On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 04:33:07PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > close 60852
> Bug#60852: glimpse: full of temp races
> Bug closed, send any further explanations to Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
[snipped a lot of the same]
People!
On 27-Aug-2001 Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 11:06:41AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>>
>> my @bashism_regexs = (
> ..
>> );
>>
>> This is the array of regexes I test Debian scripts against in lintian. it
>> is
>> not all encompassing but it catches most of
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Amaya wrote:
> Sorry to insist on this.
> Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
Yes.
> Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
If it's your package, and you're comfortable that it's been built correctly,
and it's built from an identical source package from any other package
Amaya:
> Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
> Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
Should not be needed. As long as you provide a source package which,
when compiled under alpha (with or without an autobuilder), generates
a binary package that works, everything should be ok.
* Richard A Nelson
(Please don't cc me. It says so in the headers)
| On 24 Aug 2001, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
|
| > * Richard A Nelson
| >
| > | * sendmail source: dh_testversion-is-deprecated
| >
| > Just
| >
| > sendmail: dh_testversion-is-deprecated
| >
| > should work.
|
| Thats what I th
> You should delete the old .debs and only leave the most
> current versions
> in the archive, if I recall correctly.
OK, i can do that, but the strange thing is that
dpkg-scanpackage was generating the Packages.gz with the newest
version, with more than one version of the debs.
Hereward
Sorry to insist on this.
Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
Overwhelmed,
Amaya
--
Save the bandwidth for the windoze email worms. ;-) - Peter Gervai -
.''`.
: :' : Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (Kernel 2.4.6) on Re
You should delete the old .debs and only leave the most current versions
in the archive, if I recall correctly.
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 07:26:51PM +, Hereward Cooper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm managed to generate a Packages.gz file for my two packages,
> but recentlly (last couple of hours) when I
Thank you, I guess it's now fixed!!!
I'm so happy...
Now it's just a temporal fix, I know I have to see why it was failing... and
probably talk to upstream. It should build with standard gettext.
Thanks again.
--
Save the bandwidth for the windoze email worms. ;-) - Peter Gervai -
.''`.
> Question is:
> How can I tell if I am in an alpha arch and how can I add the ./configure
> option if so?
>
DEB_HOST_ARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH)
ifeq (alpha,$(DEB_HOST_ARCH))
CONFIG_FLAGS = --with-included-gettext
endif
and then add $(CONFIG_FLAGS) to the configure comma
Hi Amaya,
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Amaya wrote:
> I just got a bug on one of my packages, it doesn't build on alpha.
> As we don't have accessible alpha machines around, the submitter was kind
> enough to open an account for me in this machine and I managed to fix it
> adding an extra option to ./con
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Amaya wrote:
> Sorry to insist on this.
> Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
Yes.
> Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
If it's your package, and you're comfortable that it's been built correctly,
and it's built from an identical source package from any other packag
Amaya:
> Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
> Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
Should not be needed. As long as you provide a source package which,
when compiled under alpha (with or without an autobuilder), generates
a binary package that works, everything should be ok.
--
To UNSUBSC
Hi,
I just got a bug on one of my packages, it doesn't build on alpha.
As we don't have accessible alpha machines around, the submitter was kind
enough to open an account for me in this machine and I managed to fix it adding
an extra option to ./configure in the debian/rules file, so that it comp
* Richard A Nelson
(Please don't cc me. It says so in the headers)
| On 24 Aug 2001, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
|
| > * Richard A Nelson
| >
| > | * sendmail source: dh_testversion-is-deprecated
| >
| > Just
| >
| > sendmail: dh_testversion-is-deprecated
| >
| > should work.
|
| Thats what I t
> You should delete the old .debs and only leave the most
> current versions
> in the archive, if I recall correctly.
OK, i can do that, but the strange thing is that
dpkg-scanpackage was generating the Packages.gz with the newest
version, with more than one version of the debs.
Hereward
--
T
Sorry to insist on this.
Is there an autobuilder for alpha?
Should I upload the generated alpha .deb?
Overwhelmed,
Amaya
--
Save the bandwidth for the windoze email worms. ;-) - Peter Gervai -
.''`.
: :' : Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (Kernel 2.4.6) on R
You should delete the old .debs and only leave the most current versions
in the archive, if I recall correctly.
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 07:26:51PM +, Hereward Cooper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm managed to generate a Packages.gz file for my two packages,
> but recentlly (last couple of hours) when I
Thank you, I guess it's now fixed!!!
I'm so happy...
Now it's just a temporal fix, I know I have to see why it was failing... and
probably talk to upstream. It should build with standard gettext.
Thanks again.
--
Save the bandwidth for the windoze email worms. ;-) - Peter Gervai -
.''`.
Hi,
I'm managed to generate a Packages.gz file for my two packages,
but recentlly (last couple of hours) when I updated the package
version to 1.0.4-4 inorder to fix some bugs I get the problem
that the generated Packages.gz doesn't contain the newest
version, instead the oldest (1.0.4-1).
#
> Question is:
> How can I tell if I am in an alpha arch and how can I add the ./configure
> option if so?
>
DEB_HOST_ARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH)
ifeq (alpha,$(DEB_HOST_ARCH))
CONFIG_FLAGS = --with-included-gettext
endif
and then add $(CONFIG_FLAGS) to the configure comm
Hi Amaya,
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Amaya wrote:
> I just got a bug on one of my packages, it doesn't build on alpha.
> As we don't have accessible alpha machines around, the submitter was kind
> enough to open an account for me in this machine and I managed to fix it
> adding an extra option to ./co
Hi,
I just got a bug on one of my packages, it doesn't build on alpha.
As we don't have accessible alpha machines around, the submitter was kind
enough to open an account for me in this machine and I managed to fix it adding
an extra option to ./configure in the debian/rules file, so that it com
Hello,
In the README file of the Plex86 program, you can find the following warning:
,-.
| IMPORTANT NOTICE|
|-|
Hi,
I'm managed to generate a Packages.gz file for my two packages,
but recentlly (last couple of hours) when I updated the package
version to 1.0.4-4 inorder to fix some bugs I get the problem
that the generated Packages.gz doesn't contain the newest
version, instead the oldest (1.0.4-1).
#
Hello,
In the README file of the Plex86 program, you can find the following warning:
,-.
| IMPORTANT NOTICE|
|-|
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 01:01:35AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 07:06:40PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Colin Watson wrote:
> > > But then people can't use self-compiled kernels without using
> > > kernel-package, and you also don't know whether an installed kernel
> > > p
TEST PLEASE IGNORE.
LordZe-->
Un Computer sicuro è un computer spento.
->
Di Maria Antonio
System Administrator
-Credito Italiano- Italy(MI)
UIN 123773221 /join #linux-mi (ircnet)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home)
** On Aug 23, Andrew Suffield scribbled:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 07:17:29PM +0530, Viral wrote:
> > If I am building a new package, which uses c++, is it a better idea to
> > use gcc 3 rather than the current one ?
>
> Not unless the upstream source requires g++ 3.0 (can't think of any
> reason
TEST PLEASE IGNORE.
LordZe-->
Un Computer sicuro è un computer spento.
->
Di Maria Antonio
System Administrator
-Credito Italiano- Italy(MI)
UIN 123773221 /join #linux-mi (ircnet)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home)
---
** On Aug 23, Andrew Suffield scribbled:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2001 at 07:17:29PM +0530, Viral wrote:
> > If I am building a new package, which uses c++, is it a better idea to
> > use gcc 3 rather than the current one ?
>
> Not unless the upstream source requires g++ 3.0 (can't think of any
> reason
31 matches
Mail list logo
