> Because there is documentation telling what is going behind the scenes?
> Like understandable manpages for every debhelper command.
Sure. I think that we basically here all agree that, whether we
actually like cdbs or not, its documentation has a lot of room for
improvement...
signature.as
Quoting Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is it no longer a requirement of NM that applicants demonstrate
> > themselves capable of putting together a source package without the use
> > of rules helpers?
>
> Well, I've never actually done this, a
> cdbs is top-down because it defines the package build as much as
> possible in line with how the cdbs developers think it should be
> done. It expects the developer to tweak the countless,
> undocumented parameters until it's right.
>
> debhelper is bottom-up because it gives you smal
> There are also pretty significant differences in the design goals of
> debhelper and cdbs, differences which I believe have a major impact on the
> ability of maintainers to understand their own packages and on the
> respective helper-induced build failure rates of the two. I think these are
>
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 09:41:34AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > When you make a wishlist bug RC, you are by definition forcing someone
> > else to spend time on it, either to fix it or play BTS ping pong with
> > you, since their package doesn't need to be kept out of the next stable
> > r
#include
* Manoj Srivastava [Fri, Jun 09 2006, 02:02:48PM]:
> On 9 Jun 2006, Christoph Berg said:
> > This is also my impression. CDBS might be nice to automate the task
> > "make a .deb out of this Gnome source", but imho it completely fails
> > when you want to deviate from the "standard" in an
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Esteban Manchado Velázquez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libhighline-ruby
Version : 1.2.0
Upstream Author : James Edward Gray II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://highline.rubyforge.org/
* License : Ruby's and GPL
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it no longer a requirement of NM that applicants demonstrate
> themselves capable of putting together a source package without the use
> of rules helpers?
Well, I've never actually done this, and I got through NM. (I've always
used debhelper, altho
also sprach Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.10.0010 +0200]:
> Let's compare debhelper to cdbs.
... this makes me think:
cdbs is top-down because it defines the package build as much as
possible in line with how the cdbs developers think it should be
done. It expects the develope
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:02:48PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> This is my opinion and others will disagree:
> >> Please don't. CDBS is a major pain to use for those who didn't
> >> (co-)author it. It's just too much about obfuscation.
> > This is also my impression. CDBS might be nice to
> I am still puzzled. Imagine for instance that French translators of
> OpenOffice are willing to use this infrastructure, whereas Dutch
> are not interested. Will this situation be allowed?
Well, it is quite likely to happen, yes, so my first reaction is to
say that, yes, the system should all
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:02:48PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I am surprised to hear you say so, since CDBS is one of the
> most configurable build systems out there. You can add commands to
> any phase of the build, by just adding targets/dependencies/variables.
If you can figure
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 08:18:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> raw answers...
>
> > Who does decide which files are being imported?
>
> I would say the team who administers the server (what we defined as
> "Administrators" in the infrastructure targets). This is of course
> coordinated with
On 9 Jun 2006, Christoph Berg said:
> Re: martin f krafft 2006-06-09
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> also sprach Jean Parpaillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.09.1118
>> +0200]:
>>> I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
>>
>> Why?
>
> I was just about to ask the same. Which packaging scheme do yo
* Christoph Berg [Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:30:27 +0200]:
> Again, I'm fine if you use CDBS for your package, but please never
> recommend it to any new maintainer.
Full ack, seconded.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer
Re: martin f krafft 2006-06-09 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> also sprach Jean Parpaillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.09.1118 +0200]:
> > I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
>
> Why?
I was just about to ask the same. Which packaging scheme do you use
now?
> This is my opinion and others will
* Bastian Blank:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 12:53:48PM +0200, Gordon Grubert wrote:
>> Problematic Debian-Client (structurally identical to Suse-Client):
>> - Linux DEBIAN-CLIENT 2.6.15.1
>> - Yukon Gigabit Ethernet with default drivers (Debian Sarge AMD64)
>
> Sarge don't have a kernel 2.6.15. But
Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
>> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
>> > +patch and say something like:
>>
>> How do you think I should have applied
This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
> > +patch and say something like:
>
> How do you think I should have applied this advice in the case of bug
> #360851?
In the
also sprach Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.09.1747 +0200]:
> > This is old. Why not switch to debhelper compatibility level 5,
> > which includes switching to a new format for *.install files?
>
> What new format?
Sorry, there's no old and new. There's one and two column, the first
of
also sprach Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.09.1724 +0200]:
> For my own packages I usually do not use debhelper features
> unavailable in stable as I like to be able to make backports
> easily.
Then use compatibility level 4. Debhelper 5 *is* on backports.org
though.
--
Please do n
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
> +patch and say something like:
How do you think I should have applied this advice in the case of bug
#360851?
> As opposed to writing to demand that the maintainer spend their free
> ti
* martin f krafft [Fri, 09 Jun 2006 15:19:03 +0200]:
> This is old. Why not switch to debhelper compatibility level 5,
> which includes switching to a new format for *.install files?
What new format?
