Re: dpkg-source and ignore everything outside of debian/
El Jueves, 22 de Diciembre de 2005 17:15, Christoph Berg escribió: > Re: Alejandro Exojo in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I'm trying to generate a diff.gz in which only the debian/ directory is > > included. > > filterdiff -z -i '*/debian/*' Thanks for the suggestions. Unfortunately, this one will break the .dsc file. I was hoping to find a solution using just dpkg-source. I've looked at its code, and if understood it properly (I'm a perl begginner), this is not possible, since the regexp is applied only to the filename, not the path. Thanks anyway. :) Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dpkg-source and ignore everything outside of debian/
Hi. I'm trying to generate a diff.gz in which only the debian/ directory is included. My package contains some patches for Makefile.am in debian/patches, but when the source is cleaned, the patches unapplied, and the Makefile.in are regenerated, there are differences between the original ones, and the regenerated, because they come from different automake versions. The only workaround I found, is unpack the orig.tar.gz, copy the debian/ directory to the tree (which I have stored under version control), and _then_ and only then, generate the source package with -i, which already skips the ".svn" dirs, etc. I'm trying to add a regular expression to the "-i" option to skip anything outside the debian directory, but I can't find the right one. :( Any suggestion is very welcome. Thanks in advance. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Minimum copyright / author information
El Jueves, 7 de Abril de 2005 07:56, Rudy Godoy escribiÃ: > I don't think he needs to put such statements on each source image, > providen that he puts a license for the whole artwork or for each one > in a LICENSE file or something. Thank you Rudy. I will tell that to upstream. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minimum copyright / author information
Hi. I'm packaging a set of emoticons for KDE. At this moment, is just for my own use, and for those who find them useful, but I'm considering that if the package is interesting enough for Debian, the original tarball will need more information which is not provided at the moment. The upstream page is: http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=10554 In that page, it says the license is GPL, with a link to the FSF page with the GNU GPL license, etc, but in the tarball there isn't any information about the autor, the copyright, etc. Just the icons in SVG and PNG. I suppose I will have to ask upstream about at least include the license, and the copyright information in it, but should I demand him more things? For example, the source is in SVG. Should be any notice in each source image? Anything else? Thanks in advance. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: public domain
El Miércoles, 30 de Marzo de 2005 09:26, Carlos Parra escribió: > Hello, > I'd like to package a program that's licensed under "public domain". > I've been talking with the autor and says that he likes also BSD-style > license... > > The change of license is necesary to get into the main archive, isnt > it? No. See for example, the copyright of sqlite: This package was debianized by Andreas Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 26 Sep 2001 17:00:18 +0200. It was downloaded from http://www.sqlite.org. Upstream Author: D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Copyright: The author disclaims all copyright. The library is in the public domain. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: copyright and license missing?
