On Mon, 7 May 2001 21:49:12 +0200, Filip Van Raemdonck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The tools available for automatic changes signing seem to do this for you.
Yes, they do. Judging from the debsign source, this is a gpg issue.
However, debsign fails for me because gpg returns some strange error
c
I wrote:
> > to this on debian/rules :
> >
> > install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
> >
> > The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
> > in the package.
> >
> > Do I still need to do the `chown root.floppy /usr/bin/jazip' in
> > postinst?
"Sean 'Shal
Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The RSA patent was only valid in the USA, an oversight on RSA's part.
> That's the difference.
But surely a sizable chunk the Debian usersbase lives in the US, there
were official CDs sold in the US containing the software, etc. So the
difference is only
On mié, may 09, 2001 at 01:09:30 -0400, Decklin Foster wrote:
> You probably have fileutils 4.1-1 installed. Upgrade to 4.1-2.
Exactly!, was it a 4.1-1 bug?, I hadn't seen the changelog.
I don't know if it solves the problem because I hadn't finished my last
dist-upgrade, really huge!: 108Mb :)
T
I wrote:
> > to this on debian/rules :
> >
> > install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
> >
> > The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
> > in the package.
> >
> > Do I still need to do the `chown root.floppy /usr/bin/jazip' in
> > postinst?
"Sean 'Sha
"PSG" == Peter S Galbraith writes:
[...]
PSG> to this on debian/rules :
PSG> install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
PSG> The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
PSG> in the package.
Even with ?
dh_fixperms -Xusr/bin/jazip
Christian
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:00:44PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> My understanding was that we're not using suidregister in
> postinst now, and instead setting the ownership/permissions in
> the package itself.
>
> So I moved this from postinst:
>
> if [ -x /usr/sbin/suidregister ];
>
> to this on debian/rules :
>
> install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
>
> The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
> in the package.
>
> Do I still need to do the `chown root.floppy /usr/bin/jazip' in
> postinst?
>
or is dh_fixperms (or an equiv) re
Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The RSA patent was only valid in the USA, an oversight on RSA's part.
> That's the difference.
But surely a sizable chunk the Debian usersbase lives in the US, there
were official CDs sold in the US containing the software, etc. So the
difference is only
On mié, may 09, 2001 at 01:09:30 -0400, Decklin Foster wrote:
> You probably have fileutils 4.1-1 installed. Upgrade to 4.1-2.
Exactly!, was it a 4.1-1 bug?, I hadn't seen the changelog.
I don't know if it solves the problem because I hadn't finished my last
dist-upgrade, really huge!: 108Mb :)
My understanding was that we're not using suidregister in
postinst now, and instead setting the ownership/permissions in
the package itself.
So I moved this from postinst:
if [ -x /usr/sbin/suidregister ]; then
suidregister -s jazip /usr/bin/jazip root floppy 4754
else
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:19:50PM +0100, Paul Martin wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
>
> > OTOH, isn't a license just required for *using* software that falls
> > under the patent -- in contrast to just distributing it? How is
> > distributing lame diffe
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't
> > > be legally redistributed
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> OTOH, isn't a license just required for *using* software that falls
> under the patent -- in contrast to just distributing it? How is
> distributing lame different from distributing implementations of RSA
> one year ago? We did th
"PSG" == Peter S Galbraith writes:
[...]
PSG> to this on debian/rules :
PSG> install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
PSG> The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
PSG> in the package.
Even with ?
dh_fixperms -Xusr/bin/jazip
Christian
--
To U
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:00:44PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
>
> My understanding was that we're not using suidregister in
> postinst now, and instead setting the ownership/permissions in
> the package itself.
>
> So I moved this from postinst:
>
> if [ -x /usr/sbin/suidregister ]
>
> to this on debian/rules :
>
> install -m 4755 -g floppy jazip debian/tmp/usr/bin
>
> The problem is that fakeroot is _not_ setting the ownership
> in the package.
>
> Do I still need to do the `chown root.floppy /usr/bin/jazip' in
> postinst?
>
or is dh_fixperms (or an equiv) r
Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't
> > be legally redistributed in binary form.
>
> What do you mean ?? There are lots of packages includ
My understanding was that we're not using suidregister in
postinst now, and instead setting the ownership/permissions in
the package itself.
So I moved this from postinst:
if [ -x /usr/sbin/suidregister ]; then
suidregister -s jazip /usr/bin/jazip root floppy 4754
els
Javier Viñuales Gutiérrez writes:
> install: cannot stat '': No existe el fichero o el directorio
You probably have fileutils 4.1-1 installed. Upgrade to 4.1-2.
--
things change.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:19:50PM +0100, Paul Martin wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
>
> > OTOH, isn't a license just required for *using* software that falls
> > under the patent -- in contrast to just distributing it? How is
> > distributing lame diff
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't
> > > be legally redistributed
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 08:09:51PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> OTOH, isn't a license just required for *using* software that falls
> under the patent -- in contrast to just distributing it? How is
> distributing lame different from distributing implementations of RSA
> one year ago? We did t
Hello, I was fixing the bugs of my easy package called hptalx when I'd got
an error running debuild, the message said:
install: cannot stat '': No existe el fichero o el directorio
make[1]: *** [install] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/vigu/debian/hptalx/hptalx-1.1.0'
make: *** [install]
Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > It can be debianised, but it can't be included in debian, since it can't
> > be legally redistributed in binary form.
>
> What do you mean ?? There are lots of packages inclu
Javier Viñuales Gutiérrez writes:
> install: cannot stat '': No existe el fichero o el directorio
You probably have fileutils 4.1-1 installed. Upgrade to 4.1-2.
--
things change.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
Hello, I was fixing the bugs of my easy package called hptalx when I'd got
an error running debuild, the message said:
install: cannot stat '': No existe el fichero o el directorio
make[1]: *** [install] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/vigu/debian/hptalx/hptalx-1.1.0'
make: *** [install
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 02:05:29AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:19:21PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote:
> > > hi developers,
> > > this is my first message, i hope it's appropriate. there's talk going
> >
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 02:05:29AM +0200, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:53:44PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 03:19:21PM -0400, MaD dUCK wrote:
> > > hi developers,
> > > this is my first message, i hope it's appropriate. there's talk going
> >
29 matches
Mail list logo
