On Fri Jul 9 23:08:14 BST 2010, Joshua Timberman wrote:
Actually, the difference is that sbuild uses schroot with LVM snapshots for
the chroot environments. It's quite a nice, elegant system and I prefer it to
pbuilder for developing packages.
Ya, I can definitely see why sbuild would be
Ryan,
while your first answer demonstrated you are not properly informed on the
technical aspects of either the proper Ubuntu archives or PPAs, this second
one show you don't have any clue about how GetDeb works.
Anyway I was just trying to point you in what I believed to be a better
direction.
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Joao Pinto joao.pi...@getdeb.net wrote:
Ryan,
while your first answer demonstrated you are not properly informed on the
technical aspects of either the proper Ubuntu archives or PPAs, this second
one show you don't have any clue about how GetDeb works.
When I
Hello!
On Jul 9, 2010, at 2:39 PM, Ryan Oram wrote:
The only difference is that pbuilder automates a bit more. I
stand completely corrected.
Actually, the difference is that sbuild uses schroot with LVM snapshots for the
chroot environments. It's quite a nice, elegant system and I prefer it
On Fri Jul 9 23:08:14 BST 2010, Joshua Timberman wrote:
Actually, the difference is that sbuild uses schroot with LVM snapshots for
the chroot environments. It's quite a nice, elegant system and I prefer it to
pbuilder for developing packages.
Ya, I can definitely see why sbuild would be
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Ryan Oram ryano...@trentu.ca wrote:
On Fri Jul 9 23:08:14 BST 2010, Joshua Timberman wrote:
Actually, the difference is that sbuild uses schroot with LVM snapshots
for the chroot environments. It's quite a nice, elegant system and I prefer
it to pbuilder for
On Sat Jul 10 00:34:53 BST 2010, Joao Pinto wrote:
I am sorry but you are not correct, GetDeb only does packaging when such is
required, we try to avoid redundant work and package forking. Re-using
Ubuntu, Debian and PPAs building rules is a requirement if you intend to
minimize dependency
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 17:45 -0400 BST, Joao Pinto
joao.pi...@getdeb.net wrote:
Why set up another project instead of participating in GetDeb ?
What do you expect to achieve with Ubuntu AppUpdate that you can't with
GetDeb ?
I believe I sent you an e-mail asking if your team wanted
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Ryan Oram ryano...@trentu.ca wrote:
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 17:45 -0400 BST, Joao Pinto
joao.pi...@getdeb.net wrote:
Why set up another project instead of participating in GetDeb ?
What do you expect to achieve with Ubuntu AppUpdate that you can't
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Joao Pinto joao.pi...@getdeb.net wrote:
Did you read http://wiki.getdeb.net/AutomatedBuildSystem ?
We have experienced some hosting problems on the last couple of months which
had a major impact on our availability, we expect to recover full
operationally soon.
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Ryan Oram ryano...@trentu.ca wrote:
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Joao Pinto joao.pi...@getdeb.net wrote:
Did you read http://wiki.getdeb.net/AutomatedBuildSystem ?
We have experienced some hosting problems on the last couple of months
which
had a major
, which has been at times too strict and a bit
unforgiving. However, the lack of Launchpad integration is major
sticking point and the major reason why Ubuntu AppUpdate was created
in the first place. This doesn't mean I'm not willing collaborate to
with your team on side-projects (in fact expect a bit
12 matches
Mail list logo
