Re: RFS: quickrdp

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 07:42:23 +0100 Tobias Eliasson wrote: > On 01/30/2012 12:13 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote: > > > > The default value for "Locale telnet/Perl/SSH executable" dialogs > > appears to be "gnome-terminal". (??!) > It launches a terminal for launching the actual executable. It's not > rest

Bug#661389: RFS: roxterm/2.5.2-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.5.2-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://roxterm.sourceforge.net * License : GPL-

Bug#661389: RFS: roxterm/2.5.2-1

On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 21:11:30 + Tony Houghton wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" > > * Package name: roxterm >Version : 2.5.2-1 It

Bug#661389: RFS: roxterm/2.5.3-1 (was 2.5.2-1)

The latest version of this package is now 2.5.3-1: * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.5.3-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://roxterm.sourceforge.net * License : GPL-2+, LGPL-3+ Section : x11 It builds these binary packages

Best use of bug tracker for a complicated situation

I maintain roxterm. The source package of that name generates a number of binary packages: roxterm-common, roxterm-gtk2, roxterm-gtk3 and roxterm (a virtual package depending on roxterm-gtk3). A user has reported 2 bugs with slightly different symptoms, one for roxterm-gtk2 and one for roxterm-gtk

Can't upload to mentors.debian.net

I can't upload my package (roxterm) to mentors.debian.net. I've set up my .dput.cf as suggested at . If I use the HTTP method I get "403 Forbidden" as soon as it tries to upload the .dsc file. The FTP method has partially succeeded but always times out (

Re: Can't upload to mentors.debian.net

On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:52:47 +0200 Nicolas Dandrimont wrote: > Le 18/04/2012 à 17:20, Tony Houghton écrivit : > > I can't upload my package (roxterm) to mentors.debian.net. [Snip] > You can also poke support@m.d.n if the upload still fails (the files are > gone, so it

Bug#669401: RFS: roxterm/2.6.1-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages] Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.6.1-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton URL

Re: Bug#669401: RFS: roxterm/2.6.2-1 (was 2.6.1-1)

/r/roxterm/roxterm_2.6.2-1.dsc On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:03:13 +0100 Tony Houghton wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" > > * Package name: roxterm > Version : 2.6.1-1 > Upstream Author : Tony Houghton > URL : http

Bug#671651: RFS: roxterm/2.6.3-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.6.3-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://roxterm.sourceforge.net * License : GPL2+

Bug#674961: RFS: roxterm/2.6.4-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.6.4-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://roxterm.sourceforge.net * License : GPL2+

Re: How to build a source tarball that includes symbolic links?

On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 05:42:56 +0200 David Lindelöf wrote: > The source of my project includes symbolic links to other source trees > (notably, the CppUTest framework and a library used by several of our > projects). When I call `dpkg-buildpackage` to build a debian package > out of my project, I've

Re: How to build a source tarball that includes symbolic links?

On Thu, 7 Jun 2012 16:19:05 +0200 David Lindelöf wrote: > As a *really temporary* workaround, is there a way I could have the > build system copy over the files to their proper locations, just for > building the package? And then delete them and reinstate the symbolic > links? Yes, in a Makefile

Bug#678552: RFS: roxterm/2.6.5-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "roxterm" * Package name: roxterm Version : 2.6.5-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton URL : http://roxterm.sourceforge.net License : GPL2+

Bug#678552: RFS: roxterm/2.6.5-1

Pinging this. I guess it may already be too late to avoid some of the extra work needed to get it into testing after the freeze though :-(. On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:59:27 +0100 Tony Houghton wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > >

Easy bugfix for roxterm: should it go into wheezy?

A bug has been found in roxterm: . I wouldn't consider it a high priority but the fix is very trivial, just adding a single line of code. Should I release this for wheezy? If so, how do I go about it? Should I open a debian bug and give it a certain prior

Re: Bug#670176:

On Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:27:15 +0100 Nick Andrik wrote: > The problem is that I ran dput yesterday but the package dis not > appear in my packages on mentor (I didn't even receive an email). > I guess it got stuck somewhere in the incoming queue. > I read somewhere that it takes 6 hours to get unstu

RFS: roxterm

The previous maintainer of roxterm, Thierry Randrianiriana, is stepping down. As the upstream developer I'd like to take over maintenance, but I need a sponsor. I already have my own debian directory for roxterm, or I could use Thierry's. Mine probably needs a bit of work with lintian etc before i

