I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2.1-4.1
of my package "zynaddsubfx".
> Has anyone pinged Eduardo recently? This is an important package, which
> needs proper maintainance. The upload should probably be sponsored via
> debian-multimedia rather than QA. Opinions, Offers? :
> No - unless the code in question has a non-free or non-GPL compatible
> licence.
Thats way to broad a statement. Its pretty fine to have GPL incompatible
licenses.
--
bye Joerg
(13:24) ist iptables eigentlich nur ein tool zum
verhindern von aussenkonnecti,erungen auf gewissen ports o
On 11295 March 1977, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Is there a possibility to make delayed uploads as a DM ?
No.
--
bye, Joerg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Windows ME? Mit 13? Kann der nicht lieber Drogen nehmen wie andere Kinder
in dem Alter?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
On 11340 March 1977, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
> I couldn't find it out anywhere: what are the exact conditions under
> which a package is moved into the NEW queue?
"Adds a package (source or binary) to the archive which isn't already known".
--
bye, Joerg
There is no point in trying to fix b
On 11361 March 1977, David Paleino wrote:
> Secondly, I've just adopted john. The old maintainer kept 1.6.x series in
> unstable, and a "1.7-2" in experimental. Now I've uploaded 1.7.2-1 into
> unstable, will the experimental version disappear? Should I request its
> removal
> (and if yes, how)?
On 10401 March 1977, Joost van Baal wrote:
>> I made 3 packages that are licensed in PHP License.
>> I know that this license isnt supported by Debian.
> Which PHP License isn't supported by Debian? Debian ships PHP 4 in
> main, part of which is licensed under "The PHP License, version 3.0".
> Se
On 10403 March 1977, Jose Carlos do Nascimento wrote:
> I understood that my packages wont be accepted, .
> But if upstreamer doesnt want to change license, what can I do ?
> Put in non-free or contrib ? or just put in my own ftp ?
Not with a PHP* license, no. Get them to change it.
non-free wo
Hi
This is a fairly generic request, but Im looking for Co-Maintainers for
all my packages that don't already have one.
You can find the list of my packages at
http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you are interested in helping with one of those - mail me *off-list*
and we discuss the way i
On 10996 March 1977, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Well, you are right, I'll rename this package in konq-pdfsmp, like in ubuntu.
> In ubuntu, there are many packages with provides, like this package, actions
> with imagemagik, recode, mplayer etc etc.
>From what I can see in this thread there shoul
On 11009 March 1977, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> * debian/changelog:
> - Either merge both version, either change -1 to UNRELEASED and move the
> close to -2 as -1 will not be released into unstable if you don't merge
> changelog..
Wrong advice, thats what -vVERSION is for, see dpkg-buildpackage
On 11096 March 1977, Neil Williams wrote:
>> * Is the package lintian/linda clean?
> Finally, what do other sponsors think about linda? Personally, I
> uninstalled it long ago as simply unreliable. Are there genuine issues
> that linda *can* find which lintian cannot? Is linda still riddled w
On 11097 March 1977, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> "Binary foo is linked with version 1 and 2 of libfoobar" is something
>> lintian doesnt get, AFAIK.
> What I believe linda is actually finding is that the binary is linked with
> version 2 of libfoobar and also linked to another library which is itself
>
On 11106 March 1977, Julien Valroff wrote:
> * Package name : sshfp
> Version : 1.1.3-1
> Upstream Authors : Paul Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Jake Appelbaum
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.xelerance.com/software/sshfp/* License
> : GPL
> Se
On 11150 March 1977, Gregory Colpart wrote:
>> > * there is a problem with PHP licence version 3.0
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/08/msg00190.html should give
>> you more details.
>> You probably want to contact the authors.
> Yes, AFAIK the best solution is that you contact authors
On 11167 March 1977, Kartik Mistry wrote:
> I am maintaining packages of festival family (festival, -dev, -doc,
> speech-tools). I took maintainership sometime ago and fixed many bugs,
> but package has no patch system ie all patches resides in .diff.gz.
