Re: First draft of review of policy must usage

2006-10-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:49:03PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > > > - Packages involving shared libraries should be split up into > > + Packages involving shared libraries ought to be split up into > > several binary packages. This section mostly deals with how > > this se

Re: First draft of review of policy must usage

2006-10-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 01:03:11AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Next, I removed clauses that said that all the requirements of > policy must be met for a package to be in main or contrib; we know > that is not true. > > I have replaced some uses of the word must when it was

Re: Missing days?

2006-10-17 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 02:34:11PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > Hi! > > I have started to wonder a bit about 'missing days' - a thing that is > especially importaint now when we are heading for a total freeze. > > >From http://packages.qa.debian.org/u/udev.html: > Too young, only 1 of 10 days old

Re: Build failure: cannot find -lglib-2.0

2006-10-13 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 11:40:04AM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > A number of packages currently fail to build with: > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lglib-2.0 > > Can someone please investigate whether this is a bug in those packages > or some underlying problem and file bugs. I've put some bui

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version > >of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 > > Well, th

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 04:17:39PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > > >The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires > >as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary > >infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) > > Ok, the reduces the libs

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > > In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs > available on the web page for "problems" and found the libraries that > are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty > offenders, li

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > > You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la > KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they > KBM> link in. > > Will this problem disappear i

Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies

2006-09-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 02:40:49PM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > > One thing I noticed is that there are a lot of "problems" (in your > terminology) caused by unneeded dependencies on libgcc1 > (/lib/libgcc_s.so.1). From my quick investigation, it appears that the > C++ and Fortran compilers (

Re: "~" in builddirs caused libtool to fail

2006-09-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 04:26:16PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote: > > > # libtool --version > > > ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 1.5.22 Debian 1.5.22-4 (1.1220.2.365 2005/12/18 > > > 22:14:06) > > > > That's what you have installed in /usr/bin, try: > > ./ld10k1/libtool --version > > ltmain.sh (GNU l

Re: Policy process (was: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?)

2006-09-18 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 11:43:18AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Copying the debian-policy list, since this conversation is basically about > that. > > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I don't think policy changes need to be seconded. We have a polic

Re: [Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?

2006-09-17 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 09:55:46AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [Mario Holbe] > > >> So, as long as the Debian policy doesn't handle this, > > > I agree that we should update the policy to document this fact. > > It would be quite nice to have

Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?

2006-09-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 02:21:19PM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > [Kurt Roeckx] > > Afaik, Ubuntu is already using this. As a result, I've actually got a > > bug against my package submitted because it didn't handle it. My > > package now recreates the dire

Re: Moving /var/run to a tmpfs?

2006-09-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 06:54:05PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Hello, > It has been pointed out to me in http://bugs.debian.org/387699 > that syvinit is going to move /var/run to a tmpfs to solve a long-standing > issue, having some place to store state information before partitions > are chec

Re: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394

2006-09-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 09:20:00PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > A number of packages (at least three, but possibly more) fail to build > > with the error: > > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394 > >

Re: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394

2006-09-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:28:24PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > A number of packages (at least three, but possibly more) fail to build > with the error: > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lraw1394 > Can someone investigate why this is the case. I've put built logs > (mbox file) at http://people.d

Re: Buildds still not picking up new architectures, why?

2006-08-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:47:13AM +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > > This issue has been blocking the Ada transition (19 source packages, > 11 RC bugs) for about 3 weeks now, and I'd really like to be able to > proceed. I don't see how this can be blocking a transition. Please just do it for the

Re: [Ping] Packages-arch-specific: please add architectures to Ada packages

2006-07-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 10:03:56PM +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > It has been a week since I sent the request below, and I received no > answer. I am resending to the three maintainers of > Packages-arch-specific, and CCing debian-devel. > > I've restricted the list of supported architectures to

Re: additions to dpkg-architecture

2006-07-14 Thread Kurt Roeckx
> > | You have searched for the contents of libssl0.9.7 in stable, > > | architecture sparc. Package contains 9 files, displaying files 1 to 9. > > | > > | usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 > > | usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.7 > > | usr/lib/v8/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 > > | usr/lib/v8/libssl.so.0.9.7 > > | usr/lib/v

Re: These new diffs are great, but...

2006-06-29 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 09:35:09PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote: > Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 09:15:13PM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote: > >> Same here. Very annoying on a box where you only update every few weeks > >> or something. Wouldn't it be possible to make snapsho

Re: Bug#363486: dpkg: [update-alternatives] New categories for: WORD, EXCEL, MEDIA-PLAYER etc.

