Bug#741007: RFS: museek+/2:0.2+git20140306.e92f562d-1 [ITA]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "museek+" * Package name: museek+ Version : 2:0.2+git20140306.e92f562d-1 Upstream Author : Adam Cécile and others * URL : http://www.museek-plus.net/ * License : GPL-2+ Section : net It builds those binary packages: mucous - Python/curses client for museekd murmur - PyGTK2 client for Museekd, the P2P Soulseek Daemon museekd- Client for the SoulSeek peer-to-peer network (server daemon) museekd-tools - Tools to manage a museekd daemon museeq - Qt client for museekd museeq-locales - Translations for museeq musetup-gtk- Gtk based museekd configuration utility python-museek - Python bindings for museek+ To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/museek%2B Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/museek+/museek+_0.2+git20140306.e92f562d-1.dsc More information about museek+ can be obtained from http://www.museek-plus.net/. The source is in collab-maint at http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/museek%2B.git. Changes since the last upload: * New maintainer (Closes: #673872) * Remove dpatch machinery, pending conversion to 3.0 (quilt). * Convert rules file to debhelper tiny format. * Bump debhelper compatibility level to 9. * Convert deprecated python-support tools to use dh_python2. * Convert package to source format 3.0 (quilt). * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.5.0. * Enable hardening flags for build. * Stop overlinking muscan and museekd by using --as-needed. * Add an upstream changelog generated from the SVN history. * Convert copyright file to DEP-5. * Import new upstream snapshot from git. -- David Banks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caobnz7arsv4xc_wgnmr9s9rcdwc3__a7vvuo0aqlmpjb56a...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#710821: RFS: mosh-scheme/0.2.7+dfsg-1 [NEW] -- fast R6RS Scheme interpreter
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mosh-scheme" Package name: mosh Version : 0.2.7+dfsg-1 Upstream Author : Taro Minowa URL : http://code.google.com/p/mosh-scheme/ License : BSD-2-clause Section : lisp It builds those binary packages: mosh-doc- fast R6RS Scheme interpeter - reference documentation mosh-scheme - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mosh-scheme Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh-scheme/mosh-scheme_0.2.7+dfsg-1.dsc More information about Mosh can be obtained from http://mosh.monaos.org/ Please see my previous RFS mails for more information on the packaging: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660049 http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00227.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/11/msg00549.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/01/msg00253.html -- David Banks -- 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/CAOBNZ7Z=6k2do-hvosknk6yfqpnbhtzgqvcgwf74cfs1-fc...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#660049: mosh sponsorship and name
Hi Christine, On 25 March 2012 20:39, Christine Spang wrote: > As you may have noticed from the activity on your mosh ITP, I didn't > check the WNPP bugs list before sponsoring another package with the name > 'mosh', which has now clearned NEW and entered the archive. > > Would you be willing to rename your mosh package to, say, mosh-scheme? > I'd be happy to then sponsor your package to the archive and be your > sponsor for future uploads. Well, mosh seems like an older program, having been begun by the R6RS process in 2008; but I would concede that keithw/mosh probably has a larger user base. As these rename issues can get thorny and mosh is already in the archive in any case, I'll be willing to rename. Hopefully the technical barriers will not be too hard to surmount. Aside: CCing to both bugs to be safe. However, how should the existing bugs be handled in this case? Simply rename the ITP and RFS to 'mosh-scheme'? Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/CAOBNZ7Z=3NjvYv2gRn=ywR=1ratlbtv5pm8zp8_ckn4si...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#662955: review
Hi, I'm not a DD so I can't sponsor your package, but I would be using this
package if it was in the archive. Thanks for packaging it. A few points about
the package:
* You don't need the substvar ${shlibs:Depends} in the control file for the
binary packages, since they are not compiled code. This gives a warning
currently.
* Why is the package priority extra? It should probably be optional.
* Consider switching off DH_VERBOSE in debian/rules before release, or at least
remove the comment above it.
