On 2019-06-22 12:20 +0200, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
> Hello,
>
> can someone please tell me a source about the meaning of :native in the
> Build-Depends?
The architecture you are building on, see deb-src-control(5):
,
| An architecture qualifier name can be a real Debian architecture name
|
> On Dec 25, 2018, at 02:41, Geert Stappers wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 06:09:04PM -0800, Matthew Fernandez wrote:
>> Hello Debian Mentors,
>>
>> I???m preparing to request a piece of software I maintain be made
>> available on Debian and have been doing my homework trying to package
>>
On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 06:09:04PM -0800, Matthew Fernandez wrote:
> Hello Debian Mentors,
>
> I???m preparing to request a piece of software I maintain be made
> available on Debian and have been doing my homework trying to package
> it correctly.
>
> It???s a C++ binary, but comes with a Python w
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018, 10:54 p.m. Daniel Sperka, wrote:
>It seems that under stretch, libvtk5 has been replaced by libvtk6, and
> libpng12 by libpng16.
>
This is the *very* reason for which -dev packages shouldn't contain the
soversion...
Given that you are using cowbuilder, which respects th
I put 'em all on separate lines so I can add comments;
my control tends to look like this for packages that build on multiple
versions of ubuntu:
Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7),
# libpng12-dev for ubuntu 16.04, libpng-dev for ubuntu 17.10 and up
libpng12-dev | libpng-dev,
libvtk6-dev | libv
Thank you Christian for your clear explanation.
I think i only need the headers files, but i will check
this before to file a bug to the qtcreator package, so.
Thankfully,
Benoît
Le 13/06/2017 à 08:54, Christian Seiler a écrit :
Hi,
On 06/12/2017 11:05 PM, Benoît Rouits wrote:
Is there a sol
Hi,
On 06/12/2017 11:05 PM, Benoît Rouits wrote:
> Is there a solution ? Should i file a bug on WNPP to ask for a
> qtcreator-dev package in order to have qtcreator source installed in
> /usr/src ?
Do you need the entire source of Qt Creator or just some header files?
In either case, you can onl
work is already in progress, no need to prod or write stuff like
"Don't do that." is not helping anyone
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> [Sandro Tosi in CC]
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:05:44PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 05:53:04PM +0100,
[Sandro Tosi in CC]
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 11:05:44PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 05:53:04PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > matplotlib build-depends on:
> > - python3-mpltoolkits.basemap:arm64
> > python3-mpltoolkits.basemap depends on:
> > - python3-matplotlib:ar
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 05:53:04PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> matplotlib build-depends on:
> - python3-mpltoolkits.basemap:arm64
> python3-mpltoolkits.basemap depends on:
> - python3-matplotlib:arm64
> python3-matplotlib depends on:
> - python-matplotlib-data:arm64 (>= 2.0.0~rc2-1)
> matplotlib
On Jan 3, 2017 9:33 PM, "Paul Wise" wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Thanks, that does help a lot, and it helped me to realize that the
packages
> are built on the Debian machines and sent to users already built, so
there's
> no need for the users to install the Build
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Thanks, that does help a lot, and it helped me to realize that the packages
> are built on the Debian machines and sent to users already built, so there's
> no need for the users to install the Build-Depends, right?
Right, except users might w
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 12:52:26PM -0500, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Thanks, that does help a lot, and it helped me to realize that the packages
> are built on the Debian machines and sent to users already built, so
> there's no need for the users to install the Build-Depends, right?
Right.
--
WBR, wR
On Jan 2, 2017 4:56 PM, "Octavio Alvarez" wrote:
If you are using "apt install" then the packages under Build-Depends are
not installed at all, only those under Depends, and, because they are
needed for the program to work, those are not uninstalled after
installation.