2006-06-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:53:57PM +0300, Jari Aalto wrote: > | > > | > The same problem is with Office programs: > | > > | > lyx > | > abiword > | > oowriter > | > ... > | > > | > The /etc/alternatives contains a good framework to canonicalize actions to > | > common names available in

ITP: elfutils

2006-05-20 Thread Kurt Roeckx
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name : elfutils * Version : 0.120 * Upstream Author : redhat (Ulrich Drepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) * URL :ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/systemtap/elfutils/ * License : GPL Description : A collection of utilities and DSOs to handle compiled objects. Elfutils

Re: Does /etc/shadow exist in an sbuild environment?

2006-04-27 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 07:09:17AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > > Turning shadow on in chroots is left up to the local admin. > > This is optionnally done by the passwd package when it is > reconfigured, see /var/lib/dpkg/info/passwd.config > > Of course, using "shadowconfig on" is also pos

Re: [Help] Versioning of a library

2006-04-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 11:10:35PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I'm the maintainer of libgtkdatabox-0.2.3.0-0. Until now there > was no request for an update of the upstream version and I had > personal reasons to stay with an outdated version. Now I was > asked to package the latest ve

Re: AMD64: etch and uploads

2006-04-18 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 12:17:54PM -0400, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 12:41:50AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Developers with amd64 machines are also now able to upload new versions > > of their package built locally (rather than in an i386 chroot) -- but > > in order to

Re: Lintian package-has-a-duplicate-relation

2006-04-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Apr 16, 2006 at 01:19:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Now, the clean solution for those cases when there's a compelling reason > > to implement this bad idea: see what dpkg-shlibdeps(1) has to say about > > shlibs.local. > > I've tried t

Re: amd64 uploads

2006-04-09 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > Le Ven 7 Avril 2006 20:33, Kurt Roeckx a écrit : > > > A lot of the others simply need to desupport old versions of > > > Python. > > > > python2.1 and 2.2 are supposed to be removed soon, but

Re: amd64 uploads

2006-04-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:20:09PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> kid3 > > > > This one dep-wait on the wrong package. > > Yeah, the dep-wait should be dropped to reflect the recent upload. > > Speaking of dep-wait, there appear to be a few bugs w

Re: amd64 uploads

2006-04-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 07:25:30PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >kid3 > > This one dep-wait on the wrong package. The package did declare a build dependency on libtunepimp2-dev until you uploaded one that build depends on libtunepimp3-dev yesterday. wanna-build doesn't remove those automaticly

Re: First AMD64 Binary Uploaded

2006-03-28 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 05:56:11PM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > For now I suggest you contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > OK, thanks; I considered that, but wasn't sure it was focused enough. > (Granted, -devel isn't t

Re: First AMD64 Binary Uploaded

2006-03-27 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 04:25:43PM -0500, Aaron M. Ucko wrote: > Yee-ha! This makes a wonderful (if moderately belated) first birthday > present for my em64t workstation. :-) > > One question, though: what's the contact address for the new buildd's > administrators? I tried [EMAIL PROTECTED] (to

Re: Severity of architecture-dependent bugs

2006-02-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:30:16AM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote: > A grave bug has been file against a package I maintain pointing out > that the package does not work on AMD64 and in fact never has, even > though it builds on AMD64. Since it turns out this package has never > worked on AMD64, this b

Re: Implicition declarations of functions and bugs

2006-01-20 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 11:19:58PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Samuel Thibault, le Fri 20 Jan 2006 23:15:11 +0100, a écrit : > > Maybe the debian policy should require > > -Werror-implicit-function-declaration in CFLAGS so as to avoid such > > issue? > > Or buildds could check for "implicit de

Re: gconf transition

2006-01-09 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 03:09:34PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 06 janvier 2006 à 14:28 -0600, Alejandro Bonilla a écrit : > > /usr/lib/libgconf2-4/gconf-sanity-check-2: error while loading shared > > libraries: libpangocairo-1.0.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such > > fil

Re: debian "experimental"

2005-12-30 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 04:48:06PM +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free > deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free So why do you use ftp.debian.org and not ftp.pl.debian.org for experimental?

