Hi Paul
I have also found the migration from RPM packaging to Debian packaging
to be a hard one (I'm *not* a mentor, BTW). Some of my observations include:
1. Whereas RPM provides one key tool, 'rpmbuild', Debian packaging
seems to provide dozens of different tools, not all of which are
It occurred to me that I could try to work around
this by using a
build directory that is completely outside of the
source code tree.
Hello,
My own experience is something like this; by the
way, I am also a newbie to packaging, so this is just
what works for me, not necessarily what's
Hi,
Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
foo-static_1.0_all.deb
Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
now with normal build script:
foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (updated from foo-updated_1.0_all.deb)
foo-static_1.1_all.deb (same as
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 23:35 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
Hi,
Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
foo-static_1.0_all.deb
Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
now with normal build script:
foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (updated from
Osamu Aoki wrote:
Hi,
Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
foo-static_1.0_all.deb
Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
now with normal build script:
foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (updated from foo-updated_1.0_all.deb)
El 02/10/08 12:51 Osamu Aoki escribió:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 12:10:16PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Osamu Aoki wrote:
Any suggestion for debian/rules ? or pointer to good example.
You can't really do this, AFAIK. You can break the source into 2
separate source packages that each
Hi,
My question is arch:all (not any) ... more specifically,
foo-static_1.0_all.deb is documentation package which does not change
document contents from 1.0 to 1.1 transition.
I know there is a way to do it but I am not sure if it is a good and
valid way. I also was not sure where I have seen
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 12:10:16PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Osamu Aoki wrote:
Any suggestion for debian/rules ? or pointer to good example.
You can't really do this, AFAIK. You can break the source into 2
separate source packages that each build one package. That way you
only update
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 01:47:51 +0900
Osamu Aoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know there is a way to do it
??
On what basis? Which packages? Are you confusing porter uploads
using dpkg-buildpackage -B ?
but I am not sure if it is a good and
valid way. I also was not sure where I have seen it.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2008, Osamu Aoki wrote:
This way user will not be forced to download same package again.
Having the same binary version on the same architecture come from two
different source versions is fundamentally broken.
It behavoir is non-defined in the BTS
You also won't satisfy your
Hi,
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
and,
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
Those two warnings, show me. But the
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:03:40 -0500, Elías A. M. wrote:
Hi,
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
Try passing -Wl,--as-needed into LDFLAGS to the compiler
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
Hi,
Hi I'm not a developer but I try to suggest you.
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none
David Paleino [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:03:40 -0500, Elías A. M. wrote:
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
You can safely ignore this warning.
Luca Bruno [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500,
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think it'sa bad situation when a build tool emits a warning that is
routinely ignored; it commonly leads to masking real problems.
The correct solution is for the warning to go away. Either this *is*
something that needs attention, or it is not. In the
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
Le Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 11:15:20PM +0200, Luca Bruno a écrit :
Your package is linking
Luca Bruno wrote:
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
Hi,
Hi I'm not a developer but I try to suggest you.
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
Hi again:
I tried your suggests, but I don't have successful
I put, my debian/rules:
--
include /usr/share/dpatch/dpatch.make
#The upstream source don't include ./configure rule, only make
#LDFLAGS=-Wall -g
#export LDFLAGS
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The correct solution is for the warning to go away. Either this *is*
something that needs attention, or it is not. In the former case, what
is the problem and what is the solution? In the latter case, why is
the warning there
19 matches
Mail list logo
