Bug#902634: RFS: flashplugin-nonfree/1:3.7+nmu1 [NMU] [RC] -- Adobe Flash Player - browser plugin

2018-06-28 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important
Control: block 851066 by -1
Control: block 889804 by -1

Dear mentors,

I'm looking for a sponsor for an NMU of flashplugin-nonfree, which fixes
some old bugs making the downloader unusable since at least January
2017[1]. The maintainer (Bart Martens) has not responded to that bug at
all, nor has anyone replied to the intent to NMU that I posted last week[2].

This upload includes a patch from Gianluigi Tiesi which removes all
references to Bart's people.debian.org page, which has not seen any
updates during his apparent absence. These include tarball checksum and
GPG verification checks via his site that are *removed* since Adobe
doesn't seem to provide them (instead, they rely on HTTPS).

[1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851066
[2]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851066;msg=127

At the same time, I've also included changes to fix some trivial but
non-RC bugs[3][4].

[3]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=862144
[4]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=885119

The source of the package is available at mentors[5] as well as Salsa[6]
- note that the current package in unstable never defined a Vcs, so I'm
only using the latter so far as tracking for these fixes.

[5]: https://mentors.debian.net/package/flashplugin-nonfree
[6]: https://salsa.debian.org/jlu-guest/flashplugin-nonfree/

A debdiff (as of writing) is attached, which should be equivalent to the
Salsa diff
https://salsa.debian.org/jlu-guest/flashplugin-nonfree/compare/f9cdfd78a...master

The RFS info:

 * Package name: flashplugin-nonfree
   Version : 1:3.7+nmu1
   Upstream Author : Bart Martens 
 * URL : http://wiki.debian.org/FlashPlayer
 * License : GPL-2
   Section : web

Full changelog:

flashplugin-nonfree (1:3.7+nmu1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Non-maintainer upload.
  * Remove broken references to https://people.debian.org/~bartm/; patch
from
Gianluigi Tiesi (Closes: #851066, #889804, #884262)
- This removes checksum verification of the Flash tarballs and PGP
  validation of get-upstream-version.pl, which were previously
provided by
  that site.
- It also rewrites the upstream version parsing to fetch from Adobe
  directly.
- Remaining changes to this patch: don't use --no-check-certificate
  with wget
  * Add Recommends: libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37-gtk2. (Closes: #862144)
  * Remove remaining calls to gpg and the dependency on gnupg.
(Closes: #885119)

 -- James Lu   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:27:56 -0700

Best,
James
diff -Nru flashplugin-nonfree-3.7/debian/changelog 
flashplugin-nonfree-3.7+nmu1/debian/changelog
--- flashplugin-nonfree-3.7/debian/changelog2016-08-03 22:49:06.0 
-0700
+++ flashplugin-nonfree-3.7+nmu1/debian/changelog   2018-06-22 
16:27:56.0 -0700
@@ -1,3 +1,21 @@
+flashplugin-nonfree (1:3.7+nmu1) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+  * Non-maintainer upload.
+  * Remove broken references to https://people.debian.org/~bartm/; patch from
+Gianluigi Tiesi (Closes: #851066, #889804, #884262)
+- This removes checksum verification of the Flash tarballs and PGP
+  validation of get-upstream-version.pl, which were previously provided by
+  that site.
+- It also rewrites the upstream version parsing to fetch from Adobe
+  directly.
+- Remaining changes to this patch: don't use --no-check-certificate
+  with wget
+  * Add Recommends: libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37-gtk2. (Closes: #862144)
+  * Remove remaining calls to gpg and the dependency on gnupg.
+(Closes: #885119)
+
+ -- James Lu   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:27:56 -0700
+
 flashplugin-nonfree (1:3.7) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * update-flashplugin-nonfree: Delete old cached get-upstream-version.pl.
diff -Nru flashplugin-nonfree-3.7/debian/control 
flashplugin-nonfree-3.7+nmu1/debian/control
--- flashplugin-nonfree-3.7/debian/control  2016-08-03 22:49:06.0 
-0700
+++ flashplugin-nonfree-3.7+nmu1/debian/control 2018-06-22 15:45:59.0 
-0700
@@ -8,7 +8,8 @@
 
 Package: flashplugin-nonfree
 Architecture: i386 amd64
-Depends: debconf | debconf-2.0, wget, gnupg | gnupg2, libatk1.0-0, libcairo2, 
libfontconfig1, libfreetype6, libgcc1, libglib2.0-0, libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.14), 
libnspr4, libnss3, libpango1.0-0, libstdc++6, libx11-6, libxext6, libxt6, 
libcurl3-gnutls, binutils, ${misc:Depends}, ${shlibs:Depends}
+Depends: debconf | debconf-2.0, wget, libatk1.0-0, libcairo2, libfontconfig1, 
libfreetype6, libgcc1, libglib2.0-0, libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.14), libnspr4, libnss3, 
libpango1.0-0, libstdc++6, libx11-6, libxext6, libxt6, libcurl3-gnutls, 
binutils, ${misc:Depends}, ${shlibs:Depends}
+Recommends: libwebkit2gtk-4.0-37-gtk2
 Pre-Depends: ca-certificates
 Suggests: iceweasel, firefox-esr, konqueror-nsplugins, 
ttf-mscorefonts-installer, fonts-dejavu, ttf-xfree86-nonfree, 
flashplugin-nonfree-extrasound [i386], hal-flash
 Conflicts: flashplugin

Bug#885562: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.2-1

2017-12-27 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I'm looking for a sponsor for my package "lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings".
This package is already in the Debian archive, but my last sponsor
(Christian Kastner) has been inactive for some months and has since
suggested that I open a new RFS.

