Re: RFS: nbc (2nd try)
Slavko wrote: > Dňa Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:22:57 +0100 Benoît Knecht > napísal: > > > As Guido pointed out, that license isn't free unfortunately. > > the license problem seems to be solved, while i get response from nbc > author, that this file is not needed in linux version (included by > mistake) and can be safely removed (and will be removed from next > releases). I didn't tried to build package without it yet. > > But now i do not know how to remove it from source. Will be repacking > the *.orig.tar.gz file without it and making notice in README.Source > enough? You should also add '+dfsg' (or arguably '~dfsg') to the upstream version (so that your package version would be '1.2.1.r4+dfsg-2'). Also, I think you should document that change in the Source field of debian/copyright's header paragraph rather than debian/README.source. Cheers, -- Benoît Knecht -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111225215914.ga32...@marvin.lan
Re: RFS: apt-spy
Paul Wise at "Sun, 25 Dec 2011 12:29:09 +0800" wrote: PW> I do not intend to sponsor this package, but here is a review: PW> Do you have a VCS for apt-spy? All code is on github but I don't use git for the debian part. PW> You might want to run wrap-and-sort -s PW> Why did you switch from a non-native package to a native one? The PW> debian/changelog file does not explain why. I think that apt-spy would be usefull only on Debian. Do you suggest to describe in the changelog? PW> The upstream Makefile says version 3.2.1 but you are uploading it as 3.2.2. I'll correct is ASAP. PW> You are claiming copyright on files that you didn't add anything to or PW> only changed trivial stuff in (relative to the version in the PW> archive), is there a reason for that? I'll verify, it should be I did by error. PW> You are modifying old debian/changelog entries from the version in the archive. PW> #515515 is not the kind of bug that should be closed in a changelog. OK, I'll correct it PW> Please read the devref section about changelog entries. PW> Your debian/changelog entries could use some improvement, I would PW> suggest this instead: PW> apt-spy (3.2.1-1) unstable; urgency=low PW> * New upstream release PW>- Fixes segfault with option -m and special args (Closes: #645839) PW>- Fixes another segfault (Closes: #447232) PW>- Fixes segfault with with -v or -h options (Closes: #491802) PW>- Fixes the region filter (Closes: #617699) PW>- Fixes paths in the man page (Closes: #548591, #551344) PW>- Doesn't get confused by leading blanks (Closes: #457049) PW>- Inlines initialization of defaults (Closes: #317592) PW>- Tests all of the IP addresses for a mirror (Closes: #320112) PW> * Applied patch to copyright and other files (Closes: #645910) PW> * Moved mirrors.txt from /var/cache/apt-spy to /var/cache/apt PW> * Updated to latest policy, ???no changes needed? PW> -- Stefano Canepa Sun, 18 Dec 2011 00:02:21 +0100 I'm going to correct it as you suggest. PW> There is an empty dir in the source package: debian/dir PW> Your postinst will cause the package to fail to upgrade if there are PW> any extra files in /var/cache/apt-spy or /var/lib/apt-spy/. PW> The comment in debian/lintian-overrides does not make any sense for PW> the tag that is overridden. PW> debian/apt-spy.lintian-overrides seems to contain PW> Why is debian/postinst under a different license to the rest of the package? PW> Why is the debian/menu file in the package? apt-spy doesn't appear to PW> provide any sort of GUI. I'll correct this error. PW> You have created a GPL incompatibility by licensing trim.h/trim.c PW> under the GNU GPL v3. Please switch away from the OpenSSL variant of PW> curl or relicense those files. The latter would require permission PW> from the monit copyright holders. You have stripped their copyright PW> notices out of those two files, which I think might be illegal. PW> Some files without any copyright holder or license were added. PW> You might want to switch to debhelper 7 dh rules.tiny style PW> I guess in debian/rules you meant to not set DH_VERBOSE. PW> cppcheck finds 3 resource/memory leaks. I did not use it. But I'll try. PW> The README.Debian can be removed since everything in it is either PW> irrelevant or