* The translations seem to be being compiled twice, once during dh_auto_build
and once during dh_auto_install. This is probably unnecessary.
* You may want to Recommend or Suggest the 'vorbisgain' and 'mp3gain' package,
if rubyripper can use them. The same goes for 'normalize' but this may
require a patch, since Debian uses the name 'normalize-audio' for this
command. These were mentioned by the configure script.
* Grepping the source it seems that rubyripper can also use 'cdrdao' and 'sox'
for certain things -- consider the same for them.
* Consider changing your DEP-5 format URL now that this has become official.
Bug#660049: typo
Obviously I meant mosh and not 'hello'. It was late. :) Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/CAOBNZ7ZD_9QsEyiC8BeNjjbgBO0nMAD3=c+u+sr9ortaqbk...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#660049: RFS: mosh/0.2.7+dfsg-1 [NEW] -- fast R6RS Scheme interpreter
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "hello": dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh/mosh_0.2.7+dfsg-1.dsc It builds these binary packages: mosh - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter mosh-doc - fast R6RS Scheme interpeter - reference documentation More information about hello can be obtained from http://code.google.com/p/mosh-scheme/. Please see my previous RFS mails for more information on the packaging: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00227.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/11/msg00549.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2012/01/msg00253.html Cheers, David -- 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/20120216000727.4616.89173.report...@vuurvlieg.phys.solasistim.net
RFS: mosh (3rd try)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mosh". * Package name: mosh Version : 0.2.7+dfsg-1 Upstream Author : Taro Minowa * URL : http://mosh.monaos.org/ * License : BSD-2-clause Section : lisp It builds those binary packages: mosh - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter mosh-doc - fast R6RS Scheme interpeter - reference documentation To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mosh Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh/mosh_0.2.7+dfsg-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Note to potential reviewers: you may find my past RFS interesting. http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00227.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/07/msg00291.html I have patched the source to avoid the requirement to use a patched libgc, so mosh now links against system libgc. The debian/rules performs a 2-pass build: it bootstraps once using precompiled images, then builds itself with patches using the interpreter built in stage 1. Lintian overrides are documented in their respective files. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/CAOBNZ7bPfvt7kDvoVg4sSDfh8M1Dad1rp1eHPZ8m6Bcnq=b...@mail.gmail.com
RFS: mosh (2nd try)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mosh". * Package name: mosh Version : 0.2.7+dfsg-1 Upstream Author : Taro Minowa * URL : http://mosh.monaos.org/ * License : BSD-2-clause Section : lisp It builds those binary packages: mosh - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter mosh-doc - fast R6RS Scheme interpeter - reference documentation To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mosh Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh/mosh_0.2.7+dfsg-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Note to potential reviewers: you may find my past RFS interesting. http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00227.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/07/msg00291.html I have patched the source to avoid the requirement to use a patched libgc, so mosh now links against system libgc. The debian/rules performs a 2-pass build: it bootstraps once using precompiled images, then builds itself with patches using the interpreter built in stage 1. Lintian overrides are documented in their respective files. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/caobnz7y8ger957yz+yaukqxxevnns+lj4a3kof11y9y257s...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: stumpwm
