-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
> If the changelog says 'removing/updating foo support because blah
> no longer available' then there is no need to say 'and I refreshed
> all my patches' too - that's just as anspect of makig it work
> nicely.
Perfect, thanks so I won't mention th
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lirc":
* Package name: lirc
Version : 0.9.4-devel
Upstream Author : Christoph Bartelmus et. al.
* URL : http://sf.net/p/lirc
* License : GPLv2 and MI
Your message dated Tue, 1 Dec 2015 18:35:25 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1649718264.22463063.1448994925728.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#806806: RFS: arrayfire/3.2.0+dfsg1-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #806806,
regarding RFS: arrayfire/3.2.0+dfsg1-4
to be marked as d
Your message dated Tue, 1 Dec 2015 18:35:25 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1649718264.22463063.1448994925728.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#806806: RFS: arrayfire/3.2.0+dfsg1-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #806801,
regarding RFS: clfft/2.8-2
to be marked as done.
This m
+++ Werner Detter [2015-12-01 13:01 +0100]:
> Hi,
>
> > Have you got any reason not to simply refresh your patches?
> > Something like: quilt pop -a; while quilt push; do quilt refresh; done
>
> well, there is no reason. I'm asking because this is the first time
> I have this topic. Sure, refresh
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "arrayfire"
* Package name: arrayfire
Version : 3.2.0+dfsg1-4
Upstream Author : ArrayFire Development Group
* URL : http://arrayfire.com/
* License : BSD
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:03:45AM -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
> >> My package doesnt build in amd64
> >> http://paste.debian.net/hidden/7253bf53/, I want to know, if I need
> >> add -fPIC flag only amd64 or in any arch in the configure?
> > All shared libraries should be compiled with -fPIC.
>
Hi Andrey
2015-11-30 23:34 GMT-05:00 Andrey Rahmatullin :
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 05:51:12PM -0500, Daniel Echeverry wrote:
>> My package doesnt build in amd64
>> http://paste.debian.net/hidden/7253bf53/, I want to know, if I need
>> add -fPIC flag only amd64 or in any arch in the configure?
>
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "clfft"
* Package name: clfft
Version : 2.8-2
Upstream Author : Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
* URL : https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clFFT
* License : Ap
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "adjtimex"
* Package name: adjtimex
* Version : 1.29-6
* Upstream Author : Steven S. Dick , James R. Van Zandt
* URL : http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/admin/ti
Werner Detter writes:
>> Have you got any reason not to simply refresh your patches?
>> Something like: quilt pop -a; while quilt push; do quilt refresh; done
>
> well, there is no reason. I'm asking because this is the first time
> I have this topic. Sure, refreshing all patches would be probabl
Your message dated Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:17:45 + (UTC)
with message-id
<1856424092.21970833.1448975865348.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#806788: RFS: clblas/2.8+ds1-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #806788,
regarding RFS: clblas/2.8+ds1-2
to be marked as done.
This mea
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "clblas"
* Package name: clblas
Version : 2.8+ds1-2
Upstream Author : Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
* URL : https://github.com/clMathLibraries/clBLAS
* License
Hi,
> Have you got any reason not to simply refresh your patches?
> Something like: quilt pop -a; while quilt push; do quilt refresh; done
well, there is no reason. I'm asking because this is the first time
I have this topic. Sure, refreshing all patches would be probably the
best - but do I have
Werner Detter writes:
>> For example, if 3.patch has not been forwarded upstream yet, then I
>> would definitely modify it (instead of creating a new patch).
>
> I've modified 3.patch - in the course of the modification one line has
> been deleted (perl "use" statement) as it's not needed anymore
15 matches
Mail list logo