Need a sponsor for garchiver
I need a sponsor. The program is called garchiver. It's a replacent for WinZip, with two interfaces. The classic WinZip, and then a tree interface. It's a GNOME app, written in Python with one widget written in C. It uses autoconf and automake. Because of the Python/C combination, this was an interesting thing to do. I would like for some experienced developer to have a look at my autoconf macros, to see if I got it right. The .deb is here: http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/garchiver -- Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not going to be easy though. For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:38:36PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an > advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet > him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. > see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. > > > -- > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix
Re: Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:53:55 +0200, Danie Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not > going to be easy though. > > For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. sorry i got confused... i'm currently appliing to become a d.d. but this will take some time. well if noone else offers to sponsor it you can contact me later. Regards, -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 5) xmlrpc-c includes its own copy of expat (under a different soname) for > > binary compatibility with other Linux versions. I'd prefer not to > > change this, because it would make it hard for my users to build > > binaries that worked on more than one distro. > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would > really appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the > standalone copy. What he said! It avoids code duplication, is more elegant, and most importantly: it won't lock users into a particular library version, needlessly. What if I want to use your library, and a modern version of libexpat in the same program? As long as you include your own expat version, this will either simply break, or work with some tricks, at the cost of increased memory footprint. For an example of real life breakage, look at apache. It gratuitously includes its own "expat-lite" library. Once you use it together with mod_perl and some perl XML stuff (which in turn depends on a recent libexpat): segfault. -- Robbe signature.ng Description: PGP signature
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, > an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to > meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the > community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. I have a question about that. I filled in the webform on http://nm.debian.org/newnm.php last week, checked every botton except the gpg key and if I have an advocate. The webform warned about that I haven't got my key signed etc. Shouldn't I see my name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php under No Advocate? I have sent mail to two dd in sweden, and trying to get my key signed. Is it required to have an advocate and signed gpg key before you fill in the webform or not? Cheers Mikael PS Sorry for my English, it's not my Native language DS
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
* Mikael Andersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010628 14:29]: > I have a question about that. I filled in the webform on > http://nm.debian.org/newnm.php last week, checked every botton except > the gpg key and if I have an advocate. > The webform warned about that I haven't got my key signed etc. > Shouldn't I see my name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php under No > Advocate? No. > Is it required to have an advocate and signed gpg key before you fill in > the webform or not? You need a signed gpg key, but not an advocate when you apply -- the message currently printed is not clear, though. I have fixed that now. (It should have said that you needed a GPG signd key.) > I have sent mail to two dd in sweden, and trying to get my key signed. If they don't respond, contact me in private mail and I will try to help you.
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:54:43PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote: > > 5) xmlrpc-c includes its own copy of expat (under a different soname) for > > binary compatibility with other Linux versions. I'd prefer not to > > change this, because it would make it hard for my users to build > > binaries that worked on more than one distro. > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would really > appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the standalone copy. This will make Debian binary-incompatible with other Linux distributions, which I consider a very serious problem. Let me see if I can explain. Here's ldd output from an xmlrpc-c application compiled on another distro (ldd is run on the Debian system). libxmlrpc.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc.so.3 (0x4001a000) libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 (0x40026000) libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 (0x4002f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40041000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) And the same application compiled on Debian: libxmlrpc.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc.so.3 (0x4001a000) libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 (0x40026000) libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 (0x4002f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40041000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) The ldd output is identical on both systems, and I can scp binaries from one system to the other, and expect them to run. The sonames libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 and libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 are part of the xmlrpc-c ABI (application binary interface), which I guarantee for all users of my software on Linux. An installation of xmlrpc-c which does not provide these sonames is broken. > I also noticed you use the old version of expat, not 1.95. Any > particular reason? Yes. I use James Clark's stable 1.x version of expat, not the 2.x development series maintained by Clark Cooper. Do the two versions have identical ABIs? If not, it will be quite a few months before I can consider upgrading. Basically, I think that we'd both have a much easier life if xmlrpc-c continued to use its own private version of expat. ;-) But if you feel strongly that this is the wrong thing to do, we'll need to work together to figure out a way to support the xmlrpc-c ABI under Debian. > > 7) The modules are named xmlrpc-c0, xmlrpc-c-dev and xmlrpc-c-apps. > > Should I use a different naming convention? > > You could also use libxmlrpc-c0 and libxmlrpc-c-dev. That way it's easy > to spot they're libraries. There might even be a policy about this. I looked long and hard, but I could not find any policy. I may actually rename the packages to libxmlrpc-c3 and libxmlrpc-c-dev, which would better match the sonames. > > So those are all the problems I *know* about. ;-) Are there any others > > which I've missed entirely? > > Well, did you read the policy manual? Of course. Cheers, Eric
Re: Change of package name or command name.
