On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 11:43:24AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> > > BuildGLXLibrary is true.
> >
> > Y
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 11:43:24AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> > > BuildGLXLibrary is true.
> >
> > Y
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> > BuildGLXLibrary is true.
>
> Yup, that's busted.
I guess we can live with glu.h getting installed unnece
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:10, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
> > > and get to work.
> >
> > As stated be
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:08, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> > BuildGLXLibrary is true.
>
> Yup, that's busted.
I guess we can live with glu.h getting installed unnece
On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 07:10, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
> > > and get to work.
> >
> > As stated be
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> > > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
>> > > and g
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:42:42PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> So your plan is to remove them, right?
As such, yes.
> Personally I would rather prefer to keep them in place, manly because I am
> paranoid and due to the complexity of the packages one check more (that is
> already in pla
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 02:52:58AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> I'll research waht kinds of change will be needed to use
> --list-missing and to drop MANIFEST check mechanism.
I think all we need is a kind of "ANTI-MANIFEST" ;-) which contains the
output of dh_install --list-missing from a kn
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
> > and get to work.
>
> As stated before, I'm ready to do the work. But I'd like to have at
> least a
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> BuildGLXLibrary is true.
Yup, that's busted.
> I meant to stress the need, and that it could be any package providing
> libglu-dev, should there ever be a reasonabl
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
>> > > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
>> > > and g
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 07:42:42PM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> So your plan is to remove them, right?
As such, yes.
> Personally I would rather prefer to keep them in place, manly because I am
> paranoid and due to the complexity of the packages one check more (that is
> already in pla
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 02:52:58AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> I'll research waht kinds of change will be needed to use
> --list-missing and to drop MANIFEST check mechanism.
I think all we need is a kind of "ANTI-MANIFEST" ;-) which contains the
output of dh_install --list-missing from a kn
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:58AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I think we just need someone to establish a branch, roll up his sleeves,
> > and get to work.
>
> As stated before, I'm ready to do the work. But I'd like to have at
> least a
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:02:32AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Upstream is broken, it installs all GL/ headers if BuildGlxExt ||
> BuildGLXLibrary is true.
Yup, that's busted.
> I meant to stress the need, and that it could be any package providing
> libglu-dev, should there ever be a reasonabl
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:01, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > IMO it's stupid to ship glu.h if we're not going to ship the rest of the
> > > library.
> >
> > This change doesn't
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > >
> > > 2) Build without BuildGLULibrary is not easy.
> > >
> > > Even if we decide libGLU will not ship, we need
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:09, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > >
> > > 2) Build without BuildGLULibrary is not easy.
> > >
> > > Even if we decide libGLU will not ship, we need
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 19:01, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > IMO it's stupid to ship glu.h if we're not going to ship the rest of the
> > > library.
> >
> > This change doesn't
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
>> > 3) Purpose of MANIFESTs (I believe) are checking what kind of files
>> > will be installed under debian/tmp, and *.install files or
>> >
Hi Branden,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I originally came up with the MANIFEST thing as a means of doing what
> you described, and also as a simplistic method of forcing the build to
> fail if something didn't get built.
>
> These days, which dh_install's --list-missing flag,
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
>> > 2) Build without BuildGLULibrary is not easy.
>> >
>> > Even if we decide libGLU will not ship, we need some more changes
>> > to solve problems
>>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that
> > >> reason
> > >> and others.
> >
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> 3) Purpose of MANIFESTs (I believe) are checking what kind of files
> will be installed under debian/tmp, and *.install files or
> something updates are needed.
>
> I think it is not good idea to edit MANIFESTs dir
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:34:23AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> This is not, as has been alleged, a coup, or a deliberate attempt to get
> Branden out; nor anything more sinister than a misguided attempt to work
> quickly while I had time, for which I apologize.
I accept your apology. IMO package
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > IMO it's stupid to ship glu.h if we're not going to ship the rest of the
> > library.
>
> This change doesn't ship it though, does it?
Not in the package, but the fact that
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
>> > 3) Purpose of MANIFESTs (I believe) are checking what kind of files
>> > will be installed under debian/tmp, and *.install files or
>> >
Hi Branden,
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I originally came up with the MANIFEST thing as a means of doing what
> you described, and also as a simplistic method of forcing the build to
> fail if something didn't get built.
>
> These days, which dh_install's --list-missing flag,
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Michel Dänzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
>> > 2) Build without BuildGLULibrary is not easy.
>> >
>> > Even if we decide libGLU will not ship, we need some more changes
>> > to solve problems
>>
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that reason
> > >> and others.
> >
> >
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> 3) Purpose of MANIFESTs (I believe) are checking what kind of files
> will be installed under debian/tmp, and *.install files or
> something updates are needed.
>
> I think it is not good idea to edit MANIFESTs dir
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > IMO it's stupid to ship glu.h if we're not going to ship the rest of the
> > library.
>
> This change doesn't ship it though, does it?
Not in the package, but the fact that
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:34:23AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> This is not, as has been alleged, a coup, or a deliberate attempt to get
> Branden out; nor anything more sinister than a misguided attempt to work
> quickly while I had time, for which I apologize.
I accept your apology. IMO package
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that
> >> reason
> >> and others.
>
> I think there are three points of issue relat
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:35, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that reason
> >> and others.
>
> I think there are three points of issue related it.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> I think there are three points of issue related it.
>
>
> 1) We will ship libGLU or not?
>
> Perhaps, YES.
> I agree your point, currenlty We can not disable libGLU
> cleanly (described one more problem on 2).
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
>> Changed paths:
>>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 11:35:36AM +0900, ISHIKAWA Mutsumi wrote:
> I think there are three points of issue related it.
>
>
> 1) We will ship libGLU or not?
>
> Perhaps, YES.
> I agree your point, currenlty We can not disable libGLU
> cleanly (described one more problem on 2).
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
>> Changed paths:
>>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that
> > reason
> > and others.
>
> I'm looking forward to hearing them.
>
> Anyway, I agree that the commi
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
> Changed paths:
>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.alpha
>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 10:12:44PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I object to killing off the X-forked GLU package at this point for that reason
> > and others.
>
> I'm looking forward to hearing them.
>
> Anyway, I agree that the commit in
rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
Changed paths:
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.alpha
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.hurd-i386
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIF
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 20:40, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
> Changed paths:
>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.alpha
>M /branches/4.3.0/sid/
rev 238: ishikawa | 2003-06-22 13:31:01 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jun 2003) | 8 lines
Changed paths:
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.alpha
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIFEST.hurd-i386
M /branches/4.3.0/sid/debian/MANIF
46 matches
Mail list logo
