On 2024-09-27 22:29:54, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, 27 Sept 2024 at 09:38, Iustin Pop wrote:
> ...> I just added a barebone config for one of my packages, and while the
> > pipeline worked, I got an error for the arm64 cross-compile that seems
> >
On 2024-09-24 09:18:45, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We've overhauled the README.md at
> https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline to be as complete as
> possible, yet clear and to the point. If you are not yet using Salsa
> CI for pre-upload quality assurance for your package, you might
On 2024-09-24 09:18:45, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We've overhauled the README.md at
> https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline to be as complete as
> possible, yet clear and to the point. If you are not yet using Salsa
> CI for pre-upload quality assurance for your package, you might
On 2024-03-31 22:23:10, Arto Jantunen wrote:
> Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
>
> > Le dimanche, 31 mars 2024, 14.37:08 h CEST Pierre-Elliott Bécue a écrit :
> >> I would object against creating a PGP key on the HSM itself. Not having
> >> the proper control on the key is room for disaster as soon
On 2024-03-31 08:03:40, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
> On 30/03/24 20:43, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > On 2024-03-30 11:47:56, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 at 09:57, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > > Give me good Salsa support for autopkgtest + lintian + piuparts, and
On 2024-03-31 10:47:57, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2024 at 08:39, Bastian Blank wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 12:05:54PM +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 11:22:33PM -0300, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote:
> > > > As others have said, the best solution
On 2024-03-31 00:58:49, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 10:56:40AM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > Now it is time to take a step forward:
> > >
> > > 1. new upstream release;
> > > 2. the DD/DM merges the upstream release VCS into
On 2024-03-30 11:47:56, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 at 09:57, Iustin Pop wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-03-30 08:02:04, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
> > > Now it is time to take a step forward:
> > >
> > > 1. new upstream release;
> > > 2.
On 2024-03-30 08:02:04, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
> Now it is time to take a step forward:
>
> 1. new upstream release;
> 2. the DD/DM merges the upstream release VCS into the Debian VCS;
> 3. the buildd is notified of the new release;
> 4. the buildd creates and uploads the non-reviewed-in-practice
On 2023-10-15 16:08:32, Wookey wrote:
> I think you can consider me representative of the typical maintainer
> who's intereaction with *roff languages almost entirely takes the
> form: 'Oh bloody hell I really ought to write a man page for this
> because upstream is too youthful to have done so - n
On 2022-04-23 22:48:03, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> Op 23-04-2022 om 16:10 schreef Andrey Rahmatullin:
> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 03:13:29PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote:
> > > > I see several possible options that the images team can choose from
> > > > here.
> > > > However, several of these o
On 2020-11-29 14:06:31, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> For the sake of disclosure, I'm also an Ubuntu Developer.
>
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 12:58:53PM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > I have a Launchpad account, and the project itself lists my Launchpad
> >
Hi all,
Asking for people who have experience as Debian developers and who are
annoyed by the Ubuntu bug count in the QA (debian) page. These bugs are
trivial/minor, but still, I'd like to clean up.
Let's take for example
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-pylibacl/+bug/1876350.
I h
On 2019-12-19 12:29:59, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Hi Arturo!
>
> I know that this discussion took place some months ago, but I am just
> now getting around to catching up on some old threads :-)
Same here :)
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 01:52:30PM +0200, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote:
> > > 2) in
On 2019-06-04 17:51:56, Graham Inggs wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 2019/06/03 10:40, Daniel Lange wrote:
> > To do better, we should really offer SMTP submission/IMAP services for
> > @debian.org as soon as possible and - after a grace period - publish a
> > mx -all SPF record.
>
> I would certainly make us
On 2019-05-13 17:58:47, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 5/13/19 3:57 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > On May 13, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >
> >> As promised, I'd like to start a discussion on whether we want to
> >> recommend using the dh command from debhelper as our preferred build
> >> system.
> > I have al
On 2018-11-10 15:31:31, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> Also, indeed I'm not an HRM person, […]
And especially because of that, thank you very much for your work.
> I don't feel any "guilt" here, sorry.
