Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
- To: Jakub Wilk <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Bug#683184: RFS: suckless-tools/39-1 [ITA]
- From: Vasudev Kamath <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:16:22 +0530
- Message-id: <CAK+NOPUbuUXN_ny8o-LW1ppeSH=vKPuUjs7t7y5U_qzrKfjBcQ@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: Vasudev Kamath <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <20121009202359.GA8318@jwilk.net>
- References: <20120730162618.GA4652@vasudev.homelinux.net> <20120816184623.GA4458@jwilk.net> <20120818163702.GC4448@vasudev.homelinux.net> <20120820134906.GA4488@jwilk.net> <20120822171013.GB9720@vasudev.homelinux.net> <20120824183245.GA4417@jwilk.net> <20120825073210.GC4472@vasudev.homelinux.net> <20120830163434.GA9290@jwilk.net> <CAK+NOPXgKgkPOrkGUWVhXhP5wY_Q7e6SDYZnhm9CLkzr0E9Taw@mail.gmail.com> <20120831111601.GA2636@jwilk.net> <20121009202359.GA8318@jwilk.net>
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Jakub Wilk <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Shouldn't the copyright file also mention download location for sprop (i.e.
> hg.suckless.org) too?
Does source: field allow multiple URL's? According to Debian
this field can be free form text which means I can put with a note
that sprop was
got from the different URL like below
Source: http://dl.suckless.org/tools except sprop which was downloaded
from hg tip at http://hg.suckless.org
> I'd prefer if create_get_orig source downloaded a specific revision of prop
> (currently ecfe2752b310) rather than tip. That would make the script more
Well yes I will modify it and also I will try to persuade conor lane
smith to put it in dl.suckless.org ;-)
that way it will be more clean for both above source: field and get-orig-source
> Would you mind preparing also a package for Wheezy, with *minimal* fixes for
> #685611 (and perhaps other bugs that would fit the freeze criteria)?
Yes I can do that I was just not sure whether to do it or not :-).
Only problem will be I can track this wheezy source
in my current git reposiotory but I guess the old repository still
exist and only just renamed. I will prepare this and
ping back to you tonight!
Just a note is it okay to change Vcs-* field in this version even
though its not mentioned in bug report?