 * Package name: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings
   Version : 1.2.2-1
   Upstream Author : Sean Davis 
 * URL : https://launchpad.net/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings
 * License : GPL-3
   Section : x11

It builds those binary packages:
lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings - settings editor for the LightDM GTK+
Greeter

To access further information about this package, please see:
https://mentors.debian.net/package/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings

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

 dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings_1.2.2-1.dsc

The changelog for this version is as following:

lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings (1.2.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release.
  * patches: drop, applied upstream.
  * Bump standards version to 4.1.2, no changes needed.
  * Remove alternate recommends on gksu. Closes: #885547

Thanks in advance,
James



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#864056: RFS: icoutils/0.31.2-1.1 [NMU]

2017-06-03 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for package "icoutils"

 * Package name: icoutils
   Version : 0.31.2-1.1
   Upstream Author : Frank Richter <frank.rich...@gmail.com>
 * URL : http://www.nongnu.org/icoutils/
 * License : GPL-3+
   Section : graphics

It builds those binary packages:

  icoutils   - Create and extract MS Windows icons and cursors

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

https://mentors.debian.net/package/icoutils

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

  dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/i/icoutils/icoutils_0.31.2-1.1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

icoutils (0.31.2-1.1) unstable; urgency=high

  * Non-maintainer upload.
  * Add patch fix-wrestool.patch from upstream commit
http://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/icoutils.git/commit/?id=3c990fcc754c81a02ab5981d59b01025f1596b2c
to fix wrestool not extracting icons - this is a regression from 0.31.2.
Closes: #860220


I want to upload this low threshold NMU[1] because the bug being fixed
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=860220) breaks
icoutils' wrestool entirely, and prevents gnome-exe-thumbnailer (which I
maintain) and likely others[2] from properly working. Per the regular
NMU guidelines[3], I've also waited 5 days before pushing a fix for this
severity 'important' bug. Although the stretch upload deadline is coming
up soon, I really want to fix this bug for stretch so that programs
depending on wrestool are fully functional.

[1]: https://wiki.debian.org/LowThresholdNmu
[2]: https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=wrestool
[3]:
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu-guidelines

Regards,
James Lu



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#834539: RFS: zuki-themes/3.20-1-1 [ITP]

2016-08-16 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "zuki-themes"

* Package name: zuki-themes
* Version : 3.20-1-1
* Upstream Author : Mattias 
* URL : https://github.com/lassekongo83/zuki-themes
* License : GPL-3
* Section : x11

It builds those binary packages:

zuki-themes - Zuki themes for GNOME, Xfce and more

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

https://mentors.debian.net/package/zuki-themes

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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/z/zuki-themes/zuki-themes_3.20-1-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:
* Initial Debian release. (Closes: #834278)

One particular note: I'm not quite sure why the debian/watch check on
mentors fails: on my system running stretch/sid, uscan works fine.

Best,
James



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#790104: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.0-1 [ITP]

2015-10-11 Thread James Lu 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
 
Hi everyone,

(Hoping this is the right list for this)

Recently I've been trying to get lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings into
Debian, since it's a nifty utility! Right now, my packaging work has an
RFS (request for sponsorship) bug at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=790104. If there's
anyone interested in reviewing, the source is at mentors.d.n
 and Git
at
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.git.

Best,
James
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
 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=2Iyo
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Bug#790104: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.0-1 [ITP]

2015-10-11 Thread James Lu 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
 
On 11/10/2015 2:37 AM, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 2015-10-11 07:54, James Lu wrote:
>>> d/copyright:
>>>  - The license appears to be GPL-3, not GPL-3+ (at least in the handful
>>>of files I checked). This also requires correction of the free-
>>>standing license block (the last paragraph)
>>
>> I see. Ubuntu's packaging wrote the license as GPL-3+ for both the
>> packaging and the source, but I guess the license of the individual
>> files must prevail here. Fixed.
>
> Hm, I just realized that I overlooked something here, namely the license
> of the packaging that came from Ubuntu :-/
>
> that makes things a bit more complicated, because:
> * It is clear that upstream wanted GPL-3 for the upstream source
> * It is clear that Ubuntu's packager wanted GPL-3+ for the
> packaging, even if this motive was inspired by the erroneous
> assumption of the GPL-3+ for the upstream source (asking the
> packager directly might resolve that)
>
> IOW, my initial advice was wrong. You need to keep GPL-3+ for the
> packaging, and add GPL-3 for the upstream source.
>
> Sorry about the mixup!

That's what I did here (forgot to mention it more clearly). The upstream
source (*) is set to GPL-3 and the Ubuntu packaging + my changes (the
debian/ folder) is GPL-3+.

