Re: RFS: libsockets
El mar, 01-09-2009 a las 20:58 +0200, George Danchev escribió: > On Tuesday 01 September 2009 19:37:18 Leinier Cruz Salfran wrote: > > thanks for the tips .. actually I use "pbuilder --login > > --bindmounts /home/salfrancl --save-after-login" and after package > > creation I install/remove within the environment .. the line "lintian's > > authors do not recommend running it with root privileges!" is because > > 'lintian' detects I'm using user 'root' (within 'pbuilder' > > environment) .. I think it's not a problem > > It is not a problem per se for your packages, but might be a problem for your > system, which is highly unlikely, since lintian hardly does rm -rf o_O > frivolously, but bugs happen and anyway nice to have in mind when lintian > authors say so. > > What I meant to write was to install lintian as root inside the cow chroot, > and then check your packages as non-root, but I now see I missed to write > that > in my previous message. This way your system is safe enough - nothing beats, > non-root inside chroot ;-) > thanks once again .. i'll follow your advice because i'm using '--save-after-login' > > thanks anyway ;) > > Welcome. > > -- > pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB > > signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: RFS: libsockets
thanks for the tips .. actually I use "pbuilder --login --bindmounts /home/salfrancl --save-after-login" and after package creation I install/remove within the environment .. the line "lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges!" is because 'lintian' detects I'm using user 'root' (within 'pbuilder' environment) .. I think it's not a problem thanks anyway ;) El mar, 01-09-2009 a las 19:40 +0200, George Danchev escribió: > On Tuesday 01 September 2009 17:34:20 Leinier Cruz Salfran wrote: > > El mar, 01-09-2009 a las 09:30 +, Yavor Doganov escribió: > > > В Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:36:11 -0400, Leinier Cruz Salfran написа: > > > > libsockets (2.3.6-2) unstable; urgency=low > > > > > > > > * Added debugging symbols package > > > > > > > > lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges! > > > > > > Indeed, so why do you do that? ;-) > > > > that happens because i'm making the package inside 'pbuilder' > > environment ;) > > You can also login into the chroot environment: > > # cowbuilder --login (--bindmount /dir - if you need something from outside, > eventually) > > and get adduser installed, then build your package, provided you also > installed the needed build-dependencies. This way you can also test your > package for install/remove/upgrade from previous version/whatever in a clean > chroot environment. > > -- > pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 > > signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: RFS: libsockets
El mar, 01-09-2009 a las 09:30 +, Yavor Doganov escribió: > В Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:36:11 -0400, Leinier Cruz Salfran написа: > > > libsockets (2.3.6-2) unstable; urgency=low > > > * Added debugging symbols package > > > lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges! > > Indeed, so why do you do that? ;-) that happens because i'm making the package inside 'pbuilder' environment ;) > > > I: libsockets2: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libsockets.so.2.3.6 > > This is not about debugging symbols at all -- read the lintian tag > description and the documentation it points to. > > that library have a shared library and seems doesn't have that control file, well, I think it's not critical i need this library in order to make the other package: wircc (web irc client) .. any sponsor please :) signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: what happen to 'bootsplash'?
thanks pab, i was reading about plymouth .. looks interesting .. can be available for 'squeeze' release? .. well, my intentions was to know if it possible to upload 'bootsplash' (reloaded) .. i was working on it because i'm 'bootsplash' lover .. i made some changes, fixes and finally adapted to 'squeeze' .. i make the question because i want to know what are the chances to make it public or maintain for my exclusive consume El lun, 31-08-2009 a las 09:27 +0800, Paul Wise escribió: > This question is probably on the wrong list, debian-user would have > been more appropriate. > > These days you want splashy or plymouth. The latter is the way of the > future because it uses kernel mode setting. > > If you really want bootsplash, see snapshots.debian.net: > > http://snapshot.debian.net/package/bootsplash > > s.d.n is not currently working as desired, but that will be fixed when > snapshot.debian.org is setup. > > -- > bye, > pabs > > http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise > > signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
what happen to 'bootsplash'?
