> >> In a few weeks, we'll start filing RC bugs against the remaining
> >> packages.
> > RC bug? What the heck are you talking about?
>
> No RC Bug, normal severity. If its a dummy out of an (now) empty source
I also agree with the severity to be normal.
Which could, btw, have been said in a m
[Don Armstrong]
> All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
> linking exception either need to:
>
> 1) Get a linking exception.
> 2) Stop linking with OpenSSL.
3) For indirect dependencies: make sure you're only using the bits
of the (for example) libcurl
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 20050716T195244-0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> That's a far cry different from someone wanting to enforce a
>> requirement.
>
> Who, in this thread, is this hypothetical someone?
Right. Manoj asked: why should we have a requirement? S
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 01:54:48PM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:42:44 +0200, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > What's with the recent push to get every little things written
> >down into policy, so the developer no longer is req
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 16:38:20 +0200, Torsten Landschoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> Hi *, What kind of discussion is this?
This is a discussion about project quality.
> We can't effort more bureaucrazy (typo intended) in the project. Let
> the people doing the work do the work instead o
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 06:54:42PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> In addition, please verify that the library you're uploading hasn't
> already been transitioned by the maintainer, by checking both the NEW
> queue on ftp-master[2] and the status of any new versions in unstable
> before uploading.
Below is a list of libraries which appear to be blocking other packages that
need to go through the C++ transition[1] and which are themselves ready to
go through the ABI transition. These packages should be uploaded ASAP,
either by maintainer upload or NMU; even though no bugs have been filed,
th
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 01:55:48AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 12:46:03PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> If your examples are like B1 is a console program and B2 an X program
> >> and P doesn't want to pull in
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 12:46:03PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> If your examples are like B1 is a console program and B2 an X program
>> and P doesn't want to pull in X for console users then splitting is
>> the right thing to do. isdnutils wou
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 12:46:03PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> If your examples are like B1 is a console program and B2 an X program
> and P doesn't want to pull in X for console users then splitting is
> the right thing to do. isdnutils would be example of having split due
> to this in th
Hi Matt,
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 03:18:52AM +1000, Matt Flax wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> I am currently deep in the tail end of my PhD at the moment. I would
> really appreciate co-developer ownership, where I can return to duty
> with you on these packages once I have a little more time. Probably
>
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10353 March 1977, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> >> we need to remove
> >> from the archive all the Woody-to-Sarge transition dummy packages.
> > No, that's not true, we don't *need* to remove woody-to-sarge dummy
> > packages, as they are also woody-to-etc
Hi,
Le dimanche 17 juillet 2005 à 13:13 +0200, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> PLEASE, if you have something important to say to most developers,
> use debian-devel-announce, not a message from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> with no special headers. That's dangerously near to being spam.
>
> Yes, I know this ra
On 10353 March 1977, Santiago Vila wrote:
>> we need to remove
>> from the archive all the Woody-to-Sarge transition dummy packages.
> No, that's not true, we don't *need* to remove woody-to-sarge dummy
> packages, as they are also woody-to-etch dummy packages.
We do not support that. No. So yes,
Karl Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2. B1
>is the important program, and B2 is not as important. Is it OK
>for the declared package dependencies to not satisfy all the
>run-time shared library dependencies of B2? What if they are
>list
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote:
> Hello Debian mainainers,
>
> In accordance with the Etch wishlist^wTODOList[1],
Do not confuse a personal wishlist with a real todo list.
> we need to remove
> from the archive all the Woody-to-Sarge transition dummy packages.
No, that's n
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> This two pages are asking for authentification. I guess this is not
> intended?
Oops! It should be fixed ;-)
Thanks.
PS: I read the list.
--
adn
Mohammed Adnène Trojette
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscr
* Mohammed Adnène Trojette [Sun, 17 Jul 2005 22:46:19 +0200]:
> Hello Debian mainainers,
Hi!
