Dear mentors,
I've packaged a new version of my library package 'libharu'. Since
upstream uses a -RELEASE type of version number, I copied this, and
this resulted in a libhpdf-2.1.0 package.
I've now updated my package to version 2.2.1.
It builds these binary packages:
libhpdf-2.2.1 - C library
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 04:09:49AM +0200, Jérôme SONRIER wrote:
Le jeudi 14 juillet 2011, Andreas Rönnquist a écrit :
That said - You are upstream too for this package? It would be very
nice to provide a upstream changelog - lintian (from unstable) if
run as
Yes, I'm the upstream
But I still want to fix the .symbols file. However, I was not able to
find how I should do it in this case (new packagename).
Should I just generate a new file from scratch (I have not seen
incompatible api changes) or refer to the old version number for
functions which were available before.
I have done the work needed
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Kilian Krause kil...@debian.org wrote:
Hi Bastien,
On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 09:17 +0200, roucaries bastien wrote:
Ping ?
1. debian/watch needs fixing to avoid your ugly epoch hack:
opts=uversionmangle=s/[-\.]//g \
is the correct
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
But I still want to fix the .symbols file. However, I was not able to
find how I should do it in this case (new packagename).
Symbols files are mainly useful when one SONAME/package name lasts
longer than one Debian release cycles.
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2.1-1
of my package libharu.
It builds these binary packages:
(new) libhpdf-2.2.1 - C library for generating pdf files
libhpdf-dev - C library for generating pdf files (development files)
I've tested the package and lintian does not
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
- I've removed the .symbols because it is a bit irrelevant in a
package whose name changes when the so-name changes (see discussion on
d.mentors: [0].
[0]: http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2011/07/msg00365.html
Ahh, the package
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 20110606-1
of my package kpartsplugin.
It builds these binary packages:
kpartsplugin - Netscape-compatible plugin to embed KDE file-viewers
into
browser
The package appears to be lintian clean:
$ lintian -iIEm --pedantic *.deb
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:34:30 +0200, roucaries bastien
roucaries.bastien+deb...@gmail.com wrote:
They are no patches. It is a bug in gitpkg even after david Bremner
patch lintian complain.
I'm a bit surprised by that. In any case, try version 0.20 of gitpkg
which contains a different fix.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
- I've removed the .symbols because it is a bit irrelevant in a
package whose name changes when the so-name changes (see discussion on
d.mentors: [0].
[0]:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14.07.2011 13:55, Max Tsepkov wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package evolution-tray.
For reference, there is also an ongoing discussion on debian-devel
regarding the package. See the corresponding thread on [1].
[1]
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:34:30 +0200, roucaries bastien
roucaries.bastien+deb...@gmail.com wrote:
They are no patches. It is a bug in gitpkg even after david Bremner
patch lintian complain.
I'm a bit surprised by that.
Hi,
[...]
I have created the new file symbols: the new file is attached to the email.
If the file is now correct, then you can review the new version of the
package in debian.mentors (
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/q/qdacco).
I couldn't find any attachment in your email, but
Hi Michael,
[...]
The question is: how do you generate these files with c++ tags? Is it
possible to automatically generate the files?
[...]
Yes, that can be done almost fully automatically. The main step is piping
the
current symbols file through c++filt, as in
cat
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:41:05 +0200, roucaries bastien
roucaries.bastien+deb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:30 PM, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
I use 0.20, it does not export patches but lintian complain. See the
file in mentors. I believe it is a lintian bug.
What
Johan,
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 11:31:04AM +0200, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
I've packaged a new version of my library package 'libharu'. Since
upstream uses a -RELEASE type of version number, I copied this, and
this resulted in a libhpdf-2.1.0 package.
I've now updated my package to version
Hi
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:28:28 +0100
Michael Tautschnig m...@debian.org wrote:
[...]
I'm afraid the copyright file isn't yet fully complete:
- src/md5.h, src/md5.cpp have a distinct license and copyright holders.
- src/GMDBus.h is LGPL v2.1+
- line 11 of debian/copyright should probably
On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:06:06 +0200, roucaries bastien
roucaries.bastien+deb...@gmail.com wrote:
Not fixed in my case:
lintian *.changes || lintian --version
E: autoconf-archive source: git-patches-not-exported
Lintian v2.5.1
Ah, yes. I agree this is a bug, different than the bug we just
* Kilian Krause kil...@debian.org, 2011-07-14, 20:34:
If you can confirm that the symbols file for your last version and this
version match up perfectly, then the SONAME shouldn't have been bumped
in the first place
Err, no, you can't conclude that ABI wasn't broken just from the fact
that
Hi,
[...]
I fixed these warnings.
[...]
Thanks a lot for quickly addressing all those points! I've now built and
uploaded your package. Pending review and acceptance by ftp-masters, it should
appear in the archives in a few days!
Thanks a lot for your work,
Michael
pgp6IZX5OAzzy.pgp
Hi,
[...]
Changes:
kpartsplugin (20110606-1) unstable; urgency=low
.
* New upstream release
* Added missing libx11-dev in Build-Depends (Closes: #632122)
* Copyright file switched to DEP-5 format
[...]
Thanks a lot for updating and improving the package! It's built and
Hi again,
[...]
Thanks a lot for updating this package. Yet the new non-repacking leaves some
doubts to me:
- Don't repack anymore. is a nice hint that something has changed, but yet
it
left me to find this out myself via the debdiff.
- Using repacknot1 as version appears to be a
Thanks to people from debian-devel the package is now ready and lintian
clean.
Therefore, I'm reposting the RFS.
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package evolution-tray.
* Package name: evolution-tray
Version : 0.0.7-1
Upstream Author : Lucian Langa
Hi Jakub,
On Thu, 2011-07-14 at 20:48 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
* Kilian Krause kil...@debian.org, 2011-07-14, 20:34:
If you can confirm that the symbols file for your last version and this
version match up perfectly, then the SONAME shouldn't have been bumped
in the first place
Err, no,
24 matches
Mail list logo
