Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 04:15:40PM -0300, Leo Costela Antunes wrote:
>> Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,=20
>> but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
Has it already been discussed that at
http://incomi
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 04:15:40PM -0300, Leo Costela Antunes wrote:
>> Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,=20
>> but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
Has it already been discussed that at
http://incomi
On Sex, 2004-10-15 at 16:29, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> > Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
> > but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
>
> Are you sure you made your package with the same (md5) orig file as the
> previous version?
Yes, both -1 and
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 04:15:40PM -0300, Leo Costela Antunes wrote:
> Hi all
>
> What can I do about the forwarded problem?
> I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
> same problem.
> Any pointers?
>
> Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
Hi all
What can I do about the forwarded problem?
I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
same problem.
Any pointers?
Cheers and thanks
-Forwarded Message-
> From: Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Leo Costela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Debian Instal
On Sex, 2004-10-15 at 16:29, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> > Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
> > but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
>
> Are you sure you made your package with the same (md5) orig file as the
> previous version?
Yes, both -1 and
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 04:15:40PM -0300, Leo Costela Antunes wrote:
> Hi all
>
> What can I do about the forwarded problem?
> I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
> same problem.
> Any pointers?
>
> Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
Hi all
What can I do about the forwarded problem?
I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
same problem.
Any pointers?
Cheers and thanks
-Forwarded Message-
> From: Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Leo Costela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Debian Instal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Moreno Garza wrote:
| On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 15:32 +0200, Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
|
|> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
|>
|> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my
|> sponsor, I have already chosen a package t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
| Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my
| sponsor, I have already chosen a package to work with.
|
|
OK, I only wanted to know what I have to do.
Thanks
- --
Guglielmo Dapavo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 15:32 +0200, Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
> I have already chosen a package to work with.
You ought read something like this, before anything:
http://people
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:32:34 +0200
Guglielmo Dapavo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
> I have already chosen a package to work with.
The usual way is to work with the package and then post the URL[1] with
your packaging efforts,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Moreno Garza wrote:
| On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 15:32 +0200, Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
|
|> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
|>
|> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my
|> sponsor, I have already chosen a package to w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
I have already chosen a package to work with.
Thanks
- --
Guglielmo Dapavo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
| Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my
| sponsor, I have already chosen a package to work with.
|
|
OK, I only wanted to know what I have to do.
Thanks
- --
Guglielmo Dapavo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
V
On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 15:32 +0200, Guglielmo Dapavo wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
> I have already chosen a package to work with.
You ought read something like this, before anything:
http://people
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:32:34 +0200
Guglielmo Dapavo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
> I have already chosen a package to work with.
The usual way is to work with the package and then post the URL[1] with
your packaging efforts,
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 03:59:44PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
wrote:
> Problem: as user of a random package X, I'd need to judge somehow if the
> packager works well with upstream or not. The number of 'upstream' tagged
> bugs, or untagged upstream bugs, or forwarded bugs etc.
On Friday 15 October 2004 01.21, Craig Small wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:50:22PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> > My experience is that if you can take the time to track down the
> > upstream bug tracking system and learn how it is used, it is much
> > better (== you get more reactions)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi I'm a Debian applicantt, is there anyone willing to be my sponsor,
I have already chosen a package to work with.
Thanks
- --
Guglielmo Dapavo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http
En réponse à Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > You mean /usr/share/doc/tetex-base/remove-oldmaps :-)
>
> Err, yes. And it isn't even executable. That way, I hope to make
> people think before typing.
When I use such a script, I like it prints w
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 03:59:44PM +0200, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
> Problem: as user of a random package X, I'd need to judge somehow if the
> packager works well with upstream or not. The number of 'upstream' tagged
> bugs, or untagged upstream bugs, or forwarded bugs etc. c
On Friday 15 October 2004 01.21, Craig Small wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:50:22PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> > My experience is that if you can take the time to track down the
> > upstream bug tracking system and learn how it is used, it is much
> > better (== you get more reactions)
Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> I demand that Frank Küster may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
>> If you happen to have tetex-base installed in sid or sarge and have
>> continuously updated since woody, you'll find lots of useless *.map files
>> in /etc/texmf/dvips which are no lo
En réponse à Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > You mean /usr/share/doc/tetex-base/remove-oldmaps :-)
>
> Err, yes. And it isn't even executable. That way, I hope to make
> people think before typing.
When I use such a script, I like it prints w
Darren Salt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> I demand that Frank Küster may or may not have written...
>
> [snip]
>> If you happen to have tetex-base installed in sid or sarge and have
>> continuously updated since woody, you'll find lots of useless *.map files
>> in /etc/texmf/dvips which are no lo
26 matches
Mail list logo