Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:21:49PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>
>> > could someone sponsor xlife 5.0-7 for me please. It is just changes in
>> > Build-Depends so it reb
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> mv -f Makefile Makefile.bak
>>> imake -DUseInstalled -I/usr/lib/X11/config
>>> Imakefile.c:39: error: Imake.tmpl: No such file or directory
>>> imake: Exit code 1.
>>> Stop.
>>> make: *** [build-sta
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:44:16PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:21:49PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> > > could someone sponsor xlife 5.
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 01:01:43AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
[...]
> Right. These are all good reasons to start hacking around ;-) but now I can
> think of some troubles for autobuilder in case of upstream sites not
> accesible at the package build time or incomplete/changes downloads being
>
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:44:16PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:21:49PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > > could someone sponsor xlife 5.0-7 for me please. It is just changes in
> > > Bui
On Monday 01 May 2006 00:11, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:06:59PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > Nobody says that get-orig-source must be only used for repackaging
> > purposes. I think it is fine to have such target just getting the
> > upstream source (ok a hash checking a
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:06:59PM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> Nobody says that get-orig-source must be only used for repackaging
> purposes. I think it is fine to have such target just getting the
> upstream source (ok a hash checking against a previously checked
> and trusted version is requir
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 10:21:49PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> > could someone sponsor xlife 5.0-7 for me please. It is just changes in
> > Build-Depends so it rebuilds against the new X11R7.
>
> > http://mrvn.homeip
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 05:22:38PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> could someone sponsor xlife 5.0-7 for me please. It is just changes in
> Build-Depends so it rebuilds against the new X11R7.
> http://mrvn.homeip.net/xlife/
I'm on it.
--
Lionel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What's next ? To have a unified (and sanely implemented) get-orig-source
> target incorporated in debhelper | cdbs | dpatch to be reused by
> interested packagers ?
I think this would be rather hard to do. At least for cases where the
source is being
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh no, I bet there's another point of DevRef contention for you ..
> | 3. _should_, except where impossible for legal reasons, preserve the
> | entire building and portablility infrastructure provided by the
> | upstream author.
George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 21:37, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I don't find get-orig-source as useful for normal packages that don't
>> require repackaging of upstream source. In that case, for the most
>> part, I don't think it's worth the effort.
> Nobody sa
> But using cvs export also means I'd have to check-in every change I
> want to test, doesn't it?
Either that, or doing the changes in the export, and manually merging
the changes you've done back into your working directory.
Best regards,
Ben
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 11:37:09AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I repackage openafs, for instance, because upstream distributes OpenAFS as
> two separate tarballs and dpkg support for multiple upstream source
> tarballs is not yet available, because there's *one* file in the MacOS
> packaging that
On Sunday 30 April 2006 21:37, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:05:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> One advantage of insisting on a get-orig-source target
> >
> > Do you insist on a get-orig-source target while sponsoring? It's
> > cu
On Sunday 30 April 2006 21:29, Russ Allbery wrote:
--cut--
> No, I would instead say:
>
> * Repackaging must be documented in debian/copyright, and if the
>repackaging means that anything a user may expect to be present is
>missing, that must be documented in README.Debian.
>
> * A get-or
Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:05:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> One advantage of insisting on a get-orig-source target
> Do you insist on a get-orig-source target while sponsoring? It's
> currently optional according to the debian-policy.
> http://www.d
George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 10:05, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Well, discussing it is exactly what I'm doing right now. :) Obviously
>> if I can't convince anyone here, there's no point in filing a bug
>> against the Developer's Reference for a change that has
Benjamin Mesing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > find release/$(deb_dir_name) -type d -name CVS | xargs rm -rf
> You know about "cvs export"? This would spare you to having to delete
> the CVS directories.
But using cvs export also means I'd have to check-in every change I
want to test,
Hi,
could someone sponsor xlife 5.0-7 for me please. It is just changes in
Build-Depends so it rebuilds against the new X11R7.
http://mrvn.homeip.net/xlife/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:09:21 +
Source: xlife
Binary: xlife
Architecture:
On Sunday 30 April 2006 12:41, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:05:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-p
> > >ractices.en.html#s-bpp-origtargz
> > > http://www.debian
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:05:19AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch-best-pkging-practices.en.html#s-bpp-origtargz
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s-copyrightfile
>
> I think
> find release/$(deb_dir_name) -type d -name CVS | xargs rm -rf
You know about "cvs export"? This would spare you to having to delete
the CVS directories.
Best regards
Ben
--
Please do not send any email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- all email not
originating from the mailing list will be del
On Sunday 30 April 2006 10:05, Russ Allbery wrote:
--snip--
> One advantage of insisting on a get-orig-source target as part of the
> review is that it ensures that the derivation of the .orig.tar.gz file is
> automated and reproducible, making it easier and quicker to package the
> *next* upstream
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 11:53:20PM +0200, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 05:47:46PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>> Isn't debian/README.Debian the one you would like to edit?
> It might be. However, the included information is (probably) not
> useful to end users.
I use debi
Bart Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A description of why and how the source was repackaged, should go in
> "README.Debian-source or a similar file".
This is a statement from the Developer's Reference that I think I disagree
with. I do already know it's there, so repeating it doesn't make
26 matches
Mail list logo
