Re: There must be bug. But where?
Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Donnerstag, den 24.11.2005, 19:53 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: >> An incoming queue for reprepo is a ~100 lines shell script to check the >> changes file signature and include the files in reprepro. Probably less >> if you rewrite it in perl. > > Yes. But that is something, which needs to be written. debarchiver > exists and works. Or better: it normally works. > > Regards, Daniel Which reminds me that I wanted to send that shell script as whishlist bugreport to reprepro. Thanks. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: There must be bug. But where?
Am Donnerstag, den 24.11.2005, 19:53 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: > Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Am Mittwoch, den 23.11.2005, 21:21 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: > >> Let me just make the suggestion to better use reprepro. > > > > That's not an alternative. It has no easy incoming mechanisms for remote > > systems. > > > > Regards, Daniel > > And apt-ftparchive has? No. But debarchiver has. That's the program I'm talking about and which makes use of apt-ftparchive. The problem is, that I receive the mentioned error messages when it should rerun apt-ftparchive. And it is IMO not a bug in debarchiver, because it was working a week ago and there was no update of the application itself. The bug must be in another package. I tried to downgrade gzip and also apt-utils/apt. But both do not solve the problem. I am still examining, why it is complaining about a non-existent gzip (error 100), because gzip exists. Maybe it's a temporary problem caused by the latest libstdc++ allocator change. I don't know. My hope was, that a more skilled (wo)man could figure that out. > An incoming queue for reprepo is a ~100 lines shell script to check the > changes file signature and include the files in reprepro. Probably less > if you rewrite it in perl. Yes. But that is something, which needs to be written. debarchiver exists and works. Or better: it normally works. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: There must be bug. But where?
Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Mittwoch, den 23.11.2005, 21:21 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: >> Let me just make the suggestion to better use reprepro. > > That's not an alternative. It has no easy incoming mechanisms for remote > systems. > > Regards, Daniel And apt-ftparchive has? An incoming queue for reprepo is a ~100 lines shell script to check the changes file signature and include the files in reprepro. Probably less if you rewrite it in perl. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: There must be bug. But where?
Am Mittwoch, den 23.11.2005, 21:21 +0100 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow: > Let me just make the suggestion to better use reprepro. That's not an alternative. It has no easy incoming mechanisms for remote systems. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: There must be bug. But where?
Let me just make the suggestion to better use reprepro. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
