Hi,
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dropbox". This package was
> previously in Debian's repositories (its former maintainer was Ivan
> Borzenkov ), but it was removed due to unresolved issues
> with licensing. I have edited
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pidgin-latex".
* Package name: pidgin-latex
Version : 1.4.4-1
Upstream Author : Benjamin Moll
* URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/pidgin-latex/
* License : GPL-2
Section : net
It builds these
Hi Yavor,
Yavor wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:1.3.0-1 of my
> package "gnustep-examples".
debdiff against the version in unstable shows that there's a new theme
in the package, which is licensed under GPLv3 according to
gui/ExampleTheme/Rhea/COPYING. Another new file i
Dear list,
I'm preparing a squeeze backport for sendmail, but as I'm not a DD/DM I'm now
searching for somebody to sponsor this upload for me, mentors may find the
package at mentors.debian.net:
dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sendmail/sendmail_8.14.4-2~bpo60+1.dsc
The only real
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:04:10 -0600
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 February 2011 16:44:49 Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> > >> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the
> > >> reason to
On Tuesday 15 February 2011 16:44:49 Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> >> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the reason to
> >> use both, but removing unmodified conf files seems like a win to me.
> >> Keep
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Joey Hess wrote:
> Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
>> Sure. That doesn't make it correct, optimal, or the best option, just
>> how things have always been done.
>>
>> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the reason to
>> use both, but removing unmodified
Matt Zagrabelny wrote:
> Sure. That doesn't make it correct, optimal, or the best option, just
> how things have always been done.
>
> I understand the difference between remove and purge and the reason to
> use both, but removing unmodified conf files seems like a win to me.
> Keeps the clutter d
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:50:53 +0100
Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2011-02-15 22:24 +0100, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday 15 February 2011 15:16:27 Tony Houghton wrote:
> >> How about I file a wishlist bug for dpkg and apt for an option
> >> similar to purge but which only purges files
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:06:20 -0800
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Tony Houghton wrote:
> > It wouldn't be quite so bad if packages called update-rc.d disable
> > on their init scripts when removed so that init doesn't read the
> > disused scripts, but AFAICT from the Policy Manual (s
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Tony Houghton wrote:
>> I don't like about it is that init scripts get left behind when
>> uninstalling packages.
>
> Configuration files are always left behind unless you purge a package.
Sure. That doesn't make it corr
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Tony Houghton wrote:
> I don't like about it is that init scripts get left behind when
> uninstalling packages.
Configuration files are always left behind unless you purge a package.
> It wouldn't be quite so bad if packages called update-rc.d disable
> on their init scripts
On 2011-02-15 22:24 +0100, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 February 2011 15:16:27 Tony Houghton wrote:
>> How about I file a wishlist bug for dpkg and apt for an option similar
>> to purge but which only purges files which haven't been altered from the
>> package's default?
>
> From
"Jesús M. Navarro" writes:
> Anyway, my position would be that init script shouldn't have to be
> config files. For this to be true these steps should need to be worked
> on:
[...]
Given that nearly all of the Linux distribution work on init systems right
now is towards replacing the old Syste
On Tuesday 15 February 2011 15:16:27 Tony Houghton wrote:
> How about I file a wishlist bug for dpkg and apt for an option similar
> to purge but which only purges files which haven't been altered from the
> package's default?
From what I understand, neither APT nor dpkg know if a file has been mo
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:33:25 +
Tony Houghton wrote:
> I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles? Is there a
> good reason other than that they're in /etc and nobody bothered to make
> an exception in debhelper?
>
> I would have thought it would be better to treat them as n
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011, Tony Houghton wrote:
> I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles? Is
> there a good reason other than that they're in /etc and nobody
> bothered to make an exception in debhelper?
Anything that is in /etc should be editable by the admin, and changes
respecte
Hi
On Tuesday 15 February 2011, Jesús M. Navarro wrote:
> Hi, Michael:
>
> On Tuesday 15 February 2011 18:37:38 Michael Fladischer wrote:
> > Tony Houghton, 2011-02-15 17:33:
> > > I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles?
> >
> > Debain switched to dependency-based boot with
* Jesús M. Navarro [110215 20:40]:
> Anyway, my position would be that init script shouldn't have to be config
> files. For this to be true these steps should need to be worked on:
> 1) See for boot dependencies not being stablished in the init script itself (a
> sourced directory under /etc/defa
Hi, Michael:
On Tuesday 15 February 2011 18:37:38 Michael Fladischer wrote:
> Tony Houghton, 2011-02-15 17:33:
> > I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles?
>
> Debain switched to dependency-based boot with Squeeze and those
> dependencies are controlled by the LSB headers insi
Tony Houghton writes:
> I'd consider packages which require editing of the init script instead
> of using /etc/default or similar to be badly designed at best. I know
> fixing the mass of existing packages would be too big a job, but I
> thought it might be possible to provide a new option in dh_
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 3.4+dfsg1-1
of my package "dmaths".
It builds these binary packages:
libreoffice-dmaths - Formula editor improvements for LibreOffice
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these (RC) bugs: 612333
The package c
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:27:39PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
> I'd consider packages which require editing of the init script instead
> of using /etc/default or similar to be badly designed at best. I know
> fixing the mass of existing packages would be too big a job, but I
> thought it might be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tony Houghton, 2011-02-15 17:33:
> I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles?
Debain switched to dependency-based boot with Squeeze and those
dependencies are controlled by the LSB headers inside each init script.
On the majority of
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 17:05:41 +
The Fungi wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:33:25PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
> [...]
> > I would have thought it would be better to treat them as not to be
> > modified by the user/admin; any init configuration should be done via
> > /etc/default.
>
> In y
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:33:25PM +, Tony Houghton wrote:
[...]
> I would have thought it would be better to treat them as not to be
> modified by the user/admin; any init configuration should be done via
> /etc/default.
In years gone by, I've frequently had to manually adjust initscript
cont
I was wondering, why are init scripts installed as conffiles? Is there a
good reason other than that they're in /etc and nobody bothered to make
an exception in debhelper?
I would have thought it would be better to treat them as not to be
modified by the user/admin; any init configuration should b
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:1.3.0-1
of my package "gnustep-examples".
It builds these binary packages:
gnustep-examples - GNUstep example applications
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentor
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.94-1
of my package "p910nd".
It builds these binary packages:
p910nd - small printer daemon intended for diskless workstations
The package appears to be lintian clean.
The upload would fix these bugs: 607852
debian/changelog:
Hey Boyd,
With regards to: "Perhaps you are installing your template with
permissions that are too restrictive"
You're totally right! This was causing my script to fail, thanks very
much for pointing it out, everything is working perfectly now :)
Now I've familiarized myself with the wiki on chmo
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:49:32 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I intend to package iText Java library and tried to write a watch file.
> The files section is specifying several releases at
>
>http://sourceforge.net/projects/itext/files/iText/
>
> but if I look at the redirector page as
Hi,
I intend to package iText Java library and tried to write a watch file.
The files section is specifying several releases at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/itext/files/iText/
but if I look at the redirector page as recommended at
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/debian-watch-file-shoul
32 matches
Mail list logo
