Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Loïc Minier
Hey Trying to kick the dust a bit as having the triplet "in the air" is kind of an unhappy situation for armhf :-) On Wed, Sep 08, 2010, Guillem Jover wrote: > We currently need something like this in dpkg-dev because the mappings > need to be bidirectional, as dpkg-dev needs to be ab

Natalija nodod shaujamriiku!

2011-02-17 Thread Mackuss Anatolijs
Vecmilgravja veikalinjaa sodien var iegadaties shaujamo Kahr Arms MK9 Nav vajadziga ne atlauju, ne atlauju no policista! Neparproti, un mekle realaja rajonaa: http://www.bezatlaujas.info ! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Steve Langasek
Loïc's latest post drew my attention back to this thread, where I see I had this message flagged for follow-up: On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:35:24AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > I realize this is ideal, but: > > - there's been very strong upstream pushback on this, asserting that this >

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > Hi all, > >  I really would like to know the stance of the dpkg maintainers regarding the > armhf dpkg patch. I have a ton of armhf patches that I'm waiting to file as > bug reports, but without the dpkg patch, those patches would b

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Konstantinos Margaritis
Luke, 1. My name is Konstantinos, or Kostas, or if you prefer, just call me markos. It's not konstantinos, and it's not konstantinous. 2. My workload is big even without considering "crazy" solutions of distro-wide bitbake-integrations. If you so strongly believe that this method works so great, f

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Wookey
+++ Steve Langasek [2011-02-17 12:03 -0800]: > Loïc's latest post drew my attention back to this thread, where I see I had > this message flagged for follow-up: > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:35:24AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > > I realize this is ideal, but: > > > > - there's been

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > Luke, > > 1. My name is Konstantinos, or Kostas, or if you prefer, just call me > markos. It's not konstantinos, and it's not konstantinous. sorry! :) i have always spotted such auto-finger-typing errors in the past: i apologise

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
sorry, markos - and again, apologies to all, but i am actually now getting deeply concerned. allow me to ask you this, markos. why, if someone says, "i have an idea that could help you, and could help the debian project in general, it's complex, it's been misunderstood frequently in the past (not

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi Luke, On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 12:06:27AM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > sorry, markos - and again, apologies to all, but i am actually now > getting deeply concerned. > allow me to ask you this, markos. why, if someone says, "i have an > idea that could help you, and could help

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

2011-02-17 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Steve Langasek wrote: > Hi Luke, allo steve. > I think you are working from a buggy assumption here. i'm pleased - and relieved - to see the word "think". >  The problem is not > that infrastructure is lacking to let Konstantinos et al. get on with making >