Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread Ansgar Burchardt
Hi, as this seems to be only about including the output of `uname' in motd, how about just *not* including it? I never found it to be particular helpful anyway... If you want to include information about the machine you are connecting to, then the OS version, amount of RAM, number and speed of pr

Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread The Wanderer
On 01/02/2015 at 05:56 AM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Hi, > > as this seems to be only about including the output of `uname' in > motd, how about just *not* including it? I never found it to be > particular helpful anyway... > > If you want to include information about the machine you are > conne

Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread Faidon Liambotis
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 11:56:44AM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > as this seems to be only about including the output of `uname' in motd, > how about just *not* including it? I never found it to be particular > helpful anyway... > > If you want to include information about the machine you are co

Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread Faidon Liambotis
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 07:08:22PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 04:20:36PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > > c) base-files shipping /etc/update-motd.d, plus a script: > >00-uname: #!/bin/sh\nuname -snrvm\n > > Could you please choose another package? debianutils comes

Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 04:16:44PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 07:08:22PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 04:20:36PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > > > c) base-files shipping /etc/update-motd.d, plus a script: > > >00-uname: #!/bin/sh\nunam

Re: motd handling in jessie & beyond

2015-01-02 Thread Santiago Vila
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 04:16:44PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > What is your concern with shipping a simple executable shell script? Actually, it's not the executable what does not belong to base-files, it's the *functionality*. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.

dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Hi folks, I'm just packaging some library to various deb distros using pbuilder + git-buildpackage. Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package (while usual 'make install' is okay) - it seems that some of the dh stuff drops that flag :( maybe some of you guys might have an idea ?

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread The Wanderer
On 01/02/2015 at 10:52 AM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > Hi folks, > > > I'm just packaging some library to various deb distros using pbuilder > + git-buildpackage. > > Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package (while > usual 'make install' is okay) - it seems that s

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Neil Williams
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 16:52:10 +0100 "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm just packaging some library to various deb distros using > pbuilder + git-buildpackage. > > Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package > (while usual 'make install' is okay) - it seem

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Martin Pitt
Hello Enrico, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult [2015-01-02 16:52 +0100]: > Unfortunately, the .so's loose the +x flag in the package > (while usual 'make install' is okay) - it seems that some of the > dh stuff drops that flag :( Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 02.01.2015 17:08, Martin Pitt wrote: Hi, > Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not be > executable. Oh, wasn't aware of that. Just used to that as gcc sets that flag. Is it a bug in gcc, or are there platforms where +x is required ? cu -- Enrico Weigelt, metux I

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Fri, 2015-01-02 at 18:16 +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 02.01.2015 17:08, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Hi, > > > Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not be > > executable. > > Oh, wasn't aware of that. Just used to that as gcc sets that flag. > Is i

Re: dpkg packaging problems

2015-01-02 Thread Colin Watson
On Fri, Jan 02, 2015 at 06:16:17PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 02.01.2015 17:08, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Yes, man dh_fixperms. Shared libraries don't need to and should not be > > executable. > > Oh, wasn't aware of that. Just used to that as gcc sets that flag. > Is it a

Bug#774458: ITP: mgrs -- Utility for converting between WGS84 lat/lng and MGRS coordinates

2015-01-02 Thread Bas Couwenberg
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Bas Couwenberg * Package name: mgrs Version : 0.0~20131209-80d5465 Upstream Author : proj4js Developers * URL : https://github.com/proj4js/mgrs * License : Expat Programming Lang: Javascript Description : Utility

[Ticket ID: 104966] Accepted docker.io 1.3.3~dfsg1-2 (source amd64 all) into unstable

2015-01-02 Thread Central do Usuario Suporte Geral
  Tianon Gravi       Tianon Gravi, Recebemos seu ticket em 03/01/2015 e o mesmo será respondido o mais rápido possível. ID Ticket: 104966 Assunto: Accepted docker.io 1.3.3~dfsg1-2 (source amd64 all) into unstable Prioridade: Média Status: Aberto Departamento: Suporte Geral