Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
properly in debian/rules however, and I was wondering if there were
any packages
> Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
> successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
> than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
> properly in debian/rules however, and I was wondering if there were
> any
Hi all,
I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of
the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
The program I found contained too many bugs to be considered for
packaging (IMO), but should, in
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
>
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of the
> program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
>
> The program I found contained
Neil McGovern wrote:
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of
> the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
IMHO only programs that are of use by reasonable many people should be submitted
to the debian archive. Thus, if the buggyness of the program r
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Rottmann wrote:
>>>However - some of these apps are useful in their own right (such as a
>>>data viewer or conversion tool). Is it ok to place a symlink from
>>>/usr/bin to /usr/share/libfoo-apps/bin so that users can invoke these
>>>apps dire
Dear all,
some days ago someone filed an obviously bogus bug against a package
I'm co-maintaining (nautilus-media, bug #197352), i.e. he complained
about being unable to install the gnome-core metapackage on hppa
because nautilus-media on which gnome-core depends is unavailable on
that arch.
The
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:30:26 +0100, Neil McGovern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi all, I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing
> of the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
If yo
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 12:30:45PM -0400, Morgon Kanter wrote:
> Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
> successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
> than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
> properly in
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 10:43:25PM +0200, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> some days ago someone filed an obviously bogus bug against a package
> I'm co-maintaining (nautilus-media, bug #197352), i.e. he complained
> about being unable to install the gnome-core metapackage on hppa
> because nautilus-media on
I know this question (or a similar one) comes up periodically both here
and on -devel. Unfortunately, I have to ask it again, because I can't
find a complete solution to my problem.
Because I still use it, I adopted ncompress a few months ago when it was
orphaned. I spent a night or two and clos
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> What is the generally accepted way within the "Debian culture" to deal
> with such reports? Do I close the bug right away? Do I downgrade it?
> Do I reassign it (in this case to gstreamer)?
You can reassign it with the priority and bug title changed to w
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Because I still use it[...]
I have to ask...why? :-)
--
- mdz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Because I still use it[...]
>
> I have to ask...why? :-)
Well, I think you're poking fun at me, but I'm going to pretend that I
didn't notice and give you an answer anyway. :)
The main reason I took it is that my Cedar Backup package (not
officially in Debian) supports tar.Z backups and henc
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then also m68k and
> mips befor
Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Anyway, now that I've done all of this cleanup, I've realized that the
> package won't move into testing until I build it on all of the
> architectures it was built on for woody. Right now, according to the
> excuses list, I am missing alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, powerpc, s3
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As a side-note, this package
>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>its license is non-free.
I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
it slashdotted within the past month.) If y
Blars Blarson wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>As a side-note, this package
>>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>>its license is non-free.
> I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> it slashdotted w
Hi, mentors.
Few days ago I tried to convince you to upload pose, a Palm OS Emulator.
Today I pretend you to upload the skins for this emulator, a package called
pose-skins.
The sources can be get by visiting:
http://www.superiodico.net/debian/upload/pose-skins/
And the package info comes her
> > I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
> > it slashdotted within the past month.) If you can confirm this, just
> > wait till then and move it to main.
> Unfortunately it seems that that's only true for very us-centric
> people, not Debian.
Yes - when I dug into
> Chroots are usually accessible with 'dchroot ' when and where
> they are available.
Got it. I was able to do that on debussy for arm, and m68k on crest
(although it turns out m6k autobuilds at least some non-free already).
> This is one of the reasons why non-free sucks.
I understand now. :-)
> If I were you I'd maybe build it on some of these architectures if I
> felt motivated to do so, and then file a bug on ftp.debian.org to get
> the old builds removed for the other architectures that are no longer
> autobuilding non-free software. If they don't want to autobuild it, why
> waste th
Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
properly in debian/rules however, and I was wondering if there were
any packages
> Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
> successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
> than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
> properly in debian/rules however, and I was wondering if there were
> any
Hi all,
I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of
the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
The program I found contained too many bugs to be considered for
packaging (IMO), but should, in
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
>
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of the
> program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
>
> The program I found contained
Neil McGovern wrote:
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing of
> the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
IMHO only programs that are of use by reasonable many people should be submitted
to the debian archive. Thus, if the buggyness of the program r
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Rottmann wrote:
>>>However - some of these apps are useful in their own right (such as a
>>>data viewer or conversion tool). Is it ok to place a symlink from
>>>/usr/bin to /usr/share/libfoo-apps/bin so that users can invoke these
>>>apps dire
Dear all,
some days ago someone filed an obviously bogus bug against a package
I'm co-maintaining (nautilus-media, bug #197352), i.e. he complained
about being unable to install the gnome-core metapackage on hppa
because nautilus-media on which gnome-core depends is unavailable on
that arch.
The
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:30:26 +0100, Neil McGovern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hi all, I was wondering over this (partially hypothetical) question:
> If I find a program that contains quite a few bugs (causes crashing
> of the program, no external data loss), should it be packaged?
If yo
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 12:30:45PM -0400, Morgon Kanter wrote:
> Are there any packages that do this? In order to fully build gnu-crypto
> successfully, I will need to be able to have a seperate build directory
> than the source directory. I have been having trouble setting this up
> properly in
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 10:43:25PM +0200, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> some days ago someone filed an obviously bogus bug against a package
> I'm co-maintaining (nautilus-media, bug #197352), i.e. he complained
> about being unable to install the gnome-core metapackage on hppa
> because nautilus-media on
I know this question (or a similar one) comes up periodically both here
and on -devel. Unfortunately, I have to ask it again, because I can't
find a complete solution to my problem.
Because I still use it, I adopted ncompress a few months ago when it was
orphaned. I spent a night or two and clos
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> What is the generally accepted way within the "Debian culture" to deal
> with such reports? Do I close the bug right away? Do I downgrade it?
> Do I reassign it (in this case to gstreamer)?
You can reassign it with the priority and bug title changed to w
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Because I still use it[...]
I have to ask...why? :-)
--
- mdz
> > Because I still use it[...]
>
> I have to ask...why? :-)
Well, I think you're poking fun at me, but I'm going to pretend that I
didn't notice and give you an answer anyway. :)
The main reason I took it is that my Cedar Backup package (not
officially in Debian) supports tar.Z backups and henc
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:19:21PM -0500, Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> According to the machines list, I can get access to a machine running
> sid for hppa, powerpc, sparc and mipsel. This leaves alpha, arm, ia64
> and s390 before ncompress can move into testing, and then also m68k and
> mips befor
Kenneth Pronovici wrote:
> Anyway, now that I've done all of this cleanup, I've realized that the
> package won't move into testing until I build it on all of the
> architectures it was built on for woody. Right now, according to the
> excuses list, I am missing alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, powerpc, s3
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As a side-note, this package
>is non-free because of issues surrounding the LZW patent, not because
>its license is non-free.
I've think that patent is about to expire. (June 20? I think I saw
it slashdotted within the past month.) If y
40 matches
Mail list logo
