Re: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#478328: ITP: samba4 -- LanManager-like fileserver and active directory server

Quoting Jelmer Vernooij ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Jelmer Vernooij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is a plan we discussed with Jelmer at the SambaXP conference. (for people less involved in samba stuff, Jelmer is, along with Andrew Bartlett, one of the two "lead"

Re: NMU versioning

On Tuesday 29 Apr 2008 3:02:34 pm Amaya wrote: > > "The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX, where > > X is a counter starting at 1." > > I have found that NMUing native source packages is a bit tricky, as in, > what is the consensuous regarding this increment? Where to incre

Re: NMU versioning

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:32:34AM +0200, Amaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > James Vega wrote: > > "The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX, where > > X is a counter starting at 1." > > I have found that NMUing native source packages is a bit tricky, as in, > what is the con

Re: NMU versioning

James Vega wrote: > "The version must be the version of the last upload, plus +nmuX, where > X is a counter starting at 1." I have found that NMUing native source packages is a bit tricky, as in, what is the consensuous regarding this increment? Where to increment? I hope I made myself understood

Re: NMU versioning

* Mike Hommey [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:54:59 +0200]: > FWIW, I think NMUing a package shouldn't end up with a sourceful upload > but should instead have a .diff.gz, whether it's a native package or not. 100% agreed. (Assuming you mean a NMU should never, ever, create a new tarball, particularly apply

Re: NMU versioning

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > FWIW, I think NMUing a package shouldn't end up with a sourceful upload > > but should instead have a .diff.gz, whether it's a native package or not. > > 100% agreed. (Assuming you mean a NMU should never, ever, create a new > tarb

Re: NMU versioning

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Mike Hommey [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:54:59 +0200]: > > FWIW, I think NMUing a package shouldn't end up with a sourceful upload > > but should instead have a .diff.gz, whether it's a native package or not. > 100% agreed. (Assuming you me

Re: NMU versioning

Kartik Mistry wrote: > someversion+nmu1, someversion+nmu2 for example see, bzflag package. It > is at 2.0.10.20071115+nmu1 right now. Thanks, that answers my question. -- ·''`. Come, let me sing into your ear, those dancing days are gone : :' : I carry the sun in a golden cup, the moon

Re: NMU versioning

* Bastian Blank [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:55:23 +0200]: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Mike Hommey [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:54:59 +0200]: > > > FWIW, I think NMUing a package shouldn't end up with a sourceful upload > > > but should instead have a .diff.gz, whether i

Re: NMU versioning

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 01:01:53PM +0200, Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Bastian Blank [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:55:23 +0200]: > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:16:28PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > > * Mike Hommey [Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:54:59 +0200]: > > > > FWIW, I think NMUing a packag

Re: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#473752: Bug#473752: Bug#473752: Boost 1.35 has been released

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:22:24AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > In contrast, the alternative strategy of having all the libfoo-dev > (1.34.1) packages conflict with libfoo1.35.0-dev packages has just a > single negative: that you can't develop simultaneously with 1.34.1 and > 1.35.0. On the

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.0113 +0200]: > Here is a sample of the sort of documentation that would satisfy this > recommendation, written for a package that's using quilt: Might I suggest that for such cases, a common file explaining how to use quilt can be used or be

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 03:00:40PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.0113 +0200]: > > Here is a sample of the sort of documentation that would satisfy this > > recommendation, written for a package that's using quilt: > > Might I suggest that

Bug#478516: ITP: libcaptcha-recaptcha-perl -- perl implementation of the reCAPTCHA API

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Gerfried Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: libcaptcha-recaptcha-perl Version : 0.92 Upstream Author : Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Captcha-reCAPTCHA/ * License : same as p

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.0113 +0200]: >> Here is a sample of the sort of documentation that would satisfy this >> recommendation, written for a package that's using quilt: > > Might I suggest that for such cases, a common file explaining how

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

Am Montag, den 28.04.2008, 16:13 -0700 schrieb Russ Allbery: > After extensive discussion in Bug#250202 and elsewhere on how to handle > the increasing variety of different build and patch systems in Debian, the > consensus on the debian-policy list is to recommend adding a new > documentation fil

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

also sprach Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.1535 +0200]: > Full ACK. I'd also like to see one for dpatch. Possibly something > that can just be symlinked too. Not sure about just symlinking. I'd rather say it should be: To use this package, you need to install dpatch. Onc

Bug#478518: ITP: librelative-perl -- Load modules with relative names

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Edi STOJICEVIC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: librelative-perl Version : x.y.z Upstream Author : Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni * URL : http://search.cpan.org/~saper/relative-0.04/lib/relative.pm * License : GPL (same t

Re: Bug#478518: ITP: librelative-perl -- Load modules with relative names

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 04:20:42PM +0200, Edi STOJICEVIC wrote: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Edi STOJICEVIC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: librelative-perl Version : x.y.z You might want to fill this in. Upstream Author : Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni * URL

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is some kind of stupid! You expect every package, that uses quilt > or dpatch to ship the same quilt/dpatch documentation? You did read the part of the proposal saying: This explanation may refer to a documentation file installed by one of th

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 10:31, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.1535 +0200]: > > Full ACK. I'd also like to see one for dpatch. Possibly something > > that can just be symlinked too. > > Not sure about just symlinking. I'd rather say it shou

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

Am Dienstag, den 29.04.2008, 14:47 + schrieb Peter Makholm: > Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > This is some kind of stupid! You expect every package, that uses quilt > > or dpatch to ship the same quilt/dpatch documentation? > > You did read the part of the proposal saying: >

Re: heimdal and testing

> Hello, Hello Brian. For these kind of questions, I don't mind if you main the -release list directly. > Can somebody please interpret why Heimdal is blocked from testing for me: > The version of heimdal in unstable bumps sonames

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:31:30 +0200, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > also sprach Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.1535 > +0200]: >> Full ACK. I'd also like to see one for dpatch. Possibly something >> that can just be symlinked too. > Not sure about just symlinking.

