Re: proposed new pseudo-package 'debian-mentors' for handling sponsoring requests

[Raphael Hertzog]

Hi,

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> We plan to ask for the creation of a new pseudo-package
> debian-mentors or mentors.debian.org [3] (contact:
> debian-mentors@lists.debian.org) in Debian's bug tracking system (the
> name is still subject to change). A workflow for handling sponsoring
> requests is proposed below. It is based on an earlier discussion on the
> debian-mentors list[1].

The proposal looks great. And I like that it will allow us to know more,
and in an automated way, about the status of a current sponsorship request.

That way the PTS can provide more precise information instead of just
telling that a package is available on mentors.debian.net.

To better fit the naming of pseudo-packages, we ought to pick
mentors.debian.org but it would be weird if that DNS entry did not exist.

Dear DSA, do you think it's possible to have a CNAME mentors.debian.org
pointing to mentors.debian.net? It's currently not hosted on a .d.o
machine but AIUI the mentors.debian.net admins are interested to move it
to DSA-managed host at some point.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Pre-order a copy of the Debian Administrator's Handbook and help
liberate it: http://debian-handbook.info/liberation/


-- 
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/20120118074034.gj12...@rivendell.home.ouaza.com

Re: RFS: couriergrey (3rd)

[Marco Balmer]

Dear Gergely,

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 12:38:55AM +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Marco Balmer  writes:
> > Dear Gergely, debian-mentors,
> > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "couriergrey".
> Will have a look this week. Sorry for the delays.

Thank you! - I just updated again the package.
  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/couriergrey/couriergrey_0.3.0.1-1.dsc
  https://github.com/micressor/couriergrey/tree/debian

-marco


signature.asc
Description: GnuPG Signature

Re: RFS: oss-compat (RC bug fix)

[Stephen Kitt]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:41:35 +0800, Paul Wise  wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > I note that the package is installable on hurd-*. AFAICT Hurd doesn't
> > support sound or Alsa so maybe it should not depend on 'hurd' or
> > should switch to architecture linux-any (or linux-all if that
> > existed)?
> 
> The kind folks on #debian-hurd pointed out that kldutils provides
> module-init-tools on kFreeBSD and that it is useful for oss-compat to
> be installable on hurd since other things depend on it (that don't
> nessecarily need OSS at runtime).
> 
> I took the liberty of adding (LP: #340873) to the changelog.

LP#340873 actually corresponds to #518149, which was fixed in 0.0.4+nmu3. I
did notice though that it was still open against Lucid, which already has
0.0.4+nmu3, so I closed it manually there. Thanks for triaging the other
launchpad bugs!

> Uploaded.

Thanks!

Stephen


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

RFS: dwb

[Nathan Owens]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dwb".

 * Package name: dwb
   Version : 2011.10.29-2
   Upstream Author :  Stefan Bolte 
 * URL :  http://bitbucket.org/portix/dwb
 * License : GPL-3
   Section : net

This would close bug #656145 requesting for this package.  It is a 
webkit browser that can use "hints" like vi keys to follow a weblink


It builds those binary packages:

dwb   - lightweight webkit browser

To access further information about this package, please visit the 
following URL:


  http://mentors.debian.net/package/dwb

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dwb/dwb_2011.10.29-2.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/4f164d59.3010...@gmx.us

Re: Packaging proprietary software

[Ivan Reche]

2012/1/18 Ivan Reche 

> Thanks for the tips. It seems like a nice solution.
>
> Where do I find good documentation for the creation of binary packages? I
> couldn't find much material about it, except for an old tutorial (
> http://tldp.org/HOWTO/html_single/Debian-Binary-Package-Building-HOWTO/).
>
> Can someone recommend me a Debian's binary package for use as an example
> to create mine?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ivan
>
>
> 2012/1/16 Ansgar Burchardt 
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> On 01/16/2012 03:27 PM, Ivan Reche wrote:
>>
>>> The package is just a directory with lots of binaries and it likes to
>>> install itself in /opt. Besides that, it needs to set some environment
>>> variables (similar to JAVA_HOME and friends).
>>>
>>> What is the best way to approach this? Do I change the PATH environment
>>> variable to point to, lets say, /opt/bin? Are there problems with
>>> "creating" new environment variables in a package installation?
>>>
>>
>> For site packages, I would install the program to /opt/whatever as it
>> wants and install a wrapper script in /usr/bin that sets the required
>> environment variables and starts the program.  This way users have the
>> program in their $PATH by default and the environment stays clean.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ansgar
>>
>>
>> --
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to 
>> debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.**debian.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>> listmas...@lists.debian.org
>> Archive: 
>> http://lists.debian.org/**4f143c12.10...@debian.org
>>
>>
>
Sorry for the top-posting :(

Re: Packaging proprietary software

[Ivan Reche]

Thanks for the tips. It seems like a nice solution.

