> More of an operational point of view,
> it's difficult to look at source code.
> Bug #250202 is the one to look at; which seems to have a solution.
With that page, I've got a much better understanding of what and the
advantages and disadvantages of double-tarred source.
I'll look into svn-bui
Hi
> > Also, how does this work WRT pristine source requirements? I notice
> > that coreutils embedded upstream tarball is pristine, but of course
> > the .orig is not.
>
> That's the kind of question I'm looking answers for. In the developer
> manual,
> it is clearly said that the .orig.tar.
On 2 November 2005 15:54, Darren Salt wrote:
> Use lsdiff (in patchutils) to find out if a patch is in the wrong place:
>
> $ lsdiff -z ../foo_1.2.3-4.diff.gz | grep -v /debian/
>
> You can move the offending patches into a file in debian/patches/ with
> filterdiff and dpatch-edit-patch:
>
> $
I demand that François-Denis Gonthier may or may not have written...
> On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>>> I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang
>>> packages. The biggest change is that the package is now fully using
>>> dpatch, *but*, basing myself on
On 2 November 2005 10:42, Justin Pryzby wrote:
[Changed to a more suitable subject]
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:08:13AM -0500, Fran?ois-Denis Gonthier wrote:
> > On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the er
Justin Pryzby wrote:
for example), I've put the compressed upstream right in the package. It
> Also, how does this work WRT pristine source requirements? I notice
> that coreutils embedded upstream tarball is pristine, but of course
> the .orig is not.
IMO this isn't a political problem - t
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:08:13AM -0500, Fran?ois-Denis Gonthier wrote:
> On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang
> > > packages. The biggest change is that the package is now fully using
> > > dpatch, *bu
On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang
> > packages. The biggest change is that the package is now fully using
> > dpatch, *but*, basing myself on some other package I've seen (coreutils
> > for example), I've p
On 2 November 2005 09:13, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang
> > packages. The biggest change is that the package is now fully using
> > dpatch, *but*, basing myself on some other package I've seen (coreutils
> > for example), I've p
Hi,
> I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang packages.
> The biggest change is that the package is now fully using dpatch, *but*,
> basing myself on some other package I've seen (coreutils for example), I've
> put the compressed upstream right in the package. It is
hello,
I was just wondering.
I'm working on some big changes for the new upstream of the erlang packages.
The biggest change is that the package is now fully using dpatch, *but*,
basing myself on some other package I've seen (coreutils for example), I've
put the compressed upstream right in t
11 matches
Mail list logo
