On 2004-07-28 "Magosányi Árpád (mag)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded
> version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution
> in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades.
[...]
No, "stable". Afaict from developer
On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 07:36:43AM +0200, Magosányi Árpád (mag) wrote:
> Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded
> version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution
> in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades.
> But the upload has been rejected b
Hi!
Please tell me how to fix a woody-only bug. I know that the uploaded
version should only contain the fix. I thought that the distribution
in changelog should be woody-proposed upgrades.
But the upload has been rejected bu Katie:
Rejected: Unknown distribution `woody-proposed-updates'.
Thank
Frank Küster wrote:
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Frank Küster wrote:
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Package name : folding
Version : 4.00
Upstream : http://folding.stanford.edu
URL : http://wagon.dhs.org/folding/
Description : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cli
(Sorry for the dup, I've forgotten to include the list on the first reply)
Le mardi 27 juillet 2004 à 19:02 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit :
> hi,
> i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the
> makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable.
> Then it tries in make install to inst
Frank Küster wrote:
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Frank Küster wrote:
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Package name : folding
Version : 4.00
Upstream : http://folding.stanford.edu
URL : http://wagon.dhs.org/folding/
Description : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Client (ins
please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation"
https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS
--
Pierre Habouzit http://www.madism.org/
-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
gpg : 1024D/A1EE76
(Sorry for the dup, I've forgotten to include the list on the first reply)
Le mardi 27 juillet 2004 à 19:02 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit :
> hi,
> i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the
> makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable.
> Then it tries in make install to inst
please read [1], especialy section called : "Advanced customisation"
https://wiki.duckcorp.org/DebianPackagingTutorial_2fCDBS
--
Pierre Habouzit http://www.madism.org/
-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
gpg : 1024D/A1EE76
On 2004-07-27 Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good.
> but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning:
> /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a
> deprecated variable"
[...]
http://bugs.debi
Le mardi 27 juillet 2004 à 14:39 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit :
> i saw other packages build with cdbs, which had these warning too?
> does anyone know, what it is?
Hi,
No idea on the warning, but afaik they are here for all my packages and
I don't have a problem to build them. To be honest I've no
hi,
i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the
makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable.
Then it tries in make install to install .mo-files in /usr/ instead of
$(DESTDIR)/usr
without cdbs this is no problem and it installs it correctly.
i put two logs of the build proce
hi,
i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good.
but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning:
/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated
variable"
/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_CLEAN_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated
On 2004-07-27 Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good.
> but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning:
> /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated
> variable"
[...]
http://bugs.debi
Le mardi 27 juillet 2004 à 14:39 +0200, Nico Golde a écrit :
> i saw other packages build with cdbs, which had these warning too?
> does anyone know, what it is?
Hi,
No idea on the warning, but afaik they are here for all my packages and
I don't have a problem to build them. To be honest I've no
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> First off, I'd like to thank you for spending the time to construct
> this useful analysis!
>
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>>
>>>Package name : folding
>>>Version : 4.00
>>>Upstream : http://folding.stanford
Willi Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For the general problems associated with different licenses in one
package, you might find a look at http://bugs.debian.org/218105
informative. (Although I hope that your package isn't as mixed as
ours).
> I can think of these solutions for 2:
>
> - Distribu
hi,
i change my package gtksee to cdbs and have the problem, that the
makefile doesn't uses the $(DESTDIR) variable.
Then it tries in make install to install .mo-files in /usr/ instead of
$(DESTDIR)/usr
without cdbs this is no problem and it installs it correctly.
i put two logs of the build proce
hi,
i switched my packages to cdbs and i think it is very good.
but i have one problem, in the build process i get this warning:
/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_BUILD_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated
variable"
/usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/buildcore.mk:59: "DEB_CLEAN_MAKE_TARGET is a deprecated
Check out netpbm for a package with many, many licenses. I don't think
your case can possibly be worse than that. Anyways, the license file is
done in a very systematic way.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 03:16:53PM +0200, Willi Mann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm facing a small problem with my package logwatch
Hi!
I'm facing a small problem with my package logwatch[0]. Logwatch's licensing
file (License) [1] doesn't match the reality in two ways:
1) Logwatch consists of many perl scripts, many of them not written by the
maintainer of logwatch (Kirk Bauer), but by various contributors (including
me
Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> First off, I'd like to thank you for spending the time to construct
> this useful analysis!
>
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> Nick Lewycky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>>
>>>Package name : folding
>>>Version : 4.00
>>>Upstream : http://folding.stanford
Willi Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For the general problems associated with different licenses in one
package, you might find a look at http://bugs.debian.org/218105
informative. (Although I hope that your package isn't as mixed as
ours).
> I can think of these solutions for 2:
>
> - Distribu
Check out netpbm for a package with many, many licenses. I don't think
your case can possibly be worse than that. Anyways, the license file is
done in a very systematic way.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 03:16:53PM +0200, Willi Mann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm facing a small problem with my package logwatch
Hi!
I'm facing a small problem with my package logwatch[0]. Logwatch's licensing
file (License) [1] doesn't match the reality in two ways:
1) Logwatch consists of many perl scripts, many of them not written by the
maintainer of logwatch (Kirk Bauer), but by various contributors (including
me).
Hello,
Collect $20 to play our online gambling hall, Super Fast payouts
Goto: gaming-money.biz in your web browser,
at the cashier type in coupon: FR93P
200 Dollars credit on your first deposit
Goto: gaming-money.biz in your web browser,
at the cashier type in bonus code: FMJKU
Allow us to sh
Hello,
Collect $20 to play our online gambling hall, Super Fast payouts
Goto: gaming-money.biz in your web browser,
at the cashier type in coupon: FR93P
200 Dollars credit on your first deposit
Goto: gaming-money.biz in your web browser,
at the cashier type in bonus code: FMJKU
Allow us to sh
27 matches
Mail list logo
