Sean Whitton:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon 13 May 2019 at 11:52AM +00, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
>> [re-sent with debian-release list address corrected...]
>
> Also resending. Sorry.
>
>> so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from
>> 'testing':
>> dpkg: error: error executing
Hi,
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:33:44AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I'd like to call out one specific thing from Andreas's quote and the
> general argument. It's the belief that we've reached a point where in
> some cases uniformity is more important than maintainer preference.
I second this.
Sean Whitton writes:
> This now exists: https://wiki.debian.org/DgitFAQ
Thank you.
One issue I noticed:
git-buildpackage and git-dpm users are fully supported […]
That seems to contradict earlier statements that “separate
Debian-packaging-only repository” workflow (which is supported by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 19:07:44 -0700
Source: u-boot
Architecture: source
Version: 2019.01+dfsg-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Vagrant Cascadian
Changed-By: Vagrant Cascadian
Closes: 928947
Changes:
u-boot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 09:34:45 +0700
Source: docker.io
Architecture: source
Version: 18.09.1+dfsg1-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Dmitry Smirnov
Changed-By: Arnaud Rebillout
Closes: 921600
Changes:
docker.io
Hello,
On Mon 13 May 2019 at 04:32PM -04, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I think for new packages (with the exception of new packages maintained in a
> team that has a different pattern), it's not unreasonable. When starting from
> scratch, dh is almost certainly no harder and usually easier than
Hello Sam,
On Mon 13 May 2019 at 12:22PM -04, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
> Holger> - packages using cdbs. cdbs has features dh doesnt have and
> Holger> I dont think it's wrong to use cdbs. (
>
> Just for my information, what are the big features cdbs
Hello,
On Mon 13 May 2019 at 11:52AM +00, Holger Levsen wrote:
> [re-sent with debian-release list address corrected...]
Also resending. Sorry.
> so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
> dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files
Hello,
On Mon 13 May 2019 at 11:32AM +00, Holger Levsen wrote:
> so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
> dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files is upgraded
> before debian-security-support (but doesnt happen if d-s-s is upgraded
Hello all,
In a recent thread there were several requests for a dgit FAQ.
This now exists: https://wiki.debian.org/DgitFAQ
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 19:47:52 -0400
Source: plinth
Architecture: source
Version: 19.7
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: FreedomBox packaging team
Changed-By: James Valleroy
Changes:
plinth (19.7) experimental;
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 20:56:13 -0300
Source: forensics-all
Architecture: source
Version: 3.7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Security Tools
Changed-By: Joao Eriberto Mota Filho
Changes:
forensics-all (3.7)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 16:23:51 -0700
Source: arm-trusted-firmware
Architecture: source
Version: 2.1-2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Vagrant Cascadian
Changed-By: Vagrant Cascadian
Changes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 19:53:32 +0100
Source: dbus
Architecture: source
Version: 1.13.10-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Utopia Maintenance Team
Changed-By: Simon McVittie
Closes: 928877
Changes:
dbus
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 23:44:32 +0100
Source: t50
Architecture: source
Version: 5.8.3-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Security Tools
Changed-By: Samuel Henrique
Changes:
t50 (5.8.3-2) unstable;
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 22:45:09 +
Source: dnsdist
Architecture: source
Version: 1.4.0~alpha2-2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: dnsdist packagers
Changed-By: Chris Hofstaedtler
Changes:
dnsdist
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 18:07:33 -0400
Source: spf-engine
Binary: postfix-policyd-spf-python pyspf-milter python3-spf-engine
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.9.0-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Scott Kitterman
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 20:47:13 +0100
Source: python-nameparser
Binary: python-nameparser python3-nameparser
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Python Modules Team
On 2019-05-13 17:58:47, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/13/19 3:57 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On May 13, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >
> >> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> >> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
> >> system.
> > I have
On 5/13/19 6:28 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> "Thomas" == Thomas Goirand writes:
>
> Thomas> Now, I have another example, which is quite the opposite one
> Thomas> of what you gave as example:
>
> Thomas>
>
Quoting Sam Hartman (2019-05-13 21:49:20)
> > "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
> Holger> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 03:37:55PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Bernd> gcc also needs a compiler to build - so I think it should be
> Bernd> safe to allow debhelper to build its package using
On Mon, 13 May 2019 22:22:32 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> In my experience, keeping existing packages at exotic build systems or
> ancient dh compat levels causes fewer problems than people trying to
> change that just for the sake of it.
