Re: About creating .deb packages
also sprach Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.12.31.0058 +0100]: Unfortunately, ar(1) won't suffice as it cannot create BSD-style archives. DEB files are BSD ar archives, not GNU ar. Thus, you need dpkg-source. Hmm, do you have a definitive reference for that? All I can find from a quick google on seemingly relevant terms is a year-old e-mail exchange between Goswin and aba about a specification of the file format, which is fairly disjoint and doesn't really explain the issue properly. There is a bug against apt-utils somewhere. Other than that, no, sorry, no reference right now. Ask Goswin, he knows. Also, the problem only surfaces with apt-ftparchive, I think. dpkg and APT can use GNU and BSD ar. You need a control file. Whether that is debian/control (standard source package), or DEBIAN/control (binary package) does not matter though. However, if you use debian/control, you also need debian/changelog. Why do you need debian/changelog if you're using debian/control? Because DEBIAN/control is created from these two. Surely there could be an alternate means of specifying the package version number, since you're not restricted to using the Usual Debian Tools -- remember, absolute minimalism here... debian/control and debian/changelog are the standards for Debian source packages. debhelper is also more or less of a standard, which uses them. Obviously, you can create DEBIAN/control (not the capitals, now I am talking dpkg-deb) with other means, but then why need debian/control. It's actually quite a fun mental game, this: What do I *really* need, rather than what I'm accustomed to needing. ed(1), tar(1), dpkg-deb. also sprach Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.12.31.0309 +0100]: 4. Create a file called control that looks like this: Package: hello-example Description: A quicky and dirty example of a debian package 5. Now tar it up with the name control.tar.gz $ tar cvzf control.tar.gz control So what will be the version of your package? I won't have a chance to reply anymore for three weeks. I'll be back then. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver! signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: About creating .deb packages
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 11:15:46AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Matthew Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.12.31.0058 +0100]: Surely there could be an alternate means of specifying the package version number, since you're not restricted to using the Usual Debian Tools -- remember, absolute minimalism here... debian/control and debian/changelog are the standards for Debian source packages. debhelper is also more or less of a standard, which uses them. Obviously, you can create DEBIAN/control (not the capitals, now I am talking dpkg-deb) with other means, but then why need debian/control. Aah, well there's the thing -- we're talking absolute minimum requirements here. Debhelper is several levels above that, and we're even below the level of Debian source package. It's actually quite a fun mental game, this: What do I *really* need, rather than what I'm accustomed to needing. ed(1), tar(1), dpkg-deb. gzip and (BSD) ar can replace dpkg-deb, I think. - Matt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
package xsok
Hello everybody! I have been working in a orphaned package, xsok, and now it's lintian clean :) If you want to have a look: http://carlospc.homelinux.org/debian/xsok/ I've signed de .deb package... but i'm not a debian developer (not yet :p). I wasn't sure what i should have to write at changelog... The last version is 1.02-12, if this is a NMU it should be 1.02-12.1 or it should be a new revision so the number would be 1.02-13? -- Carlos P.C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: About creating .deb packages
* martin f krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED] [041230 12:23]: also sprach Frank K?ster [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.12.30.1110 +0100]: on it. Basically, you just need a data.tar.gz and a control.tar.gz with a control file in it (I'm not sure about md5sums). md5sums is not required, but provided by most packages uses debhelper (and others). It's pointless inside the package anyway and should probably be created upon installation with debsums instead, if you rely on this functionality. Depends what you want these md5sums for. The way they currently are used is a very useful tool to check files against unintended corruption. (Which has helped me quite often to track problems, or to rule out such problems) When they are generated at install time, there could be bit-switchers arising between unpacking them and calculating their checksums. Also the md5sum files would no longer have a canonical look.[1] In my eyes each package not having a .md5sums file, especially those important packages missing them, is a shame. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link [1] Though the program combining cruft, debsums, checking the authority of the checksum files and fitting on a floppy is still to be written. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: package xsok
Hi Carlos! Carlos Parra Camargo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If you want to have a look: http://carlospc.homelinux.org/debian/xsok/ I will look over it. I've signed de .deb package... but i'm not a debian developer (not yet :p). What's the way, but you don't need to provide any .deb package, because your sponsor, that you should serach here with a RFS (Reqest for Sponsoring), will build a new package, sign with his key and upload it for you into Debian archive. I wasn't sure what i should have to write at changelog... Really? Did you read New Maintainer Guide and other documentation for package creation? - you should close your IFA bug report (You retitled the orphan bug report, didn't you?) - you should introduce you as zhe new maintainer - you should list closed bugs if you have fix any. The last version is 1.02-12, if this is a NMU it should be 1.02-12.1 or it should be a new revision so the number would be 1.02-13? I understand, you want to be the new maintainer for it, right? Then it is a new package version, 1.02-13. Sponsored NMUs are discouraged, so mostly DDs do NMUs. Kindly regards, Erik -- www.ErikSchanze.de * Bitte keine HTML-E-Mails! No HTML mails, please! Limit: 100 kB * pgpmVOdqZKHFv.pgp Description: signature
