Accepted:
dpkg_1.14.7_amd64.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.14.7_amd64.deb
dselect_1.14.7_amd64.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dselect_1.14.7_amd64.deb
Override entries for your package:
dpkg_1.14.7_amd64.deb - required admin
dselect_1.14.7_amd64.deb - required admin
Thank you for your contributi
Accepted:
dpkg_1.14.7_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.14.7_powerpc.deb
dselect_1.14.7_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dselect_1.14.7_powerpc.deb
Override entries for your package:
dpkg_1.14.7_powerpc.deb - required admin
dselect_1.14.7_powerpc.deb - required admin
Thank you for you
Accepted:
dpkg_1.14.7_alpha.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dpkg_1.14.7_alpha.deb
dselect_1.14.7_alpha.deb
to pool/main/d/dpkg/dselect_1.14.7_alpha.deb
Override entries for your package:
dpkg_1.14.7_alpha.deb - required admin
dselect_1.14.7_alpha.deb - required admin
Thank you for your contributi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 07:31:34 +0300
Source: dpkg
Binary: dpkg dselect dpkg-dev
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 1.14.7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Dpkg Developers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Changed-By: Guillem Jover <[E
Hi,
On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 07:06:59 +0300, Guillem Jover wrote:
> We talked about uploading next version soon, so that we can proceed
> with the dpkg-shlibdeps rewrite Raphael has been working on. So I'll
> commit some minor pending issues, try to merge the dpkg-cross stuff,
> and upload late this
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 09:45:20AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
> > So the logic there would be:
> > if there's an upstream tag, then
> > generate an .orig.tgz
> > if there's a pristine-tar info,
> > hax0r it to be pristine
> >
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 02:55:37 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 06:24:15PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 22:04:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > bzr and git always ship the complete repository with each wo
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 06:24:15PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 22:04:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> > bzr and git always ship the complete repository with each working
> > directory. This is why they are called "distributed". Arch seems to be
> >
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 22:04:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 02:16:12PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 20:33:58 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:49:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava w
Hi,
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 15:49:55 -0400, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 02:19:36PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:24:46 -0400, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>> I presume you could ship all the "normal" files in one tarball, the
>>>
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 02:16:12PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 20:33:58 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> > On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:49:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > You probably mean source package here and not .deb. Also the original
> >
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 02:19:36PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Err, and why am I doing this? Why am I not shipping my working
> directory as a tarball, complete instead of breaking it up
> (apparently arbitrarily) into three parts?
As opposed to an .orig.tar.gz and all the debian/,
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How is git reconstituting the files if there is no network
> access? Are they shipping all the bits needed to get a full working
> dir without any network access?
As I understand it, yes, that's the basic idea.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PR
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:14:39 -0400, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:52:45AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> What does this mean in non-git context?
> I think truncating the patch-log history is unimportant for Arch, but
> any ++pristine-trees should definitely
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:24:46 -0400, Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 11:10:41AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hmm. If I have just the ./{arch} directory, and none of the files,
>> then arch thinks the files have just been deleted; and you can't just
>> check out
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 20:33:58 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:49:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> OK, commenting on this with my "I use arch" hat on. If I understand
>> correctly, we are proposing shipping a working directory in the .deb;
>> and
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:49:48AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> OK, commenting on this with my "I use arch" hat on. If I
> understand correctly, we are proposing shipping a working directory in
> the .deb; and not shipping an orig.tar.gz nor a diff.gz file. I like
You probably mean s
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 11:10:41AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hmm. If I have just the ./{arch} directory, and none of the
> files, then arch thinks the files have just been deleted; and you can't
> just check out stuff, since the tree is up to date. Ah. Baz undo
> restores all the
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:52:45AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> What does this mean in non-git context?
I think truncating the patch-log history is unimportant for Arch,
but any ++pristine-trees should definitely be nuked prior to packing.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 15:44:47 +, Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:05:32AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:16:13 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > I've been working on making dpkg-source support a new source
>> > package fo
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 10:13:45 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Colin Watson wrote:
>> I have a change to man-db that uses triggers to update the manual
>> page database automatically, fixing my second oldest remaining
>> bug. I'd love to upload this. While it doesn't break with a
>> non
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 09:54:39 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
>> Oh, one question that comes to mind: how does this affect checking
>> for non-free stuff in past revisions? If 3.1-4 had some non-free
>> files that get reimplemented for 3.2-1, do we (a) expect the
>
Hi,
OK, commenting on this with my "I use arch" hat on. If I
understand correctly, we are proposing shipping a working directory in
the .deb; and not shipping an orig.tar.gz nor a diff.gz file. I like
the idea; and I think I can support nested arch packages (submodules in
.git speak),
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:05:32AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:16:13 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > I've been working on making dpkg-source support a new source package
> > format based upon git. The idea is that a source package has only a
> > .dsc and a
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 05:25:00PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> (Sorry, everything is still a bit blur in my mind and while I was
> preparing myself to maybe hack on wig&pen as my next dpkg related project,
> this discussion took me by surprise :-))
Btw, if someone has too much free time and d
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > (It might be just me, but I'm getting the feeling that implementing
> > Wig&Pen via this v3 format is probably easier than implementing it via
> > the v2 format...)
