On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 05:20, Lars E. D. Jensen wrote:
> Hi list
>
> I'm trying to make a deb package for the first time.
>
> My rules script looks like this:
If you would put the entire package in public web/ftp space, it would be
easier to help you. Any number of things could be wrong (in fact
On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 05:20, Lars E. D. Jensen wrote:
> Hi list
>
> I'm trying to make a deb package for the first time.
>
> My rules script looks like this:
If you would put the entire package in public web/ftp space, it would be
easier to help you. Any number of things could be wrong (in fact
g close enough attention. :)
Compare with kpoker and sillypoker.
Ben
--
Ben Armstrong-. Medianet Development Group,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] `-.Dymaxion Research Limited
http://www.dymaxion.ca/>`- Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 11:20, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote:
> I'm not sure what would be best practice to avoid those errors, because
> the admin might have to configure the video device first anyway (though
> the default /dev/video0 is usually a nice guess).
I should think the normal case for a webc
g close enough attention. :)
Compare with kpoker and sillypoker.
Ben
--
Ben Armstrong-. Medianet Development Group,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] `-.Dymaxion Research Limited
http://www.dymaxion.ca/>`- Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
--
To UNSUBSCRI
On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 11:20, Thomas -Balu- Walter wrote:
> I'm not sure what would be best practice to avoid those errors, because
> the admin might have to configure the video device first anyway (though
> the default /dev/video0 is usually a nice guess).
I should think the normal case for a webc
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 02:03:10PM +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> For the moment I commented these the cp lines out, and restored the
> original files from the tarball. However, what is the "proper" solution
> to this?
Have upstream update these themselves?
You may be unwittingly causing portability
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 02:03:10PM +0100, Ross Burton wrote:
> For the moment I commented these the cp lines out, and restored the
> original files from the tarball. However, what is the "proper" solution
> to this?
Have upstream update these themselves?
You may be unwittingly causing portabilit
has many other benefits as well, both to the child and guide). I will
always advocate these more effective methods first. But in the end, it is
the child's guide's choice as to what is suitable for a child to use or not
use. A conflicts takes away that choice and sets Debian Jr. up as the
&quo
has many other benefits as well, both to the child and guide). I will
always advocate these more effective methods first. But in the end, it is
the child's guide's choice as to what is suitable for a child to use or not
use. A conflicts takes away that choice and sets Debian Jr. up as
You don't say what these packages are or why they should go into Debian. It
is unlikely people will be interested in looking at your packages until you
have done this. Please see http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp about filing an
ITP bug against the 'wnpp' pseudo-package for each of your packages
You don't say what these packages are or why they should go into Debian. It
is unlikely people will be interested in looking at your packages until you
have done this. Please see http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp about filing an
ITP bug against the 'wnpp' pseudo-package for each of your packages
c
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:37:13PM +0200, Marc Leeman wrote:
> One thing I would like to have comments on though is the possible
> section of my package nvrec, which is dependent on liblame and the
> question if can be put into debian in the first place.
With some reengineering of nvrec, perhaps.
Hi,
Looking over the past month or so of debian-mentors, I'm seeing that quite a
number of people's appeals for sponsorship or advocacy are apparently
falling on deaf ears (unless these are being answered only in private
email). If regulars here would periodically scan the past week or more of
de
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 01:43:11AM +0100, David H. Askew wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Some time ago I filed the bug report indicating my intentions to
> package jedit.
Would've been nice to cite a bug#. Never mind, I have located it:
#136535.
> This deb and its releases since the bug report have bee
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:37:13PM +0200, Marc Leeman wrote:
> One thing I would like to have comments on though is the possible
> section of my package nvrec, which is dependent on liblame and the
> question if can be put into debian in the first place.
With some reengineering of nvrec, perhaps.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 02:01:46PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 09:24:27PM -0700, Kristis Makris wrote:
> > tkxcd - a diff front end with a look and feel based on Atria Clearcase
> > xcleardiff. Similar to tkdiff. Outdated, but upstream has a much
> >
Hi,
Looking over the past month or so of debian-mentors, I'm seeing that quite a
number of people's appeals for sponsorship or advocacy are apparently
falling on deaf ears (unless these are being answered only in private
email). If regulars here would periodically scan the past week or more of
d
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 09:24:27PM -0700, Kristis Makris wrote:
> tkxcd - a diff front end with a look and feel based on Atria Clearcase
> xcleardiff. Similar to tkdiff. Outdated, but upstream has a much
> improved version that I'm pushing him to formally release.
This one looks interesting. I'm
On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 01:43:11AM +0100, David H. Askew wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Some time ago I filed the bug report indicating my intentions to
> package jedit.
Would've been nice to cite a bug#. Never mind, I have located it:
#136535.