> Now, for better maintenance and making l
On 11693 March 1977, Dominik Smatana wrote:
> Or should I edit these files and add missing licenses (copy & paste
> from "main" file)?
Talk to upstream. Unless you have written the files it is *NOT* yours to
declare them being licensed in whatever way.
--
bye, Joerg
hmm, I should fill in the b
>> E: easymp3gain-gtk: embedded-zlib ./usr/bin/easymp3gain
> @ftp-masters: was the removal of embedded-zlib from the list of tags that
> can be overridden just temporary (because of the klibc incident)?
Yes it was temporary and its already back.
--
bye, Joerg
I'm kinky and perverse, but my ill
On 12197 March 1977, Chris Baines wrote:
> Those source archives are used to build a toolchain capable of compiling
> firmware for the Lego Mindstorms NXT. Its critical both for support
> reasons and for practical size issues that I use the exact same method
> to compile the device firmware as ups
On 13070 March 1977, Steffen Vogel wrote:
> There still the problem that the package name (sun) might be too generic
> to be included in the archive. What do you think about this concern?
> I've collected some alternatives:
> solar
> suncal
> atsun
> sunrun
> suncycles - makes no sense to me
As
On 13223 March 1977, Joey Hess wrote:
> I think the DAK rejects are based on lintian checks now, but am not 100%
> sure.
Correct.
> An ovrride would probably work.
Not currently, "package-contains-ancient-file" is a fatal tag.
> I think it would be reasonable to file a bug on lintian that this
Magosányi Árpád <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can I express this fact in debian/control?
Build-Conflicts
--
bye Joerg
Aqua mach mal man brain
maxx: schon probiert das gibts ned
pgpylZQL9K2VP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Zenaan Harkness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> debhelper puts the following into the "clean" rule in debian/rules:
dh_make
> - why are these two files copied in?
There is *no* good reason for it.
That should help if there are newer version of the files available.
If that happens its IMO better
Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However this is only 40KB (with pod) and I think it might be rejected
> by ftp-master. - Are there any better possibilities?
Why should they reject it? "Only 40kb" is not a reason.
(If its split out from another source into too small packages, then
y
Thorsten Sauter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some other packages like sysstat simply prints a message about a
> incompatible dataformat, and move or delete the old datafile. Is this an
> acceptable way for such a program also? And if so, should I do a
> database export first, before deleting and
Nico Manicone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but nothing happend.
> 1. Please close bug 107407
> 2. Enter 227958 in packages worked on
> This was my first try for an ITP. It would be nice if someone could tell
> what i made wrong.
You filed a new bug, thats wron
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
I build the Package for mailfilter and need a sponsor now to get it into the
Debian Archiv. (Don Kennedy started working on it, he also filed a bug
against wnpp (#101152) but he cancelled working on it (one mailfilter package
is enough :) ).
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
Ive got a question how to do the following right:
Im working on a library package (fidoconf) which has some binarys. So i build
a libfidoconf0, libfidoconf0-dev and fidoconf-runtime Package. It depends on
libsmapi but this is not a problem, i buil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
I build the Package for mailfilter and need a sponsor now to get it into the
Debian Archiv. (Don Kennedy started working on it, he also filed a bug
against wnpp (#101152) but he cancelled working on it (one mailfilter package
is enough :) ).
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi
Ive got a question how to do the following right:
Im working on a library package (fidoconf) which has some binarys. So i build
a libfidoconf0, libfidoconf0-dev and fidoconf-runtime Package. It depends on
libsmapi but this is not a problem, i bui
pp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there any (I do not say easy) way to automagically take
> dependencies from configure script and place it in control files?