El Sábado, 12 de Marzo de 2005 10:49, Qingning Huo escribió: > I am working on these two packages: libtorrent and rtorrent [1]. There > are no copyright claims on any source files or README files. There is > only an AUTHORS file with the name and email of the author. On the > other hand, it is indicated on the website that the software is > "Licensed under the GPL", but I can find nowhere in the source tarball > saying so. There is a COPYING file (GPLv2) though. IMHO, _is_ a problem. If I publish tomorrow the Good Personal License, I can say that the author wants to distribute the program under the terms on my license. And note that sometimes one uses different licenses in the same tarball (for example, for documentation). -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: pdf files in upstream tarball and -doc package
El Viernes, 11 de Febrero de 2005 17:21, Jay Berkenbilt escribiÃ: > That isn't to say that it is impossible to create a security hole > through a PDF file, but it's more comparable to html in that respect > than to PostScript. ÂIn other words, you could include a malicious > link or put invalid PDF data that would exploit a security hole in a > specific PDF viewer, but you can't actually embed malicious code. Really? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=110470798901386&w=2 I'm a PDF ignorant, so maybe I misunderstood something. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFC: KBoincSpy package
El Sábado, 22 de Enero de 2005 22:14, Frank S. Thomas escribió: > Hi mentors, > > I have packaged KBoincSpy[0] for Debian. KBoincSpy is a KDE based > monitoring utility for the BOINC[1] client. BOINC itself is the software > platform for distributed computing that is used by projects like [EMAIL > PROTECTED], > Climateprediction.net or [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > KBoincSpy is the successor of KSetiSpy, a monitoring utility for the old > classic [EMAIL PROTECTED] client, and IMHO the best BOINC GUI for Unix-like > operating systems. Its plugin based design makes it very flexible and the > use of KIO slaves even let you monitor remote clients. I remember with happiness when I was new to free software, and used seti at home, and KSetiSpy. I liked it a lot, and KBoincSpy looks greater, now that the framework is free software. I hope you have time to make KBoincSpy enter Debian. Since I don't see replies in debian-mentors to your request, I suggest you to also ask for a sponsor in debian-qt-kde, or a debian mailinglist in your language, if exists (in my case I have debian-devel-spanish :-)). > As I said before, I have packaged KBoincSpy for Debian and would > appreciate it if someone could have a look at this package. Source and > binary-i386 packages are available at my private repository: > > deb http://www.thomas-alfeld.de/frank/download/debian/ ./ > deb-src http://www.thomas-alfeld.de/frank/download/debian/ ./ Unfortunately, I'm not a Debian Developer, so I can not sponsor you, but I have some small comments: - You include some changes directly in the diff; some are generated, like the ones in Makefile.in's, and some in cpp sources. For some people, is OK to include the files generated by automake and autoconf (thiw way, you don't need to build-depend on them), but I don't see a good idea to modify directly the sources. Normally a sponsor will check better for malicious or improper changes if you don't modify directly the sources. I suggest you to create a patchsystem, and put your changes in debian/patches. You can use other package as a example. I copied a lot of code of the KDE packages in kxmleditor. - The package recommends boinc-client, but where is this package available? A comment in the description, or in README.Debian, will be great for a BOINC newbie. - The override for 'desktop-file-in-wrong-dir' is unneeded if you patch the Makefile.am for installing in the xdg_apps directory (which is correct, of course). It was a small lintian bug, and in the next version, will not complain about the other desktop files. Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Patching the upstream sources, and the debian diff
El Jueves, 30 de Diciembre de 2004 10:39, martin f krafft escribió: > also sprach Alejandro Exojo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.12.30.1031 +0100]: > > > Ideally, "source" packages would contain only true man-written > > > sources. If your diff is big because generated files are being > > > changed, then have ./debian/rules:clean target remove them. Then, > > > dpkg-buildpackage will warn "file deleted", but that's okay. > > > > OK. > > This will not decrease the size of the source package, since > whatever you delete in the clean target will not remove the files > from the .orig.tar.gz file. Yes, but what I wanted, is remove the generated files from the diff.gz, because they will be generated again at build time. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Patching the upstream sources, and the debian diff
