ntrib-functionality for a
group of people (and no significant other functionality, to that group). I
can see that having the whole package in contrib is not desirable, though. It
can only be avoided by splitting off the script (or removing it altogether,
but that's not very nice to our users
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 12:56:05PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2006, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > Packages containing some contrib material, without which the package
> > functions well, can indeed go in main AFAIK.
>
> Yes. That's enough. If you agree on
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jun 2006, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > Because the package (as I understood it, I don't actually know the package)
> > doesn't actually function at all for some people. That's not because they
>
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 06:13:49PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> The reason why the link should be included is so that the library can
> already be used between unpacking and configuring (running ldconfig) the
> package.
And because if ldconfig creates the link, it isn't owned by the packag
PROTECTED]
> Reading a request on a not-yet-existing program on a german Debian board
> about a month ago I started to seriously consider contributing to Debian
> after I've written the program for only one person due to the lack of
> reliable, trustworthy posibillities to test an
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 01:41:06AM +0300, Eddy Petri??or wrote:
> >> I don't think any part of packages (description or separate field) are
> >> the correct place for the Homepage field.
> >
> >Yes, that's because it's an unneeded duplication of what's already
> >present in /usr/share/doc/*/copyrig
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 07:50:11AM -0600, Joseph Smidt wrote:
> I have a package that needs four pactches. I put the four patches into
> debian/patches and cdbs patches just fine. I want not use cdbs if possible
> for I am confused at how exactly it is working,
It is a very good idea not to use
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 11:25:19AM +, Gerrit Pape wrote:
> ! test -e patch-stamp || \
I suppose you mean
test ! -e patch-stamp || \
Also, your method doesn't always allow to recover from an aborted build.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://
On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 10:37:28AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> However, a recent upgrade (I suspect to libtool or gcc) on amd64 has
> meant that I now get architecture-specific lintian errors involving
> rpath :
>
> $ lintian pilot-qof_0.0.10-1_amd64.deb
> W: pilot-qof: binary-or-shlib-defines-r
an member. You need to do a lot more in that case, so getting
your key signed is probably not a priority. But it's a good thing anyway, of
course. :-)
Good luck,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail,
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 09:25:15AM +0300, Mihai Felseghi wrote:
>Hello again mentors, I've started to package from sratch gsubedit
> (a subtitle editor for Gnme) but wen I run the configure script it
> keeps complaining about the missing of gnomeConf.sh file (I already
> installed the dev libr
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 12:05:20PM +0200, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> The package I'm making is ??swsusp, the package it's using is vbetool.
> It links in some routines from vbetool to post videocards at resume
> time. It does of course do other stuff as well.
> I don't think it makes sense to make both
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 01:12:10PM +1000, Craig Small wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:02:01AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > It appears that, although the COPYING file and the website
> > claim that TreeView X is GPL, all the source files have Library GPL
> > headers (except the Nexus one
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 05:32:12PM -0400, Charles Fry wrote:
> > > > Depends. Does it actually fix the warning?
> > >
> > > Yes, but it also broke my binary, which can no longer find the needed
> > > library. Any suggestions? Is rpath okay in this case? The needed library
> > > is coming from /usr
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 09:40:23AM -0400, Charles Fry wrote:
> > In almost any situation rpath is a bad thing. It is a very good idea to
> > let lintian check this. A "private" library for the package is an
> > exception. Of course lintian could also check and allow
> > /usr/lib/$packagename wit
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:34:20AM +0300, George Danchev wrote:
> > > > shc (3.8.6-1) unstable; urgency=low
> >
> > ^^^
> >
> > This is the wrong version number for an NMU anyway.
>
> True. Fixed as -0.1. Hm, it would be nice if lintian and linda warn if
> changelog claims Non-mainta
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:31:22PM +0200, Ricardo Mones wrote:
> > That also should be catched and warned, since an NMU done by a
> > maintaner makes no sense.
>
> It's not very common, but it does: the NMU is prepared by another
> non-DD and the package maintainer sponsors it.
I remember a thr
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 09:57:26AM -0400, Charles Fry wrote:
> > So please, please, please do fix (remove) the rpath in the package.
