-theme might also be a good candidate, since it's unintrusive and
gnome-tweak-tool already expects to find it.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
)
If no pkg-gnome maintainer objects, I could upload it in the coming week.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http
On 13/08/11 15:03, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
But vnstat is already present:
But it's maintained by the QA team, so maybe an adoption would be in order?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/iv9oln$1k5$1...@dough.gmane.org
build).
Cheers
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here
[1] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/4e176b0d.8060...@debian.org
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
saying I was free to do so, I just hadn't realized
his reply was private and not on-list. I interpreted this answer as
permission, but perhaps an explicit (and public) one would be better.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors
.
Search the website for the old link and update all the links.
I'd consider doing these after the wiki version gathers at least a bit
of support. My point was just taking a bit of the responsibility off of
Mathew's back, but if that doesn't happen, the point is moot.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
Leo costela Antunes wrote:
Matthew Palmer wrote:
In addition, the FAQ for this list:
http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html might answer some
of your questions.
As a side note, wouldn't the wiki be the perfect place for this?
Don't get me wrong, I totally appreciate
of a waste of potential help, having it in a different place.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
/numptyphysics/numptyphysics_0.3-1.dsc
I would be glad if someone reviewed and uploaded this package for me.
I'll take a look at it ASAP and get back to you.
Cheers
[0] http://bugs.debian.org/496586
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors
Gabriele Giacone wrote:
Leo costela Antunes wrote:
Was 0.3 already released somewhere? I can find no traces of it either on
the homepage, the maemo.org project page or SVN.
No and yes. There are no 0.3 binary releases but I found this [1]: 7
weeks ago, 0.3.0.3 became 0.3.0.7. We could
to elaborate a bit more?
Isn't that the whole idea behind patching and running autoreconf in the
first place? If we wanted the changed files produced by autoreconf in
the debian.tar.gz we wouldn't need to run it, right? What am I missing?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here
!
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
wanna have a hand in it. Practically just a psychological thing! :)
If you still wanna maintain it, incorporate the mentioned fixes and I'll
upload it!
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
each new release.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
gladly advocate his DM status,
should he want to apply for it.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
in this case and
the name of the base source directory doesn't really matter much.
Or did I misunderstand your question?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
... :)
Cheers
[0]http://changelog.complete.org/archives/910-how-to-think-about-compression
[1]http://changelog.complete.org/archives/931-how-to-think-about-compression-part-2
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
the program can do.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-maint, let me know! :-)
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
guys might have
already talked about, but it seemed like a nice step to integrate it
with the team.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
recognizes it...
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
not ;-) ).
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
to bump versions
before the package actually gets into the archive, so you could just
stick with '-1' for a Debian version, so merging the changelog entries
should do the trick.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Felipe Sateler wrote:
This can be triggered with the -v option to dpkg-buildpackage
Live and learn. Never noticed that one before! :-)
Uploading.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
./ | grep UNKNOWN | cut -d: -f1 | while
read file; do grep -L General Public Licence $file; done'
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
seems good.
After you take a look at these issues (or just justify them) I can
sponsor you, if no one with more expertise in this sort of package pops
up until - let's say - monday.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
research on the topic. Wikipedia is your friend (even if it's
not always particularly right about everything). It might ease your life
if you intend on becoming a Debian Maintainer or Developer.
Cheers and good luck with the package!
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here
Anibal Avelar wrote:
On 12/5/07, Leo costela Antunes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
- And, of course, using 'chrpath' on debian/rules
No, it doesn't work for AMD. I tried to use chrpath directly to
binaries files, but it didn't work.
Are you sure? Check out package 'transmission', it's been
.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Russ Allbery wrote:
lintian.debian.org only checks i386.
Oh, now that makes sense!
Guess the obvious sometimes slips by unnoticed :-)
But anyway, I have an amd64 server and a package with the same problem
which chrpath solved, so my argument stands.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert
the packages. I can get them from the original website.
