Hi!
A new version of a package that I maintain has changed the name of the
default configuration file. I want to propagate this name change, but
how do I handle it properly? AFAICT, I'm not allowed to touch conffiles
in the maintainer scripts, but this would mean that the old
configuration would j
Andreas Metzler:
> You could conditionally move the existing configuration file in the
> preinst to the new location.
Thanks. I'm doing something similar with a non-conffile for another of
my packages, so I'll just copy the working code from that. I was just
unsure whether I was allowed to do it
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If a package creates a user when it is installed, should it remove this user
when it is removed, on only when it is purged?
IMHO, when it is purged. At least if it may own the configuration files that
removing the package may leave behind. For the package I have that create
Matthew Palmer:
I just had another thought -- make a -1 revision with an empty diff.
Weird, but I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work...
That usually works just fine, and it what I do when I release jwhois, since
I have also been doing the upstream releases. The debian subdirectory
I've created a couple of Debian packages of software. The initial creation
is covered in the guide I downloaded from www.debian.org, but after that I
am a bit wondering; How do I re-Debianize a new release, keeping so that I
can create the diff file as is required?
Also, any news on when the new m
I am involved in Debianizing a program (I am not the listed maintainer of
it, simply because the registration is closed), and have struck a problem.
The program, jwhois (should be in the distribution now), has been changed so
that it will keep a cache of previous lookups. To get this to work, the
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho:
> > I've created a couple of Debian packages of software. The initial
> > creation is covered in the guide I downloaded from www.debian.org, but
> > after that I am a bit wondering; How do I re-Debianize a new release,
> > keeping so that I can create the diff file as is re
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho:
> Bug.
Okay, I have now reported it (and fixed my local copy).
However, the uupdate reported a problem, complaining that 0.6 is less than
0.52, which was the previous version. I "fixed" this by changing the version
number to 0.60, is that the correct way of doing it?
--
Julian Gilbey:
> 6 < 52. See the packaging manual, section 5. Your solution seems
> reasonable if the intention is that 0.52 < 0.6.
It is indeed the case. The program uses numeric numbering (which is not as
common on Unix/Linux programs as otherwise, and this program is a
multi-platform program
Peter S Galbraith:
> Which group to use? I don't know...
Where do I look/ask?
> Can debhelper do this? Yes, see the man page for dh_suidregister
Thanks, I will.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Peter S Galbraith:
> Can debhelper do this? Yes, see the man page for dh_suidregister
I can't figure it out. I have created a debian/suid file:
===[ cut ]===
jwhois /usr/bin/jwhois root users 2755
===[ cut ]===
But when I try to install, all I get is:
Setting up jwhois (2.3pre3-1) ...
Install
Julian Gilbey:
> chmod 2755 /usr/bin/jwhois
I can't seem to get this (+chown) past. I'm creating the package using
fakeroot, which might be the problem.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
> You're calling dh_suidregister incorrectly. I have made it print error
> messages when you do that, now. Read the man page..
I tried, but I didn't find out from there what the format of the suid file
was, so I figured it should be the same as the suid.conf file, but I guess I
was wrong.
Now to
Julian Gilbey:
> I think, BTW, that I meant:
> chmod 2755 debian/tmp/usr/bin/jwhois
> That could be the problem (And change debian/tmp to whatever is
> appropriate.)
I do have it pointing to debian/tmp. The output doesn't list any errors:
chmod 2755 debian/tmp/usr/bin/jwhois
chgrp users
Julian Gilbey:
> Is something in [...] (such as dh_fixperms) changing the permissions?
Ah! dh_fixperms did indeed fiddle with the permissions, after moving the
chmod downwards it works just fine. Thanks!
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Julian Gilbey:
> Note the dh_fixperms is at the end of this sequence, and must be:
> Debian packages should not ship with any special bits set (except for
> symlinks and directories).
Okay. Got it now.