Not automagic, but try installing pbuilder. It works with debootstrap
and builds your package in a chroot environment. If the build fail
Kristis Makris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've packaged tkxcd, a Tcl/Tk diff front end that has a look and feel
> similar to that of Artia Clearcases xcleardiff, and it is available at:
> http://www.public.asu.edu/~makrists/debian/tkxcd
> I'm looking for a sponsor.
If there is noone else
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now I've seen that sarg as been orphaned on January 2002 and I'd like to
> become its maintainer, but I don't know any Debian Developer that can
> promote my candidation and I could not find any information about the
> former sarg maintainer to contac
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Build a package for it (use the existing one, update it).
> Do you know where I can find info on a packaged that has been
> oprhaned?
bugs.d.o/wnpp
packages.d.o/packagename
> Since it is not in the archive anymore I don't know where to get source
>
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Build a package for it (use the existing one, update it).
> Do you know where I can find info on a packaged that has been
> oprhaned?
bugs.d.o/wnpp
packages.d.o/packagename
> Since it is not in the archive anymore I don't know where to get source
>
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Check what #128283 says:
> | If someone is interested in re-introducing this package into Debian
> | again, they can fetch the removed sources from
> | /org/ftp.debian.org/morgue/rhona/ on auric.debian.org.
> You can ask your sponsor to get them for
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Frederic also offered to sponsor me. I'd like to thank all of you for
> your kindness. :-) Don't know how it works, can I have more than one
> sponsor? :-)
You can have as many sponsors as you want. But you should stay with one
package at one sponsor
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A Debian developer has asked me if I wanted to adopt a package.
> However, I'm not a Debian developer. How long does it take to become
> a Debian developer nowadays? (Getting my GnuPG certified shouldn't be
> a problem.)
> If it takes months, it's pr
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No.
>> You dont need to be a DD to work for Debian.
>> Just ask an existing Developer to sponsor you.
> Deciding to join the NM process is considered required or at least
> highly recommended by most sponsors though, AFAIK.
Why?
I think its better to
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 04:20:10PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> I think its better to do some work for Debian through a sponsor
>> *before* joining the NM Process.
> If I'm sponsoring someone, I will always recommend ver
Botond Botyanszki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Only if you have INSTALL in debian/docs or debian/.docs.
>> dh_make may have added this for you. Remove it and all will be well.
> I don't have an INSTALL file under debian/, the only one is in the
> rootdir of the pacakge. I wouldn't mind removing
Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I started my NM-process at the 5. July 2002, and it was checked by my
> advocate at the 10. July 2002. Now 25 days (more than 3 weeks) passed,
Wait another 2 - 3 weeks.
Go and read all at nm.debian.org, including the templates for the AM.
Prepare you fo
Mark Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a sponsor for GtkBalls [1]. I have created initial
> packages [2], so please take a look at them and be as critical as
> possible. This is my first packaging, so is likely to contain mistakes.
> [1] http://gtkballs.antex.ru/
> [2]
Mark Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon was faster, so i dont look at your package. :)
> to create the build dependencies, I just followed the instructions in
> the new maintainer's guide:
Another way is to use pbuilder (or a selfmade chroot).
First you go and look what Upstream says you
Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my control file I have:
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, netbase, libmailutils0 (= ${Source-Version})
> However, Lintian throws up on me for:
> E: mailutils-imap4d: package-has-a-duplicate-relation libmailutils0,
> libmailutils0 (= 20020713-1)
This sound
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrea Mennucc) writes:
> I am trying to upload a package for a proposed updated to woody
> can someone please tell me why I get this error?
> (or point me to a doc)?
Easy. Version in sid *must* be > then the one in woody.
--
begin OjE-ist-scheisse.txt
bye, Joerg
Ludovic Drolez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Easy. Version in sid *must* be > then the one in woody.
> Easy buthow do you solve the problem ?
