On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> btw side note, why do all the ssl-enabled packages I've seen the source for,
> i.e. yours and lynx-ssl, depend on the obsolete package libssl096-dev instead
> of the current replacement package libssl-dev?
Eh, because I hadn't noticed the problem yet?
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:29:00PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> > some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors
> > explain
> > how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
>
> You'
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:29:00PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> > some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors
> > explain
> > how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
>
> You'
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that that matters. The BXA refers to "Open Cryptographic
> Interfaces". My understanding was that any software which contained hooks
> to call other software which actually performed encryption was regulated
> as
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:03:48PM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors
> explain
> how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
You'll need to generate tw
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:03:48PM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > 2) Do the binary .debs go in non-US?
> > >
> > > Yes. Policy currently requires it.
> >
> > OK, I understand that this is a quirk of Debian policy, and not US law.
> >
>
> It wouldn't make sense for .deb's t
> Really? I am not doing any static linking with libssl, only dynamic, so I
> don't believe that I am including any crypto.
I'm not sure that that matters. The BXA refers to "Open Cryptographic
Interfaces". My understanding was that any software which contained hooks
to call other software which
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:27:04AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
>
> Hmm... anyone going to package manedit ?
> I tried it. It was rather fun to play with. It edits in roff.
>
> Should I upload it ?
IIRC, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is maintainer
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> btw side note, why do all the ssl-enabled packages I've seen the source for,
> i.e. yours and lynx-ssl, depend on the obsolete package libssl096-dev instead
> of the current replacement package libssl-dev?
Eh, because I hadn't noticed the problem yet?
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 08:28:12PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
>
> > >
> > > 2) Do the binary .debs go in non-US?
> >
> > Yes. Policy currently requires it.
>
> OK, I understand that this is a quirk of Debian policy, and not US law.
>
It wouldn't make sense for .deb's to go in a place diff
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:29:00PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> > some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors explain
> > how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
>
> You'll n
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:29:00PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> > some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors explain
> > how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
>
> You'll n
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:53:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm not sure that that matters. The BXA refers to "Open Cryptographic
> Interfaces". My understanding was that any software which contained hooks
> to call other software which actually performed encryption was regulated
> a
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 01:51:54AM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> >
> > 1) I live in the US. Therefore, do I have to send a BXA notification to the
> > government (I believe license exception TSU is applicable - correct me if
> > I'm
> > wrong)?
>
> You may. Since it's easy, you probablys hould
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:03:48PM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> some simple fileutils magic in debian/rules. BTW can anyone on -mentors explain
> how I set up a debian/rules file that generates multiple binary packages?
You'll need to generate two
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:03:48PM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > 2) Do the binary .debs go in non-US?
> > >
> > > Yes. Policy currently requires it.
> >
> > OK, I understand that this is a quirk of Debian policy, and not US law.
> >
>
> It wouldn't make sense for .deb's
> Really? I am not doing any static linking with libssl, only dynamic, so I
> don't believe that I am including any crypto.
I'm not sure that that matters. The BXA refers to "Open Cryptographic
Interfaces". My understanding was that any software which contained hooks
to call other software whic
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:27:04AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
>
> Hmm... anyone going to package manedit ?
> I tried it. It was rather fun to play with. It edits in roff.
>
> Should I upload it ?
IIRC, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is maintainer
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 08:28:12PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
>
> > >
> > > 2) Do the binary .debs go in non-US?
> >
> > Yes. Policy currently requires it.
>
> OK, I understand that this is a quirk of Debian policy, and not US law.
>
It wouldn't make sense for .deb's to go in a place dif
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 01:51:54AM -0400, Brian Ristuccia wrote:
> >
> > 1) I live in the US. Therefore, do I have to send a BXA notification to the
> > government (I believe license exception TSU is applicable - correct me if I'm
> > wrong)?
>
> You may. Since it's easy, you probablys hould.
Brian Ristuccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:14:22PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > >> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> > > archives, not even non-US.
> >
> > http://www.d
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:14:22PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> > archives, not even non-US.
>
> http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/unable-to-package
>
> IIRC your ques
>> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> archives, not even non-US.
http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/unable-to-package
IIRC your questions are addressed there.
--
Marcelo | Mustrum Ridcully did a lot for
Brian Ristuccia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:14:22PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > >> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> > > archives, not even non-US.
> >
> > http://www.
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:14:22PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> > archives, not even non-US.