Re: debian "experimental"

2005-12-30 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 04:12:23PM +0100, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > Hi, > > I have noticed that directory > debian/dists/experimental/main/binary-i386 is empty. > Where is new "experimental" repository? -rw-r--r-- 1 mirror mirror 1288427 2005-12-29 21:14 Packages drwxr-sr-x 2 mirror mirror

Re: buildd administration

2005-12-20 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 09:54:34AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > >> I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against > >> build-dep

Re: buildd administration

2005-12-18 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 08:34:04PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > > > > Six months is a lot of time; and experimental should provide you with > > the space and machine power to handle the rebuilding. > > I don't know of any autobuilders that build packages from sid against > build-dependencies in e

Re: urgency='low' testing propogation only 5 days for gtk+2.0?

2005-12-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 06:10:11PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > It is my understanding that an urgency='low' upload defines a 10 day > delay in testing propogation, unless overridden by hints. > > However, yesterday's gtk+2.0 upload indications only a 5 day delay. > Why? > > http://packages.qa.d

Re: congratulations to our ftp-master team

2005-12-13 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:25:03AM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote: > > [1]: As I write this 79 NEW packages, 85 total. Then ftp-master must be really busy, since it's now 64, total 69. Also note that most of those packages in new aren't even a week in it, alot aren't even a day old. I think they're

Re: ldd -u (Re: Solving recursive dependency disease in KDE-based packages)

2005-12-11 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 05:02:15PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:56:08PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Nathanael Nerode [Sun, 11 Dec 2005 07:35:41 -0500]: > > > > > To work out which libraries you're linked to which you don't actual

Re: ldd -u (Re: Solving recursive dependency disease in KDE-based packages)

2005-12-11 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 04:56:08PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Nathanael Nerode [Sun, 11 Dec 2005 07:35:41 -0500]: > > > To work out which libraries you're linked to which you don't actually > > need, > > ldd -u is invaluable. > > This seems like not the case _at all_ to me (the "inva

Re: Sparc build failure analysis (was Re: StrongARM tactics)

2005-12-11 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 05:55:23AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Indeed, for practical buildd maintainance purposes, the distinction is > > not that important -- though 'Failed' is known to not benefit of a > > requeue, while 'Building:Maybe-Failed' might or might not, it's unkown, > > most a

Re: StrongARM tactics

2005-12-06 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 11:51:00AM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Hi, > > hotkey-setup: might also work on amd64 ia64 (depends on dmidecode) > OTOH, maintainer usually seems to know what he's doing... Also see #331280. Afaik, there is no reason this couldn't be changed to work on

Re: StrongARM tactics

2005-12-05 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:43:15PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote: > Hi, > > Vincent Sanders wrote: > > [1] http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/architecture.php?a=arm > > taking a "random" (end of alphabet) sample from maybe-failed: > > twinkle: requeue (probably libccrtp was stuck in NEW) Ju

Re: possible freetype transition; improved library handling needed for all C/C++ packages

2005-11-27 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 11:48:37PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > I've trimmed the configure scripts to avoid this, leaving me with the > link commands for the two binaries being: > > g++ -Wall `"/usr/bin/wx-config" --cxxflags` -I/usr/include -I/usr/include > -I/usr/include -g -O2 -o tqsl tq

Re: possible freetype transition; improved library handling needed for all C/C++ packages

2005-11-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 02:43:14PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > * Use Debian's libtool. > > kmldonkey links with the following libraries: -lkdeui -lkio. As shipped, > libtool expands that to every library under the sun. The new libtool > indeed reduces this to /usr/

Re: UTF-8 for debian/control

2005-11-06 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 11:41:21PM +0100, Roland Stigge wrote: > > Time for reviewing > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/12/msg00521.html and a > statement in Policy about that (for consistency with changelogs that are > already handled that way)? UTF-8 is only recommended in the changel

Re: How to get rid of a poised version

2005-11-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 06:35:03PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 11:30:20AM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Mea culpa. I did a stupid thing with sbcl: in version 1:0.9.6.0-1 I used > > the > > following construction: >

Re: How to get rid of a poised version

2005-11-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 11:30:20AM +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote: > Hello, > > Mea culpa. I did a stupid thing with sbcl: in version 1:0.9.6.0-1 I used the > following construction: [...] > So is there anything else I can do? Yes, bootstrap it once for each arch manually. This really is someth

Re: real-i386

2005-11-03 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 11:35:22AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 12:22 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Nick Jacobs: > > > > > You mean, it's seriously been proposed that a > > > significant amount of work should be done to restore > > > support for a processor that has not b