hello all. i have a question: what happen to 'bootsplash' package? it is a project that is currently inactive but some people wants to use it yet .. and there is a potent consumer of it: (open)suse distribution i know that it requires a linux kernel patch and it may be difficult to maintain and evolves a hard and long timed work, but would be a good idea to maintain and keep alive that package .. i know there are people who likes it signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: RFS: libsockets
I updated to '2.3.6-2' .. changelog: libsockets (2.3.6-2) unstable; urgency=low * Improved 'debian' directory inspired in 'giflib' source package * Improved patch system: switched to 'quilt' * Added debugging symbols package -- Leinier Cruz Salfran Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:16:00 -0400 Lintian: # lintian -I --pedantic libsockets_2.3.6-2_i386.changes warning: lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges! I: libsockets2: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libsockets.so.2.3.6 El vie, 28-08-2009 a las 12:10 -0400, Leinier Cruz Salfran escribió: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets". > > * Package name: libsockets > Version : 2.3.6-1 > Upstream Author : Anders Hedstrom > * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ > * License : GPL > Section : libs > > It builds these binary packages: > libsockets-dev - C++ Sockets Library - development files > libsockets2 - C++ Sockets Library > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > The upload would fix these bugs: 544074 > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main > contrib non-free > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets/libsockets_2.3.6-1.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. > > I have followed the recomendations of Michal Čihař .. I have fixed: > - debian/copyright > - debian/control > - patch system > - other things. > > After build I tested with lintian: > > # lintian -I --pedantic libsockets_2.3.6-1_i386.changes > warning: lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges! > I: libsockets2: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libsockets.so.2.3.6 > > > Kind regards > Leinier Cruz Salfran signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
RFS: libsockets
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets". * Package name: libsockets Version : 2.3.6-1 Upstream Author : Anders Hedstrom * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ * License : GPL Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libsockets-dev - C++ Sockets Library - development files libsockets2 - C++ Sockets Library The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 544074 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets/libsockets_2.3.6-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I have followed the recomendations of Michal Čihař .. I have fixed: - debian/copyright - debian/control - patch system - other things. After build I tested with lintian: # lintian -I --pedantic libsockets_2.3.6-1_i386.changes warning: lintian's authors do not recommend running it with root privileges! I: libsockets2: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libsockets.so.2.3.6 Kind regards Leinier Cruz Salfran signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: RFS: libsockets++
hi thanks for review the package El mar, 18-08-2009 a las 23:30 +0200, Michal Čihař escribió: > Hi > > Dne Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:44:08 + > Leinier Cruz Salfran napsal(a): > > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ > > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main > > contrib non-free > > - dget > > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5-2.dsc > > Just quick review: > > - you add change license stuff in debian diff without any explanation I made one change in the license (debian/copyright): the openssl library exception did I made something wrong? i followed [1] > - debian/rules contains lot of commented out things, it looks like this > package is ideal candidate for minimal dh based debian/rules I commented the lines that I do not use for package construct, for example: # dh_installmenu # dh_installdebconf # dh_installlogrotate # dh_installemacsen # dh_installpam # dh_installmime # dh_installinit # dh_installcron # dh_installinfo # dh_installman should I remove it? > - please use patch system instead of directly patching sources okey, i'll investigate how to do it > - how did you choose soname for the library? what if upstream decides > for different numbering later? I am in contact with the author > - lintian -I --pendantic: > I: libsockets++ source: debian-watch-file-is-missing this is required? > I: libsockets++ source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field > "section" in package libsockets++2 i used 'dh_make' to contruct 'debian' directory then I modified what I needed > P: libsockets++ source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system > Ajp13Socket.cpp and 117 more > '177 more' :) .. I followed [1] i'll fix it thanks [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/05/msg00595.html signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: Taking care of exising packages
