Your message dated Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:37:04 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Closing #658105
has caused the Debian Bug report #658105,
regarding RFS: qastools
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Sebastian H. wrote:
> qasconfig - ALSA configuration browser
> qashctl - mixer for ALSA's High level Control Interface
> qasmixer - ALSA mixer for the desktop
I'm going to sponsor your package. However, please take in
consideration the opportunity to co-ma
Sorry, copy'n paste mistake.
> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
>
> dget -x
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qastools/qastools_0.17.0-1.dsc
Current version is
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qastools/qastools_0.17.1-1.dsc
--
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.17.1-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License : GPL-3
S
A Debian user hinted that the painting was totally screwed in
experimental ( Qt 4.8 ).
That's fixed in the new package:
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qastools/qastools_0.17.1-1.dsc
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
Well, still true.
Btw. the ITP i
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.17.0-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License : GPL-3
Section : sound
It builds those binary pac
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
>
> * Package name: qastools
>Version : 0.16.2-1
>Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
> * URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
> * License : GPL-3
>Section : sound
>
> I
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.16.2-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License : GPL-3
Section : sound
It builds those binary pa
> The naming scheme then would look like this:
>
> qastools-common - QasTools common files
> qasconfig - ALSA configuration browser
> qashctl - High level Control Interface ALSA mixer
> qasmixer - ALSA mixer for the desktop
Rebuilt and uploaded:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/qastools
dget -
>> It builds those binary packages:
>>
>> qastools-common - QasTools: Common files
>> qastools-qasconfig - QasTools: ALSA configuration browser
>> qastools-qashctl - QasTools: High level Control Interface ALSA mixer
>> qastools-qasmixer - QasTools: ALSA mixer for the desktop
>
> I understand
Am 15.12.2011 15:59, schrieb Sebastian H.:
It builds those binary packages:
qastools-common - QasTools: Common files
qastools-qasconfig - QasTools: ALSA configuration browser
qastools-qashctl - QasTools: High level Control Interface ALSA mixer
qastools-qasmixer - QasTools: ALSA mixer for t
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
The current multipackage version is now uploaded to mentors.
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.16.1-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License
>>> A few comments about your man pages:
>>>
>>> - Your .TH line is "wrong" (you shouldn't use the command name and
>>> section number a second time after the date); have a look at
>>> /usr/share/man/man7/man-pages.7.gz for a better example.
>>>
>>> - qasconfig and qashctl don't take an
>>> So? It's difficult for me to get your point when you're asking questions
>>> without making any statement. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
>>
>> Depending on the answers, my statements would be different. In general,
>> I see to 'primary' reasons for a package split in a package with kind
Sebastian H. wrote:
> > A few comments about your man pages:
> >
> > - Your .TH line is "wrong" (you shouldn't use the command name and
> > section number a second time after the date); have a look at
> > /usr/share/man/man7/man-pages.7.gz for a better example.
> >
> > - qasconfig and
> A few comments about your man pages:
>
> - Your .TH line is "wrong" (you shouldn't use the command name and
> section number a second time after the date); have a look at
> /usr/share/man/man7/man-pages.7.gz for a better example.
>
> - qasconfig and qashctl don't take any options; p
Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-12-13, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> > So? It's difficult for me to get your point when you're asking questions
> > without making any statement. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
>
> Depending on the answers, my statements would be different. In general,
> I see to 'pr
On 2011-12-14, Sebastian H. wrote:
> I've made a quick build.
>
> qastools-common_0.16.1-1_all.deb 23988 bytes
> qastools-qasconfig_0.16.1-1_amd64.deb 61768 bytes
> qastools-qashctl_0.16.1-1_amd64.deb 274986 bytes
> qastools-qasmixer_0.16.1-1_amd64.deb 309520 bytes
>
> versus
>
> qastool
Am 13.12.2011 20:22, schrieb Sune Vuorela:
> On 2011-12-13, Benoît Knecht wrote:
>> Sebastian H. wrote:
Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
improvement forcing users to install both tool
>>> I haven't looked into the details, but I don't think you need to patch
>>> your CMakelists.txt at all. Simply use debian/${package}.install files
>>> to tell debhelper which files belong to which binary package (see
>>> dh_install(1)).
>>
>> That's looks even easier.
>> But together with the ma
On 2011-12-13, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> So? It's difficult for me to get your point when you're asking questions
> without making any statement. I'd be grateful if you could clarify.
Hi
Depending on the answers, my statements would be different. In general,
I see to 'primary' reasons for a package
Hi,
>> What's the size of these packages? what's their dependencies?
>
> qasmixer is 1400 kB (give or take), and is around 230 kB. You can see
> their dependency with 'apt-cache depends qasmixer qasconfig'.
>
>> A quick look from here looks like they are qtgui apps that uses
>> libasound ?
>
>
Benoît Knecht writes:
>> > I see the point of having one source package for all the tools, but you
>> > could still make several binary packages from there (as alsa-tools does,
>> > though not for every single utility I must admit).
>>
>> What's the size of these packages? what's their dependenci
Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-12-13, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> > Sebastian H. wrote:
> >> > Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> >> > better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> >> > improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giv
Sebastian H. wrote:
> > Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> > better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> > improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
> > the choice. But maybe I'm missing something
On 2011-12-13, Benoît Knecht wrote:
> Sebastian H. wrote:
>> > Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
>> > better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
>> > improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
>> > the choice. But
> Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
> the choice. But maybe I'm missing something.
The short answe
Sebastian H. wrote:
> >>> Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> >>> better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> >>> improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
> >>> the choice. But maybe I'm missing something.
> >>
>
>>> Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
>>> better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
>>> improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
>>> the choice. But maybe I'm missing something.
>>
>> The short answer is, it mak
Sebastian H. wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
>
> * Package name: qastools
>Version : 0.16.0-1
>Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
> * URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
> * License : GPL-3
>Section : sound
>
>
Sebastian H. wrote:
> > Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> > better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> > improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
> > the choice. But maybe I'm missing something.
>
> The short
Hi Benoît
> Why regroup qasmixer and qasconfig into one package? Wouldn't it be
> better having them Recommend each other? It doesn't seem like an
> improvement forcing users to install both tools instead of giving them
> the choice. But maybe I'm missing something.
The short answer is, it makes
Hi Sebastian,
Sebastian H. wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
>
> * Package name: qastools
>Version : 0.16.0-1
>Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
> * URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
> * License : GPL-3
>Section
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qastools".
* Package name: qastools
Version : 0.16.0-1
Upstream Author : Sebastian Holtermann
* URL : http://xwmw.org/qastools
* License : GPL-3
Section : sound
It builds those binary pa
34 matches
Mail list logo
