dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
Hello! I just tried to make XFMail build like suggested in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz. So the clean target in debian/rules calls the autotools. After that dpkg-source tries to build the diff. I get the following output then: dpkg-source -b xfmail-1.5.1 dpkg-source: building xfmail using existing xfmail_1.5.1.orig.tar.gz dpkg-source: building xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.diff.gz dpkg-source: cannot represent change to depcomp: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to ltmain.sh: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to install-sh: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to missing: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to mkinstalldirs: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to INSTALL: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: building xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.dsc dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source All these are symlinks from file to /usr/share/autoconf/file. Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it? Thanks in advance! Florian -- Florian Hinzmann private: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key / ID: 1024D/B4071A65 Fingerprint : F9AB 00C1 3E3A 8125 DD3F DF1C DF79 A374 B407 1A65 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 By the way, if you use the debhelper scripts (dh_makeshlibs in particular) , you don't need to write the postinst by hand, and as a bonus, lintian will not complain about it. OK, done ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package review
Please inform the administrators of your server (www.cbu.edu) that their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled. On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at: http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/ Warren - -- GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88 GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE73aVnmaGhn1WdnogRAkQTAJ48avRruokN88AYPCZkUIutRshdEACePaOd eELhEzDxa2gxPvTJwCjujzY= =ek78 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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: webserver directory locations when you're not using a webserver
* Hereward Cooper | Now what happens when you either don't have a local webserver, or | are not creating the gallery for it? Should the package put the | images/ directory in a directory some where (/etc/tigger/images/) | then get the user to move it to the apporiate place and telling them | to use --imagedir=, noting this in the README.debian and man | page. I take it that making a depend on apache, and auto placing the | images/ in /var/www/images/ is out of the question. There isn't any policy on this one, but I have proposed one in bug #89867 against policy. If you think that is a good solution, please second my proposal. -- Tollef Fog Heen Axiom #1: You Can't Win -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or file a bug against it. -- Christian Surchi | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] FLUG: http://www.firenze.linux.it | Debian GNU/Linux: http://www.debian.org Consider a spherical bear, in simple harmonic motion... -- Professor in the UCB physics department -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is this a strip problem?
I downloaded the source of shellutil-2.0 package, ran ./configure make check. Now the size of printf utility is 108102 bytes. Then I ran strip --remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note printf, which is what dh_strip uses for executables. Now its size is 18324 bytes. But ls -l /usr/bin/printf shows 10496 bytes, 8KB smaller than mine. What am i missing here? My system is a Debian potato distro. -wyang -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is this a strip problem?
On 03-Nov-2001 Weichang Yang wrote: I downloaded the source of shellutil-2.0 package, ran ./configure make check. Now the size of printf utility is 108102 bytes. Then I ran strip --remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note printf, which is what dh_strip uses for executables. Now its size is 18324 bytes. But ls -l /usr/bin/printf shows 10496 bytes, 8KB smaller than mine. What am i missing here? My system is a Debian potato distro. -wyang funny, I thought it did strip --strip-unneeded. It could also be different compilation options. Or glibc. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
#include hallo.h Florian Hinzmann wrote on Fri Nov 02, 2001 um 11:58:03AM: All these are symlinks from file to /usr/share/autoconf/file. Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it? Is there an autogen.sh script which you have executed? Or something like libtoolize -f? It seems like the autoconf system of your package has been generated, making symlinks to the installed packages. Generaly, it is better not to touch the build system of the upstream, unless it is really needed. In your case, you may create static copies of the mentioned files, but this would end up in an bloated diff file. You have now only few options: a) delete the new symlinks in the clean rule, and do the same thing you have allready done in the configure rule. Don't forget to set Build-Dependency on required automake/autoconf/libtool tools then. or b) Revert your change. Extract the orig tarball somewhere, put your debian-stuff in that directory, continue your work. Gruss/Regards, Eduard. -- Es ist schon erstaunlich, was sich Menschen so alles zusammenge- und ueberzuechtet haben: Ultralange Dackel, die in der Mitte regelrecht durchbrechen, Zwergpinscher, die zu nichts nuetze sind, Michael Jackson und Windows 95. Hans Bonfigt in d.r.t.k. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
