Hello,
on upstream is now a dfsg-free Version available.
I close this bug and upload a new package without +dfsg.
Thanks
Jörg
--
pgp Fingerprint: 7D13 3C60 0A10 DBE1 51F8 EBCB 422B 44B0 BE58 1B6E
pgp Key: BE581B6E
CAcert Key S/N: 0E:D4:56
Jörg Frings-Fürst
D-54526 Niederkail
Threema:
Your message dated Sun, 13 Jul 2014 08:13:04 +0200
with message-id 1405231984.6262.6.camel@merkur
and subject line Debian bug #754515
has caused the Debian Bug report #754515,
regarding RFS: uriparser/0.8.0+dfsg-1 [ITA]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package uriparser
Package name: uriparser
Version : 0.8.0.1-1
URL : http://uriparser.sourceforge.net/
License : BSD-3-clause, LGPL-2.1+, GPL-3.0+
Dear all,
I recently uploaded a binary incompatible new version of the ViSP C++ library.
We have in testing a package libvisp2.8_2.8.0-5.1 and in unstable a
package libvisp2.9_2.9.0-2
piuparts testing2sid check now fails, see:
https://piuparts.debian.org/testing2sid/fail/libvisp-dev_2.9.0-2.log
On 07/13/2014 07:24 AM, Eriberto wrote:
Hi Tong,
I think that no exist a place. But I use it:
$ find /usr/share/doc -name '*changelog.Debian.gz*' -exec cat {}
changelogs.gz \;
You can use zcat, zgrep or mcview to read the changelogs.gz file. I
prefer mcview.
Regards,
Eriberto
Hi All,
I've noticed that the PTS does not display the usual warning about
Lazarus 1.2.4 released but not packaged. I've tried to investigate the
issue and found that upstream has rearranged their repository layout
under SF.net so that the watch site [1] does not work anymore for it.
The new
Hi Thomas,
On 13.07.2014 10:41, Thomas Moulard wrote:
I recently uploaded a binary incompatible new version of the ViSP C++ library.
We have in testing a package libvisp2.8_2.8.0-5.1 and in unstable a
package libvisp2.9_2.9.0-2
So far, so good. The library changed it's SOVERSION and thus a
Hi,
On 13/07/14 11:13, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
Hi All,
I've noticed that the PTS does not display the usual warning about
Lazarus 1.2.4 released but not packaged. I've tried to investigate the
issue and found that upstream has rearranged their repository layout
under SF.net so that the
Hi Daniel,
On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 11:21 +0100, Daniel Lintott wrote:
Hi,
...
I think your actually the following the bug at [1]. You can see the
conversation I had with Paul in that bug report.
Regards,
Daniel Lintott
I have tested your tool for Lazarus and it looks working as
Hi Abou,
On 13/07/14 12:40, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
Hi Daniel,
...
I have tested your tool for Lazarus and it looks working as expected.
That's always good to know!
I'd recommend to use this solution in [2] as it looks really easy to
maintain/update with so few php lines. Also I
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 03:34:30AM +, T o n g wrote:
What's that '-i' is for in the 'debuild -i' command?
Looks like it's passed to lintian.
I was looking for it in debuild dpkg-buildpackage man pages but still
wasn't sure what it is for.
The actual whole command I use is:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:28:23PM +, T o n g wrote:
override_dh_auto_install:
install -m 755 ddclient \
$(DESTDIR)/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755 debian/ddclient.NetworkManager \
$(
)/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/50-ddclient
dh_auto_install
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 03:51:24AM +, T o n g wrote:
Hi,
I used the `dh_make` to create a new rules file, but found that what I
want to install are not in the final package.
Here is what the old rules file looks like:
install: build
dh_testdir
dh_testroot
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 12:02:05 +0200, Ross Gammon wrote:
I'm wondering if there is a central place that I can search for all
Debian change logs for all packages, to see if the same lintian
problem I'm having now have been dealt with before, and also see how
exactly those lintian problems are
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:19:08 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
I used the `dh_make` to create a new rules file, but found that what I
want to install are not in the final package.
Here is what the old rules file looks like:
install: build
dh_testdir dh_testroot dh_clean -k
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 18:18:21 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
I saw in the log,
...
dh_installdirs
debian/rules override_dh_auto_install
make[1]: Entering directory '/export/build/pkg/ddclient/bld/
ddclient-3.8.2'
install -m 755 ddclient \
/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755
} I found that if I use -i I will get the following problems, whereas if -i
} is omitted, then they won't show up.
}
} I: ddclient: unused-debconf-template ddclient/hostslist
} I: ddclient: unused-debconf-template ddclient/blankhostslist
I cannot replicate this.