Re: Bug#336698: dh_strip: debug data going to the wrong place

2005-11-01 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 02:12:04PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Sorry, you're completely wrong. The files installed in > > /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib are detached symbol files, that are loaded > > automatically by gdb -- *not* using LD_LIBRARY_PATH; and gdb looks for >

Re: Packages file missing from unstable archive

2005-10-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 05:11:00AM -0700, Ian Bruce wrote: > > If the .deb files were compressed using the gzip "--rsyncable" option, > then fetching them with zsync (or rsync) would be considerably more > efficient than straight HTTP transfers. No it wouldn't. Remember that .deb files are never

Re: Dependencies of -dev packages

2005-10-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 04:29:20PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 07:55:25PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > > $ pkg-config --libs a > > > -la -lb > > ^^^ > > > > It should not link to libb if you only request it to link to &

Re: Dependencies of -dev packages

2005-10-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 05:20:16PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > > > > > $ pkg-config --libs a > > > -la -lb > > ^^^ > > > > It should not link to libb if you only request it to link to > > liba. liba should have a DT_NEEDED for libb, and the linker > > should find the symb

Re: Dependencies of -dev packages

2005-10-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:03:51PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 07:15:38PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > 3D > > Pretty please don't suggest that unless you first fix pkg-config. > > It's always linking in the libraries required for stati

Re: Dependencies of -dev packages

2005-10-21 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 09:16:01PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote: > - Make pkg-config mandatory. pkg-config can already handle the case that > different libraries are needed for static and shared linking. > pkg-config also helps the second problem (conflicting -dev packages), > see below Pretty

Re: There are buildlogs for amd64 packages?

2005-10-21 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 09:20:52PM +0200, Erik Schanze wrote: > Hi, > > there can I find the build log for dvgrab_1.7-1 on amd64? > > http://buildd.debian.org/ doesn't list amd64 at all and > http://amd64.ftbfs.de/ has only 1.8-1 and higher. Only buildd logs since about May 2005 are available on

Re: Bug#332498: RFH: openssl -- Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary and related cryptographic tools

2005-10-06 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:07:01PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: normal > > > I request assistance with maintaining the openssl package. > > I am currently the only maintainer, but this package really needs a > team to work on it. Too many packages depend on the libr

Re: dh_libtool proposal (-dev dependencies on -dev from libtool)

2005-10-05 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 05:44:02PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > > The proposal is to have this program populate a substvar named > ${libtool:Depends}. I've studied this problem at a cursory level, and > this is what I currently intend to do: > > * Traverse the directory to be installed for .l

Re: Bug#331072: ITP: cinelerra-cvs -- non-linear video editor and compositor for Linux.

2005-10-01 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 03:05:08PM +0200, Riccardo Setti wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Riccardo Setti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > * Package name: cinelerra-cvs > Version : 2.0-cvs > Upstream Author : > * URL : http://www.example.org/ > * License

Bug#142164: Packages files should be in UTF-8

2005-09-30 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 11:32:13PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > reassign 142164 general > thanks > > Hi, > > Just because a topic has been discussed on the policy > discussion list is not reason enough to assign the bug to > policy. Note that bug has been reassigned to the policy

Re: architecture-specific release criteria - requalification needed

2005-09-22 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 06:45:35PM +0930, Debian-armeb Porting Team wrote: > > We *really* need to be hooked into the buildd system to be able to > automatically build the rest of the stable, testing and unstable > releases. This is our top-most priority, and we hope to get help on > this point f

Re: Debian shared libs use far more memory than required

2005-08-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 10:25:15AM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > > I checked the content of the .data section in libgtk and the > > unexpected data appears to be composed of all exported > > symbols aligned to a multiple of 16. Obviously a symbol > > table of some kind. > > The whole thing sound

Re: Debian shared libs use far more memory than required

2005-08-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 12:21:07AM +0200, Stephane Chauveau wrote: > > I am not really surprised because I just compared the linker scripts > from 2.15 and 2.16. > They have a different section ordering and the official debian package > clearly follows the 2.16 ordering. Also, there was no diffe

Re: Debian shared libs use far more memory than required

2005-08-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:47:17PM +0200, Thiemo Seufer wrote: > The immediate suspect is binutils, particularily ld. It might be > interesting to do test compiles with an older binutils version > (2.15 vs. 2.16?) and see if the problem is reproducible. The package in question was already build us

