question about debian constitution (vote counting)

Hi, I have a question about section A.6 (Concorde Vote Counting) of the debian constitution. The longer I look at it the less I understand it. For you reference: the relevant paragraphs are 2.Option A is said to Dominate option B if strictly more ballots prefer A to B than prefer B to

question about debian constitution (vote counting)

Hi, I have a question about section A.6 (Concorde Vote Counting) of the debian constitution. The longer I look at it the less I understand it. For you reference: the relevant paragraphs are 2.Option A is said to Dominate option B if strictly more ballots prefer A to B than prefer B t

Re: Still looking for a gnome-utils sponsor

Ok, now I found someone. Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> agreed to sponsor me. Thank you, Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/privat.html pgpuwQI3QAXs8.pgp Description: PGP signat

Re: Package checking

On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 12:32:06AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: > >From current policy: > > When specifying the set of build-time dependencies, one should list > only those packages explicitly required by the build. It is not > necessary to list packages which are required merely be

Still looking for a gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I'm still looking for a sponsor for the gnome-utils package. My version is at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ If nobody volunteers, how could I increase the probability of finding a sponsor? Jochen -- Omm

Re: Still looking for a gnome-utils sponsor

Ok, now I found someone. Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> agreed to sponsor me. Thank you, Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/privat.html PGP signature

Re: Package checking

On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 12:32:06AM +, Julian Gilbey wrote: > >From current policy: > > When specifying the set of build-time dependencies, one should list > only those packages explicitly required by the build. It is not > necessary to list packages which are required merely b

Still looking for a gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I'm still looking for a sponsor for the gnome-utils package. My version is at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ If nobody volunteers, how could I increase the probability of finding a sponsor? Jochen -- Omm

Re: debian revision numbers for gnome-utils

On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 02:56:46PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > In short, it's up to you. I was told that "Closes: #12345"-like entries in the changelog only close bugs which are mentioned in the most recent release. You must close bugs in older (but not uploaded) releases manually. So it may be

Re: debian revision numbers for gnome-utils

On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 02:56:46PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > In short, it's up to you. I was told that "Closes: #12345"-like entries in the changelog only close bugs which are mentioned in the most recent release. You must close bugs in older (but not uploaded) releases manually. So it may b

Re: looking for gnome-utils sponsor

> I have prepared ... Oh, I forgot. The package is at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ Jochen pgpLFoJqyx2FH.pgp Description: PGP signature

looking for gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I have prepared a new revision of the gnome-utils package. It includes an additional manual page and installs more documentation into the doc/gnome-utils/ directory. I would be glad if anybody would look at this and upload it if it's ok. Jochen -- http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/vo

debian revision numbers for gnome-utils

Hi, last week I prepared a new package for the gnome-utils package and asked for a sponsor. As nobody volunteered this one was not uploaded to the server. Now I did some additional fixes (add a man page, ...) and want to prepare a new package. Should I increase the Debian revision number for th

Re: looking for gnome-utils sponsor

> I have prepared ... Oh, I forgot. The package is at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ Jochen PGP signature

looking for gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I have prepared a new revision of the gnome-utils package. It includes an additional manual page and installs more documentation into the doc/gnome-utils/ directory. I would be glad if anybody would look at this and upload it if it's ok. Jochen -- http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/v

debian revision numbers for gnome-utils

Hi, last week I prepared a new package for the gnome-utils package and asked for a sponsor. As nobody volunteered this one was not uploaded to the server. Now I did some additional fixes (add a man page, ...) and want to prepare a new package. Should I increase the Debian revision number for t

looking for gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I have prepared a new version of the gnome-utils package. The location is http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ Could someone have a look at this and upload it if my package is ok? I know it is not perfekt, but I think it is better then the current version. Jochen

debhelper and multiple README files

Hi, I have a question about debhelper: I try to pack a package which has multiple README files, scattered over several sub-directories. README foo/README bar/README My plan is to install them in the doc directory as doc/README doc/README.foo doc/README.bar Is there a way to do this wit

looking for gnome-utils sponsor

Hi, I have prepared a new version of the gnome-utils package. The location is http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/gnome-utils/ Could someone have a look at this and upload it if my package is ok? I know it is not perfekt, but I think it is better then the current version. Joche

debhelper and multiple README files

Hi, I have a question about debhelper: I try to pack a package which has multiple README files, scattered over several sub-directories. README foo/README bar/README My plan is to install them in the doc directory as doc/README doc/README.foo doc/README.bar Is there a way to do this wi

Build-Depends

Hi, I have two question about Build-Depends: (1) If I want to Build-Depend on packages A, B, C, D, E, and F. And A depends on B, C, D, E, and F. Should I just mention A, because it implies B to F or should I enumerate them all? (2) If I try to compile a package via "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroo

Build-Depends

Hi, I have two question about Build-Depends: (1) If I want to Build-Depend on packages A, B, C, D, E, and F. And A depends on B, C, D, E, and F. Should I just mention A, because it implies B to F or should I enumerate them all? (2) If I try to compile a package via "dpkg-buildpackage -rfakero

how to build debugging binaries

Hi, is there any standard way to create a version of a debian package with debugging enabled (i.e. to use the -g compiler switch during compilation)? My plan is to observe the program with gdb while it is running. And running the program is much easier when it is installed. And installing the p

how to build debugging binaries

Hi, is there any standard way to create a version of a debian package with debugging enabled (i.e. to use the -g compiler switch during compilation)? My plan is to observe the program with gdb while it is running. And running the program is much easier when it is installed. And installing the

looking for chbg sponsor

Hi, I intend to pick up the orphaned chbg package and tried to pack the new upstream release. The files are at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/chbg/ Would anybody sponsor the package? Jochen -- http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/ pgp0UNOS00OTR.pgp Description:

looking for chbg sponsor

Hi, I intend to pick up the orphaned chbg package and tried to pack the new upstream release. The files are at http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/chbg/ Would anybody sponsor the package? Jochen -- http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/ PGP signature