And neither should you.
thanks,
iustin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2018-03-02 13:51:24, Gert Wollny wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 02.03.2018, 14:15 +0200 schrieb Lars Wirzenius:
> >
> >
> > Counter proposal: let's work on ways in which uploaders can make it
> > easy and quick for ftp masters to review packages in NEW. The idea
> > should be, in my opinion, that an
On 2017-03-05 12:41:18, Ben Finney wrote:
> Sebastiaan Couwenberg writes:
> > I'd like to see a compromise in the DFSG like #4 for standards to
> > allow their inclusion in Debian when their license at least allows
> > modification when changing the name or namespace for schemas and the
> > like.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: multitime
Version : 1.3
Upstream Author : Laurence Tratt
* URL : http://tratt.net/laurie/src/multitime/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C
Description : a time-like tool which does
On 2016-11-29 13:08:54, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 2016-11-28 23:07, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > On 2016-11-27 20:42:26, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > >* The bug should be of severity "important" or higher
> >
> > Quick question: assuming all the other conditio
On 2016-11-27 20:42:26, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>* The bug should be of severity "important" or higher
Quick question: assuming all the other conditions are met (minimal patch,
clean debdiff, etc.), this seems to discourage normal bugs fixing. Is
that intentional (i.e. there must be significant
On 2016-06-27 18:10:00, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> - - Approved purchase of PGP hardware tokens for DAMs. (Up to 200€)
Could you please tell which hardware was this? Just curious for my own
use—still have to migrate to such a solution, so I'm wondering what are
others use, especially in/related to Debi
On 2016-05-27 18:56:21, Tiago Ilieve wrote:
> Iustin,
>
> On 27 May 2016 at 18:34, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > That is a good point indeed. I'll think about it, but unless I find a
> > much nicer solution I'll go ahead with the current one.
> >
> > At the m
On 2016-05-27 03:01:29, Tiago Ilieve wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On 25 May 2016 at 17:09, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > I'm convinced we will need at some point to document VCS packaging
> > layouts in a way that allow tools to use that information
> > programmatically. But right now that informatio
On 2016-05-25 09:25:08, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 25.05.2016, 08:25 +0200 schrieb Stefano Zacchiroli:
> > I just wonder whether we should also take the chance of improving the
> > spec in a way that will allow, down the line, to automatically find the
> > actual packaging
On 2016-05-25 09:34:43, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> My vote goes for changing nothing. IMO the extra convenience does not
> outweigh the costs of having to support all the specific layouts in all
> our infrastructure that wants to interact with the packaging git
> repositories.
I'm not sure this is s
On 2016-05-25 18:00:55, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 25.05.2016, 09:34 +0200 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
> > I fear that adding such expressivity is encouraging bad practice. While
> > I can understand that a single repository can be convenient and easier
> > to manage than prop
Hi all,
The Debian Haskell team has migrated a while back from per-package
repositories to a single repository which contains the packaging (only
debian/) for the vast majority of packages
(https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-haskell/DHG_packages.git/). This
makes sense for us since the packaging
On 2016-05-15 21:45:55, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Hi Niels,
>
> 2016-05-15 20:49 GMT+02:00 Niels Thykier :
> > Bálint Réczey:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> I think making PIE and bindnow default in dpkg (at least for amd64) would
> >> be
> >> perfect release goals for Stretch.
>
On 2016-05-06 11:07:57, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 02:16:32AM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm not sure if this is a bug or if I'm doing something wrong, looking
> > for advice. If one wants to deprecate a conffile locate in an
Hi,
I'm not sure if this is a bug or if I'm doing something wrong, looking
for advice. If one wants to deprecate a conffile locate in an otherwise
empty directory (let's say /etc/foo/bar), the following happens at new
package install time:
- before files unpacking, new-preinst is called; from
d
Hi all,
I'm very glad for the automatic debug packages, but I wonder if I'm
doing something wrong since I get this warning:
dpkg-genchanges: warning: package foo-dbgsym listed in files list
but not in control info
The package is generated, so this mostly seems like a harmless warning
Hi and sorry for what is a basic question, but I can't find a clear
answer.
It seems that dpkg-maintscript-helper is the tool to remove conffiles,
but it doesn't seem to have any special handling for init scripts. Which
means that simply calling "rm_conffile …" will just remove the
/etc/init.d/ sc
On 2016-01-04 23:41:40, Eric Valette wrote:
> On 04/01/2016 20:43, Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> >an initramfs is not mandatory as long as you don't have /usr on a
> >separate partition.
> >No initramfs + split /usr is not supported and has been broken for a while.
>
> Did you actually test it? It wor
On 2016-01-04 12:03:07, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 19:15:18 +0100, m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) wrote:
> >Anyway, if you think that the merged /usr scheme is about systemd then
> >you are automatically disqualified from taking part in this discussion
> >because you are not understandi
On 2016-01-03 22:22:16, Tom H wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > On 2016-01-03 12:59:01, Tom H wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't like usr-merge because it goes against my historical
> >> expectation that "/{,s}bin" be separate
On 2016-01-03 12:59:01, Tom H wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Geert Stappers wrote:
> I don't like usr-merge because it goes against my historical
> expectation that "/{,s}bin" be separate from their /usr namesakes and
> contain binaries required for boot.
