Bug#793331: RFS: postsrsd/1.2-1 [ITP]

2015-08-17 Thread Tomasz Buchert
On 17/08/15 21:53, Oxan van Leeuwen wrote: > Hi, > > On 15-08-15 12:21, Tomasz Buchert wrote: > >I've tested the AppArmor profile too, it looks fine, although I'm not > >sure if 'm' is needed in the profile for '/usr/sbin/postsrsd', since > >it seems to work just fine without it. I've a rather bas

Bug#793331: RFS: postsrsd/1.2-1 [ITP]

2015-08-17 Thread Oxan van Leeuwen
Hi, On 15-08-15 12:21, Tomasz Buchert wrote: I've tested the AppArmor profile too, it looks fine, although I'm not sure if 'm' is needed in the profile for '/usr/sbin/postsrsd', since it seems to work just fine without it. I've a rather basic knowledge about AppArmor, so if you could explain it

Bug#795858: marked as done (RFS: actiona/3.9.0-1 -- emulate human activity through a powerful GUI and JavaScript)

2015-08-17 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:05:20 +0100 with message-id <1439834720.91469.bpmail_high_carr...@web171805.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> and subject line has caused the Debian Bug report #795858, regarding RFS: actiona/3.9.0-1 -- emulate human activity through a powerful GUI and JavaScript to be m

Re: Best practices for downloader packages

2015-08-17 Thread Adam Borowski
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:29:12PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote: > >> * Since the download code if DFSG-Free, the downloader goes to > >> contrib, independently of the copyright of the data, right? > > > > Right. > > which is a bit pity, since the package *is* actually DFSG-free, > including th

Bug#795876: marked as done (RFS: fuzzywuzzy/0.6.1-1)

2015-08-17 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:50:43 + (UTC) with message-id <1301383542.6354367.1439830243520.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#795876: RFS: fuzzywuzzy/0.6.1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #795876, regarding RFS: fuzzywuzzy/0.6.1-1 to be marked as done. This

Bug#789526: marked as done (RFS: trac-mercurial/1.0.0.7+hged4f0932196b-1 [RC])

2015-08-17 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:31:35 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: trac-mercurial/1.0.0.7+hged4f0932196b-1 [RC] has caused the Debian Bug report #789526, regarding RFS: trac-mercurial/1.0.0.7+hged4f0932196b-1 [RC] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#795876: RFS: fuzzywuzzy/0.6.1-1

2015-08-17 Thread Edward Betts
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "fuzzywuzzy" * Package name: fuzzywuzzy Version : 0.6.1-1 Upstream Author : Adam Cohen *

Bug#683120: RFS: yadifa/2.0.5-1 [ITP]

2015-08-17 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
Control: owner -1 ! Hi Markus, Following my review: 1) # upstream does not sign releases #yadifa source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature ls upstream/signing-key.asc upstream/signing-key.asc which one is correct? 2) sbin/yadifad/install-sh not mentioned in copyright (and every insta

Bug#795858: RFS: actiona/3.9.0-1 -- emulate human activity through a powerful GUI and JavaScript

2015-08-17 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
Control: owner -1 ! Hi Adrien, I did have some problem in recreating the pristine tarball, I had to change back on changelog, and control the source name, and then git-buildpackage didn't fail anymore (and to move back the orig tarball of course) Built&Signed&Uploaded on experimental and tagged

Bug#784898: I would be interested

2015-08-17 Thread Felix Zielcke
Am Mittwoch, den 10.06.2015, 19:15 -0400 schrieb Yaroslav Halchenko: > to see this package in Debian so I can provide review/sponsorship > when > time allows (hopefully in the next day or so). > > meanwhile: > > - make package really ready -- vcs fields should point to existing > repository.

