On Sun, 2013-04-07 at 18:26 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 15:40:12 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/write_interface.c b/write_interface.c
> > index 1aa331a..2a42d48 100644
> > --- a/write_interface.c
> > +++ b/write_interface.c
> > @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ stati
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 15:40:12 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> diff --git a/netcfg-static.c b/netcfg-static.c
> index 4e9ca29..1987bec 100644
> --- a/netcfg-static.c
> +++ b/netcfg-static.c
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ int main(int argc, char** argv)
> case WCONFIG:
> if (requested_w
Le Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 05:39:56PM +0900, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 07:59:46AM +0100, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
> >
> > Here, we know about the bug and solution (I haven't looked at the code
> > but adding iw at the same place where wireless-tools are added when
> > the
Joey,
am Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:47:17AM -0400 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> Also, if we are going to depend on something linux-specific in a task,
> we could | depend on the freebsd equivilant too, and that should work
> with the task being arch all. If there is not a freebsd equivilant, we
>
reassign 697890 netcfg
retitle 697890 Please install iw on systems with wireless harware.
thanks
Le Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 07:59:46AM +0100, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
>
> Here, we know about the bug and solution (I haven't looked at the code
> but adding iw at the same place where wireless-tools
Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> We therefore have the following choices:
>
> 1) Reassign 697890 to netcfg.
> 2) Go ahead and upload with architecture-dependant task(s).
>
> If we chose 1), are there good chances that the bug will be fixed ? Netcfg
> already has 40 bugs open, inc
Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> > network-manager is currently listed in Depends.
>
> Note anyway that having network-manager [linux-any] in the Recommends field is
> also buggy. Having all packages in main satisfying their Recommends
> relationships has been a release goal in the
Le Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:03:53PM -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
> Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > Indeed, when committing these changes, I thought that, because that
> > arch-dependent packages are added to Recommends and not Depend, it
> > would not be a problem. Apparently it is. This is what slightly
Le Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:03:53PM -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
>
> > Oh, I didn't think this this was, but, indeed, as we already add
> > wireless-tools through netcfg, I see not reason to not use the same
> > concept to add iw when the (installation) interface is wireless (of
> > course, one might
Hi!
On 07/03/13 17:58, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> [...]. The need to be on CD#1 was
> what drove me to commit. If there are alternative solutions, yes we
> should consider them.
In #697868 I suggested an alternate way to nudge a package onto (GNOME)
CD1. Then it would only need to be a Recommend
Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Indeed, when committing these changes, I thought that, because that
> arch-dependent packages are added to Recommends and not Depend, it
> would not be a problem. Apparently it is. This is what slightly
> puzzles me, indeed.
network-manager is currently listed in Depends
Quoting Joey Hess (jo...@debian.org):
Thanks, Joey, for bringing this interesting alternative perspective.
Indeed, when committing these changes, I thought that, because that
arch-dependent packages are added to Recommends and not Depend, it
would not be a problem. Apparently it is. This is what
My concerns with going arch any would be that it becomes slower to make a
tasksel change for some pressing concern, and this magnifies any
installation breakage, or blockage caused by task dependencies. The same
reason we keep debootstrap arch all.
Also every divergence between architectures makes
Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> There are multiple ways to solve this:
>
> - The upload is made by an uploader.
> - I or someone else sponsor an upload where the changelog is signed
>by an uploader.
> - The upload is marked "Team upload".
> - The upload is made version 3.16,
Le Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 07:12:39AM +0100, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
> Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> > Le Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 09:25:31PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
> > >
> > > Unless I'm missing something obvious, switching to “architecture: any”
> > > for some tasks should
Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> Le Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 09:25:31PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
> >
> > Unless I'm missing something obvious, switching to “architecture: any”
> > for some tasks should be OK.
>
> Shall I upload with the attached patches applied ?
I would prefer
Le Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 09:25:31PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
>
> Unless I'm missing something obvious, switching to “architecture: any”
> for some tasks should be OK.
Shall I upload with the attached patches applied ?
Cheers,
--
Charles
>From 92aea904ba8993ad20da026dbebd1dd67469252d Mon
Christian PERRIER (05/03/2013):
> It probably needs a pre-approval by Cyril.
>
> I'm not deeply worried about this specific bug (adding "iw" to
> desktop and laptop) because we can release wheezy without that fix.
>
> I'm more worried about the network-manager-gnome addition to the
> gnome-deskt
Quoting Ben Hutchings (b...@decadent.org.uk):
> Just because a package is architecture: all, does not mean it has to be
> installable on all architectures.
>
> > Would that break something ? Otherwise, despite it looks unusual, I would
> > suggest to go ahead with architecture-dependant tasks if
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 09:01 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 11:03:59PM +, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> > On Sun, 2013-03-03 at 13:51 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > > Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> > >
> > > > unfortunately it makes the package fail to bu
Le Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 11:03:59PM +, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> On Sun, 2013-03-03 at 13:51 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> > Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> >
> > > unfortunately it makes the package fail to build.
> > >
> > > dpkg-gencontrol: error: the Recommends field cont
On Sun, 2013-03-03 at 13:51 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
>
> > unfortunately it makes the package fail to build.
> >
> > dpkg-gencontrol: error: the Recommends field contains an arch-specific
> > dependency but the package is architecture all
> >
Quoting Charles Plessy (ple...@debian.org):
> unfortunately it makes the package fail to build.
>
> dpkg-gencontrol: error: the Recommends field contains an arch-specific
> dependency but the package is architecture all
> dh_gencontrol: dpkg-gencontrol -ptask-desktop -ldebian/changelog
> -Tdebi
Le Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 08:44:14AM +0100, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
>
> So, leaving this sitting in my TODO list. Of course, anyone is free to
> upload tasksel with the current pending changes.
>
> (I added "[linux-any]" to "iw")
Hi Christian,
unfortunately it makes the package fail to build.
Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org):
> Christian PERRIER (10/02/2013):
> > Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubu...@debian.org):
> > > OK, you guys convinced me. Re-opening the bug, then.
> > >
> > > Should this be wheezy material?
>
> Certainly. ;)
>
> > I pushed 3d1e7081810f5dde9915238e7a8b6e
Christian PERRIER (10/02/2013):
> Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubu...@debian.org):
> > OK, you guys convinced me. Re-opening the bug, then.
> >
> > Should this be wheezy material?
Certainly. ;)
> I pushed 3d1e7081810f5dde9915238e7a8b6e2d991128f8 in tasksel git.
>
> I suggest we keep this for D-
Quoting Christian PERRIER (bubu...@debian.org):
> reopen 697890
> reassign 697890 tasksel
> retitle 697890 Please add iw to the desktop and laptop tasks
> thanks
>
> Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org):
>
> > I guess I'd be happy to see iw in both the desktop and laptop tasks.
>
> OK, you
27 matches
Mail list logo