In my experience ancient debian/rules runes are also a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 22:25:32 +0200
Source: base-files
Architecture: source
Version: 10.3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Santiago Vila
Changed-By: Santiago Vila
Closes: 928172
Changes:
base-files (10.3) unstable;
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 21:22:34 +0200
Source: lemonldap-ng
Architecture: source
Version: 2.0.2+ds-7+deb10u1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
Changed-By: Xavier Guimard
Closes: 928944
Changes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 22:16:14 +0200
Source: chrony
Architecture: source
Version: 3.5~pre1-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Vincent Blut
Changed-By: Vincent Blut
Changes:
chrony (3.5~pre1-1) experimental;
On Monday, May 13, 2019 8:33:44 AM EDT Sam Hartman wrote:
> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
> system.
>
> As we can see on https://trends.debian.net/#build-systems a majority of
> packages
> "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
Holger> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 03:37:55PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
Bernd> gcc also needs a compiler to build - so I think it should be
Bernd> safe to allow debhelper to build its package using
Bernd> debhelper. Or am I missing something
> "Bernd" == Bernd Zeimetz writes:
>> - build-depends of debhelper.
Bernd> gcc also needs a compiler to build - so I think it should be
Bernd> safe to allow debhelper to build its package using
Bernd> debhelper. Or am I missing something here?
If we reach consensus on the
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 03:37:55PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Bernd> gcc also needs a compiler to build - so I think it should be
> Bernd> safe to allow debhelper to build its package using
> Bernd> debhelper. Or am I missing something here?
> If we reach consensus on the overall
On 5/13/19 3:39 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:33:44AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> Today at least I don't think we're talking about making not using dh an
>> RC bug. It would not make a lot of sense to me to start there.
>
> indeed. using dh should currently be a "should"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 13:59:17 -0400
Source: megadown
Architecture: source
Version: 0~20180705+git83c53dd-1.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Vivia Nikolaidou
Changed-By: Boyuan Yang
Closes: 927462
Changes:
Adam Borowski writes:
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:25:11AM +0200, Ansgar wrote:
>> It supports solid compression[1] which
>> compresses multiple files into one block like tar.xz, but unlike tar.xz
>> can use more than one block: "Later versions of 7-zip use a variable
>> solid block size, so that
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:17:26PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 19:08 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > reassign -1 base-files
> > retitle -1 base-files: please add a break on d-s-s < 2019.04.25
and FWIW and for future releases, I've just now done
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:33:44AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>...
> Andreas Tille's explanation (quoted below) is typical of what I've heard
> in this area.
>
> >To come back
> >to the question: I'm positively convinced that we should strive to
> >unify our packaging as much as possible and in
On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 19:08 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> reassign -1 base-files
> retitle -1 base-files: please add a break on d-s-s < 2019.04.25
> thanks
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 01:00:14PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 11:52 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > > So I
reassign -1 base-files
retitle -1 base-files: please add a break on d-s-s < 2019.04.25
thanks
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 01:00:14PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 11:52 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > So I think this can only be fixed properly (=without asking people to
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 19:56:39 +0200
Source: lxqt-sudo
Architecture: source
Version: 0.14.1-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: LXQt Packaging Team
Changed-By: Alf Gaida
Closes: 928941
Changes:
lxqt-sudo (0.14.1-2)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 20:06:50 +0200
Source: hello
Architecture: source
Version: 2.10-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Santiago Vila
Changed-By: Santiago Vila
Closes: 928887
Changes:
hello (2.10-2) unstable;
Version: 1:2.22.0~rc0+next.20190513-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Gerrit Pape
Changed-By: Jonathan Nieder
Description:
git- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
git-all- fast, scalable, distributed revision control system (all subpacka
git-cvs
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:58:47PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> https://salsa.debian.org/openstack-team/debian/openstack-debian-images/blob/debian/stein/debian/rules
> Why would one want to switch that one to something else?
- because it makes archive wide changes a lot easier.
- it's also
On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 15:57:34 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I have already asked this last time, but nobody answered.
> I use debhelper in all of my packages but I have never switched to dh:
> why should I bother?
Here are some reasons you might want to consider.
When modifying those packages,
On 13.05.19 15:39, Holger Levsen wrote:
Maybe we could also make the "should" stronger:
- new packages (except if they are ment to become build-depends of
debhelper)*must* either use dh or cdbs.