>
>>>  - There's a formatting issue in the free-standing license text (line
>>>27 is not indented)
>>
>> I'm not sure what this means. Is it supposed to be indented to the width
>> of "X-Comment: "? That's what I did.
>
> Oh, I see what you meant to do now -- it wasn't lacking indentation, it
> was beginning a new field.
>
> However, in that case, the field's name is just "Comment" [1], without
> the "X-" prefix.
>
> [1]
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#stand-alone-license-paragraph
>
> Regards,
> Christian
>
Done. I'll fix the other email too.

Best,
James
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
 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=C+Q6
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Bug#790104: Fwd: Bug#790104: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.0-1 [ITP]

2015-10-11 Thread James Lu 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
 
(This was supposed to go to the maintainers for lightdm-gtk-greeter in
Debian, not the upstream list; sorry for the noise.)

Hi everyone,

Recently I've been trying to get lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings into
Debian, since it's a nifty utility! Right now, my packaging work has an
RFS (request for sponsorship) bug at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=790104. If there's
anyone interested in reviewing, the source is at mentors.d.n
 and Git
at
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.git.

Best,
James
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
 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=ys49
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Bug#790104: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.0-1 [ITP]

2015-10-10 Thread James Lu 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
 
Hi Christian,

Thanks for the thorough review!

On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 22:47:21 +0200 Christian Kastner  wrote:
> d/control:
>  - The frontend for git at anonscm.d.o has been changed from gitweb to
>git; please update Vcs-Browser URL accordingly
>  - Developer's Reference §6.2.2 says that the synopsis is not a
>sentence, so you don't need to start it with a capital letter
>  - synopsis / long description: GTK is spelled with all-caps, however

Done.

>  - Depends seems to be missing Pango, going by PKG-INFO

Assuming this means gir1.2-pango-1.0, added.

>
> d/copyright:
>  - The license appears to be GPL-3, not GPL-3+ (at least in the handful
>of files I checked). This also requires correction of the free-
>standing license block (the last paragraph)

I see. Ubuntu's packaging wrote the license as GPL-3+ for both the
packaging and the source, but I guess the license of the individual
files must prevail here. Fixed.

>  - In the header, the field's name is "Source", not "Upstream-Source"

Done.

>  - There's a formatting issue in the free-standing license text (line
>27 is not indented)

I'm not sure what this means. Is it supposed to be indented to the width
of "X-Comment: "? That's what I did.

> d/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.lintian-overrides:
>  - Instead of adding lintian override for the missing man page of
>lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings-pkexec, symlinking it to the
>manpage of lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings, as some other packages do
>for -pkexec files (eg: src:mate-system-tools), would be more useful

That's a better idea, done.

> d/rules:
>  - You don't need a get-orig-source target for a mere uscan invocation.
>g-o-s is for cases in which downloading via uscan produces something
>that does _not_ match the orig tarball uploaded to the Debian
>archive: for example, when files have been removed from the original
>source (think: DFSG cleaning), or when you can only recreate the
>tarball by checking out from a repository

Removed, thanks.

>
> I'm happy to sponsor your package, but out of curiosity: have you tried
> pinging the lightdm-gtk-greeter maintainers? They could be interested in
> this package, and are probably in a much better position to assist you
> with issues related to this program than I am.

No, I'll do that now.

Best,
James
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
 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=BhiE
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Bug#790104: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings

2015-10-04 Thread James Lu 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
 
Hi Patrick,

I'm not the developer of lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings; I'm just
interested in maintaining it in Debian. Mentors.debian.net is a place
where you can upload packages and find a sponsor to get them uploaded
into Debian, but so far there hasn't been anyone interested in doing so.
There's an open RFS (request for sponsorship) bug at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=790104 (Cc'ing it here).

My PGP key is E71C0B9D (also attached).

Best,
James

On 04/10/2015 11:43 AM, Patrick Byrne wrote:
> Hi, > > I am sorry to bother you, but someone has pointed out you have
authored a program which looks useful and which I am trying to get hold
of. > > I am running debian testing (stretch) with xfce, and want to
configure the lightdm greeter screen for my multiple monitor setup. You
appear to have authored 'lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings' to facilitate
this operation. > > I am trying to install the latest dsc from here: >
http://mentors.debian.net/package/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings > > using
instructions here: >
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMentorsFaq#How_do_I_install_a_package_from_mentor.debian.net.3F
> > It says to do this: > gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net
 --recv-keys [author's key id] > > but I
don't know what /author's key id/ is! Can you please give me a hint? > >
Is there any mechanism for getting this promoted into debian? it looks
like it deserves to be. > > Thanks for your time, > Patrick > > -- >
Patrick Byrne

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
 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=txMR
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



0xE71C0B9D.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys


0xE71C0B9D.asc.sig
Description: Binary data

Bug#797636: RFS: variety/0.5.4-1 [ITP]

2015-08-31 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "variety"

 * Package name: variety
   Version : 0.5.4-1
   Upstream Author : Peter Levi <peterl...@peterlevi.com>
 * URL : http://peterlevi.com/variety/
 * License : GPL-3
   Section : python

It builds those binary packages:

  variety - Wallpaper changer, downloader and manager

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

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


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

  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/variety/variety_0.5.4-1.dsc

More information about variety can be obtained from 
http://peterlevi.com/variety/.

