[adding -devel to cc]
On 12/3/18 8:11 PM, Dominik George wrote:
>> well, Debian is using gitlab!!! so this sentence has no sense. The
>> problem here
>> is that is a complex software that depends of a lot of pieces and it's
>> not
>> easy/possible to fit the definition. So, maybe we should create
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> [adding -devel to cc]
>
> On 12/3/18 8:11 PM, Dominik George wrote:
> >> well, Debian is using gitlab!!! so this sentence has no sense. The
> >> problem here
> >> is that is a complex software that depends of a lot of pieces and it's
> >> not
> >> easy
Hi,
It has been brought to my attention that both packages "whitedune" and
"dune" provide the binary "/usr/bin/dune" (#916468).
The situation falls directly under section 10.1 of the Policy:
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s-binaries
> Two different packages must not inst
Hi,
why does libnss3/buster depend on libc6 >= 2.28 for i386 but for amd64,
>= 2.14 suffices?
I'm running stretch/amd64 with libnss3 pinned to buster, using stretch's
libc6. On that machine, live-build'ing an i386 stretch image no longer
works since the current libnss3 migrated to buster a few da
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 01:19:54PM +, Daniel Reichelt wrote:
> why does libnss3/buster depend on libc6 >= 2.28 for i386 but for amd64,
> >= 2.14 suffices?
Symbols, I'm sure.
> Is there a technical rationale for this
You can compare the symbol lists to find the differences, I suppose.
--
WBR
Hey,
* Pirate Praveen [2018-12-18 09:34:46 CET]:
> On 12/3/18 8:11 PM, Dominik George wrote:
> >> well, Debian is using gitlab!!! so this sentence has no sense. The
> >> problem here
> >> is that is a complex software that depends of a lot of pieces and it's
> >> not
> >> easy/possible to fit
On 2018, ഡിസംബർ 18 7:14:14 PM IST, Rhonda D'Vine wrote:
> And yes, I'm with Alexander, the volatile maintenance can't be dumped
>on the backports team. It's a different workflow anyway.
My proposal for backports is to have only the dependencies of packages in
volatile that fall in the curren
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:38:39PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> But if that is not possible, volatile as a separate archive is also fine.
instead of volatile we need PPAs.
--
cheers,
Holger
---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hello all
Slightly overdue, we have created a survey for the Buster artwork.
Please choose your favourite at:
https://surveys.debian.net
Please be nice and vote only once!
Note: the survey talks about moving themes from left to right,
but in some
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Goirand
* Package name: puppet-module-heini-wait-for
Version : 2.0.1
Upstream Author : Dirk Heinrichs
* URL : https://github.com/heini/puppet-wait-for
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Puppet
Descriptio
Stéphane Glondu writes ("Conflict over /usr/bin/dune"):
> The "dune" package (of which I am the maintainer) is a popular build
> system for OCaml projects. It is pretty recent, has strong upstream
> support, and more and more projects are switching to it, which is a
> reason to have it in Debian.
>
Resending because
1. mailing @packages.d.o rather than @packages.qa.d.o
2. fixed one of the google urls which I broke while
removing tracking crap
Stéphane Glondu writes ("Conflict over /usr/bin/dune"):
> The "dune" package (of which I am the maintainer) is a popular build
> system for OC
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:12 AM Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:38:39PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> > But if that is not possible, volatile as a separate archive is also fine.
>
> instead of volatile we need PPAs.
Shortly before the Stretch release, when I was scrambling to
On 12/18/18 8:41 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:38:39PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>> But if that is not possible, volatile as a separate archive is also fine.
>
> instead of volatile we need PPAs.
I think a redefined volatile is the best option for sharing work. But
PPA
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Conflict over /usr/bin/dune"):
> https://www.google.com/search?q=dune+software
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dune_(software)
> https://www.google.com/search?q=%2Fusr%2Fbin%2Fdune
>
> Under the circumstances it seems obvious that, at the very least, the
> ocaml build t
Even firefox was renamed twice.
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 09:46:42PM +0100, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
>
> There is a random seed file stored by systemd-random-seed.service that saves
> entropy from one boot and loads it again after the next reboot. The random
> seed file is re-written immediately after the file is read, so the syste
On 2018-12-18 18:40, Pirate Praveen wrote:
On 12/18/18 8:41 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:38:39PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
But if that is not possible, volatile as a separate archive is also
fine.
instead of volatile we need PPAs.
I think a redefined volatile is th
Am 18.12.2018 um 18:48 schrieb Ian Jackson:
> But overall I think this, plus the history of the ocaml program's
> name, does demonstrate that the ocaml program's claim to the overall
> software name `dune', and the command name `dune' is incredibly weak.
>
> I just checked and `odune' seems to be
On Wed, 19 Dec 2018, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> trust - a something we can only have in backports-like "volatile" repo.
Did you mean: in an unstable-like “volatile” repo?
Backports have a defined mission, which has nothing to do
with the “volatile” proposal. What you were referring to,
integration-
On Wednesday, 19 December 2018 9:17:51 AM AEDT Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Did you mean: in an unstable-like “volatile” repo?
Yes perhaps more like "unstable".
I'm saying that IMHO we should have only one common/shared "PPA" for "stable"
users. I do not want many personal/individual archives.
> Ba
On Wednesday, 19 December 2018 2:11:43 AM AEDT Holger Levsen wrote:
> instead of volatile we need PPAs.
I think concept of "volatile" is better, stronger.
PPA allows people to ship whatever they want without cooperating in policy
compliant (official) repo. This is the Debian way where many people
>> We had volatile, which, redefined properly, could help. I am trying
>to draft such a definition.
>
>Did you get a chance to work on it?
I do have this on my todo list for around Christmas.
People who know me that I deliberately leave out the year, but my intentions
are 2018 ;).
-nik
On 12/19/18 1:05 AM, Philipp Kern wrote:
> In the Ubuntu PPA case you get free reign over what's in that archive
> and what you backport as part of offering the package. Obviously this
> might conflict with the existing set. But the same is true for a
> centralized volatile archive if you need to b
24 matches
Mail list logo
