Package plugins packaging
Hello, all. I need help from expereinced maintainers, because I don't know, how to do it right. I have some QT program, qutIM, which should be builded by cmake. Also, there is a number of plugins, who use qmake for building and are developed as separate branches. For plugin compilation its source must be placed to the qutim source /plugins/ directory, i.e. I must have source of qutim to compile qutim plugin. So I have a problem, how must I organize their packaging? I have an idea to create one source package qutim, which will include all plugins and produce after compilations packages qutim, qutim-plugin-icq, qutim-plugin-jabber, etc. But as the main package and plugins are developed by different teams, I don't know - is it possible? Should I place plugins in orig.tar.gz or in diff.tar.gz? Or such packaging should be done in completely different way? I really don't know :) And 2 minor questions: I haven't found clear answer, which CC licenses are treated as DFSG compatible now? Could someone read this license: http://pastebin.com/m4ba1c5ed and say, can I package smile pack, which uses this license, for the non-free section, or it'll be rejected? Thank you. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod
Re: Package plugins packaging
2008/11/7 Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Another approach is to find out what files are necessary for compiling > plugins. Theoretically, you don't need the C++ sources, only the headers > and maybe some static libraries. Then, you can ship all of this in a > qutim-devel package, and modify the build system of the plugins so that > it uses them. Yeah, that's exactly what I need, thank's a lot :) May be, you can help me with the following? > which CC licenses are treated as DFSG compatible now? Could someone read this > license: > http://pastebin.com/m4ba1c5ed and say, can I package smile pack, which uses > this license, > for the non-free section, or it'll be rejected? -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package plugins packaging
2008/11/9 Vincent Fourmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > This makes it look like it is not possible to switch from the original > archive to any other kind of archive. So you cannot distribute it as a > Debian package. Drop it ;-)... Thank you. That's a pity, but I have to deal with it. :) -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package plugins packaging
2008/11/9 Martin Meredith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Or, put the rar file in a tarball, and it qualifies for non-free if it's > REALLY important to have it available. Wow, it's really interesting idea :) Hopefully, I'll have no need in this. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Misunderstand in debian/rules script
Hello, all. I have a little problem while building a package - it uses two systems for building - cmake in the main package dir and qmake in one subdirectory. I have in my debian/rules file the following strings: #QUOTE begin build: build-stamp build-stamp: dh_testdir cmake . dh build convert -resize 32x32 \ icons/program_64.png icons/program.xpm cd plugins/icq pwd qmake-qt4 icq.pro make cd ../.. touch $@ #QUOTE end It normally builds the main part, but fails on the subdir building with the "Cannot find file: icq.pro" error. `pwd` outputs `/home/myhome/worskspace/package`, so I think that it simply returns to the main dir after each command execution. I haven't found any mention about that in Debian Developer's Reference and don't know how to fix that problem, so I have to ask your help. Thanks. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Adoption of Nix?
Hello. While I was writing, Josselin Mouette said almost all I wanted to say, but I'll add a little :) 2008/12/24 Artyom Shalkhakov : >>> The claims that I think are valuable are: >>> - *all* dependencies of a package are automatically found by Nix, >>> no exceptions, >> Hmm... Nix probably use libastral, doesn't it? Even for C/C++ programs there >> is no way to 100% automatically determine entire list of runtime >> libraries/tools needed for some particular program (consider runtime library >> opening and all non-library dependencies). > > This is not about libastral, it's about pure functions (those without > side-effects). Well, as I see, it uses it's own package format, which is wrapper-description around everything - source, deb or rpm. Does it really have any sense? We have our deb and src packages, do we really need any wrappers, that make us possible to install rpms? For what purposes? Surely, dpkg always allows you to rollback any installed packages. You just sometimes have to rollback half of all your packages - in accordance with dependencies. I've just looked to the structure of that package format - it also requires to write dependencies - so what in it deals with 'em better? I really don't understand. Can it work with sections like "Recommends" or "Suggests"? And, of course, for the 2-3 versions of each package will make debian security team curse you for ages. Consider it :) -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Adoption of Nix?
