On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 04:24:01PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> although I've read the policy again, I am not sure whether it is allowed
> to store scripts in /usr/share/$package? In particular, scripts that are
> only meant to be called by postinst (or prerm), never by a user. They
> could go to /
Hi all,
although I've read the policy again, I am not sure whether it is allowed
to store scripts in /usr/share/$package? In particular, scripts that are
only meant to be called by postinst (or prerm), never by a user. They
could go to /usr/lib/$package, but that would mean creating an extra
direc
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 01:29:37PM +, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> Quoting Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > I've packaged Q and would like to get a sponsor for it.
>
> I've tried to grab it to take a look, but:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/q-lang$ apt-get source q-lang
> Err http://mentors.deb
Quoting Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I've packaged Q and would like to get a sponsor for it.
>
[snip]
Looks like a useful package.
I've tried to grab it to take a look, but:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/q-lang$ apt-get source q-lang
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 04:24:01PM +0100, Frank Küster wrote:
> although I've read the policy again, I am not sure whether it is allowed
> to store scripts in /usr/share/$package? In particular, scripts that are
> only meant to be called by postinst (or prerm), never by a user. They
> could go to /
Hi all,
although I've read the policy again, I am not sure whether it is allowed
to store scripts in /usr/share/$package? In particular, scripts that are
only meant to be called by postinst (or prerm), never by a user. They
could go to /usr/lib/$package, but that would mean creating an extra
direc
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 09:58:53AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> > - Does it matter that I built this on a testing rather than unstable
> > system ? (I have a stable and a testing box here).
> The *deb is not really interesting; important are the source parts (dsc,
> diff.gz, orig.tar.gz). But you
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 01:29:37PM +, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> Quoting Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > I've packaged Q and would like to get a sponsor for it.
>
> I've tried to grab it to take a look, but:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/q-lang$ apt-get source q-lang
> Err http://mentors.deb
Quoting Kari Pahula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I've packaged Q and would like to get a sponsor for it.
>
[snip]
Looks like a useful package.
I've tried to grab it to take a look, but:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/q-lang$ apt-get source q-lang
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 09:58:53AM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote:
> > - Does it matter that I built this on a testing rather than unstable
> > system ? (I have a stable and a testing box here).
> The *deb is not really interesting; important are the source parts (dsc,
> diff.gz, orig.tar.gz). But you
Ben Young wrote:
> Yeah... but it was said in a quite arrogant manner. Matthew Palmer said
> things neatly in his first email (which I think everybody understood
> correctly!), then I didn't quite like the tone of his second one. Just
Yeah, the second one was a little over the top. How many previ
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 12:09:10AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've been thinking sometime about trying to adopt the orphaned package
> cooledit since i use it every day and like it a lot. I really think
> it should be included in the Debian distro. When checking the orphan
> list the other
Ben Young wrote:
> Yeah... but it was said in a quite arrogant manner. Matthew Palmer said
> things neatly in his first email (which I think everybody understood
> correctly!), then I didn't quite like the tone of his second one. Just
Yeah, the second one was a little over the top. How many previ
--- Esteban Manchado Velázquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:43:26PM -0800, Ben Young
> wrote:
> > On 03/03/04, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> >
> > > Make that at least two. And I haven't exactly
> seen
> > a huge clamour of people
> > > rushing to your defence in any coheren
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 12:09:10AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've been thinking sometime about trying to adopt the orphaned package
> cooledit since i use it every day and like it a lot. I really think
> it should be included in the Debian distro. When checking the orphan
> list the other
author put it under GPL, new debs are here:
http://ketavet.dyndns.org/truncate
--
Luca Pasquali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://ketavet.dyndns.org
gnupg key fingerprint = A149 BCDF E19B 75DB 1A0D 1060 A19F FFFB 4684 E718
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- Esteban Manchado Velázquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:43:26PM -0800, Ben Young
> wrote:
> > On 03/03/04, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> >
> > > Make that at least two. And I haven't exactly
> seen
> > a huge clamour of people
> > > rushing to your defence in any coheren
I've been thinking sometime about trying to adopt the orphaned package cooledit
since i use it every day and like it a lot. I really think it should be
included in the Debian distro. When checking the orphan list the other day
i noticed it has been removed from unstable and the orphan bug archive
18 matches
Mail list logo