Changes since the last upload:

variety (0.5.4-1) unstable; urgency=medium
   * Initial Debian release, partly based off upstream packaging.
 (Closes: #758223). Remaining debian/ changes:
 - Bump to debhelper 9 and standards version 3.9.6.
 - "XS-Python-Version: current" is deprecated, remove it.
 - Set source/format to 3.0 (quilt).
 - Fix "syntax-error-in-dep5-copyright" Lintian warning.
 - Add patches/dont-embed-underscore.diff, removing the use of a bundled
   libjs-underscore.
 - Rewrite extended description, removing comments that aren't consistent
   across all DEs.
 - Add a manual page, based off help2man output.
 - Add a debian/watch file for Launchpad.
 - control: add Homepage field.
 - control: remove duplicate python-lxml dependency.
 - Add myself to debian/copyright.
 - rules: add get-orig-source target.

Regards,
James Lu




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#790104: RFS: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/1.2.0-1 [ITP]

2015-06-26 Thread James Lu 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.

 * Package name: lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings
   Version : 1.2.0-1
   Upstream Author : Andrew P. pan.pav@gmail.com
 * URL : http://launchpad.net/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings
 * License : GPLv3
   Section : utils

It builds those binary packages:

lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings - Settings editor for LightDM Gtk+ Greeter

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

http://mentors.debian.net/package/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings

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

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings_1.2.0-1.dsc

More information about lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings can be obtained from 
http://launchpad.net/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.

Changes since the last upload:

lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings (1.2.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Initial Debian release, imported from Ubuntu. (Closes: #788614)
  * debian/ folder changes:
- Add a watch file pointing to Launchpad.
- Write a manpage (lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.1), dropping
  the binary-without-manpage lintian override
  for /usr/bin/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.
- Add a get-orig-source target for debian/rules.
- Set myself as maintainer.
- Set package source/format to 3.0 quilt.
- debian/links: symlink the root NEWS file as an upstream changelog.
  This fixes the no-upstream-changelog Lintian pedantic warning.
- debian/rules: override dh_auto_clean to remove
  po/lightdm-gtk-greeter-settings.pot, so that successive builds work.

Regards,
James Lu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=V+aq
-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: https://lists.debian.org/blu436-smtp6261c695298b6cea80e6e4f5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-06-16 Thread James Lu 

Hi Vincent,

All right, thanks for the help too!

Best,
James

On 16/06/2015 12:46 AM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:09 AM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Hi Vincent,

Oops, I probably uploaded the wrong version. The get-orig-source target uses
the date of the last debian/changelog entry to set timestamps, so I must've
changed that without regenerating the tarball.

Reuploaded, should be fixed now.

Yep, looks good to me. Uploaded, thanks for your contribution to Debian!

Regards,
Vincent



--
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/blu436-smtp96ba66139e56895c51dea5f5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-06-15 Thread James Lu 

Hi Vincent,

Oops, I probably uploaded the wrong version. The get-orig-source target 
uses the date of the last debian/changelog entry to set timestamps, so I 
must've changed that without regenerating the tarball.


Reuploaded, should be fixed now.

Best,
James

On 14/06/2015 11:47 PM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

Hi James,

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 4:55 PM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Hi Vincent,

Wow, that's a lot of magic for one makefile target! I followed the guide,
setting the file timestamps to the last changelog entry's date, and it works
fine now. I've uploaded the newest version to mentors.

Using your get-orig-source target, I still get an orig tarball with a
different md5sum (178a964633a9ed23dad36bf2d6a5e9ef) compared to the
tarball you've uploaded to mentors (d1ec1ce2db3cc38f89b07b643ad9d055).

Regards,
Vincent



--
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/blu436-smtp84a60651c9113b96863d21f5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-06-09 Thread James Lu 

Hi Vincent,

Wow, that's a lot of magic for one makefile target! I followed the 
guide, setting the file timestamps to the last changelog entry's date, 
and it works fine now. I've uploaded the newest version to mentors.


James

On 08/06/15 11:36 PM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

Hi James,

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:51 PM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Hi Vincent,

I've removed bzr from the build dependencies.

After fiddling with the get-orig-source a bit, I realized that I can't get
the same checksum either when running it multiple times. According to a
'diff' of 'tar -tvf' output, the only difference between these generated
tarballs was the source files' timestamps. This is probably because bzr is
used to fetch the sources every time get-orig-source is ran, and it saves
the current time (of checkout) as the timestamp of the files, instead of the
code's modification date. For this, there appears to be a wishlist bug
filed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/245170

The reproducible builds team has a list of suggested workarounds for
various causes of non-reproducibility, one of which is timestamps in
generated tarballs. See [1] for a fairly simple way of making your
get-orig-source target reproducible.

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/TimestampsInTarball



--
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/blu436-smtp590897c4ec41497fbaf2aff5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-06-08 Thread James Lu 

Hi Vincent,

I've removed bzr from the build dependencies.

