Re: Override disparity

2006-08-07 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 08:18:06PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > I prefer putting them in the same section as the main package so that > people browsing by section in aptitude will actually see them. You make a point. I really have no opinion as I am using apt-get in command line and I am al

Re: Override disparity

2006-08-07 Thread Russ Allbery
Thibaut Paumard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Which leads us to this question: do *-doc packages belong in section > doc, or in whatever the main package is (science, in this case)? I prefer putting them in the same section as the main package so that people browsing by section in aptitude will a

Re: RFS: advanced PNG (Portable Network Graphics) optimizer

2006-08-07 Thread Luis Armendariz
Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: On 8/5/06, Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 04:57 -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote: 2 small comments: Actually it's 3 comments! :-) Huh? I counted again, and I still see two comments: 0, 1, 2 :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAI

Re: RFS: feedparser -- Universal Feed Parser for Python

2006-08-07 Thread Carlos Galisteo
Joe Wreschnig wrote: This is all incorrect (at least, it's not in 4.1-4, the URL for 4.1-5 sees to be missing, but I'll assume he just updated the changelog to adopt the package). You are right. I uploaded an "adoption release" (currently unavailable) mostly for obtaining the mantainer status a

RFS: stardict-english-czech

2006-08-07 Thread Michal Čihař
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "stardict-english-czech". * Package name: stardict-english-czech Version : 20060801-1 Upstream Author : Milan Svoboda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and many other contributors * URL : http://cihar.com/software/slovnik * Li

Re: What are the uninstallable packages in the QA pages?

2006-08-07 Thread Neil Williams
Charles Plessy wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am the maintainer of treeviewx, and the QA pages say that it is > unistallable on m68k and powerpc. > > However, I successuflly apt-get installed treeviewx this morning on my > iMac... Does anybody knows what are the criteria used by the QA page to > de

Re: Jabbin packages now available, need fixing+sponsor

2006-08-07 Thread Christoph Haas
On Friday 04 August 2006 22:29, Russ Allbery wrote: > Christoph Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [If anyone has an idea how to run lintian from a Python program and > > having it controlled by a timeout I'd be glad. No idea why lintian > > hangs for a day.] > > lintian certainly shouldn't hang

Re: Override disparity

2006-08-07 Thread Thibaut Paumard
Le lundi 07 août 2006 à 15:31 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit : > On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 22:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the > > > override file for the following file(s): > > > > > > muscle-doc_3.60-1_all.deb: package says sec

Re: Override disparity

2006-08-07 Thread Thijs Kinkhorst
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 22:26 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the > > override file for the following file(s): > > > > muscle-doc_3.60-1_all.deb: package says section is doc, override says > > science. > > I searched the policy, but

Override disparity

2006-08-07 Thread Charles Plessy
Dear Mentors, I got the following error in a package I co-maintain: > There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the > override file for the following file(s): > > muscle-doc_3.60-1_all.deb: package says section is doc, override says science. I searched the policy, but did

What are the uninstallable packages in the QA pages?

2006-08-07 Thread Charles Plessy
Dear mentors, I am the maintainer of treeviewx, and the QA pages say that it is unistallable on m68k and powerpc. http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED] However, I successuflly apt-get installed treeviewx this morning on my iMac... Does anybody knows what are the criteria used by the QA page to

/dev/*random permissions

2006-08-07 Thread Enrico Tassi
Hi, I've an odd question regarding /dev/*random permissions. I ship with my package freepops a script to create a chroot jail. Inside the jail I need /dev/*random but I'm a bit confused about the permissions I've to assign to these files. garfield:/home/tassi# ls -al /dev/.static/dev/*random

Re: RFS: feedparser -- Universal Feed Parser for Python

2006-08-07 Thread Loïc Minier
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006, Joe Wreschnig wrote: > > - you build your package with "python", which is the current python > >version, but you declare a build-dep on python-all-dev, and > >XS-Python-Version: >= 2.1 > >=> change that to python-dev and XS-Python-Version: current, OR make > >

Re: RFS: jabbin

2006-08-07 Thread Andrew Donnellan
On 8/7/06, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sounds great. I'm also busy fixing up their license notices and stuff, I have write access to upstream SVN so bugs can be fixed and so on. > I'm considering co-maintaining this, if anyone wants to help feel free to > ask. I noone steps in

Re: RFS: jabbin

2006-08-07 Thread Andrew Donnellan
On 8/6/06, George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Just to let you know that the upstream tarball (jabbin_2.0beta2.orig.tar.gz) contains non-free bits, that is 3party/iLBC/* [1], thus you should repackage it as dfsg tarball with these bits removed. I don't know how vital that is for