Re: order of builds on a buildd: icu (optional/libs)

2005-08-19 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 05:46:19PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 07:40:30PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote: > > > Based on what I've seen in other threads, the order in which packages > > get built on a buildd is a function of, among perhaps other factors, > > its priority an

Re: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path

2005-08-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 01:34:56PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > For the past week, I've started getting errors like the following when > building any packages in pbuilder that include shared libraries with the > current tool chain in unstable: > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for l

Re: Please notify your rdepends' maintainers if you break an interface

2005-08-15 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 06:33:59PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > apt-rdepends > > Interesting, but not useful for the case I had today: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-rdepends --build-depends --reverse foo > E: Reverse build-dependencies are not

Re: status of jackd? (bug #318098)

2005-08-09 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:28:58AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 01:01:16AM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote: > > mini rant: what's the point in breaking important packages in > > unstable for significant periods (e.g. the bug above was filed > > 2005/07/13)? Isn't experimental

Re: The BTS and bug subscriptions

2005-07-23 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 06:11:14PM +1000, Pascal Hakim wrote: > > It is now possible to subscribe and unsubscribe from individual bugs in > the Bug Tracking System. To do so, simply send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED], or [EMAIL PROTECTED], where > nnn is the bug number you wish to {,un}subscribe

Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal

2005-07-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 2. The information of -dev packages depending on other -dev packages > > > cannot be automatically determined currently; > > > it should be possible to obtain a minimal list by analyzing the > > > NEEDED field of the objdump output. > > > > Errr, -

Re: HashKnownHosts

2005-07-03 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 03:52:07PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > The only time I've ever removed entries from > known_hosts is when I know that a specific host's key has changed, and > 'ssh-keygen -R' deals with that just fine. That options seems to be undocumented. It's not in the man page or the

Re: Orphaning packages

2005-06-18 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 11:08:28PM +0200, Ivo Timmermans wrote: > Hi, > > I'm orphaning these packages: > > dutch (bug #314839) > > dutch should probably be adopted by someone who speaks Dutch. I'm willing to adopt this package is nobody else wants it. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [E

Re: package building problems (was Re: Canonical and Debian)

2005-06-08 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 08:11:46PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > > > > >4) buildd software issues(pbuild,sbuild,wanna-build,etc) > > > > It looks like this software could use some redesign to put less work > > > on the buildd maintainers and scale better to more buildds. > > > Do you have some

Re: PostgreSQL transition ahead

2005-06-07 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 07:24:06PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Martin Pitt: > > > (2) PostgreSQL 8.0 brought a new SONAME for libpq (libpq4), which > > removed a few symbols which were only intended for internal use, > > but were used nevertheless by some client apps (like "psql"). >

Re: non-free to main, but buildds not picking up?

2005-05-29 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 04:05:42PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > My ggobi package recently made it from non-free/math to math (as the AT&T > license was replaced by the CPL, same as for graphviz). However, as shown by > igloo's script, buildds are not picking it up: > > http://people

Re: [Release Notes] Use Woody's or Sarge's aptitude for upgrades?

2005-05-16 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:44:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > 1. apt-get install aptitude > 2. change the /etc/apt/sources.list to point to "stable" > 3. aptitude update > 4. aptitude install aptitude dpkg > 5. aptitude -f --with-recommends dist-upgrade 0. change the /etc

Re: Sarge release for amd64 - Please help to fix the remaining bugs

2005-04-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 07:36:36PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > > Does that mean amd64 installer come without a mailer by default? Or will the > amd64 installer install a different mailer? The problem is that the old version of libmysqlclient-lgpl was build before we switched to an nptl onl

Re: Sarge release for amd64 - Please help to fix the remaining bugs

2005-04-25 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 11:32:25AM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote: > > There are still a few packages in sarge which fail to build from source > on amd64. Those packages will not be part of the amd64 release of sarge. I've made a list list on saterday too which included all patched versions in the

Re: Do not make gratuitous source uploads just to provoke the buildds!

2005-03-13 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 09:44:33AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 11:17:52PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > Because we want packages in base to be preferred, as well as packages in > > libs. > > I think I slightly misunderstood the "ordering by section" bit -- I was > assu

Re: automake/autoconf in build-dependencies

2005-03-13 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 02:02:29PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Kurt Roeckx > > > And how can you know you can actually build it if you > > never tried it? > > That's the point, actually: If I build-depend on autoconf, I *cannot* > know that it wi

Re: automake/autoconf in build-dependencies

2005-03-13 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 12:04:59PM +, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > - Putting autoconf-generated files in the source package is nearly as > > fragile as generating them at build time. If there are changes in > > autoconf which break the configure.