After fiddling with the get-orig-source a bit, I realized that I can't 
get the same checksum either when running it multiple times. According 
to a 'diff' of 'tar -tvf' output, the only difference between these 
generated tarballs was the source files' timestamps. This is probably 
because bzr is used to fetch the sources every time get-orig-source is 
ran, and it saves the current time (of checkout) as the timestamp of the 
files, instead of the code's modification date. For this, there appears 
to be a wishlist bug filed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/245170


Best,
James

On 07/06/15 11:17 PM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

Hi James,

(Sorry for the late reply!)

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:28 AM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Hello Vincent,

Okay, I've uploaded a newer version of the package that should fix the
problems you mentioned. Earlier, I was trying to manually sync up
both Karolina's and upstream's debian/ folders (they had different content,
like build-dep versions, etc.), and I must have missed
the watch file. I also added a get-orig-source to debian/rules, which pulls
the revision from Launchpad bzr, removes the INSTALL
symlink, and then repacks.

debian/clean is removed and the changelog is also more verbose now.

You don't need to declare a build-dep on bzr because it's only used by
d/rules get-orig-source, not during the build itself (to be precise,
Policy §7.7 specifies the specific d/rules targets in which the
dependencies listed in various d/control fields must be satisfied to
invoke them; get-orig-source is not one of these targets), so please
remove bzr from your build-deps.

The orig tarball you've uploaded to mentors seems to differ from a
tarball that I've generated locally using your get-orig-source target
(i.e. hashsums don't match).

Regards,
Vincent



--
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/blu436-smtp100cf3d37eb39e7144ac85df5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-05-19 Thread James Lu 

Hello Vincent,

Okay, I've uploaded a newer version of the package that should fix the 
problems you mentioned. Earlier, I was trying to manually sync up
both Karolina's and upstream's debian/ folders (they had different 
content, like build-dep versions, etc.), and I must have missed
the watch file. I also added a get-orig-source to debian/rules, which 
pulls the revision from Launchpad bzr, removes the INSTALL

symlink, and then repacks.

debian/clean is removed and the changelog is also more verbose now.

Best,
James

On 18/05/2015 2:33 PM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

Control: owner -1 !

On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package gtk3-engines-unico. This upload
fixes an RC bug that caused GTK3 applications to crash with any theme that
uses the Unico engine, along with some other graphics rendering bugs (tested
with GTK 3.14).

Ok, now that the package's orphaned status has been clarified, here's
a more thorough review:

Please be more verbose in d/changelog (w.r.t. your changes to
d/control, e.g. like adding/removing build-deps/deps/pre-deps).

debian/rules is missing a get-orig-source target, which is described
in Policy §4.9 [1]. It's not mandatory as per Policy, but since you
also aren't including a debian/watch file (BTW, why did you remove
it?), it's harder for others to verify your orig tarball (and I
consider one or the other mandatory when sponsoring packages).

debian/clean should be redundant now.

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html



--
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/blu436-smtp226221f7af75530acebbefef5...@phx.gbl

Bug#784854: MIA for Karolina Kalic karol...@resenje.org

2015-05-18 Thread James Lu 

Hello MIA Team,

After some discussion on bug #784854 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=784854, I'm trying 
to find information about maintainer Karolina Kalic 
karol...@resenje.org, whose package gtk3-engines-unico was 
apparently orphaned incorrectly without the MIA team's consent. A 
critical bug (#706330 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=706330) has been 
affecting the package since April 2013, and she haven't responded since.


Looking at: 
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/beyond-pkging.html#mia-qa


 The|echelon|information available through thedevelopers' LDAP 
database https://db.debian.org/, which indicates when the developer 
last posted to a Debian mailing list. (This includes mails about uploads 
distributed via the|debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org 
mailto:debian-devel-chan...@lists.debian.org|list.) Also, remember to 
check whether the maintainer is marked as on vacation in the database.


Karolina Kalic is not in the LDAP database, though 
https://contributors.debian.org/contributor/karolina-guest%40alioth 
provides a bit of info.


 The number of packages this maintainer is responsible for, and the 
condition of those packages. In particular, are there any RC bugs that 
have been open for ages? Furthermore, how many bugs are there in 
general? Another important piece of information is whether the packages 
have been NMUed, and if so, by whom.


She is involved in the packaging of 4 packages, 2 of which have been 
taken over and 3 with RC bugs. https://qa.debian.org 
https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=karolina%20kalic%20%3ckarol...@resenje.org%3Ecomaint=yes/developer.php?login=karolina%20kalic%20%3ckarol...@resenje.org%3Ecomaint=yes 
https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=karolina%20kalic%20%3ckarol...@resenje.org%3Ecomaint=yes


 Is there any activity of the maintainer outside of Debian? For 
example, they might have posted something recently to non-Debian mailing 
lists or news groups.


A quick Google search for karol...@resenje.org finds some things about 
PGP keys and the Debian packages she's been involved in, but all of 
these seem to be from 2011-2012. Searching the name is really ambiguous, 
giving various results for different packages on various distributions. 
I did find this forum post 
http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?p=815887#p815887 from Linux 
Mint though, discussing how Unico was abandoned in Debian... The latest 
post by date I found at a strange lookingDebian bugs mirror 
http://debian.2.n7.nabble.com/Bug-706330-Re-Some-applications-segfaults-after-upgrade-to-3-8-0-1-td3005089.html#a3006577, 
but that just duplicates what was in the bug tracker anyways.