El Lunes, 27 de Diciembre de 2004 03:29, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh escribió: > There is no "proper" way. You have two good choices, and one bad choice > IMHO (and I do have a lot of experience on this :P): (...) > 2. Patch the autotools files (*.in, *.am) at build time, make sure all > the build dependencies are 100% correct (hint: conflicting with > autoconf2.13 is *always* a good idea if you're not using autoconf 2.13 > and automake 1.4). This means that the autobuilders will have to > rerun the entire thing, and so will the users, etc. (...) I finally did 2. If the source package is generated in the first run of dpkg-buildpackage, Makefile.ins are not included because they don't change (the unpatching, doesn't modifies them, because are freshly unpacked). > Linda and lintian can only do so much. Have a look on AM_MAINTAINER_MODE, > btw. And read that README.Debian from autotools-dev ;-) I've already read that README some time ago, but after a recent reread, some things are more clear now. ;-) Thanks a lot. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Patching the upstream sources, and the debian diff
El Lunes, 27 de Diciembre de 2004 03:07, Justin Pryzby escribió: > debuild is the frontend of frontends; try that. Thanks, I will try it. > > - Are not correct the packages that include generated files in the diff? > > Ideally, "source" packages would contain only true man-written > sources. If your diff is big because generated files are being > changed, then have ./debian/rules:clean target remove them. Then, > dpkg-buildpackage will warn "file deleted", but that's okay. OK. > Just curious; why do you have to regenerate it? Because upstream included a Makefile.am with wrong installation paths, and some bad written rules, so I included a small patch for it. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Patching the upstream sources, and the debian diff
Hi. I've been working this days in Debian packaging, and it was the first time I needed to patch the upstream sources, more especifically, the Makefile.am. I studied the patching stuff from other packages, and then, added the relevant lines to my debian/rules, and the patches to debian/patches/. I've been always building the source and the binary with dpkg-buildpackage, and I was happy with that. But this time, since before the dpkg-source -b, the clean target is called, the patches are unapplied, and automake is called again. This generates different Makefile.in's from the ones that upstream provides, because upstream used automake 1.7.6 and unstable now haves 1.7.9 (in automake1.7). This differences are now added to the diff.gz, but this doesn't sounds to me the proper way. What I did to create this package, was to add stuff inside debian/, so I tried to: extract the original sources, add the debian directory, and inmediately, run dpkg-source -b, before doing anything that calls the clean target of debian/rules. This created a diff with the contents I expected, and instead of 15K, it was just 5K. However, looking at other packages, I see huge diffs with more than 300K, and including lots of generated stuff. So here are my questions: - Is there a preferred way of generating the source and/or the binary package? - Are not correct the packages that include generated files in the diff? Thanks a lot. PS: Grrr, and linda says it's a warning to Build-Depend on automake*, when clearly many packages have to regenerate their Makefile.in. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Order of package removal
El Miércoles, 15 de Diciembre de 2004 15:43, Frank Küster escribió: > Is it possible to combine removing one package with purging an other one > in the same apt (aptitude, whatever) run, by any means? Yes, the easiest way, is with aptitude in GUI mode. Place the cursor on the package you want to remove, then press "-", and then in the package you want to purge, and press "_". To perform scheduled actions, press "g", and "g" again. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[RFS, RFA] kxmleditor: XML Editor for KDE (2nd try)
Hi. I sent a request for a sponsor for this package, some months ago. The package is up for adoption (bug #255299); his mantainer isn't interested anymore in this package, and some upstream releases have been produced since the last time he could upload a package. He finally packaged the last upstream release, so I merged his work with my previous one, and we two hope that I can find a sponsor, so the package is well mantained again, and he isn't bored anymore with a package that doesn't interests him. From the changes file: Changes: kxmleditor (1.1.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release (Closes: #277487). * New mantainer (Closes: #255299), thanks Mike for the previous work. * Revert changes from Frank Lichtenheld's NMU. They are not needed with latest upstream. * debian/watch: Added a watch file for DEHS (by Mike Hommey). * debian/control: - Corrected the description by a native English speaker. ;-) - Moved section from "editors" to "kde". - Updated "Build-Depends" (changed libqt3-compat-headers to qt3-dev-tools greater than 3.3, because contains files created with designer 3.3). * debian/copyright: Reflex the work of all mantainers, and added the excerpt of the GPL. * debian/menu: Quoted all entries, and deleted obsolete "kderemove". * Changed DH_COMPAT to debian/compat. * debian/rules: minor change. * shlibs.local: file removed, isn't necessary anymore. Files: cee01095c9be191bf167d3885314af0a 620 kde optional kxmleditor_1.1.3-1.dsc 0edae2359e6260524481b920d58580da 1308240 kde optional kxmleditor_1.1.3.orig.tar.gz 3ed7f19bb768f93cf2dad56da3876a9f 4526 kde optional kxmleditor_1.1.3-1.diff.gz ffc57081dd7bb28fc3ad40f6dd76e4ab 818788 kde optional kxmleditor_1.1.3-1_i386.deb The package can be fetched at: http://darkshines.net/debian/dists/unstable/kxmleditor/source/ ...and it is linda and lintian clean. It only haves one lintian warning, because upstream includes recursively one subdirectory, and forgots to remove the CVS dir. Thanks in advance. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 21:48, Manoj Srivastava escribió: > At this point, I have not seen the OP do anything that they > ought not to have done, and I have no idea what circumstances they > were dealing with -- they may not have a choice about the OS/MUA at > this point. We should be inviting to people who are trying to help > Debian while not yet on a free platform, rather than exposing our own > prejudices and pre-judgements. First of all, sorry if went a bit off-topic previously. My only intention was to show, that it isn't that strange to find funny, strange or curious, the use of a propietary mailer for asking for a sponsor. I didn't wanted to convince anyone that he is right or wrong, just to explain reasons that shouldn't be that strange in this context. That's all I have to add to this thread. ;-) -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpvWaUH54Xzr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 21:48, Manoj Srivastava escribió: > At this point, I have not seen the OP do anything that they > ought not to have done, and I have no idea what circumstances they > were dealing with -- they may not have a choice about the OS/MUA at > this point. We should be inviting to people who are trying to help > Debian while not yet on a free platform, rather than exposing our own > prejudices and pre-judgements. First of all, sorry if went a bit off-topic previously. My only intention was to show, that it isn't that strange to find funny, strange or curious, the use of a propietary mailer for asking for a sponsor. I didn't wanted to convince anyone that he is right or wrong, just to explain reasons that shouldn't be that strange in this context. That's all I have to add to this thread. ;-) -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpGypXxU441e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 15:25, martin f krafft escribió: > Chill. First, it is trivial to create Debian packages even on > Windows, and second... it's a mail client. I am also not complaining > that you use KMail, am I? I think it's bloat and does not provide > some important features. No, I am not elaborating or discussing > this. You must admit that is not very common to create Debian packages outside of Debian, isn't it? At least, if you are supposed to test a package, you should use a clean environment, and winbugs is not the cleanest environment I can imagine. ;-) About Outlook: it's propietary software. For me it's not a matter of taste or technichal reasons (mutt vs. kmail vs. evolution vs. thunderbird...), it's a matter of commitment with free software. > > Also is a great source of viruses and worms. :-( > > So? Do you/we care? Yes, when it fills my mailbox with junk, and makes me waste resources for deleting them. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 14:53, David Moreno Garza escribió: > On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 09:03 +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote: > > > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 > > > > Really, I don't want to flame but I cannot resist to point out that a > > "want-to-be" Debian Maintainer uses such a mailer... > > Who cares? Probably that works for him. It's propietary software that runs only in a propietary OS, in which is pretty hard to create Debian packages. ;-) Also is a great source of viruses and worms. :-( -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 15:25, martin f krafft escribió: > Chill. First, it is trivial to create Debian packages even on > Windows, and second... it's a mail client. I am also not complaining > that you use KMail, am I? I think it's bloat and does not provide > some important features. No, I am not elaborating or discussing > this. You must admit that is not very common to create Debian packages outside of Debian, isn't it? At least, if you are supposed to test a package, you should use a clean environment, and winbugs is not the cleanest environment I can imagine. ;-) About Outlook: it's propietary software. For me it's not a matter of taste or technichal reasons (mutt vs. kmail vs. evolution vs. thunderbird...), it's a matter of commitment with free software. > > Also is a great source of viruses and worms. :-( > > So? Do you/we care? Yes, when it fills my mailbox with junk, and makes me waste resources for deleting them. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: looking for a sponsor
El Jueves, 21 de Octubre de 2004 14:53, David Moreno Garza escribió: > On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 09:03 +0200, Alexis Sukrieh wrote: > > > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 > > > > Really, I don't want to flame but I cannot resist to point out that a > > "want-to-be" Debian Maintainer uses such a mailer... > > Who cares? Probably that works for him. It's propietary software that runs only in a propietary OS, in which is pretty hard to create Debian packages. ;-) Also is a great source of viruses and worms. :-( -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: GTorrentViewer - a BitTorrent MetaFiles viewer/editor.