Hi Desmond, On 07/11/11 18:05, Desmond O. Chang wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "stumpwm". I am not a DD so I can't upload your package. However I am a stumpwm user, except I have been using the upstream git version until now because I initially had trouble using the Debian package and didn't have the time to troubleshoot. Technically the package looks fine, it builds cleanly in a sid chroot. Lintian has one pedantic warning: P: stumpwm: copyright-refers-to-symlink-license usr/share/common-licenses/GPL You may want to change that to GPL-2. I faced some problems in using the package. Initially, both clisp and sbcl would complain about "Component 'stumpwm' not found". I eventually found out that I needed a symlink: /usr/share/common-lisp/systems/stumpwm.asd -> /usr/share/common-lisp/source/stumpwm/stumpwm.asd I presume the package was meant to set this link up itself, but for some reason it didn't. I installed it using 'dpkg -i' after building it with 'debuild'. You might want to use DEP-3 for patches. Consider updating your DEP-5 formatting: Format-Specification -> Format Upstream-Source -> Source Upstream-Maintainer -> Upstream-Contact And you need to expand the short name for the license GPL-3+. Once I had set up the symlink, I was able to load and use stumpwm successfully with both SBCL and CLISP. I would give you some more detailed feedback on using the package, but at the moment I am using stumpwm with GNOME 3 (in fallback mode) and my configuration -- which is pretty fragile -- was broken. I believe this is because upstream git defaults to compiling an SBCL image as a binary, which has a marginally faster startup time. Because the packaged version of stumpwm loads slightly slower, GNOME is (most times!) able to load its panel first, causing Stumpwm to load on top of it, which breaks the ability to use the GNOME panel. [Suggestions welcome, I don't consider this a bug in the stump package because using stump with the GNOME panel seems to be quite a bizarre and non-recommended configuration. I have been meaning to migrate away from it but didn't get the time.] Thanks for your work on stumpwm! Cheers, David -- 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/j9e2uj$nip$1...@dough.gmane.org
RFS: mosh
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mosh". * Package name: mosh Version : 0.2.7+dfsg-1 Upstream Author : Taro Minowa * URL : http://mosh.monaos.org/ * License : BSD-2-clause Section : lisp It builds those binary packages: mosh - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter mosh-doc - fast R6RS Scheme interpeter - reference documentation To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mosh Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh/mosh_0.2.7+dfsg-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Note to potential reviewers: you may find my past RFS interesting. http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00227.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/07/msg00291.html I have patched the source to avoid the requirement to use a patched libgc, so mosh now links against system libgc. The debian/rules now performs a 2-pass build: it bootstraps once using precompiled images, then builds itself with patches using the interpreter built in stage 1. Lintian overrides are documented in their respective files. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/CAOBNZ7ZxgzuLt383KwO0r6dwNwNJDWst4M8SFprgkJ=ssr6...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: mosh
Hi Michael, On 10/07/11 22:39, Michael Tautschnig wrote: > I'm sorry, I haven't yet reviewed your package, I'm only commenting on the > issues you raised. No problem, I appreciate it. >> For reference, I have attempted to build against a libgc using a default >> configuration and it breaks badly at runtime. >> > > Given that, according to the discussion in #156, some earlier version had > apparently worked fine: couldn't the Debian package simply revert that > "optimization" that requires GC_DONT_ADD_BYTE_AT_END? At the time this was implemented it was quite a significant change and touched most aspects of the interpreter. I think this would be quite hard to revert, and doing so would basically constitute a fork. However I haven't tried to do it, so I can't really be sure. It's worth noting that the bundled version of libgc is also a CVS version, as several bugs unrelated to the optimization were found in the stable libgc. (I get the impression from upstream that this is because Mosh uses the C++ wrapper, which is part of libgc but not as heavily tested.) > I must state that a package that only works under very specific compile-time > settings of an external library makes me shiver. It seems that mosh has no > safety checks and the necessity to rely on such low-level optimizations raises > questions about the design of this software... Sure, I agree, and I will probably raise a question on the ML about this. >> #2. psyntax-mosh requires several Scheme sources to be compiled into a >> single 'binary' (which is actually text, but not human-editable). >> However, the build script requires a previous version of Mosh. Releases >> are distributed with a precompiled version so the users doesn't need an >> older version. I asked about this on IRC, and it seems it's >> unacceptable to use the precompiled file in the final build, so two >> solutions were suggested. One is to initially build using the >> precompiled file and then rebuild over the top using the >> now-bootstrapped version (The version doesn't necessarily need to be >> older.) The other method is to