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: > > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. > > What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. Richard Braakman
Re: Change of package name or command name.
Richard Braakman (2001-06-28 18:00:46 +0300) : > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: >> > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. >> >> What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? > > It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. One single letter: X :-) R. -- Roland Mas Au royaume des aveugles, les borgnes sont mal vus.
Re: Finding a sponsor...
Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? Ilia Lobsanov Nurey Networks Inc. http://www.nurey.net/ GPG key: http://mail.lobsanov.com/pubkey.gpg
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Danie, On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Danie Roux wrote: > I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not > going to be easy though. A developer does not have to be physically proximate to you to be your advocate; in fact, it doesn't have to be your advocate who signs your key, either. The advocate merely ... advocates for you to the NM committee, he is someone who will speak on your behalf in recommending you for maintainership. So in many cases, it may be better to seek a debian developer who knows your work and can evaluate your packages -- often your sponsor is best suited to be your advocate. You still need to have your key signed before you can become a d-d, and this usually requires a physical meeting. IIRC, there are some d-d's living in South Africa, though I don't remember what city; and if a physical meeting doesn't seem possible, there are other ways that have been used in the past to handle the identification requirement. In the meantime, sponsored uploads are a great way to get started with Debian. Regards, Steve Langasek postmodern programmer > For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:38:36PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an >> advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet >> him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. >> see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. > > -- > > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:32:16PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would > > really appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the > > standalone copy. > > What he said! It avoids code duplication, is more elegant, and most > importantly: it won't lock users into a particular library version, > needlessly. What if I want to use your library, and a modern version > of libexpat in the same program? As long as you include your own expat > version, this will either simply break, or work with some tricks, at > the cost of increased memory footprint. Let me brainstorm about possible solutions. First, here are my hard constraints as the upstream maintainer. If these can't be satisfied, I can't release Debian packages. 1) xmlrpc-c applications must run on any libc6 i386 Linux distribution without recompilation. The only current exception to this is applications which use the w3c-libwww client module, which will be going away for exactly this reason. 2) xmlrpc-c applications must run on distros which provide a copy of libexpat, and ones which don't. Since the libexpat sonames have not been incremented in a correct manner on all distributions, it's extremely hard for me rely on pre-installed versions of expat. 3) xmlrpc-c uses expat to parse potentially hostile network data, so it must rely on stable, well-audited versions of expat. Right now, this means using James Clark's 1.x packages, not the 1.95 development series. Your constraints: 4) It must be possible to write applications which use both xmlrpc-c and the Debian version of expat. Possible solutions: A) Make xmlrpc-c use the Debian version of expat. This would violate constraints (1), (2) and (3). B) Use the current xmlrpc-c setup. This would violate constraint (4). C) Rename all the symbols exported by xmlrpc-c's version of expat to co-exist with other versions of expat. I can do this in the upstream source the next time I change sonames. This doesn't violate any of the above constraints, but it *does* cause xmlrpc-c applications to have a slightly higher memory footprint (about 100K, shared by all xmlrpc-c applications). All things considered, my preference (as the upstream maintainer) leans strongly toward (C). Basically, the copy of libexpat in xmlrpc-c is private, and I'd very much like to keep it that way. > For an example of real life breakage, look at apache. It gratuitously > includes its own "expat-lite" library. Once you use it together with > mod_perl and some perl XML stuff (which in turn depends on a recent > libexpat): segfault. This is bad, and I'm happy to work around this problem. Cheers, Eric
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 09:31:54AM -0500, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > You need a signed gpg key, but not an advocate when you apply -- the > message currently printed is not clear, though. I have fixed that > now. (It should have said that you needed a GPG signd key.) Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I had been under the impression that other forms of identification were still possible, though severely discouraged.
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
I think that now an advocate is needed to simply say that they agree with your application, and be a mentor of sorts. After an advocate is found, an application manager is assigned. I don't think that there is any requirement for an actual physical meeting. Photo ID appears to be acceptible. > > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. > > > -- > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: Finding a sponsor...