>
> I would appreciate any tips on how to go about fixing this. My package
> is courierpassd, currently only available in unstable. It depends on
> courier-authlib w
nstaller binary packages). There are two kinds of packages, "binary" and
"source". So even a pure documentation package with only text files in it is
called a "binary package". The library packages you talk about are binary
packages as well (and of course they also hav
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:08:29PM +0200, Andreas Fester wrote:
> * Package name: subcommander
> * License : GNU/GPL
I didn't really look at the package, just at the copyright file. The reason
is that you said GNU/GPL, which is incorrect. "GNU/Linux" means "a
combination of the GNU s
ch means just a split in two: the main package, and the plugin.
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the mess
On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 09:48:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I've seen many recommendations that the 'debian/' directory should not
> > be part of the 'foo_X.Y.orig.tar.gz' tarball but should always be added
> > by the 'foo_X.Y-Z.diff.gz', even in th
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:23:21PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> I think that I will provide a PDF, and ship the .doc files (as I they
> are the source...).
If the only reason you ship them is that they are source, be sure to not ship
them in the binary package, but only in the source package (wh
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 12:00:52PM +0200, Luca bedogni wrote:
> W: webcam-server source: native-package-with-dash-version
> N: Native source packages are sometimes created by accident. In most
> N: cases the reason is the location of the original source tarball.
> N: dpkg-source searches for this
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:14:36AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 09:33:46AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > OK, thanks all for your answers. I will mention the problem in the
> > README. How can I give a message only to the users who upgrade from the
> > previous version?
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:57:51AM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I would like to know what happen with him?
I don't know anything about Stan, but AFAIK these sort of queries should be
sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], so they don't show up on google. It's not a nice
thing to have your name mentioned
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 12:44:17PM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> [1] I need to override because the error could only be *fixed* by
> repackaging the .orig.tar.gz, which I don't want to do for so little a
> thing, when the problem can be adequately worked around.
While I fully agree th
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 03:36:41PM +0300, Damyan Ivanov wrote:
> Bas Wijnen -- 10.10.2006 12:09 --:
> > Then again, looking at the warning there's something wrong with the check as
> > well. That is, assuming you did remove the files in the clean target, the
> > hint abo
ets documented).
Thanks for your interest in helping to improve Debian!
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, n
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:52:01AM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Arvind kumar wrote:
> > First thing I need is access to latest CVS code for craft package
> > (only read permission will do ). As far as I could make out from
> > debian.org , there is some strict guide lin
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 07:52:04AM +0100, Gouki wrote:
> I contacted the author (2 times) and asked his permission to create a
> Debian package of his application before I started. Days passed and I
> decided to go ahead. Maybe I would hear from him during the process.
>
> Since the package is alm
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 12:11:27AM -0400, Muammar Wadih El Khatib Rodriguez
wrote:
> I chose a package that I want to create. I was seeking for copyright
> and I just found the information I'll show below:
>
> " It is a free software distributed under GPL terms,
> see www.gnu.org for more informa
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 10:58:37PM +0400, Al Nikolov wrote:
> Hello, all mentors!
>
> Please clarify for me, in which section should go a GPL-licensed package,
> which is quite unusable without (but technically not Depends on), er,
> obscure blobs of data, usually gathered by a way of sniffing dat
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 08:13:38AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 03:30:50PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard a ?crit :
> > Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
> > > * free packages which require [...] packag
On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 09:57:57PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Marco Amadori wrote:
> > This seems to be against DFSG n# 8. License Must Not Be Specific to Debian
> > [0]
>
> You're absolutely right.. for main, but not for non-free.
This is a matter for -legal, but anyway.
No, he's not right
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 10:06:05AM +0100, Markus Schulz wrote:
> After a package upgrade i want to check if the generated config file was
> modified by user with a md5sum and ask the user if i can override the
> existing config file (only if different) with the new generated
> version.
> But a
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:06:08PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 04:33:49 -0700, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >The error is, if you don't *need* a specific version of the package, you
> >shouldn't depend on it at /all/. Essential means it's always available, so
>
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 02:01:54PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 01:59:05PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > Packages aren't moved out of essential.
>
> So you can guarantee that bash will always be essential?