documented in the upstream README. OK. PW> There is one gcc warning. PW> apt-spy is not available in Ubuntu, you might want to investigate why. PW> Please review the debtags to make sure they still apply: PW> http://debtags.alioth.debian.org/edit.html?pkg=apt-spy PW> Please add a screenshot of typical usage: PW> http://screenshots.debian.net/upload PW> lintian warnings: PW> W: apt-spy: latest-debian-changelog-entry-changed-to-native PW> I: apt-spy: extended-description-is-probably-too-short PW> I: apt-spy: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man8/apt-spy.8.gz:117 I'll check again. Thanks for your reply, I learned many thinks from you. Bye Stefano -- Stefano Canepa aka sc: s...@linux.it - http://www.stefanocanepa.it Three great virtues of a programmer: laziness, impatience and hubris. Le tre grandi virtù di un programmatore: pigrizia, impazienza e arroganza. (Larry Wall) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4zss56x@lepre.stefanocanepa.home
RFS: Code Browser
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "code-browser". * Package name: code-browser Version : 3.23-2 Upstream Author : Marc Kerbiquet * URL : tibleiz.net/code-browser * License : GPL-2 Section : editors It builds those binary packages: code-browser - Folding text editor To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/code-browser Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/code-browser/code-browser_3.23-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, Nathan Owens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef78325.7020...@gmx.us
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
wer...@aloah-from-hell.de writes: >> Stable is frozen, we do not change packages there unless there is a very >> good reason to do so. The bug you are fixing does not seem to qualify as >> release critical thus we need to deal with the problem as is. > > OK, thanks for your details. I do also think, that this bug is not a release > critical rather an important bug. It is possible to fix non-RC bugs in updates to stable (that are deemed important enough to be fixed). The maintainer and the (stable) release managers have to agree with it though. > In the long run, I want to take over the package as there is currently > no maintainer for it. As you said, I should check the current package > in testing if the mentioned bug there does also persist ? Taking over maintenance is a good idea. The release managers usually require bugs to be fixed in testing before approving changes to stable. Regards, Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87obuwebl2@marvin.43-1.org
RFS: texi2html
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "texi2html". * Package name: texi2html Version: 5.0-1 Upstream Author : Francesco Cecconi * URL : http://www.nongnu.org/texi2html/ * License : GPLv2 Section : text It builds those binary packages: texi2html - Convert Texinfo files to HTML To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/texi2html Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/texi2html/texi2html_5.0-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, -- Francesco Cecconi nmapsi4 core developer www.nmapsi4.org | Key ID: 11F6E468 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: RFS: nbc (2nd try)
Hi, Dňa Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:22:57 +0100 Benoît Knecht napísal: > As Guido pointed out, that license isn't free unfortunately. the license problem seems to be solved, while i get response from nbc author, that this file is not needed in linux version (included by mistake) and can be safely removed (and will be removed from next releases). I didn't tried to build package without it yet. But now i do not know how to remove it from source. Will be repacking the *.orig.tar.gz file without it and making notice in README.Source enough? regards -- Slavko http://slavino.sk signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
Hi Arno, > well, you're presumably the new maintainer. Hence it is up to you to > package new versions whenever that seems feasible to you. Generally you > should try to keep track with upstream so yes, package the new version > by evolving the latest source package available in Sid. The current upstream version is out for more than 2 years so I think the new package should rely on the latest upstream version. Thank you, werner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef746cd.9010...@aloah-from-hell.de
