Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: scmail
Version : 1.3
Upstream Author : Satoru Takabayashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.namazu.org/~satoru/scmail/index.html.en
* License : BSD
Description : a mail filter written in Scheme
Scmai
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: gonzui
Version : 0.2
Upstream Author : Satoru Takabayashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://namazu.org/~satoru/gonzui/
* License : GPL v2
Description : a source code search engine
Gonzui is a source code
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 07:53:19PM +0200, Fabian Fagerholm wrote:
> For another perspective, think about the ongoing work to support other
> kernels than Linux. Presently, promising work is apparently being done
> on both Debian GNU/Hurd and Debian GNU/FreeBSD kernels. There are
> already packages
On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:24 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> True. But that's OK because all of the geda-* program packages that use
> the library are updated at the same time as the library, and I maintain
> all of those packages.
>
> Upstream releases them all as a set. They could be one tarball;
Martin Kittel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to have some clarification on whether it is sensible to
> declare a package dependency on kernel-image-x.y (e.g. kernel-image-2.6,
> _not_ a full kernel version kernel-image-x.y.z)
Your package doesn't depend on Linux 2.6. Your package dep
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 12:09:42PM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Sure, one can go behind the backs of maintainers with
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/ch3.en.html#s3.6
> > ("Disabling daemon services")
> and hope you remember what you did. But it's not as friendly as
> th
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 12:09:42PM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Now that maintainers realized that one might like a package installed,
> but perhaps only plans to use it unoften, it only makes sense for not
> starting at boot to be offered as a friendly configuration option,
> instead of needing so
Sure, one can go behind the backs of maintainers with
> http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/ch3.en.html#s3.6
> ("Disabling daemon services")
and hope you remember what you did. But it's not as friendly as
the approaches more and more packages are taking, as seen in my /var/log/b
On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library.
> I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means
> we've had libgeda2, 3, 5, ... 18, 19, 20. Almost every new version
> requires a new package, w
On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 03:12:45AM +0200, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 12:02 +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Upstream increments the soname for incompatible changes to the library.
> > I've been reflecting that in the package name (libgedaXX) which means
> > we've had libgeda2, 3,
Following on from the recent discussions about library packaging, I
could use some advice from the experts on the best way to handle
packaging of libgeda.
The situation is as follows. gEDA consists of a library package and a
bunch of program packages. They come from upstream in different
tarballs,
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-23 01:31]:
> > And finally, are there plans to update the Developer's Reference to
> > reflect this change in standard procedure?
>
> Yes, while this procedure hasn't really been discussed much, it's now
> just de-facto how it happens.
There's
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 10:22:24AM -0800, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 02:26:48PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > Secondly, yes, I've been informed that there was not many acitivity
> > lately, but didn't yet follow up. I'll do so soon.
> > If you want to privately notify
Maybe I am still not making myself clear:
I _know_ that having that dependency will not fix my problem. I _know_ that even
with the dependency I will have to check during installation and if possible
every time a binary is executed whether the kernel version is right.
Yet I still think a dependen
Hi,
> I would like to ask about common practice in packaging libraries, especially
> their development files. There is a rather old tool like pkg-config.
> It gives standarized interface[1] for getting compiler and linker flags.
> What is your recomendation for adding a .pc files in -dev package?
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Adam Majer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: rake
Version : 0.4.14
Upstream Author : Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://rake.rubyforge.org/
* License : MIT
Description : a simple ruby build program with capabi
to throw in my $0.02:
as folks have pointed out, even declaring a dependency against
the package won't guarantee your package will work anyway, why
not just make it a suggests, and in your config script do
something like
rev=`uname -r | grep '^2.6'`
if [ ! "$rev" ]; then
# show debconf no
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 12:38:05AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Using runtime checks is the most appropriate solution here.
Shouldn't the software be doing this anyway, as part of its normal error
checking? I'm astounded that a maintainer is willing to break Debian's
traditionally weak coupling
Make l0ve to a gal this weekend
http://aesculusunrefinement.com/sse/
offa-dis : aesculusunrefinement.com/xyp/
The instrument bark aren't .
