On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Fred Strauss wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm not a debian developer, yet :)
> But I'd like to be.
> I'd like to start by adopting an orphaned package.
> The package I have in mind is qub - The Q Universal Boardgame
>
Did you get a reply yet?
I use this from time to time (In fact I spons
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Fred Strauss wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm not a debian developer, yet :)
> But I'd like to be.
> I'd like to start by adopting an orphaned package.
> The package I have in mind is qub - The Q Universal Boardgame
>
Did you get a reply yet?
I use this from time to time (In fact I spon
> - When done, edit the control file, and change the _binary package_
>name from the one dh_make guessed to one similar to other plugin
>packages, like xmms-jess.
> - Then edit the rules file (and other files in debian/) where dh_make
>used it's guessed (binary!) package name and subs
#include
Hereward Cooper wrote on Thu Oct 04, 2001 um 04:23:47PM:
> > I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
> > *upstream* name. It should be enough to change the name used by
> > Debian.
>
> Sorry didn't word it too great as i was in a rush.
> What i just basically
Hi,
I don't have any experience with perl module packages, and I usually
work under potato which has a quite different perl policy. I'd
appreciate if anybody who knows how to build perl packages on sid
would take a look at my libnet-ipnetmember-perl package from
http://q.bofh.de/~mh/debian/libnet-
Jeremy Higgs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In that case, in the Makefile, before I create the package, would I be
> able to just do 'dch -v $(VERSION)$(BRANCH)-$(DATE)' (where the
> variables are already defined in the Makefile) to bump up the
> revision...
Yes you could do that. Although putting
> - When done, edit the control file, and change the _binary package_
>name from the one dh_make guessed to one similar to other plugin
>packages, like xmms-jess.
> - Then edit the rules file (and other files in debian/) where dh_make
>used it's guessed (binary!) package name and sub
#include
Hereward Cooper wrote on Thu Oct 04, 2001 um 04:23:47PM:
> > I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
> > *upstream* name. It should be enough to change the name used by
> > Debian.
>
> Sorry didn't word it too great as i was in a rush.
> What i just basicall
Jeremy Higgs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In that case, in the Makefile, before I create the package, would I be
> able to just do 'dch -v $(VERSION)$(BRANCH)-$(DATE)' (where the
> variables are already defined in the Makefile) to bump up the
> revision...
Yes you could do that. Although puttin
> I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
> *upstream* name. It should be enough to change the name used by
> Debian.
Sorry didn't word it too great as i was in a rush.
What i just basically mean is, how do you change a package name under
debian from the orginal/defaul
Hi!
I'm trying to create a package for RCF (a firewall) to be built from
a CVS tree and I'd like to somehow 'retrieve' the version and
revision from the root Makefile (which is already used to create the
.deb file...) I tried using the '-v' switch of dpkg-buildpackage to
do it, but I think I
Hereward Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If i'm making a package of an xmms plugin, how do I change the upstream
> package name, jess, to the debian one, xmms-jess in the package.
I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
*upstream* name. It should be enough to cha
christophe barbé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My current understanding is that package should be build against currently
> available pacakges. Is that incorrect ?
In general, yes. Of course there are exceptions, for example when some
app requires a specific minimum version. Dunno if that is the
> I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
> *upstream* name. It should be enough to change the name used by
> Debian.
Sorry didn't word it too great as i was in a rush.
What i just basically mean is, how do you change a package name under
debian from the orginal/defau
Hi!
I'm trying to create a package for RCF (a firewall) to be built from
a CVS tree and I'd like to somehow 'retrieve' the version and
revision from the root Makefile (which is already used to create the
.deb file...) I tried using the '-v' switch of dpkg-buildpackage to
do it, but I think I
Hereward Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If i'm making a package of an xmms plugin, how do I change the upstream
> package name, jess, to the debian one, xmms-jess in the package.
I don't think I understand you. How/why would you want to change the
*upstream* name. It should be enough to ch
christophe barbé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My current understanding is that package should be build against currently
> available pacakges. Is that incorrect ?
In general, yes. Of course there are exceptions, for example when some
app requires a specific minimum version. Dunno if that is the
I should have missed something because I can't understand why evolution is
not installable.
I'm looking for the general reason behind this and not in the evolution
case.
Last week a new version of evolution was released in SID.
Then installing it was not possible due to "not installable" packages.
I should have missed something because I can't understand why evolution is
not installable.
I'm looking for the general reason behind this and not in the evolution
case.
Last week a new version of evolution was released in SID.
Then installing it was not possible due to "not installable" packages
19 matches
Mail list logo
