Re: (2nd try) RFS: Erudite Directory Service Admin
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 22:07 -0600, David Moreno Garza wrote: > On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 21:25 -0500, Mark Roach wrote: > > These are native packages i.e. The debian packaging info is part of the > > upstream tarball (I am the author). It is my understanding that since > > there is no difference between upstream and packaged versions no diff is > > necessary... isn't this right? > > Right, I didn't figured out because of the version in the package: When > dealing with native packages, there is no need for adding a Debian > revision, so your versions should look like 0.1, instead of a «common» > 0.1-1 or so. Ahh, this makes sense. I have dropped it. (0.8.1 is in my repository now.) > Building the package on a pbuilder environment brings this error: > > checking for X... no > checking for gconftool-2... no > configure: error: gconftool-2 executable not found in your path - should > be installed with GConf > make: *** [config.status] Error 1 > pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package > > You should just need to build-depend on gconf2. Whoops, I'm not actually using gconf at the moment. I removed it from configure > And just a personal note. If there is not previous release of edsadmin > in the Debian archive why list them on changelog.Debian.gz? That seems sensible. Thanks very much for taking the time to look at this. -Mark
Re: (2nd try) RFS: Erudite Directory Service Admin
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 21:25 -0500, Mark Roach wrote: > > You should also provide .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz files to extract > > source packages. > > These are native packages i.e. The debian packaging info is part of the > upstream tarball (I am the author). It is my understanding that since > there is no difference between upstream and packaged versions no diff is > necessary... isn't this right? Right, I didn't figured out because of the version in the package: When dealing with native packages, there is no need for adding a Debian revision, so your versions should look like 0.1, instead of a «common» 0.1-1 or so. Building the package on a pbuilder environment brings this error: checking for X... no checking for gconftool-2... no configure: error: gconftool-2 executable not found in your path - should be installed with GConf make: *** [config.status] Error 1 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package You should just need to build-depend on gconf2. And just a personal note. If there is not previous release of edsadmin in the Debian archive why list them on changelog.Debian.gz? This obviously will vary from any maintainer's point of view. But in this case, I just see debian/changelog needed for tracking package's changes which will be in the archive, and besides, this would reaffirm this since, being this a native package, you maintain ChangeLog (probably asked for avoiding any autoconf complains) and debian/changelog. I hope I could get myself clear and understandable :-) Regards, -- David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.damog.net/ What the fuck is 'WTF'?
Re: (2nd try) RFS: Erudite Directory Service Admin
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 17:38 -0600, David Moreno Garza wrote: > On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 17:28 -0500, Mark Roach wrote: > > I am the author of EDSAdmin (Erudite Directory Service Admin). It is a > > python+gtk application that aims for easy maintenance of LDAP > > directories. I have packaged it and would like to see it included in [..] > You should also provide .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz files to extract > source packages. These are native packages i.e. The debian packaging info is part of the upstream tarball (I am the author). It is my understanding that since there is no difference between upstream and packaged versions no diff is necessary... isn't this right? -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: minimum package name length
On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 00:51, Stephan Beyer wrote: > Hi, > > > When looking at the existing names, I noticed that there are no package > > names with only two characters, and not that many with three. > > apt-cache show mc dc bc > to name a few ;) > > best regards, > sbeyer D'oh! I was counting newlines as well when grepping for package names... At least I know now that there are no package names with 1 character only :-) Thanks! Til -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: minimum package name length
On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 12:25:59AM +0100, Tilman Koschnick wrote: > When looking at the existing names, I noticed that there are no package > names with only two characters, and not that many with three. except for : af an at bb bc bl cu cw dc di dx ed ee es fv gb gq gs gv hf ht hx im kq le lv m4 mc mp nd ne nn pi pv qe qm rc re ri sc sl sn sp tf ud vh vm wl wv xt Frank > Cheers, Til -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: minimum package name length
Hi, > When looking at the existing names, I noticed that there are no package > names with only two characters, and not that many with three. apt-cache show mc dc bc to name a few ;) best regards, sbeyer -- Stephan Beyer 0xFCC5040F IANADD http://www.noxa.de/~sbeyer/debian/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
minimum package name length