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.0113 +0200]: >> Here is a sample of the sort of documentation that would satisfy this >> recommendation, written for a package that's using quilt: > Might I suggest that for such cases, a common

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

Daniel Leidert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > *Only* if the build system differs, people should put additional > comments into README.source. I could at least agree to force people to > make a comment like > > "[..] This package use (quilt|dpatch). ... >... read /usr/share/doc/(dpatch|quilt)

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.1846 +0200]: > I'm guessing that you missed that this is exactly what the > proposal allows for. You may want to read it again. :) So it seems. The sample you quoted is surely misleading, in that case. I saw it and my redundancy detection

NewInEtch / NewInLenny

Hello, There used to be http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtch but it's gone without a trace, and I can't figure out how to ask moin to tell me where it went. Does anyone know? Also, along the same lines, are we keeping a NewInLenny list somewhere? If there isn't one already, we should start one! I am

Re: NewInEtch / NewInLenny

Hi! * martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080429 18:55]: > There used to be http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtch but it's gone > without a trace, [..] There are still some Translations: http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtchGerman http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtchRussian http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtchSp

Priority Changes

libcap2 version 2.08-2 in Lenny just changed priority from required to optional. The package itself didn't change. Is there a package or some other object that tracks priority changes, ideally via packages.qa.debian.org or packages.debian.org or similar. TIA, --Mike Bird -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, e

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > also sprach Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.04.29.1846 +0200]: >> I'm guessing that you missed that this is exactly what the >> proposal allows for. You may want to read it again. :) > So it seems. The sample you quoted is surely misleading,

newspost - neues Paket bauen - Fragen -- newspost - build new source package - questions

Bitte um Hilfe bei einigen Fragen betr. des Bauens von Quellpaketen: Habe einige Erweiterungen / Änderungen gemacht zum Programm (Source Paket) newspost. Folgendes ist mir inzwischen gelungen: Vorhanden Datei: newspost_2.1.1.orig.tar.gz Datei: newspost_2.1.2.beta.tar.gz ( erzeugt mit dpkg-so

build new source package - questions

Please help, I have some questions regarding building Source Packages. Made some changes to source package newspost. Successful with following: There exists file: newspost_2.1.1.orig.tar.gz File: newspost_2.1.2.beta.tar.gz ( erzeugt mit dpkg-source -b newspost-2.1.2.beta) - all files, also t

Re: Priority Changes

Mike Bird wrote: libcap2 version 2.08-2 in Lenny just changed priority from required to optional. The package itself didn't change. Is there a package or some other object that tracks priority changes, ideally via packages.qa.debian.org or packages.debian.org or similar. This particular change

Re: NMU versioning (was: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads)

* Raphael Hertzog [Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:16:34 +0200]: > (reply-to set to debian-devel only) > On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, James Vega wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 09:42:59PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote: > > > This DEP is available on the Debian Wiki[1]. > > "The version must be the version of the last

Re: NMU versioning (was: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads)

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > I want a consistent versioning scheme, thus +nmuX for both native and > > non-natives packages. > > I'd be very unhappy about that. For one, I think using such suffix in a > field that forms part of users' everyday's life is, uhm, inappropriate > or d

Re: build new source package - questions

Just a few lines about appropiate mailing lists and their languages. Hallo David, schön, dass du mit Debian eine Distribution gefunden hast, für die es sich für dich zu lohnen scheint, etwas mehr zu tun; trotzdem gibt es ein paar Regeln, an die auch du gebeten bist, dich zu halten: 1. Man sende

Bug#478585: ITP: qpdf -- command-line PDF transformation software

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Jay Berkenbilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: qpdf Version : 2.0 Upstream Author : Jay Berkenbilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://qpdf.sourceforge.net/ * License : Artistic License Version 2.0 Programming Lang:

Re: New README.source documentation for Debian packages

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:15:08AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Tuesday 29 April 2008 10:31, martin f krafft wrote: > > Not sure about just symlinking. I'd rather say it should be: > > > > To use this package, you need to install dpatch. > > > > Once installed, please see /usr/share/doc/d

Re: NMU versioning (was: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads)

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:17:12PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > > I want a consistent versioning scheme, thus +nmuX for both native and > > > non-natives packages. > > > > I'd be very unhappy about that. For one, I think using such suffix in a > >

Re: NewInEtch / NewInLenny

On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 12:55 AM, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There used to be http://wiki.debian.org/NewInEtch but it's gone > without a trace, and I can't figure out how to ask moin to tell me > where it went. Does anyone know? I saw this problem with another page a while ag