-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/04/13 18:15, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-04-07 at 16:19 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
>>> On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200 Daniel Pocock
>>> wrote:
>>>
I notice this bug was downgrade
Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Montag, 1. April 2013, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> Rather than accept the harm, surely the release team could simply roll
>> back the upload in some manner?
>
> As I understand it, only by introducing an epoch in the package version.
Or by using the 9.0.0+really0.99-1 ve
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> So it seems that this is only going to be an issue if users take the
> unusual step of changing /etc/fstab to refer to LVs by UUID. But maybe
> there are management tools that do that as a matter of course?
One should never use UUIDs in fstab to refer t
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Philip Hands wrote:
> Might it be possible to do that with git-subtree, and then track the
> application specific branch created by subtree as the upstream for each
> package?
I'm not familiar with this case, nor with git subtree but my favourite
solution for multi
Paul Wise writes:
...
> Probably what needs to happen is to split the git repo up into one per
> app.
Might it be possible to do that with git-subtree, and then track the
application specific branch created by subtree as the upstream for each
package?
I think all that needs to be done for that
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 04:01:25PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> UUIDs are used by default AFAICS when the installer creates the
> fstab, and should work just fine. Just looking and I don't have
> an example system which uses UUIDs /and/ LVM root, however--this
> does not appear to be the default f
On Sun, 2013-04-07 at 16:19 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200 Daniel Pocock
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and
> >> appears to have been missed so far:
> >
> > It was only push
Roger Leigh (07/04/2013):
> UUIDs are used by default AFAICS when the installer creates the
> fstab, and should work just fine. Just looking and I don't have
> an example system which uses UUIDs /and/ LVM root, however--this
> does not appear to be the default for LVM. While this is an
> importa
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 04:19:15PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200 Daniel Pocock
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and
> >>
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 16:19:15 +0200
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
> > It was only pushed to RC status by your request and then almost
> > immediately moved back to original severity of Important by one of
> > the maintainers.
> >
> > It is up to the maintainers t
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Werner Detter
* Package name: libcmime
Version : 0.1.6
Upstream Author : Axel Steiner,
Werner Detter,
Robin Doer,
* URL : http://www.libcmime.org
* License : LGPL3
Programming
On 04/07/2013 10:19 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200 Daniel Pocock
wrote:
I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and appears to
have been missed so far:
It was only pushed to RC status by your request and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 07/04/13 15:47, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200 Daniel Pocock
> wrote:
>
>> I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and
>> appears to have been missed so far:
>
> It was only pushed to RC status by your
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sylvestre Ledru
* Package name: emscripten
Version : git
Upstream Author : Alon Zakai
* URL : http://emscripten.org
* License : MIT license and the University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source
License
Programming Lang: JS
On 7 April 2013 at 13:01, Julian Gilbey wrote:
| On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Philip Rinn wrote:
| > On 07.04.2013 03:07, Julian Gilbey wrote:
| > > Ah, thanks Chris, I wasn't aware of that! But then it seems to me
| > > that the correct lines should be:
| > >
| > > Build-Depends: .
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:25:43 +0200
Daniel Pocock wrote:
> I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and appears to
> have been missed so far:
It was only pushed to RC status by your request and then almost
immediately moved back to original severity of Important by one of the
maint
On 05/04/13 14:06, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock writes ("SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)"):
>> It may actually be useful for the technical committee to review what is
>> on the wiki and make some general statement about Debian's position (if
>> they haven't done so in the past), a
On 04/02/2013 09:18 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Actually that hits another problem. Namely that the epoch does not
> appear in the binary package filename. While wheezy would have 1.2.3-1
> and unstable would have 1:1.2.3-1 they both produce the same
> foo_1.2.3-1_amd64.deb. But for certain t
I notice this bug was downgraded below the RC threshold and appears to
have been missed so far:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612402
Basically, if somebody has UUID syntax in /etc/fstab, their root FS
isn't mounted and they can't boot
Patches are included, should this be bum
What you want should be possible if upstream were to add some git
tags. Obviously the downloaded tarball would need to be modified.
Does upstream release individual tarballs for each application?
Probably what needs to happen is to split the git repo up into one per app.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wi
Hi,
I am thinking to set my debian/watch files for some applications that are using
the same git repository. There is an open discussion about that in the upstream
developers mail list.
The problem is that the repository http://repo.or.cz/w/dockapps.git has
multiple dockapps applications. Ever
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 12:16:40PM +0200, olivier sallou wrote:
> dh-make-perl indeed for Perl CPAN packages.
>
> dh-make for base packages...
gem2deb for Ruby packages ...
--
Antonio Terceiro
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Xavier Guimard
* Package name: libhash-storediterator-perl
Version : 0.003
Upstream Author : Chad Granum
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Hash-StoredIterator
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+
Programming Lang: Perl
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libnet-idn-nameprep-perl
Version : 1.101+dfsg
Upstream Author : Claus F�rber
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Net-IDN-N
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Philip Rinn wrote:
> On 07.04.2013 03:07, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > Ah, thanks Chris, I wasn't aware of that! But then it seems to me
> > that the correct lines should be:
> >
> > Build-Depends: ..., r-base-dev, ...
> > [...]
> > Depends: ..., ${R:Depends}
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 01:55:24AM +0100, Aneurin Price wrote:
> On 4 April 2013 18:28, wrote:
>
> > There is apparently no mode of argument, or "style of
> > communications", which is capable of penetrating the Debian
> > bureaucracy. It is impervious, even to patches which have been
> > previou
On 2013-04-05 13:37, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 11:56:04AM +0200, Thomas Koch wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> as I've posted some minutes ago I'm searching to generate the files in
>> debian/
>> and remembered the DPU project[1]. It took me some time to find the blogpost
>> again and
On 07.04.2013 03:07, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> Ah, thanks Chris, I wasn't aware of that! But then it seems to me
> that the correct lines should be:
>
> Build-Depends: ..., r-base-dev, ...
> [...]
> Depends: ..., ${R:Depends}, ...
>
> as the source package is *not* dependent upon the R version, onl
28 matches
Mail list logo