If you are using "apt buil
On Jan 2, 2017 10:06 PM, "Paul Wise" wrote:
You might be interested in looking at some of these diagrams to
discover more about how Debian works:
https://wiki.debian.org/Diagrams
You can look up any confusing jargon you find in this glossary:
https://wiki.debian.org/Glossary
--
bye,
pabs
htt
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Taylor Kline wrote:
> What is the difference? How are they treated differently during the
> apt installation process? Thanks :)
You might be interested in looking at some of these diagrams to
discover more about how Debian works:
https://wiki.debian.org/Diagrams
On 01/02/2017 06:06 AM, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Thank you, Octavio. Does this mean apt will temporarily install
> the Build-Depends packages and remove them after the installation
> completes?
If you are using "apt install" then the packages under Build-Depends are
not installed at all, only those u
Taylor Kline writes:
> Thank you, Octavio. Does this mean apt
You mean ‘dpkg’.
APT is a tool to fetch packages and to make requests to ‘dpkg’. It is
‘dpkg’'s job to do the actual install/remove of each individual package.
> will temporarily install the Build-Depends packages and remove them
>
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 09:06:10AM -0500, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Thank you, Octavio. Does this mean apt will temporarily install the
> Build-Depends
> packages and remove them after the installation completes?
apt doesn't build the package during install. Packages that you install
are already built.
Thank you, Octavio. Does this mean apt will temporarily install the
Build-Depends
packages and remove them after the installation completes?
On 01/01/2017 04:07 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Taylor Kline writes:
>
>> What is the difference [between the “Build-Depends” field and the
>> “Depends” field]?
>
> The difference is precisely that between building the package from
> source, versus using the package installed.
For example, a compil
Taylor Kline writes:
> What is the difference [between the “Build-Depends” field and the
> “Depends” field]?
The difference is precisely that between building the package from
source, versus using the package installed.
The “Build-Depends” and “Build-Depends-Indep” fields appear only in the
sou
Build-Depends should not make any effect during package installation
process, because it's a dependency only for package-building process.
__
I'm using this express-made address because personal addresses aren't
masked enough at lists.debian.org archives.
El 30/12/16 a les 05:31, Taylor
Taylor Kline writes:
> What is the difference? How are they treated differently during the
> apt installation process? Thanks :)
Build-Depends is used only during build-time. (Usually on the buildds,
though it can be on developer's computers as well.)
Depends, on the other hand, are packages th
On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 12:11:37PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
> > Let give a try. I am dealing with the libgap-sage package [1].
>
> Thanks for the extensive details.
>
> > To begin with, GAP is a Computer Algebra System (CAS).
> > From an u
On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 03:22:41AM +, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> >
> >> for one of my package, libgap-sage [1], the source material used for build
> >> is in fact seded meterial from an other package, gap: grossely the sed
> >>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Thanks for your prompt reply.
On 02/11/16 04:11, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
>> Let give a try. I am dealing with the libgap-sage package [1].
>
> Thanks for the extensive details.
You are welcome.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> 2] The scripts that modify the original GAP source files is not distributed
> within
> the libgap upstream source ball, but it is available via the libgap git
> repository [2] at Bitbucket
> along some documentation for generating our own m
On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Let give a try. I am dealing with the libgap-sage package [1].
Thanks for the extensive details.
> To begin with, GAP is a Computer Algebra System (CAS).
> From an upstream point of view, libgap is not part of GAP itself.
> libgap is rather
Hello,
On 01/11/16 05:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
>> for one of my package, libgap-sage [1], the source material used for build
>> is in fact seded meterial from an other package, gap: grossely the sed
>> process
>> is the main part of libgap pa
Jerome BENOIT writes:
> for one of my package, libgap-sage [1], the source material used for build
> is in fact seded meterial from an other package, gap
One good solution would be to have the ‘gap’ package build a new binary
package, maybe ‘gap-data’, that contains the data you need in a format
On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Is there any guidance for such source packages ? Which ones of them I may
> consider
> a good example.
They are all about the same, ship the source under /usr/src, done.
> I guess it is the best way to proceed.
It is probably the least go
Hello, thanks for the quick reply.
