Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear Mentors:
I am looking for a sponsor for the package normaliz [1] that
I am maintaining on behalf of the Debian Science-Team.
This version fix the FTBFS issue #806769 that pointed random emitting
of `Bus error' fro
On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 05:51:12PM -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
> My package doesnt build in amd64
> http://paste.debian.net/hidden/7253bf53/, I want to know, if I need
> add -fPIC flag only amd64 or in any arch in the configure?
All shared libraries should be compiled with -fPIC.
--
WBR, wRAR
Hi,
> For example, if 3.patch has not been forwarded upstream yet, then I
> would definitely modify it (instead of creating a new patch).
I've modified 3.patch - in the course of the modification one line has
been deleted (perl "use" statement) as it's not needed anymore.
Therefore some subsequen
Hi mentors,
My package doesnt build in amd64
http://paste.debian.net/hidden/7253bf53/, I want to know, if I need
add -fPIC flag only amd64 or in any arch in the configure?
Thanks!
--
Daniel Echeverry
http://wiki.debian.org/DanielEcheverry
Linux user: #477840
Debian user
Software libre
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear Mentors:
I am looking for a sponsor for the package gmp-ecm [1] that
I am maintaining on behalf of the Debian Science-Team.
This version fix the FTBFS issue #806619 that pointed that
the gmp-ecm package did not ho
Vincent Bernat writes:
> ❦ 30 novembre 2015 10:41 +0100, Ferenc Wagner :
>
>> Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
>> copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
>> later those carried over from other macro packages included into
>> Ma
Alex Vong writes:
> I am not a mentor, the following is just my opinions:
I'm afraid that if you answer a question on debian-mentors, you're a
mentor by definition. :)
> I don't know how Makefile.in is being handled in particular, but I
> think in general, if one file has more than one copyrigh
> * Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto , 2015-11-29, 16:12:
> >I removed the 'override_dh_makeshlibs' and now 'dpkg-gensymbols' is
> >warning that:
>
> I certainly didn't advocate removing this override.
A little rush of mine.
>
> The override passed -X options to dh_makeshlibs. They are needed to
Hi,
after a few weeks of other leisures i came back to Debian
packaging for a new upstream release of my software.
Currently i feel plain stupid because i fail to install
a patch which shall silence a few lintian warnings about
the man pages.
I unpacked the upstream tarball, moved it to the paren
On 11/09/2015 08:51 AM, David Douard wrote:
> On 11/06/2015 04:30 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>
Hi,
I've (at last) reuploaded a version of circus (0.12.1) on mentors.
I've disabled the tests, as suggested by Gianfranco, in order to have a package.
I'll try to figure out how to
❦ 30 novembre 2015 10:41 +0100, Ferenc Wagner :
> Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
> copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
> later those carried over from other macro packages included into
> Makefile.am (for example: include
Hi,
I am not a mentor, the following is just my opinions:
I think if possible, Makefile.in should not be included in tarball,
since dh_autoreconf will re-generate it at build-time anyway. But I
think it is fine to keep it if the upstream tarball provides it since
it does not worth repacking the t
Dear mentors,
Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
later those carried over from other macro packages included into
Makefile.am (for example: include doxygen.am). The result is like this:
# M
13 matches
Mail list logo
