Bug#739056: RFS: cwm/5.1-1 [ITP] -- Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo * James McDonald , 2014-02-15, 14:46: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cwm/cwm_5.1-1.dsc Bad news: /usr/bin/cwm is already taken: https://packages.debian.org/sid/all/swap-cwm/filelist Tagging the bug +moreinfo, because this is showstopper. -- Jakub Wil

Re: Handling daemons that fail to start

* Andrey Rahmatullin , 2014-02-19, 23:04: Which CPUs mcelog supports, and where is it documented? Upstream README seems to imply that it should be able to run everywhere: “It is recommended that mcelog runs on all x86 machines, both 64bit (since early 2.6) and 32bit (since 2.6.32)”. According t

Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:37:13PM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: > On 22 February 2014 12:42, Bart Martens wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building > >> only, on genget

Bug#731036: Changed the name

Hi, I changed the name of the upstream project (and the Debian package, of course) to “thinkpad-scripts”. So the new URL on mentors is: http://mentors.debian.net/package/thinkpad-scripts Since the last upload, there has been some upstream development, so we are at 3.5.1 now: dget -x ht

Re: How to mark bugs which solution is in the documentation?

Thanks a lot for your answer. I'll do that. Best regards, Joseph On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 21 Feb 2014, Joseph Herlant wrote: >> I found several bugs which solution is provided by the documentation. >> How do we properly mark these bugs once the link to the

Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: > My question is, how this situation should be handled, should these > manuals be removed and package uploaded as dfsg ? Or the best is to > wait for upstream to change the licence. If you don't need this package in testing you c

Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?

On 22 February 2014 12:42, Bart Martens wrote: > On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building >> only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line >> arguments handling. However ge

Re: gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:58:39AM +0100, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote: > Hi, > > I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building > only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line > arguments handling. However gengetopt was removed from testing due to > [2], it is

Re: Working with gbp and older releases

On sob, lut 22, 2014 at 11:02:12 +0100, Tobias Frost wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 19.02.2014, 20:00 +0100 schrieb Dariusz Dwornikowski > > I uploaded my version to mentors. Would you be so nice to review it ? > > http://mentors.debian.net/package/maradns > > Hi Dariusz, > > Sure, I'll take a look.

gengetopt - Is this a +dfsg case?

Hi, I am maintaining a great package - zmap. It depends, for building only, on gengetopt [1] to generate main.c stub for command line arguments handling. However gengetopt was removed from testing due to [2], it is only in unstable for now. This blocks new zmap versions going to testing. I alread

Re: Working with gbp and older releases

Am Mittwoch, den 19.02.2014, 20:00 +0100 schrieb Dariusz Dwornikowski > I uploaded my version to mentors. Would you be so nice to review it ? > http://mentors.debian.net/package/maradns Hi Dariusz, Sure, I'll take a look. (I'm not a DD, so I cannot sponsor.) A suggestion: You should the RFS