On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 02:20:59PM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> > We want to provide a binary distribution to our end users, and we want
> > to have best possible experience, right?
>
> We want to provide a libre / *free* distribution to our end users.
> Anything else is just tolerated / hoste
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , 2014-09-02, 11:56:
> >2. Move it to non-free and get it vetoed as auto-buildable
> >(requires that its license and the license of its non-free
> >build-dependencies allow his). This isn't really supposed to
> >work, but AFAIK
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 05:43:15PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > It requires manually vetoing which packages from non-free are safe to
> > be used as contrib build dependencies (much like we manually veto what
> > packages from non-free can be autobuilt).
>
> Why would we need to manually select
* Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , 2014-09-02, 11:56:
2. Move it to non-free and get it vetoed as auto-buildable (requires
that its license and the license of its non-free build-dependencies
allow his). This isn't really supposed to work, but AFAIK we trust
people will not abuse it, so it should
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
>> Sure. The bug #690282 is two years old. All I ask here is how this can
>> be changed, or what the effective way is to support all platforms
>> here -- especially for a DM without abusing his mentor.
>
> It is not trivial to address this request.
>
> It requir
On Tue, 02 Sep 2014, Ole Streicher wrote:
> The policy manual says (2.2.2):
>
> | The contrib archive area contains supplemental packages intended to
> | work with the Debian distribution, but which require software outside
> | of the distribution to either build or function.
>
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Paul Wise writes:
>> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> >> I am just looking for a solution for this problem...
>> >
>> > It might be easier to port the software to something that isn't
>> >
Jonathan Perry-Houts writes:
> Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but have you looked in to
> plplot? There is a program that claims to assist in converting pgplot
> dependencies to plplot for exactly this
> purpose. http://pg2plplot.sourceforge.net/
I'll have a look into that.
Thank
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Paul Wise writes:
> > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Ole Streicher wrote:
> >> I am just looking for a solution for this problem...
> >
> > It might be easier to port the software to something that isn't
> > non-free so the package can be put in main.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but have you looked in to
plplot? There is a program that claims to assist in converting pgplot
dependencies to plplot for exactly this purpose.
http://pg2plplot.sourceforge.net/
On August 20, 2014 9
Paul Wise writes:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Ole Streicher wrote:
>
>> I am just looking for a solution for this problem...
>
> It might be easier to port the software to something that isn't
> non-free so the package can be put in main.
As you can see from the bug, dependency from pgplot
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Ole Streicher wrote:
> I am just looking for a solution for this problem...
It might be easier to port the software to something that isn't
non-free so the package can be put in main.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi Ole,
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 10:07:31AM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Andreas Tille writes:
> > On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 01:31:40PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
> >>
> >> And, the question remains: how do I effectively shall maintain such a
> >> package without burding a heavy load to my sponso
Andreas Tille writes:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 01:31:40PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
>>
>> And, the question remains: how do I effectively shall maintain such a
>> package without burding a heavy load to my sponsor and possibly to other
>> people (porters)? I am willing to do my job here, but I
On 2014-08-18 09:46 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Ole,
>
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 01:31:40PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
>>
>> And, the question remains: how do I effectively shall maintain such a
>> package without burding a heavy load to my sponsor and possibly to other
>> people (porters)?
Hi Ole,
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 01:31:40PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
>
> And, the question remains: how do I effectively shall maintain such a
> package without burding a heavy load to my sponsor and possibly to other
> people (porters)? I am willing to do my job here, but I see myself quite
>
Jakub Wilk writes:
> i386 packages can be built in a chroot. For anything else, you can ask on a
> porters' mailing list[0]; although it might not be worth the effort.
OK, my sponsor granted be upload rights for the package yet. So, I first
uploaded a new version (source + amd64), and then built
Jakub Wilk writes:
> [Out of curiosity, is there a reason your name in the From field is
> written in a mixture of Latin and Cyrillic scripts?]
That is my usenet-setup; it just makes it difficult do google my
postings by my name while the name is still human-readable.
> * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 19:49:
>>> i386 packages can be built in a chroot. For anything else, you can
>>> ask on a porters' mailing list[0]; although it might not be worth
>>> the effort.
>>
>> Since I am not a DD yet, this would mean that I have to ask for
>> access to
* Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 19:49:
i386 packages can be built in a chroot. For anything else, you can ask
on a porters' mailing list[0]; although it might not be worth the
effort.
Since I am not a DD yet, this would mean that I have to ask for access
to all porter boxes, build the binaries,
[Out of curiosity, is there a reason your name in the From field is
written in a mixture of Latin and Cyrillic scripts?]
* Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-15, 10:15:
I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
(pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr wrote:
> One more question:
> Jakub Wilk writes:
> > * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 09:46:
> >> I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
> >> (pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local pbuilder
> >> (after adding
One more question:
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 09:46:
>> I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
>> (pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local pbuilder
>> (after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
>
>
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> Initial priorities are set by the ftpmaster that accepted the package from
> NEW. They may, or may not match the ones in the package's priority field.
>
> i.e. that field is an _advisory_ field.
This is not what is in the policy. The policy says, that it is
On Thu, 14 Aug 2014, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
> > Also, dak is canonical for priorities, and values in binary packages
> > are only used on initial upload to set the initial override value.
> > From that point forward, changes have to be made via bugs filed with
> > ftp.debian.o
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr) writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> I'm pretty sure that default is applied before dak ever sees the binary
>> package priority. (In other words, it's expanded via the build process
>> before priorities are added to the *.changes file.)
> So it is a debhe
Russ Allbery writes:
> debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr) writes:
>> Ansgar Burchardt writes:
>
>>> As I don't really care about Priority and Section for source packages, I
>>> haven't thought further about this and dak currently uses misc:extra for
>>> all of them.
>
>> Policy, 5.6.6: Pri
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr) writes:
> Ansgar Burchardt writes:
>> As I don't really care about Priority and Section for source packages, I
>> haven't thought further about this and dak currently uses misc:extra for
>> all of them.
> Policy, 5.6.6: Priority
> | This field represent
Ansgar Burchardt writes:
> As I don't really care about Priority and Section for source packages, I
> haven't thought further about this and dak currently uses misc:extra for
> all of them.
Policy, 5.6.6: Priority
| This field represents how important it is that the user have the
| package insta
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 10:08:
I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
(pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local pbuilder
(after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
>>>This is bug #6
* Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 10:08:
I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
(pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local
pbuilder (after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
This is bug #690282.
Hmm, so how do I build the
* Ansgar Burchardt , 2014-08-14, 10:26:
Also, I am wondering about the section and priority: The control file
[3] and the dsc file has contrib/science and optional, but the PTS
lists them as contrib/misc and extra. Who changed that, why is this
done, and shouldn't the uploaded/maintainer be inf
Hi,
debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr) writes:
> Also, I am wondering about the section and priority: The control file
> [3] and the dsc file has contrib/science and optional, but the PTS lists
> them as contrib/misc and extra. Who changed that, why is this done, and
> shouldn't the uploade
Jakub Wilk writes:
> * Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 09:46:
>> I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
>> (pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local pbuilder
>> (after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
>
> This is bug #690282
* Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr , 2014-08-14, 09:46:
I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
(pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local
pbuilder (after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
This is bug #690282.
Also, I am wondering about
Hi,
I've uploaded a package to contrib [1], that needs a non-free package
(pgplot5) as build dependency. While it builds nicely on my local
pbuilder (after adding non-free), it fails to build on the buildds [2].
Is there a special thingy that I missed when I specified the dependency?
Also, I am
36 matches
Mail list logo
