Quoting Hideki Yamane (henr...@debian.or.jp):
> Now I've uploaded fixed one, could you review it again?
I haven't followed this very closely but is it OK to upload the fixed
package now? I can do it (I guess that the previous pointer to the
.dsc file is the right one) but prefer asking before d
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.0-1
of my package "recoverjpeg".
It builds these binary packages:
recoverjpeg - tool to recover JPEG images from a filesystem image
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 572234
The package can be
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, Sage Weil wrote:
> > Ok, the build is fixed (man_MANS vs dist_man_MANS in the man/Makefile.am),
> > and pbuilder is behaving fine on my other box. The updated .dsc is at
> >
> > http://ceph.newdream.net/debian/dists/unstable/main/so
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gkrellm-cpufreq".
* Package name: gkrellm-cpufreq
Version : 0.6.1-1
Upstream Author : Christoph Winkelmann
* URL : http://mathicse.epfl.ch/~winkelma/gkrellm2-cpufreq/
* License : GPL
Section :
Gregor Jasny writes:
> I'm the maintainer of the libv4l package. It produces two binary
> packages: libv4l-0 and libv4l-dev.
> With the latest release upstream decided to rename it to v4l-utils and
> add some utilities.
> To be consistent with upstream I changes the package source name to
> v4l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/02/2010 11:05 AM, Michal Čihař wrote:
> For example because GPL-3 is not compatible with GPL-2 by itself. So
> once the code is under GPL-3 you can not use it in GPL-2 licensed
> program.
> Also I don't see reason why you should limit Debian user
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.7.9-2
of my package "backup-manager".
It builds these binary packages:
backup-manager - command-line backup tool
backup-manager-doc - documentation package for Backup Manager
Apart from one overridden warning, the package appears to
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.6.4-1
of my package "gdisk".
It builds these binary packages:
gdisk - GPT fdisk text-mode partitioning tool
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.n
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3.3-12
of my package "iptotal".
It builds these binary packages:
iptotal- monitor for IP traffic, not requiring SNMP
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 572246 (grave). [1]
The package can
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Bhavani Shankar R wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 20100302-1
> of my package "mobile-broadband-provider-info".
Done. Thanks for your work!
--
Cheers,
Kartik Mistry | 0xD1028C8D | IRC: kart_
Debian GNU/Linux Deve
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Jari Aalto wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois writes:
>
>> Jari Aalto (02/03/2010):
>>
>>> [Please keep CC]
>>
>> [Done.]
>>
>>> Can anyone see any obvious errror, that eludes my eyes? Files
>>> available at:
>>
>> $ cat dyndns-2010.0301+gitdd160bd/debian/source/format
>>
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Jari Aalto (02/03/2010):
>
>> [Please keep CC]
>
> [Done.]
>
>> Can anyone see any obvious errror, that eludes my eyes? Files
>> available at:
>
> $ cat dyndns-2010.0301+gitdd160bd/debian/source/format
> 3.0 (native)
>
> (Enjoy 3.0…)
Jakub, Cyril thanks.
I had re-pack
--- dyndns-2010.0301+gitdd160bd.orig//debian/source/format
2010-03-01 10:26:56.0 -0300
+++ dyndns-2010.0301+gitdd160bd/debian/source/format2010-03-02
13:52:57.0 -0300
@@ -1 +1 @@
-3.0 (native)
+3.0 (quilt)
Regards,
Eriberto - Brazil
2010/3/2 Jari Aalto :
> ...
> W: dynd
Jari Aalto (02/03/2010):
> [Please keep CC]
[Done.]
> Can anyone see any obvious errror, that eludes my eyes? Files
> available at:
$ cat dyndns-2010.0301+gitdd160bd/debian/source/format
3.0 (native)
(Enjoy 3.0…)
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Jari Aalto , 2010-03-02, 18:35:
[Please keep CC] Following lintian warning is displayed:
$ debian -us -uc
...
W: dyndns source: native-package-with-dash-version
W: dyndns source: debian-watch-file-in-native-package
The debian/changelog line reads:
dyndns (2010.0301+gitdd160bd
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 20100302-1
of my package "mobile-broadband-provider-info".