Where do I find good documentation for the creation of binary packages? I
couldn't find much material about it, except for an old tutorial (
http://tldp.org/HOWTO/html_single/Debian-Binary-Package-Building-HOWTO/).

Can someone recommend me a Debian's binary package for use as an example to
create mine?

Thanks,

Ivan

2012/1/16 Ansgar Burchardt 

> Hi,
>
>
> On 01/16/2012 03:27 PM, Ivan Reche wrote:
>
>> The package is just a directory with lots of binaries and it likes to
>> install itself in /opt. Besides that, it needs to set some environment
>> variables (similar to JAVA_HOME and friends).
>>
>> What is the best way to approach this? Do I change the PATH environment
>> variable to point to, lets say, /opt/bin? Are there problems with
>> "creating" new environment variables in a package installation?
>>
>
> For site packages, I would install the program to /opt/whatever as it
> wants and install a wrapper script in /usr/bin that sets the required
> environment variables and starts the program.  This way users have the
> program in their $PATH by default and the environment stays clean.
>
> Regards,
> Ansgar
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to 
> debian-mentors-REQUEST@lists.**debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: 
> http://lists.debian.org/**4f143c12.10...@debian.org
>
>

Re: RFS: dmaths

[Jakub Wilk]

* Innocent De Marchi , 2012-01-17, 18:48:

s/rule/rules/ in debian/changelog.

I am sorry; I don't understand this phrase


There's a typo in Debian changelog: you should replace "rule" with 
"rules".


I have a feeling that the new description is not (much) better than 
the old one. Could you please ask at 
debian-l10n-engl...@lists.debian.org for a review?


OK. I have sent a message to the list
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2012/01/msg00051.html).
I have changed the description by the suggestion of Justin B Rye.


Hmm, the package I downloaded a few minutes ago from mentors still has 
the same description...


(I'll reply to the rest of your mail later.)

--
Jakub Wilk


--
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/20120118000406.ga5...@jwilk.net

Re: proposed new pseudo-package 'debian-mentors' for handling sponsoring requests

[Charles Plessy]

Le Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:59:14PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt a écrit :
> SUMMARY
> ===
> 
> We plan to ask for the creation of a new pseudo-package
> debian-mentors or mentors.debian.org [3] (contact:
> debian-mentors@lists.debian.org) in Debian's bug tracking system (the
> name is still subject to change). A workflow for handling sponsoring
> requests is proposed below. It is based on an earlier discussion on the
> debian-mentors list[1].
> 
> The workflow will also be made available on [2].
> 
> [1] 
> 
> [2] 
> [3] mentors.debian.net is not a .org service (yet). We do not intend to
> push its transition by that right now.

Dear Ansgar and everybody,

I think that using a bug tracking system is the way to go.  I have proposed in
the past a worflow for using WNPP bugs, but having a dedicated pseudo-package
would definitely be superior.

Another point of my proposal was to ask that developers who call for
sponsorship try to review at least another package.  Please do not hesitate to
take the idea of you like it.

  http://wiki.debian.org/PackageReview

Have a nice day,

-- 
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


-- 
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/20120117235414.gb26...@merveille.plessy.net

Re: RFS: quickrdp

[Jakub Wilk]

* Jakub Wilk , 2012-01-15, 16:49:

There are some warnings from dpkg-shlibdeps:

dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_aui-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_richtext-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_html-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_baseu_xml-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_qa-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_gtk2u_xrc-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libwx_baseu_net-2.8.so.0 could be avoided if 
"debian/quickrdp/usr/bin/quickrdp" were not uselessly linked against it (they 
use none of its symbols).


It shall be noted that this is a very minor problem. If fixing it is 
difficult, I'm okay with leaving these warnings.


--
Jakub Wilk


--
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/20120117222103.ga9...@jwilk.net

proposed new pseudo-package 'debian-mentors' for handling sponsoring requests

[Ansgar Burchardt]

SUMMARY
===

We plan to ask for the creation of a new pseudo-package
debian-mentors or mentors.debian.org [3] (contact:
debian-mentors@lists.debian.org) in Debian's bug tracking system (the
name is still subject to change). A workflow for handling sponsoring
requests is proposed below. It is based on an earlier discussion on the
debian-mentors list[1].

The workflow will also be made available on [2].

[1] 

[2] 
[3] mentors.debian.net is not a .org service (yet). We do not intend to
push its transition by that right now.

RATIONALE
=

Currently there are three ways to ask for sponsorship of an upload to
the Debian archive: uploads can be requested via a packaging team, via
private mail to a (known) developer or via public mail to the
debian-mentors lists.

