Hi there,
the following is a problem that I already had with another package where
a solution for this is also pending. The problem is the following.
A Sourceforge project, for which I create the packages, does have
several files on sf.net. One is the stable tree with a version like
1.4.x and the
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 01:37:33PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> version=3
> http://sf.net//-(.*)\.tar\.gz
>
> Then it will report every development version as a newer version, which
> is wrong. On the sourceforges projet site this files are divided into
> different packages, on called and o
Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 13:37 +0200 schrieb Patrick Schoenfeld:
> Hi there,
>
> the following is a problem that I already had with another package where
> a solution for this is also pending. The problem is the following.
>
> A Sourceforge project, for which I create the packages, does have
>
On 9/20/07, Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've uploaded the package to this address:
> > http://daloradius.sourceforge.net/packages/daloradius-0.9-3/
> > which the debian/ directory in there is what interests us.
>
> why the package? Upload your sources if you want any kind of help
Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> If you are sure that they use only dots and numbers, you may wish to
> use ([\d\.]+) instead of (.*) for versioning.
How would that help me? This would match digits and points as part of
the version instead of everything and so it would also consider 1.5.x to
be newer then 1
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 02:06:48PM +0200, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote:
> How would that help me? This would match digits and points as part of
> the version instead of everything and so it would also consider 1.5.x to
> be newer then 1.4.x.
> Which is right, if one just compares version numbers to eac
Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 13:54 +0200 schrieb Daniel Leidert:
> Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 13:37 +0200 schrieb Patrick Schoenfeld:
[..]
> JFTR: If the project uses stable=even and unstable=odee (middle) version
> numbers, you can also use
>
> http://sf.net//-(\d+\.\d?[02468]\.\d+)\.tar\.gz
Ma
Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 14:34 +0200 schrieb Patrick Schoenfeld:
> Hi,
>
> Daniel Leidert schrieb:
> > Then use
> >
> > http://sf.net//-([\d\.]+)\.tar\.gz
> >
> > I always use this to avoid matching on packages like
> > package-foo-x.y.z.tar.gz, if I want to match on package-x.y.z.tar.gz
>
>
Hi,
Daniel Leidert schrieb:
> Then use
>
> http://sf.net//-([\d\.]+)\.tar\.gz
>
> I always use this to avoid matching on packages like
> package-foo-x.y.z.tar.gz, if I want to match on package-x.y.z.tar.gz
no this does not help me. I think there is a misunderstanding.
The filenames of the pack
Daniel Leidert schrieb:
> Well, you removed the second proposal from my answer, which exactly
> handles this case (I e.g. have a similar problem for gchempaint and
> gnome-chemistry-utils, see the debichem SVN). So I'm wondering, why you
> didn't give it a try?
Well, probably because it is _not_ h
Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A Sourceforge project, for which I create the packages, does have
> several files on sf.net. One is the stable tree with a version like
> 1.4.x and then it has a -devel tree with a version like 1.5.x.
How are the URLs differentiated between stable
Daniel Leidert schrieb:
> version=3
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=14963&package_id=166159
> .*mantisbt\/mantis-([\d\.]+)\.tar\.gz.*
Thanks. I will test that und use that concept for further packages.
Seems to be an example of not seeing the forest cause of so much trees,
Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 15:45 +0200 schrieb Patrick Schoenfeld:
> Daniel Leidert schrieb:
> > Well, you removed the second proposal from my answer, which exactly
> > handles this case (I e.g. have a similar problem for gchempaint and
> > gnome-chemistry-utils, see the debichem SVN). So I'm wond
Am Freitag, den 21.09.2007, 16:03 +0200 schrieb Daniel Leidert:
[..]
> Here is an example that works. However, you need to add some mangle
> rules to make it work downloading the .tar.gz too and naming the file
> correctly.
[snip]
The following seems to work out-of-the-box:
version=3
http://sour
Hello All,
I am working on packaging a front end for MPD called Pitchfork. I was
looking through the source gathering copyright information and noticed
that some components are released under the:
1. Creative Commons License Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic
2. PHP License Version 3.01
Will t
(Charliej has asked a straightforward question about a package's
license and whether it can be in Debian. Accordingly, I'm crossposting
to debian-legal; please follow up on that list. Charliej, please
subscribe to debian-legal to follow the discussion.)
Charliej <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xmms-pulse".
* Package name: xmms-pulse
Version : 0.9.3-1
Upstream Author : Lennart Poettering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://0pointer.de/lennart/projects/xmms-pulse/
* License : GPL v2
Section
17 matches
Mail list logo