Best,
James

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-05-17 Thread James Lu 

Hello Vincent,

I have uploaded a new manually packed tarball of the Bzr trunk, with 
version 1.0.3+bzr152-1 instead of the +14.04.20140109 Ubuntu had in its 
repository. I didn't make that clear, but a bad version number could 
accidentally replace the package they have AFAIK.


As for the package truly being orphaned, I assume that the people who 
filed the report already knew what was going on. The LDAP database 
didn't find anything for Karolina Kalic or karol...@resenje.org, and the 
package has been orphaned for almost 2 years now. Two of their packages 
appear to have new maintainers already 
https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=karolina%40resenje.org 
(curtain and spotlighter).


Either way, I'll Cc them on this conversation now. I'm not sure what has 
been done already, and what still has to be done.


Best,
James

On 12/05/2015 1:09 AM, Vincent Cheng wrote:

Control: tag -1 + moreinfo

Hi James,

On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 11:52 AM, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Hi,

Okay. Forget what I said about quilt, I don't think it'd fix this particular
issue either.

Right now, the problem is in the original source (aka the .orig.tar). The
INSTALL file isn't even installed in the final binary, but just having a
symlink in the original source is enough to make Lintian complain. Adding a
debian/clean file only removes the INSTALL file from the extracted tree, but
not the .orig.tar.gz.

I could add a Lintian override if this is appropriate.

Just from what you've said above, I'd ignore the lintian error
entirely; if INSTALL is never used during the build process or
installed into any of the binary packages produced by your source
package, then source-contains-unsafe-symlink is quite harmless. It
_is_ a valid lintian error though, since the orig tarball upstream
presumably contains an INSTALL file symlinked above the root of the
source package, and removing it via debian/clean doesn't change that.

Where did you obtain this orig tarball? I can't seem to find a tarball
versioned as 1.0.3+14.04.20140109 at [1]; if you actually are rolling
your own tarball instead of using one provided upstream, then why not
get rid of that symlink in your tarball?

Also, this may seem to be a formality, but is this package actually
orphaned? Neither the maintainer nor the MIA team filed #717044; a
random user deciding to ITA the package out of the blue is more or
less hijacking the package. Please follow the steps outlined in
devref 5.9.4/5.9.5 [2] to properly orphan a package and adopt it.

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://launchpad.net/unico
[2] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#orphaning

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-05-10 Thread James Lu 

Hi,

Okay. Forget what I said about quilt, I don't think it'd fix this 
particular issue either.


Right now, the problem is in the original source (aka the .orig.tar). 
The INSTALL file isn't even installed in the final binary, but *just 
having a symlink in the original source is enough to make Lintian 
complain*. Adding a debian/clean file only removes the INSTALL file from 
the extracted tree, but not the .orig.tar.gz.


I could add a Lintian override if this is appropriate.

James

On 09/05/2015 10:24 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:

On Sat, 9 May 2015 19:19:22 James Lu wrote:

Hi,


Did you try removing symlink from debian/clean file?

debian/clean? I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the New Maintainers
guide https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html.

It is a part of debhelper suite. See dh_clean(1).



What does it have to do with quilt?

I was trying to use a quilt patch to replace the symlink with a copy of
the regular file, but that didn't work. I don't know what the regular
practice is for situations like this.

I did not look into your packaging but why not just ignore symlink and install
original file? Or replace symlink from override_dh_install? Repacking orig.tar
to drop symlink in unnecessary...

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-05-09 Thread James Lu 

Hi,

Did you try removing symlink from debian/clean file?


debian/clean? I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the New Maintainers 
guide https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html.



What does it have to do with quilt?
I was trying to use a quilt patch to replace the symlink with a copy of 
the regular file, but that didn't work. I don't know what the regular 
practice is for situations like this.


Regards,
James

On 09/05/2015 6:40 PM, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:

On Sat, 9 May 2015 09:04:39 James Lu wrote:

One small note: the tarball was repacked in order to remove the INSTALL
symlink, which quilt didn't seem to handle properly (it just reported no
files changed).

Did you try removing symlink from debian/clean file? Wouldn't it be easier
than repacking? What does it have to do with quilt? Thanks.

Bug#784854: RFS: gtk3-engines-unico/1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1 [ITA] [RC]

2015-05-09 Thread James Lu 

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package gtk3-engines-unico. This upload 
fixes an RC bug that caused GTK3 applications to crash with any theme that uses the Unico 
engine, along with some other graphics rendering bugs (tested with GTK 3.14).

 * Package name: gtk3-engines-unico
   Version : 1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1
   Upstream Author : Ubuntu Core Developers 
ubuntu-devel-disc...@lists.ubuntu.com
 * URL : https://launchpad.net/unico
 * License : GNU LGPL v3 / 2.1?? (The Launchpad page says LGPL 3, but 
the source code still says LGPL 2.1, so I kept the latter in packaging)
   Section : x11

It builds those binary packages:

  gtk3-engines-unico - Unico Gtk+ 3 theme engine

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

http://mentors.debian.net/package/gtk3-engines-unico

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

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gtk3-engines-unico/gtk3-engines-unico_1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1.dsc

More information about gtk3-engines-unico can be obtained from 
https://launchpad.net/unico.