El mié, 19-08-2009 a las 20:07 +0200, Patrick Matthäi escribió: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Leinier Cruz Salfran schrieb: > > Hello > > > > I want to take this opportunity to add that the bugs need to be > > addressed, especially the wish list. There are people who send bugs to > > request to be added or taken into consideration certain properties and > > functionality in the packages and maintainers are ignoring. Another > > Examples? > Personaly on wishlist items (new upstream functionalitys) it is the job > of upstream to address them, the maintainer should forward it to them > and maybe upstream does not want it? > You're right in that part, it all depends from the point of view we look, now evaluate this: if the sender requests that maintainer of the package to take into consideration to add or modify any part of the package, or add something missing and that can be added? For example, if I create a program in Perl or Python, I pack and upload it and someone asks me to consider adding a file that may help, or someone requests a modification of the code? That is what I mentioned in my previous post. > > thing is the system of new packages (debian-mentors, > > mentors.debian.net) .. I think that there could be a team dedicated to > > addressing this important task, same as the team dedicated to the > > kernel, the core packages, translation, among other important packages. > > I think you do not know how much work it is to sponsor a packages, > especially if it is NEW or the maintainer does not have enough > experience yet and the whole sponsoring requests ends up in a 30 mails > conversation.. > I do not think you're right in that part. I do not deny that I lack experience, but I know that to create a package takes time and dedication and thus, to evaluate and see if the package meets the minimum requirements takes more time. For the same reason is that, as a suggestion, I explained to DD to assess the possibility of creating a team of DD that can be charged with this task that is as important as many other > > > > I believe that this significantly affects the quality of the > > distribution > > Debian has the biggest software repository of every distribution. > I do not think that it is a *such important* part to include new software. > The most important RFS reports are such which fixes bugs (especially RC > ones). > I agree with you in the part that is more important to address a package that updates or fixes a bug, but it is also important to address the new revenue package. An example of this, when I started using Debian one of the things that impressed me was the amount of programs, games, tools, and libraries that exist in the repository. Just ordered a 'apt-get' and was installed and almost ready to use. > For some weeks I take a look on the mentors mail archive and the > packages list for sponsors on mentors.debian.net - I wanted to sponsor > packages which are waiting since "ages" to get uploaded. > My result was, that most packages are more or less quickly uploaded, but > neither the sponsor and maintainer replied to the thread on the mailing > list / removed the package from mentors, which is bad. > I have for you a scenario: Suppose you're excited about Debian, you like Debian, you want to help to make Debian better and spend part of your time to package a program, game, tool or a library. When you finished, you test it with 'lintian', install, uninstall, then uploaded to the 'mentors.debian.net' and finally sent an RFS. Spend one week, two weeks, three weeks and it's time that you ask yourself: What is happening? Until the time comes to desist from a help and good day, after a very long time, you receive a message talking about a DD package, then what are you doing? And the time comes that you no longer want to help. A good day, after a very long time, you receive a message from a DD talking about your package, what you would do in that time? > What I want to say: > I think the current situation is not as dramatical as some people state > it here, please correct me if I have got a wrong view of it. > Not misinterpret me, please, my only goal is to assess how DD can improve the current situation of the incoming packages for the sake of those want to help not be disappointed. > - -- > /* > Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards, > Patrick Matthäi > GNU/Linux Debian Developer > > E-Mail: pmatth...@debian.org > patr...@linux-dev.org > > Comment: > Always if we think we are right, > we were maybe wrong. > */ > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkqMP20ACgkQ2XA5inpabMdEIgCeLET/h/2n8CDkpgS6WTShKNBa > eeEAn2pvmlsMiyhI1/u+ug1FZtUEUjsC > =3XMu > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: Taking care of exising packages
Hello
I want to take this opportunity to add that the bugs need to be
addressed, especially the wish list. There are people who send bugs to
request to be added or taken into consideration certain properties and
functionality in the packages and maintainers are ignoring. Another
thing is the system of new packages (debian-mentors,
mentors.debian.net) .. I think that there could be a team dedicated to
addressing this important task, same as the team dedicated to the
kernel, the core packages, translation, among other important packages.
I believe that this significantly affects the quality of the
distribution
El mié, 19-08-2009 a las 08:55 -0300, Rogério Brito escribió:
> Dear all,
>
> Motivated by some unfortunate trends seen in debian-mentors, I would
> like to raise (again) the question of wheter we are doing the right
> thing or not.
>
> Here is my plea:
>
> ,
> | Attn Debian/Ubuntu/whatever developers and maintainers:
> |
> | It is with sadness that I see many NEW packages uploaded to the Debian
> | repository and little thought about some packages that are already in
> | the distribution, but that are bit-rotting.
> |
> | Please, if an existing package has not been updated for some time, just
> | publicize this fact more conspicuously. Let us engage the existing (and
> | prospective) maintainers in taking care of aging, but still useful
> | packages.
> |
> | If, OTOH, the packages are not useful, or no one is willing to maintain
> | it in Debian, I would propose to remove it as soon as possible from the
> | archives, since they present problems (two of the first that come to
> | mind are: users installing packages that won't work/might break their
> | systems, and the burden of having to worry about security updates).
> |
> | In a certain sense, more *MAINTAINANCE* of programs should be expected
> | from Debian Developers/Maintainers (and not only of packages, but also
> | regarding the ports).
> |
> | Let us take a moment of reflextion regarding the archive as a whole and
> | not just fire up/accept new ITP's and RFS's without taking into
> | consideration the current state (and the Release Critical bug counts) of
> | the existent packages.
