Re: RFS: yougrabber

On 19/12/2007, chaica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Package name: yougrabber > Version : 0.29.2-2 You still haven't fixed everything I pointed out[1] last time you asked for a sponsor, please fix them. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/12/msg00222.html -- Atomo64 -

Re: RFS: yougrabber

Hello again, Using DEB_BUILD_OPTS=noopt doesn't make any change while building the package, this should be fixed (you don't seem to be passing the CFLAGS to make). You aren't using the configure target, you should also remove it. Also, as I said on my first message, why don't you let dh_shlibdeps

Re: Sponsor for existing libapache-mod-* packages.

On 27/01/2008, Andreas Wenning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think you should talk to the Debian QA team and see if the maintainer > > can be classified as "missing in action" (MIA). > > Do they have a mailing list or IRC-channel that I could use? I just asked: [12:01] coven was set ok for 1y

Re: How to have automated versionning with the php5-cli (=XXX) | php5-cgi (=XXX) | libapache2-mod-php5 (=XXX)

On 29/01/2008, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:14:07PM +0800, Thomas Goirand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm trying to build a package for eaccelerator. As most of the time, we > > do put things in production on our servers BEFORE attempting to

Re: List of out-of-date packages on a given architecture.

Charles Plessy wrote: > Dear Mentors, > > I was just wondering if there was a tool accsssible to non-DDs, that > would allow to get the list of packages that have been uploaded more > than 10 days ago, but never built on a given architecture. I am about to > write an email to the buildd admin of

Re: Lintian: outdated-autotools-helper-file

Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 01:40:07PM -0600, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz > wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 08:27:52PM +0100, David Paleino wrote: >> > E: gnome-translate source: outdated-autotools-helper-file config.guess >> > 2003-07-02 >> > >> > What am I supposed to do? I b

RFC: kgb -- Archiver for .kgb files (doesn't work on non-32bits archs, changes made to address that issue)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, This package is already in the archive, and I have DM upload rights for it. A few days ago I noticed this package doesn't work on non 32bits architectures so I've done a few changes to the package. The relevant part of changelog of the next u

Re: RFC: kgb -- Archiver for .kgb files (doesn't work on non-32bits archs, changes made to address that issue)

Hi Laszlo, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: > Hi Raphael, > > On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 20:19 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> This package is already in the archive, and I have DM upload rights for >> it. A few days ago I noticed this package doesn't work on non 32bits >>

Re: RFC: kgb -- Archiver for .kgb files (doesn't work on non-32bits archs, changes made to address that issue)

Raphael Geissert wrote: > Hi Laszlo, > > Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: >> Your package has some problems. It FTBFS on my x86_64 arch: >> dh_testdir >> g++ -Wall -fno-strict-aliasing -m32 -O3 -gstabs -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE >> -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -o kgb kgb_arc

Re: kgb -- Archiver for .kgb files (doesn't work on non-32bits archs, changes made to address that issue)

Joe Smith wrote: > > I am not a DD or DM, nor have I checked your actual packaging, but your > explanations of the changes made sound reasonable sane. Obviously it would > be nice for true 64 bit versions to eventually be built, but those changes > sound like they should result in working 32 bit e

Re: Test suites

Neil Williams wrote: > make check Please use $(MAKE) instead of calling make directly. Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RFS: php5-rar

Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 27/04/2008, Deepak Tripathi wrote: >> >> > It builds these binary packages: >> > php5-rar - rar module for PHP 5 >> >> Ah, I forgot that point: is the algo the same as in unrar? unrar-free? >>

Re: RFS: php5-rar

[Please reply to the list, I _do_ read it] 2008/4/27 Deepak Tripathi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > Yes it does contain the PHP 3.01 license but it is now acceptable. check the > php-apc package in mirror it also has PHP license 3.01. No it doesn't, it is released under the PHP licence version 3.

