Hi,
On 06/12/2017 11:05 PM, Benoît Rouits wrote:
> Is there a solution ? Should i file a bug on WNPP to ask for a
> qtcreator-dev package in order to have qtcreator source installed in
> /usr/src ?
Do you need the entire source of Qt Creator or just some header files?
In either case, you can onl
Nicholas D Steeves writes:
> Would someone please point me to an example package that shows the
> correct way to override or use a special
> debian/package.convert-list-of-files-to-convert-to-html
> debian/package.convert-list-of-files-to-convert-to-plain-text
> debian/package.convert-list-of-fil
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: chinese-develop...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear mentors and chinese-developers folks,
I am looking for a sponsor for adopted package "galternatives"
* Package name: galternatives
Version : 0.13.6
Upstream Author : [n
Dear Mentors,
Would someone please point me to an example package that shows the
correct way to override or use a special
debian/package.convert-list-of-files-to-convert-to-html
debian/package.convert-list-of-files-to-convert-to-plain-text
debian/package.convert-list-of-files-to-info-pages
etc.
in
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 02:13:02PM +0100, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, Jun 11 2017, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rich-minority"
> >
> > Package name : rich-minority Version : 1.0.1-1
>
> Here's a review of bc58ab0a49df6002e4e034cea8c1398f
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:14:35PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> when libraries were build with gcc 5 'v5' was added to the soversion
> inside the library name. Should this extension be kept even if there is
> a new soversion. For instance for the package libbpp-core2v5 which has
> now sover
Hello dear mentors,
This must be a frequently asked question over the years, sorry:
I built recently a binary package of a specific plugin for qtcreator,
on Debian Stretch, but this requires the source (package) of qtcreator
in order to build. As Debian Stretch has no qtcreator-dev, i had to
apt-
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the following package:
* Package name: xtensor
Version : 0.10.4-1
Upstream Author : Johan Mabille, Sylvain Corlay and Wolf Vollprecht
* URL : http://quantstack.net/xtensor
* Li
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jun 2017 20:30:48 + (UTC)
with message-id <82309823.13941378.1497299448...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#864680: RFS: budgie-desktop/10.3.1-2 -- bugfix release
for the desktop environment Budgie Desktop
has caused the Debian Bug report #864680,
regarding R
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "budgie-desktop"
* Package name: budgie-desktop
Version : 10.3.1-2
Upstream Author : i...@solus-project.com
* URL : https://github.com/budgie-desktop/budgie-
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:21:09 + (UTC)
with message-id <1240051588.13689061.1497291669...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#863251: RFS: node-grunt-known-options/1.1.0-1~bpo8+1
has caused the Debian Bug report #863251,
regarding RFS: node-grunt-known-options/1.1.0-1~bpo8+1
Hi,
>when libraries were build with gcc 5 'v5' was added to the soversion
>inside the library name. Should this extension be kept even if there is
>a new soversion. For instance for the package libbpp-core2v5 which has
>now soversion=3. Should the new package be named
>
>libbpp-core3v5
>or
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:14:35PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> For instance for the package libbpp-core2v5 which has
> now soversion=3. Should the new package be named
>
> libbpp-core3v5
This no.
> or
> libbpp-core3
> ?
This one is right.
I think this was part of the announcement
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:16:39 + (UTC)
with message-id <2117095245.13762763.1497291399...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#864203: RFS: mercurial-keyring/1.1.8-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #864203,
regarding RFS: mercurial-keyring/1.1.8-1
to be marked as done.
This
Your message dated Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:16:11 + (UTC)
with message-id <766003393.13688637.1497291371...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#864202: RFS: mercurial-extension-utils/1.3.4-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #864202,
regarding RFS: mercurial-extension-utils/1.3.4-1
to be marked
Hi,
when libraries were build with gcc 5 'v5' was added to the soversion
inside the library name. Should this extension be kept even if there is
a new soversion. For instance for the package libbpp-core2v5 which has
now soversion=3. Should the new package be named
libbpp-core3v5
or
lib
Hello,
On Sun, Jun 11 2017, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rich-minority"
>
> Package name : rich-minority Version : 1.0.1-1
Here's a review of bc58ab0a49df6002e4e034cea8c1398fd7407322:
- why not just install README.org as it is?
- the file is not copyri
17 matches
Mail list logo