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Werner, On 25.12.2011 16:43, wer...@aloah-from-hell.de wrote: > "A new upstream version is available: 0.1.15.2, you should consider packaging > it." > Should i package the new version available or should i repack the current one > from unstable? well, you're presumably the new maintainer. Hence it is up to you to package new versions whenever that seems feasible to you. Generally you should try to keep track with upstream so yes, package the new version by evolving the latest source package available in Sid. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJO90VjAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtALUP/R3dpUr41ftd2aAwWzazF4o8 XfZjmtKw42+nOHu+LRhGYdOxCVnlNBYQeEWi+UABBjsp0zWJdgb0G1DZEJrHTmbr 9df82bF/cDc6uaBY9VQtJbvcQFZfQw87N1vb/TfsfYlpzkG+r1DIZp1188mJzWHg pf5fiMCAO7YxBAXBB9DV7RwIvnwFGF0R2kXOa4l+c8AAums/Iii7T1nYWKoBgIsG kdWvn6nGd5BJMgNiP53QAfnX+UisaTWYyoSHBy+VjU95Fisf1vSP/jCQUKccnSQ0 ytastzksig66SnCUKp/RbZGXFNKpOjv6w6DavuIrEIDp2eq9uUZs0a5MOdWB7GDJ gRHge04lT6rO1tJXcXFRVRJqWeylm79xsvNpRs05bEye7jf24eLq71VUe1YWr4es Ob1etMgCP3uuxpZM8WnMnvutJq8rwwCNMctGzFBetEnkepjPTbtKysV57ZWK4HTG wd3Yo+b4T3TIbp7iG8EoXwvpp41IOmweMY+X14RBn4om7/YGI0vXTmLRaLpoy4Wx iz6Ps80TF+uD/EruCy4LnYeKto8Zj5co7C/u3Q2Mkxl45FWDoknmb4jn6EMokoKJ QvVgkhszwyrXEdhrzVakBb6tn2o2xRo2KtRD2HzrFebvRyr2vk+4ar3A0Z3UfRlD yI7LejnQ0bFiU1Mr9lCU =Tyvl -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef74563.2060...@toell.net
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
Hi Arno, > we're developing towards Unstable only. Thus, if you want to take over > as a maintainer of a package your work is always invested in Unstable. > > In your case the package is orphaned, hence you can just take over it. > Use the latest source package available in Debian Unstable, package the > new upstream version and start working on open bugs. Don't forget to > replace yourself as maintainer in debian/control as you become > responsible for the package. another short question: the PTS indicates that there is a new upstream version available: "A new upstream version is available: 0.1.15.2, you should consider packaging it." Should i package the new version available or should i repack the current one from unstable? thanks, Werner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef744af.6060...@aloah-from-hell.de
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
Hi Arno, > In your case the package is orphaned, hence you can just take over it. > Use the latest source package available in Debian Unstable, package the > new upstream version and start working on open bugs. Don't forget to > replace yourself as maintainer in debian/control as you become > responsible for the package. If there is a version control system for > the package somewhere you might want to check latest bits available > there as well. > > Once your work is done present the reworked source package here again, > and people will review and upload it successively. thanks for the hints, that's really helpful. I will use the source package from unstable and go ahead. Thanks, Werner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef73f51.8060...@aloah-from-hell.de
RFS: wmweather+ (2nd try)
Dear mentors, I'm still trying to find a sponsor for my package "wmweather+" since my usual sponsor (martin f. krafft) seems to be busy these days. * Package name: wmweather+ Version : 2.13-1 Upstream Author : Brad Jorsch * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/wmweatherplus/ * License : GPLv2 Section : x11 The new package fixes two bugs from BTS of which one is RC. It further updates to current packaging practices (source format 3.0, VCS in collab-maint, DEP-5 copyright file, ...) and fixes some lintian warnings. It's now again lintian clean. Available on mentors.debian.net: http://mentors.debian.net/package/wmweather%2B dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/wmweather+/wmweather+_2.13-1.dsc Also available in collab-maint on Alioth: svn://svn.debian.org/collab-maint/deb-maint/wmweather+/ I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Thanks in advance! Regards, Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RFS: Tunapie
