Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
edit of german posting: i am sorry, i thought i was in the german debianforum. stupid!
for me bitlbee is an absolutely unique application. it is an instant messaging-client that does not display anything, it just sends everything to an irc-client. that means using bitlbee i can use irssi for everything concerning written realtime-communication.
this is what i inserted into my ~/.irssi/config to make bitlbee connect and reconnect automatically:
Why is checkinstall available in stable and unstable but NOT in testing?
At one time checkinstall was completely pulled from Debian repos for general bugginess and lack of mainenance. At that point, it was already in Sarge, so, of course it stayed.
Since then, the developers have evidently cooperated enough to get it back into Sid, but it will probably never get beyond that. In The Debian System, Martin Krafft explains clearly why it should never be used by serious Debian users.
I don't see any evidence it was ever removed from sid, it does indeed seem it was removed from etch (and iirc I remember the bug and it was a very nasty one). It has now migrated to lenny as well and doesn't seem to have any rc bugs for the moment.
I agree its a crappy tool though and i would avoid it where possible.
there are situations in which is may be the only reasonable choice to use checkinstall (such as a horrible inflexible or unautomatable build or install system from upstream)
most of the time though it is much better to do the packaging properly. Read the debian new maintainers guide for hints and remember debian provide all the source needed to build any package in thier repositry including all the scripts etc.
Fluenza wrote:This may be somewhat off-topic, but it's close enough that it may qualify as an amazing application that may or may not be in the Debian repositories, but I definitely don't know about it. I'm looking for anything that allows a person to edit video in Etch. I'm dealing primarily with .wmv, .asf, .mpg, and .avi type formats. Suggestions, anyone?
Anyone know of an amazing app that can do that? In the Debian repositories?
Small and useful program. Available for testing/unstable only, but, if I'm not mistaken, it works in Etch without any dependency problem:
Package: alltray (0.69-1)
Dock any program into the system tray
With AllTray you can dock any application with no native tray icon (like Evolution, Thunderbird, Terminals) into the system tray. A high-light feature is that a click on the "close" button will minimize back to system tray. It works well with Gnome, KDE, XFCE 4*, Fluxbox* and WindowMaker*. (*) No drag 'n drop support. Enable with "-nm" option.
Drivel is a GNOME client for working with online journals, also known as weblogs or blogs. It retains an elegant design while supporting LiveJournal, Blogger, MovableType, Advogato, and Atom journals, as well as derivatives such as WordPress and Drupal.
It also does spell check and supports direct input of html.
rickh wrote:
>>
In a nutshell, the packages it creates have no mechanism for following Debian protocols related to program installation.
>>
Incorrect, it does have the mechanism.
A person can include pre and post intall/remove scripts. But the person needs to supply them. So in that sense it does have the mechanism.
Earlier checkinstalls would also install directly, but it doesn't do that now which is good. It also builds rpms and slack packages.
plugwash wrote:
>>
I agree its a crappy tool though and i would avoid it where possible.
>>
You seem to be missing the point, it's designed to allow a src build to be managed by a packaging system in the case where an appropriate package doesn't exist.
That is, when there isn't an available build set anywhere, .dsc .diff.gz .orig.tar.gz
It is not meant to be a replacement or an alternative to the official build sets. So your comparison is out of context. Within the context of 'what it's designed for' it is a very good tool. imo deb dosen't get served by biased opinion, whether it's pro deb or other wise.
You response to mzilikazi question
mzilikazi wrote:
>>
What would you suggest in its place for those times when only a source code build will do?
>>
is evasive, or you didn't understand the question !
My answer would be to use 'dh_make', that will create a debian directory with a set of build scripts that you can edit. Then from the top directory just run '
["Sure, I can help you with that." -- USBank voice recognition system.
( Mn, 2.6.x, AMD-64 3000+, ASUS A8V Deluxe, 3 GB, SATA + IDE, NV34 )
Debian Wiki | Packages | Backports | Netinstall
Nice article on dh_make there, drl. Bookmarked. One of these days ...
I wouldn't use checkinstall on a bet. I'd rather just compile from source. My aversion to it comes from Martin Krafft's book. He implies that it'd be a cold day in hell before he ever used it.
Last edited by rickh on 2007-04-25 18:06, edited 2 times in total.
Nice article on dh_make there, drl. Bookmarked. One of these days ...
I wouldn't use checkinstall on a bet. I'd rather just compile from source. My aversion to it comes from Martin Krafft's book. He implies that it'd be a cold day in hell before he ever used it.
Edit: Oops! Sorry.
Last edited by rickh on 2007-04-25 18:06, edited 1 time in total.
jjmac wrote:You seem to be missing the point, it's designed to allow a src build to be managed by a packaging system in the case where an appropriate package doesn't exist.
That is, when there isn't an available build set anywhere, .dsc .diff.gz .orig.tar.gz
unless the build/install system is particularlly strage i still think you are better off doing it properly, it may be a bit of extra work the first time but it means that you don't have to do the whole process manually next time you want to build it.