On 01/11/16 05:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>
>> for one of my package, libgap-sage [1], the source material used for build
>> is in fact seded meterial from an other package, gap: grossely the sed
>> process
>> i
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> for one of my package, libgap-sage [1], the source material used for build
> is in fact seded meterial from an other package, gap: grossely the sed process
> is the main part of libgap package: is there a standard way to use the Debian
> sour
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Which is why all shared libraries should use at least trivial symbol
> versioning that assigns all symbols a version that changes with the
> SONAME.
Perhaps a pedantic/info lintian complaint is in order?
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.or
Andrey Rahmatullin writes:
> If your app is linked against libavcodec53 and against libavdevice53 and
> libavdevice53 is linked against libavcodec54 and libavcodec* doesn't use
> symbol versioning, your app will crash because of symbol conflicts.
Which is why all shared libraries should use at l
Please ignore the mail below, I think I understand that part now.
libavdevice53 itself depends on libavcodec5{3|4} depending on where it
comes from.
Paul
On 21-03-13 08:04, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On 21-03-13 07:46, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:17:50PM +01
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 08:04:10AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> >>> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
> >>> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
> >>> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so
> >>> my binar
Hi Andrey,
On 21-03-13 07:46, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:17:50PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>>> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
>>> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
>>> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 w
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:17:50PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
> > libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
> > but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so
> > my binary ended
On 20-03-13 15:54, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so
> my binary ended up importing either libavcod
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 03:54:13PM +0100, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> Maybe I've picked the wrong example, the actual problem was with
> libavdevice53, the same soname is used for either 0.8.5-1 and 9.3-1,
> but 9.3-1 links to libavcodec54 while 0.8.5-1 links to libavcodec53, so
> my binary ended up im
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:10:51 -0700
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Antonio Ospite writes:
>
> > Should I restrict the Depends for the binary packages by hand in
> > debian/control? For example adding:
>
> > libavcodec53 (<< 6:9)
>
> > to the binary package I am interested in restricting?
>
> Yes.
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:51:26 +0100
Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Antonio Ospite , 2013-03-19, 16:15:
> >for a package I am working on, I am setting versioned Build-Depends, to
> >avoid using newer libav versions which would break compilation, e.g.:
> >
> > libavcodec-dev (<< 6:9)
> >
> >Compilation
* Antonio Ospite , 2013-03-19, 16:15:
for a package I am working on, I am setting versioned Build-Depends, to
avoid using newer libav versions which would break compilation, e.g.:
libavcodec-dev (<< 6:9)
Compilation under pbuilder for Sid goes fine, but the binary packages
are still a
Antonio Ospite writes:
> Should I restrict the Depends for the binary packages by hand in
> debian/control? For example adding:
> libavcodec53 (<< 6:9)
> to the binary package I am interested in restricting?
Yes. The shared library dependency information otherwise comes from
shlibs/symb
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0100, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> Compilation under pbuilder for Sid goes fine, but the binary packages
> are still allowed to be installed with newer libav binary packages:
>
>libavcodec53 (>= 6:0.8.3-1~) | libavcodec-extra-53 (>= 6:0.8.5)
Of course, becaus
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:42:03PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:39:20PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > I checked, and dh currently doesn't support build-arch and build-indep
> > at all internally (you need to add the rules yourself). I've made a
> > patch to add proper sup
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 04:39:20PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> I checked, and dh currently doesn't support build-arch and build-indep
> at all internally (you need to add the rules yourself). I've made a
> patch to add proper support which I'll submit once I've tested it.
FWIW, the current progre
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:03:39PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>
> >> Now why does it only list 8k sources if it matches the required
> >> "build:" target? Are 50% of all sources already d
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > Output at http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/build-rule-check.bz2
>> > I haven't had time to analyse this, if someone else wants to,
>> > that would be cool.
>> >
>> > Done on lintian.debian.org using t
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 07:09:44PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Output at http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/build-rule-check.bz2
> > I haven't had time to analyse this, if someone else wants to,
> > that would be cool.
