Bug#766148: RFS: sleepenh/1.3.2 [ITA]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sleepenh" * Package name: sleepenh Version : 1.3.2 Upstream Author : was: Pedro Zorzenon Neto , now: native package * License : GPL-2 Section : utils I

Bug#758538: RFS: pysdl2/0.9.3+dfsg2-1 [ITP] -- Python wrapper around SDL2 using ctypes

retitle 758538 RFS: pysdl2/0.9.3+dfsg2-1 [ITP] -- Python wrapper around SDL2 using ctypes thanks Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pysdl2" * Package name: pysdl2 Version : 0.9.3+dfsg2-1 Upstream Author : Marcus von Appen * URL : https://bi

Bug#766177: RFS: libhdf4/4.2.10-3 [RC]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important X-Debbugs-CC: debian-...@lists.debian.org Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libhdf4" * Package name: libhdf4 Version : 4.2.10-3 Upstream Author : HDFGROUP * URL : http://www.hdfgroup.org

Bug#756373: RFS: gnustep-examples/1:1.4.0-1 -- GNUstep example applications

At Sat, 23 Aug 2014 21:52:33 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Some remarks, when they are resolved I think I will upload. > > * copyright file needs updated dates (also in the negative direction) > > * copyright needs to mention the NeXT license and license holder Updated (and also switched to format

libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16+b2) but 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16 is to be installed

Hi all, I'm currently working on the packaging of fw4spl (an open source framework) and I got this error when a run pbuilder : The following packages have unmet dependencies: libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16+b2) but 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16 is to be i

Re: libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16+b2) but 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16 is to be installed

On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 15:23:11 +0200, Corentin Desfarges wrote: > I'm currently working on the packaging of fw4spl (an open source framework) > and I got this error when a run pbuilder : > > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= >

Re: libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16+b2) but 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16 is to be installed

On 2014-10-21 15:23:11, Corentin Desfarges wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm currently working on the packaging of fw4spl (an open source framework) > and I got this error when a run pbuilder : > > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= >

Re: Re: libavifile-0.7c2 : Depends: libavifile-0.7-common (= 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16+b2) but 1:0.7.48~20090503.ds-16 is to be installed

This is #765669 causing libavifile-0.7-dev to be uninstallable after binNMUs. According tohttps://ftp-master.debian.org/deferred.html a fixed version will be available in a day. This is a bug in the avifile source package: https://bugs.debian.org/765669 Oh

Package conflicting with itself?

Hi, Does it makes sense for a package to conflict with itself? $ aptitude show python3-postgresql Package: python3-postgresql New: yes State: installed Automatically installed: no Version: 1.0.2-1+b1 Priority: optional Section: python Maintainer: William Grzybowski Architecture: amd64 Uncompress

Bug#766177: marked as done (RFS: libhdf4/4.2.10-3 [RC])

Your message dated Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:24:25 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: libhdf4/4.2.10-3 [RC] has caused the Debian Bug report #766177, regarding RFS: libhdf4/4.2.10-3 [RC] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is no

Bug#766244: RFS: dwb/20140702hg-1.1 [RC]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my no maintainer upload package "dwb" * Package name: dwb Version : 20140702hg-1.1 Upstream Author : Stefan Bolte * URL : https://bitbucket.org/portix/dwb/download

dump1090: Suggestions/comments for packaging internal web interface.

Hello All, I'm currently working on packaging dump1090[1] which happens to have a jQuery/jQuery-UI based web interface. Upstream leans on Google's CDN to provide the various JS libraries which is not acceptable in a packaged form. I spent some time patching the internal HTTP server to sup

Bug#765989: marked as done (RFS: gnome-system-tools/3.0.0-4 [ITA])

Your message dated Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:54:37 +0300 with message-id <20141021195437.ge18...@rep.kiev.ua> and subject line Re: RFS: gnome-system-tools/3.0.0-4 [ITA] has caused the Debian Bug report #765989, regarding RFS: gnome-system-tools/3.0.0-4 [ITA] to be marked as done. This means that you cla

Bug#765990: marked as done (RFS: liboobs/3.0.0-2 [ITA])

Your message dated Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:56:10 +0300 with message-id <20141021195610.gf18...@rep.kiev.ua> and subject line Re: Bug#765990: Acknowledgement (RFS: liboobs/3.0.0-2 [ITA]) has caused the Debian Bug report #765990, regarding RFS: liboobs/3.0.0-2 [ITA] to be marked as done. This means that

Bug#765992: marked as done (RFS: system-tools-backends/2.10.2-2 [ITA])

Your message dated Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:57:07 +0300 with message-id <20141021195707.gg18...@rep.kiev.ua> and subject line Re: Bug#765992: Acknowledgement (RFS: system-tools-backends/2.10.2-2 [ITA]) has caused the Debian Bug report #765992, regarding RFS: system-tools-backends/2.10.2-2 [ITA] to be m

Bug#765883: RFS: avce00/2.0.0-5

After uploading the package (and filing this RFS) I noticed that the version number was much higher than in wheezy. It appeared that there were two versions mentioned in the changelog in the repository that didn't make their way to unstable in the end. I've therefore adjusted the version number to

Package with CMAKE based C library

Hi everybody, I want to package a library, developed in C (libcmime) which is based on cmake. If I'm right - there should be a) the main package "libcmime" /usr/lib/libcmime.so.0.1 (symlink to the next one) /usr/lib/libcmime.so.0.1.14 b) the dev package "libcmime-dev" /usr/lib/libcmime.so (s

Re: Package with CMAKE based C library

Hi Werner, I just finished working up a CMAKE package that has it's own install target and creates the appropriate directories, manpages etc. I used the basic dh_* Makefile, and did a couple overrides to account for things that were performed by the CMakeLists.txt file. It really depends on

Re: Package with CMAKE based C library

Hi KI7MT, hi everybody thanks for your reply - I'm currently building the package with cdbs, debian/rules right now implements: #!/usr/bin/make -f include /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/debhelper.mk #include /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/patchsys-quilt.mk include /usr/share/cdbs/1/class/cmake.mk #export DH

Bug#765601: RFS: lxdm/0.5.0-1 [ITP]

control: forcemerge -1 765666 And so 2 identical ITP bugs (#765601 & #765666) are merged. Take care, Bob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413

Bug#765179: RFS: yubikey-neo-manager/0.2.2-1 [ITP] -- YubiKey NEO management graphical user interface

On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 11:54 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > I'd love for you two to put your review cycles into it: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764262 > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764460 My recent reviews have been to test Harlan's ability to revi

Re: Package conflicting with itself?

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote: > Does it makes sense for a package to conflict with itself? Not really, especially since there is no multi-arch header. You might want to file a bug report about this. It would probably be a good idea to add a lintian tag about it

Re: dump1090: Suggestions/comments for packaging internal web interface.

I'm missing some information in your question: How is the internal HTTP server used? Why did upstream feel the need to reimplement a HTTP server? What hostname/URLs does the internal HTTP server usually serve? Personally I would talk to upstream and get them to remove the internal HTTP server.

Bug#765883: Did anybody just upload avce00?

Hi Johan, thanks for your preparation. I injected pristine-tar and tried to upload but got: $ dput avce00_2.0.0-3_amd64.changes Uploading avce00 using ftp to ftp-master (host: ftp.upload.debian.org; directory: /pub/UploadQueue/) running allowed-distribution: check whether a local profile permi

Re: Package conflicting with itself?

On 2014-10-22 08:20 +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote: > >> Does it makes sense for a package to conflict with itself? > > Not really, especially since there is no multi-arch header. You might > want to file a bug report about this. It would