Your message dated Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:01:05 +0500
with message-id <20161213060105.hy432p2nwnocb...@belkar.wrar.name>
and subject line Re: Bug#847774: RFS: lbzip2/2.5-2 [RC]
has caused the Debian Bug report #847774,
regarding RFS: lbzip2/2.5-2 [RC]
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Hi Andrey,
On 12/12/16, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> You've replaced orig.tar.bz2 with orig.tar.gz. Is this intended? If yes,
> why? If no, please fix this.
No, that was not intended, thanks for catching this.
It should be fixed now.
--
Mikolaj Izdebski
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
You've replaced orig.tar.bz2 with orig.tar.gz. Is this intended? If yes,
why? If no, please fix this.
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2"
* Package name: lbzip2
Version : 2.5-2
Upstream Author : Mikolaj Izdebski
* URL : http://lbzip2.org/
* License : GPL-3+
Section : util
Your message dated Sun, 30 Mar 2014 22:35:33 +0200
with message-id
and subject line lbzip2_2.5-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #743038,
regarding RFS: lbzip2/2.5-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2"
Package name: lbzip2
Version : 2.5-1
Upstream Author : Mikolaj Izdebski
URL : http://lbzip2.org/
License : GPL-3+
Section : utils
It builds th
Your message dated Sun, 03 Nov 2013 16:28:19 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: lbzip2/2.3-1 [RC]
has caused the Debian Bug report #726261,
regarding RFS: lbzip2/2.3-1 [RC]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2"
* Package name: lbzip2
Version : 2.3-1
Upstream Author : Mikolaj Izdebski
* URL : http://lbzip2.org/
* License : GPL-3+
Section : util
Your message dated Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:20:05 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: lbzip2/2.2-1 - fast, multi-threaded bzip2 utility
[RC]
has caused the Debian Bug report #684585,
regarding RFS: lbzip2/2.2-1 - fast, multi-threaded bzip2 utility [RC]
to be marked as done.
This
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2"
* Package name: lbzip2
Version : 2.2-1
Upstream Author : Mikolaj Izdebski
* URL : https://github.com/kjn/lbzip2
* License : GPL-3+
Section
Hi!
Am 06.12.2011 23:17, schrieb Mikołaj Izdebski:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2".
[..]
Uploaded.
Best regards,
Alexander
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2".
* Package name: lbzip2
Version : 2.1-2
Upstream Author : Mikołaj Izdebski
* URL : https://github.com/kjn/lbzip2
* License : GPL-v3+
Section : utils
It builds those binary packag
Looks fine, uploaded.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Dear Mentors,
I've released lbzip2-0.20 and packaged it for Debian. I kindly ask you to
review it.
The dsc file is available at
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2/lbzip2_0.20-1.dsc
lintian displays the "usual"
W: lbzip2: manpage-has-errors-from-man usr/share/man/man1/lb
On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Paul Wise wrote:
Looks fine, uploaded.
Thank you.
There is one pedantic lintian complaint:
P: lbzip2 source: direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system Makefile and 1 more
I think I'd like to start using quilt or dpatch for my own good. I tried
to do an interdiff -z
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 5:13 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> I kindly request you to put the package in NEW for me.
Packages only go through NEW when they are introduced to Debian or
when they add new binary packages.
I'll have another look later today.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
On 03/17/09 10:19, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 5:55 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
>
>> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
>
> Uploaded.
>
I released upstream-version 0.15 and uploaded dpkg-version 0.15-1 to the
URL above.
I kindly request you to put the package in NE
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 03:01:10AM +0100, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> Paul Wise wrote:
>
> > And now onto the package review:
> >
> > Why does your diff.gz patch the Makefile? Shouldn't you add those
> > changes to the upstream Makefile?
>
> I don't think so. As my general, hobbyist free software deve
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
On 03/17/09 10:19, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 5:55 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
Uploaded.
Thanks a lot!
lacos
Sorry, I intended to post this to the list. I was constantly fighting with
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 5:55 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> Oops. The nocheck build option needed a change. I apologize for rushing it.
> I uploaded the package to
>
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
Uploaded.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
On 03/16/09 07:32, Paul Wise wrote:
That isn't the way to do it. Because lbzip2 is in NEW, you should add
a new changelog entry with two entries, something like this: "new
upstream release" and "bump Standards-Version, no changes needed". For
the latter, please verify that no changes were needed
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:12 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> I released a new upstream version (0.14, changes should become shortly
> visible under http://freshmeat.net/projects/lbzip2) and made available a new
> build of the corresponding Debian package; the URL is the same as above.
...
