On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 10:23:50AM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Control: severity -1 wishlist
I believe this is quite inappropriate. Quoting the documentation for bug severities: "wishlist: for any feature request, and also for any bugs that are very difficult to fix due to major design considerations." Neither of those applies, this is something that worked before and doesn't now (a bug, so does not meet first criterion). I'm pretty sure the documentation and translations of that documentation are rather larger than the pieces of software (geeze, even the compiled executable for all of these combined is less than 8KB) so there aren't major design considerations. I do understand your tag of wontfix though. > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 02:01:19PM -0800, Elliott Mitchell wrote: > > Package: util-linux > > Version: 2.20.1-5.3 > > > > Sorry, I hate to have to report it, but as of 4.2 the x86 (both ia32 and > > amd64) Linux kernel still supports the features manipulated by these > > commands. > > I was quite confused about what you where speaking of but it seems > you're talking about some commands that was removed from upstream > util-linux in ancient history. > > For example the rdev command: > > $ git show a3e40c14651fccf18e7954f081e601389baefe3f | head -n 5 > commit a3e40c14651fccf18e7954f081e601389baefe3f > Author: Karel Zak <[email protected]> > Date: Thu May 13 13:58:16 2010 +0200 Your evaluation here is erroneous. This is when rdev was removed from the *util-linux-ng* git tree. It wasn't until quite some time after this that util-linux-ng took over the util-linux name and then it was some time before any distributions were shipping binaries from this codebase (likely late in 2011 at the earliest). The effective removal wasn't until 2013 (when Debian wheezy shipped). > Not sure how exactly this applies to Debian, but assuming it does then > it would be an issue between old-oldstable and oldstabe which is just > too far back for me to personally care very much. That is indeed the timeframe when the util-linux-ng codebase took over the util-linux name. Debian has a long tradition of long release cycles, 2 years is positively recent. > > Until the Linux kernel removes these features, removal of the > > commands is quite premature. > > Which likely will not happen *ever* since the kernel policy is to not > remove things unless someone *notices* they've been sitting broken for a > long time without anyone reporting it, which will never happen given the > userspace tools doesn't exist anymore.... > Thus I'm not a fan of your logic here. Parse error. The kernel portion of this feature does indeed continue to work without problem. The issue is folks in util-linux-ng are trying to kill the utilities to manipulate to the feature when the kernel still supports it. > > I'm cringing at having to report it, but > > under the right circumstances they're still handy to have. > > In those rare cases I'd be willing to bet that just git cloning > util-linux, checking out some ancient version and builting that could be > done... or if snapshots.debian.org carries old enough versions of the > package (and they where ever included in Debian before?) they could be > extracted from there. No need for snapshots.debian.org, https://packages.debian.org/squeeze/util-linux there are all these utilities. Helpfully since the libc ABI hasn't changed they still function on updated systems without rebuilding (this is the workaround I've been using, tiny bit of `ar` and `tar` and there the tools are). > Debian does not have to ship a utility for everything... Other sources > of software besides the official archive are allowed. > Maybe there are even newer and better ways at utilizing whatever > these old tools provided. Possibly, but I haven't found anything. For a long time these tools have been the exclusive domain of util-linux. Given how few people even know this feature exists this is in fact well on its way to disappearing. My concern is userspace should *follow* the kernel on this issue, the feature still exists in the kernel (4.2!) so userspace shouldn't break things. > > Someone good with rants really needs to chew out whomever thought > > removing them was a good idea. > > I doubt ranting will solve anything. If you want this issue fixed you > should talk to upstream util-linux project though, not Debian. I have to cite bug reportting instructions for Debian which explicitly state to report bugs to *Debian* and not upstream. > >From a Debian perspective I'm tagging this wontfix because someone would > have to consider being the upstream of these tools before they get > packaged. Maybe you want to start a "old-tools" project (or whatever > name you find suitable) containing the sources for these tools and > maintain them yourself? If so, just file a RFP bug against "wnpp" once > the project is live. That is not unexpected. I know this is an olde feature that few people recall exists. I'm reportting it because I'm rather annoyed at people breaking userspace when the kernel continues support (again I believe this is a place where the kernel should lead, not userspace). -- (\___(\___(\______ --=> 8-) EHM <=-- ______/)___/)___/) \BS ( | [email protected] PGP 87145445 | ) / \_CS\ | _____ -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O- _____ | / _/ 8A19\___\_|_/58D2 7E3D DDF4 7BA6 <-PGP-> 41D1 B375 37D0 8714\_|_/___/5445
