Re: Bug#614601: ITP: libsafewrite -- Simple functions for performing safe atomic replacement of files

On 22/02/11 19:54, Ben Hutchings wrote: Judging by what you consider 'small bugs' in why should anyone trust their important data to this library? Feel free not to use it/file bugs against it. Giving fee

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

Julien Cristau writes: > I'm still not sure how 'Build-Depends: foo [i386] | bar [amd64]' > would make sense (as opposed to making it an 'and'). They're equivalent, so I would view it as intended for human readers, not for computers. In other words, I see a Build-Depends of: foo [i386] | b

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 23:26:27 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:05:28AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 22:40:52 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > > > From discussion on IRC earlier this evening, it looks like the most > > > pragmatic approach will b

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:28:05 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > perl (>= 5.10) | libmodule-build-perl > > Could you please explain what's "pointless and/or broken" about that > > one? > > (Except that it's old since even lenny has 5.10.0. > Yes, that's exactly the reason. Because the perl (>= 5.10

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 12:05:28AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 22:40:52 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > From discussion on IRC earlier this evening, it looks like the most > > pragmatic approach will be to get the apt and aptitude sbuild > > resolvers to strip the altern

Re: [php-maint] Bug#614413: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

hi, On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 19:42 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: > I disagree here. > Alternatives in build-* relationships *are* mentioned by policy. In fact, > there's even an example in section 7.1. > > There's also no stated guarantee *anywhere* (including release policy) that > the package's

Re: Release file changes

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Joey Hess wrote: > Russ Allbery wrote: > > Joerg Jaspert writes: > > > Right. For now I undo this (with next dinstall run), until either one of > > > the following happens: > > > > > - lenny is gone and the tools are fixed in squeeze with a point > > > update (provided

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 22:40:52 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > From discussion on IRC earlier this evening, it looks like the most > pragmatic approach will be to get the apt and aptitude sbuild > resolvers to strip the alternatives (after arch reduction), which > will make them behave pretty much e

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:21:24PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > > > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that > > > ease of reus

Re: [buildd-tools-devel] re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:13:19PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > > > · Standard alternative use in the form "concrete|virtual", as used for > > normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible? > > · Architecture-specific dependencies

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:49:21PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that > > ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important. > > However, the

Re: Release file changes

Russ Allbery wrote: > Joerg Jaspert writes: > > > Right. For now I undo this (with next dinstall run), until either one of > > the following happens: > > > - lenny is gone and the tools are fixed in squeeze with a point > > update (provided the SRMs approve such updates, but I *hope* so).

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:08:18 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > · Standard alternative use in the form "concrete|virtual", as used for > normal deps on virtual packages. Is this sensible? > · Architecture-specific dependencies > · Broken uses. Dependencies on multiple different libraries which will >

Bug#614657: ITP: clonalframe -- inference of bacterial microevolution using multilocus sequence data

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: andr...@an3as.eu * Package name: clonalframe Version : 1.2 Upstream Author : Xavier Didelot * URL : http://www.xavierdidelot.xtreemhost.com/clonalframe.htm * License : GPL Programming Lang: C++ Description : infer

Re: Release file changes

Joerg Jaspert writes: > Right. For now I undo this (with next dinstall run), until either one of > the following happens: > - lenny is gone and the tools are fixed in squeeze with a point > update (provided the SRMs approve such updates, but I *hope* so). > Until today we discovered: >

Re: New version of DEP-5 parser

Le mardi 22 février 2011 19:06:27, vous avez écrit : > Can't call method "fetch_element" on an undefined value at > /usr/share/perl5/Config/Model/Backend/Debian/Dpkg/Copyright.pm line 121. > > Do you want me to fill a bug report in addition to this email? Yes, please. And also include the copyri

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that > ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important. > However, there is no way to know which of those alternatives applies > to which s

Bug#614624: ITP: libtest-fatal-perl -- Simple Perl module for testing code with exceptions

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Alessandro Ghedini * Package name: libtest-fatal-perl Version : 0.003 Upstream Author : Ricardo Signes * URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-Fatal/ * License : GPL-1+ or Artistic Programming Lang: Perl Description

Re: Release file changes

> until today our Release files included 3 Hashes for all their entries: > MD5SUM, SHA1, SHA256. I just modified the code to no longer include > MD5SUM in *all* newly generated Release files. Right. For now I undo this (with next dinstall run), until either one of the following happens: - lenny

Re: Wanted: maintainer for git's emacs support

Rémi Vanicat writes: > If there should be a change in maintenance of magit, I would be very > interested because I'm one of the main upstream developer. Sorry for being quiet about this but see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/10/msg00043.html Now that squeeze has released I think thi

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:21:17PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > > Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example: > > > > libdb-dev (>= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev > > > > This dependency permits building against

Re: Auditing systems for default homedir permissions and other potential security risks and also for overly long subjects and needlessly antagonistic mailing list discussion threads

Lars Wirzenius writes: > The auditor then looks for things in the system, and in home > directories, which might be problems. For example, if it's meant to be a > mail server with a lot of security, having telnetd installed and running > would be a problem for it to flag. Likewise, it might flag h

Re: New version of DEP-5 parser

Le vendredi 21 janvier 2011 21:16:59, Dominique Dumont a écrit : > Hello > > I've fixed upstream [1] most (hopefully all) the issues > regarding the DEP5 parser based on Config::Model that > were mentioned on these lists or in the BTS. I've just discovered now but config-edit fail when header sect

Re: Bug#614601: ITP: libsafewrite -- Simple functions for performing safe atomic replacement of files

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 04:41:15PM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Shachar Shemesh > > > * Package name: libsafewrite > Version : 1.00 > Upstream Author : Shachar Shemesh > * URL : http://www.lingnu.com/opensource/safewrite

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > Taking one of php5's dependencies as an example: > > libdb-dev (>= 4.7) | libdb4.8-dev | libdb4.6-dev > > This dependency permits building against no less than *three* different > Berkeley DB versions. Given that these

Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps

On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:42:32PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Hi everyone, Roger, > > Roger Leigh has filed a few bug reports related to how the buildd's resolver > (either internal or any of the new ones: apt{,itude}) and I'm not sure I > quiet agree. > Let's take for example the one filed

Bug#614601: ITP: libsafewrite -- Simple functions for performing safe atomic replacement of files

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Shachar Shemesh * Package name: libsafewrite Version : 1.00 Upstream Author : Shachar Shemesh * URL : http://www.lingnu.com/opensource/safewrite.html * License : MIT Programming Lang: C Description : Simple func

Venera iebaaza tev piederoshajaa pastaa Haides kruushu tureetaaju!

Opaa! Pamaniju, ka ir apskatita mana profaila fochene saitaa http://www.spidola.info Grandiozs paldies par davaninju! Buchinjas (sexy) tev! Sigita -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debia

Re: Release file changes

Hi, On Montag, 21. Februar 2011, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > Yep. debmirror, reprepro, debootstrap and cdebootstrap seem to be the > tools that can't deal with this. fai-mirror came to my mind. And probably older dak setups as well? > The latter two are serious enough to > keep the change away from