> Trivial int
On 02/18/09 15:25, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:12 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
I uploaded a new build of the package:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
Please contact this list for future versions and I will upload if I am able.
I released a new upstream versio
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:00 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> 1. Can you please enlighten me how the amd64 package was built (maybe you
> built it?)
I built it in a clean chroot using cowbuilder (there is also sbuild,
pdbuilder, lvmbuilder, qemubuilder).
> Is it usual that amd64 packages get processed
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:12 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
I uploaded a new build of the package:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
Apologies for the delay, uploaded, should end up in NEW soon.
Please contact this list for future versions
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:12 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> I uploaded a new build of the package:
>
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lbzip2
Apologies for the delay, uploaded, should end up in NEW soon.
Please contact this list for future versions and I will upload if I am able.
--
b
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > If you plan on being able to debug the binaries that you've released,
> > you almost certainly need the debbugging symbols that match the
> > binaries that you've released.
> >
> > In Debian we currently aren't collecting all of t
On Monday 16 February 2009 17:11:20 ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > If you plan on being able to debug the binaries that you've released,
> > you almost certainly need the debbugging symbols that match the
> > binaries that you've released.
> >
> > In Debian we currently aren't colle
Don Armstrong wrote:
> If you plan on being able to debug the binaries that you've released,
> you almost certainly need the debbugging symbols that match the
> binaries that you've released.
>
> In Debian we currently aren't collecting all of the debugging symbols,
> so doing the above is diffic
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> Paul Wise wrote:
> > The reason is "that's the way we do it in Debian". The policy manual
> > probably has a rationale.
>
> There is no reason to generate debugging symbols and then strip
> them.
If you plan on being able to debug the binaries that you
Paul Wise wrote:
> The reason is "that's the way we do it in Debian". The policy manual
> probably has a rationale.
[...]
> Hmm, which Debian architectures do you test on?
>
> Perhaps /dev/urandom could be a good source of data.
[...]
> Yeah, always run lintian in sid and build/test your pack
Paul Wise wrote:
>> It seems awkward to me to generate debugging symbols and then strip
>> them. Is there a reason to include debugging symbols per default? It can
>> eat up a lot of disk space (and thus buffer cache) for huge projects.
>> Also, -O0 is gcc's default, AFAIK.
>>
>> Can you please ex
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:01 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> One such thing would be the set of paths I'd to put under an "install:"
> rule. This has clearly no place in Makefile.dev which is my personal
> playground, or Makefile.portable, which is what it is called. (The
> default Makefile, using gcc
Paul Wise wrote:
> And now onto the package review:
>
> Why does your diff.gz patch the Makefile? Shouldn't you add those
> changes to the upstream Makefile?
I don't think so. As my general, hobbyist free software development
policy, I *always* and *exclusively* follow the Single Unix Specificat
Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
>
>> Citing the "Version", "File size [B]" and "Decompr. speed [%]" blocks from
>> "report_alpha_osf1.txt" (I mark the relevant rows with exlamation marks
>> now):
>
> Ok, these numbers convinced me lbzip2 is better.
... fo
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:59 PM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> I believe I wasn't exact enough. If your compressed input has *any* of the
> following characterists, pbzip2 won't use multiple worker threads to
> decompress it, while lbzip2 will:
> (1) The compressed input is read from a pipe.
> (2) The co
As I've written in the "hot spice" paragraph of my RFS, lbzip2 can
decompress
- with multiple threads
pbzip2 too.
- a bz2 file consisting of a single bzip2 stream (eg. created by
standard bzip2 or 7za)
pbzip2 too.
- reading it from a pipe
pbzip2 (in 1.0.4 and later)
I bel
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Érsek László wrote:
>> How is this different to or better than pbzip2?
>
> As I've written in the "hot spice" paragraph of my RFS, lbzip2 can
> decompress
> - with multiple threads
pbzip2 too.
> - a bz2 file consisting of a
> How is this different to or better than pbzip2?
As I've written in the "hot spice" paragraph of my RFS, lbzip2 can
decompress
- with multiple threads
- a bz2 file consisting of a single bzip2 stream (eg. created by
standard bzip2 or 7za)
- reading it from a pipe
- using an in
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:11 AM, ERSEK Laszlo wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2".
How is this different to or better than pbzip2?
Perhaps you could get the two upstreams to collaborate and merge the
two implementations of the same thing?
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debi
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lbzip2".
* Package name: lbzip2
Version : 0.13-1
Upstream Author : Laszlo Ersek (myself)
* URL : http://phptest11.atw.hu/
* License : GPLv2+
Section : utils
It builds these binary packages:
lbz
41 matches
Mail list logo