>
> Could you please explain what the difference between "Wig&Pen" and v2
> format
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:05:32AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:16:13 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > My implementation adds a new 3.0 version source format. A 3.0 format
> > debian source package can consist of any files allowed by formats 1
> > and 2, but
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:16:13 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I've been working on making dpkg-source support a new source package
> format based upon git. The idea is that a source package has only a
> .dsc and a .git.tar.gz, which is just a git repo.
> My implementation adds a new 3
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:18:17PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 08:45:08AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm quite attached to being able to peek inside source packages
> > quickly by sshing over to the local mirror I keep at home which
> > grabs everything overnight so th
On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 03:17:49 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 11:09:21PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > Use .orig.tar.(bz2|lzma) if they are available
> > and no .gz can be found. Also let the user specify
> > via -C(gz|bz2|lzma) how files that need to be
> > generat
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:05:08AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > FWIW, I was thinking much more of native packages here; non-native
> > packages already tend to just import the upstream tarball which usually
> > contains generated files, which is probably why this hasn't been a
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 11:40:49AM +0200, Nicolas François wrote:
> Maybe pod has a minor issue regarding translations, which is that the
> title (the last argument to the .TH command) must be specified on the
> pod2man command line and is thus harder to translate. But I would not
> complain if it
Colin Watson wrote:
> I have a change to man-db that uses triggers to update the manual page
> database automatically, fixing my second oldest remaining bug. I'd love
> to upload this. While it doesn't break with a non-triggers-supporting
> dpkg, I'd rather wait until triggers are merged in case th
Colin Watson wrote:
> FWIW, I was thinking much more of native packages here; non-native
> packages already tend to just import the upstream tarball which usually
> contains generated files, which is probably why this hasn't been a
> problem for things like git-buildpackage. If nothing else, there
Florian Weimer wrote:
> What about empty directories?
Do you mean empty directories under .git or empty directories stored
*in* git (can't be done, use a .gitignore in the directory)
> I really think you need to work off a clone (or a cleaned-up cp -al'ed
> copy). For instance, you do not necess
Anthony Towns wrote:
> Oh, one question that comes to mind: how does this affect checking for
> non-free stuff in past revisions? If 3.1-4 had some non-free files that
> get reimplemented for 3.2-1, do we (a) expect the maintainer to do a
> no-history upload for 3.2-1; (b) check that this happens s
Hi,
I was wondering what the status of merging Ian's triggers work is; I
can't find any comments by the dpkg maintainers on it.
I have a change to man-db that uses triggers to update the manual page
database automatically, fixing my second oldest remaining bug. I'd love
to upload this. While it d
Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Maybe providing a feature on packages.debian.org (or similar) to download
> > > sources in simple, non-VC, tarball format would make this a complete
> > > non-issue though?
> > pristine-tar could be used for this, it would just need source packages
> > to put the delta so
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 10:18:17PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 08:45:08AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I'm
> > quite attached to being able to peek inside source packages quickly by
> > sshing over to the local mirror I keep at home which grabs everything
> > overnight s
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 08:45:08AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> I'm
> quite attached to being able to peek inside source packages quickly by
> sshing over to the local mirror I keep at home which grabs everything
> overnight so that I don't have to wait for it to download; particularly
> so for lar
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 11:55:49AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> Of course, a number of packages accidentally ship .svn directories and
> so on anyway, though I suppose there's a difference between "officially
> blessed by dpkg" and "warned against by lintian" ...
That has to be the understatement
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 10:09:22PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> (So, FWIW, I'm not sold on git. Not sold at all yet. But it was a good
> choice for this implementation for several reasons.)
(I don't think bzr is perfect either, of course; the lack of shallow
branches (see below
* Joey Hess:
> I have a sourcev3 branch with my changes at ,
> and have also attached a diff to this mail. I feel that this is ready
> for review and hopefully merging into dpkg now. Looking forward to your
> comments.
What about empty directories?
I really think you need to work off a clone (or
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 02:56:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 10:37:48PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > The second possibility seems to me to be more flexible, though, and
> > probably not all that hard to implement: build both a .tar.gz
> > (containing the working tree)
44 matches
Mail list logo