Re: RFS: php5-rar

Deepak Tripathi wrote: >> > > >> > > Yes it does contain the PHP 3.01 license but it is now acceptable. You were talking about php-rar, weren't you? Well, I was talking about php-rar too when I said it was released under the PHP licence version 3.0, not 3.01. Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please

Call for help: please read (bashisms)

_, which means there might be some bashisms left in other places (suggestions and patches welcome!). Examples: Running checkbashisms-in-package.sh without any argument will display: $ ./checkbashisms-in-package.sh checkbashisms-in-package.sh foo.deb [bar.deb [...]] Simple script to run checkbashis

Re: Call for help: please read (bashisms)

Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> I would like to request everybody to check for bashisms in the packages >> they: prepare, review, and upload. >> lintian is currently not able to check

Re: RFS: php5-rar

Hi, [Really, please, _stop_ sending a copy of the message to my email address. Please _only_ send it to the mailing list.] Deepak Tripathi wrote: > Hi , > I am really sorry for spam but i have checked both license and i found > that both is 3.01. > Please check the following links > > http://pec

RFH: kgb FTBFS in arm (ignoring packed attribute because of unpacked non-POD field)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, After having several troubles getting kgb to be built and be functional on all the architectures, with my -8 upload I tried to make it work by using the packed attribute, as the code relies on the size of the structures (I've already contacted

Re: RFS: lockrun

Noah Slater wrote: ... > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lockrun/lockrun_1-1.dsc $ dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lockrun/lockrun_1-1.dsc dget: retrieving http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lockrun/lockrun_1-1.dsc % Total% Received % Xfer

Re: RFS: greenwich (updated and adopted package)

Hi David, David Paleino wrote: > > > The package appears to be lintian clean; I've added a lintian override for You forgot that :) $ licensecheck src/greenwich.pl src/greenwich.pl: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) $ grep Version LICENSE Version 2, June 199

Re: RFS: greenwich (updated and adopted package)

David Paleino wrote: > > Updated package at usual URI: > > debian/rules: > dh_installexamples ... > dh_strip ... > dh_shlibdeps you don't need them, do you? :) Btw, don't you think there's a better place for the con

Re: RFS: greenwich (updated and adopted package)

David Paleino wrote: > On Fri, 02 May 2008 12:57:26 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > >> Btw, don't you think there's a better place for the contents of >> debian/README.Debian? > > I've not written that, it's from the old maintainer. I believ

Re: Bug#478387: glunarclock: bashism in debian/rules

[CC'ing -mentors] Hi Fabian, 2008/5/3 Fabian Greffrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi Raphael, > > thanks for the pointer. Would you mind sponsoring the upload? I'm afraid I can't sponsor your package, I am not a DD. But hopefully a potential sponsor in -mentors will read this message, review the

Re: Easy way to retrieve build logs from buildd.d.o?

Frank S. Thomas wrote: > > # Retrieve all build logs of the package hello. > $ getbuildlog.sh hello > > # Retrieve mips and mipsel build logs of hello 2.2-{1,2}. > $ getbuildlog.sh hello '2\.2-.' 'mips(|el)' > > Do you think this script would be a useful addition for devscripts? Better ask

Re: RFS: lockrun

Neil Williams wrote: Just re-reading what you said: ... > CC=cc > endif > That will cause troubles when using CC=gcc-4.3 dpkg-buildpackage (for example in i386, where 4.3 is not the default gcc). Something like CC=$(CC) should be used (the intention is to preserve the original $(CC), but of co

Re: RFS: lockrun

Noah Slater wrote: > On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 10:54:56AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> Please upload your key to a public keyserver. > > Very strange, my key has been uploaded for months. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~ $ gpg --recv-key 0x8FBFCFBF > gpg: requesting key

Re: RFS: lockrun

Neil Williams wrote: > On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 16:37 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> >> $(OURCC) $(CFLAGS) lockrun.c -o lockrun > > OUR is the wrong prefix, CROSSCC is probably better. > The thing is that it is not always used for cross compiling, so I don't t

Re: RFS: php-ssh2, php-geoip (new packages)

Vincent Bernat wrote: > > The licence (2.02) is not suitable for main but for php itself. You > should convince upstream to upgrade to 3.01 or to a more common license > like GPL. Please don't request to move to GPL, as the packages would then need an exception because of a licence conflict

Re: RFS: lockrun

Hi there, Noah Slater wrote: ... > > Would you mind taking another look at this package following these > changes? debian/copyright: > Debianized-By: Noah Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Debianized-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 22:58:05 + You should read the wiki page again now, those have a differen

Re: RFS: lockrun

Noah Slater wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:04:30PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> debian/copyright: By the way, where did you get this line from? > Copyright: Copyright 2008, Stephen J. Friedl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't see any statement in the .c file that it

Re: --as-needed

Jeffrey Ratcliffe wrote: ... > that defaulted to 4.2.4-1. Why didn't I get 4.3? How do I force 4.3 in > the sid pbuilder? did you update your chroot? gcc in sid is 4.3, in lenny is 4.2. To force it, in your .pbuilderrc (I've never tried by using them directly on the shell): EXTRAPACKAGES="gcc-4.