Sponsorship in teams can work very well, for example in the Debian Perl
Group, but some other teams do have a lack of developers. For these
people and maintainers of packages that do not fit in any existing team,
the only way to ask for sponsorship is often the third route: the
debian-mentors lists. However the current procedure is (too often?)
disappointing for both sponsorees [1][2], but also for developers who
lost any interest in sponsoring packages.

Problems with the current handling of debian-mentors requests include in
our opinion:

 * RFS mails are lost in space due to the high volume of requests. Many
   requests are ignored or never get any feedback. 
 * Comments and prior reviews may be lost or forgotten, or remain
   unhonoured when the maintainer opens a new RFS thread instead of
   replying to the last.
 * Nobody knows answers to questions such as "how many packages are out
   there which are seeking an uploader" or "what is the status of a
   particular RFS" without looking through mailing list archives.[3]
 * Duplication of comments on the debian-mentors list and
   mentors.debian.net. (those should die anyway, or at least be
   synchronized)

We propose to use the BTS to handle sponsoring requests. Both sponsorees
and sponsors should already be familiar with its usage and we hope it
will improve the sponsoring process for both sides. It will also make it
easier to analyse sponsoring (e.g. number of requests without a
response).

We hope this will make it easier to sponsors to seek requests that still
need attention and encourages more developers to sponsor uploads. We
also hope to encourage peer-review of packages by other non-developers.
Further suggestions on improvements or simply reasons why you do not
sponsor uploads or what other problems you have with the current
procedure or our proposed workflow are of course welcome.

[1] 
[2] 
[3] 

PROPOSED WORKFLOW
=

In general all mails should be sent to the RFS request
(n...@bugs.debian.org). Please also Cc the submitter
(nnn-submit...@bugs.debian.org). A copy will be sent to the mailing list
automatically by the bug tracker.

ASKING FOR SPONSORSHIP
--

Once a source package has been prepared and made available (for example
via [1]), file a new bug report against the debian-mentors
pseudo-package:

  To: sub...@bugs.debian.org
  Subject: RFS: hello/3.1-4 -- friendly greeter

  Package: debian-mentors
  Severity: normal (important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages)

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "hello":

  dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/h/hello/hello_3.1-4.dsc

  It builds these binary packages:

hello - friendly greeter

  More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.example.com.

  Changes since the last upload:

  hello (3.1-4) unstable; urgency=low
  
* Adopt package. (Closes: #123457)
* Fix typo in package description. (Closes: #123456)

   -- J. Maintainer   Sat, 10 Dec 2011 22:17:05 +0100

  Regards,
  J. Maintainer

Please indicate in the subject if the package fixes RC bugs, is a QA or
NMU upload or a new package:

  Subject: RFS: hello/1.0-1 [NEW] -- friendly greeter
  Subject: RFS: hello/1.0-3 [QA] -- friendly greeter
  Subject: RFS: hello/1.0-1.1 [NMU] [RC] -- friendly greeter
  Subject: RFS: hello/1.0-2 [RC] -- friendly greeter

Please keep track of the bug and respond to comments. If the bug was
tagged moreinfo or wontfix and you think you have addressed the issues,
please remove the respective tag again.

If you changed the package to address concerns, please send a follow-up
to the sponsoring request (To: n...@bugs.debian.org) that includes the
URL to the source package and the last changelog entries similar to the
initial request.

If there are issues with the upload after the bug was closed, for
example when the package was rejected by the ar

Re: Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Carlos Borroto]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Peter Samuelson  wrote:
>
> [Peter Samuelson]
>> What appears to be happening is that "config.h" wants to define some
>> stuff that affects how the off_t data type is interpreted, but this
>> fails to happen if you include certain system headers before you define
>> the LFS symbols (I'm talking about the _LARGE_FILES and _FILE_OFFSET_BITS
>> at the bottom of config.h.in).
>
> Forgot to mention: this same issue can cause more insidious bugs that
> may not be caught at link time.  You probably want to audit every
> source file to ensure that, if it includes any system headers, it first
> includes "config.h", directly or indirectly.  See GBase.h for a good
> example where this is done correctly.
>
> Peter

Thanks a lot Peter, I was able to fix this issue using your
suggestion. I also forwarded your email to the tool author, who just
this morning contacted me back and was committed to look into this
issue.

Carlos


--
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/CABgGhB+NPvsq0jBrbCjcmVpnQuVgdoCVKtf4LksyO5=wo6-...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Peter Samuelson]

[Peter Samuelson]
> What appears to be happening is that "config.h" wants to define some
> stuff that affects how the off_t data type is interpreted, but this
> fails to happen if you include certain system headers before you define
> the LFS symbols (I'm talking about the _LARGE_FILES and _FILE_OFFSET_BITS
> at the bottom of config.h.in).