> This deb and its releases since the bug report have be
On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 02:01:46PM -0300, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 09:24:27PM -0700, Kristis Makris wrote:
> > tkxcd - a diff front end with a look and feel based on Atria Clearcase
> > xcleardiff. Similar to tkdiff. Outdated, but upstream has a much
>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 09:24:27PM -0700, Kristis Makris wrote:
> tkxcd - a diff front end with a look and feel based on Atria Clearcase
> xcleardiff. Similar to tkdiff. Outdated, but upstream has a much
> improved version that I'm pushing him to formally release.
This one looks interesting. I'm
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 02:45:19PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I'm thinking of packaging wmcoincoin, a dockapp to browse DaCode sites
> news and board. However, it is written entirely in French and is not
> gettext-enabled. The basic functionalities should be accessible for any
> non-French sp
On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 09:36:58AM -0300, Marcelo Leal wrote:
>Hi,
>Well, i'm a newbie, trying to be a devel man.
>I want cooperate with this community that so have helped me. If
> somebody can help me
>Thanks in advance.
Perhaps you could explain a bit about who you are and w
On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 09:36:58AM -0300, Marcelo Leal wrote:
>Hi,
>Well, i'm a newbie, trying to be a devel man.
>I want cooperate with this community that so have helped me. If
> somebody can help me
>Thanks in advance.
Perhaps you could explain a bit about who you are and
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 03:08:49AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> The upstream of zblast released 1.2 after he released 1.2pre.
> The problem is that dpkg thinks 1.2 is older than 1.2pre.
> So I asked him what I should do. He picked 1.2.1 for
> the Debian package, saying "I very rarely use x.y.z
> v
On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 03:08:49AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> The upstream of zblast released 1.2 after he released 1.2pre.
> The problem is that dpkg thinks 1.2 is older than 1.2pre.
> So I asked him what I should do. He picked 1.2.1 for
> the Debian package, saying "I very rarely use x.y.z
>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 11:33:24AM -0800, Ossama Othman wrote:
> dh_testroot: You must run this as root (or use fakeroot).
> make: *** [install-stamp] Error 1
> debuild: fatal error at line 322:
> dpkg-buildpackage failed!
>
> I do have fakeroot installed. "fakeroot dh_testroot" succeeds, too.
>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 11:33:24AM -0800, Ossama Othman wrote:
> dh_testroot: You must run this as root (or use fakeroot).
> make: *** [install-stamp] Error 1
> debuild: fatal error at line 322:
> dpkg-buildpackage failed!
>
> I do have fakeroot installed. "fakeroot dh_testroot" succeeds, too.
>
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 09:53:45AM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> Debian source package trees (again, either native or non-native) can build &
> install by "make all && make install" provided the Debian maintainer has not
> "tainted" the Makefiles with code
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 12:22:42AM +0500, Victor Porton wrote:
> Well, what about these native packages?
They only differ in the form of the source package, not the mechanism by
which they are built.
> Do, I understand correctly that for native packages the installation
> directories are 'fictiv
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 09:53:45AM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> Debian source package trees (again, either native or non-native) can build &
> install by "make all && make install" provided the Debian maintainer has not
> "tainted" the Makefiles with
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 12:22:42AM +0500, Victor Porton wrote:
> Well, what about these native packages?
They only differ in the form of the source package, not the mechanism by
which they are built.
> Do, I understand correctly that for native packages the installation
> directories are 'ficti
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 09:21:11AM -0500, Craig wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Here's what i'm trying to do:
>
> * Create a .DEB that contains only 2 simple binaries, plus a couple of
> dependencies. (i'll have another package, tar ball for right now, for the
> source code).
Deb packages contain binari
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 09:21:11AM -0500, Craig wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Here's what i'm trying to do:
>
> * Create a .DEB that contains only 2 simple binaries, plus a couple of
> dependencies. (i'll have another package, tar ball for right now, for the
> source code).
Deb packages contain binar
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 03:41:54PM +0100, Stefan Hornburg (Racke) wrote:
> File a bug against ftp.debian.org to remove the stale packages.
But don't do that until the package is accepted under the new name.
Ben
--
nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian http
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 03:41:54PM +0100, Stefan Hornburg (Racke) wrote:
> File a bug against ftp.debian.org to remove the stale packages.
But don't do that until the package is accepted under the new name.
Ben
--
nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Debian htt
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 08:35:52AM -0500, Adam Lazur wrote:
> Hmm, I didn't think it fit well last night, but after I've slept for a
> while and now have re-read that portion of the FHS, I guess it could be
> considered "state information".
Compare with /var/lib/mailman (particularly /var/lib/mail
On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 08:35:52AM -0500, Adam Lazur wrote:
> Hmm, I didn't think it fit well last night, but after I've slept for a
> while and now have re-read that portion of the FHS, I guess it could be
> considered "state information".
Compare with /var/lib/mailman (particularly /var/lib/mai
39 matches
Mail list logo
