On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 05:06:56PM +, Peter Makholm wrote:
> "Christian Convey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
> > or do they typically fire up a RedHat system to do their .rpm
> > creation, and use a Debian workstation
Hi Raphael,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:59:53AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> ace-of-penguins_1.2-8_sid32.buildlog:dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: Symbol [EMAIL
> PROTECTED] used by debian/ace-of-penguins/usr/lib/libcards.so.1.0.0 found in
> none of the libraries.
> -> here's you have the opposite p
(I've forgot to add X-Debbugs-CC when sending this ITP. Forwarding the
mail to d-devel as I think radiance could be interesting for more people
- if anybody wants to join the team - please let me know)
Package: wnpp
Owner: Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Severity: wishlist
* Package name:
Michael Biebl wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>> [Touko Korpela]
>>> Is there any ideas to fix this? I'm having same problem with ntp+dnsmasq
>> My idea for fixing this is to reorder the sysv boot sequence using
>> dependency information, and allow those with special needs to provide
>> extra/r
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Touko Korpela]
>> Is there any ideas to fix this? I'm having same problem with ntp+dnsmasq
>
> My idea for fixing this is to reorder the sysv boot sequence using
> dependency information, and allow those with special needs to provide
> extra/replacement dependency inf
* Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070706 17:46]:
> > I'm not sure I understand; would a "COPYING" file stating "this project
> > is licensed under..." be acceptable?
>
> In practice, there's so much software out there that just provides a
> license in the README file and no separate notices in ea
[Touko Korpela]
> Is there any ideas to fix this? I'm having same problem with ntp+dnsmasq
My idea for fixing this is to reorder the sysv boot sequence using
dependency information, and allow those with special needs to provide
extra/replacement dependency information in /etc/ to adjust the
seque
As you might be aware, there are several bugs in the Debian boot
sequence. The bugs affect some combinations of packages, and are some
times hard to solve. To solve them once and for all, I want us to
switch to a dependency based sequencing of the symlinks in
/etc/rc*.d/. I gave a talk about th
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:57:31AM -0700, Alan Ezust wrote:
> Subject: apt-get -y upgrade for non-interactive sessions - and replacing conf
> files in /etc
>
> Hi - i was wondering, I'm trying to run apt-get upgrade in a
> non-interactive shell.
> I passed -y as an option, and then during the po
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Bernd Zeimetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ll-core
Version : 1.9.1
Upstream Author : Walter Doerwald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.livinglogic.de/Python/core/index.html
* License : Python lic.
Programming
> Never done it myself but I would at least built the rpm in a chroot or
> vserver with the target distribution installed.
vserver is a good hint here, definitely my favourite way to install
diferent distributions/versions/... on one machine, and way less
ressource intensive than xen & co.
--
B
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
Christian Convey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
or do they typically
"Christian Convey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
> or do they typically fire up a RedHat system to do their .rpm
> creation, and use a Debian workstation to do their .deb creation?
Never done it myself but I would at least bui
On 7/6/07, David Härdeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That reminds me, is there any DD who'd be interested in packaging
QuickyPix (http://www.cubewano.org/quickypix/)? It's another web gallery
app written in python which seems to have some nice features (like not
having to wade through 25 pages o
\On 7/6/07, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Christian Convey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
> both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
> Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
> or do
Christian Convey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
> both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
> Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
> or do they typically fire up a RedHat system to do their .r
Sex, 2007-07-06 às 18:47 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> > My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
> > both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
you can easily use virtual machines like xen and qemu to build and test
them.
> --
> Bernd Zeimetz
> <[EMAIL P
Hi,
> My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
> both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
depending on your software producing packages for Redhat, SuSE or any
other rpm based distributions on a Debian box is not what you want to do
as you want to use their specifi
My development workstation is running Debian, and I'd like to produce
both .deb and .rpm releases of my software.
Is this something people normally do from the same Debian workstation,
or do they typically fire up a RedHat system to do their .rpm
creation, and use a Debian workstation to do their
Paul Cager <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But Ben Finney said:
>> No, there needs to be an explicit grant of license explaining what
>> terms apply, and exactly which files comprise the work being licensed.
> I'm not sure I understand; would a "COPYING" file stating "this project
> is licensed und
On Tue, July 3, 2007 4:06 pm, Paul Cager wrote:
> On Tue, July 3, 2007 8:38 am, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> Explain it in debian/copyright, that's the proper place (the source
>> files don't actually need license statement, even though of course it
>> helps transparence and is therefore encouraged).
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Daniel 'DaB.' Baur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libjavajodatime-java
Version : 1.4
Upstream Author : Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://joda-time.sourceforge.net/index.html
* License : Apache L
On Thu, July 5, 2007 02:40, Martin Ferrari wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: "Martin Ferrari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: pyctures
That reminds me, is there any DD who'd be interested in packaging
QuickyPix (http://www.cubewano.org/quickypix/)? It's another web
* martin f krafft (Fri, 6 Jul 2007 07:57:57 +0200)
>
> also sprach Oleg Verych <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.07.05.1957 +0200]:
>> Unless i will see any kind of implemented proposal, i.e. tar or deb
>> that i can use/test on base installation, it's a *technical* problem.
>
> So why don't you use your t
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Mike O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: python-plwm
Version : 2.6a
Upstream Author : Peter Liljenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://plwm.sourceforge.net/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: Python
Descr
Hello,
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 07:50:30PM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote
> I'm one of Octave's Debian maintainers.
>
> The problematic part is that qtoctave is primarly a Windows application. I
> don't think they even have any sort of code for generating the HTML files
> from the Texinfo sources
26 matches
Mail list logo
