Re: Deleting files from .orig on unpack?

2010-04-08 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Jonathan Niehof [100408 01:56]: > I'm working with a package where upstream uses a flat Makefile and the > Debian package has been converted to automake. This means the Makefile > from the .orig.tar.gz gets clobbered in the build process, and then > removed entirely on clean. So build; clean isn

Re: flow of things rules/debhelper (still confused)

2010-04-08 Thread Osamu Aoki
Hi, On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 04:19:33PM +0200, jmroth+...@iip.lu wrote: > Guys, > I am still confused about my initial question when which binary-* > target in debian/rules is called. > > This also concerns: > - http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-dreq.en.html#s-rules > - http://www.debian.or

Re: flow of things rules/debhelper (still confused)

2010-04-08 Thread Osamu Aoki
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 06:48:26PM +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > Well, this is just wrong. As you can find in Debian Policy, the binary > target has to depend on binary-arch and -indep which is not provided > here. There isn't much to document. It's standard Makefile behavior. Excuse me. I can n

Re: flow of things rules/debhelper (still confused)

2010-04-08 Thread Osamu Aoki
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 11:23:02AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: ... > In general, I find mixing explicit target definitions and wildcard rules > really confusing. Yes, indeed. I will steal this phrase into maint-guide as footnote :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.deb

Re: flow of things rules/debhelper (still confused)

2010-04-08 Thread Tanguy Ortolo
Le jeudi 08 avril 2010, Osamu Aoki a écrit : > I do not know active use of binary-indep by itself. Anyone knows? > (I know some makefile has binary: binary-indep binary-arch.) I do not know what you mean by “active use”, but I do have a package which debian/rules contains a featured binary-indep:

Re: GPG Signature

2010-04-08 Thread Pablo Duboue
On Monday 22 March 2010, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > >> I added myself as requesting a GPG signature in the Cleveland area > >> from a DD ( the only thing holding me back from starting

Re: GPG Signature

2010-04-08 Thread Paul Tagliamonte
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Pablo Duboue wrote: > On Monday 22 March 2010, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Paul Wise wrote: >> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Paul Tagliamonte > wrote: >> >> I added myself as requesting a GPG signature in the Cleveland area >>

RFS: emerillon

2010-04-08 Thread Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "emerillon". * Package name: emerillon Version : 0.1.1-1 Upstream Author : Novopia Solutions Inc. * URL : http://www.novopia.com/emerillon/ * License : GPL Section : utils It builds these binary

RFS: libgstreamerjava (Java bindings for Gstreamer, LGPLv3)

2010-04-08 Thread Samuel Lucas Vaz de Mello
Hi, I need a sponsor/mentor for the libgstreamerjava package, Java bindings for the Gstreamer Multimedia Framework. Short information: - Programming Language: Java - ITP Bug: #576984 - Homepage: http://code.google.com/p/gstreamer-java/ - Version: 1.3 - Upstream Authors: Andres Colubri, Levente Fa

Re: RFS: emerillon

2010-04-08 Thread Andreas Henriksson
On tor, 2010-04-08 at 22:10 -0400, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote: [...] > Keeping in mind the (off-topic) discussion on bug 575384, the > rationale for having this retrieved from git is that it simplifies (at > least for me) maintaining and regularly building the package, if > nothing else because