split the source package into two >> packages, mosh-bootstrap and mosh, where mosh-bootstrap is >> arch-independent and mosh arch-dependent. Neither of these are clean >> but that is probably unavoidable. >> > > Well, then, which route did you follow? I don't really see a problem with the > rebuild-over-the-top variant, although of course this introduces some > complexity. I didn't follow either of these routes yet as I wanted to make sure I wasn't completely off track before working on one. Personally I agree that the dual-build seems cleaner, so I would prefer to go with that. Another complication (hah) that I should have mentioned in my original message was that the build script for the 'binary' that I'm referring to here, which is fairly substantial human readable source code, was NOT shipped with the upstream tarball. However, it is under a free license and is in the git respository, for some reason it was just excluded when releasing the tarball. As a result, to actually do this dual build, I would have to patch in the build script, or repack. Are either of these legally OK? Which do you think would be better? Cheers, David -- 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/ivfeuq$g3e$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: RFS: lebiniou, lebiniou-data
Hi Olivier, [CCing my response to the list, hope you don't mind] On 30 June 2011 03:43, Olivier Girondel wrote: [wrt fonts] > Yes, I already got a remark from Paul Wise about this, but I'm not sure > what to do, regarding the "source" of FreeMono.ttf > > FreeMono.ttf comes from http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/freefont/ > but I'm not sure about what the "source" files are, any hints would be > welcomed At a quick glance, the source would appear to be the SFD files. Here's one from the CVS: http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/*checkout*/freefont/sfd/FreeMono.sfd?revision=1.226&root=freefont >> * In lebiniou-data, I'm loving the images! Many of them are homemade, >> but some of them look like they might be copyrighted. All these images >> need license statements in debian/copyright. I'm guessing it won't be >> practical to dig up these for some of them, so if I were you I would >> just strip out the potentially problematic ones and only leave the ones >> you are sure about. > > Would you please tell me which images could be, in your opinion, copyrighted ? > I tried my best to remove those that would be problematic; > all the rest is eather home-made or under a Creative Commons license Cool - The CC licensed images need to be stated in debian/copyright. If you're sure they are homemade or CC, that's fine. The ones which immediately stuck as being potentially non-free were: * UNIX "live free or die" plate * Eye in the pyramid logo * Possibly the Cthulhu hazard sign (which I love) * Matrix code (this could be generated, though) If these have attributions, though, that's no problem. > As far as I was tought, section 6 was for "games, and everything related, > that does not fit within sections 1..3". lebiniou, IMHO, is not a > "general command" > one would include, for example, in a shell script > > Back to the origins, yes, it was a .1, but I decided to go to .6 since this is > not a (usefull) command. Arguments on this are welcomed :) FHS says, man1: "Most program documentation that a user will need to use is located here." man6: "This chapter documents games, demos, and generally trivial programs. Different people have various notions about how essential this is." Personally I'd leave it in section 1 unless the package's section is also set to 'games'. Which I wouldn't recommend ;) >> * I would prefer to have sequences.tar.gz installed unpacked, as it's >> very small. No big deal though. > > Do you mean, shipping it as a plain .tar ? Doable. Ah, when I wrote that I meant to have the entire tree unpacked under /usr/share/doc/lebinou/examples/sequences or similar. However, after posting my message I looked at the manual and you describe unpacking that tarball to your home directory, so I figured your motivation was that unpacking a tarball is easier for users than 'cp -a' or whatever. So leave it as it is. >> * The program didn't seem to detect audio from Rhythmbox out of the box, >> presumably as it was trying to use the alsa plugin where rhythmbox uses >> pulseaudio. Maybe consider adding a note to the manual about how to >> switch the audio plugin, for new users. > > This is one of the main problems regarding linux distros[1], I chose to > make ALSA a default, since some people are reluctant using PulseAudio, > I'll try my best finding a way to document this, (if you have any hint on this, > I'd be happy to get it) > > [1] Not to mention that lebiniou is also supposed to run under *BSDs ;) I think just an instruction "Pulseaudio users: use -i pulseaudio" should be OK, plus instructions on how to set that more permanently. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/4e0c3fb3.7050...@gmail.com
