On 06/29/01 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/tmp/DEBIAN/control' near line 6
> package `bloksi':
> `Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
> dh_builddeb: command returned error code
> make: *** [binary-indep] Error 1
>
> It
On 06/29/01 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> this is a near-copy of a mail I sent yesterday to debian-perl. I
> think it is relevant to this list.
>
> I just managed to build a working .deb from a perl program (a game
> that uses gtk and gnome), after a fair amount of cruft (*).
>
> I build it w/
On 06/29/01 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/tmp/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package
>`bloksi':
> `Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
> dh_builddeb: command returned error code
> make: *** [binary-indep] Error 1
>
> It
On 06/29/01 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> this is a near-copy of a mail I sent yesterday to debian-perl. I
> think it is relevant to this list.
>
> I just managed to build a working .deb from a perl program (a game
> that uses gtk and gnome), after a fair amount of cruft (*).
>
> I build it w
On 06/05/01 Michèl Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Please LART upstream heavily and give the packages a
> > proper name. That
> > tradition has done it wrong is no reason to continue
> > doing it the
> > wrong way.
The version numbering used upstream is completely reasonable:
check the archives for th
On 06/05/01 Michèl Alexandre Salim wrote:
> > Please LART upstream heavily and give the packages a
> > proper name. That
> > tradition has done it wrong is no reason to continue
> > doing it the
> > wrong way.
The version numbering used upstream is completely reasonable:
check the archives for t
On 02/23/01 Sam TH wrote:
> > It's missing build-dependencies.
>
> Added. However, is there a good way to check build-depends, or do you
> just have to guess?
There are some tools discussed on debian-devel that help
finding dependencies, search the archive for them. The most
predictable way, tho
On 02/23/01 Sam TH wrote:
> > It's missing build-dependencies.
>
> Added. However, is there a good way to check build-depends, or do you
> just have to guess?
There are some tools discussed on debian-devel that help
finding dependencies, search the archive for them. The most
predictable way, th
On 02/23/01 Sam TH wrote:
> I'm an illustrious member of the NM queue, and have completed a
> package that I would be very grateful if people would check for me, to
> make sure that I haven't missed anything. It produces no errors or
> warnings with lintian.
>
> The package is uf-view, and it's
On 02/23/01 Sam TH wrote:
> I'm an illustrious member of the NM queue, and have completed a
> package that I would be very grateful if people would check for me, to
> make sure that I haven't missed anything. It produces no errors or
> warnings with lintian.
>
> The package is uf-view, and it's
On Fri, May 07, 1999 at 01:13:04AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> That's OK, except that this package currently has 258 symlinks, and
> both the number and details are likely to change on a fairly regular
> basis. The thought of keeping that up to date is quite terrifying.
> There must surely be a
11 matches
Mail list logo
