> I am thinking about joining Debian someday soon, as a developer.
> Was wondering, what type of experience is required?
Creating a package. :)
> Also - is there a resource available that describes the writing of
> .deb packages?
http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/
> I am thinking about joining Debian someday soon, as a developer.
> Was wondering, what type of experience is required?
Creating a package. :)
> Also - is there a resource available that describes the writing of
> .deb packages?
http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/
> Is it available on any public news server I can run slrnpull from?
Try news.openrock.net. Lemme know if it doesn't work.
Will
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTEC
> the list gated to a newsgroup somewhere?
Should be gatewayed to linux.debian.devel ...
Will
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTEC
> The current package also depends on mail-transport-agent, which is needed
> (by both versions) to send mail. But, if you don't use the mail feature, it
> is not needed. Should I really have this as a dependency?
>
> Should I change them both to Recommends, or even Suggests?
You could put each b
> Can anyone tell me where i can find (or what program to use) to generate
> such a Package.gz file?
take a look at "man dpkg-scanpackages".
Will
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED
What program are you talking about?
> The program needs a patch to be applied to the kernel... How can you mark
> this need in the package ? Should it be automatized?
It's a patch not included with the standard kernel source? I don't know
if there's an official policy on what to do with these;
the "tclmidi" package has several open bugs, even though that package was
removed from the distribution several months ago (it currently exists in
stable, but won't in frozen or unstable).
Can I just close those bugs, or will it happen automagically at some
point?
> Does it handle pristine upstream source?
Yes, via the cvs-upgrade program. See /usr/doc/cvs-buildpackage/HOWTO.gz
Will
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [E
> Your .changes file must say you are uploading the .orig.tar.gz
> else dinstall has no reason to look for it. I think the option to
> dpkg-buildpackage is -sa or similar.
Indeed, this was the problem. I solved the problem by passing the -sa
option into cvs-buildpackage, which passed it on to dpk
I uploaded a new version of fsviewer a while back, and got this from
dinstall:
> Rejected: md5sum for
> dists/potato/main/source/x11/fsviewer_0.2.3.orig.tar.gz doesn't match
> fsviewer_0.2.3-2.dsc. Rejected: md5sum for
> dists/woody/main/source/x11/fsviewer_0.2.3.orig.tar.gz doesn't match
> fsvi
> I'm just wondering, is there any easy way to increase debian sub-revisions?
> (eg. from 0.4.2-1 to 0.4.2-2?). I've looked through heaps of docs and I
> can't find anything ... can anyone help me? I'm using debhelper, if that
> helps...
This is controlled by the changelog entries. Make a new deb
> Except for one point. cvs seems to mangle the time stamps, so whenever I
Check the time on your local box. Are you using ntp to keep your linux
machine in sync with the rest of the world?
Will
__
> smartupstools .rpm package puts files in /usr/cgi-bin & /usr/misc.
> may I put the files there in .deb too, or should I put them elsewhere?
They probably belong elsewhere. What are the files?
> (hm - am I asking the question on the right list?)
Yes. :)
> Devel_std etc...). Does anyone have any pointers to where I might
> find the source code which generates this screen and process this info?
I would check out the boot-floppies package:
http://packages.debian.org/boot-floppies
Wil
> Just to avoid giving the impression thast this is the only way
> to produce Debian packages, here is an alternate: look at
> http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/rules/, and you shall see a number
> of ./debian directories for various packages that have been hand
> crafted, and yet retai
> I have some very old bug reports on some of my packages outstanding. I
> cannot reproduce the problems and the reporters don't answer my
> queries about the bugs.
> Is it correct to simply close these bug reports after waiting one
> month for an answer?
That's probably what I would do. If they
> > You've got to be careful how you phrase that -- it could cause some pretty
> > serious problems if / isn't explicitly owned by some package, for example.
> > Otherwise, I agree. Debian claims jurisdiction over everything except
> > /opt, /usr/local, and /home ...