Re: RFS: lebiniou, lebiniou-data
Hi Olivier, On 05/04/11 18:24, Olivier Girondel wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my packages "lebiniou" and > "lebiniou-data". Sadly I am not a DD, but I am responding to Michael's request for non-DDs to review packages. (http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/06/msg00388.html) Technical quality of the package is overall very good. Not to mention the program itself is very impressive, I'll definitely be using it in the future. wrt to debian/copyright file there are a few issues: * You might consider using DEP-5 as a best practice, this is up to you. * You should probably mention the original author and license of src/pnglite.[ch] in the copyright file. * You should mention the copyright on fonts/FreeMono.ttf and preferably ship the source if possible. Alternatively, repack and exclude it. (About the latter, I see that in Makefile.am you use --enable-debian to disable installing the fonts. I would say as a matter of style you should keep all debian-specific tweaks inside the 'debian' directory. Arguably it's better to patch the Makefile than to put this option in. Regardless of where you put the option, though, everything in the _source_ package needs a copyright statement.) * In lebiniou-data, I'm loving the images! Many of them are homemade, but some of them look like they might be copyrighted. All these images need license statements in debian/copyright. I'm guessing it won't be practical to dig up these for some of them, so if I were you I would just strip out the potentially problematic ones and only leave the ones you are sure about. * Manpage is lebiniou.6, but I'm not sure if Le Biniou would be called a "game", though you can see it as one. I'd be comfortable with it under section 1. * A few natural language nit picks about the description: "When you run Le Biniou it gives a revolutionary rendering of the sound you are playing." I don't disagree that it's revolutionary ;) but evolutionary might fit better with the short package description. "chose your own series of pictures" You probably mean 'choose' "discover a multidimensional –spatial and chromatic– way" Dash separation normally looks like " - ". You want a space before 'spatial' and a space after 'chromatic'. "comprehending musics and sounds" 'Musics' is actually a valid plural but that's quite a strange academic usage, I'm guessing you meant just 'music'. * I would prefer to have sequences.tar.gz installed unpacked, as it's very small. No big deal though. * The program didn't seem to detect audio from Rhythmbox out of the box, presumably as it was trying to use the alsa plugin where rhythmbox uses pulseaudio. Maybe consider adding a note to the manual about how to switch the audio plugin, for new users. Nice work! One step closer. ;) Cheers, David -- 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/iuffc7$3si$1...@dough.gmane.org
RFS: mosh
Dear mentors, [Please read long description under this template] * Package name: mosh Version : 0.2.7-1 Upstream Author : Taro Minowa * URL : http://code.google.com/p/mosh-scheme/ * License : BSD-2-clause Section : lisp It builds these binary packages: mosh - fast R6RS Scheme interpreter mosh-doc - reference documentation for Mosh The package appears to be lintian clean. Pedantic shows a few warnings about duplicated files in the docs package - this is not a problem in my opinion, as the files are small autogenerated index entries and semantically meaningful in their own right. I have overridden unusual-interpreter. The upload would fix these bugs: 631139, 537776 (archived) My motivation for maintaining this package is: I use this interpreter and have submitted several patches upstream. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mosh/mosh_0.2.7-1.dsc Before you review it, let me point out several issues that may interest you. This is a rather tough package, for two main reasons: #1. It requires an embedded copy of the Boehm GC. dmoerner previously attempted to unbundle this and it did work, however a recent change in Mosh relies on a non-default compile time configuration of the GC, and also bugfixes which are only present in the CVS version. As such it's quite impractical to unbundle the GC library at the moment, and the upstream bug is marked WONTFIX. See: http://code.google.com/p/mosh-scheme/issues/detail?id=156 For reference, I have attempted to build against a libgc using a default configuration and it breaks badly at runtime. #2. psyntax-mosh requires several Scheme sources to be compiled into a single 'binary' (which is actually text, but not human-editable). However, the build script requires a previous version of Mosh. Releases are distributed with a precompiled version so the users doesn't need an older version. I asked about this on IRC, and it seems it's unacceptable to use the precompiled file in the final build, so two solutions were suggested. One is to initially build using the precompiled file and then rebuild over the top using the now-bootstrapped version (The version doesn't necessarily need to be older.) The other method is to split the source package into two packages, mosh-bootstrap and mosh, where mosh-bootstrap is arch-independent and mosh arch-dependent. Neither of these are clean but that is probably unavoidable. As a result of this I am not immediately expecting a sponsor (though hope springs eternal), but rather looking for comments and some advice on how to proceed. