Just use the old one from ftp.debian.org.
If the .orig.tar.gz already exists in .. (relative to the source dir), a new
one won't be generated.
-brad
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 05:15:46PM +1000, Jason Henry Parker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The byacc upstream tarball on ftp.debian.org 52916 bytes long, but
Hi,
The byacc upstream tarball on ftp.debian.org 52916 bytes long, but on
my development system, it compresses to 52930 bytes. (There hasn't
been an upload of this package in about a year, shame on me.) I need
to do an upload to fix several bugs, there have been no upstream
changes (I think it'
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 11:13:43AM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> For my sndconfig package, I would like to declare a different dependecy
> for the sparc architecture (sndconfig/sparc does not require isapnp,
> which isn't even available for sparc). Is this possible? I haven't been
> able to find an
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 11:13:43AM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> For my sndconfig package, I would like to declare a different dependecy
> for the sparc architecture (sndconfig/sparc does not require isapnp,
> which isn't even available for sparc). Is this possible? I haven't been
> able to find a
Hi Goswin!
You wrote:
> You can set whatever depends during build, just like the
> ${shlibs:Depends} does.
Ah, that's a solution that I didn't think about. Thanks!
--
Kind regards,
+---+
| Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sait
Hi Goswin!
You wrote:
> You can set whatever depends during build, just like the
> ${shlibs:Depends} does.
Ah, that's a solution that I didn't think about. Thanks!
--
Kind regards,
+---+
| Bas Zoetekouw | Si l'on sai
> " " == Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Goswin! You wrote:
>> Yes its possible and its covered. Try the web pages, I saw it
>> there yesterday.
> You are mistaken. It is only desribed for build time
> relationships (Build-Depends, etc). And no, the sam
On 20010106T13+0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Is it allowed or desired to exclude documentation from binary packages
> that are in the source?
Of course, if done with taste. The INSTALL file almost never should be
installed (it would not do any good for it to be installed, since the user
does the
Bug #79854 says that I should probably remove INSTALL.gz from my
package, presumably because it contains only the "Generic Installation
Instructions" that other packages like irssi and findutils contain as
well.
Is it allowed or desired to exclude documentation from binary packages
that are in the
Hi Goswin!
You wrote:
> Yes its possible and its covered. Try the web pages, I saw it there
> yesterday.
You are mistaken. It is only desribed for build time relationships
(Build-Depends, etc). And no, the same procedure doesn't work for an
ordinary Depends relation.
--
Kind regards,
+
> " " == Bas Zoetekouw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Goswin! You wrote:
>> Yes its possible and its covered. Try the web pages, I saw it
>> there yesterday.
> You are mistaken. It is only desribed for build time
> relationships (Build-Depends, etc). And no, the sa
On 20010106T13+0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Is it allowed or desired to exclude documentation from binary packages
> that are in the source?
Of course, if done with taste. The INSTALL file almost never should be
installed (it would not do any good for it to be installed, since the user
does the
Bug #79854 says that I should probably remove INSTALL.gz from my
package, presumably because it contains only the "Generic Installation
Instructions" that other packages like irssi and findutils contain as
well.
Is it allowed or desired to exclude documentation from binary packages
that are in th
Hi Goswin!
You wrote:
> Yes its possible and its covered. Try the web pages, I saw it there
> yesterday.
You are mistaken. It is only desribed for build time relationships
(Build-Depends, etc). And no, the same procedure doesn't work for an
ordinary Depends relation.
--
Kind regards,
+---
14 matches
Mail list logo