> Has the security team been informed that it includes a copy of the
> xpdf code?? From the debian/rules it looks like you build against
> libpoppler instead. You might want to get upstream to drop it from the
> tarball, since it seems libpoppler can be used.
For the records: [1], see [2].
1. ht
On Nov 18, 2007 4:50 PM, Simo Kauppi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would appreciate if somebody could take a look at the package and point out
> any packaging mistakes in it.
A review of your package:
Don't forget to send your patches upstream.
Might want to ask upstream to split FAQ 2-6 out i
On Nov 19, 2007 2:34 AM, Bradley Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "atheme-services".
A review of your package:
Why do you copy config.sub/config.guess in the clean target instead of
the configure target?
Don't forget to send patches upstream to fix th
On Nov 19, 2007 3:40 AM, Eriberto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.eriberto.pro.br/debian/pacotes/album-4.02-debian.tar.gz
Please link to the .dsc file, preferably uploaded to mentors.debian.net
> The new changelog:
>
> * New upstream release.
> * New maintainer (Closes: #430982, #338
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "codeblocks".
* Package name: codeblocks
Version : 1.0rc2~svn.20071122-1
Upstream Author : The Code::Blocks Team
* URL : http://www.codeblocks.org
* License :
Il giorno 24/nov/07, alle ore 01:09, Paul Wise ha scritto:
On Nov 24, 2007 9:35 AM, Francesco Namuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
common-install-arch::
chrpath --delete debian/gnome-phone-manager/usr/bin/gnome-
phone-manager
Precisely, this did the trick. Just add 'chrpath' to the build
Il giorno 24/nov/07, alle ore 01:34, Leo costela Antunes ha scritto:
Paul Wise wrote:
Obviously that is a hack/workaround for upstream's buggy build
system,
be sure to send a patch upstream that fixes it.
Yup, agreed.
This shouldn't be too hard since upstream is (was?) a DD (hadess).
I'v
Paul Wise wrote:
> Obviously that is a hack/workaround for upstream's buggy build system,
> be sure to send a patch upstream that fixes it.
Yup, agreed.
This shouldn't be too hard since upstream is (was?) a DD (hadess).
The package has been uploaded with the workaround for now.
Cheers
--
Leo "
On Nov 24, 2007 9:35 AM, Francesco Namuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > common-install-arch::
> > > chrpath --delete
> > > debian/gnome-phone-manager/usr/bin/gnome-phone-manager
> > >
> >
> > Precisely, this did the trick. Just add 'chrpath' to the build-deps too.
> > Update it in the SVN
Il giorno sab, 24/11/2007 alle 00.38 +0100, Leo "costela" Antunes ha
scritto:
> Francesco Namuri wrote:
> > Maybe the rpath issue is not i386 related?
>
> Yeah, possibly.
>
> > How to implement it using cdbs? adding a common-install-arch rule?
> > Somethink like:
> >
> > common-install-arch::
>
On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 22:47 +, James Westby wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 18:23 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> > You need a new changelog for Debian starting from scratch and you could
> > adapt the copyright (if the license allow it) or just make one new.
>
> I'm not so sure.
Lik
Francesco Namuri wrote:
> Maybe the rpath issue is not i386 related?
Yeah, possibly.
> How to implement it using cdbs? adding a common-install-arch rule?
> Somethink like:
>
> common-install-arch::
> chrpath --delete debian/gnome-phone-manager/usr/bin/gnome-phone-manager
>
Precisely, this
Hi Leo,
Il giorno ven, 23/11/2007 alle 23.37 +0100, Leo "costela" Antunes ha
scritto:
> Francesco Namuri wrote:
> > I've added it to svn, but I get the same warnings...
>
> >> Also, lintian is complaining about a RPATH set to /usr/lib. I
didn't
> >> delve into it, but this seems like a real error
On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 18:23 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote:
> Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> > All'incirca Fri, 23 Nov 2007 14:23:54 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sembrerebbe aver scritto:
> >
> >> You just need to make the package accomplish the Debian policy, t
Francesco Namuri wrote:
> I've added it to svn, but I get the same warnings...
>> Also, lintian is complaining about a RPATH set to /usr/lib. I didn't
>> delve into it, but this seems like a real error.
>> Does it have a good reason to do it, that I failed to see?
>
> About this, I've no idea I c
Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> All'incirca Fri, 23 Nov 2007 14:23:54 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sembrerebbe aver scritto:
>
>> You just need to make the package accomplish the Debian policy, that's
>> all you need to do.
>
> Thank you, but I'm still not confident about
On Friday 23 November 2007, George Danchev wrote:
> On Friday 23 November 2007, Erick Mattos wrote:
> > Dear mentors,
> >
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "codeblocks".
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for packaging codeblocks! I can't spponsor, but you can count me as
> a thankful user of that pack
On Friday 23 November 2007, Erick Mattos wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "codeblocks".
Hi,
Thanks for packaging codeblocks! I can't spponsor, but you can count me as a
thankful user of that package ;-)
Compilation yields the following error:
infopane.cpp:
All'incirca Fri, 23 Nov 2007 14:23:54 -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sembrerebbe aver scritto:
> You just need to make the package accomplish the Debian policy, that's
> all you need to do.
