On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> don't even use Debian as there system. And then those that do use Debian
> use stable usually (or even oldstable), meaning you have to put every
> update inside there. Good luck, it's not something I want to do.
I would have thought it woul
Mike O'Connor writes:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2011 09:41:00 -0500, Scott Kitterman
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 02, 2011 04:53:46 am Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
>> > If you have non-free enabled and install a package from main, it should
>> > install the dependencies from main. So you should hav
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes:
> On 02/03/11 04:24, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> It seems to me not worth a mass bug filing. This doesn't seem like
>> something
>> that would affect user's systems. Is there a rationale for imposing this
>> ordering other than puiparts can't deal with it?
>
> If
On a somewhat related note:
If a package is manually installed, then replaced with a transitional
package, then apt should mark the transitional package's dependencies
as manually installed and the transitional package as automatically
installed. Otherwise, when one removes the transitional packa
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 03:36:47PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:08:18PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:42:32PM -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> > > I disagree here.
>> > > Alternatives in build-* relationships *are*
Peter Pentchev writes:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:45:06AM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:40:52PM +, 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
>> > r
Hi,
after this problem came up on irc I thought I would mention it to a
larger audience:
After upgrading to squeeze the dhcp client suddenly started to overwrite
/etc/resolv.conf again while before it was configured not to do so.
Looking into the cause we discovered that the problem is that
dhcp
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:55:54PM +, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:29:57 +
> Marcin Owsiany wrote:
[...]
> >Since I use (or plan to use) git-buildpackage, I don't have a
> > tarball which could serve as an authoritative whitelist. Thus an
> > additional whitelist refre
On 15/03/11 22:29, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> The current best practice for dealing with packages using GNU autotools
> (as described in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz) is to
> run autoreconf in a prerequisite of a build target, and to remove its
> results in the clean target.
>
> Howe
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 22:29:57 +
Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> The current best practice for dealing with packages using GNU
> autotools (as described
> in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz) is to run
> autoreconf in a prerequisite of a build target, and to remove its
> results in the cle
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:29:57PM +, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The current best practice for dealing with packages using GNU autotools
> (as described in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz) is to
> run autoreconf in a prerequisite of a build target, and to remove its
> res
Dear Marcin,
Marcin Owsiany schrieb am 15.03.2011 23:29:
> However that README does not give any hints on how to best do the
> cleaning. How are others doing it?
in puf we're using dh-autoreconf in the dh(7) sequence, which creates a list of
modified files, backs them up and restores them later ag
Hello,
The current best practice for dealing with packages using GNU autotools
(as described in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz) is to
run autoreconf in a prerequisite of a build target, and to remove its
results in the clean target.
However that README does not give any hints on ho
>> The new implementation is currently only used for suites that are not
>> marked as untouchable. Oldstable and stable will switch during the next
>> point release.
> Have you (or anyone else) verified that any tools in {old,}stable
> parsing contents files are compatible with the new structure (
>> git clone https://ftp-master.debian.org/git/archvsync.git>
>> Easy enough to keep updated.
> The point is that every now and then somebody decides to rewrite
> and as a mirror admin i need to find out how the current way will
> work, the current configuration looks like and how to fit it
> into
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fabrizio Regalli
* Package name: proftpd-mod-tar
Version : 0.3.3
Upstream Author : TJ Saunders
* URL : http://www.castaglia.org/proftpd/modules/mod_tar.html
* License : GPL-2
Description : The mod_tar module suppor
On Sat, 2011-03-12 at 11:01 +0100, Torsten Werner wrote:
> we have disabled the contents generator of apt-ftparchive and replaced
> it by a new implementation in dak. There are some visible changes:
[...]
> The new implementation is currently only used for suites that are not
> marked as untouchabl
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 04:05:59PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 03/13/2011 05:53 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:20:21 +0100
> > David Kalnischkies wrote:
> >> Unfortunately many mirrors doesn't use the newest version of ftpsync [0]
> >> and therefore their two stage update
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 13:52, Jari Aalto wrote:
> - is DFSG compliant. The current license is GPL.
