On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:47:22 +0200 Peter Eisentraut wrote:
You wrote:
Ok. Easiest way would be if I had write access to SVN. Could you
please (ass current member of the team) get in touch with the Alioth
admins to figure out what's wrong?
I've fixed the permissions. Try again please.
Coin,
Jonas Smedegaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ok. Easiest way would be if I had write access to SVN. Could you please
(ass current member of the team) get in touch with the Alioth admins to
figure out what's wrong?
BTW, i do request the same access as i'm in the Team too, and as
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:35:46 +0200 Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Probably I used a custom make target with a (later?)
package-specific rule depending on it, and then at some point moved
to the current setup but forgot to remove the now unnecessary
cleanup. I'll check,
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Probably I used a custom make target with a (later?) package-specific
rule depending on it, and then at some point moved to the current
setup but forgot to remove the now unnecessary cleanup. I'll check,
and simplify the snippet if that's the case.
At this point, I
On Tue, 6 Jun 2006 23:10:36 +0200 Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Attached is the cdbs snippet I already use and have used for some
time now. It invokes dh_buildinfo as late as possible (we only want
it for inclusion in actual packaging - not while iterating over
other
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The question is not so much about whether it is dead or not, but how
one would integrate it into cdbs. One way to address it manually is:
binary::
dh_buildinfo
(or some other target -- I'm not sure).
The alternative of a proper cdbs
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Attached is the cdbs snippet I already use and have used for some
time now. It invokes dh_buildinfo as late as possible (we only want
it for inclusion in actual packaging - not while iterating over other
build issues locally), and makes sure to only invoke once.
I'm
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, this bug was reopened, but what are we going to do about it? As far
as I can tell, dh-buildinfo is dead, and there is no technically
reasonable way to integrate it into cdbs. What's the plan?
How can you say it's dead ? Dirson uploaded a
Marc Dequènes wrote:
How can you say it's dead ? Dirson uploaded a fixed package in
february (after a long time without any work, i agree), so even if it
is not well maintained, it may still be of interrest. Did you talk to
Dirson to know about his plans ?
The question is not so much about
9 matches
Mail list logo