Changes since the last upload:

gtk3-engines-unico (1.0.3+14.04.20140109+repack1-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream snapshot, forked from Ubuntu (Closes: #671936, #690278,
#695267).
  * New maintainer. (Closes: #717044)
  * Repack tarball in order to remove the INSTALL symlink in the
root folder, fixing Lintian error unsafe-symlink-in-source.
  * Update Standards Version to 3.9.6.

 -- James Lu glol...@hotmail.com  Fri, 08 May 2015 17:40:58 -0700

One small note: the tarball was repacked in order to remove the INSTALL 
symlink, which quilt didn't seem to handle properly (it just reported no files 
changed).

Regards,
  James Lu


--
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/blu436-smtp338fc27dd2b579d454887df5...@phx.gbl

Bug#783277: Source for Wine exe-thumbnailer

2015-04-28 Thread James Lu 

Hi there,

Recently, I've decided to package gnome-exe-thumbnailer/exe-thumbnailer 
in Debian (relevant bug# 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783277). I just want 
to know, Is there an upstream repo for the exe-thumbnailer source? The 
version in Ubuntu / Launchpad, which I pulled my copy from, is a lot 
newer than what winezeug (mentioned on the Wine wiki 
http://wiki.winehq.org/exe-thumbnailer) has.


Best,
James

Bug#783277: RFS: gnome-exe-thumbnailer/0.9.3 [ITP]

2015-04-28 Thread James Lu 

Hi,

I have uploaded version 0.9.3-2 to mentors now, and it appears Lintian 
clean. I added a simple manual page 
https://github.com/GLolol/gnome-exe-thumbnailer/blob/master/debian/gnome-exe-thumbnailer.1, 
which I hope is adequate. Maintainer field has been updated too.


It turns out that the upload of 0.9.3-1 failed because the orig.tar.gz 
wasn't included. I only got the upload failed notification this morning. 
The server would not allow a duplicate upload, so I bumped the revision 
(and merged the changelog entries) instead.


Regarding Alioth and creating a repository in the Wine team, I didn't 
find any place where I could create a new repo. The packaging source is 
on GitHub https://github.com/GLolol/gnome-exe-thumbnailer for now.


Best,
James

On 27/04/15 01:50 PM, Stephen Kitt wrote:

Hi James,

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:52:13 -0700, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

Thanks for the response! I've uploaded a new version (0.9.3-1) via dput
mentors, which fixes most of the problems you've mentioned. The site,
however, doesn't seem to have updated the package page, so I'm not sure
if the changes have stuck. I've mirrored the .dsc file elsewhere
http://packages.overdrive.pw/pool/main/g/gnome-exe-thumbnailer/gnome-exe-thumbnailer_0.9.3-1.dsc
just in case, though aptly (repo management) doesn't handle .changes
files yet.

I couldn't find your updated package on mentors, but the other .dsc is OK (I
don't need the .changes file to review or even to sponsor an upload).


The only warning left is binary-without-manpage, as the source doesn't
seem to provide one at all. The script, gnome-exe-thumbnailer, doesn't
handle --help either, and spits out errors instead. I'm not sure what to
do in this case, other than file a separate issue?

You'd need to write a manpage :-). Given that thumbnailers aren't run by
end-users generally, the manpage doesn't need to be very detailed; have a
look at
https://sources.debian.net/src/evince/3.14.1-2/debian/evince-thumbnailer.1/
for an example. If you've never done this before, try adapting
evince-thumbnailer.1; I can help if necessary.

Apart from that I'd prefer it if you could merge all your changes into a
single changelog entry, so there's only an entry for 0.9.3-1, then the
pre-existing entry for 0.9.3-0ubuntu1.


Finally, it might be worth packaging this within the Wine packaging team,
if you'd care to join us...

I'm not too familiar with packaging teams, but that sounds good to me!
I'm open to collaborative maintenance. :)

OK, great! You need to create an Alioth account if you don't have one yet
(https://alioth.debian.org/account/register.php), then go to the Wine
packaging team page and ask to join
(https://alioth.debian.org/projects/pkg-wine/ and look for the Request to
join link in the right-hand column).

To mark the package as team-maintained, you'd set

Maintainer: Debian Wine Party pkg-wine-pa...@lists.alioth.debian.org

in debian/control and add yourself in an Uploaders: entry. Once you're in the
team you'll be able to create a git repository there for your package too.
(But you can worry about that later if it's unfamiliar to you.)

Regards,

Stephen

Bug#783277: RFS: gnome-exe-thumbnailer/0.9.3 [ITP]

2015-04-27 Thread James Lu 

Hello Stephen,

Thanks for the response! I've uploaded a new version (0.9.3-1) via dput 
mentors, which fixes most of the problems you've mentioned. The site, 
however, doesn't seem to have updated the package page, so I'm not sure 
if the changes have stuck. I've mirrored the .dsc file elsewhere 
http://packages.overdrive.pw/pool/main/g/gnome-exe-thumbnailer/gnome-exe-thumbnailer_0.9.3-1.dsc 
just in case, though aptly (repo management) doesn't handle .changes 
files yet.


The only warning left is binary-without-manpage, as the source doesn't 
seem to provide one at all. The script, gnome-exe-thumbnailer, doesn't 
handle --help either, and spits out errors instead. I'm not sure what to 
do in this case, other than file a separate issue?