> Hrmm -- hehe -- pretty goo
> Manually getting rid of those *~'s isn't really an answer, either. I think
> a package should have the right to rm -r any directory that's not used by
> another package, empty or not.
You've got to be careful how you phrase that -- it could cause some pretty
serious problems if / isn't explicit
[Since this question relates strongly to the way debian handles tcl in
general, I've cc'd the maintainer of tcl8].
A package I'm responsible for (tclmidi) installs a _whole_mess_ of man
pages. Some go in section 1, as they're executable tcl scripts. The
others, though, are put by default in
> my /usr/local . I am hitting a stopper due to conflicting documentation
> on debmake, debhelper, etc, and confusion on which is better. Mr Will
> Lowe's documentation at Developer's Corner at debian seems out-of-date.
Yup. I've debated asking the Documentation coordinator to remove it
> reply back... Any suggestions of what to do if I would actually like to
> get it and package it... I've actually almost got a working binary package
> for i386 built on my Intel machine... could even work on a Alpha port with
> my other machine...
Just package it. If the person's a year behind
> First one: it means you have a shared library in your package without
> providing dependency information about it. In this case it shouldn't
How do I go about creaing this info?
> Second one: shared library objects are compiled in a special way
> (command line option -fPIC) so that they can be
> First one: it means you have a shared library in your package without
> providing dependency information about it. In this case it shouldn't
> cause a problem because the shared object looks like it'll only be
> used by rosegarden.
Aha. Fixed, thanks.
Can anybody give me a rundown on the poli
> but that would put data in /usr/X11R6/share and that would be bad..
Oh. Right. I'm facing a similar problem with Rosegarden. Probably I'll
have to edit the configure.in to install that stuff in /usr/share instead.
> whereas dh_make produced one that did this (from memory):
> #!/bin/sh
> if te
Can anybody tell me what this means, and what to do about it?
W: rosegarden: shared-lib-without-dependency-information
usr/X11R6/lib/rosegarden/petal/Petal.so
E: rosegarden: shlib-with-non-pic-code
usr/X11R6/lib/rosegarden/petal/Petal.so
> debmake decided to run configure --prefix=/usr, should i add a
> --bindir=/usr/bin/X11 argument to it?
use "--prefix=/usr/X11R6", and that'll get rid of the need for --bindir
and all the rest.
I'd switch to using debhelper, also -- use of debmake is depreciated (I'm
converting my packages now)
Does anybody know what's wrong here? I run dpkg-buildpackage and get
this:
rm -rf debian/tmp debian/files* core debian/substvars
dpkg-source -b rosegarden-2.1
dpkg-source: building rosegarden using existing rosegarden_2.1.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: failure: Unable to rename
rosegarden_2.1.orig.tar
> maybe dev-mentors might be better.
> > Lots of the posts on this list really belong on -user. Is it possible
> > that the word "mentors" attracts newbies?
Or packaging-help?
Will
--
Lots of the posts on this list really belong on -user. Is it possible
that the word "mentors" attracts newbies?
Will
--
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTE
> of some sort of ID (Drivers license etc) if I couldn't produce a
> signed/varified pgp key. I can provide a photocopy of my drivers license
> no problem but I don't know where to send the copy too. This is the
> question, where do I send it? I'll also send a print out of my
> application along
> I'm reading "Debian packaging manual" and "Debian policy manual". That's
> enough, or there is a better tutorial? The packaging manual looks as a
try
http://www.debian.org/~elphick/manuals.html/maint-guide/index.html
Will
--
I've been around for a while, I have a couple of packages. I'm about to
undertake packaging my first set of libraries, and I'm not sure what's
different. I understand that a stripped copy of the library goes into the
{package}lib.deb, and that a debugging-enabled copy (and header files) go
in
> As the author of one of those documents, (Will Lowe is the other but I
> don't know if he is still working on it.) I agree completely. I no longer
> use debstd in my own packages and don't recommend it to others.
I haven't had a need to upload any packages since the h
34 matches
Mail list logo