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/itsgii$d4g$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: RFS: quakespasm (2nd try)
Hi Jon, On 07/04/11 22:55, Jon Dowland wrote: Sorry I missed your first RFP. I have now added basic quake support to game-data-packager and made an upload to experimental. I will hopefully give your package a look real soon and get it uploaded! Thanks for looking at this. I guess we would want to add "Recommends: quake-data" to control for this package before it is uploaded? I see some of the details wrt. package names are still being gone over in your other thread, so we should probably wait until that's all decided, then I can add the right thing to debian/control.* Cheers, David * I'm not sure if Recommends is correct, just basing that on ioquake3 package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/innh91$sck$1...@dough.gmane.org
RFS: quakespasm (2nd try)
Dear mentors, Upstream have released a new version, so I have packaged it and am looking for a sponsor again. Changes are listed in debian/changelog. I am now maintaining the package as part of the games team, you can view the git repository here: http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-games/quakespasm.git;a=summary The most important change is that I now repack the tarball to remove some files that had no sources. I am looking for a sponsor for my package "quakespasm". * Package name: quakespasm Version : 0.85.4-1 Upstream Author : Oskan Sezer, Steven Atkinson and others * URL : http://quakespasm.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPL-2+ Section : games It builds these binary packages: quakespasm - an engine for iD software's Quake The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 615090 My motivation for maintaining this package is: This is a slightly modified port of the engine Fitzquake which is very faithful to the original game. It's a good engine and I use it. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/quakespasm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/quakespasm/quakespasm_0.85.4-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards David Banks -- 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/banlktimumir7b5f9atlazwqnf7qpvsg...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: boodler
On 09/03/11 01:48, Артём Попов wrote:
The package is in a better shape now. Dear mentors, please look at it again.
Hi Artem, it's working great now! Thanks for packaging this program, I
have never seen it before and it looks really useful.
Just a few nitpicks, I don't know how important these are and you might
want to ignore them. Just letting you know.
1. You already took ownership of #295525 but you should probably change
the title to ITP.
2. Build warnings about a useless dependency on libpthread.so:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libpthread.so.0 could be avoided
if
"debian/boodler-alsa/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/boodle/cboodle_alsa.so
debian/boodler-alsa/usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/boodle/cboodle_alsa.so"
were not uselessly linked against it (they use none of its symbols).
[repeat for all plugins]
3. Substvar warning in the build process:
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: package boodler: unused substitution variable
${python:Versions}
[repeat for all binary packages]
Hopefully a DD can pick this up now and upload it. Anyone? :)
Cheers,
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ila446$jhi$1...@dough.gmane.org
Re: RFS: boodler
Hi Artem,
On 08/03/11 05:07, Артём Попов wrote:
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/boodler
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable
main contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/boodler/boodler_2.0.4-1.dsc
Thanks for the package!
I'm not a DD, so I can't upload your package (sorry), but I had problems
building it in Sid. Cowbuilder can't build it in a freshly created
chroot. I attach the full log but the relevant part is this:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libjack0: Conflicts: libjack-0.116 which is a virtual package.
libjack-jackd2-0: Conflicts: libjack-0.116 which is a virtual package.