She hathaway doneck courtyard arlene expulsion .
aristotle marietta cupric into .
mackinaw purposeful pasty fallacy .
The barberry fluent dr
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Never mind the very idea of using anything Microsoft in such a scenario.
^
You meant Micros~1 ?
:-)
Anurag
--
---
__ __
gnu /n
On 22-Jan-05, 05:31 (CST), Martin Kittel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org> writes:
> > No. They'll see the debconf question, select "abort installation", the
> > package will not be upgraded, the package will not be broken.
> >
>
> They still had to download a usel
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 02:26:48PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> Firstly, if you mail about someone on a public list, it is polite to
> cc the person in question. Especially since google might start to show
> your very message soonishly in its results.
Now you mentioned it, indeed I should
On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 12:33 +, Thaddeus H. Black wrote:
> For what it might be worth (IANADD), I would support Martin's point of
> view.
I concur.
> > What's the use of package management if you don't go all the way?
>
> The question seems sensible. I would respectfully ask the same
> quest
Hello Steve,
Firstly I am an enthusiastic user of Debian GNU/Woody.
When the change-over to the new Sarge release occurs, there is a danger of
server overload as the entire Debian community attempts to do a broadband
up-grade from Woody to Sarge.
Is it possible to transfer some of the package
Frank Küster wrote:
"Kevin B. McCarty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
Do you have any suggestions for other function graphing programs /
libraries I could suggest to upstream?
grace is a GPL'ed program that I use sometimes for interactive graph
creation, but it can also be scripted.e
Ideally t
I tracked Sid for a while on my workstations and recently (about 3 months ago)
decided to go to Sarge since I would like my stations to track Sarge when it
goes stable. There are some packages that have been held back from Sarge,
like mozilla-mplayer[0] and java-package[1] because of dependency is
Martin Kittel wrote:
[snip]
> B) most people compile their own kernels and don't bother registering
> those with dpkg, e.g. via kernel-package, and therefore their systems,
> -while actually running a suitable kernel- do not provide the required
> virtual package.
>
> With A) I absolutely agree
Martin Kittel wrote:
[snip]
> > On a freshly installed Debian system you can happily uninstall any
> > kernel-image package because there are no[1] dependencies on it,
> > *because* installing kernels with make install is supported practice.
> > [1] Except for acouple of kernel-modules packages, wh
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 16:10:10 +1100, Sam Watkins wrote:
> > There is one pornographic comic among them (Sexy Losers), which a lot of
> > people would find offensive, perhaps we should not include the module
> > for that one in Debian.
>
Ya know, many of the web browsers in Debian can access
Dirk Eddelbuettel dijo [Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 11:51:20AM -0600]:
> (...)
> * the Perl "spreadsheet" complex:
> - spreadsheet-writeexcel
> - spreadsheet-parseexcel (2 old open bugs, forwarded ages ago)
> - ole-storage-lite
> - dbd-excel (1 old open bug, forwarded)
I can take this three, as
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 11:31:54AM +, Martin Kittel wrote:
> > > I still don't like this as the only solution, because by default it
> > > will break the running setup of people still using 2.4
> > > kernels. They'll get the update installed and the package is
> > > broken.
> >
> > No. They'll
Hi,
I would like to have some clarification on whether it is sensible to
declare a package dependency on kernel-image-x.y (e.g. kernel-image-2.6,
_not_ a full kernel version kernel-image-x.y.z)
In the thread mentioned in the subject I was told by several developers
that it does not make sense t
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 16:10:10 +1100, Sam Watkins wrote:
> There is one pornographic comic among them (Sexy Losers), which a lot of
> people would find offensive, perhaps we should not include the module
> for that one in Debian.
