Re: Build failed in Jenkins: dpkg-binaries » i386 #228

Hi! * Guillem Jover [Sun Aug 10, 2014 at 09:17:02AM +0200]: > On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 08:49:52 +0200, Jenkins Team at Grml wrote: > > See > > I: Building the package > > W: no hooks of type A found -- ignoring > > I: Running cd tmp/

[PATCH] dpkg-buildflags: Remove stackprotectorstrong arch blacklist

As of gcc-defaults 1.130 all architectures have moved to GCC 4.9, so we can remove the architecture blacklist for stackprotectorstrong. diff --git a/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm b/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm index 5223e0e..f9e8a84 100644 --- a/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm +++ b/scripts/Dpkg/Ve

Re: [PATCH] dpkg-buildflags: Remove stackprotectorstrong arch blacklist

Hi! On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 10:17:22 +0200, Romain Francoise wrote: > As of gcc-defaults 1.130 all architectures have moved to GCC 4.9, so we > can remove the architecture blacklist for stackprotectorstrong. > > diff --git a/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm b/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm > index 5223

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Including file signatures in .deb packages]

Hi! I think perhaps you might have meant to send this to the debhelper maintainers? Otherwise here's some comments. On Fri, 2014-08-08 at 12:57:38 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > We're looking to include file signatures in the different package > formats (eg.rpm, deb) and install them as 'security.ima

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Including file signatures in .deb packages]

On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 15:13 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Hi! > > I think perhaps you might have meant to send this to the debhelper > maintainers? Otherwise here's some comments. Thank you for the feedback! The patches went through a number of iterations. The initial one modified dpkg directl