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Ilia Lobsanov wrote: > Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? http://www.google.com/search?q=toronto%20debian ? *t Tomas Pospisek SourcePole - Linux & Open Source Solutions http://sourcepole.ch Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Duncan Findlay wrote: > I think that now an advocate is needed to simply say that they agree with > your application, and be a mentor of sorts. > After an advocate is found, an application manager is assigned. > I don't think that there is any requirement for an actual physical meeting. > Photo ID appears to be acceptible. Certainly not. Photo IDs can not only be faked, they can also be stolen. Without physically meeting you and seeing you, how do we know that you're really the person in the picture? There are other methods of ascertaining identity without the benefit of a physical meeting, but they usually don't involve photo IDs -- and even if they're used for satisfying the identification requirement of the NM process, they probably shouldn't be used as justification for signing a GPG key. It's my personal opinion that, if we are going to empower all Debian developers to sign other people into the Debian keyring (and consequently into the global Web of Trust), we should also require them to demonstrate a clear understanding of PKI as part of the NM process. I think there are a lot of NMs who, if they don't already know a lot about PKI before they become DD's, never learn more than the mechanics of signing a key -- and that's ok, until we start encouraging them to go out and sign other people's keys. :) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
* Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I > had been under the impression that other forms of identification > were still possible, though severely discouraged. Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these days.
GPG Key Signing (Was: Advocate/Sponsor)
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > we should also require them to demonstrate a clear understanding of > PKI as part of the NM process. manoj came up with a pretty good protocol to sign a key. i have it available in HTML at http://people.debian.org/~jaqque/keysign.html it does have some weaknesses, but it is a lot stronger than the ``oh, i've met you, i have checked your ID, and off we go'' comments welcome. -john
Re: GPG Key Signing (Was: Advocate/Sponsor)
On 28/06, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: | http://people.debian.org/~jaqque/keysign.html | | it does have some weaknesses, but it is a lot stronger than the ``oh, | i've met you, i have checked your ID, and off we go'' | | comments welcome. It has an enormous flaw: you do not sign a key, you sign an id. That means that checking for one e-mail address for being valid and signing all the ids is just bogus. You may use this protocol, but you have to repeat each for every email address you are going to sign.
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On 28/06, Martin Michlmayr wrote: | * Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: | > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I | > had been under the impression that other forms of identification | > were still possible, though severely discouraged. | | Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says | | Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some | other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? | | But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred | method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these | days. I also think that Debian should accept scanned IDs signed with a trusted X509 key (as the one issued for free by Thawte (http://www.thawte.com/)). This would allow people who went through the heavy Thawte id checking to have their identity trusted by the Debian project.
Re: Finding a sponsor...
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:05:55PM +0200, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Ilia Lobsanov wrote: > > > Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? > > http://www.google.com/search?q=toronto%20debian > ? http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/sponsor/ Uwe. -- : Uwe Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---: | http://htsserver.sourceforge.net -- Holsham Traders| | http://unmaintained.sourceforge.net -- Unmaintained Free Software | : http://www.hermann-uwe.de --- :wq -:
debconf and daemons
Hello all, I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a login client). I've got a couple of problems though: - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions appropriately (?) - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo "key value" >> /etc/myfile'. is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl and text::template? Any assistance would be most appreciated, - samj "" Description: Binary data
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Samuel Tardieu wrote: > On 28/06, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > | * Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: > | > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I > | > had been under the impression that other forms of identification > | > were still possible, though severely discouraged. > | Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says > | Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some > | other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? > | But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred > | method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these > | days. > I also think that Debian should accept scanned IDs signed with a trusted > X509 key (as the one issued for free by Thawte (http://www.thawte.com/)). This > would allow people who went through the heavy Thawte id checking to have > their identity trusted by the Debian project. No. Signing the scanned ID adds *nothing* over accepting the x509 key by itself. If faking a physical photo ID is easy, faking a scanned photo ID is ridiculously simple. If we want to accept Thawte's id checking as sufficiently rigorous for our purposes, if we want to trust Thawte[1], then there's no point in asking for a scan signed with the ID. But I don't think we should accept Thawte IDs as sufficient; the needs and goals of a PKI that uses CAs (such as Thawte) are not entirely compatible with those of a peer-to-peer system (such as PGP). Steve Langasek postmodern programmer [1] And is Thawte really so impervious to corruption that there's not even a *remote* possibility of falsification? Remember that they're now owned by Network Solutions. Anything is possible...
