On Thu, 2010-09-23 at 07:17 +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Julien Cristau writes:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 16:24:44 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> >> On Mittwoch, 22. September 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >>> PS: for my personal needs, some way to get random packages autobuilt
> >>> would
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 01:32:21 +0200
Jérémy Lal wrote:
> On 23/09/2010 01:24, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Jérémy Lal writes ("Re: Bug#597571: nodejs: non common executable
> > name (exclusive alternatives ?)"):
> >> On might object "node" would have a different meaning, depending
> >> on the packages in
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 16:24:44 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> On Mittwoch, 22. September 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>> PS: for my personal needs, some way to get random packages autobuilt
>>> would already be helpful (call that ppa if you want).>>
>> I seem to recall, ft
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Anyway, I'd like to ask you all to hold off the discussion for a few hours
> until everybody can read the summary of the CUT discussions and have a
> clearer ideas of the proposals and the implications.
hm... did you mean
http://lwn.net/Articles/406301/
On 23/09/2010 01:24, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jérémy Lal writes ("Re: Bug#597571: nodejs: non common executable name
> (exclusive alternatives ?)"):
>> On might object "node" would have a different meaning, depending
>> on the packages installed ; still, nodejs or x25node (if its maintainer
>> cares t
Jérémy Lal writes ("Re: Bug#597571: nodejs: non common executable name
(exclusive alternatives ?)"):
> On might object "node" would have a different meaning, depending
> on the packages installed ; still, nodejs or x25node (if its maintainer
> cares to follow) would be there, and unambiguous.
I t
Matt Zagrabelny writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Ian Jackson
> wrote:
> > No :-). Perhaps "ls" rather than "Ls" would have been more correct.
> > I'm not sure of the correct rule for this situation...
> >
> > (If you're thinking of "L
On 21/09/2010 18:01, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 05:26:30PM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
>>
>> Did you say that before? I don't think so. Personally, I care about the
>> Debian package only because the original bugreport (from where this
>> discussion started) was against the D
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> From what concerns the BTS, Don's proposal in [2] (the main one, not
> the alternative solution) seems reasonable to me and others in the
> thread. The proposal also seems to assume a different Maintainer
> field for the bpo package, as hinted above,
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Call it "source" if you like. The point was that the arch follows the
> package name.
It's interesting that this is exactly backwards from the way the BTS
does it. [Source packages are src:foopkg.]
Don Armstrong
--
[The] JK-88 [coffee] percola
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
dear all,
due to my PC running out of disk space, no deltas were generated in the
last week (while I was absent); I found more space, so it will be back
online as soon as it generates all needed deltas.
If you do not know what debdelta is , see
http:
On 2010-09-22, Bruce Sass wrote:
> I've heard that Testing cycles between good/installable and
> bad/un-installable--do those good times correspond to times when it
> would be possible to freeze a set of packages?
You're wrong. That's FUD you've read.
Cheers
Philipp Kern
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Brett Parker writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
>> On 22 Sep 12:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > Julien Cristau writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
>> > > Why do people hate vowels so much?
>> >
>> >
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Luca Bruno
* Package name: mspdebug
Version : 0.11
Upstream Author : Daniel Beer
* URL : http://mspdebug.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPLv2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : debugging tool for MSP430 microcontro
On 22/09/10 13:53, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Thinking about it, what we _conceptually_ need is pretty simple: a
> mechanism to declare who is the Maintainer of the bpo package and
> enforce its declaration. The responsibility of bpo maintenance will be
> on the declared bpo maintainer. If the def
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("nor
Brett Parker writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
> On 22 Sep 12:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Julien Cristau writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
> > > Why do people hate vowels so much?
> >
> > Bcs f y lv thm t y cn wrt ncmprhnsbl gbbrsh mch mr ffctvly.
On September 22, 2010 01:35:14 am Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 09/22/2010 08:47 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> >>> Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
> >>
> >> How does a major, disruptive, transition get done?
> >
> > I think
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 02:41, Pier Paolo wrote:
> i) I debootstrap (squeeze package) from lenny on a empty ext3 lvm partition
> (rectius: logical volume);
> ii) all goes well:
> mount proc...
> mount sysfs
> chroot
> aptitude ... udev, lvm2, linux-image, linux-source, ...
> update-initr
Dear Yaroslav and everybody,
the addition of new suites has the disadvantage of dispersing our userbase.
Here is a proposition that conserves the current flow of package migration for
packages released in Stable, and that makes Testing the meeting point for all
the packages.
We could introduce
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 16:24:44 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mittwoch, 22. September 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > PS: for my personal needs, some way to get random packages autobuilt
> > would already be helpful (call that ppa if you want).