Hi. 2008/12/24 Artyom Shalkhakov : >> Well, as I see, it uses it's own package format, which is >> wrapper-description around everything - source, deb or rpm. Does it >> really have any sense? > > "Every problem in computer science can be solved by adding > a layer of indirection", as the saying goes. Yep, and the next year we'll introduce new level of abstraction - for different versions of nix package format. Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate, said Occam, as I remember. > >> We have our deb and src packages, do we really need any >> wrappers, that make us possible to install rpms? For what >> purposes? >> Surely, dpkg always allows you to rollback any installed >> packages. You just sometimes have to rollback half of all your >> packages - in accordance with dependencies. > >> I've just looked to the structure of that package format - it also >> requires to write dependencies - so what in it deals with 'em better? >> I really don't understand. > > The difference is *purity*, which means that Nix expressions > are *deterministic*. And that's what really makes them better. I see nothing "purer" in them. Show the difference, please. > >> Can it work with sections like "Recommends" or "Suggests"? > > I don't know this yet, but I think it's nearly trivial to add. But it's not still added, really? And how about packaging many binary packages from the one source? > PS do you work for Nigma, an "intelligent search engine"? > Yes, I'm developer there. :) -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
Hello. 2008/12/27 Amaya : > When I reflected upon my need for approval, I also found my answer to > the one million dollars question: Why are there so few women in > computing? > For me, the patriachy is an acceptable answer. Find your own, it is an > enlightment trip, and you do not need to aome to my same answer. As for me, if someone is not interested in something, why he must be involved to it? E. g., Debian community has not so many members from Saint Helena island, and what does it mean? Discrimination? Something else? No, their majority probably don't use internet at all, and the rested are not interested in Debian. So why we are not accusing communtiy of discriminating Saint Helena inhabitants? :) Hopefully, no Debian members will be against women joining to Debian. But as we have no discrimination, they should satisfy all requirements put in for all candidates. No more :) > > You are right, the images there might be offensive to you as a man. > I am not sorry for that, sorry :) > Excuse me, you are against sexism, but what you mention is the same - from the opposite side. That's the same "women's" sexism. If we should respect women's rights, may be women should do the same? Otherwise it looks very childish, sorry. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
Sorry me, community, I've missed first messages in the thread firstly. I also hope, that this idiotic discussion will be closed soon. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
Hello. 2008/12/28 Lisi Reisz : > You would appear to be a man. If that is inaccurate, I apologise. > > But this is, as you point out, a _women's_ list. We have a right to > discus what we choose to discuss. But I refute your allegation that > this topic is idiotic. For those of us who are old enough to have > been officially and by law down-moted to second class citizenship when > we married; by law lumped in with children, and not in with men. > That message has been carbon-copied to debian-devel list. I'm not reading debian-women list. You think, this discussion should take place in d-d? I'm not sure. > This discussion is not idiotic. The issues it raises are improving, > but are at the crux of a woman's existence. Indeed, your email seems > to me to embody much of what I object to. > > If you choose to belong to a women's list, you have to accept that you > may not like everything that every woman says. > > But who are you to decide what the rest of us may or may not do? > Yes, I've already answered it. I have no contact with d-w list. If you're sending something to d-d, be ready that d-d have other rules, than d-w. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
Hello. 2008/12/28 Russell Coker : > On Sunday 28 December 2008 12:30, "Всеволод Величко" > wrote: > Did Lisi's message go to the debian-devel list? If so I didn't receive it. > > Maybe she sent a message to d-w and CC'd you as a courtesy. Emm, sorry, you probably misunderstood me. Initial messages, that I'm received (from Amaya and so on), has been sent: >>>From Amaya >>>To debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-wo...@lists.debian.org >>>Date 27 декабря 2008 г. 15:31 I've read them in the d-d and replied to them. So my reply has been sent also to d-w, not only to d-d. And I was speaking about that. Sorry me, if I've said it insufficiently clear. > http://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2008/12/threads.html > > The above list archive page has some of your messages, so it is not accurate > to claim that you have no contact with the d-w list. Heh, I'm really not signed to the d-w list, so my messages in it are result of my reply-messages, I've told above. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod
Re: "Debian women may leave due to 'sexist' post"
2008/12/28 Amaya : > Всеволод Величко wrote: >> If you're sending something to d-d, be ready that d-d have other >> rules, than d-w. > > As in we will not tolerate your girly crap here? > I dare you to threaten me or any other female again! No, just this list is dedicated to Debian development, not for any men/women stuff. Don't find threats, where they don't exist. I hope, we'll close this discussion, after all. -- Best wishes, Velichko Vsevolod
Re: Support of new source packages in squeeze
Hello.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to
> the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during
> the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements.
Excuse me, I understand, that it's offtopic, but where can I read
about the difference between old and newstyle source package formats?
I found nothing on the d-o sites.
--
Best regards,
Velichko Vsevolod
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
