"Loren M. Lang" schreef op 8 februari 2024 02:13:49
CET:
>This is just for my own curiosity and understanding. Is the NEW queue on
>FTP Master handled entirely manually?
>
>I see a number of packages that go back quite a few months, however,
>it's not exactly clear
This is just for my own curiosity and understanding. Is the NEW queue on
FTP Master handled entirely manually?
I see a number of packages that go back quite a few months, however,
it's not exactly clear to me what kind of things are holding those
packages up at least from looking at the website
Hi Paul,
thanks for the thorough answer :)
>PS: In future, when asking questions, please include specific details,
>including package names and excerpts of build logs etc. Advice is
>almost always better when given more information as input.
ACK
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 11:24 AM Peymaneh Nejad wrote:
> I realised later that this package actually break the build, and that this
> can be solved by packaging _older_ version of the dependency package (that's
> also what upstream does.
The best option is to send upstream a patch to fix the
Hi,
I have had a dependency for a package I am working on uploaded by a sponsor to
new queue.
I realised later that this package actually break the build, and that this can
be solved by packaging _older_ version of the dependency package (that's also
what upstream does.
I am wondering how
Dear mentors,
my package libjreen was uploaded to the NEW queue on 09.Dec 2015. Until
now the package is waiting there. Is this quite normal or is something
wrong with this package?
I'm asking because I want to work on the tomahawk-player package but
without this dependency, I'm unable
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 02:18:11PM +0100, Stefan Ahlers wrote:
> my package libjreen was uploaded to the NEW queue on 09.Dec 2015. Until
> now the package is waiting there. Is this quite normal or is something
> wrong with this package?
It's completely normal.
One month waiting in NEW i
<stef.ahl...@t-online.de> ha
scritto:
Dear mentors,
my package libjreen was uploaded to the NEW queue on 09.Dec 2015. Until
now the package is waiting there. Is this quite normal or is something
wrong with this package?
I'm asking because I want to work on the tomahawk-player package but
w
Hi
the issue comes from patch: add-license-info.patch
The patch is patching author's source files with author's original
copyright declaration in the global LICENSE file and the one
in head of progress.c . The patch was sent to author days ago
and we (Asias and me) are waiting for author to
Oops That package is good except for one thing:
the issue comes from patch: add-license-info.patch
The patch is patching author's source files with author's original
copyright declaration in the global LICENSE file and the one
in head of progress.c . The patch was sent to author days ago
One of my packages is in the new queue, and now it needs a tiny
change (a library it build-depends on changes it's package name).
Can I use the same Debian revision for the updated package or do I
have to bump the revision number (or is there anything else to do
this)?
TIA,
gregor
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 02:17:17PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
One of my packages is in the new queue, and now it needs a tiny
change (a library it build-depends on changes it's package name).
Can I use the same Debian revision for the updated package or do I
have to bump the revision number
* gregor herrmann [Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:17:17 +0100]:
One of my packages is in the new queue, and now it needs a tiny
change (a library it build-depends on changes it's package name).
Can I use the same Debian revision for the updated package or do I
have to bump the revision number
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:52:43PM +0100, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 02:17:17PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
One of my packages is in the new queue, and now it needs a tiny
change [..]
Simply upload new package with bumped revision number. There are plenty
--- Kai Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
http://hendry.iki.fi/debian/unstable/webpy_0.135-1.diff.gz
doesn't have a required 'build' target, which IMO is sufficient reason
to reject the upload.
What should it be? 386?
I think it refers to this:
On 2006-03-08T09:00+0100 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
Is it my imagination or binary-arch doesn't exist either?
Isn't that what .PHONY is for?
sam$ egrep PHONY webpy-0.135/debian/rules
.PHONY: build clean binary-indep binary-arch binary install configure
Best wishes,
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Not exactly, AFAIK:
http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/localfiles/infofiles/make/make_33.html
A phony target is one that is not really the name of a file. It is just a name
for some commands to be executed when you make an explicit request. There are
two reasons to use a phony target: to avoid a
On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 05:48:45PM +0900, Kai Hendry wrote:
On 2006-03-08T09:00+0100 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
Is it my imagination or binary-arch doesn't exist either?
Isn't that what .PHONY is for?
No; .PHONY is a list of rules which exist, but do not cause files of
that name to be created
Peter Samuelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Kai Hendry]
My package webpy has been in the NEW queue for a couple of weeks
...
Is that for a particular reason, or does it usually take that long?
You're spoiled - it used to be common for packages to sit in NEW for a
month or more. These days
On 2006-03-07, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They process NEW binary packages quite fast, within one to three days to
my impression.
that _WAS_ also my impression ... but having a package stuck for more
than two months without any notices have changed my impression.
(look on top-8 on
On 2006-03-07T01:04-0500 Justin Pryzby wrote:
But I suspect that it might be the Affero license.
I specified non-free. With hope of it being re-licensed or Affero
accepted in the future.
Is there a bug list somewhere associated with ftp.debian.org on the Web?
My package webpy has been in the NEW queue for a couple of weeks:
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
Is that for a particular reason, or does it usually take that long?
Is there a bug list somewhere associated with ftp.debian.org on the Web?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
[Kai Hendry]
My package webpy has been in the NEW queue for a couple of weeks
...
Is that for a particular reason, or does it usually take that long?
You're spoiled - it used to be common for packages to sit in NEW for a
month or more. These days the ftpmasters are quite a bit faster.
Still
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 02:48:35PM +0900, Kai Hendry wrote:
My package webpy has been in the NEW queue for a couple of weeks:
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
Is that for a particular reason, or does it usually take that long?
2 weeks isn't too bad; I guess it was much worse in the past
24 matches
Mail list logo