El Jueves, 30 de Septiembre de 2004 09:04, Ap0lly0n Source Forge escribió: > On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 00:15, Alexey Nezhdanov wrote: > > В сообщении от Четверг 30 Сентябрь 2004 08:10 Ap0lly0n Source Forge > > > > написал(a): > > > Hi, I would like to ask for a mentor for a program i am woking on. I > > > named it GTorrentViewer. > > > > Try to show the packages that you've prepared. > > sorry, i didn't mention that the package is in the project page: > > http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/gtorrentviewer/gtorrentviewer_0.1-1_i386 >.deb?download The _source_ package: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: GTorrentViewer - a BitTorrent MetaFiles viewer/editor.
El Jueves, 30 de Septiembre de 2004 09:04, Ap0lly0n Source Forge escribiÃ: > On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 00:15, Alexey Nezhdanov wrote: > > Ð ÑÐÐÐÑ ÐÑ ÐÐÑÐÐÑÐ 30 ÐÐÐÑÑÐÑÑ 2004 08:10 Ap0lly0n > > Source Forge > > > > ÑÐÐ(a): > > > Hi, I would like to ask for a mentor for a program i am woking on. I > > > named it GTorrentViewer. > > > > Try to show the packages that you've prepared. > > sorry, i didn't mention that the package is in the project page: > > http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/gtorrentviewer/gtorrentviewer_0.1-1_i386 >.deb?download The _source_ package: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Nepalifonts deb package needs a sponsor
El Miércoles, 8 de Septiembre de 2004 04:14, brett hartshorn escribió: > I have put together a .deb that installs the Nepali language fonts. These > are the offical unicode fonts provided by The Madan Puraskar Pustakalaya > (http://www.mpp.org.np/). > > The deb file can be downloaded from > http://opart.org/debian/nepalifonts_0.1.deb > > Or you can apt-get it from me by adding opart.org to your sources. > echo "deb http://opart.org/debian/ ./" >> /etc/apt/sources.list > apt-get update > apt-get install nepalifonts Please, read this document: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html You forgot many things: mainly, that is a lot more important the source package that the binary one; license of the package, etc. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Nepalifonts deb package needs a sponsor
El Miércoles, 8 de Septiembre de 2004 04:14, brett hartshorn escribió: > I have put together a .deb that installs the Nepali language fonts. These > are the offical unicode fonts provided by The Madan Puraskar Pustakalaya > (http://www.mpp.org.np/). > > The deb file can be downloaded from > http://opart.org/debian/nepalifonts_0.1.deb > > Or you can apt-get it from me by adding opart.org to your sources. > echo "deb http://opart.org/debian/ ./" >> /etc/apt/sources.list > apt-get update > apt-get install nepalifonts Please, read this document: http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html You forgot many things: mainly, that is a lot more important the source package that the binary one; license of the package, etc. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: kubication -- KDE network configuration selector
El Viernes, 3 de Septiembre de 2004 06:23, Luciano Bello escribió: > * URL :http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=14847 Read at the bottom of the description: 8<- This is the last release of Kubication. I've discontinued it because i've started writing a KDE daemon controled by a KControl Center Module for replacing Kubication, which IMHO is a much better solution. I expect to release it within one or two weeks. Anyway, if you find any bug in Kubication, please report it, because part of Kubication source code will be used in the KDE daemon. >8- If upstream is no longer supporting this package, I think it should not enter debian. Wait until he completes the new application, and then package it. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: kubication -- KDE network configuration selector