Cheers and good luck
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
an effort with this
package, I might take it over and package it myself. It seems
interesting, but I'll need to take a better look before committing to it.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
at it! :-)
Cheers
[0] http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Leo costela Antunes wrote:
The way I see it the options for dealing with RPATH are:
snip
- And, of course, using 'chrpath' on debian/rules
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
code dir.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
/msg00722.html
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
the trick. Just add 'chrpath' to the build-deps too.
Update it in the SVN and I'll upload it.
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
the configure script.
What do you think?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Mike O'Connor wrote:
src/gconf-bridge.* and most of the files in the telepathy directory
have copyright holders not mentioned in debian/copyright.
Francesco, will you take a look at these, before I sponsor the package?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here
Francesco Namuri wrote:
I'm looking for a temporary sponsor for gnome-phone-manager 0.40-3,
Still need this? Can I check it out from svn.d.o, or do you have any
uncommited changes somewhere?
Cheers
--
Leo costela Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
Hi,
I know it's been some time, but do you still need a hand with this?
Sounds like an interesting package.
Cheers
On Qua, 2004-10-13 at 18:17 +0800, Ivan Wong wrote:
Hi,
I think the package maintainer of Gaim is too busy for it. Is there anyone
give me a hand with this?
Any help would be
Hi
On Seg, 2004-10-18 at 05:06, Chris Vanden Berghe wrote:
I've been in contact with the gaim developers who seem to be reluctant
to add a gaim-dev package in the near future (they are considering an
experimental package, though). Therefore, I think it is better to go
ahead and just ship a
[no need to CC me, I'm subscribed to d-mentors]
On Seg, 2004-10-18 at 11:01, Chris Vanden Berghe wrote:
Hi Leo,
Hi
I decided to make my own gaim-encryption package, since:
Your motives are perfect. I agree with all of them.
You're right about the gaim headers: it would be much nicer to have
Hi
On Seg, 2004-10-18 at 05:06, Chris Vanden Berghe wrote:
I've been in contact with the gaim developers who seem to be reluctant
to add a gaim-dev package in the near future (they are considering an
experimental package, though). Therefore, I think it is better to go
ahead and just ship a
[no need to CC me, I'm subscribed to d-mentors]
On Seg, 2004-10-18 at 11:01, Chris Vanden Berghe wrote:
Hi Leo,
Hi
I decided to make my own gaim-encryption package, since:
Your motives are perfect. I agree with all of them.
You're right about the gaim headers: it would be much nicer to have
Hi all
What can I do about the forwarded problem?
I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
same problem.
Any pointers?
Cheers and thanks
-Forwarded Message-
From: Debian Installer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Leo Costela [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Debian Installer
On Sex, 2004-10-15 at 16:29, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
Are you sure you made your package with the same (md5) orig file as the
previous version?
Yes, both -1 and -2
Hi all
What can I do about the forwarded problem?
I tried reuploading the files + the orig.tar.gz, but it generated the
same problem.
Any pointers?
Cheers and thanks
-Forwarded Message-
From: Debian Installer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Leo Costela [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Debian Installer
On Sex, 2004-10-15 at 16:29, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
Rejected: pearpc_0.3.1-2.dsc refers to pearpc_0.3.1.orig.tar.gz,
but I can't find it in the queue or in the pool.
Are you sure you made your package with the same (md5) orig file as the
previous version?
Yes, both -1 and -2
Hi all,
A couple of days ago, I uploaded PearPC for inclusion into the archive.
More specifically into the contrib/otherosfs section, but now I got one
doubt troubling me.
PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be
fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for
Hi all,
A couple of days ago, I uploaded PearPC for inclusion into the archive.
More specifically into the contrib/otherosfs section, but now I got one
doubt troubling me.
PearPC does not need MacOS X or other non-free operating system to be
fully used, it can be used with Debian/PPC for
On Seg, 2003-12-15 at 20:05, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
Hi all,
Hi
I have tried to write some postinst scripts to migrate the existing
database into the new one, but I think now this is impossible, because
maybe informations which are needed in the new version are missing in
the old one.
On Seg, 2003-12-15 at 20:05, Thorsten Sauter wrote:
Hi all,
Hi
I have tried to write some postinst scripts to migrate the existing
database into the new one, but I think now this is impossible, because
maybe informations which are needed in the new version are missing in
the old one.