Hello! I just tried to make XFMail build like suggested in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz. So the clean target in debian/rules calls the autotools. After that dpkg-source tries to build the diff. I get the following output then: dpkg-source -b xfmail-1.5.1 dpkg-source: building xfmail using existing xfmail_1.5.1.orig.tar.gz dpkg-source: building xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.diff.gz dpkg-source: cannot represent change to depcomp: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to ltmain.sh: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to install-sh: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to missing: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to mkinstalldirs: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: cannot represent change to INSTALL: dpkg-source: new version is symlink dpkg-source: old version is nonexistent dpkg-source: building xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.dsc dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source All these are symlinks from file to /usr/share/autoconf/file. Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it? Thanks in advance! Florian -- Florian Hinzmann private: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Key / ID: 1024D/B4071A65 Fingerprint : F9AB 00C1 3E3A 8125 DD3F DF1C DF79 A374 B407 1A65
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 08:18:20PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: On 01-Nov-2001 Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: Lintian is a collection of stupid shell scripts. It tries to catch thr common cases and does a pretty good job. My best suggestion is to write your code in the style of most of the other scripts and everyone is happy. This isn't 'my' code, it's an almost exact copy of /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/postinst.ex So I'd expect it to be 'in the style of most of the other scripts'. This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 10:56:25AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 04:00:34PM +0100, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote: Hi, I'm building my first packages with shared library. This is what my postinst states: case $1 in configure) ldconfig ;; abort-upgrade|abort-remove|abort-deconfigure) ;; *) echo postinst called with unknown argument \`$1' 2 By the way, if you use the debhelper scripts (dh_makeshlibs in particular) , you don't need to write the postinst by hand, and as a bonus, lintian will not complain about it. OK, done ! -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Package review
Please inform the administrators of your server (www.cbu.edu) that their router is broken. It rejects ECN enabled. On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 12:52:18PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Could someone please take a look at my package for uml at: http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/debian/ Warren - -- GPG Fingerprint: 30C8 BDF1 B133 14CB 832F 2C5D 99A1 A19F 559D 9E88 GPG Public Key @ http://www.cbu.edu/~wturkal/wturkal.gpg -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE73aVnmaGhn1WdnogRAkQTAJ48avRruokN88AYPCZkUIutRshdEACePaOd eELhEzDxa2gxPvTJwCjujzY= =ek78 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
This is no different from working with a bunch of coders and everyone agreeing on a common code formatting. Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it.
Re: place of ldconfig in postinst
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:17:36AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: Talk to the maintainer of debhelper ? dh_make is NOT maintained by Joey Hess, the debhelper maint. In fact he has nothing to do with it. Write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or file a bug against it. -- Christian Surchi | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] FLUG: http://www.firenze.linux.it | Debian GNU/Linux: http://www.debian.org Consider a spherical bear, in simple harmonic motion... -- Professor in the UCB physics department
Is this a strip problem?
I downloaded the source of shellutil-2.0 package, ran ./configure make check. Now the size of printf utility is 108102 bytes. Then I ran strip --remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note printf, which is what dh_strip uses for executables. Now its size is 18324 bytes. But ls -l /usr/bin/printf shows 10496 bytes, 8KB smaller than mine. What am i missing here? My system is a Debian potato distro. -wyang
Re: Is this a strip problem?
On 03-Nov-2001 Weichang Yang wrote: I downloaded the source of shellutil-2.0 package, ran ./configure make check. Now the size of printf utility is 108102 bytes. Then I ran strip --remove-section=.comment --remove-section=.note printf, which is what dh_strip uses for executables. Now its size is 18324 bytes. But ls -l /usr/bin/printf shows 10496 bytes, 8KB smaller than mine. What am i missing here? My system is a Debian potato distro. -wyang funny, I thought it did strip --strip-unneeded. It could also be different compilation options. Or glibc.
