On Sun, Feb 14, 1999 at 01:12:21PM +0100, Giovanni Bortolozzo wrote:
>
> I'd like this packages be include in Debian 2.1 (they are tested and
> behave correctly, and are already included in a pre-2.1 Italian
> distribution) so the growing Italian Debian users may take advantage of
> them when slin
Hi, my name is Giovanni Bortolozzo.
I'm the new "mantainer" of doc-linux-it and doc-linux-it-text (this
packages contains respectively Italian translations of Linux HOWTOs and
miniHOWTOs in HTML and ascii format). I'm also the coordinator of this
translation project (see ILDP Home Page - www.pluto
On Sun, Feb 14, 1999 at 12:12:26PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> And conversely, of course there is at least one technical reason to prefer
> doing all the build in the 'build' target - the 'binary' target may be run
> as root (more likely fakeroot, I admit, but possibly actual root).
>
> It seems to
On 14 Feb 1999, James Troup wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:43:47PM +, James Troup wrote:
> > > No, the build target should be present and should do something,
> > > i.e. build the package. Even if it only depends on the two other
> > > bu
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:43:47PM +, James Troup wrote:
> > No, the build target should be present and should do something,
> > i.e. build the package. Even if it only depends on the two other
> > build targets, it should still build stuff.
>
> N
Fernando Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - I got an automatically-generated mail confirming my account/password on
> master, etc, which also mentioned that I should use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> address
> for signing packages, so I had to add this identificator to my pgp key and
> send the
On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 12:01:56AM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 02:39:53PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Yes, this is a common problem if you build a package with both a shared
> > library and binaries in it. It's pretty harmless, but ugly, to leave it how
> > it is. Your other
On Sun, Feb 07, 1999 at 10:43:47PM +, James Troup wrote:
> No, the build target should be present and should do something,
> i.e. build the package. Even if it only depends on the two other
> build targets, it should still build stuff.
No, section 3.2.1 of the packaging manual says that it is
On Sun, 14 Feb 1999, Fernando Sanchez wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm having some problems uploading a package, but I also think I
> must have done something wrong in the process, so please tell me if there is
> some big mistake in my procedures:
>
> - I got an automatically-generated mail confirming
On Sat, 13 Feb 1999, Mark Brown wrote:
> I'm trying to split my MPICH package into several binary packages, and
> having a hard time seeing where I'm going. Can someone reccomend a
> simple multi-binary package that I could look at to see what everything
> is supposed to look like - preferrably u
Hello,
I'm having some problems uploading a package, but I also think I
must have done something wrong in the process, so please tell me if there is
some big mistake in my procedures:
- I got an automatically-generated mail confirming my account/password on
master, etc, which also mentio
On Sat, 6 Feb 1999, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > .dsc and .changes file. Well it tried anyway. My problem is that I am
> > using pgp5 and but dpkg-buildpackage seems to want to use pgp2 or gpg for
>
> Simple answer: don't. Debian currently works with PGP 2.6.x and is
> moving over to GNU PG. Pleas
12 matches
Mail list logo