On Qui, 2003-12-11 at 20:00, Florian Zaehringer wrote:
Hi folks!
Hi
So I wonder how I can do that? Is there some ChangeLog for the Debian Policy?
Does somebody know where I can find the right docs? Or better: Does somebody perhaps
know what needs to be done for a simple gtk-program to be
On Qui, 2003-12-11 at 20:00, Florian Zaehringer wrote:
Hi folks!
Hi
So I wonder how I can do that? Is there some ChangeLog for the Debian Policy?
Does somebody know where I can find the right docs? Or better: Does somebody
perhaps know what needs to be done for a simple gtk-program to be
On Ter, 2003-08-12 at 14:38, Eric Winger wrote:
* all the deb-src entries i tried to add to my sources.list give me
errors when I try to get the source. What is the url for sources? This
is my latest attempt:
deb-src ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian testing main contrib free
My sources.list
On Ter, 2003-08-12 at 14:38, Eric Winger wrote:
* all the deb-src entries i tried to add to my sources.list give me
errors when I try to get the source. What is the url for sources? This
is my latest attempt:
deb-src ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian testing main contrib free
My sources.list
On Qui, 2003-07-24 at 09:09, Halil Demirezen wrote:
[snip]
my first question: is it a true usage to put gzip into rules?
and secondly, should i specify gzip as a Build-Depends?
No need to specify the dependency on gzip because it's in
build-essential, according to policy.
I'm not sure about the
On Qui, 2003-07-24 at 09:09, Halil Demirezen wrote:
[snip]
my first question: is it a true usage to put gzip into rules?
and secondly, should i specify gzip as a Build-Depends?
No need to specify the dependency on gzip because it's in
build-essential, according to policy.
I'm not sure about the
Hi
On Ter, 2003-07-08 at 12:21, Stephen Gran wrote:
The reason I'm writing is because I wonder about two things - the
program itself is only a single .c file, about 15K compressed, and I
wonder if there is any point in packaging up something this small and
easy to compile. Granted, it's not
Hi
On Ter, 2003-07-08 at 12:21, Stephen Gran wrote:
The reason I'm writing is because I wonder about two things - the
program itself is only a single .c file, about 15K compressed, and I
wonder if there is any point in packaging up something this small and
easy to compile. Granted, it's not
Hi
I imagine a simple suggests with a note on the README pointing to the
documentation on doc-linux-{html,text} would be fine.
I don't think using the extra space for duplicate documentation is a
good idea, but maybe there's a more gentle solution...
PS.:(pt_BR) eu me sinto um idiota escrevendo
Hi
I imagine a simple suggests with a note on the README pointing to the
documentation on doc-linux-{html,text} would be fine.
I don't think using the extra space for duplicate documentation is a
good idea, but maybe there's a more gentle solution...
PS.:(pt_BR) eu me sinto um idiota escrevendo
The buildd-logs[1] don't provide enough debug information?
I know this doesn't answer your question, but I assume the portability
issues you mention are all build problems in one of Debian's supported
architectures, am I right?
If so, the build logs[1] should give you more then enough help to
'dpkg -l package-name' has the official answer. Of course the package
_might_ have been removed manually, but in that case the user has
already messed up with all infrastructure we care to provide =]
I belive this method should be enough.
Cheers
On Ter, 2003-05-27 at 05:28, Alan Woodland wrote:
The buildd-logs[1] don't provide enough debug information?
I know this doesn't answer your question, but I assume the portability
issues you mention are all build problems in one of Debian's supported
architectures, am I right?
If so, the build logs[1] should give you more then enough help to
On Sex, 2003-05-09 at 19:53, José Luis Tallón wrote:
Hi all,
* Even though the upstream sources contain no debian subdirectory,
dpkg-buildpackage says it is creating a Debian-native package,
and thus creates no .diif.gz containing my debian subdirectory.
I have put
On Mon, 2003-04-28 at 18:37, Morgon Kanter wrote:
Should it be:
libzthread2-9:2.11
libzthread2-2.2.11
libzthread9-2.2.11
libzthread2.9-2.2.11
The third one is the best, but you shouldn't use the exact version in
the package name, since this whole name changing thing is about
conflicting
I second that.