Forgot to mention: this same issue can cause more insidious bugs that
may not be caught at link time.  You probably want to audit every
source file to ensure that, if it includes any system headers, it first
includes "config.h", directly or indirectly.  See GBase.h for a good
example where this is done correctly.

Peter


-- 
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/20120117201255.gb10...@p12n.org

Re: Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Peter Samuelson]

[Carlos Borroto]
> g++ -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2 -DNDEBUG
> -I/usr/include/seqan -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2
> -DNDEBUG   -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -L/usr/lib -o gtf_to_fasta
> GTFToFasta.o FastaTools.o ../src/libtophat.a libgc.a -lbam -lz -lz
> GTFToFasta.o: In function `GFaSeqGet':
> /build/buildd/tophat-1.4.0/src/GFaSeqGet.h:66: undefined reference to
> `GFaSeqGet::finit(char const*, long, bool)'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> make[3]: *** [gtf_to_fasta] Error 1

Try adding a line to the top of GTFToFasta.h right after the include
guard (#ifndef GTFToFasta_H, #define GTFToFasta_H):

#include "config.h"

What appears to be happening is that "config.h" wants to define some
stuff that affects how the off_t data type is interpreted, but this
fails to happen if you include certain system headers before you define
the LFS symbols (I'm talking about the _LARGE_FILES and _FILE_OFFSET_BITS
at the bottom of config.h.in).

Peter


-- 
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/20120117200428.ga10...@p12n.org

Re: Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Carlos Borroto]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Jakub Wilk  wrote:
> * Carlos Borroto , 2012-01-17, 13:45:
>
>> I'm working in a tool named TopHat[1]. It builds correctly on amd64:
>>
>> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89809979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-amd64.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_BUILDING.txt.gz
>>
>> But fails on i386:
>>
>> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89813979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
>>
>> The same happens in a local cowbuilder environment for Debian Sid. The
>> relevant part seems to be:
>> g++ -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2 -DNDEBUG
>> -I/usr/include/seqan -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2
>> -DNDEBUG   -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -L/usr/lib -o gtf_to_fasta
>> GTFToFasta.o FastaTools.o ../src/libtophat.a libgc.a -lbam -lz -lz
>> GTFToFasta.o: In function `GFaSeqGet':
>> /build/buildd/tophat-1.4.0/src/GFaSeqGet.h:66: undefined reference to
>> `GFaSeqGet::finit(char const*, long, bool)'
>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>> make[3]: *** [gtf_to_fasta] Error 1
>
>
> Providing a link to the source package would be helpful.
>

This is a new package not submitted yet, I guess the best I can point you to is:
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-med/tophat.git;a=summary

Thanks for looking into this issue. Please let me know if there is
anything else I could do to make it easier.
Carlos


--
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/CABgGhB+oWcJnWqAFx36j-rAAR6edz96Vx-6t7RuAH9BWT3uc=g...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Jakub Wilk]

* Carlos Borroto , 2012-01-17, 13:45:

I'm working in a tool named TopHat[1]. It builds correctly on amd64:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89809979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-amd64.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_BUILDING.txt.gz

But fails on i386:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89813979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz

The same happens in a local cowbuilder environment for Debian Sid. The
relevant part seems to be:
g++ -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2 -DNDEBUG
-I/usr/include/seqan -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2
-DNDEBUG   -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -L/usr/lib -o gtf_to_fasta
GTFToFasta.o FastaTools.o ../src/libtophat.a libgc.a -lbam -lz -lz
GTFToFasta.o: In function `GFaSeqGet':
/build/buildd/tophat-1.4.0/src/GFaSeqGet.h:66: undefined reference to
`GFaSeqGet::finit(char const*, long, bool)'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[3]: *** [gtf_to_fasta] Error 1


Providing a link to the source package would be helpful.

--
Jakub Wilk


--
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/20120117190701.ga3...@jwilk.net

Package fails to build on i386 with "undefined reference to"

[Carlos Borroto]

Hi all,

My name is Carlos Borroto. I recently joined Debian Med's team to help
packaging several bioinformatics tools. I ran into a problem I would
like get help on.

I'm working in a tool named TopHat[1]. It builds correctly on amd64:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89809979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-amd64.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_BUILDING.txt.gz

But fails on i386:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/89813979/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-i386.tophat_1.4.0-1~oneiric2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz

The same happens in a local cowbuilder environment for Debian Sid. The
relevant part seems to be:
g++ -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2 -DNDEBUG
-I/usr/include/seqan -Wall -Wno-strict-aliasing -march=i686 -O3 -g -O2
-DNDEBUG   -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -L/usr/lib -o gtf_to_fasta
GTFToFasta.o FastaTools.o ../src/libtophat.a libgc.a -lbam -lz -lz
GTFToFasta.o: In function `GFaSeqGet':
/build/buildd/tophat-1.4.0/src/GFaSeqGet.h:66: undefined reference to
`GFaSeqGet::finit(char const*, long, bool)'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[3]: *** [gtf_to_fasta] Error 1

I contacted the authors about this issue, but I haven't received a
response yet. With my limited knowledge I did some digging and it
seems I'm running into an issue similar to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glib2.0/+bug/121461

>From that bug:
"For whatever reason, on i386, the linker expects to link against
"unsigned int", but on both i386 and amd64, the libgtkmm-2.4 libraries
only offer an "unsigned long" version"

Still, I haven't found a way to resolve this issue. Is there anything
I could do beside waiting to see if the authors respond?