> |
> | This is not meant to say that new packages should be unnacepted: just
> | that a second (and third, fourth, etc) thought should be given if you
> | can help improve the Distribution, so that we don't end up with a lot of
> | half-working packages where all but a few are actually usable.
> `
>
>
> Regards, Rogério Brito.
>
> P.S.: Please, CC'me as I am only subscribed to -mentors, but not -devel.
> --
> Rogério Brito : rbr...@{mackenzie,ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8
> http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito
> Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org
>
>
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
why?
why is so hard to find a sponsor? I have a package online since 2 weeks ago, I sent 3 RFS and I have found no sponsor yet. why signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
RFS: libsockets++
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets++". * Package name: libsockets++ Version : 2.3.5-2 Upstream Author : Anders Hedstrom * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ * License : GPL2 + OpenSSL Exemption Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libsockets++-dev - C++ sockets class library - development files libsockets++2 - C++ sockets class library The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5-2.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Leinier Cruz Salfran signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: can i use 'piuparts' within 'pbuilder'
El jue, 13-08-2009 a las 18:53 -0400, Jonathan Yu escribió: > Hi: > > 2009/8/12 Leinier Cruz Salfran : > > hello dd. > > > > 1- can i use 'piuparts' within 'pbuilder'? > For what it's worth, Ryan Niebur (Ryan52) -- NM and DD candidate -- > has managed to hack piuparts to run inside a sbuild chroot. It runs > fairly slow (takes a few minutes) but isn't totally intolerable. I > think one optimization he did was install piuparts in the source > chroot, though I should let him speak for himself on that one. It does > complicate things a bit because now we're building inside a slightly > "dirty" chroot, but I think it's a fair compromise in order to get it > to run faster. > > Unfortunately it's nowhere near automatic right now (in terms of > setting it up and getting it to run during builds), and having it run > inside a temporary chroot isn't even what piuparts was intended to do. > So I would suggest for now to stay tuned, given some time, Ryan and I > will probably be able to get somewhat of a working prototype, and we > can go from there. > > I use 'pbuilder' in order to be able to make new packages with updated debian tools like 'dh_make' and 'lintian' (actually only i used) and I created the doubt because I know that 'piuparts' can handle the process of conducting tests with the new package .. I can use it outside the 'pbuilder' environment but I began to think: use it outside 'pbuilder' would be an unnecessary use of bandwith and 'piuparts' would be outdated .. well, i'm waiting for the 'chroot' version > > 2- is required use 'piuparts' in order to upload a package? > No, I just think for now it's a useful best practice. As far as I > know, running Lintian isn't optional though ;-) -- it's highly > recommended to the point of being required as far as I know. Hopefully > once some issues like slowness get ironed out in piuparts, it will > become required. Still nice to run if you have a few minutes and want > to make sure your package is as close to perfect as possible. > > > > i'm using 'lintian' and (de)installing in the 'pbuilder' environment. > > i'm not sure .. waiting > > > > ;) > > > > > > thanks. signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
RFS: libsockets++
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets++". * Package name: libsockets++ Version : 2.3.5-1 Upstream Author : Anders Hedstrom * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ * License : GPL2 with OpenSSL Exemption Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libsockets++-dev - C++ sockets class library - development files libsockets++2 - C++ sockets class library The package is lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 539568 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Leinier Cruz Salfran 0x5B95B0CB.asc Description: application/pgp-keys signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
can i use 'piuparts' within 'pbuilder'
hello dd. 1- can i use 'piuparts' within 'pbuilder'? 2- is required use 'piuparts' in order to upload a package? i'm not sure .. waiting ;) signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
RFS: libsockets++
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets++". * Package name: libsockets++ Version : 2.3.5-1 Upstream Author : Anders Hedstrom * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ * License : GPL-2 Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libsockets++-dev - C++ sockets class library - development files libsockets++2 - C++ sockets class library The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 539568 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Leinier Cruz Salfran signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: I want to delete an ITP
i catch the point
i have no need to modify the source package name .. it can be
'libsockets++'
the builded package name can be 'libsockets++2' (due to debian-policy
8.1) and 'libsockets++-dev'
in future releases... builded: 'libsockets++3' and 'libsockets++-dev'
i have a question: in the next releases of debian there may be 2
versions of my package ('libsockets++2' and 'libsockets++3')???
