Hi,
I am both the upstream author and maintainer-in-waiting for two packages:
wmxmms_scope and ripple. I'm wondering if I still need to have version numbers
such as x.x.x-x rather than x.x.x, even though every change to the actual
debian package warrants a minor version change.
My packages and s
* Michael Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000227 19:03]:
> I am both the upstream author and maintainer-in-waiting for two packages:
> wmxmms_scope and ripple. I'm wondering if I still need to have version numbers
> such as x.x.x-x rather than x.x.x, even though every change to the actual
> debian pa
On Sun, Feb 27, 2000 at 07:10:09PM -0800, Seth R Arnold wrote:
> * Michael Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000227 19:03]:
> Hello there. You would not be alone if you were to not use the x.x.x-x
> notation; apt, dpkg, and alien all forgo the -x bit. I don't know for
> sure that I would recommend it --
* Michael Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [000227 19:54]:
> I'm wondering: is there anything in policy about this? Can't seem to find
> anything, however I may have missed it.
I quickly scanned the policy doc on my machine, and found nothing about
it. The closest I came was in the debian FAQs (section
* "Jordi" == Jordi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jordi> Also, I see that vim, elvis and nvi provide an alternative for
Jordi> "vi", (in vim's case, priority 20). I think it's not against
Jordi> the policy if I provide an alternative for "pico"?
This does not work. For alternatives, all affected pa
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 02:23:32PM +1030, Michael Pearson wrote:
> > Hello there. You would not be alone if you were to not use the x.x.x-x
> > notation; apt, dpkg, and alien all forgo the -x bit. I don't know for
> > sure that I would recommend it -- I think I have read somewhere that
> > missing
Hi,
I am trying to package a program using autoconf, automake, the whole bunch
of it. I have no experiance with that, my problem is, after building the
package, config.in, configure, Makefile, Makefile.am have changed and I get
a huge diff file for the package (I needed several tries to build). I
t
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 02:09:45PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> I am trying to package a program using autoconf, automake, the whole bunch
> of it. I have no experiance with that, my problem is, after building the
> package, config.in, configure, Makefile, Makefile.am have changed and I ge
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 02:29:01PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 02:09:45PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > I am trying to package a program using autoconf, automake, the whole bunch
> > of it. I have no experiance with that, my problem is, after building the
> > packa
On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 02:41:48PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > Actually, they only get rebuilt if the date/time on the .in file is newer
> > than the date/time on the resulting file, which shouldn't be the case
> > usually...
> I think there was some discussion about this wrt Build-Depe
On 27-Feb-2000 Eliot Landrum wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I've been trying to provide complete Debian packages for the 0.9pre2
> release of the Jabber server (jabber.org) but have been stuck on one of the
> packages (etherx) because it is kind of a complicated package.
>
> Not only does etherx instal
I have packaged gat, a GNOME front-end to at and cron. If anyonje is
interested in sponsoring this package it is available at
http://mail.atipa.com/~jpenney/
Thanks.
--
_
||j |||u |||s |||t |||i |||n ||| |||p |||e |||n ||
12 matches
Mail list logo
