Hi Paul
I have also found the migration from RPM packaging to Debian packaging
to be a hard one (I'm *not* a mentor, BTW). Some of my observations include:
1. Whereas RPM provides one key tool, 'rpmbuild', Debian packaging
seems to provide dozens of different tools, not all of which are
> > It occurred to me that I could try to work around
> this by using a
> > build directory that is completely outside of the
> source code tree.
Hello,
My own experience is something like this; by the
way, I am also a newbie to packaging, so this is just
what works for me, not necessarily wha
Hi,
Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
foo-static_1.0_all.deb
Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
now with normal build script:
foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (updated from foo-updated_1.0_all.deb)
foo-static_1.1_all.deb (same as fo
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 23:35 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
> foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
> foo-static_1.0_all.deb
>
> Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
> now with normal build script:
> foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (upda
Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Suppose source foo_1.0.tar.gz produces:
> foo-updated_1.0_all.deb
> foo-static_1.0_all.deb
>
> Then with next source foo_1.1.tar.gz with updated contents will produce
> now with normal build script:
> foo-updated_1.1_all.deb (updated from foo-updated_1.0_all.deb)
El 02/10/08 12:51 Osamu Aoki escribió:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 12:10:16PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> > Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > > Any suggestion for debian/rules ? or pointer to good example.
> >
> > You can't really do this, AFAIK. You can break the source into 2
> > separate source packages t
Hi,
My question is arch:all (not any) ... more specifically,
foo-static_1.0_all.deb is documentation package which does not change
document contents from 1.0 to 1.1 transition.
I know there is a way to do it but I am not sure if it is a good and
valid way. I also was not sure where I have seen
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 12:10:16PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Any suggestion for debian/rules ? or pointer to good example.
>
> You can't really do this, AFAIK. You can break the source into 2
> separate source packages that each build one package. That way you
> only up
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 01:47:51 +0900
Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know there is a way to do it
??
On what basis? Which packages? Are you confusing porter uploads
using dpkg-buildpackage -B ?
> but I am not sure if it is a good and
> valid way. I also was not sure where I have seen i
On Thu, 02 Oct 2008, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> This way user will not be forced to download same package again.
Having the same binary version on the same architecture come from two
different source versions is fundamentally broken.
It behavoir is non-defined in the BTS
You also won't satisfy your des
Hi,
Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
and,
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
Those two warnings, show me. But the
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:03:40 -0500, Elías A. M. wrote:
> Hi,
> Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
> libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
Try passing -Wl,--as-needed into LDFLAGS to the compi
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
> Hi,
Hi I'm not a developer but I try to suggest you.
> Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
> libpthread.so.0 (it uses n
David Paleino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:03:40 -0500, Elías A. M. wrote:
> > dpkg-gencontrol: warning: unknown substitution variable ${misc:Depends}
>
> You can safely ignore this warning.
Luca Bruno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it'sa bad situation when a build tool emits a warning that is
> routinely ignored; it commonly leads to masking real problems.
>
> The correct solution is for the warning to go away. Either this *is*
> something that needs attention, or it is not. I
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
> > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked with
> > libpthread.so.0 (it uses none of its symbols).
Le Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 11:15:20PM +0200, Luca Bruno a écrit :
> Your package is lin
Luca Bruno wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 03:03:40PM -0500, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?El=EDas_A._M._ wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi I'm not a developer but I try to suggest you.
>
>> Somebody know why when I build the package, show me:
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: debian/pack/usr/games/pack shouldn't be linked wit
Hi again:
I tried your suggests, but I don't have successful
I put, my debian/rules:
--
include /usr/share/dpatch/dpatch.make
#The upstream source don't include "./configure" rule, only "make"
#LDFLAGS=-Wall -g
#export LDFLAGS
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The correct solution is for the warning to go away. Either this *is*
> something that needs attention, or it is not. In the former case, what
> is the problem and what is the solution? In the latter case, why is
> the warning
19 matches
Mail list logo