- old packages should be switched to dh (or cdbs).
And then turn this "should" into a "must"
> "Thomas" == Thomas Goirand writes:
Thomas> Now, I have another example, which is quite the opposite one
Thomas> of what you gave as example:
Thomas>
https://salsa.debian.org/openstack-team/debian/openstack-debian-images/blob/debian/stein/debian/rules
Thomas> Why would
> "Holger" == Holger Levsen writes:
Holger> - packages using cdbs. cdbs has features dh doesnt have and
Holger> I dont think it's wrong to use cdbs. (
Just for my information, what are the big features cdbs has that dh does
not?
Hi Ben,
On 2019-05-13 15:10, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 06:08 -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
> [...]
>> In brief:
>> * if maintained by person: no restriction, given that
>> the maintainer is not MIA
>> * if team-maintained: recommend dh
>
> I would suggest almost the opposite. If a
On 5/13/19 3:57 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On May 13, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
>> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
>> system.
> I have already asked this last time, but nobody answered.
> I use
On Mon, 13 May 2019, 4:43 pm Thibaut Paumard, wrote:
> However converting a package with a more convoluted rules files
> will take humanpower. While it may be justified to convert a mildly
> complex rules file on a package that has some activity, I don't think I
> would invest those resources to
Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
>On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 06:08 -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
>[...]
>> In brief:
>> * if maintained by person: no restriction, given that
>> the maintainer is not MIA
>> * if team-maintained: recommend dh
>
>I would suggest almost the opposite. If a team is happy to use an
>unusual
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 17:23:05 +0200
Source: eureka
Binary: eureka eureka-dbgsym
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.24-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Games Team
Changed-By: Fabian Greffrath
Description:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 22:57:09 +0900
Source: anthy
Binary: anthy anthy-common anthy-dbgsym anthy-el libanthy-dev libanthy1
libanthy1-dbgsym libanthyinput-dev libanthyinput0 libanthyinput0-dbgsym
Architecture: source all amd64
Version:
On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 06:08 -0700, Mo Zhou wrote:
[...]
> In brief:
> * if maintained by person: no restriction, given that
> the maintainer is not MIA
> * if team-maintained: recommend dh
I would suggest almost the opposite. If a team is happy to use an
unusual tool, that's OK because there
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 16:19:23 +0200
Source: astropy
Architecture: source
Version: 3.2~rc1-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Astronomy Maintainers
Changed-By: Ole Streicher
Changes:
astropy (3.2~rc1-1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 16:35:32 CEST
Source: libverilog-perl
Binary:
Architecture: source
Version: 3.466-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
Changed-By: أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
Hi,
Le 13/05/2019 à 14:33, Sam Hartman a écrit :
> Why Would we Want This?
> ===
dh is gret for the vast majority of packages. Whenever your rules files
ends up with the simple catch all line, plus a couple of auto_something
overrides, its probably the best solution.
For
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 10:55:06 -0300
Source: ruby2.5
Architecture: source
Version: 2.5.5-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Ruby Team
Changed-By: Antonio Terceiro
Closes: 927122
Changes:
ruby2.5 (2.5.5-2)
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:25:11AM +0200, Ansgar wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-05-10 at 16:11 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > /usr on the box I'm sitting at:
> > * zip the program: dies horribly due to /usr/lib/llvm-7/build/
> > symlink
> > loops.
> > * zip:
> > 1891345142 bytes
> > *
On May 13, Sam Hartman wrote:
> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
> system.
I have already asked this last time, but nobody answered.
I use debhelper in all of my packages but I have never
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 02:17:46PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I strongly object to adding this package, and its dependency
> gettext-base, to the transitive essential set.
I'll respond to this in a moment. (I agree but it just takes a bit
longer to respond to this.)
> I tried installing it (I
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:33:44AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Today at least I don't think we're talking about making not using dh an
> RC bug. It would not make a lot of sense to me to start there.
indeed. using dh should currently be a "should" in policy, with two
exceptions:
- packages
Hi Sam,
On 2019-05-13 12:33, Sam Hartman wrote:
> The New Maintainer's Guide [1] already is based around debhelper and dh
> and effectively recommends it strongly. So it wouldn't mean that.
>
> [1]: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/
Several years ago I nearly re-translated
As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
system.
As we can see on https://trends.debian.net/#build-systems a majority of
packages already use dh. So what would it mean to recommend dh?