> >
> > Done on lintian.debian.org using the following:
> >
> > #!/bin/
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> > In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
>> > Holschuh
>> > wrote:
>> > >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Step
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:23:59PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> > Holschuh
> > wrote:
> > >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > >> >
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 01:29:12PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> Holschuh
> wrote:
> >On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> >> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
> >
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." writes:
> In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes
> Holschuh
> wrote:
>>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>>> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
>>> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to
In <20101120183255.gf12...@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
>> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to "build%:" and dpkg-buildpackage
>> >could us
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to "build%:" and dpkg-buildpackage
> >could use build-arch/indep targets instead of build. Aparently that is
> >too much to ask.
>
> I v
Le Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 01:30:00PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. a écrit :
>
> I volunteer to make /this/ fix to any package that is unmaintained or whose
> maintainer is unresponsive, *if* Debian will change policy to /require/ build-
> arch/indep and make dpkg-buildpackage use them instead of b
In <87y68p6tcx@frosties.localnet>, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>Roger Leigh writes:
>> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> David Kalnischkies writes:
>>> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07
Roger Leigh writes:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> David Kalnischkies writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >>> And as disc
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 04:40:57PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> David Kalnischkies writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >>> And as discussed before policy disagrees
David Kalnischkies writes:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>>
>> Would you please elaborate ?
>
> Goswin likely refers
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 19:25, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>
> Would you please elaborate ?
Goswin likely refers to this thread: Buildd & binary-indep
http://lists.de
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 07:07:07PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> And as discussed before policy disagrees with reality in this.
>
---end quoted text---
Would you please elaborate ?
--
أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
Digital design engineer
GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7
GPG Fingerprint
anatoly techtonik writes:
> Hello,
>
> I've described situation around Build-Depends-Indep at
> http://wiki.debian.org/Build-Depends-Indep
> I hope it will be useful for people who are looking for description of
> this field. However, I am not expert in packaging, and some
> information is obviou
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
> anatoly techtonik wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Ø£ØÙ
د اÙÙ
ØÙ
ÙدÙ
>>
>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
>>> clean target.
>>
>> What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Inde
anatoly techtonik wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, أحمد المحمودي
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
>> clean target.
>
> What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Indep" then? Dependencies
> that are required to build package
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
> clean target.
What is the meaning of name "Build-Depends-Indep" then? Dependencies
that are required to build package, but from which "clean" rule is
indep
Hello,
I thought Build-Depends-Indep is for build-deps that are not needed by
clean target.
--
أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy)
Digital design engineer
GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7
GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7
signature.asc
Description: Digital signa
I demand that Joachim Reichel may or may not have written...
>> The underlying problem is that build-arch/indep are not mandatory and thus
>> building must call the "build" target.
> Any chance that this will be changed for lenny? If build-arch and
> build-indep are optional and there is no relia
Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The underlying problem is that build-arch/indep are not mandatory and
>> thus building must call the "build" target.
>
> This makes sense, thanks for pointing it out.
>
>> If build-indep does take a c
Hi,
> The underlying problem is that build-arch/indep are not mandatory and
> thus building must call the "build" target.
Any chance that this will be changed for lenny? If build-arch and
build-indep are optional and there is no reliable way to find out
whether these targets exist, what's the use
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The underlying problem is that build-arch/indep are not mandatory and
> thus building must call the "build" target.
This makes sense, thanks for pointing it out.
> If build-indep does take a considerable time then you can use the
> following hack
Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Joachim Reichel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> section 7.6 of the policy states that Build-Depends-Indep must be
>> satisfied if the build target is invoked.
>
> [...]
>
>> Now, if my sponsor uploads this package, it will still fail,
Hi,
Joachim Reichel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> section 7.6 of the policy states that Build-Depends-Indep must be
> satisfied if the build target is invoked.
[...]
> Now, if my sponsor uploads this package, it will still fail, right? If
> Build-Depends-Indep is not satisfied by acciden
Thamk you all for the help, I will try to combine all the tricks you
have teached me
Cheers.
Mihai Felseghi.
