On 02/05/2011 12:05 PM, Steffen Möller wrote:
On 02/04/2011 10:55 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:59:37AM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
"popt" sounds like an awfully generic name for a binary.
apt-file doesn't show that such name is in use , except li
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 07:18:42PM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
>
> another thing is that we don't touch RNAforester/g2-0.70/ which is
> excluded by one of the patches .
> So I don't understand how dh --with autotools_dev $@ should help .
It will most probably not help in this specific case (
On 02/10/2011 09:55 PM, Manuel Prinz wrote:
Hi Alex!
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 05:04:34PM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
What else should be done to process this package ?
Sorry for replying late! I had a quick look at your package. It's
looks very good given that you just started to
Am Freitag, den 11.02.2011, 09:33 +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> I'd suggest the packaging list
> debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org for further discussion
> because it might be to specific for this general list but enables
> me to watch your discussion (because some bits of code are mine
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:55:55PM +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote:
> - Please add DEP3 headers [1] to the patches. This helps others to
>gain information about the patch status. (What does it do? Was it
>forwarded to upstream?) This is especially important in patch file
>naview_copyright.pa
Hi Alex!
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 05:04:34PM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
> What else should be done to process this package ?
Sorry for replying late! I had a quick look at your package. It's
looks very good given that you just started to learn how to package!
There are a few glitches which yo
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 03:00:39PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> This would mean a misuse of the alternatives system. Alternatives is
> not intended to work around name spacing conflicts but rather to provide
> a generic interface to packages which are providing the same
> *functionality*.
I kno
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 02:34:00PM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> Let's assume a conflict on the name popt from packages A and B.
>
> Here is what I would do:
>
> /usr/bin/popt.A
> /usr/bin/popt.B
>
> /usr/bin/popt -> /etc/alternatives/popt
>
> /etc/alternatives/popt ->
Let's assume a conflict on the name popt from packages A and B.
Here is what I would do:
/usr/bin/popt.A
/usr/bin/popt.B
/usr/bin/popt -> /etc/alternatives/popt
/etc/alternatives/popt -> /usr/bin/popt.A or /usr/bin/popt.B
/usr/share/doc/A/README.Debian
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 01:28:46AM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
>
> This is a good question. My main concern is that Debian for some
> reason or another may be perceived as incompatible by the scientific
> community. If anything would require manual adjustments then we then
> lose our edge in auto
On 02/05/2011 09:11 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 07:38:12PM +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote:
>>
>> Creating some sort of "science bin/ directory" is IMHO just asking for
>> trouble. Also, if two scientific packages create a naming conflict, what
>> to do then?
>
> Just for the sake
Hi again,
I guess my proposal was a bit missunderstood.
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 11:16:25PM +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote:
> I'm specifically concerned about confusing users/admins. Let's assume that
> there exists such a place. There are two ways to put binaries in there: One
> would be to install al
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 09:11:56PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Just for the sake of interest: Do you see any other problems than a name
> space conflict in the scientific field (which I just assumed for a
> moment when I wrote the proposal which is probably not very well
> thought).
I'm specific
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 07:38:12PM +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote:
>
> Creating some sort of "science bin/ directory" is IMHO just asking for
> trouble. Also, if two scientific packages create a naming conflict, what
> to do then?
Just for the sake of interest: Do you see any other problems than a nam
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 06:02:40PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I refuse to spend my time in fights were I see no chance to win and
> an obvios workaround for the conflict is avialable (see above).
I totally agree with that one.
> The time could better been spended in writing a [solution follows
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 12:05:17PM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
>
> I still think we were too nice back then. We should have a policy
> that scientific binaries shall not be renamed if not in conflict with
> essential packages.
I do not consider this as a valid suggestion because there is no
guar
On 02/04/2011 10:55 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:59:37AM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
>>> "popt" sounds like an awfully generic name for a binary.
>>
>> apt-file doesn't show that such name is in use , except libpopt which
>> is different thing .
>
> Despite the fact
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:59:37AM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
>> "popt" sounds like an awfully generic name for a binary.
>
> apt-file doesn't show that such name is in use , except libpopt which
> is different thing .
Despite the fact that technically we do not have a conflict in name
spa
On 02/03/2011 06:21 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
$lintian vienna-rna_1.8.4-1_amd64.deb
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/ct2b
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/dpzoom
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/popt
"popt" sounds like an awfully generic name for a b
Hi Alex!
On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 05:04:34PM +0100, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
> I also have sent a message with patches to upstream maintainer .
Thanks for taking care of that!
> What else should be done to process this package ?
I just had a quick glance at the package and it seems that all of
t
> $lintian vienna-rna_1.8.4-1_amd64.deb
> W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/ct2b
> W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/dpzoom
> W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/popt
"popt" sounds like an awfully generic name for a binary.
Karsten
--
Neu: GMX De-Mail - Einfach
Hello ,
I almost finished packaging for vienna-rna (with great help of Andreas
Tille ).
linitian gives only 3 warnings :
$lintian vienna-rna_1.8.4-1_amd64.deb
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/ct2b
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/dpzoom
W: vienna-rna: binary-without-ma
22 matches
Mail list logo