Kind regards,
Carlos

[1]http://tophat.cbcb.umd.edu/


-- 
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/CABgGhBK=FBU19cbzF_e8oGUe23r15hG_Sf4XS2861R_7rYG=x...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Re: RFS: dmaths

[Innocent De Marchi]

Hi Daniel,

Thank you very much for your help. I have sent a message to the list
and I already have response
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2012/01/msg00052.html)


Regards!

I. De Marchi


-- 
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/1326822641.22572.1.ca...@debian.demarchi.org

Re: RFS: dmaths

[Innocent De Marchi]

Hi Jakub,

>s/rule/rules/ in debian/changelog.

I am sorry; I don't understand this phrase

>I have a feeling that the new description is not (much) better
than the >old one. Could you please ask at
debian-l10n-engl...@lists.debian.org >for a review? 

OK. I have sent a message to the list
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-l10n-english/2012/01/msg00051.html).
I have changed the description by the suggestion of Justin B Rye.

>What does dmaths.patch do? Could add a header to it, e.g. in
DEP-3 >format? You probably want to remove the “Binary files …
differ” >from the patch, as it obviously cannot be applied
anyway. 

The patch removes a window from acceptance of license.I've added the
header  and remove the “Binary files … differ”.

>Why do you ignore errors from “rm -Rf tmp” in the clean target?

I do not see this command errors. Do mistakes see you?

>Your copyright file seems to refer to files that don't exist in
the >source package. 

I have reviewed and have seen two directories that belonged bad writing.
Have you ever seen something else?

>How was the tarball repackaged? There's no get-orig-source
target >in debian/rules, and there's no README.source either
(please see >Policy §4.14, point 4).

OK. Added file README.source

>Lintian emits:
>P: dmaths source: unknown-copyright-format-uri
>http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dep/web/deps/
dep5.mdwn?op=file&rev=135
>(Well, lintian probably should have emitted something else. But
the >URI _is_ broken, in at least two meanings of this word. :P)

OK. Fixed.

>It also emits tons of image-file-in-usr-lib. Is that really
>unfixable?

Honestly, not what is. I think that not because of the operation of
the .oxt files. I've watched the OpenOffice documentation but nothing
found.
I are some tests to check whether it is possible.

>Why are windows-thumbnail-database-in-package overridden?

There are several "Thumbs.db" files into icons directories in the
sources. It will be better to remove them from the sources?

Thank you very much for your thorough review of the package.

The revised package is now in debian.mentors
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dmaths/dmaths_3.4.2
+dfsg1-1.dsc

Regards!

I. De Marchi


-- 
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/1326822485.22516.15.ca...@debian.demarchi.org

Re: RFS: parcellite 1.0.2~rc5-1 (updated package)

[Andrew Starr-Bochicchio]

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio
 wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Ansgar Burchardt  wrote:
>> Andrew Starr-Bochicchio  writes:
>>> Sigh... Any one feel giving me a Christmas present? Still builds in a
>>> clean sid chroot, still is lintian clean, and still fixes a bug
>>> reported by a Debian user.
>  dget -x 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/parcellite/parcellite_1.0.2~rc5-1.dsc

Sponsored off list.

Thanks all!

-- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio

   Ubuntu Developer 
   Debian Maintainer

   PGP/GPG Key ID: D53FDCB1


--
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/CAL6k_AwzLKKj1dQO+TyKcxH2EzMr2vLf3WkhKPSt=avma7h...@mail.gmail.com

RFS: tupi -- 2D Animation design and authoring tool

[Dmitry Smirnov]

Dear mentors,

I'm still looking for a sponsor for package "tupi".

#
 Tupi: 2D Magic is a design and authoring tool for digital artists interested
 in 2D Animation, offering an interface experience focused on 8-100 years old
 kids. It's source code is based on the KTooN project.
 .
 Some of its main features are: basic illustration tools (shapes, fill, text),
 gradient tools, onion skin, brushes editor, pencil with smoothness support,
 basic object library (for svg files and raster images) and many others.
 .
 Using its modules of Animation and Reproduction you can export 2D projects
 to several formats as OGG, MPEG, AVI, MOV and SWF. Additionally, the
 option of exporting Image arrays as output is available.
#

This is a new version just released by upstream who also kindly provided a 
long description (above).