On 6/23/06, Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 01:51:14PM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 6/23/06, Mihai Felseghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 01:51:14PM -0300, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 6/23/06, Mihai Felseghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hello dear mentors , please tell me if there is a method of finding
> >the build depends for a piece of software (so i can fill the
> >Build-Depends field of
This one time, at band camp, Mihai Felseghi said:
> Masami Ichikawa wrote:
> > on 06/24/06 01:48, Mihai Felseghi wrote:
> >>> Hello dear mentors , please tell me if there is a method of finding
> >>> the build depends for a piece of software
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]% objdump -p /usr/bin/flux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Masami Ichikawa wrote:
> Hi.
>
> on 06/24/06 01:48, Mihai Felseghi wrote:
>>> Hello dear mentors , please tell me if there is a method of finding
>>> the build depends for a piece of software (so i can fill the
>>> Build-Depends field of the control
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
on 06/24/06 01:48, Mihai Felseghi wrote:
> Hello dear mentors , please tell me if there is a method of finding
> the build depends for a piece of software (so i can fill the
> Build-Depends field of the control file)? I tried to use the script f
Hi!
On 6/23/06, Mihai Felseghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello dear mentors , please tell me if there is a method of finding
the build depends for a piece of software (so i can fill the
Build-Depends field of the control file)? I tried to use the script from
New Maintainers Guide but it gave
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What concern do porters have with architecture-all-only-packages?
>
> With most Arch: all packages, little to none. The concern is actually in
> *not* having stuff that is *only* needed for -indep targets (which will
> generally never be built by porting ma
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What concern do porters have with architecture-all-only-packages?
>
> With most Arch: all packages, little to none. The concern is actually in
> *not* having stuff that is *only* needed for -indep targets (which will
> generally never be built by porting ma
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:57:10AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> >> the CVS version of auctex, a
On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 09:57:10AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> >> the CVS version of auctex, a
Hi.
Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>Either I don't understand your sentence, or I have a problem reading the
>policy. In
Or I was wrong. :)
>file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-miscellaneous.html#s-deb
>ianrules
>
>I can find statements about the targets binary-arch and bi
Hi.
Frank Küster ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>Either I don't understand your sentence, or I have a problem reading the
>policy. In
Or I was wrong. :)
>file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-miscellaneous.html#s-deb
>ianrules
>
>I can find statements about the targets binary-arch and bi
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
>> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
>> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it'
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
>> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
>> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
>> all? Why not just use
Joel Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
>> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
>> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it'
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
>> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
>> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
>> all? Why not just use
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
>
> In d
Frank Küster wrote:
> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
> all? Why not just use Build-Depends here and use Build-Depends-Indep
> on
On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 04:54:42PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for practice and because I want to use it, I am working on a package of
> the CVS version of auctex, a LaTeX mode for Emacs. Since it's only an
> Emacs-addon written in Lisp, it's of course architecture independent.
>
> In d
Frank Küster wrote:
> In the original package's control file, there is a line of
> Build-Depends-Indep, but no Build-Depends. Does this make sense for a
> source package that has no architecture dependent binary packages at
> all? Why not just use Build-Depends here and use Build-Depends-Indep
> on
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:17:13PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Is there a right way for using the source of a different
> debian-package?
Look into apt-src if you are interested in developing this kind of idea.
The source-dependency approach has many pitfalls, and is not something that
is sup
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:17:13PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Is there a right way for using the source of a different
> debian-package?
Look into apt-src if you are interested in developing this kind of idea.
The source-dependency approach has many pitfalls, and is not something that
is sup
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:15:11PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:42:21PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:17:13PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> >> Is there a right way for using the source of a different
> >> debian-package?
>
> > For ocaml,
Hello,
I'd like to move this discussion to the exim4debian ml.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:23:41PM +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
>> If you're wondering: The package in question would be exim v4 with the
>> exiscan patch applied. - It cannot simply be built from the exim4
>> source-package because the
1 - 100 of 218 matches
Mail list logo