El Viernes, 3 de Septiembre de 2004 06:23, Luciano Bello escribió: > * URL :http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=14847 Read at the bottom of the description: 8<- This is the last release of Kubication. I've discontinued it because i've started writing a KDE daemon controled by a KControl Center Module for replacing Kubication, which IMHO is a much better solution. I expect to release it within one or two weeks. Anyway, if you find any bug in Kubication, please report it, because part of Kubication source code will be used in the KDE daemon. >8- If upstream is no longer supporting this package, I think it should not enter debian. Wait until he completes the new application, and then package it. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RFS, RFA] kxmleditor: XML Editor for KDE
El Martes, 17 de Agosto de 2004 00:34, Alejandro Exojo escribió: > If you can not sponsor the package for any reason, I will welcome any other > kind of feedback, of course. :-) Silly me... I forgot to paste the URL O:-))) You can add this to sources.list to fetch the package and the source: deb http://darkshines.net/debian unstable kxmleditor deb-src http://darkshines.net/debian unstable kxmleditor Or you can simply browse the directories: http://darkshines.net/debian/dists/unstable/kxmleditor/ Thanks again. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpqHfMnmvOXQ.pgp Description: signature
[RFS, RFA] kxmleditor: XML Editor for KDE
Hi. This is a request for an sponsor of the package kxmleditor, which is up for adoption (bug #255299). This version fixes a FTBFS release critical bug (#265680). The package is lintian and linda clean, and compiles without problems in pbuilder's chroot. The only warning I have, is because upstream hasn't cleaned completely the tarball, and has a CVS subdirectory under admin/. :-( From the changes file: kxmleditor (1.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release * New mantainer (Closes: #255299) * Fixed FTBFS rebuilding against new kdelibs (Closes: #265680) * debian/control: - Corrected the description by a native English speaker ;-) - Moved section from "editors" to "kde" - Updated "Build-Depends" (changed libqt3-compat-headers to qt3-dev-tools greater than 3.3, because contains files created with designer 3.3) * debian/copyright: Reflex the work of all mantainers, and added the excerpt of the GPL. * debian/menu: Quoted all entries, and deleted obsolete "kderemove" * Changed DH_COMPAT to debian/compat * debian/rules: minor updates * shlibs.local: file removed If you can not sponsor the package for any reason, I will welcome any other kind of feedback, of course. :-) Thanks a lot. Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpB0jWbfQCc4.pgp Description: signature
Re: [RFS, RFA] kxmleditor: XML Editor for KDE
El Martes, 17 de Agosto de 2004 00:34, Alejandro Exojo escribió: > If you can not sponsor the package for any reason, I will welcome any other > kind of feedback, of course. :-) Silly me... I forgot to paste the URL O:-))) You can add this to sources.list to fetch the package and the source: deb http://darkshines.net/debian unstable kxmleditor deb-src http://darkshines.net/debian unstable kxmleditor Or you can simply browse the directories: http://darkshines.net/debian/dists/unstable/kxmleditor/ Thanks again. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgprA0JuiqpUl.pgp Description: signature
[RFS, RFA] kxmleditor: XML Editor for KDE
Hi. This is a request for an sponsor of the package kxmleditor, which is up for adoption (bug #255299). This version fixes a FTBFS release critical bug (#265680). The package is lintian and linda clean, and compiles without problems in pbuilder's chroot. The only warning I have, is because upstream hasn't cleaned completely the tarball, and has a CVS subdirectory under admin/. :-( From the changes file: kxmleditor (1.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release * New mantainer (Closes: #255299) * Fixed FTBFS rebuilding against new kdelibs (Closes: #265680) * debian/control: - Corrected the description by a native English speaker ;-) - Moved section from "editors" to "kde" - Updated "Build-Depends" (changed libqt3-compat-headers to qt3-dev-tools greater than 3.3, because contains files created with designer 3.3) * debian/copyright: Reflex the work of all mantainers, and added the excerpt of the GPL. * debian/menu: Quoted all entries, and deleted obsolete "kderemove" * Changed DH_COMPAT to debian/compat * debian/rules: minor updates * shlibs.local: file removed If you can not sponsor the package for any reason, I will welcome any other kind of feedback, of course. :-) Thanks a lot. Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpftHb2tJBjv.pgp Description: signature