Re: Re: Change of package name or command name.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:11:13 +0200, Roland Mas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard Braakman (2001-06-28 18:00:46 +0300) : > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: > >> > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. > >> > >> What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? > > > > It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. > > One single letter: X :-) hey X is not in POSIX standards, and you must agree that every traditional unix command out there is lowercase. how bout "poedit2"? -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: debconf and daemons
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 04:00:47AM +1000, Sam Johnston wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which > uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is > stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a > login client). I've got a couple of problems though: > > - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this > means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails > miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is > broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon > that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? > > - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions > appropriately (?) Why do u want perm 600 ? dh_fixperms should automatically fix perms of files correctly. > > - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once > the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have > filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo "key value" >> /etc/myfile'. > is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl > and text::template? > > Any assistance would be most appreciated, > > - samj > > -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
error when building package
Hello,
when i run "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot" to create a package, i get the
following error:
dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package
`esms':
`Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
dh_builddeb: command returned error code
while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
Package: esms
Version: 0.8.5-1
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Installed-Size: 44
Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description: [...]
[...]
and so does my debian/control file:
Source: esms
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Standards-Version: 3.0.1
Package: esms
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Description: [...]
[...]
note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before ${shlibs:Depends}
to avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
--
Robert MillanDebian GNU user
zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
Re: error when building package
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:08:44AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> when i run "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot" to create a package, i get the
> following error:
>
> dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6
> package `esms':
> `Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
> dh_builddeb: command returned error code
>
> while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
>
> Package: esms
> Version: 0.8.5-1
> Section: comm
> Priority: optional
> Architecture: i386
> Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Looks correct ??
> Suggests: fortune
> Installed-Size: 44
> Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Description: [...]
> [...]
>
> and so does my debian/control file:
>
> Source: esms
> Section: comm
> Priority: optional
> Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Standards-Version: 3.0.1
>
> Package: esms
> Architecture: any
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
> Suggests: fortune
> Description: [...]
> [...]
>
> note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before
> ${shlibs:Depends} to avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
> --
> Robert MillanDebian GNU user
> zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Need a sponsor for garchiver
I need a sponsor. The program is called garchiver. It's a replacent for WinZip, with two interfaces. The classic WinZip, and then a tree interface. It's a GNOME app, written in Python with one widget written in C. It uses autoconf and automake. Because of the Python/C combination, this was an interesting thing to do. I would like for some experienced developer to have a look at my autoconf macros, to see if I got it right. The .deb is here: http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/garchiver -- Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not going to be easy though. For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:38:36PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an advocate >geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet him/her to prove >your identity so debian allows you to join the community. see http://nm.debian.org/ >for more info. > > > -- > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:53:55 +0200, Danie Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not > going to be easy though. > > For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. sorry i got confused... i'm currently appliing to become a d.d. but this will take some time. well if noone else offers to sponsor it you can contact me later. Regards, -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 5) xmlrpc-c includes its own copy of expat (under a different soname) for > > binary compatibility with other Linux versions. I'd prefer not to > > change this, because it would make it hard for my users to build > > binaries that worked on more than one distro. > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would > really appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the > standalone copy. What he said! It avoids code duplication, is more elegant, and most importantly: it won't lock users into a particular library version, needlessly. What if I want to use your library, and a modern version of libexpat in the same program? As long as you include your own expat version, this will either simply break, or work with some tricks, at the cost of increased memory footprint. For an example of real life breakage, look at apache. It gratuitously includes its own "expat-lite" library. Once you use it together with mod_perl and some perl XML stuff (which in turn depends on a recent libexpat): segfault. -- Robbe signature.ng