So, what's the appropriate group to add it to? It is supposed to be a cache
that is shared bet
peter karlsson:
> So, what's the appropriate group to add it to? It is supposed to be a cache
> that is shared between all the users on the machine, but making it setgid
> users (and the directory 775 users) isn't perhaps such a good idea?
No-one?
Should the scripts automatic
peter karlsson:
> Should the scripts automatically create a group (say 'jwhois', as that's the
> name of the program)? Can this be automated in the rules file?
I did it this way: The postinst script does a 'addgroup --system jwhois',
and manually calles suidregist
Paul Serice:
> I have a package that needs files under /var/cache to be setgid. The
> files are for Crafty to allow it to "learn" chess as it plays. Part
> of the installation is that I install all that Crafty has learned from
> all of its user's across the internet. Then as Crafty plays locall
Hi!
While developing a new version of a program I am writing, I want to be able
to create .deb packages. However, I need a valid date in the latest
changelog entry, which I don't have, since it's a pre-release version. What
do I do?
(I'd prefer it to say something like "Unreleased" instead of a d
Hi!
If a program has help files that are accessible from within the program, but
also possible to read without it (HTML), should it be placed in
/usr/share/doc or /usr/share/ ?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
htt
Hi!
I'd like to use DebConf to show a license agreement on-screen when a certain
package is installed. Currently, it is just shown by sending it to the
pager, but that's not a good idea, and I want to use DebConf instead, if
it's available.
The problem is, I can't figure out how to actually displ
Joey Hess:
> You missed a "go;" at the end of the config script. Debconf builds up
> items and does not prompt the user for any of them until told.
Hmmm, now it seems to handle it, but it only sends the license agreement by
mail to root, it does not display it when I do 'dpkg --install'. This is
Joey Hess:
> Have you perhaps picked the noninteractive frontend?
No, all other packages I install go through the dialog frontend.
I'll have to test it on another machine, though, there might be some crud
left from all the testing.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement con
For .deb packages that are not "Debian official", is there any control file
that can be used to redirect bug reports (as sent by the "bug" program), so
that they do not get sent to Debian's bug tracking system and returned since
the package isnät in there?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp
Julian Gilbey:
> Not as far as I know. But it would be a useful enhancement,
> especially if the number of "foreign" .debs increases.
Well, since there are some plans on releasing deb archives for the product I
work on, I thought it'd be nice. Since it's a commercial (as in non-free)
product, I'
Hi!
I'm in the process of taking over the uqwk package (having just been
accepted as an official Debian developer), and is updating it to the newest
version. One change that I'm doing is that I'm providing two binaries, one
compiled for nntp support, and one for spool support (they can't have both
Will Lowe:
> You could put each binary in a seperate package, and then each package
> could have the right dependencies.
I wonder if it would really be worth it, since the documentation and sample
scripts (which I would need to include in both packages) are as big as the
actual binaries. (Okay,
Newbie question; I am a new developer, and are about to take over the
packages I have previously had sponsored in to Debian. However, I also want
to add new packages, and I'm a bit uncertain about what to do about that;
should I just upload the new package (I've already packaged it for "internal
us
Fri, 26 May 2000 (>> = Joey Hess, > = me):
>> Have you perhaps picked the noninteractive frontend?
> No, all other packages I install go through the dialog frontend.
> I'll have to test it on another machine, though, there might be some crud
> left from all the testing.
Seems to be user error af
Ben Collins:
> If you read the developers documentation,
I did. Must've missed that section.
> you will see that you need to send and ITP (Intent To Package) to the
> debian-devel mailing list.
Damn. That means I actually have to read it. I don't really like it, since
it's too slow to download
Will Lowe:
> Should be gatewayed to linux.debian.devel ...
Is it available on any public news server I can run slrnpull from?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
Peter S Galbraith:
> I could add the debian directory to CVS and to `make source' such
> that it becomes part of the upstream tar file. Good idea?
I think so. They don't do any harm to others, and it's good to have all the
files in one place.
> On the other hand, uploading it to Debian as PKG_V
Hi!