Re: RFS: P4A - PHP For Applications

Andrea Giardina wrote: > Hello to everybody, > I'm searching a sponsor to upload p4a dep package on Debian. > ... Could you please provide more information? and not just marketing-like information please. > > You can find the debian package and changes here: > http://p4a.crealabsfoundation.org

Re: RFS: P4A - PHP For Applications

Andrea Giardina wrote: > >> WEBSERVERS="apache apache-ssl apache2" >> >> the first two no longer exist. > ok, right... > >> why don't you just ship the file directly into apache2's config dir? > because p4a it's a library (in your application you must require > p4a/p4a.php) but it has also to be

Re: RFS: lockrun

Noah Slater wrote: > I am dropping my intended maintainership for the `lockrun` package. > > Details can be found here: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=461915 > What has upstream's response? If you really want the package in Debian but upstream doesn't want to integrate

Re: RFS: P4A - PHP For Applications

Andrea Giardina wrote: ... Sorry, my bad. I'm used to dealing with apache modules (which are managed via a {en,dis}mod). The behaviour of your post{inst,rm} are right. > > >>> uhm, fckeditor it's been patced to work with p4a so I think it must >>> stay in p4a package. >> >> What kind of patche

Re: RFS: libzendframework-php

Andrea Giardina wrote: ... > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libzendframework-php/libzendframework-php_1.5.2-1.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. If it had been so simple I'd have uploaded the package several months ago. Please don't use such generic pa

Re: RFS: libzendframework-php

Andrea Giardina wrote: >> Please don't use such generic packaging and actually read what I already >> wrote. > Of cource I read your code but I had a different approach. I chose to > not package differents upstream's archives in the same deb source so I > packaged _only_ the library. I meant on

Re: RFS: libzendframework-php

Andrea Giardina wrote: >> I meant on the report; there are copyright and licence issues in some of >> the files. > I read your copyright notes in svn and i found all copyright problems > in tests and demos but i deleted these directory in my first package > release so I deleted also copyright noti

Re: Question about watch-file

Russ Allbery wrote: > Patrick Schoenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Well, the problem with your solution is that you silence an indicator >> for a problem anyway. Someone who looks at the lintian status of the >> package can do this from the outside and can decide to act upon. If you >> ad

Re: DEHS bug report [was Re: Question about watch-file]

David L. Anselmi wrote: > Ben Finney wrote: > [...] >> DEHS already clearly shows packages for which the upstream version >> can't be checked; e.g. see >> http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/maintainer.php?name=lojban-common>. > > What does "Tot Upstream Bugs:" mean? > > E.g., for html2ps there are 10

Re: Question about watch-file

David L. Anselmi wrote: > Raphael Geissert wrote: >> Russ Allbery wrote: >>> This is a problem that can be easily fixed if desired by, for instance, >>> having the Debian External Health Status system extract watch files >>> containing only comments and put the

Re: Question about watch-file

Ben Finney wrote: > > Bug report: The file contents should be interpreted as UTF-8 encoding. > Apparently it's not: the output I see at that URL today is (in part): Fixed. htmlentities() was messing the special characters instead of making them display properly. Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Pl

Re: Question about watch-file

Ben Finney wrote: > Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Ben Finney wrote: >> > >> > Bug report: The file contents should be interpreted as UTF-8 >> > encoding. >> >> Fixed. htmlentities() was messing the special chara

Re: Lintian error

Charliej wrote: > > With that said this is a quote from my upstream: > > "Whee, is this something you could take care of at install, delete and > then create a symlink. Or would this still violate this policy" > > Would this be a viable solution? (I told upstream I would ask) > > I don't thi

Re: Lintian error

[Please respect the CoC[0] and avoid sending me copies of the message] [0]http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct Charliej wrote: > Raphael Geissert wrote: >> Charliej wrote: >> >>> With that said this is a quote from my upstream: >>> >>> &q