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, > an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to > meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the > community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. I have a question about that. I filled in the webform on http://nm.debian.org/newnm.php last week, checked every botton except the gpg key and if I have an advocate. The webform warned about that I haven't got my key signed etc. Shouldn't I see my name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php under No Advocate? I have sent mail to two dd in sweden, and trying to get my key signed. Is it required to have an advocate and signed gpg key before you fill in the webform or not? Cheers Mikael PS Sorry for my English, it's not my Native language DS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
* Mikael Andersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010628 14:29]: > I have a question about that. I filled in the webform on > http://nm.debian.org/newnm.php last week, checked every botton except > the gpg key and if I have an advocate. > The webform warned about that I haven't got my key signed etc. > Shouldn't I see my name on http://nm.debian.org/nmlist.php under No > Advocate? No. > Is it required to have an advocate and signed gpg key before you fill in > the webform or not? You need a signed gpg key, but not an advocate when you apply -- the message currently printed is not clear, though. I have fixed that now. (It should have said that you needed a GPG signd key.) > I have sent mail to two dd in sweden, and trying to get my key signed. If they don't respond, contact me in private mail and I will try to help you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 07:54:43PM -0500, Ardo van Rangelrooij wrote: > > 5) xmlrpc-c includes its own copy of expat (under a different soname) for > > binary compatibility with other Linux versions. I'd prefer not to > > change this, because it would make it hard for my users to build > > binaries that worked on more than one distro. > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would really > appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the standalone copy. This will make Debian binary-incompatible with other Linux distributions, which I consider a very serious problem. Let me see if I can explain. Here's ldd output from an xmlrpc-c application compiled on another distro (ldd is run on the Debian system). libxmlrpc.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc.so.3 (0x4001a000) libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 (0x40026000) libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 (0x4002f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40041000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) And the same application compiled on Debian: libxmlrpc.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc.so.3 (0x4001a000) libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 (0x40026000) libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 => /usr/lib/libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 (0x4002f000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40041000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000) The ldd output is identical on both systems, and I can scp binaries from one system to the other, and expect them to run. The sonames libxmlrpc_xmlparse.so.3 and libxmlrpc_xmltok.so.3 are part of the xmlrpc-c ABI (application binary interface), which I guarantee for all users of my software on Linux. An installation of xmlrpc-c which does not provide these sonames is broken. > I also noticed you use the old version of expat, not 1.95. Any > particular reason? Yes. I use James Clark's stable 1.x version of expat, not the 2.x development series maintained by Clark Cooper. Do the two versions have identical ABIs? If not, it will be quite a few months before I can consider upgrading. Basically, I think that we'd both have a much easier life if xmlrpc-c continued to use its own private version of expat. ;-) But if you feel strongly that this is the wrong thing to do, we'll need to work together to figure out a way to support the xmlrpc-c ABI under Debian. > > 7) The modules are named xmlrpc-c0, xmlrpc-c-dev and xmlrpc-c-apps. > > Should I use a different naming convention? > > You could also use libxmlrpc-c0 and libxmlrpc-c-dev. That way it's easy > to spot they're libraries. There might even be a policy about this. I looked long and hard, but I could not find any policy. I may actually rename the packages to libxmlrpc-c3 and libxmlrpc-c-dev, which would better match the sonames. > > So those are all the problems I *know* about. ;-) Are there any others > > which I've missed entirely? > > Well, did you read the policy manual? Of course. Cheers, Eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Change of package name or command name.
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: > > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. > > What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. Richard Braakman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Change of package name or command name.
Richard Braakman (2001-06-28 18:00:46 +0300) : > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: >> > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. >> >> What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? > > It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. One single letter: X :-) R. -- Roland Mas Au royaume des aveugles, les borgnes sont mal vus. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Finding a sponsor...
Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? Ilia Lobsanov Nurey Networks Inc. http://www.nurey.net/ GPG key: http://mail.lobsanov.com/pubkey.gpg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
Danie, On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Danie Roux wrote: > I would love to have an advocate. Being in Pretoria, South Africa that's not > going to be easy though. A developer does not have to be physically proximate to you to be your advocate; in fact, it doesn't have to be your advocate who signs your key, either. The advocate merely ... advocates for you to the NM committee, he is someone who will speak on your behalf in recommending you for maintainership. So in many cases, it may be better to seek a debian developer who knows your work and can evaluate your packages -- often your sponsor is best suited to be your advocate. You still need to have your key signed before you can become a d-d, and this usually requires a physical meeting. IIRC, there are some d-d's living in South Africa, though I don't remember what city; and if a physical meeting doesn't seem possible, there are other ways that have been used in the past to handle the identification requirement. In the meantime, sponsored uploads are a great way to get started with Debian. Regards, Steve Langasek postmodern programmer > For now I want a sponsor to get garchiver in to Debian. > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:38:36PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an >> advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet >> him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. >> see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. > > -- > > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Packaging xmlrpc-c
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 01:32:16PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote: > Ardo van Rangelrooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Well, as maintainer of the expat and libxmltok packages I would > > really appreciate it if you could make an effort to use the > > standalone copy. > > What he said! It avoids code duplication, is more elegant, and most > importantly: it won't lock users into a particular library version, > needlessly. What if I want to use your library, and a modern version > of libexpat in the same program? As long as you include your own expat > version, this will either simply break, or work with some tricks, at > the cost of increased memory footprint. Let me brainstorm about possible solutions. First, here are my hard constraints as the upstream maintainer. If these can't be satisfied, I can't release Debian packages. 1) xmlrpc-c applications must run on any libc6 i386 Linux distribution without recompilation. The only current exception to this is applications which use the w3c-libwww client module, which will be going away for exactly this reason. 2) xmlrpc-c applications must run on distros which provide a copy of libexpat, and ones which don't. Since the libexpat sonames have not been incremented in a correct manner on all distributions, it's extremely hard for me rely on pre-installed versions of expat. 3) xmlrpc-c uses expat to parse potentially hostile network data, so it must rely on stable, well-audited versions of expat. Right now, this means using James Clark's 1.x packages, not the 1.95 development series. Your constraints: 4) It must be possible to write applications which use both xmlrpc-c and the Debian version of expat. Possible solutions: A) Make xmlrpc-c use the Debian version of expat. This would violate constraints (1), (2) and (3). B) Use the current xmlrpc-c setup. This would violate constraint (4). C) Rename all the symbols exported by xmlrpc-c's version of expat to co-exist with other versions of expat. I can do this in the upstream source the next time I change sonames. This doesn't violate any of the above constraints, but it *does* cause xmlrpc-c applications to have a slightly higher memory footprint (about 100K, shared by all xmlrpc-c applications). All things considered, my preference (as the upstream maintainer) leans strongly toward (C). Basically, the copy of libexpat in xmlrpc-c is private, and I'd very much like to keep it that way. > For an example of real life breakage, look at apache. It gratuitously > includes its own "expat-lite" library. Once you use it together with > mod_perl and some perl XML stuff (which in turn depends on a recent > libexpat): segfault. This is bad, and I'm happy to work around this problem. Cheers, Eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 09:31:54AM -0500, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > You need a signed gpg key, but not an advocate when you apply -- the > message currently printed is not clear, though. I have fixed that > now. (It should have said that you needed a GPG signd key.) Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I had been under the impression that other forms of identification were still possible, though severely discouraged. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
I think that now an advocate is needed to simply say that they agree with your application, and be a mentor of sorts. After an advocate is found, an application manager is assigned. I don't think that there is any requirement for an actual physical meeting. Photo ID appears to be acceptible. > > Do you mean an advocate? When you submit your appliance to join debian, an advocate geographically near will contact you for meeting. You need to meet him/her to prove your identity so debian allows you to join the community. see http://nm.debian.org/ for more info. > > > -- > Robert MillanDebian GNU user > zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Finding a sponsor...
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Ilia Lobsanov wrote: > Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? http://www.google.com/search?q=toronto%20debian ? *t Tomas Pospisek SourcePole - Linux & Open Source Solutions http://sourcepole.ch Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Duncan Findlay wrote: > I think that now an advocate is needed to simply say that they agree with > your application, and be a mentor of sorts. > After an advocate is found, an application manager is assigned. > I don't think that there is any requirement for an actual physical meeting. > Photo ID appears to be acceptible. Certainly not. Photo IDs can not only be faked, they can also be stolen. Without physically meeting you and seeing you, how do we know that you're really the person in the picture? There are other methods of ascertaining identity without the benefit of a physical meeting, but they usually don't involve photo IDs -- and even if they're used for satisfying the identification requirement of the NM process, they probably shouldn't be used as justification for signing a GPG key. It's my personal opinion that, if we are going to empower all Debian developers to sign other people into the Debian keyring (and consequently into the global Web of Trust), we should also require them to demonstrate a clear understanding of PKI as part of the NM process. I think there are a lot of NMs who, if they don't already know a lot about PKI before they become DD's, never learn more than the mechanics of signing a key -- and that's ok, until we start encouraging them to go out and sign other people's keys. :) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
* Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I > had been under the impression that other forms of identification > were still possible, though severely discouraged. Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these days. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Key Signing (Was: Advocate/Sponsor)
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:13:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > we should also require them to demonstrate a clear understanding of > PKI as part of the NM process. manoj came up with a pretty good protocol to sign a key. i have it available in HTML at http://people.debian.org/~jaqque/keysign.html it does have some weaknesses, but it is a lot stronger than the ``oh, i've met you, i have checked your ID, and off we go'' comments welcome. -john -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GPG Key Signing (Was: Advocate/Sponsor)
On 28/06, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: | http://people.debian.org/~jaqque/keysign.html | | it does have some weaknesses, but it is a lot stronger than the ``oh, | i've met you, i have checked your ID, and off we go'' | | comments welcome. It has an enormous flaw: you do not sign a key, you sign an id. That means that checking for one e-mail address for being valid and signing all the ids is just bogus. You may use this protocol, but you have to repeat each for every email address you are going to sign. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On 28/06, Martin Michlmayr wrote: | * Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: | > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I | > had been under the impression that other forms of identification | > were still possible, though severely discouraged. | | Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says | | Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some | other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? | | But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred | method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these | days. I also think that Debian should accept scanned IDs signed with a trusted X509 key (as the one issued for free by Thawte (http://www.thawte.com/)). This would allow people who went through the heavy Thawte id checking to have their identity trusted by the Debian project. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Finding a sponsor...