Are you really supposed to include debhelper in the Build-Depends line?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
H. S. Teoh:
> [NON-Text Body part not included]
I'm sorry, could you please repeat that, but this time readable?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
Hi!
How do I get update-alternatives to keep information when upgrading a
package?
Currently I have postinst add it and prerm remove it, but if I set the
alternative to point to something else than the default, this means
that that information gets lost everytime I upgrade the package...
(The pa
Hi!
I just found a Linux implementation of one of my all-time favourite
MS-DOS games, the 3D Tetris clone Frac3D, going under the name ifrac.
The program claims to be open source, but the license is home-brewed,
and it has some exceptions that make me uncertain whether it actually
is DFSG free, an
Oliver M . Bolzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> OUT. Undoubtly against DFSG point 6.
> OUT. Undoubtly against DFSG point 3, also the exceptions of point 4 are
> not applicible.
> Again point 5
All right. As I thought, then.
> Maybe you could try to convince upstream to change the licence. He wants
>
Steve Robbins:
> > copyright-file-contains-full-license might be better.
>
> I don't think that is better: sometimes the copyright file *should* be the
> full license.
>
> The only time it should NOT be, is if the copyright is one of those stored
> in /usr/share/common-licenses.
copyright-file-du
Hi!
Which of Debian's architectures are big-endian, and are there any
machines online that I, as a Debian developer, can log in and test the
software I maintain to see if it works properly on big-endian?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail acco
Ben Collins:
> SPARC and PowerPC are big-endian. You can login to vore.debian.org using
> your developer account. This is an ultrasparc system.
All right, I'm trying to check on vore now, the problem is that it
lacks some key software (like gdb) that would be nice for debugging...
Who do I conta
Hi!
I have a program that is building against Qt 2.1 that I would like to
upload, but I notice that only Qt 2.2 is available in woody, and I
would prefer not to install Qt 2.2, since it requires XFree86 4.0.1,
which removes a number of programs that I use regurarly.
Should I
1) upload the packag
Josip Rodin:
> You can upload the sources only nowadays...
There are autobuilders for all platforms that handle the compilations
for me, then?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/re
I'm trying to do a source only upload, but I'm failing to get
dpkg-source not to overwrite my tarfile (I would like to use the exact
same tarfile as my official distribution of the program, not re-pack it
for Debian).
I'm running "dpkg-source -ss -sn -b ", but it is still
overwriting the tarfile..
Josip Rodin:
> Yes, build daemons for i386, m68k, sparc, powerpc should be active.
All right. If I only could figure out how to do a source only upload
that won't overwrite my original tarfile, I'd be all set.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-ma
Hi!
So, am I supposed to move over my packages from using suidmanager to
use the new dpkg-statoverride? If so, is there a HOWTO describing how
to do it somewhere?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwo
Jeremy Higgs:
> I cannot see anything wrong...?? but I still get a 'missing separator' error!
It's a standard Makefile, so you need to have tabs before the commands
that defines the target. You've removed the initial tabs from the dh_
lines.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
State
Hi!
I have a tarfile for a debian-original program (i.e no .orig or
maintainer version), and I also have it uncompressed. When I run
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot from the uncompressed directory, it
overwrites my tarfile.
How do I stop it from doing that? I want to have the "original" tarfile
tha
Joey Hess:
> There is one wrinkle: If your package previously used suidmanager, and
> you convert it to not, you should make it Conflicts: suidmanager (<< 0.50).
> (The details of why are a little messy; see earlier discussion on
> debian-devel.)
A program I packaged (jwhois, I am taking over mai
Hi!
I can't really figure out how testing works, since one of my packages
(turqstat) currently has the very obsolete version 1.2 (same as in
potato) in testing, whereas it after that has been releases 1.3, 1.4,
2.0 and 2.0.1. 2.0 is from November last year, and should be good
enough to have gone i
Tollef Fog Heen:
> So, unless it's dependant on other buggy packages, or you get any RC
> bugs, it will go into testing.
Well, what I'm curious about is why only 1.2 is in testing, 1.4 was in
woody since a couple of months before testing was introduced.