AFAIK the debuild parameter -i
Riley Baird wrote:
I don't think that this was the author's intention.
From a legal point of view, GPL 2.0 does mean GPL 2.0 only, but I
agree that this probably wasn't the author's intention.
Well, it could be argued if this little notice in README carries more
legal weight than the
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 01:37:52PM +, T o n g wrote:
Note that you can achieve the same using dh_install(1) and probably
dh_installdirs(1), without writing override code.
Did you mean this in debian/rules?
---
# main packaging script based on dh7 syntax
%:
Hi,
I would like to know if anyone is interested in maintain the .deb package
for YACReader (www.yacreader.com). Right now, and thanks to a contributor,
the project has a beta package ready, but it still needs some work:
Package: sponsorship-requests
Subject: RFS - policyd-weight/0.1.15.2-8
Hi everybody,
currently, policyd-weight is broken in unstable/testing due to recent
libnet-dns-perl upgrade,
technically speaking policyd-weight used Net::DNS::Packet function dh_expand()
which does not
exist anymore. This
* Johannes Schauer j.scha...@email.de, 2014-07-12, 20:32:
I don't doubt that compatibility.min.js is needed. What I questioned
is whether we ever need compatibility.js in the binary package.
Indeed. I missed the non- of non-minified in your message. The
non-minified version was indeed not used
Hi,
On 13.07.2014 20:13, Werner Detter wrote:
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/policyd-weight/policyd-weight_0.1.15.2-8.dsc
I uploaded your package as is, as the diff is very small. Please
follow-up on the bug next time, if you'd like to ping us. That being
said, I
Your message dated Sun, 13 Jul 2014 20:34:19 +0200
with message-id 53c2d12b.20...@debian.org
and subject line Re: Urgent: could anyone please sponsor upload of
policyd-weight due to RC-Bug _before_ package will be removed?
has caused the Debian Bug report #753018,
regarding RFS -
Your message dated Sun, 13 Jul 2014 20:34:19 +0200
with message-id 53c2d12b.20...@debian.org
and subject line Re: Urgent: could anyone please sponsor upload of
policyd-weight due to RC-Bug _before_ package will be removed?
has caused the Debian Bug report #753018,
regarding RFS -
Hi again,
Quoting Jakub Wilk (2014-07-13 20:24:00)
Who is the copyright holder for the files in debian/? According to the
copyright file it's WANG Lu. :-P
Indeed it was. If you look at the upstream repository you'll see a
Debian directory
Oops, I missed it.
(Wouldn't it make sense to
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:29:37 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
dh_install(1) is a program, not a target.
install -m 755 ddclient \
$(DESTDIR)/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755 debian/ddclient.NetworkManager \
$(DESTDIR)/etc/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/50-ddclient
On 07/14/2014 12:20 AM, T o n g wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:29:37 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
dh_install(1) is a program, not a target.
install -m 755 ddclient \ $(DESTDIR)/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755 debian/ddclient.NetworkManager \
Hi,
Is it possible to separate gpg signing from package building?
As I'm still trying to learn Debian package building, I've found myself
fallen into this silly loop many times -- Thinking that the package would
be fine, I build it with gpg signing, but only to find out minutes later
that I
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:26:22 +0200, Ross Gammon wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:29:37 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
dh_install(1) is a program, not a target.
install -m 755 ddclient \ $(DESTDIR)/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755 debian/ddclient.NetworkManager \
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 04:06:16 +, T o n g wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:26:22 +0200, Ross Gammon wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:29:37 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
dh_install(1) is a program, not a target.
install -m 755 ddclient \ $(DESTDIR)/usr/sbin/ddclient
install -D -m 755
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:59 AM, T o n g wrote:
Is it possible to separate gpg signing from package building?
Yes and it is planned to make that the default:
https://bugs.debian.org/733029
Now I'm thinking, wouldn't it be nice I always build the package without
gpg signing, and when
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 07/14/2014 12:26 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:59 AM, T o n g wrote:
Now I'm thinking, wouldn't it be nice I always build the package
without gpg signing, and when finally I tested everything working
fine, I sign it. Would
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:31 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
I could be wrong, but I understood the question as being not how to
build without signing, but how to sign after building, without having to
rebuild. I.e., always build without signing, then sign as a separate
step once a build has proved
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
Appears I was wrong about maint-guide mentioning debsign, but it
mentions how to build without signing:
I was wrong again, it does mention debsign:
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/build.en.html#pbuilder
--
bye,
pabs
35 matches
Mail list logo