Re: RFS: roxterm

On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 18:55:41 +0100 Tony Houghton wrote: > The previous maintainer of roxterm, Thierry Randrianiriana, is stepping > down. As the upstream developer I'd like to take over maintenance, but I > need a sponsor. Sorry, I've got off to a terrible start by f

Re: RFS: roxterm

On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 19:40:12 +0100 Neil Williams wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 19:04:13 +0100 > Tony Houghton wrote: > > > The name of the packe is roxterm; if I use my own deb structure > > instead of Thierry's there may also be packages called roxterm-data, > >

RFS: roxterm (new maintainer, 1.15.1-1 ready for sponsored release)

Acting on received advice I updated the previous maintainer's packaging files and used a single package. roxterm 1.15.1-1 is ready for a prospective sponsor to test and upload it. Lintian gave a couple of warnings because it thought I was trying to perform a NMU. Presumably a sponsor will update t

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 23:05:14 +0100 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > (IANADD, so no upload from me - sorry) But thanks for your advice. > On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 10:43:04PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > Lintian gave a couple of warnings because it thought I was trying to >

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 08:44:57 +0100 Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 01:35:30AM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > I've uploaded 1.15.2-1 (I made a couple of the fixes upstream). The > > upload appeared to go OK but it isn't showing up in the pool et

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 13:59:17 +0100 Tony Houghton wrote: > Before I try uploading it again, it occurred to me that as 1.15.1-1 > hasn't been released, should I remove its entry from the changelog and > add its changes to the section for 1.15.2-1? Can anyone offer advice on that?

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:25:04 +0200 Sebastian Harl wrote: > On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 01:59:17PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > Before I try uploading it again, it occurred to me that as 1.15.1-1 > > hasn't been released, should I remove its entry from the changelog and > &

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 21:02:47 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Sure, fixing bugs is always welcome, so package reviewed and uploaded. Thanks. Should I contact you personally when I need a new release uploaded in future, or put it on sponsors.debian.net and post here again? > Everything looks fine,

Re: RFS: roxterm (now 1.15.2-1)

On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 02:18:34 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 21:02:47 +0300 > > > > George Danchev wrote: > > > Everything looks fine, except that `move-all-then-remove-some' > > > installation method [1] (which could be hazardous sometimes) could be > > > avoided by using dh_i

RFS: newsstar

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "newsstar". * Package name: newsstar Version : 1.5.4-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://newsstar.sourceforge.net * License : GPL v3 with OpenSSL exemption Section

GNOME default applications

I'm about to release a new version of roxterm and I've been asked to support GNOME default applications . Would you recommend leaving it up to the upstream Makefile or deferring it to postinst? -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk -- To

Debian changelog vs upstream changelog

What should go in a Debian changelog compared to the upstream changelog? (a) Confine it to "new upstream release", a list of any closed debian bugs and packaging changes? (b) As above plus a summary of the most important upstream changes? (c) Details of all the upstream changes too? -- TH * ht

Re: Debian changelog vs upstream changelog

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:35:34 +1100 Ben Finney wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > > What should go in a Debian changelog compared to the upstream > > changelog? > > Well now, there's “should” and there's “should”. > > > (a) Confine it to "ne

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

is package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:39:25 +0200 George Danchev wrote: > Package looks good and 557049 seems to be addressed as well, at least > works for me;-). JFYI I just run into some leftovers in the roxterm(1) > and roxterm- config(1) manpages -- they both contain [FIXME: manual] > and [FIXME: source], a

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Sat, 28 Nov 2009 09:53:09 +0200 George Danchev wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:39:25 +0200 > > > > George Danchev wrote: > > > Package looks good and 557049 seems to be addressed as well, at least > > > works for me;-). JFYI I just run into some leftovers in the roxterm(1) > > > and roxter

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

is package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.17.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Ton

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 23:44:40 +0200 George Danchev wrote: > I decided to test the new option as mentioned in the changelog "Added > always_show_tabs option", however I got lost in how the user is > supposed to change that option, since it is neither command line nor > menu one. Sure, I can stop the

RFS: sysbars

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sysbars". * Package name: sysbars Version : 0.1.3-1 Upstream Author : Tony Houghton * URL : http://www.realh.co.uk/rox.shtml#sysbars * License : GPL Section : gnome It builds th

Upgrading a package without patches to deb source 3.0

It seems like it would be a good idea to upgrade roxterm to source format 3.0. Is it as simple as creating debian/source/format containing "3.0 (quilt)" and running debuild as usual? Roxterm doesn't have any debian/patches, but I presume 3.0 (quilt) is the correct format rather than 3.0 (native) a

