¿Quieres tu Boda en la Playa?
En ODA Eventos te lo organizamos todo.
ODA EVENTOS
Cancún y Riviera Maya
(998) 267 9783
odaeven...@didaskein.com
-lugares
-ceremonias
-banquetes
-fotografía, video y música
-transportación terrestre y aérea
-hospedaje
-invitaciones, obsequios, flores
-y todos l
Ben Finney wrote:
> Eugene Gorodinsky writes:
[...]
>
>> hopefully this discussion will be more welcome here. Constructive
>> crticism is welcome, so feel free to critique.
>
> To be honest, I'm not sure what response you expect to get. There's not
> much substantive to respond to in your messa
Luk Claes writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Philipp Kern writes:
>>
>>> On 2009-11-19, Luk Claes wrote:
This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
it was built.
>>> That depends on the assumptions. If the assumption is that the buildds are
>>> trus
Eugene Gorodinsky writes:
> A while ago I participated in a discussion here about the debian
> package format. Quite recently I tried to spark up a discussion about
> package formats on the LSB list but did not get any replies
Can you point to the message (preferably via its Message-Id field) so
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
last week.
Total number of orphaned packages: 664 (new: 2)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 146 (new: 0)
Total number of packages request
A while ago I participated in a discussion here about the debian
package format. Quite recently I tried to spark up a discussion about
package formats on the LSB list but did not get any replies, hopefully
this discussion will be more welcome here. Constructive crticism is
welcome, so feel free to
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:24 -0800, Rodrigo Gallardo wrote:
> lintian is complaining about a package of mine I just converted to 3.0
> (quilt) that:
>
> W: rep-gtk source: patch-system-but-no-source-readme
[...]
> But, since dpkg-source will extract this package into the preferred
> form for modifi
lintian is complaining about a package of mine I just converted to 3.0
(quilt) that:
W: rep-gtk source: patch-system-but-no-source-readme
N:
N:This package build-depends on a patch system such as dpatch or quilt,
N:but there is no debian/README.source file. This file is recommended for
N:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 06:51:31PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Steve Langasek writes:
> > On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 11:20:17PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 12:12:33PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> >>> === modified file 'policy.sgml'
> >>> --- policy.sgml 2009-10-21 20:49:3
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andreas Tille
* Package name: r-cran-teachingdemos
Version : 2.4
Upstream Author : Greg Snow
* URL : http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/TeachingDemos/
* License : Artistic-2.0
Programming Lang: R
Description
Package: wnpp
Owner: Serafeim Zanikolas
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: beanstalkd
Version : 1.4.2
Upstream Author : Keith Rarick
* URL : http://xph.us/software/beanstalkd/
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: C
Description : simple, in-memory workqu
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andreas Tille
* Package name: r-cran-amore
Version : 0.2-11
Upstream Author : Manuel Castejón Limas
* URL : http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/AMORE/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: R
Description : GNU
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Philipp Kern writes:
>
>> On 2009-11-19, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
>>> it was built.
>> That depends on the assumptions. If the assumption is that the buildds are
>> trusted (the same as for autosign
On 2009-11-19, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
>> it was built.
> What part of "require some coordination with wanna-build" did you not read?
Well, maybe because wanna-build wouldn't be involved except for an updated
data sourc
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Smedegaard
* Package name: pyabiword
Version : 0.8.0
Upstream Author : http://www.abisource.com/developers/
* URL : http://www.abisource.com/downloads/pyabiword/
* License : GPL-2+
Programming Lang: C++, Python
Dear developers,
recently I discovered a case where an early boot script depends on
a much later boot script, yet it is present in any standard install.
I have filed this as a bug report #556661 against console-tools,
but would appreciate to see a statement as to the acceptance of
this neglect of
Philipp Kern writes:
> On 2009-11-19, Luk Claes wrote:
>> This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
>> it was built.
>
> That depends on the assumptions. If the assumption is that the buildds are
> trusted (the same as for autosigning) it would also be easy to argue
Luk Claes writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sune Vuorela writes:
>>
>>> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>>> Basicalyl, the turnar
Andreas Tille writes:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 05:52:21AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> And then someone comes along and builds a Supercomputer cluster out of
>> game consoles.
>
> Well, it *might be* that *someone* does this or that. But didn't we say
> we give priority to our user_s_
* Felipe Sateler [091118 23:39]:
>> You apparently fail to see that building the packages on mips uncovers
>> bugs that would otherwise be there, but take a longer time to uncover on
>> the 'mainstream' platforms.
>
> This is not generally true. There are are classes of bugs that appear on
> diffe
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Joel Roth
* Package name: nama
Version : 0.9986-1
Upstream Author : Joel Roth
* URL : http://search.cpan.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : Ecasound-based multitrack recorder, mixer and ma
On 2009-11-19, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:16:41PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>> > I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
>> > for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>>
>>
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 05:52:21AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> And then someone comes along and builds a Supercomputer cluster out of
> game consoles.
Well, it *might be* that *someone* does this or that. But didn't we say
we give priority to our user_s_ (mind the plural). So for the
th
On 2009-11-19, Luk Claes wrote:
> This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
> it was built.
That depends on the assumptions. If the assumption is that the buildds are
trusted (the same as for autosigning) it would also be easy to argue that
setting up some kind of co
24 matches
Mail list logo
