On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 02:24:33PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 01:13:09PM +, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > It is a payoff, larger diff for less frequent orig.tar.gz uploads. Instead
> > of uploading a 3MB mutt_1.5.6-20040915.orig.tar.gz the mutt maintainers can
>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 07:05:40PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 07, Paul Brossier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 10.2. Libraries
> > ---
> >
> > The shared version of a library must be compiled with `-fPIC', and the
> > static version must not be. In other words, e
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Daniel Kobras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: graphicsmagick
Version : 1.1.7
Upstream Author : Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.graphicsmagick.org/
* License : MIT/X
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 07:13:05PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> There are less than 80 packages in unstable still using it, and there
> is an excellent package called debhelper which can do everything that
> debmake does and probably much better, so it does not make much sense
> to keep debmake al
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 10:59:22AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I've adopted gnubg with Corrin's permission and this is now fixed in the
> version just uploaded yesterday.
Here's an updated and now hopefully complete list that also takes into
account build-depends-indep. Removing gnubg from the l
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 10:29:27PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> There is a "xcftopnm" binary in gimp-perl, but it is very slow,
> starting the Gimp engine to do the work. "Convert" from imagemagick
> supposedly also understands XCF files, but not the ones I work with,
> and it would probably be
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 06:59:53PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> ti, 2006-02-14 kello 16:28 +0100, Henning Makholm kirjoitti:
> > Does anybody have a better idea than trying (in vain) to keep myself
> > informed about the supply of image viewers in unstable and adjust the
> > dependencies appropri
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 01:21:15AM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Mar 18, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > There would definitely be duplication of arch:all between ftp.debian.org
> > and ports.debian.org (let's call it ports), as well as duplication of the
> > source.
> As a mirro
On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 02:52:41AM -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> I want to build debian package for a library called fortranposix. The
> upstream source can be found at
>
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/fortranposix
>
> This library depends on some kind of fortran 90 compiler being insta
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 04:12:31PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 11:22:51AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > Steve Langasek schrieb:
> > >>Package: oldpkg
> > >>Depends: newpkg
> > >>Description: transitional dummy package
>
> > >>Package: newpkg
> > >>Replaces: oldpkg
> >
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:52:53AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 02:05:13PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 04:12:31PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 11:22:51AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> > &g
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 03:15:02PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Daniel Kobras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:52:53AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> It explains Replaces+Conflicts. It does *not* say "create a dummy package
> >&
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:06:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:39:30PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > Method B
>
> > Package: oldpkg
> > Depends: newpkg
> > Files:
> > /usr/share/doc/oldpkg -> /usr/sha
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 09:19:42AM +0200, Andreas Fester wrote:
> Absolutely. Its also the method I would prefer because it adds minimal
> overhead providing the most seamless upgrade. I implemented it for my
> package, and the first test succeeded very well (amd64 testing/unstable),
> but today I
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 11:46:12PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:06:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Oooh, Method B is one I haven't seen proposed before in the context of dummy
> > packages. That looks far more elegant to me than the alterna
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:15:06PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Kobras writes ("Re: Renaming a package"):
> > but the alternative patch to dpkg is quite simple (see
> > below). Alas, it changes current behaviour.
>
> I don't think it this patch is
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 01:34:36PM +0200, Jérôme Warnier wrote:
> I've been upgrading my machines since Woody to Sarge, then to Etch. Now,
> my /var/lib/dpkg/available are huge (15MB), and it seems they never get
> cleaned.
> How am I supposed to clean them? Isn't there any automated tools in
> Deb
On 10 Sep 2000, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> `scsh' ought to be taken over by someone who actually uses it. I've
> not even looked at it in over a year.
If nobody objects I'd like to do this together with Martin Gasbichler who
wrote a fair part of scsh 0.6. But me having just applied for Debian
m
On 11 Sep 2000, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Kobras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Daniel> On 10 Sep 2000, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> >> `scsh' ought to be taken over by someone who actually use
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Christian Kurz wrote:
> You don't need a package maintainer to adopt the package for getting a
> new package uploaded. A sponsor for you and Martin would be enough to
> upload the package to the archive.
Okay, sorry, wrong wording. That's what I had in mind. Someone to take
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Below is a listing of packages needing a new maintainer. I know that
> all the information is in the WNPP already, but I thought it would
> be a good idea to post a summary since the WNPP bugs were not CCed
> here.
[...]
> Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROT
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > > O: manpages-de -- German manpages
> >
> > I'd be willing to take them, if it's just for the Debian maintainership
> > and fixing the few outstanding bugs. However, Joey, I see
Moi!
