that the key is actually
> signed by the ftpmasters. Skipping th
On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 06:07:18PM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'm maintaining libtorrent package, this source builds 2 binaries,
> libtorrent-rakshasa (is libtorrent9 last version in debian archive) and
> libtorrent-rakshasa-dev (i
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Package name: languagetool
Version: 0.8.6
Upstream Author: Daniel Naber (naber at danielnaber de)
URL: http://www.danielnaber.de/languagetool
License: Mostly LGPL, also some BSD, Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0
Description: A rule-based language checker
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 11:14:33AM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> > On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 06:07:18PM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> I'm maintaining libtorrent
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:09:13PM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
>
> The version I'm building is libtorrent-0.11.0 so I don't think I should
> call the binary libtorrent10.
> >>> Please check the real soname with objdump -p libtorrent-0.11.0 |grep
> >>> SONAME
> >> The real
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:52:40PM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> > If the soname is set to libtorrent.so.10, it means applications will
> > start to look for a file called "/usr/lib/libtorrent.so.10". That will
> > probably be a symlink in your case to libtorrent-0.11.0, which looks
>
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:20:30AM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> An arm buildd maintainer not reading [EMAIL PROTECTED] is simply not
> doing his job as buildd maintainer. You can't pretend to be the one
> handling builds for the whole archive while not following discussions
> around problems sp
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 09:17:06AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Namely, fix bug #224469. It's really trivial and it's been waiting
> for over three years now. This is just STUPID.
>
> Next DPL election, I want to see someone running on the platform of
> adding an extra ftpmaster *whether or
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 05:37:56PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 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
On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 06:44:49PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> If it's using dlopen(), you probably want to depend on the -dev packages,
> unless you want to hardcode the complete name of the library instead of
> the soname. It probably already breaks if they're not installed
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 10:56:33PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 01:25:31PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Saturday 06 January 2007 18:35, Claus Fischer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 1. Rescue mode needs MD devices
> > >
> > >The rescue mode of the insta
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 04:25:43PM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Yee-ha! This makes a wonderful (if moderately belated) first birthday
> present for my em64t workstation. :-)
>
> One question, though: what's the contact address for the new buildd's
> administrators? I tried [EMAIL PROTECTED] (to
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 05:56:11PM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > For now I suggest you contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> OK, thanks; I considered that, but wasn't sure it was focused enough.
> (Granted, -devel isn't t
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:25:30PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >kid3
>
> This one dep-wait on the wrong package.
The package did declare a build dependency on libtunepimp2-dev
until you uploaded one that build depends on libtunepimp3-dev
yesterday. wanna-build doesn't remove those automaticly
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:20:09PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> kid3
> >
> > This one dep-wait on the wrong package.
>
> Yeah, the dep-wait should be dropped to reflect the recent upload.
>
> Speaking of dep-wait, there appear to be a few bugs w
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> Le Ven 7 Avril 2006 20:33, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > > A lot of the others simply need to desupport old versions of
> > > Python.
> >
> > python2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be removed soon, but
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 01:19:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Now, the clean solution for those cases when there's a compelling reason
> > to implement this bad idea: see what dpkg-shlibdeps(1) has to say about
> > shlibs.local.
>
> I've tried t
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 12:17:54PM -0400, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 12:41:50AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Developers with amd64 machines are also now able to upload new versions
> > of their package built locally (rather than in an i386 chroot) -- but
> > in order to
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 11:10:35PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm the maintainer of libgtkdatabox-0.2.3.0-0. Until now there
> was no request for an update of the upstream version and I had
> personal reasons to stay with an outdated version. Now I was
> asked to package the latest ve
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 07:09:17AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> Turning shadow on in chroots is left up to the local admin.
>
> This is optionnally done by the passwd package when it is
> reconfigured, see /var/lib/dpkg/info/passwd.config
>
> Of course, using "shadowconfig on" is also pos
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : elfutils
* Version : 0.120
* Upstream Author : redhat (Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
* URL :ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/systemtap/elfutils/
* License : GPL
Description : A collection of utilities and DSOs to handle compiled
objects.
Elfutils
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:53:57PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote:
> | >
> | > The same problem is with Office programs:
> | >
> | > lyx
> | > abiword
> | > oowriter
> | > ...
> | >
> | > The /etc/alternatives contains a good framework to canonicalize actions to
> | > common names available in
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 09:35:09PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 09:15:13PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote:
> >> Same here. Very annoying on a box where you only update every few weeks
> >> or something. Wouldn't it be possible to make snapsho
> > | You have searched for the contents of libssl0.9.7 in stable,
> > | architecture sparc. Package contains 9 files, displaying files 1 to 9.
> > |
> > | usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7
> > | usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7
> > | usr/lib/v8/libcrypto.so.0.9.7
> > | usr/lib/v8/libssl.so.0.9.7
> > | usr/lib/v
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 10:03:56PM +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> It has been a week since I sent the request below, and I received no
> answer. I am resending to the three maintainers of
> Packages-arch-specific, and CCing debian-devel.
>
> I've restricted the list of supported architectures to
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Martin Kittel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am maintaining the packages of the MaxDB database system.
>
> Recently upstream has converted the database kernel from
> linuxthread-style threading to NPTL. While -at least for i386-
> linuxthreads is still supported in
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 2. The information of -dev packages depending on other -dev packages
> > > cannot be automatically determined currently;
> > > it should be possible to obtain a minimal list by analyzing the
> > > NEEDED field of the objdump output.
> >
> > Errr, -
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 06:11:14PM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote:
>
> It is now possible to subscribe and unsubscribe from individual bugs in
> the Bug Tracking System. To do so, simply send an email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], or [EMAIL PROTECTED], where
> nnn is the bug number you wish to {,un}subscribe
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:28:58AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 01:01:16AM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
> > mini rant: what's the point in breaking important packages in
> > unstable for significant periods (e.g. the bug above was filed
> > 2005/07/13)? Isn't experimental
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 06:33:59PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > apt-rdepends
>
> Interesting, but not useful for the case I had today:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-rdepends --build-depends --reverse foo
> E: Reverse build-dependencies are not
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:34:56PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> For the past week, I've started getting errors like the following when
> building any packages in pbuilder that include shared libraries with the
> current tool chain in unstable:
>
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for l
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:46:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:40:30PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>
> > Based on what I've seen in other threads, the order in which packages
> > get built on a buildd is a function of, among perhaps other factors,
> > its priority an
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:47:17PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> The immediate suspect is binutils, particularily ld. It might be
> interesting to do test compiles with an older binutils version
> (2.15 vs. 2.16?) and see if the problem is reproducible.
The package in question was already build us
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 12:21:07AM +0200, Stephane Chauveau wrote:
>
> I am not really surprised because I just compared the linker scripts
> from 2.15 and 2.16.
> They have a different section ordering and the official debian package
> clearly follows the 2.16 ordering. Also, there was no diffe
1 - 100 of 397 matches
Mail list logo