>
> http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/unable-to-package
>
> IIRC your que
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:01:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >
> > If I did this, would I still have to move the hitop packages into
> > non-US (since it would still build-depend upon libpgsql-dev which is
> > now non-US)? Is there any way around this? Should I even care which
> > part o
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:22:16AM -0400, Derek E Mart wrote:
> OK, perhaps someone can answer this question. I looked at an existing
> module package and tried to make my mangled mess look the same.
> The build halts and I get the following message every time:
>
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknow
>> Viral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
> archives, not even non-US.
http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/unable-to-package
IIRC your questions are addressed there.
--
Marcelo | Mustrum Ridcully did a lot for
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
Hmm... anyone going to package manedit ?
I tried it. It was rather fun to play with. It edits in roff.
Should I upload it ?
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 09:01:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >
> > If I did this, would I still have to move the hitop packages into
> > non-US (since it would still build-depend upon libpgsql-dev which is
> > now non-US)? Is there any way around this? Should I even care which
> > part
>
> If I did this, would I still have to move the hitop packages into
> non-US (since it would still build-depend upon libpgsql-dev which is
> now non-US)? Is there any way around this? Should I even care which
> part of the archive it goes in?
>
anything in non-us does not appear on the default
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:22:16AM -0400, Derek E Mart wrote:
> OK, perhaps someone can answer this question. I looked at an existing
> module package and tried to make my mangled mess look the same.
> The build halts and I get the following message every time:
>
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unkno
Hi,
Lukasz Jachowicz writes:
> I'm just wondering if I should install woody on my machine.
No.
> I have to get woody locally to maintain a package prepared for
> woody?
Yes.
The solution is to set up a chrooted environment for the other
distribution (I run sid, and keep potato chrooted). The
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:22:16AM -0400, Derek E Mart wrote:
> * Derek Evan Mart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010510 23:45]:
> > What is the best way to approach this issue? Are there any FAQs/HOWTOs
> > which explain this process? Any informative replies will be appreciated,
> > "rtfm"s will be tolerated
* Derek Evan Mart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010510 23:45]:
> What is the best way to approach this issue? Are there any FAQs/HOWTOs
> which explain this process? Any informative replies will be appreciated,
> "rtfm"s will be tolerated. =)
OK, perhaps someone can answer this question. I looked at an exi
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 08:58:26AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 7 May 2001 21:49:12 +0200, Filip Van Raemdonck
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The tools available for automatic changes signing seem to do this for you.
>
> Yes, they do. Judging from the debsign source, this is a gpg issue.
>
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:45:16PM -0400, Derek Evan Mart wrote:
> After several hours attempting to build debian packages for perl modules
> and twenty minutes searching google for helpful documentation, I have
> come to the conclusion that I have no frelling idea what I am doing. =)
>
> I read t
Hi,
I'm just wondering if I should install woody on my machine to compile a
package, or I can use one of Deban machines. The problem is - there is no
x86 machine running woody on the machines.cgi list.
So the question is - is the list wrong, not full, or I have to get woody
locally to maintain a
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cum veritate scripsit:
Hmm... anyone going to package manedit ?
I tried it. It was rather fun to play with. It edits in roff.
Should I upload it ?
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 07:06:05PM +0530, Viral wrote:
>
> Do the autobuilders build packages for all the architectures, or is
> the maintainer supposed to do that ?
>
The autobuilders do that. You only compile on your own system, generally.
I was even surprised to find that viewmol managed to
>
> If I did this, would I still have to move the hitop packages into
> non-US (since it would still build-depend upon libpgsql-dev which is
> now non-US)? Is there any way around this? Should I even care which
> part of the archive it goes in?
>
anything in non-us does not appear on the defaul
> To give a bit more detail from Tog's reply: you upload to unstable (this
> means you need to be running unstable yourself, unless you know how to do
> one of those chroot thingies). After a standard period of time (10 days for
> normal packages I think), the package gets copied (symlink) to tes
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:56:49PM -0500, Michael Janssen (CS/MATH stud.) wrote:
> In Warren Anthony Stramiello's email, 10-05-2001:
> >
> > It's XDrawChem, a linux version of ChemDraw, a fairly necessary app for
> > chemistry folks (at least so my girlfriend tells me, and she's a chemistry
> > ma
Hi,
Lukasz Jachowicz writes:
> I'm just wondering if I should install woody on my machine.
No.
> I have to get woody locally to maintain a package prepared for
> woody?
Yes.