Using a version number thats >the woody and < the sid one? :)
> Currently, I have:
> testing: weex 2.6.1-4
> unstable: weex 2.6.1-5
2.6.1-4woody1
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am wondering how cvs-buildpackage fits into this. From what I
> understand, cvs-inject checks in the unpacked upstream tarball into
> the CVS, puts an upstream_version tag on it. cvs-buildpackage then
> creates the orig.tar.gz from the CVS sources. Isn't
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> also sprach Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.09.06.0025 +0200]:
>> I need a sponsor for tcpreen:
> i'll sponsor you, except i don't really know what sponsoring entails
> other than uploading. maybe some mentor can tell me.
You have to look at t
"Marco Presi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My problem is this: for the two packeges I want to have two
> different man pages (in fact "server-enhanced" has more config
> options that "server") but it would nice if the man pages could have
> the same name ("server.conf.5")
> I don'
"Marco Presi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> sr> Hrm, the cleanest solution would be to send the manpages to the upstream
> sr> maintainer and have him edit the build scripts so that the correct
> sr> manpage gets installed.
> It is not possible, because the man pages were written by
> me. Pris
Andreas Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. Where can I find the old-version of the package. (Since I want to
> adopt an existing package I think I can skip the steps descriped in the
> sections 3-6 in the "Debian New Maintainers' Guide" and start with section
> 9.)
apt-get source PACKAGE
Or l
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I take this two.
Fix this please:
>libterm-progressbar-perl
debian/copyright: Looks like a single upstream, so remove the (s)
debian/control: standards version is 3.5.7 now, use that.
debian/rules: you depend on debhelper >4, but use only compat
Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>all <--- so many boxes, what about non-DD?
non-DD could request an account. With good reasons.
> developer only<--- auric (all DD since ftp-master.debian.org)
All DD have access.
> developer only by request
Its "Developer only *and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Nagy) writes:
> cdw and pornview.
pornview is already with an ITP. Don't package it again. :)
--
bye Joerg
A.D. 1492:
Christopher Columbus arrives in what he believes to be India, but
which RMS informs him is actually GNU/India.
msg08006/pgp0.pgp
Description: PG
John Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm considering packaging TPC from http://www.tpc.int, and it
> requires configuring the MTA to accept email to specific
> domain names. Needless to say, it's a fairly complicated
> mail server configuration.
> In this case, should the package just documen
Jaime Robles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have recently package an application i am developing (KLog) and i would like
> to ask a Debian developer to checkif it is well packaged.
(I wont sponsor it, i have not enough time).
Just a quick look at the diff.gz:
- You dont need to do anything wit
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Oh, i hate it. Thats UPSTREAM WORK. Nothing for Debian
>> Packages. Makes unneccessary big debian diff.gz.
> That's quite arguable. Upstreams often don't care about updating
> config.guess and config.sub, and don't realize how often it's needed for
> p
Magosányi Árpád <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can I express this fact in debian/control?
Build-Conflicts
--
bye Joerg
Aqua mach mal man brain
maxx: schon probiert das gibts ned
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Zenaan Harkness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> debhelper puts the following into the "clean" rule in debian/rules:
dh_make
> - why are these two files copied in?
There is *no* good reason for it.
That should help if there are newer version of the files available.
If that happens its IMO better
Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However this is only 40KB (with pod) and I think it might be rejected
> by ftp-master. - Are there any better possibilities?
Why should they reject it? "Only 40kb" is not a reason.
(If its split out from another source into too small packages, then
y
Thorsten Sauter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some other packages like sysstat simply prints a message about a
> incompatible dataformat, and move or delete the old datafile. Is this an
> acceptable way for such a program also? And if so, should I do a
> database export first, before deleting and
Nico Manicone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but nothing happend.
> 1. Please close bug 107407
> 2. Enter 227958 in packages worked on
> This was my first try for an ITP. It would be nice if someone could tell
> what i made wrong.
You filed a new bug, thats wron
pp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there any (I do not say easy) way to automagically take
> dependencies from configure script and place it in control files?