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "tunapie". * Package name: tunapie Version : 2.1.18-2 Upstream Author : James M Stone * URL : http://tunapie.sourceforge.net * License : GPL-2+ Section : net It builds those binary packages: tunapie- Lists audio and video streams from Shoutcast and Icecast To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/tunapie Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/tunapie/tunapie_2.1.18-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef73bf0.1050...@gmx.us
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Werner, On 25.12.2011 15:29, wer...@aloah-from-hell.de wrote: > So - I'm still interested in working for the policyd weight package but > currently > I do not know where to start properly. My idea to repackage the current > stable one > wasn't that smart, apperently :) > > In the long run, I want to take over the package as there is currently no > maintainer > for it. As you said, I should check the current package in testing if the > mentioned > bug there does also persist ? > we're developing towards Unstable only. Thus, if you want to take over as a maintainer of a package your work is always invested in Unstable. In your case the package is orphaned, hence you can just take over it. Use the latest source package available in Debian Unstable, package the new upstream version and start working on open bugs. Don't forget to replace yourself as maintainer in debian/control as you become responsible for the package. If there is a version control system for the package somewhere you might want to check latest bits available there as well. Once your work is done present the reworked source package here again, and people will review and upload it successively. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJO9zfJAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtSdoQAKlE+Pd4kgq/dWQg6jXEkk0z TltU8qrVMC+OV9TXWVaBQajbk1qWeG1Y3Rcq4QGM8kB2pp26fPw50CnfSpqZvF+0 WTdm5DJyJE2jwoT+kswG7lrb3nU9eAJeeb85sPKokK3ULZ1ZSgl8ZbJoXU51ngXe Qe9Zk1dHoCU4gypilQeSqAqNM40c0A3mXiskC3sAwmk1SoLmu7trX/77oPMn+aQU y1BTGJ1ZRlB7rXmPGifNmSw2+rJM+2DDNAqPKKP8bq0oYgQTVb8IC6TG4x4WEQh5 FaTFzWH1NryFhcL+lK8MLvfezzuIXdIsCAgC0mdO6XpaKmBoZ7oi7jnglTfeo4pq jV85Ww+WZPhE9HO7B9GUgezYC1tqvuXRhDcOJ5NjMgXKWeBZ9nxfq0CqUr1ZWh9o A5Y8AfLxFSX/C6weOrlEyZuZm4hNAqCuJqkVKZkEN+/2wiUGpS/WjD9/+6AbdDGR w6tTkwpySwkiBXXIFCFlvehvobcMcNaNbXF6L5YMf6ZibLuEUopbuqUo7VbJn1Mm vL4b/tz8c2j+TkHDvBYbzTWRiXOMz14BoaJVxvRcS+u6O4mTfyAbjcLmBryaHAF/ nOVTRna0xCulEtmCAccCWJPODp6L+Gvy3r0MBre4GjLwtRlQfDzQKcCw60SBVz0p wQkKi2K2RI2NfLMDhBGD =xE44 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef737ca.8020...@toell.net
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
Hi Arno, >> In stable there is still policyd-weight with some open bugs and the current >> maintainer chris does not have the time to take care about this package any >> more. With my uploaded package I - principially - wanted to close bug >> #641227 So my question is: should I go on further with this package? Or >> should >> I rely on the packages in Testing? > > > Stable is frozen, we do not change packages there unless there is a very > good reason to do so. The bug you are fixing does not seem to qualify as > release critical thus we need to deal with the problem as is. OK, thanks for your details. I do also think, that this bug is not a release critical rather an important bug. So - I'm still interested in working for the policyd weight package but currently I do not know where to start properly. My idea to repackage the current stable one wasn't that smart, apperently :) In the long run, I want to take over the package as there is currently no maintainer for it. As you said, I should check the current package in testing if the mentioned bug there does also persist ? best regards and thank you, Werner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef73352.1070...@aloah-from-hell.de
