Good evening. My name is James Damour, and I would like to adopt the
filler package that the Debian QA team has orphaned. I have made my
first modifications to the package, and I have uploading them to
http://mentors.debian.net.
I would appreciate it if a sponsor could review my packaging, and
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 11:40, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> James Damour dijo [Tue, May 11, 2004 at 08:25:52AM -0400]:
> > Good evening. My name is James Damour, and I would like to adopt the
> > filler package that the Debian QA team has orphaned. I have made my
> > first modific
On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 09:03, Steven Augart wrote:
> Dear James,
>
> James Damour wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 14:29, Steven Augart wrote:
> >>Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
> >>>As for SGID - if this is java game, so you most probably have a shell
> &
ckage and source to anyone wishing to review my
work. I'm not quite ready to have it uploaded to the Debian project
(not even Experimental) yet, however. If you don't mind, I'd like more
agreement on the basic concepts first.
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
I work with the sudo upstream to get a setgid
option added?" Put another way, given that my needs are not met by
any of the alternatives presented in this thread, what is the best
way (for *all* of Debian) to address them?
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
un without modification.
>
> > another. Perhaps the package should be dropped from Sarge?
>
> The best thing is probably to have/file an RC bug and ask on
> debian-release to remove the package from sarge referencing the bug number.
>
I'd be happy to do so, if this is the
On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 17:31, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 05:26:21PM -0400, James Damour wrote:
> > It was my understanding from the Debian Java policy
> > (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x73.html) that
> > by depending u
> * gcj-3.3 1:3.3.4-3
> * gcj 4:3.3.4-2
>
> So, your package should be buildable by _any_ of these. I didn't test
> that though.
>
> If filler isn't buildable by some of these, that is indeed a RC bug. As
> Thomas said, build-depends need to be specified correctly. Depending on
> java2-compiler might be it.
>
> --Jeroen
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Tue, 2004-05-11 at 11:40, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> James Damour dijo [Tue, May 11, 2004 at 08:25:52AM -0400]:
> > Good evening. My name is James Damour, and I would like to adopt the
> > filler package that the Debian QA team has orphaned. I have made my
> > first modific
Good evening. My name is James Damour, and I would like to adopt the
filler package that the Debian QA team has orphaned. I have made my
first modifications to the package, and I have uploading them to
http://mentors.debian.net.
I would appreciate it if a sponsor could review my packaging, and
On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 09:03, Steven Augart wrote:
> Dear James,
>
> James Damour wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 14:29, Steven Augart wrote:
> >>Grzegorz B. Prokopski wrote:
> >>>As for SGID - if this is java game, so you most probably have a shell
> &
ckage and source to anyone wishing to review my
work. I'm not quite ready to have it uploaded to the Debian project
(not even Experimental) yet, however. If you don't mind, I'd like more
agreement on the basic concepts first.
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
I work with the sudo upstream to get a setgid
option added?" Put another way, given that my needs are not met by
any of the alternatives presented in this thread, what is the best
way (for *all* of Debian) to address them?
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
un without modification.
>
> > another. Perhaps the package should be dropped from Sarge?
>
> The best thing is probably to have/file an RC bug and ask on
> debian-release to remove the package from sarge referencing the bug number.
>
I'd be happy to do so, if this is the
On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 17:31, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 05:26:21PM -0400, James Damour wrote:
> > It was my understanding from the Debian Java policy
> > (http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x73.html) that
> > by depending u
> * gcj-3.3 1:3.3.4-3
> * gcj 4:3.3.4-2
>
> So, your package should be buildable by _any_ of these. I didn't test
> that though.
>
> If filler isn't buildable by some of these, that is indeed a RC bug. As
> Thomas said, build-depends need to be specified correctly. Depending on
> java2-compiler might be it.
>
> --Jeroen
--
James Damour (Suvarov454) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
16 matches
Mail list logo