(moving this to debian-devel, M-F-T set appropriately)
Quite a la
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 08:52:29PM +, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know the status of Daniel Lutz? I had mailed him a while
> ago asking if he needs any help with the synergy package; the last
> upload of the package was 14 months ago, with quite a few bugs open
> that had n
Martin Kittel writes,
> Still, judging from everything I read so far, it seems that I am the only one
> with such a strict view of dependency handling, so if nobody comes up with
> support for my point of view, I will not add the dependency but go for the
> debconf solution instead.
For what it m
Le samedi 22 janvier 2005 à 00:38 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> Depends enforce that the depended-upon package is installed on the system --
> meaning that it's unpacked and configured. It can *not* ensure that a
> particular kernel is running on the system.
>
> Furthermore, it is *not* requi
Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org> writes:
> > Then one might wonder what is the use of a general "Provides:
> > kernel-image-xy" if one is not to use it.
>
> No idea.
>
Then why not remove them since they are prone to generate confusion (as it seems
they did in my case)?
> > > OTOH anybody i
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 12:56:23AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, Kevin Mark wrote:
> > It seems some developers dont know the status of other developers,
> > at least some of the time, as this and other messages I have read
> > from time to time. Is there some status page for D
On 2005-01-22 Martin Kittel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org> writes:
> > For the whole time I have been using Debian it has been accepted and
> > supported practice to _not_ use kernel-package but "make install" for
> > the kernel. Installing kernel's as .deb has al
Andreas Metzler downhill.at.eu.org> writes:
>
> For the whole time I have been using Debian it has been accepted and
> supported practice to _not_ use kernel-package but "make install" for
> the kernel. Installing kernel's as .deb has always been optional.
>
> On a freshly installed Debian syste
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 01:27:59PM +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote:
> Release-update of this month sounds really nice for me :-)
> At Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:11:03 -0800,
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Many of these security bugs have been fixed in unstable, and are just
> > waiting to propagate to testing -- l
* Kurt Roeckx:
> What is the problem with linuxthread? Are there some problems
> linuxthreads cause that go away when using NPTL?
LinuxThreads is pretty far away from POSIX compliance, and its mutexes
cannot be shared across address spaces (which is a major problem for
Berkeley DB, which therefo
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, Kevin Mark wrote:
> It seems some developers dont know the status of other developers,
> at least some of the time, as this and other messages I have read
> from time to time. Is there some status page for DD?
This information is already tracked, actually.
See:
http://www.de
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:46:18PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:
> >I'm interrested onm co-maintaining lvm2 and device-mapper.
> As am I - we use these heavily on some fairly serious kit at work, so I
> can justify the time... co-maintaining sounds like a sensible thing to
> do.
Okay, I requested a pr
On 2005-01-22 Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> It seems some developers dont know the status of other developers, at
> least some of the time, as this and other messages I have read from time
> to time. Is there some status page for DD?
Yes. http://db.debian.org/.
> Maybe something t
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 09:45:50AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> [1] Except for acouple of kernel-modules packages, which depend on a
> specific kernel compiled with specific options selected.
And mol which depends against the kernel modules which depends against
the kernel.
Bastian
--
On 2005-01-22 Martin Kittel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am still favouring the solution using "Depends" and scripts to
> detect whether you are running the right kernel.
> First, I think "Depends" is what should be done because that's what
> package management systems are about in the first pla
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 08:19:33AM +, Martin Kittel wrote:
> I am still favouring the solution using "Depends" and scripts to detect
> whether
> you are running the right kernel.
Depends enforce that the depended-upon package is installed on the system --
meaning that it's unpacked and config
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 08:52:29PM +, Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know the status of Daniel Lutz? I had mailed him a while
> ago asking if he needs any help with the synergy package; the last
> upload of the package was 14 months ago, with quite a few bugs open
> that had n
Hi,
I am still favouring the solution using "Depends" and scripts to detect whether
you are running the right kernel.
First, I think "Depends" is what should be done because that's what package
management systems are about in the first place: declaring what you need to have
to be able to run some
50 matches
Mail list logo