Tupi replaces Debian package 'ktoon', which is orphaned in Debian 
(see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/619741) and apparently not maintained by 
upstream anymore.


 * Source package URL :

http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/tupi/tupi_0.1+git12-1.dsc

 * Package name: tupi
 * Version : 0.1+git12-1
 * Upstream Author : Gustav Gonzalez 
 * Homepage: http://www.maefloresta.com/
 * License : GPL-3+
 * Section : graphics
 * Language: CPP
 * Description : 2D Animation design and authoring tool


 * QA information:

Info:   Package is Lintian clean
Info:   Package is not native
Info:   The maintainer and uploader emails are the same
Info:   Package is the latest upstream version
Info:   A watch file is present
Info:   The watch file works
Info:   The package uses straight debhelper
Info:   Closes WNPP bug #619741: "O: ktoon -- 2D animation toolkit"
Info:   Closes WNPP bug #650734: "ITP: tupi -- 2D Animation design and 
authoring tool"


 * debian/changelog:

tupi (0.1+git12-1) unstable; urgency=low

  * Debian release. (Closes: #650734, #619741)
  * New upstream release (2012-01-01)
  * debian/control:
+ Replaces: ktoon
+ Long description kindly provided by upstream
  * debian/rules
+ clean autogenerated files
+ provide LDFLAGS / --as-needed to avoid needless linking
  * debian/copyright: minor reformatting
  * debian/ cleanup
  * patch to fix FTBFS with libav-0.8


To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

http://mentors.debian.net/package/tupi


Thank you.

Dmitry.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: RFS: libapache2-mod-rpaf

[Boris Pek]

>>>  For example, that was not "a very first upload" (of mod_rpaf) for me.
>>>  But next time I should convince new sponsor and so on.
>>  That's unfortunate, but this happens. I'm sorry for you, and I made
>>  similar experiences.
>
> It's just too common to be "the default route".
>
>>  I know what you mean. I am a Debian Maintainer by myself and I'm in the
>>  same situation as you are. Several Debian developers are perhaps quite
>>  annoyed by me as well, as I was complaining a lot about the sponsor
>>  situation in Debian in the past.
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/05/msg00753.html
> This one?

Hmm, it was very interesting thread [1]. Thank you for a link.

Best regards,
Boris


[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/05/thrd2.html#00753


-- 
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/793781326810...@web148.yandex.ru

Re: Re-review request/RFS for current packaging of Red Eclipse

[Martin Erik Werner]

On Tue, 2012-01-17 at 09:47 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 6:37 AM, Martin Erik Werner wrote:
> 
> > Hello again, upstream has now released Red Eclipse 1.2 and hence this is
> > partly a RFS, partly a re-review request.
> ...
> > [1]
> > Is this motivation good enough for not using stand-alone Enet?
> 
> Hmm, I don't have a good answer for that.

I'm hesitant, but I think I'll go with embedded Enet for now, given the
indications from upstream.

(...)
> > [4]
> > List of duplicates have been forwarded, but it's mostly a wontfix since
> > linking isn't as easy on windows.
> 
> What about removing the dupes and only referring to the remaining files?

The given explanation was[0]:
> Some files are made available for modding purposes, the rest are
> impossible to symlink on all platforms. Distribution packagers are
> free to symlink files in individual packages, but this cannot be done
> on a project-wide scale.

The modding aspect is a reasonable argument for keeping the alternate
files separate (they could be different, but aren't currently), I could
symlink it all for Debian, and the gain would be about 1.3M, do you
think I should?

I have updated the packaging a bit since the re-review/RFS request, a
few typos, syntax, and style fixes. For each of the git repositories[1]
$ git log --since=debian/1.2_RFS
$ git diff debian/1.2_RFS
should list the changes, I have tagged the state of the repos as of this
email with "debian/1.2_RFS2".

Do you think these packages might be almost good to go? Would you be
willing to sponsor them at that point?

[0] http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/redeclipse/ticket/89
[1] (Once Alioth is up:)
 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-games/cube2font.git
 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-games/redeclipse.git
 http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-games/redeclipse-data.git
Also re-uploaded to mentors:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/cube2font
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cube2font/cube2font_1.2-1.dsc
http://mentors.debian.net/package/redeclipse
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/r/redeclipse/redeclipse_1.2-1.dsc
http://mentors.debian.net/package/redeclipse-data
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/non-free/r/redeclipse-data/redeclipse-data_1.2-1.dsc

-- 
Martin Erik Werner 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: How mature is Pkg-format 3.0 (git), yet?

[Thijs Kinkhorst]

On Mon, January 16, 2012 23:26, Paul Wise wrote:
>> I just wanted to ask how mature Package-format 3.0 (git) became until
>> now.
>
> It is not currently accepted by the Debian archive:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/642801

My experience until now is that it's mature in dpkg. It does the job just
like other source formats, for me.

