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 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?
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 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?
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]