The New
On May 13, Holger Levsen wrote:
> So I think this can only be fixed properly (=without asking people to
> upgrade to the latest stretch pointrelease but instead allowing upgrades
> to buster from *any* stretch pointrelease) by adding a "pre-depends:
> debian-security-support (>= 2019.04.25)" to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 13:51:42 +0200
Source: astropy-helpers
Architecture: source
Version: 3.2~rc1-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Astro Team
Changed-By: Ole Streicher
Changes:
astropy-helpers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 13:49:00 +0200
Source: rust-pcre2-sys
Architecture: source
Version: 0.2.1-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Rust Maintainers
Changed-By: Sylvestre Ledru
Changes:
rust-pcre2-sys
On Mon, 2019-05-13 at 11:52 +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> [re-sent with debian-release list address corrected...]
>
>
> hi,
>
> so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
> dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files is upgraded
> before
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:32:36AM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> hi,
>
> so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
> dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files is upgraded
> before debian-security-support (but doesnt happen if d-s-s is
[re-sent with debian-release list address corrected...]
hi,
so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files is upgraded
before debian-security-support (but doesnt happen if d-s-s is upgraded
hi,
so there is "#928172 debian-security-support: fails to upgrade from 'testing':
dpkg: error: error executing hook" which happens when base-files is upgraded
before debian-security-support (but doesnt happen if d-s-s is upgraded first...)
So I think this can only be fixed properly (=without
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 12:35:55 +0200
Source: uwsgi
Binary: libapache2-mod-ruwsgi libapache2-mod-ruwsgi-dbg libapache2-mod-uwsgi
libapache2-mod-uwsgi-dbg python-uwsgidecorators python3-uwsgidecorators uwsgi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 12:06:24 +0200
Source: swift
Binary: python-swift swift swift-account swift-container swift-doc
swift-drive-audit swift-object swift-object-expirer swift-proxy
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.21.0-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 23:11:47 -1000
Source: phpunit
Architecture: source
Version: 8.1.4-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian PHP PEAR Maintainers
Changed-By: David Prévot
Changes:
phpunit (8.1.4-1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 11:36:47 +0200
Source: llvm-toolchain-8
Architecture: source
Version: 1:8-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: LLVM Packaging Team
Changed-By: Sylvestre Ledru
Changes:
llvm-toolchain-8 (1:8-5)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 11:41:32 +0200
Source: remmina
Architecture: source
Version: 1.3.4+dfsg-2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Remote Maintainers
Changed-By: Matteo F. Vescovi
Closes: 928687
Changes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 11:29:40 +0200
Source: live-config
Architecture: source
Version: 5.20190507
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Live Systems Maintainers
Changed-By: Raphaël Hertzog
Closes: 928840
Changes:
Hi Adam,
On Fri, 2019-05-10 at 16:11 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> /usr on the box I'm sitting at:
> * zip the program: dies horribly due to /usr/lib/llvm-7/build/
> symlink
> loops.
> * zip:
> 1891345142 bytes
> * zip-the-concept (individually compressed files), xz
> 1516943024
On Fri, 2019-05-10 at 11:04 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/9/19 6:25 PM, Andrej Shadura wrote:
> > How about the format opkg used for some time, which is a .deb file
> > but
> > with tar as the outer container format instead of ar?
>
> This is a very bad idea. When installing a large amount
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 10:15:20 +0200
Source: jabber-muc
Architecture: source
Version: 0.8-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian XMPP Maintainers
Changed-By: Willem van den Akker
Closes: 928802
Changes:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 09:59:55 +0200
Source: xdx
Architecture: source
Version: 2.5.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Hamradio Maintainers
Changed-By: Christoph Berg
Closes: 928817
Changes:
xdx (2.5.0-2)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 21:23:25 -0400
Source: e2fsprogs
Binary: comerr-dev e2fsck-static e2fsck-static-dbgsym e2fslibs e2fslibs-dev
e2fsprogs e2fsprogs-dbgsym e2fsprogs-l10n e2fsprogs-udeb fuse2fs fuse2fs-dbgsym
libcom-err2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 09:51:09 +0200
Source: pirs
Binary: pirs pirs-profiles pirs-examples
Architecture: source
Version: 2.0.2+dfsg-8
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Med Packaging Team
Changed-By: Helmut
80 matches
Mail list logo