Re: package xsok
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 01:03:54PM +0100, Erik Schanze wrote: Carlos Parra Camargo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I wasn't sure what i should have to write at changelog... Really? Did you read New Maintainer Guide and other documentation for package creation? - you should close your IFA bug report (You retitled the orphan bug report, didn't you?) ITA. See http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp If Carlos only wants to do a QA upload, he should not do so, and simply upload with maintainer set to 'Debian QA group [EMAIL PROTECTED]', as Carlos did AFAICS. - you should introduce you as zhe new maintainer - you should list closed bugs if you have fix any. Well, you need to list the changes you did, annotated with bug numbers if any of those changes do fix a bug. You should _not_ just list closed bugs. The last version is 1.02-12, if this is a NMU it should be 1.02-12.1 or it should be a new revision so the number would be 1.02-13? QA uploads are a bit special: anyone can do them without being listed as maintainer or uploaders, and it is always a maintainer upload (for the purpose of this upload, you're doing QA work, so you're one of [EMAIL PROTECTED] then). Version number should be regular then, so 1.02-13. An orphaned package can never recieve a NMU. Sponsored NMUs are discouraged, so mostly DDs do NMUs. True, but suggesting a NMU can be done, and QA uploads can also be sponsored fine IMHO, although in most cases, it isn't worth the effort: it's less time to do the change oneself, being a DD, than to sponsor someone doing it. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Re: package xsok
Hi again Carlos! Carlos Parra Camargo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If you want to have a look: http://carlospc.homelinux.org/debian/xsok/ debian/copyright: - Update or remove Current Debian maintainer: field - Download source isn't reachable, try an other one, like: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/historic-linux/ftp-archives/tsx-11.mit.edu/Oct-07-1996/sources/usr.bin.X11/xsok-1.02-src.tar.gz (or a shorter one ;-) You could ask ibiblio.org for updateing its ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/games/strategy/xsok-1.01-src.tar.gz - Contained XPMs stand under BSD-like license, not GPL, see ./etc/COPYRIGHT.xpm I think copyright file should reflect this, although relicensing (under GPL) is also ok. debain/control: - As the new maintainer you should change Maintainer: field - For a Build-Depends on debhelper = 4.xx you should set compat level to 4: * remove line export DH_COMPAT=3 from debian/rules * and do in debian/: $ echo 4 compat debian/changelog: - In addition to my former mail you should mention that you updated Standards-Version: field to 3.6.1. - mention all changes above During a buid run comes up: dh_installmanpages: This program is deprecated, switch to dh_installman. It seems like a dead project, are you fit enough with the source code to deal with any future bug, especially not package specific ones? Kindly regards, Erik -- www.ErikSchanze.de * Bitte keine HTML-E-Mails! No HTML mails, please! Limit: 100 kB * pgp8wj1EIeOKT.pgp Description: signature
RFS: clanlib0.7
Hello. I prepared packages for Clanlib development branch. I think everyone knows what it is so I won't describe it here. Is someone interested in doing sponsored upload to experimental distribution? Packages can be fetched from http://skawina.eu.org/clanlib/ 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
unsubscribe
unsubscribe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Looking for sponsor for upload of sitemap 2.6-3
Hi, I'm the maitainer of the package sitemap (already in unstable and testing); I'm looking for a sponsor to upload the new version. The new version (2.6-3) is available at http://www.isotton.com/debian/sitemap/ Thank You, Aaron -- Aaron Isotton | http://www.isotton.com/ If one tells the truth, one is sure, sooner or later, to be found out. -- Oscar Wilde signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: package xsok
Hi Justin! Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 02:33:46PM +0100, Erik Schanze wrote: Carlos Parra Camargo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Contained XPMs stand under BSD-like license, not GPL, see ./etc/COPYRIGHT.xpm I think copyright file should reflect this, although relicensing (under GPL) ^^^ is also ok. Huh? Hehe? ;-) * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in ^^ * all copies or substantial portions of the Software. And what about the sentence above: * deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the * rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, ... I don't think its okay to just stick it with a different license notice, if that's what you mean. Isn't this covered by sublicense, is it? Kindly regards, Erik BTW: I'm on list, so please don't send a CC. -- www.ErikSchanze.de * Bitte keine HTML-E-Mails! No HTML mails, please! Limit: 100 kB * pgpNMQ2dKkgaR.pgp Description: signature
Re: package xsok