Does this stuff require that the package i
Joey Hess:
> Hmm. If you run chrmod in the postinst, you will clobber any different
> permissions that the user has set with statoverride.
Well, I remove the statoverride (previously suidmanager stuff) in the postrm
as well, so I need to re-instate them there.
> I think it may work to examine dp
Chris Danis:
> I'm in the NM queue, currently packaging tclbabel, a piece of
> software I have written myself. Because I am both upstream and
> possibly Debian maintainer, should this be such a native package?
It could be, but it does not need to. I have made the programs I write
myself native pa
Tollef Fog Heen:
> I've ITP'ed and packaged mboxgrep. If somebody could sponsor the
> upload for me, I'd appreciate.
I'll sponsor you, Tollef.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/r
Hi!
I'm in the process of adopting the Siag Office suite of packages, and
I'm currently wrestling a bit with lintian vs. the way it has been
packages. Lintian gives me an error on two of the packages that
"usr-doc-symlink-points-outside-of-usr-doc". The thing with that is
that there is two version
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Yes, just copy the commands you need into your postinst file from
> /usr/share/debhelper/autoscripts/postinst-doc
Is there any way to force debhelper to insert these, rather than to insert
them manually?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning u
Julian Gilbey:
> But in cases where the only meaningful installation was suid or sgid (for
> example, /bin/su), the deb always held a suid or sgid binary.
Hmmm, so my use of suidregister/dpkg-statoverride in the jwhois package
isn't really a correct implementation? I am creating a group when the
Julian Gilbey:
> If the binary must be setgid, then you should just chown/chmod the
> binary. If it could be used not-setgid, then use statoverride.
It can be used non-setgid if the sysadmin is paranoid, yes (then the
cache functions will be non-operative).
JP Sugarbroad:
> Packages should alm
2.0.1 (currently 1.2-1) (low)
Maintainer: peter karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
turqstat uploaded 26 days ago, out of date by 16 days!
out of date on alpha: turqstat (from 1.4)
out of date on arm: turqstat (from 1.4)
out of date on m68k: turqsta
Christopher C. Chimelis:
> Alpha has serious gcc/g++ problems with Qt 2.2, so don't expect an alpha
> upload for quite some timejust fyi :-)
So basically, I should change "Architecture: any" to specifically not
list alpha (and other platforms lacking Qt)?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolv
Christopher C. Chimelis:
> If it were something like GNAT, where we cannot build it on Alpha at
> all without pre-existing binaries (which don't exist for
> alpha-linux), then I would say omit Alpha.
Well, also there is the endian problem. I don't know how 1.4 debs ended
up on these machines, bec
Hi!
I have CVS access to a upstream program I am the Debian maintainer for
(jwhois), and since I have learnt the lesson of moving the debian
directory in the CVS, I'm planning to add them as a separate module.
My question, however, is how to handle differences between the Debian
version and the u
Chad C. Walstrom:
> The easiest way is to maintain a vendor branch in a local repository.
I would prefer not to make unnecessary copies...
> You can use the cvs-inject script provided by cvs-buildpackage to
> automate much of this. (Do an 'apt-cache show cvs-buildpackage'.)
Ah. cvs-buildpackag
Jaldhar H. Vyas:
> I hope this helps anyone who has faced the problem themselves. I have a
> question too, is there anyway to use the unmangled name?
Did you specify AC_LANG_CPLUSPLUS in your configure.in?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail
Hi!
If the testing scripts says that an architecture is out of date, and that
architecture is not listed as one of the target architectures for the
program in question, where do I ask to get it corrected?
--
\\// Live Long and Prosper
Peter Karlsson
Developer / Utvecklare / Utvikler
Christian T. Steigies:
> And you will note m68k is not the fastest arch on the world
> (allthough the nicest ;-)
Hmm, perhaps I should dust off the Amiga 1200 that is lying in a
desktop drawer¹ doing nothing. Wonder how much I extra stuff I need to
equip it with to get it running Debian and conne
Hi!
