Hi,
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Hello Forum,
>
> in order to add some missing sample material, I add a second source to the
> upstream source tarball,
> then I followed the multiple upstream tarballs in Debian source packages
> approach [1].
> This approach is curren
Hello Forum,
in order to add some missing sample material, I add a second source to the
upstream source tarball,
then I followed the multiple upstream tarballs in Debian source packages
approach [1].
This approach is currently used for spamassassin [2].
What is the GIT part of this approach ?
To avoid devolving in a naming the bike-shed discussion, anyone who has
a strong opinion, please manually vote in
https://debian.titanpad.com/24
and I'll tabulate them 24 hours from now.
If you want a different option than the two I've listed, please add it
at the top with a new letter. [Hopef
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "docbook-to-man"
* Package name: docbook-to-man
Version : 1:2.0.0-33
Upstream Author : Fred Dalrymple
* URL : http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/tools/dtm/
Hi Daniel,
On 13.11.2014 11:29, Daniel Lintott wrote:
On 12/11/14 22:40, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
What should work better is '>= ${source:Upstream-Version}'.
However, that is not enough to guarantee that the upstream versions
always match. One could then have e.g.:
gns3= 1.1-1
gns3-gui
On 14 November 2014 00:59, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 novembre 2014 à 03:54:05, Don Armstrong a écrit :
>>
>> This is the last chance for someone to object to entry-point as the tag
>> name. If I hear no objections, I'll put this in place on Friday, around
>> 18:00 UTC.
>
>apprent
Hi,
Seems like I sent my question to the wrong list.
Please Cc: replies, I'm not subscribed (yet)
--- Begin Message ---
Am 13.11.2014 um 19:17 schrieb Svante Signell:
Hi,
Hi,
I'm currently looking into packaging eudev, consolekit2, uselessd for
Debian. If doing so, is anybody interested in
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "berkeley-abc"
* Package name: berkeley-abc
Version : 1.01+20141105hg5b5af75+dfsg-1
Upstream Author : Berkeley Logic Synthesis and Verification Group
* URL :
Le mercredi 12 novembre 2014 à 03:54:05, Don Armstrong a écrit :
>
> This is the last chance for someone to object to entry-point as the tag
> name. If I hear no objections, I'll put this in place on Friday, around
> 18:00 UTC.
I am looking for an idea in a nutshell.
I'm not English so it's hard
On 2014-11-13 12:43, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
> I'm sorry my English is poor and I can hardly do better. I wanted to
> summarize the main ideas of the second paragraph on page [1] which I
> find very good. The maintainer should know the first glance by reading
> the description if it can offer the b
Le jeudi 13 novembre 2014 à 11:51:51, Christian Kastner a écrit :
> On 2014-11-13 09:42, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >
> > I don't think we should include the initial part about "maintainer can
> > easily solve...", as it does seems a bit patronizing ("that's easy for
> > me, but I won't do it bec
> binNMUs will cause a few of the binary packages to have a different
> debian revision than the rest of the binary packages and the source
> packages.
>
> We have a lintian check for this, I think.
Is it not-binnmuable-all-depends-any? I should've remembered that one,
because I use the fix that i
On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, Roger Light wrote:
> > Could you try ${binary:Version} instead?
>
> (= ${binary:Version}) can break binNMUs. Be careful.
binNMUs will cause a few of the binary packages to have a different
debian revision than the res
On 2014-11-13 09:42, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 07:42:33PM +0100, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
>> entry-point
>> The maintainer can easily solve this bug by himself, but he
>> wants to take it to new contributors who wish to get involved
>> in Debian. Bugs of any diff
On 12/11/14 23:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014, Roger Light wrote:
>> Could you try ${binary:Version} instead?
>
> (= ${binary:Version}) can break binNMUs. Be careful.
>
Indeed, I am keen to try and avoid any breakages like that. I also don't
think the above would w
On 12/11/14 22:40, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> [...]
>
> You require the exact upstream version (1.1).
> This can't work, because there will always be the Debian revision added
> (1.1-1~exp1).
>
I had a suspicion that this was why, but wasn't sure.
> What should work better is '>= ${source:Ups
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 03:54:05PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Excellent; thanks. I'm going to make these gender-neutral, and then I'll
> commit them.
>
> This is the last chance for someone to object to entry-point as the tag
> name. If I hear no objections, I'll put this in place on Friday, ar
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, quidame wrote:
> Oops,
>
> not Priority: but Urgency:
>
> quidame wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I try to backport bilibop_0.4.22 source package (native). If only changes
> > from 0.4.22 to 0.4.22~bpo70+1 are copied in to the changes file, lintian
> > complains with the 'backports
18 matches
Mail list logo