It's indeed not accepted in the Debian archive and also tools like Lintian
don't support it. So it depends on your goals whether you can call it
mature. It works very well for a local package I maintain.


Thijs


-- 
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/8054b018669e4f81a61abc780bf05594.squir...@wm.kinkhorst.nl

Re: RFS: shaarli

[Emilien Klein]

Hi Paul,

2012/1/16 Paul Wise :
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 6:10 AM, Emilien Klein wrote:
>
>> I've worked with upstream Shaarli to fix the issue with the inclusion
>> of the minified jQuery files. Upstream has released a tarball that
>> uses the jQuery CDN instead of the local minified files (which have
>> been removed from the archive)
>
> That isn't a good idea either since it breaks when users of it have
> network access to the software but no general Internet access to get
> to the jQuery CDN. Much better would be to depend on the Debian
> package of jQuery and use that.

I've now patched the package to depend and use the Debian package of
jQuery instead of the CDN. It is uploaded to mentors:
http://mentors.debian.net/package/shaarli

Thanks for reviewing it.
+Emilien


-- 
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/canqxmqfyjx5ath-nd9hxn4jkamhhyxvqkpsgxf+srylzirz...@mail.gmail.com

Re: How to handle software which needs huge modification when packaging for Debian

[Alexander Reichle-Schmehl]

Hi!

Am 17.01.2012 02:55, schrieb Adam Borowski:

> Even binaries that don't have their sources in this package but are
> shipped somewhere else in Debian are ok.

Sorry, but written that way it is wrong.. Or at least could be
interpreted wrong.  For _everything_ Debian ships in main we must have
the corresponding source code.  That means unless you are really,
really, really sure, that your binary in package a is really build with
sources from package b it's not okay. (Some packages build on a specific
foo-source package and therefore use an other packages sources, that's
tricky but okay.)


Best regards,
  Alexander



-- 
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/4f1548d6.8030...@debian.org

Re: RFS: shaarli

[Arno Töll]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

On 16.01.2012 23:30, Paul Wise wrote:
> Much better would be to depend on the Debian
> package of jQuery and use that.

Indeed. But that's a simple change, since upstream uses an unmodified
third party source now.


- -- 
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/
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=xqHb
-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/4f15485f.3000...@toell.net

Re: dput only .dsc file is uploaded .

[Alex Mestiashvili]

Dear Daniel ,
Thank you a lot , it helped !

Alex

On 01/17/2012 10:04 AM, Daniel Martí wrote:
> Make sure the .orig.tar.gz and .debian.tar.gz are correctly named, and
> if you are just doing a debian update (e.g. upstream.version-2) make
> sure to build the package with dpkg-buildpackage -sa. Then, dput
> mentors *.changes should do the trick.
>
> Alex Mestiashvili  wrote:
>
> Hi All ,
>
> I run into a problem with package upload to mentors .
> It seems to me that only dsc file is uploaded .
>
> I've recently uploaded a new version of  my package libpam-abl and after
> upload noticed that QA information section had many error messages . The
> problem was that time on my lxc container I used for packaging was wrong
> and I was getting messages from tar about time stamps in the future ...
>
> I fixed that problem and rebuilt the package .
> But before the upload I decided to delete the package with wrong
> timestamps , so I deleted the most recent package via web interface .
> After that I uploaded the new one with the same version .
>
> But now dget gives me the following
> dget
> 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
> dget: retrieving
> 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
>   % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
> Current
>  Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
> Speed
> 100  1916  100  19160 0  46894  0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--
> 91238
> dget: retrieving
> 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
>   % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
> Current
>  
> 
> Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
> Speed
>   0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:--
> --:--:-- 0
> curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404
> dget: curl libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
> 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
> failed
> libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc:
>   Good signature found
>skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2 (not present)
>skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.debian.tar.gz (not present)
> dscverify: libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc didn't specify any files present locally
> Validation FAILED!!
>
> I tried to upload several times , but it doesn't help
> I get messages that upload is successful and mail notification
> afterwards , but nothing changes .
>
> Could anybody tell me what I'm doing wrong ?
>
> Best rega
>  rds
> ,
> Alex
>
> 
>


-- 
Alexandre Mestiashvili
System Administrator 
Bioinformatics group, TU-Dresden, Biotec
Tatzberg 47-51
01307 Dresden Germany
Phone: +49-351-463-40070
Email: alexander.mestiashv...@biotec.tu-dresden.de

Re: Re: RFS: libapache2-mod-rpaf

[Sergey B Kirpichev]

> On 16.01.2012 23:57, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>> For example, that was not "a very first upload" (of mod_rpaf) for me.
>> But next time I should convince new sponsor and so on.
>
> That's unfortunate, but this happens. I'm sorry for you, and I made
> similar experiences.