For the various auto-builders, is it possible to get logs of any failed
builds sent via e-mail, or do one have to go hunt around to try to find
them using the various web interfaces?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish
Hi!
I notice that the BTS pages say that the bugs I have tagged as "fixed" are
"fixed in NMU", even though I tagged them manually. I have understood the
"fixed" tag as something I can use when the bug is fixed locally/upstream,
but has not yet found its way into Debian (for instance, for wishlist
Hi!
I just noticed that a package I submitted was built on the wrong
machine here at home, and is linked against wrong libraries. Can I, as
the maintainer, do a binary "NMU" where I only recompile the package
against the correct libraries? How do I go about and do that?
--
\\//
peter - http://ww
Manuel Estrada Sainz:
> The first problem is that I generate the changelog automaticly from CVS
> which seams too big and verbose for a debian changelog but I am not
> suposed to have an upstream changelog in a pure debian package.
Well, I "cheat" myself, with both a standard changelog and a Debi
Tollef Fog Heen:
> Increase the version number by 0.01, recompile and upload. See the
> developers reference 8.2, third paragraph.
So, how do I change the version number without touching the changelog?
Invoking the way the reference says will keep the current version, and
there does not seem to
Mike Markley:
> The best way to go is simply to increment the debian revision by 0.1 or so,
> with a changelog entry describing why you did it (binary-only build for arch
> xxx)...
But the reference says that I should not touch the changelog, even when
updating the version by 0.1 for a binary-onl
Colin Watson:
> Why couldn't you use 'dh_installchangelogs ChangeLog' to achieve the
> same effect?
Because it is a native Debian package, and the manual page for
dh_installchangelogs says
NOTES
It is an error to specify an upstream changelog file for a
debian native package.
--
Julian Gilbey:
> Which is impossible to do.
That's about what I figured, but it still says that :-)
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
Steve M. Robbins:
> The undocumented page provides no more information than "No manual
> entry for foo" (but the former is much longer to read). What is the
> point?
Personally, I reason that if I get "No manual entry", it is a program
that probably shouldn't have entered myself, but if I get und
quot;update excuses":
turqstat 2.0.2 (currently 1.2-1) (optional) (low)
Maintainer: peter karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
turqstat uploaded 52 days ago, out of date by 42 days!
> out of date on i386: xturqstat (from 2.0.2.0.1)
> th
Hi!
What's the thought about software which is only available in a
non-English language? I am thinking about packaging a client for the
LysKOM server, which is only available in Swedish (there's some support
for gettext, but no-one has bother translating the program into any
other languages yet).
What does this error message mean?
"No `START-INFO-DIR-ENTRY' and no `This file documents'.
install-info: unable to determine description for `dir' entry - giving up"
I get it when trying to install my program, which has an info file. I
have not done anything special about it more than let debhe
Josip Rodin:
> Your info file should have something like this near the top:
It hasn't. It starts like this:
===[ cut ]===
This is lyskom.info, produced by makeinfo version 4.0 from
/home/peter/tmp/sgmltmp.lyskom32294.info.2.
\input texinfo
^_
File: lyskom.info, Node: Top, Next: Inledning,
Hi!
Lintian warns me about that I should add --section to install-info and
points me to check for a good section in /usr/share/info/dir, but that
directory doesn't exist on my system... The install-info doesn't
recomment any valid sections either... Is there any canonical list?
--
\\//
peter - h
Hi!
Can a single binary package have a different name than the source package it
comes from?
I am packaging the LysKOM tty-client, which has the upstream name
tty-client, but I have received requests for renaming the Debian package to
lyskom-tty-client. Can I do that without changing the name of
file
dh_gencontrol: command returned error code
make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1
===[ cut ]===
The weird thing with it is that dpkg-parsechangelog does not give any
errors:
===[ cut ]===
$ dpkg-parsechangelog ; echo $?
Source: turqstat
Version: 2.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: peter kar
Eric Van Buggenhaut:
> > .
> ^^^
> You sure about that period ?