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.18.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:00:11 +0200 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > Dear mentors, > > Hi, > (excuse moi for the delay) > > > It doesn't fix any Debian bugs, but it addresses an Ubuntu LP feature > > request and several upstream f

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.18.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ment

Re: RFS: radiotray

On Thu, 6 May 2010 09:35:16 -0500 Elías Alejandro wrote: > >> radiotray  - online radio streaming player that runs on a Linux > >> system tray > > > > I'm probably not in a good position to go and do some nitpicking on > > other peoples package description but 'a Linux system tray' sounds > > a b

Possible trimming of build dependencies

Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man pages upstream I got a bug report because the location of docbook.xsl isn't consistent across OSs so I started using xmlto instead. The trouble with xmlto is it pu

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

On Fri, 14 May 2010 17:07:11 +0200 Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Tony Houghton , 2010-05-14, 15:41: > >Originally I used xsltproc to generate roxterm's man pages, as per > >the example in the New Maintainers' Guide, but when I moved the man > >pages upstream I got a bug

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

On Sun, 16 May 2010 21:44:42 +0900 Osamu Aoki wrote: >override_dh_auto_build: >xsltproc --nonet \ > --param make.year.ranges 1 \ > --param make.single.year.ranges 1 \ > --param man.charmap.use.subset 0 \ >

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl && > docbook-xml would not extremely trim the bits to be pulled as compared to > those pulled in the xmlto case, so don't expect big wins here ;-) AFAICT the above tr

Re: Possible trimming of build dependencies

On Sun, 16 May 2010 20:51:45 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > On Sun, 16 May 2010 19:38:59 +0300 > > > > George Danchev wrote: > > > Also, it seems to me that build-depending on xsltproc && docbook-xsl && > > > doc

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.18.3-1 of my package "roxterm". It builds these binary packages: roxterm- Multi-tabbed GTK/VTE terminal emulator The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debi

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:06:40 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > > > When I released the previous version I was contacted by a DD offering to > > sponsor roxterm and help me become a DM, but when I told him George > > Danchev had already uploaded i

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Sun, 23 May 2010 16:06:40 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.18.3-1 > > of my package "roxterm". > > > > It builds these binary packages: > > roxterm- Multi-tabbed

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:55:59 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Ops, apparently I forgot to reply to that (i.e. previous) mail for > some reason a week ago, sorry about that. I had a look at the src > diff against the version in sid, got lost into that, and decided that > large change like that to fix

Replacing my key

I'm a sponsored maintainer (of roxterm) and I've just approached a local DD to have my key signed. He pointed out that SHA1-generated keys are deprecated so I should probably generate a new, more secure, key. As my old key is already presumably "in the system" due to existing versions of roxterm, h

Re: Replacing my key

On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 22:39:02 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > I'm a sponsored maintainer (of roxterm) and I've just approached a local > > DD to have my key signed. He pointed out that SHA1-generated keys are > > deprecated so I should proba

Problem with mentors.debian.net

I uploaded a new version of roxterm, 1.18.4-1, to mentors.debian.net but it isn't showing up. The old version, 1.18.3-1, which didn't get uploaded by a sponsor, is still there. Should I have removed it first, or is there a problem with the server? ISTR people having similar problems with it in the

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

d processes with it), discussed at <http://sourceforge.net/projects/roxterm/forums/forum/422638/topic/3711088>, I think replacement of 1.18.2-1 should be given fairly high priority. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a s

Renaming installed files

(Upstream) newsstar ships with some sample config files which it installs as /etc/newsstar/*.sample (assuming sysconfdir is /etc). The user is supposed to remove the .sample suffixes and edit them to suit. For a Debian package, thanks to Debian's conffiles management, it makes more sense to instal

Re: Renaming installed files

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:50:54 -0600 Josue Abarca wrote: > I use > debian/rules: > ... > # Do not use language-specific extension (policy). > mv $(CURDIR)/debian/siege/usr/bin/siege2csv.pl > $(CURDIR)/debian/siege/usr/bin/siege2csv > ... TBH I had seen $(CURDIR) used like this before, and ev

Re: Renaming installed files

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:30:38 -0700 Russ Allbery wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > Josue Abarca wrote: > > >> I use > >> debian/rules: > >> ... > >> # Do not use language-specific extension (policy). > >> mv $(CURDIR)/debian/siege/