OK, so adjust your historical e
On 2016-01-03 17:03:02, Simon McVittie wrote:
> […] For
> instance, /bin -> /usr/bin is needed because otherwise #!/bin/sh would
> stop working, […]
This brings to mind—I wonder if the performance impact of having /bin/sh
be read through two indirections (/bin/sh → /usr/bin/sh →
/usr/bin/{dash, ba
On 2016-01-03 15:59:37, Svante Signell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This message was not intended to be sent to a debian-* mailing list by
> the author. However, since it is (in my opinion) of large interest I
> got the permission to forward it to debian-devel. Hopefully, also some
> of the debian-devel subs
On 2016-01-01 13:39:35, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 12:23:20PM +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> > m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> > > Thanks to my conversion program in usrmerge there is no need for a flag
> > > day, archive rebuilds or similar complexity and we can even c
On 2015-11-16 13:27:33, Ian Jackson wrote:
> [resending because my MUA messed up]
>
> Ben Hutchings writes ("Re: git, debian/ tags, dgit - namespace
> proposal"):
> > Deliberately creating identifiers that differ only by case seems
> > gratuitously confusing.
>
> I acknowledge that this is a dow
On 2015-11-15 21:26:52, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2015-11-15 at 21:10 +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> [...]
> > So this message is:
> >
> > * A request for anyone to say if they know of a reason I shouldn't do
> > this.
> [...]
>
> Deliberately creating identifiers that differ only by case see
On 2015-09-28 22:14:44, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> We propose to drop support for i386 processors older than 686-class in
> the current release cycle. This would include folding libc6-i686 into
> libc6, changing the default target for gcc, and changing the 586 kernel
> flavour to 686 (non-PAE).
>
> S
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: haskell-js-flot
Version : 0.8.3
Upstream Author : Neil Mitchell
* URL : https://github.com/ndmitchell/js-flot
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : bundles the
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: haskell-js-jquery
Version : 1.11.3-1
Upstream Author : Neil Mitchell
* URL : https://github.com/ndmitchell/js-jquery
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : bundles the
On 2015-05-03 18:32:03, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Thanks for your prompt answer, Iustin,
>
> On Sun, May 03, 2015 at 04:16:26PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > So:
> >
> > - we could have the current patch tracker resurrected easily as a stop
> > gap measur
On 2015-05-03 15:31:28, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sun, May 03, 2015 at 02:50:17PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > PS: Long-term, the current codebase needs some redoing - e.g. it uses
> > cheetah as templating engine, and that's not available under Python 3,
> > etc.
&g
On 2014-05-29 17:19:50, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
>
> > are you looking for new volunteers?
>
> I'm not a Debian sysadmin but yes, new volunteers are needed for
> patch-tracker.d.o.
>
> Requirements are that you need to be a Debian member, but y
On 2015-04-17 10:54:43, Russell Stuart wrote:
> Github has all but
> annihilated SourceForge in the hosting market place, and the stand out
> change is it's UI. That is in spite of SourceForge's impressive mirror
> network and SourceForge being VCS agnostic.
I think the VCS agnosticism is actuall
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 09:21:56AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2014, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > Packaging branches and tags
> > > ===
> > >
> > > Packaging branches should be named according to the code
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:26:24PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
>
> following the initial discussion we had in August
> (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/08/thrd2.html#00499), I have
> written a first draft of the Debian Enhancement Proposal that I suggested.
> It's now online
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 09:44:43AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 08:25:38AM +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > Hi Hilko,
> >
> > Hilko Bengen writes:
> > > This is a pity for those of us who don't really subscribe to "get
> > > everything from github as needed" model o
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 05:39:21AM +0300, Serge wrote:
> 2012/5/25 Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > And no, "I really can't think of any popular application" is not a valid
> > discussion point.
>
> But there're already popular applications and usecases tha
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 08:14:10PM +0300, Serge wrote:
> 2012/5/25 Neil Williams wrote:
> > Different hardware -> different software selection.
>
> I don't understand your point. I could understand it if we were choosing
> among benefits that most users get from /tmp being on disk and /tmp being
>
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: haskell-ekg
Version : 0.3.0.3
Upstream Author : Johan Tibell
* URL : https://github.com/tibbe/ekg
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : remote monitoring of Haskell
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: shelltestrunner
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : Simon Michael
* URL : http://joyful.com/shelltestrunner
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : test command-line
On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 04:29:12PM +, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
> Wookey, 2012-01-09 15:04+0100:
> > I assume evyone here is aware of mjg's useful posts about the issue of
> > key-management in UEFI secure boot?