It's just too common to be "the default route".

> I know what you mean. I am a Debian Maintainer by myself and I'm in the
> same situation as you are. Several Debian developers are perhaps quite
> annoyed by me as well, as I was complaining a lot about the sponsor
> situation in Debian in the past.

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/05/msg00753.html
This one?

> But please understand, the Debian Maintainer status does not guarantee
> you privileged access to Debian archives just because you have been
> advocated to such a role. It only means you went through a simple
> procedure where someone confirmed you have some skills and you deserve
> to work a bit more autonomously.

Let's see.  I've a bunch of apache2 modules, where DMUA already
allowed.  Do you think it's a good idea to confirm my skill again just
for packaging a new module (and in comparison, a very simple one)?
The same is valid for php-memcached.

Second, every DD has own standards of "the simple procedure".  Does it
make sense to go through NM "Tasks and Skills" process every time you
do some packaging work for Debian?

Probably, DD familar with me, can more easily set DMUA header (again,
that is my expirience).  It is not a good idea to abuse people you
know (they may be not interested in this particular pice of software,
after all).  So, you have dilemma: annoy people in private or ask for
upload in d-m@l.d.o and start the game again.

> However, I am sure one ore two more uploads of your package will change
> the situation again for you.

I don't think so.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: dput only .dsc file is uploaded .

[Daniel Martí]

Make sure the .orig.tar.gz and .debian.tar.gz are correctly named, and if you 
are just doing a debian update (e.g. upstream.version-2) make sure to build the 
package with dpkg-buildpackage -sa. Then, dput mentors *.changes should do the 
trick.

Alex Mestiashvili  wrote:

>Hi All ,
>
>I run into a problem with package upload to mentors .
>It seems to me that only dsc file is uploaded .
>
>I've recently uploaded a new version of  my package libpam-abl and
>after
>upload noticed that QA information section had many error messages .
>The
>problem was that time on my lxc container I used for packaging was
>wrong
>and I was getting messages from tar about time stamps in the future ...
>
>I fixed that problem and rebuilt the package .
>But before the upload I decided to delete the package with wrong
>timestamps , so I deleted the most recent package via web interface .
>After that I uploaded the new one with the same version .
>
>But now dget gives me the following
>dget
>http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
>dget: retrieving
>http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
>  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
>Current
> Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
>Speed
>100  1916  100  19160 0  46894  0 --:--:-- --:--:--
>--:--:--
>91238
>dget: retrieving
>http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
>  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
>Current
> Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
>Speed
>  0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:--
>--:--:-- 0
>curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404
>dget: curl libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
>http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
>failed
>libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc:
>  Good signature found
>   skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2 (not present)
>   skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.debian.tar.gz (not present)
>dscverify: libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc didn't specify any files present
>locally
>Validation FAILED!!
>
>I tried to upload several times , but it doesn't help
>I get messages that upload is successful and mail notification
>afterwards , but nothing changes .
>
>Could anybody tell me what I'm doing wrong ?
>
>Best regards ,
>Alex
>
>
>-- 
>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/4f1538b0.6000...@biotec.tu-dresden.de

dput only .dsc file is uploaded .

[Alex Mestiashvili]

Hi All ,

I run into a problem with package upload to mentors .
It seems to me that only dsc file is uploaded .

I've recently uploaded a new version of  my package libpam-abl and after
upload noticed that QA information section had many error messages . The
problem was that time on my lxc container I used for packaging was wrong
and I was getting messages from tar about time stamps in the future ...

I fixed that problem and rebuilt the package .
But before the upload I decided to delete the package with wrong
timestamps , so I deleted the most recent package via web interface .
After that I uploaded the new one with the same version .

But now dget gives me the following
dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
dget: retrieving
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc
  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
Current
 Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
Speed
100  1916  100  19160 0  46894  0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--
91238
dget: retrieving
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
  % Total% Received % Xferd  Average Speed   TimeTime Time 
Current
 Dload  Upload   Total   SpentLeft 
Speed
  0 00 00 0  0  0 --:--:-- --:--:--
--:--:-- 0
curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404
dget: curl libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libp/libpam-abl/libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2
failed
libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc:
  Good signature found
   skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2.orig.tar.bz2 (not present)
   skipping  libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.debian.tar.gz (not present)
dscverify: libpam-abl_0.4.2-2.dsc didn't specify any files present locally
Validation FAILED!!

I tried to upload several times , but it doesn't help
I get messages that upload is successful and mail notification
afterwards , but nothing changes .

Could anybody tell me what I'm doing wrong ?

Best regards ,
Alex


-- 
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/4f1538b0.6000...@biotec.tu-dresden.de