Kartik Mistry wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Kamaraju S
> Kusumanchi wrote:
>> dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to
>> texmacs-1.0.7.2/debian/.rules.swp: binary file contents changed
>
> This is why...
>
> Close debian/rules opened in another tab/window and remove .rules.swp
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Kamaraju S
Kusumanchi wrote:
> dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to
> texmacs-1.0.7.2/debian/.rules.swp: binary file contents changed
This is why...
Close debian/rules opened in another tab/window and remove .rules.swp
while building package..
--
Chee
rce: warning: executable mode 0755
of 'debian/patches/08_gzipbest.dpatch' will not be represented in diff
dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
dpkg-buildpackage: failure: dpkg-source -b texmacs-1.0.7.2 gave error exit
status 1
It is a bit weird in the sense it does not occur when I do
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > the old version is "nonexistent". Normally one would expect the
> > source distribution to include these files (INSTALL, install-sh, etc).
>
> No, I am packaging from the official rele
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > the old version is "nonexistent". Normally one would expect the
> > source distribution to include these files (INSTALL, install-sh, etc).
>
> No, I am packaging from the official rel
hi
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
> > In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> > links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> > replace them by the f
hi
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 03:33:18PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Florian,
>
> In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> replace them by the file to which they are linked.
not necessarily
for
hi
I have started seeing these errors myself a few months ago
problem was, I had upgraded to woody, and the new
autotools create symlinks by default instead of real files
solution (from my xmorph package): run ./autogen.sh once, and
put in the debian/rules
build: build-stamp
build-
hi
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:47:04PM +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
> > In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> > links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> > replace them by the
hi
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 03:33:18PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Florian,
>
> In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> replace them by the file to which they are linked.
not necessarily
fo
hi
I have started seeing these errors myself a few months ago
problem was, I had upgraded to woody, and the new
autotools create symlinks by default instead of real files
solution (from my xmorph package): run ./autogen.sh once, and
put in the debian/rules
build: build-stamp
build
Florian Hinzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought the autotools might be able to copy files instead of
> making symlinks.
--copy
> No, I am packaging from the official release tar file. These needed
> files are not included in upstream source.
> Upstream provides an autogen.sh script. T
Florian Hinzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought the autotools might be able to copy files instead of
> making symlinks.
--copy
> No, I am packaging from the official release tar file. These needed
> files are not included in upstream source.
> Upstream provides an autogen.sh script.
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 13:47:04 +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
> > In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> > links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> > replace them by the file to
Hi Eduard!
On 04-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
>#include
> Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sun Nov 04, 2001 um 08:18:47PM:
>
>> I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
>> I do have to run the autotools scripts.
>>
>> The question is when to run it. Before or after the Debian
>> di
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 13:47:04 +0100, Florian Hinzmann wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
> > In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> > links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> > replace them by the file to
Hello!
On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> replace them by the file to which they are linked.
Yes, thanks. I do understand another part of this autoco
Hi Eduard!
On 04-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
>#include
> Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sun Nov 04, 2001 um 08:18:47PM:
>
>> I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
>> I do have to run the autotools scripts.
>>
>> The question is when to run it. Before or after the Debian
>> d
Hello!
On 04-Nov-2001 Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
> links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
> replace them by the file to which they are linked.
Yes, thanks. I do understand another part of this autoc
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sun Nov 04, 2001 um 08:18:47PM:
> I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
> I do have to run the autotools scripts.
>
> The question is when to run it. Before or after the Debian
> diff is built.
Well, if you _need_ the makefile to clean th
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sun Nov 04, 2001 um 08:18:47PM:
> I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
> I do have to run the autotools scripts.
>
> The question is when to run it. Before or after the Debian
> diff is built.
Well, if you _need_ the makefile to clean t
Florian,
In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
replace them by the file to which they are linked.
More puzzling, though, is that the output of "dpkg-source" says that
the old version is "nonexistent"
On 03-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
> My definition of "touch" includeves everything besides the simple
> configure run (and removing configu.{guess,sub}).
I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
I do have to run the autotools scripts.
The question is when to run it. Before o
Florian,
In your original mail, the question was what to do about symbolic
links like "missing --> /usr/share/automake/missing". The answer is:
replace them by the file to which they are linked.
More puzzling, though, is that the output of "dpkg-source" says that
the old version is "nonexistent
On 03-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
> My definition of "touch" includeves everything besides the simple
> configure run (and removing configu.{guess,sub}).
I can't do a configure run as there is no configure script!
I do have to run the autotools scripts.
The question is when to run it. Before
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sat Nov 03, 2001 um 01:27:23PM:
> Hello!
>
> Would you consider reading
> /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz and then
> reading my mail again?
I did. And I do not havy anything to change in my last statement.
> Yes, I do run an (modified) autogen.s
Hello!
Would you consider reading
/usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz and then
reading my mail again?
On 03-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Is there an autogen.sh script which you have executed? Or something like
> libtoolize -f? It seems like the autoconf system of your package has
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Sat Nov 03, 2001 um 01:27:23PM:
> Hello!
>
> Would you consider reading
> /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz and then
> reading my mail again?
I did. And I do not havy anything to change in my last statement.
> Yes, I do run an (modified) autogen.
Hello!
Would you consider reading
/usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz and then
reading my mail again?
On 03-Nov-2001 Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Is there an autogen.sh script which you have executed? Or something like
> libtoolize -f? It seems like the autoconf system of your package has
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Fri Nov 02, 2001 um 11:58:03AM:
> All these are symlinks from to /usr/share/autoconf/.
> Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it?
Is there an autogen.sh script which you have executed? Or something like
libtoolize -f? It seems like the autoconf system
#include
Florian Hinzmann wrote on Fri Nov 02, 2001 um 11:58:03AM:
> All these are symlinks from to /usr/share/autoconf/.
> Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it?
Is there an autogen.sh script which you have executed? Or something like
libtoolize -f? It seems like the autoconf syste
xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.dsc
dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
All these are symlinks from to /usr/share/autoconf/.
Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it?
Thanks in advance!
Florian
--
Florian Hinzmann private: [EMAIL PROTECTED
xfmail in xfmail_1.5.1-3.dsc
dpkg-source: unrepresentable changes to source
All these are symlinks from to /usr/share/autoconf/.
Anyone had this? Anyone knows what to do about it?
Thanks in advance!
Florian
--
Florian Hinzmann private: [EMAIL PROTECTED
33 matches
Mail list logo