> >
> > We need to do one of:
> >
> > * get our bootloaders signed by something like t
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 04:42:45PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:38:10AM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > > All admins I know have at least some servers with custom kernels (in the
> > > > past it was said, to build your firewall/se
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 12:08:57PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-12-25, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> > All admins I know have at least some servers with custom kernels (in the
> > past it was said, to build your firewall/server kernels without module
> > support, so that no rootkit module could b
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 08:16:57PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Dec 07, Stephan Seitz wrote:
>
> > If this is the future way and the way the developer want to go, then
> > the way will succeed in time, but as Goswin said, it will take time.
> >
> > The admins who think the new way is bad will
On Sun, Oct 09, 2011 at 03:48:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> - I've made the "private email aliases considered harmful" point [10],
> in a somehow unrelated thread. I ask you to watch out for interactions
> in Debian that could happen only through private email addresses.
> There are
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 09:50:27PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 06:34 +0900, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Not sure where else to send this… but while checking for a small upload
> > I did I saw some very old files on incoming. If you check sorted by
Hi all,
Not sure where else to send this… but while checking for a small upload
I did I saw some very old files on incoming. If you check sorted by
date, http://incoming.debian.org/?C=M;O=A, you'll see some very old
things (1997, 2003, 2007, etc…).
Their size is not big, but seems… unclean to not
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 09:27:25AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 05:39:08PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Since liblzmaX exists, would it be a simple matter of using it in order
> > to make mandb handle such compressed man pages without having to fork?
>
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 04:03:57PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 08:30:24PM +0100, Darren Salt wrote:
> > It's worth mentioning that man-db has had xz support since March last year
> > (upstream). This is available in testing.
>
> Although I'd also like to mention that I exp
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 11:59:07PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Lars Wirzenius (l...@liw.fi) [110815 23:27]:
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 11:04:51PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> > > * Lars Wirzenius [2011-08-15 18:33 +0100]:
> > > > raw gz xz
> > > > 584163 134 file
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 06:00:50PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 05:35:54PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 04:11:49PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > > Are these any other downsides we need to consider? One issue is the
> > > existence of badly broken pr
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 04:11:49PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Fedora has moved to having /var/lock (now /run/lock) owned by
> root:lock 0775 rather than root:root 01777. This has the advantage
> of making a system directory writable only by root or setgid lock
> programs, rather th
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 05:43:55PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Neil Williams
>
> | The discussions have resulted in quite a few points which I've now put
> | on the wiki:
> |
> | http://wiki.debian.org/EmdebianIntegration
> |
> | Please refer to the wiki before raising possible technical
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 08:23:57PM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 29.07.2011 18:02, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:27:09AM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> >> What virtualisation solutions should be supported?
> >
> > Open Virtualization Format (OVF) is the only format that
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 01:17:50PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst writes:
>
> > No. systemd wants to throw out init scripts, because they are shell
> > scripts, and Shell Scripts Are Bad!!!1!! oh noes.
>
> I don't get that impression. Rather, I think both systemd and upstart
> wan
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:59:13PM +, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst debian.org> writes:
> > IMAO, a statement of (paraphrased) 'portability is for weenies' isn't
>
> Keeping portability in mind is a good thing especially if you're doing
> something
> that is easily implementable with
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 08:39:38PM +0100, Jan Dittberner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 07:01:55PM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Depends:
> > python-protobuf.socketrpc
>
> I maintain this in DPMT.
>
> The python-protobuf.socketrpc module works fine with python-protob
Hi all,
I've uploaded to experimental the new protobuf version (2.4.0a) and this
brings as always a SONAME increase. It also has a new experimental
backend (C++-based) for the Python language bindings, hence the
heads-up.
