On Sun, 30.07.00 00:20 -0400, Decklin Foster wrote:
> I'm going to use logrotate for a package, as suggested in policy 4.8.
> Would it be more appropriate to use a Suggests:, Reccommends:, or
> Depends: relationship on this package?
If your package produces logfiles which would, if logrotate does n
Hello
[forwarded to debian-mentors as the main discussion was there]
On Sat, 29.07.00 19:20 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > Attached you find a patch against dpkg-buildpackage which creates a
> > debian/strace.debhelper file when running "debian/rules buil
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > 1. strace can't handle more then 256 subprocesses, a limit you can (and
> > will) reach when building packages.
> really? I'll check it.
Trust me, I'm upstream maintainer for strace so I'm reasonably aware
of its features :)
> > 2. strace'ing an application
Hello
> Trust me, I'm upstream maintainer for strace so I'm reasonably aware
> of its features :)
Off-Topic: Why does it has this limitation?
> > And remember that this is only a "suggestive" tool like dpkg-shlibdeps,
> > if your package is so strange that it really does not work you can omit it
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> Off-Topic: Why does it has this limitation?
Lack of development time, subtle kernel bugs, etc. strace is not
a trivial application.
> Ok, what about this, I make a dpkg-genbuilddeps and a patch to debuild so
> that it *optionally* runs strace only if the user
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 11:35:09AM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > Attached you find a patch against dpkg-buildpackage which creates a
> > > debian/strace.debhelper file when running "debian/rules build".
There was a suggestion to write a wrapper libra
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 02:25:43PM +1000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > On Sat, 29.07.00 16:05 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > I improved it even more and now I have a patched dpkg-buildpackage, that
> > > > runs the strac
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 03:11:57PM -0400, Franklin Belew wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 02:25:43PM +1000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > On Sat, 29.07.00 16:05 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > > I improved it even more
> > (It's just that I bet that we never get build-depends if maintainers are
> > forced to guess them theirselves w/o automatic help)
> We get build-depends since some of the autobuilders build packages in
> minimal chroots and detect problems automatically.
Well, I never received a mail froma an
> IMO, this script should not be part of a normal build. It should be a
> simple extra utility that a maintainer can call every so often to validate
> their build deps. Generating build deps should not be part of the normal
Sorry, it seems as if I forgot to mail to this list that my latest patches
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> Well, I never received a mail froma an autobuilder saying that one of
> my packages (about 10) were examined and found to have the following
> buildtime dependencies.
Probably because it's a recent change.
> Maybe this should be done so that they can be incl
On Sun, 30.07.00 00:20 -0400, Decklin Foster wrote:
> I'm going to use logrotate for a package, as suggested in policy 4.8.
> Would it be more appropriate to use a Suggests:, Reccommends:, or
> Depends: relationship on this package?
If your package produces logfiles which would, if logrotate does
Hello
[forwarded to debian-mentors as the main discussion was there]
On Sat, 29.07.00 19:20 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > Attached you find a patch against dpkg-buildpackage which creates a
> > debian/strace.debhelper file when running "debian/rules bui
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > 1. strace can't handle more then 256 subprocesses, a limit you can (and
> > will) reach when building packages.
> really? I'll check it.
Trust me, I'm upstream maintainer for strace so I'm reasonably aware
of its features :)
> > 2. strace'ing an applicatio
Hello
> Trust me, I'm upstream maintainer for strace so I'm reasonably aware
> of its features :)
Off-Topic: Why does it has this limitation?
> > And remember that this is only a "suggestive" tool like dpkg-shlibdeps,
> > if your package is so strange that it really does not work you can omit it
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> Off-Topic: Why does it has this limitation?
Lack of development time, subtle kernel bugs, etc. strace is not
a trivial application.
> Ok, what about this, I make a dpkg-genbuilddeps and a patch to debuild so
> that it *optionally* runs strace only if the use
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 11:35:09AM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > Attached you find a patch against dpkg-buildpackage which creates a
> > > debian/strace.debhelper file when running "debian/rules build".
There was a suggestion to write a wrapper libr
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 02:25:43PM +1000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > On Sat, 29.07.00 16:05 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > I improved it even more and now I have a patched dpkg-buildpackage, that
> > > > runs the stra
On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 03:11:57PM -0400, Franklin Belew wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 02:25:43PM +1000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 12:13:05PM +0200, Christian Hammers wrote:
> > > On Sat, 29.07.00 16:05 +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > > I improved it even mor
> > (It's just that I bet that we never get build-depends if maintainers are
> > forced to guess them theirselves w/o automatic help)
> We get build-depends since some of the autobuilders build packages in
> minimal chroots and detect problems automatically.
Well, I never received a mail froma a
> IMO, this script should not be part of a normal build. It should be a
> simple extra utility that a maintainer can call every so often to validate
> their build deps. Generating build deps should not be part of the normal
Sorry, it seems as if I forgot to mail to this list that my latest patche
Previously Christian Hammers wrote:
> Well, I never received a mail froma an autobuilder saying that one of
> my packages (about 10) were examined and found to have the following
> buildtime dependencies.
Probably because it's a recent change.
> Maybe this should be done so that they can be inc
22 matches
Mail list logo