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:23:46 +0300 George Danchev wrote: > Tony Houghton writes: > > However, due to a bug which can cause roxterm to crash unpredictably > > (very serious because it can take any number of child processes with > > it), discussed at > > <http://so

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

is package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100723141620.0222c...@toddler

What to do about a bug found after the freeze

Hi, A bug was reported upstream in roxterm just after Squeeze's freeze: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3041926&group_id=124080&atid=698428 Not all the details are there. The main symptom is that if a profile specifies multiple tabs, the commands on the hidden ones don't get sta

Re: What to do about a bug found after the freeze

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 16:01:54 -0300 Maximiliano Curia wrote: > Hola Tony Houghton! > > El 13/08/2010 a las 16:44 escribiste: > > A bug was reported upstream in roxterm just after Squeeze's freeze: > > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3041926&gr

i18n issues, especially man pages

I've been sent a set of Spanish translations for roxterm, including the Docbook XML sources for the man pages, but I can't work out how to support internationalisation of these. The first problem is that the translator tells me that the headings - "NAME", "SYNOPSIS", "AUTHOR" etc - which are gener

Re: i18n issues, especially man pages

On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 23:34:09 +0200 Simon Paillard wrote: > On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 06:19:56PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > I've been sent a set of Spanish translations for roxterm, including the > > Docbook XML sources for the man pages, but I can't wo

Re: Doubts in Sigar packaging

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:21:29 +1000 Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 01:51:22PM -0300, Thiago Franco de Moraes > wrote: > > > > * The Source is in git [3]. I'm not using the last stable version > > because I wasn't able to compile it. What's the policy to version > > packages from

Re: Doubts in Sigar packaging

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:18:20 +0200 Adam Borowski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 01:31:39PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > > sigar-1.7.0~git833ca18ecfc1f3f45eaf8544d8cdafef6603772d > > > Yeah, that isn't going to work

Re: Doubts in Sigar packaging

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:00:27 +1000 Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 03:18:20PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > > > Why won't you just use `git --describe`? > > > > It produces nice version numbers of the format > > > > -- > > > > (or just when you're packaging a release) > >

Re: Doubts in Sigar packaging

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 18:23:17 +1000 Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:44:47PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:00:27 +1000 > > Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > > > git --describe is, as far as I can tell, useless for the purpose &g

Re: Is Debian Repeat Secure?

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 08:13:16 +0100 Chris Baines wrote: > Not a direct answer to your question, but, when I was using Ubuntu I had > a script that I was using to make about 300 packages, I only had to type > in my key once or twice. I have been trying to work out how to do it on > Debian but so fa

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

table main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.18.5-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubs

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package)

On 04/10/10 13:43, Asheesh Laroia wrote: > > For anyone reading -- it's a bug where a terminal emulator isn't setting > TERM properly. Kind of depressing, and kind of important! It's also > basically a one line change. > > Also, as advice for the future, it would have been nice if you had said >

RFS: roxterm (updated package) [highly configurable terminal emulator]

net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.18.5-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- TH * h

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package) [highly configurable terminal emulator]

On 12/10/10 00:50, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > > I'll take this. The change seems minimal, so I'll sponsor it. Please > be sure to request the release team for a freeze exception. Thanks. I've sent a message to debian-release. I don't fully understand the freeze exception process. I see you already u

roxterm resizing bug serious enough for freeze exception?

With some window managers and/or when closing many roxterm tabs rapidly with keyboard auto-repeat, closing tabs may cause the window to shrink, reducing the number of columns and/or rows in the remaining tabs' terminals (see

Re: roxterm resizing bug serious enough for freeze exception?

On 27/10/10 23:00, Simon Paillard wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 08:54:06PM +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: >> With some window managers and/or when closing many roxterm tabs rapidly >> with keyboard auto-repeat, closing tabs may cause the window to shrink, >> reducing the num

Re: roxterm resizing bug serious enough for freeze exception?

On 31/10/10 09:18, Wen-Yen Chuang wrote: Tony Houghton wrote: With some window managers and/or when closing many roxterm tabs rapidly with keyboard auto-repeat, closing tabs may cause the window to shrink, I am the upstream author and Debian package maintainer of evilvte. As far as I know

How to use --as-needed

How should one add --as-needed linker flags to an autotools-based package? I ended up adding CFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed to my dh_auto_configure parameters but is it OK to just overwrite CFLAGS like that, or should I add it to any existing CFLAGS? BTW, at first I tried LDFLAGS=--as-needed but automake

Uploading a newer version of a package that's frozen in testing

I want to get roxterm 1.20.x into Debian but there's 1.18.5-3 in testing waiting for Squeeze's release. Should 1.20.x go into experimental instead of unstable? If so do I do this just by putting "experimental" instead of "unstable" in debian/changelog and requesting sponsorship in the usual way?