Here is the list of packages that is affected by this (assuming my
grep-dct
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 02:43:23PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:19:37PM +0100, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Am So den 13. Feb 2011 um 23:21 schrieb Patrick Matthäi:
> > > since we have got a stable release with dkms now, I am asking myself, if
> > > it is stil
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 06:00:10PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:52:22 +0100 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 23:21 +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
> > > since we have got a stable release with dkms now, I am asking myself, if
> > > it is still nec
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 03:19:32PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Iustin Pop writes ("Re: package testing, autopkgtest, and all that"):
> > I think even without a full archive integration, having this spec
> > publicised a bit among developers would be useful; I know I
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 02:45:57PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("package testing, autopkgtest, and all that"):
> > Regarding this specific point (tests run on packages as if they were
> > installed), IIRC Ian Jackson worked a bit on the matter, producing some
> > code (aut
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:37:26AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Montag, 24. Januar 2011, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Second, README.test are designed for human consumption, whereas a
> > standardisation of how to invoke the tests would allow for much more
> > auto
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 06:45:56PM -0500, Michael Hanke wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:19:32AM +0100, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > First, tests run during a package build are good, but they do not
> > ensure, for example, that the package as installed is working OK. I've
> >
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:52:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > First, tests run during a package build are good, but they do not
> > ensure, for example, that the package as installed is working OK. I've
>
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 11:32:07PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Hi!
>
> In the weekend 14-16 January 2011, the Debian Security Team convened in
> Linux Hotel, Essen. We discussed many things, a lot of security work was done
> and of course the necessary socialising wasn't forgotten. We'd like
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 08:35:05PM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> I really would like to see us trying to work together more effectively
> instead of objecting to things right ahead without even knowing wether
> it is such a big relevant deal to make a fuzz about. IMHO it isn't, far
> from it.
We
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 07:46:56AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Now that backports are becoming official, I think that it is the right
> time to reconsider the maintenance model of backports. I would
> personally prefer if we had the same rules of packages ownership as for
> normal packages ("nor
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 10:02:15PM +0200, David Paleino wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 21:37:21 +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 09:10:02PM +0200, David Paleino wrote:
> > > On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 20:12:28 +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > >
> >
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 09:10:02PM +0200, David Paleino wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2010 20:12:28 +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > After some discussion on how the actual links should be presented so
> > that uscan can find them while still keeping the desired UI behaviour,
> >
Hi all,
[resend since my original mail from Aug 26th got lost]
As promised during Debconf, I went and talked with the code.google.com
people about the changes to the download list which broke uscan. For the
record, the rationale for the changes was (quoted with permission):
> Background: We used
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 07:54:03AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 23:44:52 +0200
> Iustin Pop wrote:
> > > There is nothing wrong with a source package that glides through
> > > several stable releases without needing a rebuild, especially if it
>
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:34:32PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 22:59:25 +0200
> Iustin Pop wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:43:36PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > > On 05/24/2010 11:05 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > > * The
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:43:36PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 05/24/2010 11:05 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > * The plan concerning dpkg-source and the default source format has been
> > clarified. In the long term, the default format will disappear and
> > debian/source/format will
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 06:48:41PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 05:16:08PM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> > Hi, All
> >
> > Recently, code.google.com changed the download page link format.
> > As a result, the old debian/watch file in packages whose upstream source
> > co
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 08:34:27AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-03-03, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Changing to SHA won't help. I'm for ditching all md5sums from packages.
> > It's not a lot of disc space gained but it does give a false sense of
> > security or 'insurance' if you want to avoid
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 04:12:30PM +0100, Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>
> On Dec 31, 2009, at 15:04, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> > On 2009-12-31 14:10:46 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 02:02:36PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> >>> POSIX says:
>
> Have we resolved where the can
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 01:38:43AM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mo, 28 Dez 2009, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Sorry to hear about your bad experience. I use the same workflow,
> > git-buildpackage + 3.0 (quilt) and I have no problems so far.
>
> Good for you.
>
> >
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 01:14:46AM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Can someone of the proposers of this (nice? stupid? rubbish?) format
> explain me please why on earth:
> - git-buildpackage
> - dpkg-buildpackage
> - and in fact at the bottom dpkg-source
> fuck around in my git repository, applyin
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Iustin Pop
* Package name: ganeti-htools
Version : 0.2.0
Upstream Author : Iustin Pop
* URL : http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/
* License : GPL2
Programming Lang: Haskell
Description : Cluster tools for Ganeti
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 02:56:20PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> In particular, from the replies to my question the picture I get is
> that everybody is using ad hoc solutions to implement what some people
> are pretending to be properly supported by Debian. I found it not
> defendable, maybe
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 05:36:02PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I have been told by upstream maintainers of one of my packages and by
> prominent developers of other distributions that supporting a standalone
> /usr is too much work and no other distribution worth mentioning does it
> (not Ubuntu,
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 09:57:25PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Luca Niccoli
>
> | But what if I don't need hotplugging? Why should I bear hal flaws if I
> | don't need its features?
>
> A machine without USB or PCI is not a particularly common sight those
> days. Heck, even machines with
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