Not automagic, but try installing pbuilder. It works with debootstrap
and builds your package in a chroot environment. If the build fails
Kristis Makris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've packaged tkxcd, a Tcl/Tk diff front end that has a look and feel
> similar to that of Artia Clearcases xcleardiff, and it is available at:
> http://www.public.asu.edu/~makrists/debian/tkxcd
> I'm looking for a sponsor.
If there is noone else i
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now I've seen that sarg as been orphaned on January 2002 and I'd like to
> become its maintainer, but I don't know any Debian Developer that can
> promote my candidation and I could not find any information about the
> former sarg maintainer to contact
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Build a package for it (use the existing one, update it).
> Do you know where I can find info on a packaged that has been
> oprhaned?
bugs.d.o/wnpp
packages.d.o/packagename
> Since it is not in the archive anymore I don't know where to get source
>
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Build a package for it (use the existing one, update it).
> Do you know where I can find info on a packaged that has been
> oprhaned?
bugs.d.o/wnpp
packages.d.o/packagename
> Since it is not in the archive anymore I don't know where to get source
>
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Check what #128283 says:
> | If someone is interested in re-introducing this package into Debian
> | again, they can fetch the removed sources from
> | /org/ftp.debian.org/morgue/rhona/ on auric.debian.org.
> You can ask your sponsor to get them for y
Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Frederic also offered to sponsor me. I'd like to thank all of you for
> your kindness. :-) Don't know how it works, can I have more than one
> sponsor? :-)
You can have as many sponsors as you want. But you should stay with one
package at one sponsor.
Botond Botyanszki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Only if you have INSTALL in debian/docs or debian/.docs.
>> dh_make may have added this for you. Remove it and all will be well.
> I don't have an INSTALL file under debian/, the only one is in the
> rootdir of the pacakge. I wouldn't mind removing
Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I started my NM-process at the 5. July 2002, and it was checked by my
> advocate at the 10. July 2002. Now 25 days (more than 3 weeks) passed,
Wait another 2 - 3 weeks.
Go and read all at nm.debian.org, including the templates for the AM.
Prepare you for
Mark Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> I'm looking for a sponsor for GtkBalls [1]. I have created initial
> packages [2], so please take a look at them and be as critical as
> possible. This is my first packaging, so is likely to contain mistakes.
> [1] http://gtkballs.antex.ru/
> [2] h
Mark Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon was faster, so i dont look at your package. :)
> to create the build dependencies, I just followed the instructions in
> the new maintainer's guide:
Another way is to use pbuilder (or a selfmade chroot).
First you go and look what Upstream says you n
Jeff Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my control file I have:
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, netbase, libmailutils0 (= ${Source-Version})
> However, Lintian throws up on me for:
> E: mailutils-imap4d: package-has-a-duplicate-relation libmailutils0,
> libmailutils0 (= 20020713-1)
This sounds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrea Mennucc) writes:
> I am trying to upload a package for a proposed updated to woody
> can someone please tell me why I get this error?
> (or point me to a doc)?
Easy. Version in sid *must* be > then the one in woody.
--
begin OjE-ist-scheisse.txt
bye, Joerg
Ludovic Drolez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Easy. Version in sid *must* be > then the one in woody.
> Easy buthow do you solve the problem ?
Using a version number thats >the woody and < the sid one? :)
> Currently, I have:
> testing: weex 2.6.1-4
> unstable: weex 2.6.1-5
2.6.1-4woody1?
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am packing a new version of paleta
Wrong list. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is for such questions.
I move it there, look at the Mail-Followup-To!
> $uupdate -u paleta_0.1.02082002-1.tar.gz
> in paleta-0.0.20062002/ the old source directory
> as I was fixing errors etc. ,run
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am wondering how cvs-buildpackage fits into this. From what I
> understand, cvs-inject checks in the unpacked upstream tarball into
> the CVS, puts an upstream_version tag on it. cvs-buildpackage then
> creates the orig.tar.gz from the CVS sources. Isn't
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> also sprach Oliver Kurth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.09.06.0025 +0200]:
>> I need a sponsor for tcpreen:
> i'll sponsor you, except i don't really know what sponsoring entails
> other than uploading. maybe some mentor can tell me.