But maybe we still need a canonical list of problematic packages, and
the CBP status would only be aplicable to inform wannabe packagers that
there's an ongoing analysis on the packagability of that software.
On second thought, I'm not sure it would be worth it, but I like the
On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 15:22, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
the conflicts and replaces make a new install of the package over the old one
go smoothly. However, it will not cause apt to automatically move to the new
package.
A good solution IMO is to keep a fake (empty) package of
Hi
On Wed, 2003-04-16 at 09:36, Joe Nahmias wrote:
I posted a clarification from upstream about this to the BTS -- see
the ITP (bug #178113) http://bugs.debian.org/178113. It doesn't seem
(to me) that there is any _real_ legal issues -- perhaps mailing -legal
is the right thing to do...
I'd
Hi
I'm having this very lame problem with my debian/rules file:
I'm setting CFLAGS to -g in case the DEBUG build option is set but then
running
$(MAKE) CFLAGS=$(CFLAGS)
inside the build target results in overridden variables.
From what I could find, the Makefile uses CFLAGS internally to store
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 17:04, josX wrote:
John wrote:
josX wrote:
I wrote a program, and i would like to have it in debian format,
and if people like it in the debian releases. If packaging isn't
too difficult i would have no problems with debianizing it, but
it is not my first interest
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 17:04, josX wrote:
John wrote:
josX wrote:
I wrote a program, and i would like to have it in debian format,
and if people like it in the debian releases. If packaging isn't
too difficult i would have no problems with debianizing it, but
it is not my first interest
Hi
I'm having some problems with two RC bugs in my packages, I'd like to
see if any mentor can help me out...
FIRST (#184121): is it OK to declare an explicit dependency on
libsigc++-dev if my dev package includes files from it? (I'm guessing it
is, by documentation, but something doesn't look
Hi
I'm having some problems with two RC bugs in my packages, I'd like to
see if any mentor can help me out...
FIRST (#184121): is it OK to declare an explicit dependency on
libsigc++-dev if my dev package includes files from it? (I'm guessing it
is, by documentation, but something doesn't look
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 15:32, deFreese, Barry wrote:
Hello,
Is there a single document source for the Debian Policy and related
documents? I have been trying to diligently read through all of them but
occasionally I want to read it offline and I really don't want to have to go
through each
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 15:32, deFreese, Barry wrote:
Hello,
Is there a single document source for the Debian Policy and related
documents? I have been trying to diligently read through all of them but
occasionally I want to read it offline and I really don't want to have to go
through each
On Seg, 2003-02-03 at 16:40, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
CFLAGS = -Wall -O3 `freetype-config --cflags` ${SDL_CFLAGS} ${BUMPREF_CFLAGS} `
What do I have to change to be able to add -mieee on alpha, preferably
from debian/rules, or configure ?
I'd use something like this:
CFLAGS = -O2 -Wall
if
On Seg, 2003-02-03 at 16:40, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
CFLAGS = -Wall -O3 `freetype-config --cflags` ${SDL_CFLAGS}
${BUMPREF_CFLAGS} `
What do I have to change to be able to add -mieee on alpha, preferably
from debian/rules, or configure ?
I'd use something like this:
CFLAGS = -O2 -Wall
if
On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 22:06, Ian Wilkinson wrote:
and if anyone tells me to RTFM please point out where TFM is, as I can't
find it :-)
Maybe you could find some aswers in the Perl Packaging Policy, at:
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/perl-policy/ (TFM =] )
Appart from the
On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 22:06, Ian Wilkinson wrote:
and if anyone tells me to RTFM please point out where TFM is, as I can't
find it :-)
Maybe you could find some aswers in the Perl Packaging Policy, at:
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/perl-policy/ (TFM =] )
Appart from the
Hi
Should I do nothing an tag as wontfix? Or try to upload into stable?
Any comments?
IMHO, these are quite serious bugs, but do not render the package
unusable OR pose any security threat, since using GetUpdateSQL is not
the only way to do it.
Furthermore, introducing the new version to
86 matches
Mail list logo
