On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 08:30:52PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> While I fully support properly marking obsolete packages by putting
> them in the (unfortunately misnamed :) oldlibs section (well excluding
> library-like depended on packages that get dropped as a mater of course).
> I wanted to not
Hi!
On Thu, 2024-03-28 at 09:58:29 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> On Thu 07 Mar 2024 at 11:22pm +01, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > diff --git a/policy/ch-source.rst b/policy/ch-source.rst
> > index 4307e89..2fb05cd 100644
> > --- a/policy/ch-source.rst
> > +++ b/policy/ch-source.rst
> > @@ -685,7 +685,7
Hi!
On Wed, 2024-04-17 at 04:24:16 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Package: developers-reference
> Version: 13.5
> Severity: normal
> Now that the deborphan package has been removed from unstable,
> the section "Make transition packages deborphan compliant" in
> "Best Packaging Practices" is out
Hi!
On Thu, 2024-04-18 at 23:29:11 +0300, Maytham Alsudany wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 4.7.0.0
> Severity: normal
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org
> In early 2022, Guillem added support for a new Static-Built-Using field to
> dpkg, encouraging packagers to use it over
El 15/4/24 a las 22:26, Bill Allombert escribió:
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 09:52:39AM +, MOESSBAUER, Felix wrote:
On Fri, 04 Aug 2023 10:44:38 + sohe4b+2fz7rb0ixc53g@cs.email wrote:
Package: base-files
Version: 12.4+deb12u1
Followup-For: Bug #1039979
Control: tags -1 patch
I attach a pat
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:29:11PM +0300, Maytham Alsudany wrote:
> +``Static-Built-Using``
> +~~
IMO this should not only state when it is to be used, but also what
it is used for and by whom. IOW who is the intended receiver. What
will they do with the info provided in this f
6 matches
Mail list logo