Subsections
Hi. An easy question: Where should I put a package that can fit in two subsections? I'm looking in the policy, but it only lists which subsections exist, but not a brief description. In my case, I'm trying to adopt kxmleditor, which actually is in section "editors", but I think "kde" is better, because don't bloats too much the other sections. Thanks in advance. Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subsections
Hi. An easy question: Where should I put a package that can fit in two subsections? I'm looking in the policy, but it only lists which subsections exist, but not a brief description. In my case, I'm trying to adopt kxmleditor, which actually is in section "editors", but I think "kde" is better, because don't bloats too much the other sections. Thanks in advance. Greetings. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Someone with access to non-i386 architecture needed.
El Jueves, 10 de Junio de 2004 00:11, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo escribió: > So I'm asking you for help. Could someone try to build imgseek on some > non-i386 architecture? Build fails because of QT library. How have you set up the QTDIR variable on your system? If you look at KDE packages, for example, you will see that they set this variable to /usr/share/qt3, and others that maybe you will need. Check /usr/share/doc/kdelibs4-dev/Packaging.txt.gz for examples, if you like. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Someone with access to non-i386 architecture needed.
El Jueves, 10 de Junio de 2004 00:11, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo escribió: > So I'm asking you for help. Could someone try to build imgseek on some > non-i386 architecture? Build fails because of QT library. How have you set up the QTDIR variable on your system? If you look at KDE packages, for example, you will see that they set this variable to /usr/share/qt3, and others that maybe you will need. Check /usr/share/doc/kdelibs4-dev/Packaging.txt.gz for examples, if you like. -- Alex (a.k.a. suy) - GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2 http://darkshines.net/ - Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: questions about packaging a kde app
El Sábado, 14 de Febrero de 2004 12:57, Tommaso Moroni escribió: > Hi! > > While packaging my first kde application I had some problems/doubts: > Is there any way to convert the upstream docbook in a man page? > I tried with docbook-to-man and docbook-utils but they both didn't work. Have a look at a perl script that Dominique Devriese wrote. It reads the output of kfoobar --help, and converts it in a man page. I found it really useful. Its in kdesdk/scripts/kdemangen.pl > Also, is it normal that the program doesn't install the manual in > KHelpCenter? Use the debhelper templates that kdelibs4-dev provides (it includes a file with the kde dirs). There is also a helpful document in /usr/share/doc/kdelibs4-dev for KDE packaging. Best regards.
Re: questions about packaging a kde app
El Sábado, 14 de Febrero de 2004 12:57, Tommaso Moroni escribió: > Hi! > > While packaging my first kde application I had some problems/doubts: > Is there any way to convert the upstream docbook in a man page? > I tried with docbook-to-man and docbook-utils but they both didn't work. Have a look at a perl script that Dominique Devriese wrote. It reads the output of kfoobar --help, and converts it in a man page. I found it really useful. Its in kdesdk/scripts/kdemangen.pl > Also, is it normal that the program doesn't install the manual in > KHelpCenter? Use the debhelper templates that kdelibs4-dev provides (it includes a file with the kde dirs). There is also a helpful document in /usr/share/doc/kdelibs4-dev for KDE packaging. Best regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
