Bug#789461: ITP: runescape -- Complete quests and win enormous treasures in RuneScape
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Carlos Donizete * Package name: runescape Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Jagex Limited * URL : http://www.runescape.com/ * License : GPL-2+ Programming Lang: Java Description : Complete quests and win enormous treasures in RuneScape The game is a unofficial Linux client Java-based. It makes sure that OpenGL works when using Java7/OpenJDK7. . RuneScape offers players a huge variety of benefits such as hundreds of additional quests and adventures, a larger game world to explore, exclusive skills and master and access to a whole host of minigames. . Players can also access the most powerful weaponry and armour in the game, create clan citadels with their friends and even build their very own house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150621080403.6245.63882.reportbug@debian
Re: Q: Which is suitable "distribution" in changelog for point release?
On Fri, 2015-06-19 at 16:37 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Which is suitable "distribution" in changelog for Jessie and wheezy
> point release? (and why) I just looked debian-release posts and
> confused...
>
> - stable / oldstable
> - stable-proposed-updates / oldstable-proposed-updates
> - jessie / wheezy
>
> The recommended distribution is the codename (jessie, wheezy). This way
> there can be no confusion.
That's what I would have thought, but:
$ dch -r -D jessie
dch warning: Recognised distributions are: unstable, testing, stable,
oldstable, experimental, {testing-,stable-,oldstable-,}proposed-updates,
{testing,stable,oldstable}-security, wheezy-backports, jessie-backports
and UNRELEASED.
Using your request anyway.
dch: Did you see that warning? Press RETURN to continue...
I don't see any bugs about not accepting Jessie here and if it weren't
deliberate I'd expect older releases to be listed (i.e. it's not just
that devscripts hadn't caught up with Jessie yet).
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1434875967.17598.7.ca...@debian.org
Bug#789392: marked as done (general: fails to show dual screens on startup)
Your message dated Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:13:06 +0200 (CEST) with message-id and subject line Closing, please use user support channels for help [was: fails to show dual screens on startup] has caused the Debian Bug report #789392, regarding general: fails to show dual screens on startup to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 789392: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=789392 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: general Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, * What led up to the situation? The problem I am having is that when I turn on my laptop with the hdmi cable connected to another screen, the laptop screen seems like "turned off". Laptop (Screen 1) + Samsung Screen 22" (Screen 2). The same problem happens if I logout (my laptop screen "turns off"). * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? To solve this I have to go to display settings and start playing with the configuration 2 o 3 times until I can see my laptop screen working. * What outcome did you expect instead? The outcome expected is being able to turn on my laptop connected with the hdmi to another screen and see both screens fine. Screen 1 on the left and Screen 2 on the right, both visibles. -- System Information: Debian Release: 8.1 APT prefers stable-updates APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Hello Carlos, as is, your bug report contains too little information to act on, therefore I am closing it. F.ex. what desktop environment are you using (KDE, Gnome etc.)? Also, did you check whether your problem might allready have been reported against the xorg package or your desktop environment? Please use one of the Debian user support channels to get assistance to clarify your problem: https://www.debian.org/support https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/ http://forums.debian.net/ http://ask.debian.net/ irc://irc.oftc.net/debian If you find out more about your problem, then adding more information to the bug report and reassigning it to the right package would be nice. If needed you can also re-open the bug report then. Thanks, *t--- End Message ---
desktop files for xscreensaver hacks in different desktop environments
[Please follow up to debian-desk...@lists.debian.org only] Hi all desktop environment packagers, The xscreensaver software is divided into several binary packages [0], where some of these ship collections of screensaver hacks (basically a small program that draws something nice or funny on the screen and can be launched by a screensaver daemon). These xscreensaver packages also ship desktop files for their hacks [1]. The desktop files are not used by the xscreensaver daemon or its configuration utilities, they are only shipped as a service to users so that they can easily install and use the hacks even if they cannot use the xscreensaver daemon (because some desktop environment had to run their own show for screensaver daemon solution, a touch of NIH and all that). Then some DEs would like to use these desktop files and some DEs need to have them hidden. Up to now we have been using "OnlyShowIn=GNOME;" but e.g. Mate wants to be added [2]. I would like to change this to "NotShowIn", as per Jonas suggestion in that bug report. This can be discussed. Either way, we would need to know which DE should be whitelisted, respectively, blacklisted. The freedesktop.org DE list is "GNOME", "KDE", "LXDE", "MATE", "Razor", "ROX", "TDE", "Unity", "XFCE", "Cinnamon", "EDE", "Old" Which of these can use the screensaver hack desktop files, and which need them hidden? An alternative for me is to stop shipping any desktop files and leave that to the DE but that would be silly if they can be of use and we can sort this out without too much trouble. Please follow up to debian-desk...@lists.debian.org only. Best regards, Tormod [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596944 [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/xscreensaver.git/tree/debian/screensavers-desktop-files + http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/xscreensaver.git/tree/debian/screensavers-desktop.stub [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=766880 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caarsgazbdg-urmoy8k5p_2re25kby7tjfw+1ro+lvwq43rr...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Q: Which is suitable "distribution" in changelog for point release?
On 21/06/15 10:39, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-06-19 at 16:37 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Hideki Yamane wrote:
>> Which is suitable "distribution" in changelog for Jessie and wheezy
>> point release? (and why) I just looked debian-release posts and
>> confused...
>>
>> - stable / oldstable
>> - stable-proposed-updates / oldstable-proposed-updates
>> - jessie / wheezy
>>
>> The recommended distribution is the codename (jessie, wheezy). This way
>> there can be no confusion.
>
> That's what I would have thought, but:
>
> $ dch -r -D jessie
> dch warning: Recognised distributions are: unstable, testing, stable,
> oldstable, experimental,
> {testing-,stable-,oldstable-,}proposed-updates,
> {testing,stable,oldstable}-security, wheezy-backports,
> jessie-backports and UNRELEASED.
> Using your request anyway.
> dch: Did you see that warning? Press RETURN to continue...
>
> I don't see any bugs about not accepting Jessie here and if it weren't
> deliberate I'd expect older releases to be listed (i.e. it's not just
> that devscripts hadn't caught up with Jessie yet).
Then please file a bug.
Cheers,
Emilio
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55872911.4070...@debian.org