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:05:55PM +0200, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Ilia Lobsanov wrote: > > > Is there an advocate in Toronto, Ontario, Canada that can sign my key? > > http://www.google.com/search?q=toronto%20debian > ? http://www.internatif.org/bortzmeyer/debian/sponsor/ Uwe. -- : Uwe Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---: | http://htsserver.sourceforge.net -- Holsham Traders| | http://unmaintained.sourceforge.net -- Unmaintained Free Software | : http://www.hermann-uwe.de --- :wq -: -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debconf and daemons
Hello all, I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a login client). I've got a couple of problems though: - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions appropriately (?) - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo "key value" >> /etc/myfile'. is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl and text::template? Any assistance would be most appreciated, - samj ""
Re: Advocate/Sponsor
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Samuel Tardieu wrote: > On 28/06, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > | * Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010628 16:53]: > | > Does the GPG key need to be signed or does it just need to exist? I > | > had been under the impression that other forms of identification > | > were still possible, though severely discouraged. > | Yeah, those forms still exist. The web site even says > | Do you yet have a GPG key signed by a current developer or some > | other photo ID scanned in and signed with your GPG key? > | But I usually talk of 'signed keys' because that's the preferred > | method and because it is usually possible to get a signature these > | days. > I also think that Debian should accept scanned IDs signed with a trusted > X509 key (as the one issued for free by Thawte (http://www.thawte.com/)). This > would allow people who went through the heavy Thawte id checking to have > their identity trusted by the Debian project. No. Signing the scanned ID adds *nothing* over accepting the x509 key by itself. If faking a physical photo ID is easy, faking a scanned photo ID is ridiculously simple. If we want to accept Thawte's id checking as sufficiently rigorous for our purposes, if we want to trust Thawte[1], then there's no point in asking for a scan signed with the ID. But I don't think we should accept Thawte IDs as sufficient; the needs and goals of a PKI that uses CAs (such as Thawte) are not entirely compatible with those of a peer-to-peer system (such as PGP). Steve Langasek postmodern programmer [1] And is Thawte really so impervious to corruption that there's not even a *remote* possibility of falsification? Remember that they're now owned by Network Solutions. Anything is possible... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Change of package name or command name.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:11:13 +0200, Roland Mas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard Braakman (2001-06-28 18:00:46 +0300) : > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:08:33AM +0900, Yooseong Yang wrote: > >> > Yes. poEdit is a horrible name. Command names should be all lowercase. > >> > >> What item in Debian Policy? you mean policy 2.3.1 or something? > > > > It's not in Debian Policy, it's a Unix tradition going back 30 years. > > One single letter: X :-) hey X is not in POSIX standards, and you must agree that every traditional unix command out there is lowercase. how bout "poedit2"? -- Robert MillanDebian GNU user zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debconf and daemons
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 04:00:47AM +1000, Sam Johnston wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm trying my hand at a somewhat more challenging package this time, which > uses debconf to extract a username and password from the user whichi is > stored in a config file in /etc and used to start a daemon (specifically a > login client). I've got a couple of problems though: > > - debconf doesn't append '|| true' to the init.d stop in prerm. this > means that when start-stop-daemon returns 1 the removal/upgrade fails > miserably if the daemon isn't running or can't be stopped. imho this is > broken (although it may be better than removing a package under a daemon > that refuses to stop?). how do i get around this? ignore it? > > - install -m 600 myfile /etc/myfile doesn't set the permissions > appropriately (?) Why do u want perm 600 ? dh_fixperms should automatically fix perms of files correctly. > > - debconf was surprisingly easy... however creating the config files once > the information has been obtained wasn't. i would have liked to have > filled in a template but ended up doing 'echo "key value" >> /etc/myfile'. > is there a 'standard' way of doing this? perhaps i should be using perl > and text::template? > > Any assistance would be most appreciated, > > - samj > > -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
error when building package
Hello,
when i run "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot" to create a package, i get the following
error:
dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package `esms':
`Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
dh_builddeb: command returned error code
while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
Package: esms
Version: 0.8.5-1
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Architecture: i386
Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Installed-Size: 44
Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description: [...]