Certainly not. :-) I'm saying that we don&#
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 03:00:40PM +0530, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
> Hi,
Hello,
> My question is:
> Currently knentstats is at version 1.6.1.
> How would I repackage knetstats when version 1.6.2 is released ?
There are several ways. Personally, I just get the new upstream tarball,
unpack it, re
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:43:14AM -, Paul Cager wrote:
> What is the recommended approach here?
>
> (1) Ignore the problem - it is only an *informational* message,
> and previous releases have ignored it.
> (2) Patch as recommended in msg01481.html; send patch to upstream author.
> (3)
ing the shorter lists
actually exist. :-)
Thanks in advance for your thoughts and advice on this,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain te
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 11:34:05AM +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 10:15:31AM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > I have a bug (#406121), which I don't want to fix before the release (it's
> > minor). Is there a way to tag it as such? Or should I just
Hi,
This is slightly off-topic, for which I apologise. It's just that I
learned about symbol versioning during my NM process, and nobody outside
Debian seems to understand what it is. :-(
I have a library, which I want to package for Debian. I felt it would
be a good idea to use symbol versioni
Hi Miriam,
It might take a few days before I get to it, but I'd be happy to sponsor
(and co-maintain, if you want) SDCC for/with you.
I don't mind if someone else is faster in sponsoring this time. :-)
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 11:22:55AM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
&
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 03:40:01AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> I would like to create something like the Ubuntu Personal Package
> Archive (PPA), but for Debian.
I don't know that, so I'm only responding to your description.
> It's written in Django (Python) and my idea is to have a
Hi,
I'm taking a look at it, and see that Sam is in the Uploaders. Should I
upload the package (if it's good), or does he normally do that?
Thanks,
Bas
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:15:04AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.0.20070315-5
Hello again,
I have some questions before uploading the package:
- You have specified "Priority: extra". According to policy, "This
contains all packages that conflict with others with required,
important, standard or optional priorities, or are only likely to be
useful if you already know
Hi Jens,
I uploaded the package. I still have some comments (see below), but
they weren't enough reason to not upload.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:20:11AM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > this is a "GPL without version" claim, which according to the GPL
> > means any version is acceptable. I
>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:13:21PM +0200, Jens Seidel wrote:
> > What I meant is that if you consider license information of any value to
> > the reader of the manual page, it should contain a link to the actual
> > license text (it can be on the internet as well). In fact, I expect it
> > not to
Hi,
I'm taking a look at this. An extra note/feature request for the
mentors template: please write what has changed with respect to the
previous version.
Thanks,
Bas
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 12:39:33AM +0100, Marco Rodrigues wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new ver
Hi,
Here's a list of things I found in the package:
- The second '*' in debian/changelog is indented incorrectly.
- About XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: I almost don't dare to say it, but I'd
like to have it added again. ;-) Perhaps it's better to wait until
Miriam is back from her break, and leave
Uhm, ok, someone else uploaded this package in the meantime. The points
I raised in the previous e-mail are still worth fixing in the next
upload.
And I'd still like answers to:
> - There is a lintian override installed, which isn't documented in the
> changelog. Why is it needed? (In other
On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 08:03:44PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote:
> I'm considering applying for maintainer of a couple packages, and I
> wondered if Debian had some policy on preferring professional or
> personal email addresses for maintainers.
In Debian, we do things Right(tm). :-) That includes
Hi,
First of all, I'm going to take a look at the package and upload it if
it's ok (I'll look at the next version you announced :-) ). So if
others were planning to do the same, please let me know.
First comment: The ITP says there are problems with the copyright
notices. From the RFS I underst
I didn't read the discussion before, but I think I know what it's about
anyway, and I'd like to say something about it. :-)
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 07:51:48PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (09/10/2007):
> > > I could have stripped these parts from the diff, but
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 03:25:22PM +0200, David Bremner wrote:
> Epoch added, off-list suggestions of Bas incorporated. New version
> 1:0.2-27-3 uploaded to mentors.
It looked good, so I uploaded it. You should be getting some e-mail
about it being NEW. If there are any problems, please let me k
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 03:41:27PM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for a 7 days delayed NMU of package "grun".