> [2] http://adn.diwi.org/wiki/index.php/DummyPackagesList
> [3] http://adn.diwi.org/wiki/index.php/DummyPackagesStatus
This two pages are asking for authentification. I guess this is not
intende
Hi,
"the mighty video team", in boring alphabetical order (but you who where there
know who they are), Andrew McMillan, Chris Halls, Erik Johansson, Henning
Sprang, Herman Robak, Holger Levsen, Javier Candeira, John Lightsey,
Kalle Boess, Martin Langhoff, Noel Koethe, Peter de Schrijver, Tore S
On Jul 17, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I already did this for discover1, but did this in a way to make it use
> lsb-base only if it is installed.
I can't see the point. The package is tiny, so if it should be used then
everybody should install it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.
Hello Debian mainainers,
In accordance with the Etch wishlist^wTODOList[1], we need to remove
from the archive all the Woody-to-Sarge transition dummy packages.
This is why Clément Stenac and I have tried to establish a list of the
packages to be removed[2]. This[3] page also explains how the lis
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> apt-get remove --purge libssl0.9.7 gives me tons of packages. Just
> an estimation: We need to repack half of all packages then?
NO.[1]
All that needs to happen is that GPLed packages without an OpenSSL
linking exception either need to:
1) Get a
[Thomas Hood]
> The package is only 20 kbytes installed. Let's just start Depending on it.
I agree. We should start using the LSB, not just talk about trying to
be LSB conforming. :)
But I made the use optional for discover1 because someone complained
and said it was just a fancy way to get col
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 20:33:40 +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I used this code to make lsb-base optional, and used the lsb functions
> for output:
>
> if [ -f /lib/lsb/init-functions ]; then
> . /lib/lsb/init-functions
> else
> log_begin_msg() { echo "$@"; }
> log_success_msg(
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
sean finney told:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> > thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
>
> or you could always contact the a
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> Why not building curl --without-sssl and --with-gnutls=/usr? Maybe a
> NMU?
this is definitely NOT a reason to NMU libcurl. remember that it is
your package that is "broken". of course you could still file a
wishlist bug again
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
sean finney told:
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> > thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
>
> or you could always contact the a
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 08:21:00PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> I don't see a gpl'd alternative to curl for internet streaming. I am
> thinking about to build moc --without-curl then :(
or you could always contact the author and inform them of their
self-inflicted license violation. in my e
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2005/7/17, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Karl Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2. B1
>> > is the important program, and B2 is not as important. Is it OK
>> > fo
[Marco d'Itri]
> I am considering switching the init scripts of my packages to
> lsb-base (which means that it will have to be promoted to important
> priority, at least).
> If anybody has objections please voice them now.
I already did this for discover1, but did this in a way to make it use
lsb-
2005/7/17, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Karl Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2. B1
> > is the important program, and B2 is not as important. Is it OK
> > for the declared package dependencies to not satisfy all the
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 the mental interface of
Marco d'Itri told:
> On Jul 17, Elimar Riesebieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > comfortable to build curl against gnutls in general? Any hints?
> Upstream developers should get a clue and either properly license their
> software, stop using libcurl
Hi Paul,
I am currently deep in the tail end of my PhD at the moment. I would
really appreciate co-developer ownership, where I can return to duty
with you on these packages once I have a little more time. Probably
about next year some time.
I still have a few others to maintain as well as the
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 04:34:05PM -0700, Matt Kraai wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> The aspell dictionary packages build-depend on aspell-bin (>> 0.60).
> aspell-bin is now a virtual package provided by aspell, but virtual
> packages cannot be versioned, so these build-dependency cannot be
> satisfied.
>
>
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:35:14 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> On 20050717T025707-0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> A little reading comprehension on your part would help a bit
>> here. Hint: dict policy would help.
>>
>> The discussion started wuth a wuestion of _policy_
I am considering switching the init scripts of my packages to lsb-base
(which means that it will have to be promoted to important priority, at
least).