Re: RFS: liboauth-php

Daniel Watkins wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "liboauth-php". > > * Package name: liboauth-php > Version : 0.0~svn620 Package versioning is wrong, please refer to policy. > Upstream Author : Andy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> . > * License

Re: RFS: liboauth-php

Hi Daniel, Daniel Watkins wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:01:16 -0500 > Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Upstream Author : Andy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> . >> > * License : MIT >> >> Oh rea

Re: RFS: libmarkdown-php

Hi, Please take liboauth-php's review and fix the same applying issues on this package. Cheers, -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a

Re: RFS: libxmpp-php

A very quick look reveals some inconsistencies between the Copyright/Upstream information in debian/copyright and the one available in the .php files. And, I see you have a patch in debian/patches but you are not applying it and running the test suite at build time (making the phpunit b-d complete

Re: RFS: libmarkdown-php

Hi Daniel, debian/rules: The package FTBFS twice in a row because it moves the "PHP Markdown Readme.text" in the main directory without rolling back that change at the clean target (another possible solution would be to rename the file once it is under debian/). debian/copyright: The same issue a

Re: RFS: libxmpp-php

Hi Daniel, Daniel Watkins wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:09:34 -0500 > Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> A very quick look reveals some inconsistencies between the >> Copyright/Upstream information in debian/copyright and the one >> available in

Re: No sponsor found for weeks, what to do now?

Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO Lors de la soirée naissante du mercredi 27 août 2008, vers 18:24, > Andreas Schildbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait : > >> phpmyid - standalone, single user, OpenID identity provider >> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/phpmyid > > You can try to ask for

Re: No sponsor found for weeks, what to do now?

[Please don't send me a copy of the message, thanks.] Kartik Mistry wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 5:53 AM, Raphael Geissert > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (xlintian is an alias to the dev copy of lintian on my machine, which >> also happens to have a couple or mo

Re: RFS: wordpress-openid [was: Re: No sponsor found for weeks, what to do now?]

Andreas Schildbach wrote: > Hi Raphael, > > On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 19:23 -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > >> Andreas, please don't take these wrong but your packages really need a >> lot of changes and reading the documentation and looking at different >> pa

Re: RFS: phpmyid

Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO En ce début d'après-midi ensoleillé du jeudi 28 août 2008, vers > 15:04, Andreas Schildbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait : > >>> In debian/control, your dependencies are too strict. > >> I relaxed the dependencies. However, how can I know that my package >> actual

Re: RFS: wordpress-openid

Andreas Schildbach wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "wordpress-openid". > > * Package name: wordpress-openid > Version : 2.2.1-1 > Upstream Author : Will Norris, Alan J. Castonguay, Factory Joe > * URL : http://wordpress.org/extend/

Re: RFS: xinha

Hi Mathieu, Mathieu PARENT wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xinha". > > * Package name: xinha > Version : 0.95~rc2-1 Version 0.95 has now been released, could you please update the package? DD's: can anyone take a look at the package when upd

Re: RFS: xinha

George Danchev wrote: > On Saturday 30 August 2008 04:30:21 Raphael Geissert wrote: > > Hello, > >> > * Package name: xinha >> > Version : 0.95~rc2-1 >> >> Version 0.95 has now been released, could you please update the package? >>

Re: RFS: xinha

Mathieu Parent wrote: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Raphael Geissert > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Mathieu, >> >> Mathieu PARENT wrote: >> >>> Dear mentors, >>> >>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xinha&qu

Re: RFS: copher

Hi, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/copher > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main contrib non-free > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/

Re: RFS: libmarkdown-php

Daniel Watkins wrote: > Hi Raphael, > > Thanks for the continuing attention. > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:16:14 -0500 > Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> debian/rules: >> The package FTBFS twice in a row because it moves the "PHP Markdown >

Re: RFS: libmarkdown-php

Daniel Watkins wrote: > On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 14:22:32 -0500 > > The updated package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libmarkdown-php > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main contrib non-free > - dget >

Re: Choosing a sensible name for a new package split from octave3.0

Rafael Laboissiere wrote: ... > > octave3.0-mscripts (although, there will be other files than *.m in > the > package) ... > > Suggestions? > Why not just octave3.0-scripts? (note the missing 'm'). It would make more sense than a -data or -common package to me as it really descr