You have to look at th
"Marco Presi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My problem is this: for the two packeges I want to have two
> different man pages (in fact "server-enhanced" has more config
> options that "server") but it would nice if the man pages could have
> the same name ("server.conf.5")
> I don't
"Marco Presi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> sr> Hrm, the cleanest solution would be to send the manpages to the upstream
> sr> maintainer and have him edit the build scripts so that the correct
> sr> manpage gets installed.
> It is not possible, because the man pages were written by
> me. Prist
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I take this two.
Fix this please:
>libterm-progressbar-perl
debian/copyright: Looks like a single upstream, so remove the (s)
debian/control: standards version is 3.5.7 now, use that.
debian/rules: you depend on debhelper >4, but use only compat
Guido Trotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A while ago my AM told me that CVS directories shouldn't go into package
> source, and to tell upstream please to remove them. I answered that I'll do
> it for the next version of the package: now we are at it, I tried to ask
> upstream, but he replied t
Andreas Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. Where can I find the old-version of the package. (Since I want to
> adopt an existing package I think I can skip the steps descriped in the
> sections 3-6 in the "Debian New Maintainers' Guide" and start with section
> 9.)
apt-get source PACKAGE
Or l
Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>all <--- so many boxes, what about non-DD?
non-DD could request an account. With good reasons.
> developer only<--- auric (all DD since ftp-master.debian.org)
All DD have access.
> developer only by request
Its "Developer only *and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Nagy) writes:
> cdw and pornview.
pornview is already with an ITP. Don't package it again. :)
--
bye Joerg
A.D. 1492:
Christopher Columbus arrives in what he believes to be India, but
which RMS informs him is actually GNU/India.
pgpNPAg47RgRN.pgp
Description: PGP sig
John Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm considering packaging TPC from http://www.tpc.int, and it
> requires configuring the MTA to accept email to specific
> domain names. Needless to say, it's a fairly complicated
> mail server configuration.
> In this case, should the package just documen
Jaime Robles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have recently package an application i am developing (KLog) and i would
> like
> to ask a Debian developer to checkif it is well packaged.
(I wont sponsor it, i have not enough time).
Just a quick look at the diff.gz:
- You dont need to do anything
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Oh, i hate it. Thats UPSTREAM WORK. Nothing for Debian
>> Packages. Makes unneccessary big debian diff.gz.
> That's quite arguable. Upstreams often don't care about updating
> config.guess and config.sub, and don't realize how often it's needed for
> p
Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What is the best way to handle native Debian packages under CVS?
> The problem is to avoid the CVS directories going in the tarball.
cvs-buildpackage
--
bye Joerg
(Irgendwo von heise.de):
Jesus war ein typischer Student:
- Lebte bis er 30 war bei den
On 14600 March 1977, p...@reseau-libre.net wrote:
> I'm currently starting the packaging of the ftpsync tool, and some of
> the binaries are for internal purpose of the ftpsync tool only. They
> should not, as a consequence, be deployed in /usr/(s)bin.
Already done, it is in NEW currently (source
On 17018 March 1977, Jonathan Rubenstein wrote:
Since this bug really doesn't affect the package that much as it works
fine anyway with only a few broken links, is it worth going through
the
trouble of getting it fixed while it's still in NEW, or is it better
to
leave it and get the fix uplo
On 16178 March 1977, lorenzo wrote:
I'm going to add ~20 service runscripts from my collection to a Debian
package that I want to reintroduce in Debian, and I have to chose the
license.
For this project I mainly care about two things:
1. allow fast circulation (even if it's at cost of less prote
93 matches
Mail list logo