I was a bit busy, and expected someone else to look at this before me,
but appearantly that didn't happen. It seems like a serious problem, so
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:20:06AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have just one question about this part:
> >
> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
> > #include "grun2.xpm"
> > #if defined (HAVE
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:52:33AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is it ok with you if I upload it with a string literal instead of a
> > define?
>
> Yes, no problem. Thanks for the review.
One more thing, th
ruz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 04:02:28PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:52:33AM -0500, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> > > Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > Is it ok with you if I upload it with a string litera
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:50:20AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> If I understand things correctly, we are discussing the NMU of grig by
> Cyril (#444509).
No, not really. The post you replied to stated explicitly that it
wasn't talking about any specific event, just about general procedure.
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 08:22:06PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 03:24:40PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > I don't know much about java, but if those are just compilations of
> > things for which the source is also in the tarball, there is no need to
>
On Thu, Nov 08, 2007 at 09:10:11AM -0200, Tiago Saboga wrote:
> The background is that I already have to repackage upstream tarball,
> because they contain compiled jars.
I don't know much about java, but if those are just compilations of
things for which the source is also in the tarball, there i
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 05:53:04PM -0200, Eriberto wrote:
> Ok. But in my package I chose the GPL as license (debian/copyright file).
You can do that, and it sort of makes sense if you want to release your
packaging only under the GPL. However, you can still allow the other
options for the users
On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 10:27:21AM +0100, Bart Martens wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:44 +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I'd suggest that the copyright file
> > should be redone and done so it can be parsed automatically:
> >
> > http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat
>
> On Wed, 2007-11
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 05:20:32PM +0100, David Bremner wrote:
> Can someone point me to policy about file headers?
For license information, there is no Debian policy, because this is not
up to Debian to change. The copyright holder may distribute code with a
license. How she does that is up to
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 11:35:31PM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2007/12/2, Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > 1) Copyright / license issues: By removing important information from
> > the previous packaging you might insult the packaging license.
> > Redistribution in Debian might theref
On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:53:45AM -0600, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> > > The new dpkg-shlibdeps is giving me tons of messages of the form
> > >
> > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol ui_node_remove_node used by
> > > debian/liferea/usr/lib/liferea/libliscrlua.so found in none of the
> > >
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 03:06:27PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> And yes, if you refer to "the GPL" today, it certainly means GPL3.
Not at all. Well, at least not completely. ;-) GNU GPL 3 itself says
about this (section 14):
If the Program does not specify a version number of the GNU
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:09:21PM +0100, Gilles Filippini wrote:
> I've uploaded yesterday to mentors.d.n a new release of my package nted.
> The upload seemed successful but I didn't received any confirmation mail
> and the package doesn't show up on the mentors.d.n web site.
>
> Here is th
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:04:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I think the best way is to include the license text in debian/copyright
> > just like any other license that is not in common-licenses.
>
> We probably don't really want to include a copy of the GPLv1 in every Perl
> package.
If th
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 10:21:41PM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> Bas Wijnen wrote:
>>
>> RMS does this, in his attempts to move people to use the newest version
>> of the GPL. He has a point, but if Debian would fully agree with it, I
>> suppose we would rel
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:44:39PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 12:04:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >>> I think the best way is to include the license text in
> >>> debian/copyright
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 11:03:48AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Erik Schanze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [071215 20:09]:
> > I created the cunit.commands and signed it by:
> > $ gpg --clearsign cunit.commands
> > $ mv cunit.commands.asc cunit.commands
> >
> > What's wrong?
>
> You forgot the magic
Hello,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 06:54:06PM +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> I'm the maintainer of SQLite3 packages. Upstream used to ship the
> sources and documentation in one tarball. Now this is changed, source
> still ships in a tarball, but docs is separeted to a zip file. What
> would be th
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:39:18PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
> The last upstream version has some license issue(relicense GPL code as
> LGPL), and this version have fix this problem. please help upload it,
> thanks.
I'll have a look at it.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send encrypted
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:39:18PM +0800, LI Daobing wrote:
> The last upstream version has some license issue(relicense GPL code as
> LGPL), and this version have fix this problem. please help upload it,
> thanks.
Some comments:
Upstream appearantly changed the license headers. That's good.