The solution is to set up a chrooted environment for the other
distribution (I run sid, and keep potato chrooted). Th
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:22:16AM -0400, Derek E Mart wrote:
> * Derek Evan Mart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010510 23:45]:
> > What is the best way to approach this issue? Are there any FAQs/HOWTOs
> > which explain this process? Any informative replies will be appreciated,
> > "rtfm"s will be tolerate
Hello,
First of all I apologise if this is considered OT, but
I am interested in becoming a Debian maintainer, and
currently stuck in the process waiting for an
advocate.
I am moderately familiar with Debian's package
management system, have run various releases of Debian
from 2.0 to Sid snapshot
* Derek Evan Mart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010510 23:45]:
> What is the best way to approach this issue? Are there any FAQs/HOWTOs
> which explain this process? Any informative replies will be appreciated,
> "rtfm"s will be tolerated. =)
OK, perhaps someone can answer this question. I looked at an ex
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 08:58:26AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 7 May 2001 21:49:12 +0200, Filip Van Raemdonck
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The tools available for automatic changes signing seem to do this for you.
>
> Yes, they do. Judging from the debsign source, this is a gpg issue.
>
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:45:16PM -0400, Derek Evan Mart wrote:
> After several hours attempting to build debian packages for perl modules
> and twenty minutes searching google for helpful documentation, I have
> come to the conclusion that I have no frelling idea what I am doing. =)
>
> I read
Hi,
I'm just wondering if I should install woody on my machine to compile a
package, or I can use one of Deban machines. The problem is - there is no
x86 machine running woody on the machines.cgi list.
So the question is - is the list wrong, not full, or I have to get woody
locally to maintain a
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 07:06:05PM +0530, Viral wrote:
>
> Do the autobuilders build packages for all the architectures, or is
> the maintainer supposed to do that ?
>
The autobuilders do that. You only compile on your own system, generally.
I was even surprised to find that viewmol managed t
> To give a bit more detail from Tog's reply: you upload to unstable (this
> means you need to be running unstable yourself, unless you know how to do
> one of those chroot thingies). After a standard period of time (10 days for
> normal packages I think), the package gets copied (symlink) to te
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:56:49PM -0500, Michael Janssen (CS/MATH stud.) wrote:
> In Warren Anthony Stramiello's email, 10-05-2001:
> >
> > It's XDrawChem, a linux version of ChemDraw, a fairly necessary app for
> > chemistry folks (at least so my girlfriend tells me, and she's a chemistry
> > m
Hello,
First of all I apologise if this is considered OT, but
I am interested in becoming a Debian maintainer, and
currently stuck in the process waiting for an
advocate.
I am moderately familiar with Debian's package
management system, have run various releases of Debian
from 2.0 to Sid snapsho
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:00:01AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> What about setting up a non-patent debian archive somewhere were the patent
> don't apply. India could be a likely candidate, i think, but then maybe they
> only don't like patent on medicine or such ?
I'm in India. I'm not sure about
Hi all,
I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
archives, not even non-US.
Firstly, the lame license is LGPL as of version 3.88.
The psycho-acoustic model used in LAME is also GPLed (or LGPLed). I believe
its not the same as the one patented by the Fraunhofer I
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:33:19AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The RSA patent was only valid in the USA, an oversight on RSA's part.
> > That's the difference.
>
> But surely a sizable chunk the Debian usersbase lives in the US, there
> were offi
I was wondering about doing this for some time, but events have
forced my hand. hitop build-depends against libpgsql-dev which has
become main/non-US.
The situation as it stands is that 'hitop', a HTML preprocessor with
pretentions to be an web-based application server, is one package. It
is built
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 11:00:01AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> What about setting up a non-patent debian archive somewhere were the patent
> don't apply. India could be a likely candidate, i think, but then maybe they
> only don't like patent on medicine or such ?
I'm in India. I'm not sure abou
Hi all,
I would like clarify the reason for lame not being included in the debian
archives, not even non-US.
Firstly, the lame license is LGPL as of version 3.88.
The psycho-acoustic model used in LAME is also GPLed (or LGPLed). I believe
its not the same as the one patented by the Fraunhofer
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:33:19AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The RSA patent was only valid in the USA, an oversight on RSA's part.
> > That's the difference.
>
> But surely a sizable chunk the Debian usersbase lives in the US, there
> were off
I was wondering about doing this for some time, but events have
forced my hand. hitop build-depends against libpgsql-dev which has
become main/non-US.
The situation as it stands is that 'hitop', a HTML preprocessor with
pretentions to be an web-based application server, is one package. It
is buil
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 07:27:44PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> Hi. I am a novice Debian package maintainer, in the queue for becoming an
> official developer. I am maintaining a package called althea, which is an
> IMAP email client for GTK+. They have recently added support for SSL through
> l
63 matches
Mail list logo
