Re: script-not-executable
Jaromír Mikeš mira.mi...@seznam.cz writes: Ok. Can I make override for it. You *can* make an override for any warnings. The warnings are there for good reasons, though, so you shouldn't ignore them without a good understanding of why, and an even better reason why the warning doesn't apply. You should fix the file so that it is described by exactly one of the following: * Makes sense to run this file as a command directly from the command-line: executable permission on, with valid shebang line. Preferably named without the ‘.py’ suffix. * Only intended for use for import into a larger program: executable permission off, no shebang line. Named with ‘.py’ suffix. -- \“Ubi dubium, ibi libertas.” (“Where there is doubt, there is | `\freedom.”) | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: lives, 2nd try
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.3-1 of my package lives. It builds these binary packages: libweed-dev - Development library for inclusion of plugins into LiVES libweed0 - Runtime library for inclusion of plugins into LiVES lives - Linux Video Editing System lives-data - Data files for LiVES The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives/lives_1.1.3-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Harry Rickards -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAkrCUwkACgkQ+9DWHFhEn2/pTgQAyA1ZuqChcY/CDo/G5kijMTRf e7jxpdifSUDGHwnUxxkaDENkTYq1BZIMkozUwMTayh3NfLzNk/U8Z919bJTkHmAW eK3JPDnDkYoSDILxI8P3XsRf2sJwCsHzTa2xccWjXGL7IaCz46IMjIMJxLUMhJEA H0sC0HI4IoerAV8PE8o= =scrW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Installing a local binary package, with the packages it recommends.
Hi Charles Plessy, hello mentors, to apt. Does anybody know a better way than the mk-build-deps trick? IANADD, untested and everything else, but you could try to build areal package (yes, equivs should be enough), generate a mini-archive with apt-ftparchive (included in apt-utils which should be installed everywhere) write a little sources.list(.d) stance for this generated archive and finially issue an apt-get update apt-get install foobar Best regards / Mit freundlichen Grüßen, David DonKult Kalnischkies -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: jmdns
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package jmdns. * Package name: jmdns Version : 2.0 * URL : http://jmdns.sourceforge.net/ * License : Apache 2.0 Programming Lang: Java Description : java implementation of multi-cast DNS (Apple Rendezvous) It builds these binary packages: libjmdns-java - A Java implementation of multi-cast DNS (Apple Rendezvous) The upload would fix these bugs: 486697 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jmdns - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jmdns/jmdns_2.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Mathieu Malaterre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: lives, 2nd try
Hi Harry, a havent't sponsored your package, but I looked at it and have some comments: On Samstag, 3. Oktober 2009, Harry Rickards wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.3-1 Please don't sponsoring requests too frequently to this list, you last for this package you've sent 4 days before this one. http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives/lives_1.1.3-1.dsc Your gpg key is only signed by yourself. Please try to get some signatures. Also it would be great, if you could convince the upstream lives developers to published sha1/sha256 checksums and gpg sign those. (So one can reliably check that the orig.tar.gz is actually the one published by upstream and the diff is actually the one from you :) Then I saw the SaveFileName patch you apply via debian/patches is not mentioned in debian/changelog and I stopped looking further. regards, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: RFS: lives, 2nd try
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/09 12:09, Holger Levsen wrote: Hi Harry, a havent't sponsored your package, but I looked at it and have some comments: Ok. Thanks anyway. On Samstag, 3. Oktober 2009, Harry Rickards wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.3-1 Please don't sponsoring requests too frequently to this list, you last for this package you've sent 4 days before this one. Duly noted. http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives/lives_1.1.3-1.dsc Your gpg key is only signed by yourself. Please try to get some signatures. Ok. Will try. Also it would be great, if you could convince the upstream lives developers to published sha1/sha256 checksums and gpg sign those. (So one can reliably check that the orig.tar.gz is actually the one published by upstream and the diff is actually the one from you :) Have passed on to upstream. Then I saw the SaveFileName patch you apply via debian/patches is not mentioned in debian/changelog and I stopped looking further. Whoops. I've added a mention and uploaded to mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lives/lives_1.1.3-1.dsc regards, Holger Thanks Harry Rickards hricka...@l33tmyst.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAkrHQxIACgkQ+9DWHFhEn2/N7QP/WjYTVI1BMit1O8Sx1lOI2KNA 62XJ90H1ZJcCi75oa+974jz7cLtkVIRuExiem0Dk9dxhZlm/wAkU9oFHNEAoOS32 YQVzXKlKUvyYiMUxw0PlV+3dfOF7NcwyhADw0H46gy5ZMUj6Yt6fPHp55UmfkoD1 JY15YwX4nsB4eZe11zs= =DqB3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
presumable last policy change before releasing Squeeze?