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Werner, On 25.12.2011 12:48, wer...@aloah-from-hell.de wrote: > In stable there is still policyd-weight with some open bugs and the current > maintainer chris does not have the time to take care about this package any > more. With my uploaded package I - principially - wanted to close bug > #641227 So my question is: should I go on further with this package? Or > should > I rely on the packages in Testing? Stable is frozen, we do not change packages there unless there is a very good reason to do so. The bug you are fixing does not seem to qualify as release critical thus we need to deal with the problem as is. If you think the problem is release critical indeed, please talk to the stable release team (debian-rele...@lists.debian.org) whether they would like to push your update through stable-proposed-updates. Please note, if you consider that way make sure you made a minimal-invasive changeset first, which only changes things absolutely necessary to deal with the bug. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJO9yvnAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtIxgQALHzQ4Gqgg5OcBCkb/GLzCAW J+mqhNFqFujIZwGRNqkszVGCIpD45OvjEaxUNESTbv8G/nXC49JPkXFXe8+i7obs BTmoqY4qxjpIM1e7T2dBcqZDbhDg5iAHSO12NQO5nfTYKOj3VELenBT2Vo3r1H7r YeC1RSWhbLJKrcXj72W1baxsbWJsXFmOZyaQ8abIMt2VnWbr3Uz9CKRU8zm/N0DH fOTS1IZTj5fm9pRP1M6Az9cqkOv5VrmeBkinZvvN6HzwJ7RElQ92HfyiHYEOrgQQ +L7t/sJDiBUpWwd8lOoNNMN0e+FMGZ1L4gNhBZBKwxJ/fQr0gAcbPQcVeqNptMWC DOSsEnwp1XB7yr2xlJdOyR5OP3w6VmUGU5RlXu6M5dN0dRuhtW9Kei2yjLB7B1ns 4DJRUxn066+GIYnxbuyzDHyB5VjtMqTYvle3tQxN767Pb64PrvH6d5NIhWcHE+zg WIMcS6J0PFlAb/jwlYUcanTqVExKxUvnd/f/55iIAjTmpJJEdGn2wR6l7PsqZoHH zor/w2yGufI5tvCGX5xCxSqbVupuB+SJpK9jugP3GuFz3sl/tZuocA3ID3bwfojr pBqeOkaSC+NwoH8kmVWUAw81y4iJNvOo0L7xI8jCyggyq7HdDibd6OUJ3b3e2B99 wX5hWgb7o2UdJ6r8X+2m =PPon -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef72be7.8030...@toell.net
Re: RFS: policyd-weight
Hello Arno, thanks for your response. > * I am not sure what you actually want to achieve? It seems you're > trying to NMU policyd-weight 0.1.15.1-2 but we have 0.1.15.1-3 already > in Testing for 8 months. Please make your changes on the latest version > of the package. That also fixes many outdated packaging styles your > package is still relying upon despite of being fixed in Testing. In stable there is still policyd-weight with some open bugs and the current maintainer chris does not have the time to take care about this package any more. With my uploaded package I - principially - wanted to close bug #641227 So my question is: should I go on further with this package? Or should I rely on the packages in Testing? > * You are doing a QA upload, policyd-weight. By definition that's no NMU > but a regular upload. Please update your changelog and change the > version number to 0.1.15.1-4. OK, thanks for the hint. > * It is perfectly fine to do a single QA upload only. However, if you > want you can also officially take over maintainership of that package. > It needs someones help - this could be you. My Upload was just for bug-closing-purposes in the current policyd-weight package in stable. I want to take over the package, but I probably do need some help for the start Thanks Arno and have a nice day, Werner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef70d77.3060...@aloah-from-hell.de
RFS: nuitka (3rd try)
Dear mentors, I am out of review comments for the package: * Package name: nuitka Version : 0.3.17pre2-1 Upstream Author : Kay Hayen * URL : http://nuitka.net * License : GPLv3 Section : python It builds those binary packages: nuitka - Python compiler with full language support and CPython compatible To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/nuitka Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nuitka/nuitka_0.3.17pre2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I believe it relatively is simple package. No real compile time dependencies. Pure Python. Lintian clean. Closes an ITP bug, etc. At Python compile time, it uses g++ and Scons, but without the user noticing. Esp. Nuitka is not itself build with Scons, nor needs the user use it, etc. There is a inline copy of Scons in Nuitka, which is removed for Debian of course, and not in the binary build. I am willing to be a "good" upstream, and have so far made all known modifications to fit better into Debian. Thanks in advance, Kay Hayen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ef6e8f2.6080...@gmx.de