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer
martin f krafft debian.org> writes:
[...]
> also sprach Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org>
[2006.06.09.1337 +0200]:
>> I am using
>> DEB_DH_INSTALL_SOURCEDIR = debian/tmp
>> for that purpose.
> This is old. Why not switch to debhelper compatibility level 5,
> which includes switching to a new
Problematic Debian-Client (structurally identical to Suse-Client):
- Linux DEBIAN-CLIENT 2.6.15.1
- Yukon Gigabit Ethernet with default drivers (Debian Sarge AMD64)
Sarge don't have a kernel 2.6.15. But this is a known and unfixed bug in
Linux. The fix is sheduled for .18.
My fault. The used
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 07:46:06AM +0200, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-07 02:20]:
> > > We did pick two compiler warnings and scanned the build logs
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: severities of blocking bugs"):
> Well, consider this. If there is a feature someone wants from
> a package, say kernel-pack^H^H^H^Hfoo.
>[most of scenario snipped -iwj]
> Can one now change the wishlist bug to grave as well? I think
> not, since
John Goerzen writes ("Re: Who can make binding legal agreements"):
> The other plausible interpretation is that SPI *is* on the hook, as the
> legal entity that owns servers that are distributing software.
If you use your shell account at your ISP to distribute software, and
the ISP concludes you
John Goerzen writes ("Re: Who can make binding legal agreements"):
> * If a member project engages in activities that would jeopardize
>SPI's classification as a non-profit entity
Things of that kind would be using SPI property or funds for
unsuitable activities. Note that if Debian do it se
Daniel Kobras writes ("Re: Renaming a package"):
> but the alternative patch to dpkg is quite simple (see
> below). Alas, it changes current behaviour.
I don't think it this patch is correct as is, but something similar
might not be unreasonable if it had to be turned on with a command
line optio
* Jean Parpaillon [Fri, 09 Jun 2006 11:18:07 +0200]:
> Why do the default behaviour of dh_install is not to get files in
> 'debian/tmp' ?
That was the default behavior for the old dh_movefiles, which got
deprecated in debhelper 4 in favour of dh_install (see the changelog for
4.0.0 for details).
also sprach Jean Parpaillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.06.09.1118 +0200]:
> I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
Why?
This is my opinion and others will disagree:
Please don't. CDBS is a major pain to use for those who didn't
(co-)author it. It's just too much about obfuscation.
> In th
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
Simon Kelley
dnsmasq 2.31-1
Looks pretty trivial, it will fixed in the next upstream/upload.
Cheers,
Simon.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 12:53:48PM +0200, Gordon Grubert wrote:
> Problematic Debian-Client (structurally identical to Suse-Client):
> - Linux DEBIAN-CLIENT 2.6.15.1
> - Yukon Gigabit Ethernet with default drivers (Debian Sarge AMD64)
Sarge don't have a kernel 2.6.15. But this is a known and unfix
Le 09.06.2006 13:37, Andreas Metzler a écrit :
> Jean Parpaillon altern.org> writes:
>
>> I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
>> In the .install files, path are not prefixed by "debian/tmp" so
>> the building fail.
>> It seems that I can correct this in 2 ways:
>> - either I prefix t
Jean Parpaillon altern.org> writes:
> I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
> In the .install files, path are not prefixed by "debian/tmp" so
> the building fail.
> It seems that I can correct this in 2 ways:
> - either I prefix the paths with debian/tmp
> - or I can set a special variabl
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> Hi all, I got an FTBFS bug yesterday;
> > There was an error while trying to autobuild your package:
> > > install -m 755 debian/lynx
> > > /build/buildd/lynx-cur-2.8.6dev18/debian/lynx-cur-wrapper/usr/bin/lynx-cur
> > > install: cannot cr
Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
The command 'debdelta-upgrade' is meant to be run between 'apt-get
update' and 'apt-get upgrade'; it downloads .debdelta files and
recreate the new .deb files from them; always using the *installed* old
version of the .deb, and not the old .deb file itself.
Is it
This one time, at band camp, Jean Parpaillon said:
> Hi,
> I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
> In the .install files, path are not prefixed by "debian/tmp" so
> the building fail.
> It seems that I can correct this in 2 ways:
> - either I prefix the paths with debian/tmp
> - or I can s
Hi,
I want to migrate my package (wormux) to CDBS.
In the .install files, path are not prefixed by "debian/tmp" so
the building fail.
It seems that I can correct this in 2 ways:
- either I prefix the paths with debian/tmp
- or I can set a special variable (DEB_DESTDIR, am I right ?) to debian/tmp
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tobias Klauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: valkyrie
Version : 1.1.0
Upstream Author : OpenWorks LLP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.open-works.co.uk/projects/valkyrie.html
* License : GPL
Programming Lang:
Hi,
quite some of the "dereferencing type-punned pointer" problems are really
problems in the wxwindows 2.6 library.
Greetings, Joost Damad
--
The planet Andete is famous for it's killer edible poets.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Co
42 matches
Mail list logo
