Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Philip Brown
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 02:02:54AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > Ok. Ok. Since the NMU did not get through, and the diff did. Could you > please take a look at it? > I will be happy to do so. Thanks for the patch file.

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 05:10:42PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > > well, since your packaged "bounced", I guess I'll submit mine then. > but I'll fix that pixmap error first. > Expect the updated packages to hit the queue in a few hours. Oh, and just for your convenience, they are also at /home/jf

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 05:10:42PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 01:45:38AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña > wrote: > > > > I cannot reproduce these errors, the .deb only spits: > > > > W: kdrill: copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate > > > > W: kd

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Philip Brown
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 01:45:38AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > > I cannot reproduce these errors, the .deb only spits: > > > W: kdrill: copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate > > > W: kdrill: menu-icon-missing /usr/X11R6/include/X11/pixmaps/kdrill.xpm > > >

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 04:46:09PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > For the record, this was NOT an approved NMU. I was happy for you to do it > previously, presuming you would show the changes to me BEFORE you > submitted, as you did the first time. But this one missed two critical > proceedural thing

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Philip Brown
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 01:07:30AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > @@ -1,3 +1,14 @@ > +kdrill (6.3.1-1.1) unstable; urgency=low > + > + * NMU (approved) > +- Fixed lintian warning (boilerplate in debian/copyright) > +- Added spanish po translation to test the po-debconf usag

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 04:15:04PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:18:33AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:38:32PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > > > I was about to upload it, and then I found that it got a plethora of > > > linti

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Philip Brown
On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 12:18:33AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:38:32PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > > I was about to upload it, and then I found that it got a plethora of > > lintian errors. > > > > W: kdrill: prerm-does-not-remove-usr-doc-link > > W:

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
Attached to this mail is the patch with the differences between Philip's 6.3.1-1 version and the 6.3.1-1.1 version I've just uploaded. Since this is an NMU, the bugs fixed by the previous version (#167374, #167375 and #169979) should now be closed manually (#221831 should be closed too in this bat

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 01:38:32PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:37:57AM -0800, Martin Quinson wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I had a look at the kdrill package because it uses old-style debconf > > templates without the po-debconf system. I was about to build a patch to > > s

Re: Bug#169979: kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Philip Brown
On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 11:37:57AM -0800, Martin Quinson wrote: > Hello, > > I had a look at the kdrill package because it uses old-style debconf > templates without the po-debconf system. I was about to build a patch to > solve this, but I notice that this package is in a very bad shape: >... I

kdrill package in a very bad shape

2004-02-17 Thread Martin Quinson
Hello, I had a look at the kdrill package because it uses old-style debconf templates without the po-debconf system. I was about to build a patch to solve this, but I notice that this package is in a very bad shape: - new upstream version 6.3.1 (07.02.2004) - FTBFS since 20 Nov 2002 for a stupid

Developer.php performance (+patch)

2004-02-17 Thread Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Hi, developer.php is quite slow sometimes, especially on people with much packages, you can notice delays, it even timeouts sometimes. The main performance hog is a linear (O(n)) search in bugs.txt for every row==package. On my tests, a linear search in a 8000 line (number of source packages) bu

about kernels

2004-02-17 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
That's for your information. Matt Z. also said he has in his own TODO list the removing of kernels with security issues before sarge releasing. - Forwarded message from Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivery-date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:01:38 +0100 From: H