Hi, what's the earliest event or point in time after which event/point but before Squeeze shipping as stable the policy won't be changed anymore but I as a sponsored maintainer will still be able to upload (ask my sponsor Paul Wise to upload) my lbzip2 package? I'd like to update the package to the (then) current policy version at that point. Thanks, lacos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: aegis (updated package, NMU)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.24-5.2 of package aegis. This NMU fix an error I introduced in the previous one. It builds these binary packages: aegis - transaction-based software configuration management aegis-doc - documentation for aegis aegis-tk - aegis Tk user interface aegis-web - aegis web based user interface The upload would fix these bugs: 549231 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aegis - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aegis/aegis_4.24-5.2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Thanks -- Walter Franzini http://aegis.stepbuild.org/ pgpLcCzvN5sLl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: presumable last policy change before releasing Squeeze?
ERSEK Laszlo la...@caesar.elte.hu writes: what's the earliest event or point in time after which event/point but before Squeeze shipping as stable the policy won't be changed anymore but I as a sponsored maintainer will still be able to upload (ask my sponsor Paul Wise to upload) my lbzip2 package? I'd like to update the package to the (then) current policy version at that point. What's your motivation for this? It's not a problem if packages included in a Debian release are conformant with a slightly outdated version of Policy. I don't see that as a good reason for delaying the upload of an otherwise-ready release of your package. -- \ “If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we | `\ despise, we don't believe in it at all.” —Noam Chomsky, | _o__) 1992-11-25 | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: presumable last policy change before releasing Squeeze?
On Sun, 4 Oct 2009, Ben Finney wrote: It's not a problem if packages included in a Debian release are conformant with a slightly outdated version of Policy. I don't see that as a good reason for delaying the upload of an otherwise-ready release of your package. -q: - I don't have anything to upload yet, - when I will, it won't really affect end users, - I like a fresh Standards-Version, - I'd like to work on the package in a single focussed session. -v -v -v: The version in Squeeze (0.15-1) corresponds to the current upstream version, so there's no new Debian package to release as of now. 0.15-1 conforms to Policy version 3.8.1, supposedly not very far behind 3.8.3.0. Although as upstream I consider the utility finished, I expect a small change in the documentation. (It depends on external stuff, so I can't do it just yet.) Once I cover that, I'd like to merge it into the Debian package, also updating the packaging itself to newest guidelines. This is tedious and doesn't bring anything to users, so instead of rushing it and possibly making several Policy rounds until Squeeze ships, I'd like to concentrate it into one session/upload. In this case package tidyness through less work is more important to me than package availability, since it won't bring anything to users, just keep my stuff neat. Are you saying that I should update the package as soon as said external stuff allows, and go with the then-current Policy version into Sqeeze, leaving my sponsor and the build network more time as well? Thanks, lacos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: presumable last policy change before releasing Squeeze?
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 01:34:12AM +0200, ERSEK Laszlo wrote: - I like a fresh Standards-Version, This is not a valid reason to make an upload to Debian. It is perfectly permissible to have a package with an outdated standards version, especially if the updates to policy do not apply to your package (which is the case in 99% of packages for a given change to policy, in my experience). - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: presumable last policy change before releasing Squeeze?
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 6:55 PM, ERSEK Laszlo la...@caesar.elte.hu wrote: what's the earliest event or point in time after which event/point but before Squeeze shipping as stable the policy won't be changed anymore but I as a sponsored maintainer will still be able to upload (ask my sponsor Paul Wise to upload) my lbzip2 package? I'd like to update the package to the (then) current policy version at that point. Since the freeze date for squeeze hasn't yet been set, there is no way of knowing which version of policy will be current for squeeze. Usually the release team uses a mass freeze exception to allow anything uploaded to unstable before the freeze into testing regardless of the usual 10 days of waiting before testing migration. So as long as it is uploaded before the freeze date you should be fine. Most Standards-Version updates are of the form Bump Standards-Version, no changes needed and such updates should not be done unless they accompany some other update like fixing bugs or adding a new upstream version. Anyway, here are some ideas about what you could do to improve lbzip2: Write an article for debaday.debian.net about lbzip2 to promote it and get more users/testers. Have the package description and manual page reviewed by the Smith Review Project: http://wiki.debian.org/I18n/SmithReviewProject Take a look at the FreeBSD port and see if the Makefile patch is appropriate to include upstream or if not, contact the port maintainer about it. Document in the manual page or README the TAR_OPTIONS environment variable and how to make tar use lbzip2 by default. Talk to the upstream tar maintainers about ways to make tar detect if lbzip2 is available and use it instead of bzip2. Work on the bugs mentioned in the manual page if appropriate. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
