Jérémy Lal wrote:
> I can prepare a patch for nodejs package.
Thanks!
[...]
> - I can't help but talk about "npm", an essential development tool distributed
> in latest nodejs (can be compared to ruby's gem). It allows one to install and
> publish npm packages to a common registry.
> It will nee
* Jérémy Lal , 2011-11-29, 01:23:
Is there a simple way to search all packages having a node shebang ?
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/unusual-interpreter.html
(Unfortunately, the list might be incomplete because the lintian lab is
still a bit broken; see bug #641468.)
--
Jakub Wilk
On 29/11/2011 00:16, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
>
>> I think the best way to fix this is to prepare both renaming uploads
>> in advance, and allow either of the two contending maintainers to
>> upload both packages simultaneously.
>
> Thanks, that sounds sensible to me.
>
> Since
Ian Jackson wrote:
> I think the best way to fix this is to prepare both renaming uploads
> in advance, and allow either of the two contending maintainers to
> upload both packages simultaneously.
Thanks, that sounds sensible to me.
Since this still seems to be stalled, I would like to hear from
On 17/11/2011, at 7:04 AM, Joey Hess wrote:
> A similar case with a large userbase is the syslog daemon. Debian used
> to ship standard with a /usr/sbin/syslogd. Then it was replaced with a
> /usr/sbin/rsyslog, from a different package. Since rsyslog is Priority
> important, it gets installed autom
Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> The syslog case does not apply since the *standard* syslog was changed
> at the distribution level and another package *provides* the same
> functionality. Users could, if the old syslog package is still in the
> archive, install the old syslog as an alternative.
Sure,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:04:36PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> One user claimed it would inconvenience users, but provided no supporting
> details about why a user would run it manually.
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-hams/2010/08/msg00032.html
> The package's own documentation states "Node is
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Who would refer to the node binary as provided by the ham package node
> > except for the inetd and the ax25d superservers? (Serious question.)
>
> Did anyone address above question already?
One user claimed it would inconvenience users, but provided no supporting
de
On 11-11-09 at 08:33am, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> > I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual
> > resolution of the issue.
>
> I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about
> helping users with the conversio
Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> Earlier when this particular situation was being discussed, someone mentioned
> the generic name "node" was bad for a computer binary. 10-15 years ago it
> was a different landscape. The node.js folks should probably have given
> more thought to their binary's name give
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 08:33:38AM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
>
> On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> > I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual
> > resolution of the issue.
>
> I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about helping
> users
On 2011-11-08, Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> I hope to avoid any issues with breaking old boxes with the eventual
> resolution of the issue.
I don't know what's wrong with Jonathan Nieder's advise in [0] about helping
users with the conversion automatically. That's how it's usually done.
He even pr
On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 07:16:35AM +1100, Damien Gardner Jnr wrote:
>
> I have to pop my head up from my lurker-hole here, and say that I'm a more
> than a little confused, why a 15 year old application should change its name
> at all? Even the Node.js wiki makes it clear that the application s
On 07/11/2011, at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Should the binary on the ham radio side be called ax25-node, or
> LinuxNode, or something like that? Given a proposed name, I would be
> happy enough to assume I have your blessing and start sending patches
> to the node bug. :)
I have to pop my
(+cc: nod...@packages.debian.org. Sorry for the noise.)
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>> You claim to not use either package, but yet you advocate for the node.js
>> package to keep the executable name "node" - this is strange to me.
>
> Sorry, I must have been unclear.
A few
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 09:20:31PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Hi Pat,
>
> Patrick Ouellette wrote:
>
> > The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is
> > simply "node" in package "node"
> >
> > Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side
Hi Pat,
Patrick Ouellette wrote:
> The binary on the ham radio side is not "LinuxNode" in package "node" it is
> simply "node" in package "node"
>
> Since you are still concerned with this issue, and neither side has shown a
> willingness to change, I would say the time has come for both packages
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 01:27:42AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In February, I wrote[1]:
>
> > Both LinuxNode (package "node") and node.js (package "nodejs") are
> > designed to be accessed through the command name "node".
> [...]
> > If there is any way I can help, please feel free
18 matches
Mail list logo