?
i suppose the answer is positive if i ask a sponsor to upload the
packages, but if question is some sponsor uploaded my package today
(libsockets++2) and there is an update tomorrow (libsockets++3) and
there is another package depending on (libsockets++2)???
would be better idea if I created the package "libsockets++' and
'libsockets++-dev'???
thanks...
El jue, 13-08-2009 a las 00:09 +0200, Sandro Tosi escribió:
> 2009/8/12 Leinier Cruz Salfran :
> > I changed the source package name.
> >
> > I readed [1] .. Correct me if I'm wrong, please
>
> well, if you ask, you should wait for a reply...
>
> > I can send a mail to 'cont...@bugs.debian.org' with body:
> >
> > reassign 539568 libsockets++2 2.3.5
>
> no, 'wnpp' metapackage is the correct one to use for ITPs
>
> > retitle 539568 libsockets++2: C++ sockets class library
>
> is this the same title as before (hint: "ITP: libsockets++ -- C++
> sockets wrapper library") with only the package name changed? (hint:
> no) - retitle it correctly.
>
> Moreover, why adding the '2' to the package name? (I didn't follow the
> thread that lead to this package rename).
>
> >
>
> one question mark is more the enough to express a question.
>
> > Thanks
>
> welcome
>
> --
> Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
> My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
> Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
>
>
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: I want to delete an ITP
I changed the source package name. I readed [1] .. Correct me if I'm wrong, please I can send a mail to 'cont...@bugs.debian.org' with body: reassign 539568 libsockets++2 2.3.5 retitle 539568 libsockets++2: C++ sockets class library Thanks [1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control El mié, 12-08-2009 a las 23:39 +0200, Sandro Tosi escribió: > Hello Leinier, > first of all, this question is more fit for debian-mentors that for > -devel, so I'm adding the list to CC (please follow up there, removing > -devel). > > 2009/8/12 Leinier Cruz Salfran : > > Hello. > > > > I'm creating my first package, after reading the debian policy and > > others mails in 'debian-mentors' list I want to delete the ITP Bug > > #539568 in order to create a new one with the same library but with > > other name .. How can I do that? > > Well, if you only want to change the package name, simply retitle the > bug. Instructions are at [1]. Please also note that the package name > you specify in the ITP is the source package name, not the binary > one(s) (and not, the may also not correspond, in some cases). > > [1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control > > In case you need also to add new information, do so mailing the bug at > nn...@bugs.debian.org > > Regards, signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: RFS: libsockets++
Hola Mauro, I updated the packages following Ansgar and your instructions and within 'pbuilder' environment build also. Can you check it? - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets ++/libsockets++_2.3.5-1.dsc Regards ;) El lun, 10-08-2009 a las 22:02 -0300, Mauro Lizaur escribió: > Hola Leinier, > > El 2009-08-10, Leinier Cruz Salfran escribio: > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets++". > > > > * Package name: libsockets++ > > Version : 2.3.5 > > Upstream Author : gry...@alhem.net > > * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ > > * License : GPL > > Section : libs > > > > It builds these binary packages: > > libsockets++ - C++ sockets class library > > libsockets++-dev - C++ sockets class library - development files > > > > I haven't built this lib but at a quick glance: > > - The package (most likely) should be non-native, and yours is a native. > - Try to improve the copyright file. > - It misses the license, also if the lib license is the GPL v1, you >should provide the full license since it isn't available anymore in >/usr/share/common-licenses/, note the GPL symlink points to the v3. > - the line with the copyright author isn't well formatted. > - the upstream author is incomplete > Take a look at this thread[0], which may be useful. > - Update the standards-version > - since you're using debhelper 7, there's no need to use 'dh_clean -k' in > debian/rules, use 'dh_prep' instead. > > Perhaps i'm missing something more, but i'll leave it to you > (and lintian, hint.) > > [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html > > Saludos, > Mauro > > -- > JID: lavaram...@jabber.org | http://lusers.com.ar/ > 2B82 A38D 1BA5 847A A74D 6C34 6AB7 9ED6 C8FD F9C1 > > signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
RFS: libsockets++
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libsockets++". * Package name: libsockets++ Version : 2.3.5 Upstream Author : gry...@alhem.net * URL : http://www.alhem.net/Sockets/ * License : GPL Section : libs It builds these binary packages: libsockets++ - C++ sockets class library libsockets++-dev - C++ sockets class library - development files The upload would fix these bugs: 539568 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libsockets++/libsockets++_2.3.5.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Leinier Cruz Salfran signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