It builds these binary packages:
mobile-broadband-provider-info - database of mobile broadband service providers
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The pack
[Please keep CC] Following lintian warning is displayed:
$ debian -us -uc
...
W: dyndns source: native-package-with-dash-version
W: dyndns source: debian-watch-file-in-native-package
The debian/changelog line reads:
dyndns (2010.0301+gitdd160bd-1) unstable; urgency=low
Thi
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 03:01:24PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> tisdag den 2 mars 2010 klockan 14:22 skrev Dominik George detta:
> >
> > I know what local changes are. And I *want* any of these changes to be
> > lost when a package is updated.
> >
> > As I mentioned in my very first mail,
tisdag den 2 mars 2010 klockan 14:22 skrev Dominik George detta:
>
> I know what local changes are. And I *want* any of these changes to be
> lost when a package is updated.
>
> As I mentioned in my very first mail, this is a repository of packages for
> *local* deployment, to systems *I* mainta
> Mmm, in this case by "local changes" we (at least I, but I assume
> also KiBi and Paul Wise) mean "what the sysadmin has done by hand
> after installing a previous version of the package", not
> "what some parts of the package installation have done during
> the installation itself".
I know wha
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 12:00:25PM +0100, Dominik George wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:37:25 +0200, Peter Pentchev
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:23:25AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> Dominik George (26/02/2010):
> >> > OK, as it is done in postinst, there does not seem to be a
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 12:37:25 +0200, Peter Pentchev
wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:23:25AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Dominik George (26/02/2010):
>> > OK, as it is done in postinst, there does not seem to be a
>> > difference to my current chown setup. dpkg-statoverride will make
>> >
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:57:07 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >> To be consistent with upstream I changes the package source name to
> >> v4l-utils.
> >> But what actions do I have to take to take to replace libv4l with
> >> v4l-utils in the archive?
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Renaming_a_Package
> I
On 2010-03-02 11:14 +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:10:59 +0100, Gregor Jasny wrote:
>
>> To be consistent with upstream I changes the package source name to
>> v4l-utils.
>> But what actions do I have to take to take to replace libv4l with
>> v4l-utils in the archive?
>
>
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 06:43:07PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:23:25AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >> Dominik George (26/02/2010):
> >> > OK, as it is done in postinst, there does not seem to be a
> >> > differ
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:23:25AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Dominik George (26/02/2010):
>> > OK, as it is done in postinst, there does not seem to be a
>> > difference to my current chown setup. dpkg-statoverride will make
>> > sure
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:23:25AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Dominik George (26/02/2010):
> > OK, as it is done in postinst, there does not seem to be a
> > difference to my current chown setup. dpkg-statoverride will make
> > sure that the permissions are set everytiem the file is
> > re-in
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 11:10:59 +0100, Gregor Jasny wrote:
> To be consistent with upstream I changes the package source name to v4l-utils.
> But what actions do I have to take to take to replace libv4l with
> v4l-utils in the archive?
http://wiki.debian.org/Renaming_a_Package
Cheers,
gregor
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
Dne Tue, 02 Mar 2010 10:39:10 +0100
Gabriele Giacone <1o5g4...@gmail.com> napsal(a):
> Actual before or after our choice? We are redistributing it and we can
> choose whether releasing it under version 2 or 3.
> "What reason for that?" Why not?
>
Hello,
I'm the maintainer of the libv4l package. It produces two binary
packages: libv4l-0 and libv4l-dev.
With the latest release upstream decided to rename it to v4l-utils and
add some utilities.
To be consistent with upstream I changes the package source name to v4l-utils.
But what actions do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/02/2010 12:26 AM, Michal Čihař wrote:
> Hi
>
> Dne Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:01:36 +0100
> Gabriele Giacone <1o5g4...@gmail.com> napsal(a):
>
>> On 03/01/2010 08:51 AM, Michal ihaY wrote:
>>> The license seems to be GPL-2+ (at least all file headers
31 matches
Mail list logo