Thank you, but I'm still not confident about how to deal with
debian/copyright and d
On Nov 22, 2007 2:57 PM, Giovanni Mascellani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there somewhat like a policy, best practises or similar about doing
> this?
Not that I know of, but I've been asked this question before, so this
is my answer:
If the packaging licence allows it, you can take the package
Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> Hi all!
> I'm making a Debian package which already exists in Ubuntu. I'd like to
> take advantage of the efforts already done by the Ubuntu maintainers
> and modify the Ubuntu package instead of create a completely new one.
>
> Is there somewhat like a policy, best pr
Hi,
Il giorno ven, 23/11/2007 alle 17.33 +0100, Leo "costela" Antunes ha
scritto:
> Francesco Namuri wrote:
>
> > I've fixed all... :)
>
> The package is hitting the new dpkg issue[0] with libusb-0.1-4. I
> successfully dodged the issue adding
>
> DEB_DH_SHLIBDEPS_ARGS_ALL := -u'--ignore-missin
Hi,
On Thursday 22 November 2007 20:53, Eriberto wrote:
> Ok. But in my package I chose the GPL as license (debian/copyright file).
Why? Why do you want to reduce the usefulness of your package? I cannot think
of any good reason...
You take choice away, gain nothing and make your package less u
Francesco Namuri wrote:
> I've fixed all... :)
The package is hitting the new dpkg issue[0] with libusb-0.1-4. I
successfully dodged the issue adding
DEB_DH_SHLIBDEPS_ARGS_ALL := -u'--ignore-missing-info'
to debian/rules, but I don't want to upload without your blessing on the
change.
Also, li
Hi Leo,
Il giorno ven, 23/11/2007 alle 16.07 +0100, Leo "costela" Antunes ha
scritto:
> Mike O'Connor wrote:
> > src/gconf-bridge.* and most of the files in the telepathy directory
> > have copyright holders not mentioned in debian/copyright.
>
> Francesco, will you take a look at these, before
Hi all!
I'm making a Debian package which already exists in Ubuntu. I'd like to
take advantage of the efforts already done by the Ubuntu maintainers
and modify the Ubuntu package instead of create a completely new one.
Is there somewhat like a policy, best practises or similar about doing
this? I
Mike O'Connor wrote:
> src/gconf-bridge.* and most of the files in the telepathy directory
> have copyright holders not mentioned in debian/copyright.
Francesco, will you take a look at these, before I sponsor the package?
Cheers
--
Leo "costela" Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signatu
Hi,
I'm sorry to Leo and Mike, for a mistake I've send the mail to they
private address and not to the list...
I've Fixed the copyright problems, uploaded a new version to mentors,
the SVN address is:
svn://svn.debian.org/pkg-bluetooth/packages/gnome-phone-manager
(I don't have any pending chang
On Nov 23, 2007 7:10 PM, Robin Cornelius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it think that is now all the issues you raised with the package dealt with.
Some minor issues (only the first is a show-stopper):
inet_ntop.c isn't under the MIT licence as debian/copyright suggests.
Change:
/---
Develop
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:53:57PM +0100, Francesco Namuri wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a temporary sponsor for gnome-phone-manager 0.40-3,
> my usual sponsor and co-maintainer is on vacation, so I'm asking to the
> list...
> I've added only a build-dep to fix a bug, this is the only difference
>
Francesco Namuri wrote:
> I'm looking for a temporary sponsor for gnome-phone-manager 0.40-3,
Still need this? Can I check it out from svn.d.o, or do you have any
uncommited changes somewhere?
Cheers
--
Leo "costela" Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP di
Hi,
I'm looking for a temporary sponsor for gnome-phone-manager 0.40-3,
my usual sponsor and co-maintainer is on vacation, so I'm asking to the
list...
I've added only a build-dep to fix a bug, this is the only difference
between the one already in debian.
thanks in advance.
http://mentors.debian
Hi,
Il giorno ven, 23/11/2007 alle 00.18 -0500, Mike O'Connor ha scritto:
>
> Karl Grill is mentioned as a copyright holder in some of the source
> files, but isn't mentioned in deban/copyright
fixed
thanks for review.
The respective dsc file can be found at:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/po
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi! I solved this problem. The final package is at
http://www.eriberto.pro.br/debian/pacotes/iceweasel-firegpg-0.4.6-1-debian.tar.gz
Regards,
Eriberto - Brazil
Mike O'Connor escreveu:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 05:02:17PM -0200, Eriberto wrote:
> Thi
On Nov 20, 2007 5:09 AM, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2007 6:53 PM, Robin Cornelius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Which way do you suggest I should go with the naming? I can recreate a
> > c-ares package if required or stick with the libcares name.
>
> I suggest:
>
> source
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 12:17:53PM +0530, Kartik Mistry wrote:
> Please fill the details you left out!
Additional I find the description very meaningless. I can't say from the
description what it is. IANADD so my opinion might not count, but I
don't feel like checking this package for packaging is
36 matches
Mail list logo