Bug#683120: RFS: yadifa/2.0.5-1 [ITP]

2015-08-17 Thread Markus Schade
Hi everyone, On 16.08.2015 at 22:53 Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Christian Kastner , 2015-08-16, 19:08: >> debian/rules: >> - I believe the "export DH_OPTIONS [...] to make magic work" can be >> dropped. I think this is a remnant from a time long past; I can't find >> any reference to this in recent docu

Bug#795858: RFS: actiona/3.9.0-1 -- emulate human activity through a powerful GUI and JavaScript

2015-08-17 Thread Adrien Cunin
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for actiona 3.9.0-1. The package is maintained in collab-main/git: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/actiona.git Changes since the last upload: actiona (3.9.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium

Re: Introduce wrapper package of linuxbrew into Debian

2015-08-17 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
Hi Lumin, >I didn't mean "overriding the env is bad". I mean: >-> can we directly add ENVs for users? > -> how about doing this in wrapper script: > sed -i -e "$a\$(cat /usr/share/.../example/profile)" .bashrc > -> very bad. >Then can ENVs be handled automatically? > >Then there are 2 th

Re: Best practices for downloader packages

2015-08-17 Thread Ole Streicher
Jakub Wilk writes: > * Ole Streicher , 2015-08-16, 19:17: >> * Shall it be native? There is no "local" upstream code, so the >> directory is just empty (except the debian/ subdir). However, >> "native" may not the best mark to it, since the package ist not >> really a debian-only one (the data may

Re: Introduce wrapper package of linuxbrew into Debian

2015-08-17 Thread lumin
Hi Gianfranco Costamagna, On Mon, 2015-08-17 at 08:27 +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > yes, exactly the point I had, so somewhere the user should be aware that > reporting > the bug on Debian Bug Tracking System is *wrong*. > and here we are: > how do you say that to the user? > You say ove

Bug#793171: RFS: git-lfs/0.5.2-1 [ITP]

2015-08-17 Thread Hugo Lefeuvre
Hi Stephen, Here are some remaining problems I'd like to see solved before sponsoring the package. (1) debian/control: --- - Concerning git "(>= 1.8.0)": The version in jessie-backports is 2.1, so anyway this condition will be verified in case of a backport to stable.

Re: Introduce wrapper package of linuxbrew into Debian

2015-08-17 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
Hi Lumin >Such "packaging bug" is upstream bug, and is handled by Homebrew >and Linuxbrew upstream. And files made that trouble was not provided >by Debian package .. yes, exactly the point I had, so somewhere the user should be aware that reporting the bug on Debian Bug Tracking System i

Bug#795704: RFS: mlucas/14.1-dfsg1 [ITP] -- program to perform Lucas-Lehmer test on a Mersenne number

2015-08-17 Thread Alex Vong
2015-08-16 23:56 GMT+08:00, Jakub Wilk : > * Alex Vong , 2015-08-16, 19:42: >>http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mlucas/mlucas_14.1-dfsg1.dsc > > I don't intend to sponsor this package, but I had a quick look at it: > Thanks for the quick look! > Don't assume that kfreebsd-any means only

Bug#795771: RFS: dblatex/0.3.7-1

2015-08-17 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna
control: owner -1 ! Hi Andreas, let's review: 1) please use a machine-readable copyright file http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ 2) d/compat: please bump to 9 3) d/control: you might want to run wrap-and-sort to clean the formatting up, to bump debhelper to >=9 and

Re: Bug#795344: libmems-1.6-1: not properly linked to its dependencies

2015-08-17 Thread Tobias Frost
Am Montag, den 17.08.2015, 00:11 +0200 schrieb Gert Wollny: > On 13.08.2015 18:17, Andreas Tille wrote: > > I confirm that this at least has some effect - unfortunately not > > the wanted > > one sinde the > > > > @BOOST_FILESYSTEM_LIB@ @BOOST_IOSTREAMS_LIB@ > > @BOOST_SYSTEM_LIB@ > > > >

Re: Bug#795344: libmems-1.6-1: not properly linked to its dependencies

2015-08-17 Thread Andreas Tille
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:11:23AM +0200, Gert Wollny wrote: > > On 13.08.2015 18:17, Andreas Tille wrote: > >I confirm that this at least has some effect - unfortunately not the wanted > >one sinde the > > > > @BOOST_FILESYSTEM_LIB@ @BOOST_IOSTREAMS_LIB@ @BOOST_SYSTEM_LIB@ > > > >placeholders

Re: Introduce wrapper package of linuxbrew into Debian

2015-08-17 Thread lumin
Hi Gianfranco Costamagna, On Sun, 2015-08-16 at 07:26 +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > yes, this is not a problem, and this is already done locally (manually) by > many > folks. > > But who will take care of "packaging bug x for package y installed with > linuxbrew?" Such "packaging bug"