How
Hi,
On 12-10-12 10:00, Andreas Tille wrote:
> not that I would specifically interested in this very package (just
> stumbled upon it because of the "physics" keyword) I think you could
> enhance your chances to find a sponsor if you would more closely join
> the pkg-games team (by for instance fol
Hi,
On 07-02-13 16:08, Boris Pek wrote:
> Four weeks passed since our discussion. Any progress on this?
A little. I tried to run autoreconf as part of the build process, but
was unable to make it compile. This is quite a serious problem, and
exactly the reason I prefer to have it part of the pac
Wouter van Heyst wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 03:55:56PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
>
>>Hello mentors,
>>
>>I recently adopted GFingerPoken (not uploaded yet). However, I found
>>out that the artwork in the source is actually generated with pov-ray.
>>So I s
em. If the system works, noone gets annoyed by
people trying it.
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message bod
Sven Mueller wrote:
Installations with debian packages are far too verbose already for my
taste. Please don't bother the admin (me) with questions at uninstall
time as well. I hate giving an (un)install command, only to come back a
few hours later to see that it waits for my input approx. 10% throu
Miriam Ruiz wrote:
--- Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Still, is a warning. Miriam, perhaps you should
ask upstream to change
0x950412de to 0x950412deL or similar.
Yes, I'm concerned about it even when it's a warning.
I've sent an email upstream this morning commenting
that problem (and
Mauro Darida wrote:
> Currently there is no top level Makefile. This may require additional tuning.
> Done. Please edit the files in the debian/ subdirectory now. You should also
> check that the debianadv Makefiles install into $DESTDIR and not in / .
This is an important warning. If you understa
Ricardo Mones wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2005 10:23:19 -0400
> "Brenda J. Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyway your case is clearly different, your source is a kpr file not
> a pdf one.
>
>
>>If not, then how should I proceed? I can put the .kpr, .ps and .pdf
>>in the package... I could pl
* complex expressions (similar to bash)
* labels of unlimited length
* conditional compilation depending on expressions
All the files can be downloaded from
http://129.125.47.90/~shevek/debian/z80asm/
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If
Oh, I forgot to mention, I filed an ITP as bug #308310 for it.
Bas Wijnen wrote:
> Short description: assembler for the Zilog Z80 microprocessor
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send
Erik Schanze wrote:
> Hi Bas!
Hello,
>>Short description: assembler for the Zilog Z80 microprocessor
>>
>>Long description:
>> The Z80 microprocessor is used in old home computers, such as the
>> ZX-spectrum and MSX, and in several newer devices, such as the TI-83
>> graphical calculator and the
Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Bas Wijnen may or may not have written...
>
>>Erik Schanze wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>>Seriously, I think you should improve your long description to explain to
>>>an (unexperienced) user what this package is for. What can yo
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
Personally, I would not use Java at all for this reason, but if you have
invested time in learning it (which I haven't), I can imagine some
problems are conceptually easier with it. In that case, use extreme
caution.
Finally of course, I am not a la
inary to
a non-GPL-compatible library if there is no exception. Thing is, who
would write an exception in the license of a library only for a binary?
It can happen of course, but it doesn't sound like something that
happens a lot.
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e
at sounds like it could be better. Now I haven't seen anything
"successful" for other packages either, so perhaps it is simply impossible.
Is there anything I can (and should) do to get rid of the "maybe"?
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> There are currently over 200 orphaned packages, many of which have
> been on WNPP for quite a long time and some with RC bugs. I intend to
> request the removal of a number of packages in three weeks unless a
> package has been adopted by someone by then.
--snip--
> gfp
Hello mentors,
I recently adopted GFingerPoken (not uploaded yet). However, I found
out that the artwork in the source is actually generated with pov-ray.
So I started reworking the package to do a "complete" compilation, which
also compiles the art from source.
However, I just noticed that pov-
Ben Finney wrote:
> On 23-Jun-2005, Bas Wijnen wrote:
>
>>- provide new artwork which does not need pov-ray or any other
>>non-free compiler
>
> The simplest solution that results in a free package.
>
> How good is (free) Blender at reading POV-Ray files? How
101 - 195 of 195 matches
Mail list logo