Re: Where are the files of tetex-bin_3.0-1?

2005-03-11 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 07:45:23PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > (Cc to -devel, because this might be of general interest). > > Hello, > > on Tuesday I got a mail from katie that tetex-bin_3.0-1 was accepted, > but the files don't seem to be in the archive. There was a problem with katie stopping

gcc-3.3 3.3.5-9 C++ ABI problem.

2005-03-08 Thread Kurt Roeckx
Hi, gcc-3.3 3.3.5-9 was build with the configure option --disable-__cxa_atexit instead of --enable-__cxa_atexit. This causes it to have a different C++ ABI. This was fixed in the 3.3.5-10 which should be available soon. I've made a list of source packages that might have been build with the 3.3

Re: Does this break binary compatability on 64bit architectures?

2005-02-24 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 05:53:02PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote: > Hello. > > Upstream of a library package that I maintain changed function prototypes > in the followinf way: > > > > > -int mailpop3_retr(mailpop3 * f, uint32_t index, char ** result, > > +int mailpop3_retr(mailpop3 * f, un

Re: The ghost of libc-dev

2005-02-18 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 02:05:56PM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote: > > *) The standard way of doing this today is to have a -dev package which > needs libc headers Depend on 'libc6-dev | libc-dev' to avoid the situation > of having only a pure-virtual package. Why does that rule exists anyway? It's al

Re: Debug packages cluttering the archive

2005-02-06 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 01:14:09AM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 10:33:53PM -0700, Joel Aelwyn wrote: > > It was brought up on IRC, a couple of weeks ago (my apologies, but I don't > > recall who brought it up, nor do I have a log) that it is now possible > > to strip debugg

Re: About valid and invalid user names

2005-02-05 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 01:38:36PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > Hi, > > adduser has two bug reports open where people are asking for user name > rules to be relaxed. One report wants "." to be allowed in user names, > another wants usernames to start with numbers. > > May I ask for your opinion bef

Re: list what's in the NEW queue?

2005-02-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:47:28PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > It would be better to set up a arch-indep > autobuilder (on a FAST machine that can handle pbuilder's unpacking of > chroots, so that chroot crappage won't happen so often) and file FTBFS > automatically. We build all b

Re: Bug#292831: udev: udev prevents X from beeing started

2005-01-31 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 03:46:50PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 05:31:03AM +0100, Joey Hess wrote: > > Marco d'Itri wrote: > > > My package works as designed, but let me know if you can design > > > something better. > > > > Oh, so it's udev that's responsible for what II

Re: NPTL support in 2.4 kernel series?

2005-01-21 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Martin Kittel wrote: > Hi, > > I am maintaining the packages of the MaxDB database system. > > Recently upstream has converted the database kernel from > linuxthread-style threading to NPTL. While -at least for i386- > linuxthreads is still supported in

Re: Manpages licensed under GFDL without the license text included

2005-01-09 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 01:20:15PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > Looking into sarge I found a number of manpages, that do not look > > redistributeable as they are licensed under the G"F"DL but do not > > include the full licence text needed to be distributeable. Especially

Re: For people more knowledgeable about buildds...

2005-01-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:13:11PM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote: > Hi, > > Is there a webpage that shows the current queue of packages in Needs-Build > state? igloo's pages are great, but they only let you know the position in > the queue of a package, not what's before or after it (out of curiosit

Re: Linux Core Consortium

2004-12-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 08:29:16PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The problem is not the autobuilder infrastructure per se. It is that > > testing and unstable are largely in sync (!). This, combinded with the > > fact that testing must not

Re: Synching mirrors and clients (was: Re: apt-proxy v2 and rsync)

2004-11-04 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 05:46:55PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote: > > Now if you feel advantous, repack as many package on the source mirror > with gzip --rsyncable and notice the difference. Exactly how is this going to help? I can only see this as being useful when the files change. Files should nev

Re: S/390 buildd reconfiguration --> problem fix

2004-10-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 06:25:33AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Unfortunately this changed the kernel architecture from s390 to s390x. > This in turn has the potential to break older configure scripts. May I suggest that you use the linux32 util? It should change the returned uname -r from s

<    1   2   3   4