It's just in the parsed output, not in the original, and I think is
supposed to look like that.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.sof
peter karlsson:
> I'm getting a weird error from debhelper; it says that it cannot
> parse the changelog:
D'uh! I forgot I split the changelog into one per each binary package
generated from the sources. The error message was for the *other*
changelog file...
--
\
Hi!
What does this mean?
dpkg-gencontrol: error: source package has two conflicting values - turqstat
and xturqstat
My source package "turqstat" generates two binary packages, "turqstat"
and "xturqstat". They each have their own changelogs (debian/changelog
and debian/xturqstat.changelog), and
Wichert Akkerman:
> You can't do that, changelogs have to be shared.
Why? The changelog lists what was changed between the versions, and that
differens between the two binary packages I created (there was a feature
only added to the command line version, not the GUI version), and I want
that refl
Steve Langasek:
> Since this is the Debian changelog rather than an upstream changelog, the
> majority of changes noted are specific to the shared debian directory, of
> which there is precisely one for any set of binary packages that are built
> from a single source package.
Well, first of all,
Steve Langasek:
> Do you ever intend to release this software as a tarball for use outside
> of Debian?
Yes, the tarball that I create for Debian is also distributed from my
homepage (together with Debian packages compiled for potato, for those that
do not use unstable), along with a RAR package
Matthew Palmer:
I just had another thought -- make a -1 revision with an empty diff.
Weird, but I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work...
That usually works just fine, and it what I do when I release jwhois, since
I have also been doing the upstream releases. The debian subdirectory is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If a package creates a user when it is installed, should it remove this user
when it is removed, on only when it is purged?
IMHO, when it is purged. At least if it may own the configuration files that
removing the package may leave behind. For the package I have that creates a
Mark Roach:
> These are native packages i.e. The debian packaging info is part of
> the upstream tarball (I am the author). It is my understanding that
> since there is no difference between upstream and packaged versions
> no diff is necessary... isn't this right?
When I've released upstream sof
Hi!
Are you really supposed to include debhelper in the Build-Depends line?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
H. S. Teoh:
> [NON-Text Body part not included]
I'm sorry, could you please repeat that, but this time readable?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
--
To UNS
Hi!
How do I get update-alternatives to keep information when upgrading a
package?
Currently I have postinst add it and prerm remove it, but if I set the
alternative to point to something else than the default, this means
that that information gets lost everytime I upgrade the package...
(The p
Hi!
I just found a Linux implementation of one of my all-time favourite
MS-DOS games, the 3D Tetris clone Frac3D, going under the name ifrac.
The program claims to be open source, but the license is home-brewed,
and it has some exceptions that make me uncertain whether it actually
is DFSG free, a
Oliver M . Bolzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> OUT. Undoubtly against DFSG point 6.
> OUT. Undoubtly against DFSG point 3, also the exceptions of point 4 are
> not applicible.
> Again point 5
All right. As I thought, then.
> Maybe you could try to convince upstream to change the licence. He wants
>
Steve Robbins:
> > copyright-file-contains-full-license might be better.
>
> I don't think that is better: sometimes the copyright file *should* be the
> full license.
>
> The only time it should NOT be, is if the copyright is one of those stored
> in /usr/share/common-licenses.
copyright-file-d
Hi!
Which of Debian's architectures are big-endian, and are there any
machines online that I, as a Debian developer, can log in and test the
software I maintain to see if it works properly on big-endian?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail acc
Ben Collins:
> SPARC and PowerPC are big-endian. You can login to vore.debian.org using
> your developer account. This is an ultrasparc system.
All right, I'm trying to check on vore now, the problem is that it
lacks some key software (like gdb) that would be nice for debugging...
Who do I cont
Hi!
I have a program that is building against Qt 2.1 that I would like to
upload, but I notice that only Qt 2.2 is available in woody, and I
would prefer not to install Qt 2.2, since it requires XFree86 4.0.1,
which removes a number of programs that I use regurarly.
Should I
1) upload the packa
1 - 100 of 224 matches
Mail list logo