Re: apt-proxy, apt-cacher & approx

Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi, > > We've been using apt-proxy for about a year, and then found it quite > buggy. So we moved to using apt-cacher. Now we have loads of problems > with apt-cacher as well (like currently, a recurring tzdata size They will go away if you unlink the .deb file in /var/ca

Re: question

i could say that possible candidate packages for > this file are x,y,z... That's what Build-Depends are for: there you specify the name of the packages required to build the package; and of course you can use ORed dependencies, e.g. Build-Depends: foo | bar > > many thanks Chee

Re: question

Dionysis Kalofonos wrote: > Hello Raphael, > > thank you for replying. > > Raphael Geissert wrote: >> That's what Build-Depends are for: there you specify the name of the >> packages required to build the package; and of course you can use ORed >> depen

Re: Automated checks for correct ‘build’ and ‘clean’ behaviour

hose bugs. pbuilder support hook scripts which can help you do most of the stuff automagically (once coded, of course). Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Using pbuilder to test packages with gcc-snapshot

ot; EXTRAPACKAGES="gcc-snapshot ${EXTRAPACKAGES}" > > My pbuilder configuration contains the interactive shell hook(s): > > http://people.debian.org/~pabs/tmp/pbuilder.tar.gz > Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#495542: RFS: libcas-php

proper sanitation of getCallbackURL which uses data like REQUEST_URI; and there's more about this, but I'm better going to test it and send the info to bugtraq. What about also shipping the api docs? > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. > > Kind

Fwd: Re: RFS: xinha

ping --- Forwarded message (begin) Subject: Re: RFS: xinha From: Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 14:43:51 -0600 Newsgroup: gmane.linux.debian.devel.mentors Mathieu Parent wrote: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Raphael Geissert > <[

Re: Bug#495542: RFS: libcas-php

Hi, [No need to CC me as long as -mentors is] Olivier Berger wrote: > Hi. > > Thanks for your review. I'll respond bellow. > > Le lundi 17 novembre 2008 à 15:20 -0600, Raphael Geissert a écrit : >> Olivier Berger wrote: >> [...] >> > >>

Re: Re: RFS: xinha

http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html > > (http://evan.prodromou.name/ccsummary/ccsummary.html) ^^^ Nice, this is the same file :) > > > Mathieu Parent Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: RFS: xinha

call&rev=REVISION You are actually supposed to replace REVISION with the revision of the page you based your copyright file on. debian/examples: I can see some references to the php-xinha.php file in xinha itself, are you sure it should be installed just as an example? Cheers, -- Raphael Geiss

Re: Re: RFS: xinha

Hi, 2008/11/23 Mathieu Parent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi, > > > Thanks for all your help > > 2008/11/23 Raphael Geissert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [...] >> >>> Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 6.0.7~) >> >> what is that tilde doing there? (lintia

Re: RFS: webcpp

ked. Then the new upload could be made. OR The new package could be uploaded and the RT contacted so that it gets unblocked once the 10 days delay is over. > > Mraw, > KiBi. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Re: RFS: webcpp

Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:39:04PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> The only reason why I would recommend to wait is because the package >> currently in sid should probably be unblocked. Then the new upload could be >> made. OR >> The new pa

Re: RFS: webcpp

rently in sid fixes a fairly nasty bug, but it > doesn't cause data loss or anything so I don't know if it should qualify > as an RC bug. > If the diffstat is not large, and the changes are not just cosmetic, it is very likely that it will get unblocked. Cheers, -- Raphael Gei

RFS: ganttpv (was: Re: Processed: owner 509061)

cessing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: >> >>> owner 509061 Brian C. Christensen >> >> Bug 509061 [wnpp] ITP: ganttpv -- project scheduling software >> Owner recorded as Brian C. Christensen . >>> >> End of message, stopping processing here. >&g

Re: Added requirement for translation of debconf templates

I'm willing to help it get in the archive", the package maintainer should then send the request for translations. Other than that, +1 for pushing this idea. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-r

Re: RFS: whohas (bugfix)

> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/whohas/whohas_0.22-2.dsc Why do you think the information in README.Debian is relevant to anyone installing the package? Also, some typos in README.Debian: Intrebid wih upsream Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.