If anybody has objections please voice them now.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jul 17, Elimar Riesebieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> comfortable to build curl against gnutls in general? Any hints?
Upstream developers should get a clue and either properly license their
software, stop using libcurl or adding gnutls support to it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Descripti
Hi,
linuxsampler has been FTBFS since its first upload, is now
uninstallable, and requires a rebuild against the latest g++.
Matt, are you still interested in maintaining this package? and libgig?
if not, i would be interested to adopt them.
cheers, piem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PR
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 04:28:56PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> I know, but as written before, IMHO the abi version number should
> not be encoded in the package name. Usually you just get a new
> abi, but no new functionality, so why introduce a new name? Just
> to work around the limitations of
Harald Dunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Harald Dunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>
>>>But I can follow your argument. Dpkg should allow installing
>>>different C++ abis on the same machine. Only within each
>>>dependency chain the abi version number must b
Joachim, for the record:
YOU ROCK!!!
-- javier
Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> brought to you by the Utnubu team (that is me, still waiting for more
> members, hint hint :-)), is the a newly formatted repository of Ubuntu
> patches.
>
> On http://utnubu.alioth.debian.org/scottish/by_maint/ y
Hi,
I am currently maintaining moc, a _m_usic _o_n _c_onsole player:
http://moc.daper.net
apt-cache show moc
The new version 2.3.0 needs libcurl-dev, 'cause streaming is
possible now. Start using libcurl, which depends on libssl, and
since GPL is incompatible with OpenSSL license, the package wa
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Harald Dunkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>
>>But I can follow your argument. Dpkg should allow installing
>>different C++ abis on the same machine. Only within each
>>dependency chain the abi version number must be unique, so
>>it should become some kind of packag
Hi,
brought to you by the Utnubu team (that is me, still waiting for more
members, hint hint :-)), is the a newly formatted repository of Ubuntu
patches.
On http://utnubu.alioth.debian.org/scottish/by_maint/ you will find a
directory for each maintainer with modified packages, inside directories
PLEASE, if you have something important to say to most developers,
use debian-devel-announce, not a message from "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
with no special headers. That's dangerously near to being spam.
Yes, I know this rant is not new (I remember a similar one from Branden)
but apparently past rants ab
Karl Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2. B1
> is the important program, and B2 is not as important. Is it OK
> for the declared package dependencies to not satisfy all the
> run-time shared library dependencies of B2? What if they are
> texi2html's behavior changed recently: if it is invoked with
> -split=chapter, old versions place the HTML files in the same
> directory as the documentation source, whereas new versions place the
> generated files in a subdirectory.
To get the old behavior, one can use
--output . --split=chap
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi folks,
Gutenprint (the new name for Gimp-Print 5.0) will enter unstable
today, and a number of changes come with it.
I have made a great deal of effort to ensure smooth upgrades, and it
was uploaded to experimental two weeks ago for further testin
On 20050717T025707-0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> A little reading comprehension on your part would help a bit
> here. Hint: dict policy would help.
>
> The discussion started wuth a wuestion of _policy_. Once you
> comprehend what that word means, you'll see what Thomas meant.
Suppose package P contains files /usr/bin/B1 and /usr/bin/B2. B1
is the important program, and B2 is not as important. Is it OK
for the declared package dependencies to not satisfy all the
run-time shared library dependencies of B2? What if they are
listed in Suggests?
I have found many such p
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 10:11:34 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> On 20050716T195244-0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>> That's a far cry different from someone wanting to enforce a
>> requirement.
> Who, in this thread, is this hypothetical someone?
> As far as I can tell
On 20050716T195244-0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> That's a far cry different from someone wanting to enforce a
> requirement.
Who, in this thread, is this hypothetical someone?
As far as I can tell, this thread started with a simple question: is
there a policy for a certain thing? There were
52 matches
Mail list logo
