Hi,
I just discovered today that some packages can store pretty huge cache
data in my $HOME, and found that rather problematic. When I backup my
home, I don't want to waste backup space or time to do it, because I
have to check what eats space and tell if it's cache data.
Couldn't such packages,
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: tweak
Version : 3.01
Upstream Author : Simon Tatham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/tweak/
* License : MIT
Programming Lang
Quote:
"Notebooks4free is a way for you to get totally FREE stuff! We have partnered
with large online advertisers looking to acquire new customers. In
exchange for trying cool online offers, you can receive free products. Our
company, Notebooks4free, started over 5 years ago and has quickly
b
Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb The Fungi:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> > > Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running
> > > Edgy ;)
> >
> > If you're developing packages for
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb The Fungi:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> [...]
>
> > Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running
> > Edgy ;)
>
> [...]
>
> If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would
> suggest at
On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 08:23:16PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
[...]
> Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running
> Edgy ;)
[...]
If you're developing packages for Debian, not Ubuntu, I would
suggest at a minimum that you do your builds in a Sid chroot
(pbuilder and/o
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola:
> On 3/13/07, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> > > > If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is
> > > > that the upstream number? If you wan
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Peter Samuelson:
> [Roman Müllenschläder]
>
> > > So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the
> > > one in stable?
> >
> > Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;)
>
> I know I'm stating the obvious here
[Roman Müllenschläder]
> > So, why are you using a version that's not the one in testing, nor the
> > one in stable?
>
> Because my laptop, where I'm building the packages on, is running Edgy ;)
I know I'm stating the obvious here ... but you shouldn't try to
develop packages for Debian exclusiv
On 3/13/07, sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> > If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is
> > that the upstream number? If you want to have release candidates of
> > your _own_ package, you should d
hi roman,
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 20:23 +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola:
> > On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a
> > > version number like: 1.
Am Dienstag, 13. März 2007 schrieb Margarita Manterola:
> On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a
> > version number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ?
>
> If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1.
On 3/13/07, Roman Müllenschläder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version
number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ?
If you use that number, the upstream version should be 1.0.8~rc1. Is
that the upstream number? If you want to have release candid
Hi there ...
I'm packaging for debian right now and wanted to now if I may use a version
number like: 1.0.8~rc1-1 ?
Reason is the following: I have this packages on my repository for making it
available to users for testing puposes. I know that the initial release
should be 1.0.8-1. So if I do
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Riku Voipio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: scratchbox2
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : Lauri Leukkunen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://rahina.org/sb2/
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: C, lua
Description
Hallo Roman,
Am 2007-03-08 22:01:25, schrieb Roman Müllenschläder:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. März 2007 schrieb Roman Müllenschläder:
> > Hi there ...
> >
> > I've got a little problem ;)
>
> Sorry .. will never user reply for a new message anymore ;)
Things happen!
I create a new debian/control on th
RalfGesellensetter wrote:
>
> Maybe I'd rather go for the Suse Multimedia Live CD.
>
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/live-cd-9.2/SUSE-Linux-9.2-LiveCD-Audio.iso
This is OT for this mailinglist, but...
DeMuDi is dead, SUSE 9.2 is antique and AFAIK not security supported
anymore.
I would recomm
Re: Russ Allbery 2007-01-06 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This is what I'd do. Yes, it's a bunch of extra packages, but it clearly
> expresses the actual dependency structure, rather than an approximation of
> it, and that's usually a good thing in the long run.
As a very late follow up, here's what the
On Monday 12 March 2007 18:25, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> On 10956 March 1977, Tim Brown wrote:
> > Why package it? Other than the practical uses outlined above, because
> > having binaries on a system outside of the package management system is a
> > PITA to keep track of / update and it makes buildi
19 matches
Mail list logo