Hi, I'm intending to package the Cluster Command & Control tool suite [0], commonly refered to as C3. My package name of choice would be c3, but I was wondering if such short names are acceptable. Is there any documentation or general consent? When looking at the existing names, I noticed that there are no package names with only two characters, and not that many with three. Cheers, Til [0] http://www.csm.ornl.gov/torc/C3/index.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: (2nd try) RFS: Erudite Directory Service Admin
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 17:28 -0500, Mark Roach wrote: > I am the author of EDSAdmin (Erudite Directory Service Admin). It is a > python+gtk application that aims for easy maintenance of LDAP > directories. I have packaged it and would like to see it included in > Debian. > > The homepage is here: http://edsadmin.sourceforge.net/ > Debian files here: http://edsadmin.sourceforge.net/debian/ > > > License for my own code is GPL, with three modules from other authors > under LGPL. > > Nice features include server discovery using DNS SRV records or DNS-SD > (Rendezvous) as well as sasl/gssapi support. > > > Thanks for any feedback. You should also provide .diff.gz and .orig.tar.gz files to extract source packages. -- David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.damog.net/ You really got me going... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(2nd try) RFS: Erudite Directory Service Admin
I am the author of EDSAdmin (Erudite Directory Service Admin). It is a python+gtk application that aims for easy maintenance of LDAP directories. I have packaged it and would like to see it included in Debian. The homepage is here: http://edsadmin.sourceforge.net/ Debian files here: http://edsadmin.sourceforge.net/debian/ License for my own code is GPL, with three modules from other authors under LGPL. Nice features include server discovery using DNS SRV records or DNS-SD (Rendezvous) as well as sasl/gssapi support. Thanks for any feedback. Mark Roach -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Looking for a sponsor
Patrzę w ekran, a to Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo pisze do mnie: > - If upstream uses configure stuff, then why are you patching > Makefile.in and similar files? Can't you just use --prefix=/usr ? I do. However files installed by upstream have wrong permissions. That's why I fix it. > - Your copyright file still doesn't look as it should. > Take a look at such files in other packages. Name of author should be > mentioned also under "Copyright" header. Then follows license. > You can use package "potrace" as an example. > - You should close your bugreport (ITP) in changelog entry. Fixed. Cheers Maciej -- M.Sc. Maciej Dems [EMAIL PROTECTED] - C o m p u t e r P h y s i c s L a b o r a t o r y Institute of Physics,Technical University of Lodz ul. Wolczanska 219, 93-005 Lodz, Poland, +48426313649 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package renaming doubt
Hi, I maintain gnuradio debian packages. A new upstream is released which is far superior to the old versions, but the source names have changed. SONAME is not changed however. The binaries also have their names changed, but one of the packages have the same name (python-gnuradio). I have asked for the old packages to be removed from the archive. Now, is there a way I can upload the newer packages into the archive. Having same name for one of the binary package means I cannot use "Replaces" field. What is the sane way of handling this? Any advice in this regard will be greatly appreciated. Thanks -- Ramakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Use Free Software -- Help stamp out Software Hoarding! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Looking for a sponsor
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 01:13:29PM +0100, Maciej Dems wrote: > > How does your package differ from konwert? > > Has it got some advantages? > > These two packages have very similar functionality. I dont know konwert > very well so I cannot tell much about differences between these two > packages. I thing that whether user would use polcnv or konwert is the > question of personal preference. (that's why I think it should be in > Debian). Ok I took a look at your package. Few glitches I found: - If upstream uses configure stuff, then why are you patching Makefile.in and similar files? Can't you just use --prefix=/usr ? - Your copyright file still doesn't look as it should. Take a look at such files in other packages. Name of author should be mentioned also under "Copyright" header. Then follows license. You can use package "potrace" as an example. - You should close your bugreport (ITP) in changelog entry. Otherwise package looks good for me. Good luck with finding sponsor. I can't upload it cause I'm not DD yet. regards fEnIo -- _ Bartosz Fenski | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp:0x13fefc40 | IRC:fEnIo _|_|_ 32-050 Skawina - Glowackiego 3/15 - w. malopolskie - Polska (0 0) phone:+48602383548 | Slackware - the weakest link ooO--(_)--Ooo http://skawina.eu.org | JID:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | RLU:172001 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Looking for a sponsor
Patrze w ekran, a to Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo pisze do mnie: > How does your package differ from konwert? > Has it got some advantages? These two packages have very similar functionality. I dont know konwert very well so I cannot tell much about differences between these two packages. I thing that whether user would use polcnv or konwert is the question of personal preference. (that's why I think it should be in Debian). Cheers Maciej -- M.Sc. Maciej Dems [EMAIL PROTECTED] - C o m p u t e r P h y s i c s L a b o r a t o r y Institute of Physics,Technical University of Lodz ul. Wolczanska 219, 93-005 Lodz, Poland, +48426313649 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
