Re: How do I know if my package is 'arch-all' or 'arch-any'?

2009-12-29 Thread Iustin Pop
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 11:38:11PM +0200, anatoly techtonik wrote: > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 11:01 PM, W. Martin Borgert > wrote: > > Quoting "anatoly techtonik" : > >> > >> python-support README [1] contains different instructions for > >> 'arch-all' and 'arch-any' packaged. How do I know which

Re: Documenting Python Debuntuisms

2010-07-14 Thread Iustin Pop
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:56:02AM +0100, Suno Ano wrote: > > Barry> We had a report in upstream Python from a user who was trying to > Barry> find information about dist-packages. He did a Google search and > Barry> didn't find any definitive official explanation of this > Barry> Debuntuism.

Re: guidelines for sphinx based documentation?

2012-05-23 Thread Iustin Pop
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:02:30PM +0200, Tim Michelsen wrote: > Hello, > is there any recipe/snippet for how to install or treat a sphinx > based python package documentation in debian/rules? Hi, Have you looked at dh_sphinxdoc? regards, iustin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ.

Re: python debug packages

2016-05-14 Thread Iustin Pop
On 2016-04-22 19:36:12, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 22.04.2016 16:58, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote: > > Hi > > > > Now that debug symbols are automatically generated in -dbgsym packages, > > how do you handle the debug > > /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/.x86_64-linux-gnu_d.so files? > > >

Re: getmail: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye

2019-11-13 Thread Iustin Pop
On 2019-11-13 15:06:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 11/12/19 4:37 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > The related binary packages are available in 2 binary names (depending on > > release) > > getmail4 (version=4,5) popcon installed ~2000 > > getmail (version=3,5) popcon installed ~1000 > > > > https://q

Re: Bug#936604: getmail: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye

2019-11-13 Thread Iustin Pop
On 2019-11-14 00:24:15, Osamu Aoki wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 03:31:04PM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote: > > On 2019-11-13 15:06:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > > On 11/12/19 4:37 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > > The related binary packages are available in 2 binary names

Re: Python 2.1/2.2 removal; Python 2.4 as default

2006-04-07 Thread Iustin Pop
adding 2.4. However, I've been unable to find a sponsor. Regards, Iustin Pop signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Python 2.1/2.2 removal; Python 2.4 as default

2006-04-07 Thread Iustin Pop
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:38:43PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: > I've already re-built these two packages, removing 2.1 and 2.2 support > and adding 2.4. However, I've been unable to find a sponsor. Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Will update the bug reports later today w

Re: amd64 uploads

2006-04-09 Thread Iustin Pop
someone from debian-python can step up as a sponsor ? I offered > him to do so, but I'm not *that* python interested, and someone more > involved with python would surely be better. That would be great, indeed. Thanks, Iustin Pop signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Request for help to convert the lyx package

2006-08-02 Thread Iustin Pop
ild time, so one did not have to bother with their removal. Are the new fancy tools not doing this (asks a developer still not up-to-date with the new python policy)? Thanks, Iustin Pop -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Request for help to convert the lyx package

2006-08-02 Thread Iustin Pop
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:02:05PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > Le mer 2 août 2006 19:51, Iustin Pop a écrit : > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 07:42:40PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > and the pyo and pyc files are generated by your build process. you > > > have t