RFS: roxterm (flexible terminal emulator) (updated package for experimental)

gets and since 1.18.5 the documentation has been improved and a Spanish translation added. Thanks to Scott Howard for answering my query about using experimental. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.

RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

gets and since 1.18.5 the documentation has been improved and a Spanish translation added. Thanks to Scott Howard for answering my query about using experimental. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton PS I RFSd 1.20.1-1 about a week ago but it was overlook

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On 09/01/11 14:45, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: Hi, Tony Houghton writes: I RFSd 1.20.1-1 about a week ago but it was overlooked and I received a patch this weekend so instead of pinging my previous RFS I created a new version and merged the debian/changelog entries for 1.20.1-1 through 1.20.3-1

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On 10/01/11 13:57, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: I downloaded the package from mentors.d.o, the most recent 6 changelog entries are: roxterm (1.20.3-1) experimental; urgency=low roxterm (1.19.4-1) unstable; urgency=low roxterm (1.19.3-1) unstable; urgency=low roxterm (1.19.2-1) unstable

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On 14/01/11 02:49, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: Hi! Tony Houghton writes: Please could you check the latest version: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On 15/01/11 08:26, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any clue? Can you rebuild it without the debugging symbols being strippe

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On 15/01/11 16:51, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: Tony Houghton writes: On 15/01/11 08:26, Kan-Ru Chen wrote: OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:26:43 +0800 Kan-Ru Chen wrote: > OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after > launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my > environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any clue? I can reproduce this with zsh and nano, b

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

I've filed a bug against vte upstream which you may want to subscribe to. I don't know if they'll take much notice, because the affected vte function is deprecated and I think its replacement is OK, but somebody there might know what's going on.

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:26:43 +0800 Kan-Ru Chen wrote: > OK. When I was doing the final test, roxterm existed immediately after > launch. 1.18.5-3, however, has no such problem. I suspect it's only my > environment, x86_64-linux-gnu. Do you have any clue? Kan-Ru Chen helped me identify what was c

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)

On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 19:58:13 +0800 Kan-Ru Chen wrote: > Uploaded. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110122155059.06c9012b@toddler

Re: RFS: transifex-client

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:28:15 +0200 Faidon Liambotis wrote: > Janos Guljas wrote: > > Hi Faidon, > > > > Thank you for a review. It is fixed. > > Uploaded. I'd like to use this package but I can't find it on p.d.o. They don't usually take this long to appear do they? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

s 0.27.4-1 due to bug #611826. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.

Init scripts as conffiles

I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles? Is there a good reason other than that they're in /etc and nobody bothered to make an exception in debhelper? I would have thought it would be better to treat them as not to be modified by the user/admin; any init configuration should b

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:05:41 + The Fungi wrote: > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:33:25PM +0000, Tony Houghton wrote: > [...] > > I would have thought it would be better to treat them as not to be > > modified by the user/admin; any init configuration should be done via > &g

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:33:25 + Tony Houghton wrote: > I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles? Is there a > good reason other than that they're in /etc and nobody bothered to make > an exception in debhelper? > > I would have thought it would be bet

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:06:20 -0800 Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Tony Houghton wrote: > > It wouldn't be quite so bad if packages called update-rc.d disable > > on their init scripts when removed so that init doesn't read the > > disused scripts, bu

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:50:53 +0100 Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2011-02-15 22:24 +0100, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > > On Tuesday 15 February 2011 15:16:27 Tony Houghton wrote: > >> How about I file a wishlist bug for dpkg and apt for an option > >> similar to pur

Re: Init scripts as conffiles

On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:04:10 -0600 "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote: > On Tuesday 15 February 2011 16:44:49 Matt Zagrabelny wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Joey Hess wrote: > > > Matt Zagrabelny wrote: > > >> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the > > >> reason to

RFS: roxterm (updated package, 2nd try)

s 0.27.4-1 due to bug #611826. I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.

RFS: roxterm (updated package)

a long way out of date due to Squeeze's freeze. Experimental has 1.20.7-1 (again because of the freeze). Will that automatically disappear when a newer version appears in unstable? Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org wi

  1   2   >