The new version of the OpenDX toolkit now provides sane libraries, so I
wanted to restructure the packages a bit. In particular, there is a new
package libdx4, so I wanted to rename what used to be dx-dev package as
libdx4-dev. This turned out to be harder than I thought.
The -dev package wi
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 04:37:55PM +0200, Michael Piefel wrote:
> Alternatively, there could be a new control field, say "Supersedes:",
> which would result in the above behaviour. Of course, there'd have to be
> a change in policy...
This has already been proposed as "Previously:" (#33344), and
"
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 08:47:53PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> I was thinking about the dummy package approach, but then the dummy
> package would just hang around indefinitely, right?
If the new package replaces all files in the dummy package, dpkg removes
it automatically. But cf. #202997.
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 10:44:04PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Stephen's points are valid and quite useful
> considering an upstream developer's point of view,
> but for random user joe who is trying to find a development
> package, one of the following may help him find the right package
>
>
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 04:41:48PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> It seems like the 'sensible' thing to do might be to provide both.
> Typically I would think the standard 'ping' would be, well, pretty
> standard, and would work across multiple kernels/OSes/etc. We could
> also have an 'lping' or s
On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 12:18:00AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10469 March 1977, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I can't see the rationale for rejecting source uploads, and they used to
> > be accepted in the past.
>
> Because people then fuck up their packages even more.
>
> No, they havent bee
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 01:40:05AM -0400, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 03/07/07, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I heard this crap only when using alsa.
>
> which is a problem, since OSS is deprecated in favour of ALSA.
It's only OSS-the-kernel-drivers that are deprecated.
OSS-t
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 09:52:28AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I really feel we should get rid of all these static libraries. Who uses
> static linking now that even our glibc doesn't support it correctly
> across versions?
People who want their binaries to run across different Linux machines
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 08:09:32AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Which doesn't, in any way, promote the idea that we should keep the .la
> files. People who need/want a statically linked binary often want to
> control exactly *which* libraries are statically linked, and will build
> the link comm
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:57:40AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 10:38:49AM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 09:52:28AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > I really feel we should get rid of all these static libraries. Who
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 12:48:28PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> Often worse, due to the dramatically increased amount of data which
> must be loaded from disk in a cold-cache situation. Another 800K of
> glibc you've got to read in. The memory usage sucks too.
That's glibc. It's already in
On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 01:29:19PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 02:12:25PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote:
> > Rather 'chmod +x /usr/bin/make' according to the error message. Weird.
>
> It is a confusing (confused) error message. The permission pro
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 01:25:26PM +0200, Mikael Hedin wrote:
> I've enhanced oglerc(5) by adding a tbl section (.TS and .TE and the
> things in between). On my system (sid) it is preproccessed by tbl(1)
> when I run 'man ./oglerc.5', but on the upstream author's sytem
> (solaris something), the t
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 11:57:50PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 03:46:55AM -0500, Rahul Jain wrote:
> > Why does xcdroast need to be setgid? I think it's terrible to have any user
> > able to burn or screw up a burn... why can't they use sudo or su?
>
> Doesn't the user h
On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 09:41:46PM +0300, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
>
> > + mpg123 uploaded 125 days ago, out of date by 115 days!
> > mpg123-alsa is uninstallable (needs alsa-base 0.4, which is no
> > longer available?)
>
> mpg123 won't work with the newer AL
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 10:23:22AM -0500, Pat Mahoney wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:22:16PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
> >
> > Please be careful with ladspa.h
> > It's currently not free.
>
> Why do you say this? http://www.ladspa.org/ladspa_s
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 09:54:45AM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010905 10:17]:
> > I intend to adopt doc-linux-ja, Japanese version of doc-linux.
> > The reason to adopt is that Colin Watson is also written as follows:
> >
> > Marco Budde is packaged in 1
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Joost van Baal wrote:
> Your package upload (cl-imho, manpages-de, tiger) was rejected due to a
> mismatch in the original source md5sum. I saw this in
> auric:/org/ftp.debian.org/incoming/REJECT/*.reason . The package I
> maintain (lire) was rejected for
Hi!
I'm currently fighting with deb symbols files for a C++ library I'm
packaging, and I'd like to get some insight in how others are coping
with this task. In particular, I wonder how to get rid of symbols from
standard template instances that leak into the ABI, eg.
$ cat test.cpp
#include
st
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 12:15:19PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 07 avril 2009 à 11:57 +0200, Mike Hommey a écrit :
> > I found nothing better than using a version script. I'm lucky that the
> > library in question (WebKit) only really exports C symbols, and C++ is only
> > internal det
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 02:42:16AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Daniel Kobras schrieb:
> > Have you used this option successfully with a C++ library? In this case,
> > libtool creates input for the linker option "-retain-symbols-file"
> > rather than a version
43 matches
Mail list logo