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 06:28:57PM +0100, Erik Schanze wrote: Hi Justin! Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 02:33:46PM +0100, Erik Schanze wrote: Carlos Parra Camargo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Contained XPMs stand under BSD-like license, not GPL, see ./etc/COPYRIGHT.xpm I think copyright file should reflect this, although relicensing (under GPL) ^^^ * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in ^^ * all copies or substantial portions of the Software. And what about the sentence above: * deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the * rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, ... I don't think its okay to just stick it with a different license notice, if that's what you mean. Isn't this covered by sublicense, is it? I would differentiate between sublicense and relicense. You want to relicense the xpm's; that is, to apply a difference license. And it only makes sense that you can do so if you are the copyright holder (or of the original license grants you that permission, which IMHO doesn't make sense, because that also gives you permission to add and remove rights and restrictions from the original license). To me, the right to sublicense means: You can give other people this software *under this license*. On a related thought, the GPL uses the phrase under the terms of this License. To be strict, software derived from GPL software doesn't have to be released under the GPL, just on functionally equivalent terms (for example, the hypothetical ZZZ license, which is a verbatim copy of the GPL). Comments? Happy y2k5, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Looking for sponsor for upload of sitemap 2.6-3
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 05:50:02PM +0100, Aaron Isotton wrote: I'm the maitainer of the package sitemap (already in unstable and testing); I'm looking for a sponsor to upload the new version. What is it, what does it do, etc? You'll usually get more interest from potential sponsors if you provide some details so they can go oh, that sounds interesting / useful / whatever, I'll sponsor that. I don't believe there is a single DD here who has the time to sponsor anything and everything that comes along -- god help them if there is such a person out there... Your package already being in unstable does make it potentially a bit easier -- a quick 'apt-cache show sitemap' showed me that I have no interest in sponsoring the package, but you want to make it as easy as possible for a potential sponsor, to maximise your chances of getting someone. - Matt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
New Package: stellarium
I've just made a new package: Stellarium Astronomy Software Stellarium is a free GPL software which renders realistic skies in real time with openGL. It is available for Linux/Unix, Windows and MacOSX. With Stellarium, you really see what you can see with your eyes, binoculars or a small telescope. ( http://stellarium.free.fr/ ) Anybody interested: https://baby.yi.org:8000/debian/stellarium/ I haven't received any answer to my last post avout avida ( http://dllab.caltech.edu/avida/ , packages available at https://baby.yi.org:8000/debian/avida/ ) so I assume that everybody is too busy. Thanks in advance for your comments, Miry PS: Happy New Year __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!: ¡250 MB GRATIS! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Package: stellarium
On Sat, 01 Jan 2005, Miriam Ruiz wrote: Thanks, i'll try to find it. I couldn't find it in http://packages.debian.org/, and the only package i found for that program is an old version in www.apt-get.org. http://snapshot.debian.org: http://snapshot.debian.net/archive/2003/09/15/debian/pool/non-free/s/stellarium/ -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Package: stellarium
On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 02:43:31AM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote: I've just made a new package: Stellarium Astronomy Software Hi Miriam, You might also be interested in SkyChart: http://handhelds.freshmeat.net/projects/skychart/ Its by the author of Cartes du Ciel, which is pretty well known and esteemed. Happy holidays, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Package: stellarium
--- Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 02:43:31AM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote: I've just made a new package: Stellarium Astronomy Software Hi Miriam, You might also be interested in SkyChart: http://handhelds.freshmeat.net/projects/skychart/ Its by the author of Cartes du Ciel, which is pretty well known and esteemed. Happy holidays, Justin Thanks!!! I'm gonna have a look at it :)) The pity is that it seems to be written in kylix/delphi but it looks nice :) Thanks! :) Happy new year :) Miry __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!: ¡250 MB GRATIS! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Package: stellarium
Lots of thanks, I found that info extremelly useful. Even when it is a great program, the program has to go to non-free: Stellarium has been moved in section non-free to close bug #198495 (Please clarify copyright license of astronomical data used by this software). Please look at the copyright file for more informations. The astronomical data are from the Hipparcos data catalogue. The Hipparcos data catalogue license complies with the DFSG. A message acknowledging ESA has been put in this copyright file. Unfortunately, stellarium upstream can't give me the licence of the textures and the images the program displays. Some are coming from Celestia, and some are coming from unknown sources. Upstream understands well the licensing problems and is going to work on this. As long as this issue remains, Stellarium will stay in non-free. As I already have it packaged, mostly because it is a program I personally use and it's easier for me to install and uninstall it this way, I understand why the original maintainer might has lost his interest in it. I don't think I'd like to maintain it myself. Maybe I'll just put it in mentors.debian.es just in case it is useful for anyone, or maybe I should write to the original maintainer. Thanks, Miry --- Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: On Sat, 01 Jan 2005, Miriam Ruiz wrote: Thanks, i'll try to find it. I couldn't find it in http://packages.debian.org/, and the only package i found for that program is an old version in www.apt-get.org. http://snapshot.debian.org: http://snapshot.debian.net/archive/2003/09/15/debian/pool/non-free/s/stellarium/ -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!: ¡250 MB GRATIS! Nuevos servicios, más seguridad http://correo.yahoo.es -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