[...]
and so does my debian/control file:
Source: esms
Section: comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Standards-Version: 3.0.1
Package: esms
Architecture: any
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
Suggests: fortune
Description: [...]
[...]
note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before ${shlibs:Depends} to
avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
--
Robert MillanDebian GNU user
zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: error when building package
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:08:44AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> when i run "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot" to create a package, i get the following
>error:
>
> dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package
>`esms':
> `Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
> dh_builddeb: command returned error code
>
> while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
>
> Package: esms
> Version: 0.8.5-1
> Section: comm
> Priority: optional
> Architecture: i386
> Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
Looks correct ??
> Suggests: fortune
> Installed-Size: 44
> Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Description: [...]
> [...]
>
> and so does my debian/control file:
>
> Source: esms
> Section: comm
> Priority: optional
> Maintainer: Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Standards-Version: 3.0.1
>
> Package: esms
> Architecture: any
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
> Suggests: fortune
> Description: [...]
> [...]
>
> note that i have tried putting perl-base, libwww-perl before ${shlibs:Depends} to
>avoid that strange comma and yet didn't work.
> --
> Robert MillanDebian GNU user
> zeratul2 wanadoo eshttp://getyouriso.org/
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: error when building package
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 03:55:40AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:08:44AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > when i run "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot" to create a package, i get the following
>error:
> >
> > dpkg-deb: parse error, in file `debian/esms/DEBIAN/control' near line 6 package
>`esms':
> > `Depends' field, missing package name, or garbage where package name expected
> > dh_builddeb: command returned error code
> >
> > while my debian/esms/DEBIAN/control file looks correct:
> >
> > Package: esms
> > Version: 0.8.5-1
> > Section: comm
> > Priority: optional
> > Architecture: i386
> > Depends: ,perl-base, libwww-perl
>
>
> Looks correct ??
>
> > Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, perl-base, libwww-perl
Definitely incorrect. What's happening is that shlibs is returning no
dependencies, or you're not running it. If you've commented out dh_shlibdeps
in your debian/rules file, then remove the ${shlibs:Depends}, section from
debian/control, otherwise comment it out and remove the ${shlibs:Depends},
section anyway.
:) d
--
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"can NE1 help me aim nuclear weaponz? /MSG ME!!"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1st try at packaging perl program
Hello,
this is a near-copy of a mail I sent yesterday to debian-perl. I
think it is relevant to this list.
I just managed to build a working .deb from a perl program (a game
that uses gtk and gnome), after a fair amount of cruft (*).
I build it w/ the help of the "New Maintainer's Guide", the
"Packaging Manual", the devel, mentors and perl mailing lists. There
are still a few things that I don't understand, such as that below.
Would anyone be willing to send me the source tree of a debian
package that wraps a perl program/module (or send me the url for one)?
Also, I read in last February's perl archive about Joey's
CPAN::Debian and about Lupus's work in the same direction. Has anyone
used them? I downloaded CPAN::Debian, but didn't look at it yet.
Cheers,
Etienne
PS: Sample thing I don't understand :
### Lintian complains that :
W: bloksi: perl-script-needs-dependency "libgtk-perl" ./usr/games/bloksi use Gtk
I tried the following lines in the 1st paragraph of the rules files
Depends: perl, libgtk-perl, libgnome-perl, libgtk-imlib-perl
and
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends},${perl:Depends}
without results.
(*) The source tree, .deb, etc are at http://anonimo.isr.ist.utl.pt/-
~etienne/debianized_bloksi). The real cruft part is in
Makefile.PL's postamble part.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