Re: RFS: tkgate (updated package)

quilt-patch-missing-description 02_manpages.diff Please improve the packages descriptions. Typos in debian/control: langauge Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subj

Re: RFS: sl-modem (updated package)

iption class_device.diff Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: sl-modem (updated package)

Hi Neil, Neil Williams wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:08:53 -0600 > Raphael Geissert wrote: > >> > The package appears to be lintian clean. >> >> Not really: >> $ lintian --pedantic -IE --show-overrides sl-modem*dsc >> W: sl-modem source: deb

Re: RFS: sl-modem (updated package)

أحمد المحمودي wrote: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 07:41:08PM +, Neil Williams wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:08:53 -0600 >> Raphael Geissert wrote: >> >> > > The package appears to be lintian clean. >> > >> > Not really: >> > $ lin

Re: RFS: sl-modem (updated package)

أحمد المحمودي wrote: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 09:04:42PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: >> >> Have you read the tag's description? it is not as to what the package does. > > You mean the long description ? I fixed it & uploaded. No, I mean this: $ lintian

Re: Re: RFS: xinha

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Mathieu, Daniel, Sorry for the late response, it's until now that I'm reading old messages from -mentors. Mathieu Parent wrote: > 2008/11/29 Mathieu Parent : >> 2008/11/27 Raphael Geissert : >> [...] >>> >>

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

Dear mentors, I've made the necessary changes to my package "php-ffmpeg" so it only creates the php5-ffmpeg binary package. The package is lintian clean The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-ffmpeg - Source repository: deb-src ht

RFS: php-adodb

bphp-adodb). * Due to the directory name the version is 504 (real version is 5.04), is there any need of modifying it, and if so, how can I do it? Kind regards Raphael Geissert -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosop

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

Hi, First of all, thanks for the reply. On 03/05/07, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le Friday 04 May 2007 00:32:51 Raphael Geissert, vous avez écrit: > Dear mentors, Hi ! > I've made the necessary changes to my package "php-ffmpeg" so it onl

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

On 04/05/07, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le Friday 04 May 2007 03:45:01 Raphael Geissert, vous avez écrit: > Could you please check if the changes I made (removed -2) are ok? Link ? :) http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-ffmpeg Source repository: deb

Packaging php5-qt

Dear mentors, I'm trying to package the php5-qt extension, but I've encountered some issues that I would like to know your opinions in order to correctly handle the situation. First of all, when the extension is compiled, the resulting name is php_qt.so; instead of the usual NAME.so (which in th

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

Hello, On 04/05/07, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le Friday 04 May 2007 21:22:39, vous avez écrit: > > Link ? :) > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/php-ffmpeg > Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main contrib non-free Ok, now as far

Re: Copyright issues GPL-PHP license

Hello, On 5/6/07, Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This isn't about PHP, it isn't about copyright, it is simply a bad package that was badly thought out and badly implemented with the wrong design in mind. The idea of a web server written in PHP is ludicrous. In my very personal opini

Re: Copyright issues GPL-PHP license

On 06/05/07, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 08:29:37PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sunday 6 May 2007 20:23, David Paleino wrote: > > Why? > > And a web server written in awk, then? Is that of any real-world use? > > I've seen implementat

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

Hello, On 07/05/07, Reinhard Tartler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.devel.mentors as well. "Raphael Geissert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Build dependencies are ok no

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

On 07/05/07, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le Saturday 05 May 2007 02:59:10, vous avez écrit: > > Ok, now as far as i can see, debian packaging stuff seems alright, but > > there are some modifications on source files contained in the diff.gz. My > > personal policy is to put everythi

Re: RFS: php-ffmpeg

On 12/05/07, Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Le Wednesday 09 May 2007 00:36:17, vous avez écrit: > Ok, I will move the modifications made to the files under tests/ to > debian/patches. > I can't make one that moves tests/test_ffmpeg.php to ./ because that > file is deleted when calling

Re: RFS: kplayer

This package is already available at www.debian-multimedia.org I would say there's a reason why it isn't in the official repositories. Christian is a DD so he doesn't need any sponsor ;) -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/p

RFS: kgb

/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kgb/kgb_1.0b4-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Raphael Geissert -- Atomo64 - Raphael Please avoid sending me Word, PowerPoint or Excel attachments. See ht

Re: RFS: crosstex

On 14/06/07, Robert Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am seeking a sponsor for CrossTeX, maintained by myself and Emin Gun Sirer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. The URL above has a link to download the source tarballs and Debian package information from the CrossTeX SourceForge project page. In my p

  1   2   >