>
> I seem to recall, ftpmaster was planni
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 22. September 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
> PS: for my personal needs, some way to get random packages autobuilt
> would already be helpful (call that ppa if you want).
I seem to recall, ftpmaster was planning something like that. Or wanted to?
If so, what the status? If not, shall
On 22/09/2010 15:01, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> I think that if you concentrate on preparing the next release like you
> do, volunteers that are not interested in the stable release (except
> for their own package) will show up and deal with migrations to
> rolling.
>
It won't happen but I'd
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:39:01 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> Going by what multiarch proposed and apt already supports that should be
>>
>> apt-get install linux-2.6:src
>>
>> where "src" is just another architecture (at least for the user
>> interface).
>>
On 22 Sep 12:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Julien Cristau writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
> > Why do people hate vowels so much?
>
> Bcs f y lv thm t y cn wrt ncmprhnsbl gbbrsh mch mr ffctvly. Ls y sv
> smll mnt f typng.
Hi all,
On Tue, 21 Sep 2010, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> CUT discussions at debconf10 and recent news of the birth of Linux Mint
discussions on CUT have continued after debconf on the CUT mailing. I
wrote a summary of the discussion that will be published in Linux Weekly
News before tomorrow.
Ho
Am 2010-09-21 22:39, schrieb Simon Josefsson:
Also, any external GPL code that Simon links to needs to have the same
exception. Is there any external GPL code?
Well of course - KDE.
I believe kdelibs is LGPL, so maybe you are OK. It depends on what
parts of KDE is used.
You are right:
http:
Julien Cristau writes ("Re: [RFC] Binary packages containing the source"):
> Why do people hate vowels so much?
Bcs f y lv thm t y cn wrt ncmprhnsbl gbbrsh mch mr ffctvly. Ls y sv
smll mnt f typng.
Ian.
(sorry)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject o
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:39:01 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Going by what multiarch proposed and apt already supports that should be
>
> apt-get install linux-2.6:src
>
> where "src" is just another architecture (at least for the user
> interface).
>
Why do people hate vowels so much?
Hector Oron writes:
> Dear developers,
>
> ABSTRACT
> How to enable in some special cases a way to allow one source
> package have multiple maintainers within Debian archive.
It might be better to say they have different flavours which should (out
of practicallity) or must be build on their ow
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 à 03:08 +0200, Jakub Wilk a écrit :
>> * Hector Oron , 2010-09-15, 21:26:
>> > c) allow build depends on source packages, which it is probably a worst
>> > idea.
>>
>> On the contrary, I think that allowing source packages to be installab
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> Oracle recently announced [1] their own 2.6.32-based Unbreakable Enterprise
> Kernel for their RHEL derivative called Oracle Linux. The announcement
> promises severe performance improvements compared to the stock RHEL kernel.
>
> Do you
Dear kernel team and -devel,
Oracle recently announced [1] their own 2.6.32-based Unbreakable
Enterprise Kernel for their RHEL derivative called Oracle Linux. The
announcement promises severe performance improvements compared to the
stock RHEL kernel.
Do you know what patches they applied to
On 09/22/2010 02:52 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
[...]
> [experimental/]unstable(sid)/testing(e.g squeeze)/stable
>
> *constantly* present and functioning all the time the same way.
>
> Then upon freeze we just copy the state of
> unstable -> pending
> testing(squeeze) -> frozen(squeeze, e.g
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 08:52:09PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> NB I am having some deja vu that 'frozen' used to be used explicitly
>in the archive... is that so?
Indeed. That was before testing was introduced.
> Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual, and pending->fro
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 08:26:22AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:47:31 +0200
> Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > > Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
> > >
> > > How does a major, disruptive, transi
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 07:31:45 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
> So when and where are library transitions meant to occur? Transitions
> are always disruptive, always cause some packages to be non-functional
> or non-installable. There has to be somewhere (unstable) where libfoo2
> can be uploaded with
On 09/22/2010 08:47 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
>>> Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
>>
>> How does a major, disruptive, transition get done?
>
> I think his proposal boils down to this: we *always* have unstable
> and
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Alessio Treglia
* Package name: ukopp
Version : 3.8
Upstream Author : Michael Cornelison
* URL : http://kornelix.squarespace.com/ukopp/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : Full and incremental backu
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:47:31 +0200
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 07:31:45AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > > Then unstable/testing would roll further as usual
> >
> > How does a major, disruptive, transition get done?
>
> I think his proposal boils down to this: we *always* have
40 matches
Mail list logo
