On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:18 PM Ondřej Surý wrote:
> while your effort is valiant, I see a little value in it as there’s no real
> world use case. While your arguments are valid, you are imposing additional
> work on generally already overloaded maintainers with unclear goal and
> purpose.
Per
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 7:06 PM Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> I've read the distro-tracker documentation and it seems like interaction
> is by visiting with a web browser or via email. Is there an official or
> even unofficial API for access to data in distro-tracker?
There are a few APIs defined
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 4:11 PM Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> You'll make it unnecessarily harder to bootstrap environments that need
> themselves to build if you do that.
The idea here is that bootstrap builds are special and so they should
be very explicit rather than happen as a side effect of regu
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: 1245 (new: 13)
Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 240 (new: 1)
Total number of packages reque
> "Daniel" == Daniel Schepler writes:
Daniel> (Incidentally, another offshoot was creating local patches to sbuild
Daniel> which add an operation mode using systemd-nspawn --ephemeral to
start
Daniel> a container (along with the base being a BTRFS subvolume to speed up
Daniel
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 11:18 AM Ondřej Surý wrote:
> while your effort is valiant, I see a little value in it as there’s no real
> world use case. While your arguments are valid, you are imposing additional
> work on generally already overloaded maintainers with unclear goal and
> purpose.
>
>
Daniel,
while your effort is valiant, I see a little value in it as there’s no real
world use case. While your arguments are valid, you are imposing additional
work on generally already overloaded maintainers with unclear goal and purpose.
Perhaps your energy and enthusiasm (which I appreciate)
I've read the distro-tracker documentation and it seems like interaction
is by visiting with a web browser or via email. Is there an official or
even unofficial API for access to data in distro-tracker?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 08:50:25 -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> I've been running a manual test bootstrap of Debian (starting with
> cross-compiled packages amd64 -> i386 up to the point I was able to
> install debhelper), and posting a few bugs I've found along the way.
> These are where I found t
> "Daniel" == Daniel Schepler writes:
Daniel> However, I've been getting push back on some of these, with
Daniel> maintainers of the opinion that it isn't actually a bug. So, I
Daniel> thought I'd consult here to get more opinions on whether these are
Daniel> true bugs, or wh
On Thu, 2020-01-16 at 08:50 -0800, Daniel Schepler wrote:
> These are where I found that having extra packages installed during
> the dpkg-buildpackage run either failed or resulted in broken
> packages. (Some examples of the type of thing I mean: #948522,
> #887902.)
If you build outside a contr
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 05:46:56PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:15:29PM +, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> > > No, did I give that impression? Sorry, search is going to stay
> > > with regex on (I think it's) package names and descriptions.
> >
> > Speaking of search, are the a
I've been running a manual test bootstrap of Debian (starting with
cross-compiled packages amd64 -> i386 up to the point I was able to
install debhelper), and posting a few bugs I've found along the way.
These are where I found that having extra packages installed during
the dpkg-buildpackage run e
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:15:29PM +, Paul Wise wrote:
> > No, did I give that impression? Sorry, search is going to stay
> > with regex on (I think it's) package names and descriptions.
>
> Speaking of search, are the apt maintainers aware of apt-xapian-index
> and do you have any thoughts o
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:57 PM Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> No, did I give that impression? Sorry, search is going to stay
> with regex on (I think it's) package names and descriptions.
Speaking of search, are the apt maintainers aware of apt-xapian-index
and do you have any thoughts on it?
--
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 07:01:25AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Does it really make sense to deprecate regexps for apt-cache search?
> In that case, I think you're very unlikely to want a literal match.
No, did I give that impression? Sorry, search is going to stay
with regex on (I think it's) pack
Does it really make sense to deprecate regexps for apt-cache search?
In that case, I think you're very unlikely to want a literal match.
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 11:11:38PM +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> Starting with APT 2.0 (1.9.6 in experimental), the apt(8) binary will
> not try to interpret package names passed on the command-line as regular
> expressions or fnmatch() style patterns. Future versions of apt-get(8)
> and apt
18 matches
Mail list logo