Conflicts: libjack0 but 1:0.120.1+svn4142-1 is to
be installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy: Depends: libmp3lame-dev which is a
virtual package.
[This is the first time I have used cowbuilder but also I have tried to
build while manually resolving the dependencies on my Sid machine using
plain debuild and I face the same error.]
Cheers,
David
-> Copying COW directory
forking: rm -rf /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528
forking: cp -al /var/cache/pbuilder/base.cow /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528
I: removed stale ilistfile /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528/.ilist
forking: chroot /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528 cowdancer-ilistcreate /.ilist find . -xdev -path ./home -prune -o \( \( -type l -o -type f \) -a -links +1 -print0 \) | xargs -0 stat --format '%d %i '
-> Invoking pbuilder
forking: pbuilder build --buildplace /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528 --buildresult /var/cache/pbuilder/result/ --debbuildopts --no-targz --internal-chrootexec chroot /var/cache/pbuilder/build//cow.23528 cow-shell /home/amoe/boodler_2.0.4-1.dsc
W: /root/.pbuilderrc does not exist
I: Running in no-targz mode
I: using fakeroot in build.
I: Current time: Tue Mar 8 14:49:23 GMT 2011
I: pbuilder-time-stamp: 1299595763
I: copying local configuration
I: mounting /proc filesystem
I: mounting /dev/pts filesystem
I: Mounting /var/cache/pbuilder/ccache
I: policy-rc.d already exists
I: Obtaining the cached apt archive contents
I: Setting up ccache
I: Installing the build-deps
-> Attempting to satisfy build-dependencies
-> Creating pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy package
Package: pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy
Version: 0.invalid.0
Architecture: amd64
Maintainer: Debian Pbuilder Team
Description: Dummy package to satisfy dependencies with aptitude - created by pbuilder
This package was created automatically by pbuilder to satisfy the
build-dependencies of the package being currently built.
Depends: debhelper (>= 8), libasound2-dev, libbio2jack0-dev, libesd0-dev, libmp3lame-dev, libpulse-dev, libshout-dev, libvorbis-dev, python-all-dev
dpkg-deb: building package `pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy' in `/tmp/satisfydepends-aptitude/pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.deb'.
Selecting previously deselected package pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.
(Reading database ... 10675 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (from .../pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.deb) ...
dpkg: pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy: dependency problems, but configuring anyway as you requested:
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on debhelper (>= 8); however:
Package debhelper is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libasound2-dev; however:
Package libasound2-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libbio2jack0-dev; however:
Package libbio2jack0-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libesd0-dev; however:
Package libesd0-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libmp3lame-dev; however:
Package libmp3lame-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libpulse-dev; however:
Package libpulse-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libshout-dev; however:
Package libshout-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libvorbis-dev; however:
Package libvorbis-dev is not installed.
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on python-all-dev; however:
Package python-all-dev is not installed.
Setting up pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (0.invalid.0) ...
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Initializing package states...