Nitpick, but winetricks is LGPL (same as Wine).
> - does not depend on external programs outside of Debian.
Winetricks can do some things without external help (change the
emulated windows
* Jari Aalto (jari.aa...@cante.net) [110315 19:57]:
> What is the status of this ITP opened 2010-10-03, 6 months ago? To my
> understanding winetricks:
> - does not depend on external programs outside of Debian.
>
> - is a single utility that helps quite a bit to install WINE related
>
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I mean, I really don't understand why you can't atleast list the
> other files from the package.
I've added a de-duplication mechanism.
Torsten
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscri
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:52:05 +0200
Message-ID: <87k4g0fc8a@picasso.cante.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
--text follows this line--
> Andreas Barth
>
>
> I agree that starting with the current scripts is for starters. But we
> should do it in a way that is prepared for doi
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:29:08AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 08:55:47PM +0100, Michael Vogt wrote:
> > One missing feature is that it needs to send along info about the
> > release/arch its looking for or the returned list needs to be extended
> > to include this in
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 17:52:31 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> And for packages you either have to do stable updates all the time, or
> add an additional repository, or use unstable on a server. Whatever you
> prefer.
>
Not to mention debian mirrors don't have to run debian.
Cheers,
Julien
--
On 03/15/2011 04:54 PM, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> On 03/15/2011 04:17 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>>> Indeed, I don't know why we bother with packages at all.
>>
>> Thanks for your constructive comment.
>
> He's right though. With packages,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 03/15/2011 04:17 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> Indeed, I don't know why we bother with packages at all.
>
> Thanks for your constructive comment.
He's right though. With packages, you can receive automatic
notification of available updates
On 03/15/2011 04:17 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Indeed, I don't know why we bother with packages at all.
Thanks for your constructive comment.
--
Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org
GPG Finger
On 15/03/11 at 16:05 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 03/13/2011 05:53 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> > On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:20:21 +0100
> > David Kalnischkies wrote:
> >> Unfortunately many mirrors doesn't use the newest version of ftpsync [0]
> >> and therefore their two stage update of the mirror
On 03/13/2011 05:53 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:20:21 +0100
> David Kalnischkies wrote:
>> Unfortunately many mirrors doesn't use the newest version of ftpsync [0]
>> and therefore their two stage update of the mirror is flawed:
>
> I wonder why does anyone package it? If w
Package: general
Severity: important
Tags: squeeze
I've really no idea, which package(s) are responsible for this problem.
In my log files I can find messages like:
Mar 15 14:56:09 oedibus automount[1983]: set_tsd_user_vars: failed to get group
info from getgrgid_r
As the result the output fro
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Olivier Berger
* Package name: php-opendocument
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Author : Christian Weiske , Alexander Pak
* URL : http://pear.php.net/package/OpenDocument
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: PHP
Description
On 2011-03-15, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Apt would then accept either version.
>
> Of course this only makes sense for unstable which updates regularly.
> For security we might consider doing it also, but re-issue a new
> InRelease a few hours after the first mirror pulse that gets rid of the
> old
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Paul Wise [Tue, Mar 15 2011, 08:58:47AM]:
>
> > What was the reason for adding InRelease anyway?
>
> I guess (repeating: *guess*) the main reason is that GPG signature needs
> to be verified for the exact file contents. If you put them int
Looks like it was a false alarm, all is normal again at
{http,ftp}.us.debian.org. Is ftp.us.debian.org the master node?
> Same problem now also at {http,ftp}.us.debian.org?
>
> W: Failed to fetch
> bzip2:/var/lib/apt/lists/partial/ftp.us.debian.org_debian_dists_unstable_main_binary-i386_Packages
34 matches
Mail list logo