Finally, it might be worth packaging this within the Wine packaging team, if
you'd care to join us...


I'm not too familiar with packaging teams, but that sounds good to me! 
I'm open to collaborative maintenance. :)


Best,
James

On 26/04/2015 10:16 PM, Stephen Kitt wrote:

Control: owner 783277 !

Hi James,

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 17:52:29 -0700, James Lu glol...@hotmail.com wrote:

I am looking for a sponsor for my package gnome-exe-thumbnailer

   * Package name: gnome-exe-thumbnailer
 Version : 0.9.3
 Upstream Author : 2010-2012 Jan Nekvasil jan.nekva...@ryant.cz
   2009-2010 Christian Dannie Storgaard
cybo...@gmail.com 2009-2012 Scott Ritchie scottritc...@ubuntu.com
   * URL : http://wiki.winehq.org/exe-thumbnailer
   * License : LGPL-2.1+
 Section : gnome

Changes since the last upload:

gnome-exe-thumbnailer (0.9.3) unstable; urgency=medium

* Initial Debian release, forked from Ubuntu. (Closes: #767376)

Note that the version uploaded to Debian might end up replacing that in
Ubuntu.


* Update debian/ files:
   - Set myself as maintainer.
   - Bump to debhelper 9.

You need to change the value in debian/compat as well as the version in the
build-dependency.


   - Remove outdated gconf2 build-dependency, depend on libglib2.0-bin
 instead (for theme fetching).
   - Remove unnecessary dependency on python.
   - Update Standards Version to 3.9.6.
   - Set priority to optional from extra.
   - Include my changes in debian/copyright.

The declarations aren't quite right; you don't need the years after
Copyright:, so simply

Files: *
Copyright:
  2010-2012 Jan Nekvasil ...

Also, did you receive the source by email, or did you download it from
Ubuntu? The Source: states the former but it's the same in Ubuntu, so I'm
guessing you need to change that ;-).


   - Remove /usr/share/gconf/schemas from dirs file.
   - Explicitly set source/format to 3.0 native. This is what the Ubuntu
 packaging seems to suggest, as there is only one .tar.gz
 file available for download.

The Ubuntu packaging is indeed native, as indicated by debian/source/format;
but this isn't a native package (a native package is a package which contains
software written specifically for Debian). I'd rather you changed
debian/source/format to 3.0 (quilt) and used 0.9.3-1 as package version;
that would also avoid issues upgrading from the Ubuntu version of the
package. (Copy Ubuntu's .tar.gz to gnome-exe-thumbnailer_0.9.3.orig.tar.gz.)

Could you also fix the following lintian issues?

* P: gnome-exe-thumbnailer source: unversioned-copyright-format-uri
   http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5

(The URI should be
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
currently.)

* I: gnome-exe-thumbnailer: capitalization-error-in-description-synopsis
   Gnome GNOME
* I: gnome-exe-thumbnailer: capitalization-error-in-description Gnome GNOME
* W: gnome-exe-thumbnailer: binary-without-manpage
   usr/bin/gnome-exe-thumbnailer

Finally, it might be worth packaging this within the Wine packaging team, if
you'd care to join us...

Regards,

Stephen

Bug#783277: RFS: gnome-exe-thumbnailer/0.9.3 [ITP]

2015-04-24 Thread James Lu 

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package gnome-exe-thumbnailer

 * Package name: gnome-exe-thumbnailer
   Version : 0.9.3
   Upstream Author : 2010-2012 Jan Nekvasil jan.nekva...@ryant.cz
 2009-2010 Christian Dannie Storgaard cybo...@gmail.com
 2009-2012 Scott Ritchie scottritc...@ubuntu.com
 * URL : http://wiki.winehq.org/exe-thumbnailer
 * License : LGPL-2.1+
   Section : gnome

It builds those binary packages:

  gnome-exe-thumbnailer - Wine .exe and other executable thumbnailer for Gnome

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

http://mentors.debian.net/package/gnome-exe-thumbnailer


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

  dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-exe-thumbnailer/gnome-exe-thumbnailer_0.9.3.dsc

More information about gnome-exe-thumbnailer can be obtained from 
http://wiki.winehq.org/exe-thumbnailer.

Changes since the last upload:

gnome-exe-thumbnailer (0.9.3) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Initial Debian release, forked from Ubuntu. (Closes: #767376)
  * Update debian/ files:
 - Set myself as maintainer.
 - Bump to debhelper 9.
 - Remove outdated gconf2 build-dependency, depend on libglib2.0-bin
   instead (for theme fetching).
 - Remove unnecessary dependency on python.
 - Update Standards Version to 3.9.6.
 - Set priority to optional from extra.
 - Include my changes in debian/copyright.
 - Remove /usr/share/gconf/schemas from dirs file.
 - Explicitly set source/format to 3.0 native. This is what the Ubuntu
   packaging seems to suggest, as there is only one .tar.gz
   file available for download.

 -- James Lu glol...@hotmail.com  Wed, 22 Apr 2015 20:20:35 -0700

Regards,
 James Lu


--
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/blu436-smtp90ab9f71d98594e615ff55f5...@phx.gbl