Writing extended state information...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
bsdmainutils{a} debhelper{a} esound-common{a} file{a} gettext{a}
gettext-base{a} groff-base{a} html2text{a} intltool-debian{a}
libasound2{a} libasound2-dev{a} libasyncns0{a} libaudiofile-dev{a}
libaudiofile0{a} libavahi-client-dev{a} libavahi-client3{a}
libavahi-common-data{a} libavahi-common-dev{a} libavahi-common3{a}
libbio2jack0{a} libbio2jack0-dev{a} libcap2{a} libcelt-dev{a}
libcelt0-0{a} libcroco3{a} libdbus-1-3{a} libdbus-1-dev{a
RFS: quakespasm
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "quakespasm". * Package name: quakespasm Version : 0.85.3-1 Upstream Author : Oskan Sezer and others * URL : http://quakespasm.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPL-2+ Section : games It builds these binary packages: quakespasm - an engine for iD software's Quake The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 615090 My motivation for maintaining this package is: This is a slightly modified port of the engine Fitzquake which is very faithful to the original game. It's a good engine and I use it. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/quakespasm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/quakespasm/quakespasm_0.85.3-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards David Banks -- 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/AANLkTinuzAAQLKyHXmwCG2MRqhTOteKk=wf_dkvye...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: sisc
On 20 September 2010 21:11, Torsten Werner wrote: > Hi David, > > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 8:36 PM, David Banks wrote: >> I uploaded a new version of the package. > > your package is targeted to stable. You probably want to change that > to unstable. Erk. Fixed. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/aanlkti=zgtu_thhukcg8orcrzrom1i5ytctrfmxxe...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: sisc
Hey Torsten, I uploaded a new version of the package. On 12 September 2010 18:28, Torsten Werner wrote: > At least the copyright holders and/or licenses of the > following files are not documented: > > doc/sss/dbparam.dsl Now mentioned in debian/copyright. The license was not in the files themselves so I found the correct license from the docbook-dsssl project's release tarball. > doc/esub2acm.cls I now remove this file, and esub2acm.layout, when repacking. it was only used to build a PDF version of a related paper which is bundled with the source, but not built by any targets in 'build.xml'. It lacks copyright and a license. (I've left the paper that uses the files, in the interests of keeping the diff between the repacked and upstream tarball minimal.) > src/sisc/modules/srfi/srfi-*.scm I have been looking at the way other Schemes handle this. Many just give a blanket license for the entire set of SRFIs, which is indeed in the SRFI spirit. However, to be sure, I have added individual copyrights and licenses for the files where SISC uses a reference implementation of a SRFI. Let me know if you have any questions as this process does seem to have some grey areas. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/aanlktikpxefvs-cfj6m7frxpcumx+hnbfw=jpgeun...@mail.gmail.com
Re: RFS: sisc
I have uploaded a new package for sisc in response to Torsten's points. On 28 July 2010 19:04, Torsten Werner wrote: > Hi David, > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:10 PM, David Banks wrote: >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sisc". > > I have some questions / notes: > > - Is there a reason for not putting the jar files into /usr/share/java > to comply to the Debian java policy? I now install the jars to /usr/share/java in compliance with the policy. > - May you split the changes to the upstream sources into individual > patches into debian/patches please? This is now done. > - What is means with "Relies on the java2-runtime virtual package, > which is not by default available in Debian main." in README.Debian? Ah, that was from the old debian packaging by the maintainer, which I adapted. (Statement was probably accurate in those days.) I have now removed this file altogether, as it contained nothing else. > - Please add the full text of the MPL to debian/copyright. Now done in DEP-5 form. > - Prerm should only remove alternatives when called with 'remove' as > the first argument to avoid overwriting user made changes during > upgrades. Done. > - The file seems to have a different license. Please check again. Not quite sure what you mean here? which file? Thanks for your time. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/aanlkti=s4tuq+lj3unvox=x=hmp=ygvjwcpgi9wfc...@mail.gmail.com
RFS: sisc
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sisc". Package name: sisc Version : 1.16.6-1 Upstream Author : Scott G. Miller URL : http://sisc-scheme.org/ License : MPL or GPL-2 Section : interpreters It builds these binary packages: sisc - A Java integrated, fully R5RS compliant Scheme system The package appears to be lintian clean. My motivation for maintaining this package is: This is the only current implementation of Scheme that complies with a recent standard (R5RS) and runs on the JVM. It's one of the most R5RS-compliant Scheme implementations there is. In addition it's also embeddable, supports a large number of SRFIs, and has an FFI to Java. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sisc - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sisc/sisc_1.16.6-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Cheers, -- David Banks -- 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/aanlktimljkjx4avyhzmwlkbt8m5cbyf0fsj9ca1vs...@mail.gmail.com
