Hello, Here is a log of a discussion held with vorlon and Zomb about this issue, just so that this knowledge doesn't dissapears again as my original followup apparently did.
10:58 < vorlon> svenl: why exactly did you mark 242068 as "grave"? 11:08 < svenl> vorlon: let me check. 11:10 < svenl> vorlon: mmm, maybe i would not have. 11:10 < svenl> vorlon: it makes the package unusable on powerpc. 11:11 < svenl> vorlon: since the new airport is unsupported (being a broadcom chip), this mean a major chunk of wifi chips is not supported. 11:12 < svenl> vorlon: the bug has been open 286 days, is reported to be functional on powerpc (in the 2.6.6 days). Not sure what the situation is on other arches, but the maintainer don't seem to do his job seriously about this one. 11:12 < svenl> vorlon: so i would either remove the package or fix this. 11:13 < svenl> vorlon: this could be a primary installation method for d-i in addition. 11:14 < svenl> vorlon: notice that #286305 is 27 days old and also grave, and a solution to it would fix the other one too. And there is #290047 too. 11:14 < svenl> vorlon: what is the MIA status of Bradley Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ? 12:51 < svenl> vorlon: do you think 242068 should be downgraded ? 12:52 < vorlon> svenl: yes, I don't see why having a lack of binaries on an architecture is RC. It's common enough for module packages to only provide i386 binaries. 12:53 < svenl> vorlon: when there is only x86 binaries. 12:53 < svenl> vorlon: and i tried to build the stuff for myself, and failed. 12:53 < svenl> vorlon: so there is more than just that broken. 12:53 < svenl> vorlon: and there is also the bug about x86 2.4.27 stuff. 12:53 < svenl> vorlon: and there is a report of them working on powerpc. 12:54 < vorlon> ok, well you didn't *say* any of that when you raised the bug severity. You raised the severity on a bug report asking for *powerpc modules in the archive*. 12:54 < svenl> vorlon: yep, but i told it to you a bit above. 12:54 < svenl> you didn't seem to react on it. 12:55 < svenl> vorlon: that package seem utterly abandoned by its maintainer anyway. 3 RC bugs it has right now. 12:55 < svenl> vorlon: i would just quick it out of sarge for now, more secure like that. 12:56 < vorlon> the other bugs I was already planning to NMU for, because I understand why they're RC. You didn't mention anything about the package being unusable on powerpc when you try to rebuild it above, and a lack of binaries on powerpc isn't RC. 12:56 < jvw> svenl: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with suspecions 12:57 < svenl> vorlon: i am not entirely sure about this. 12:57 < svenl> vorlon: and i raised the RC level to catch attention, which it did. 12:57 < vorlon> 286305 may have been open for 27 days, but it wasn't actually fixable until 2.4.27-2 was available. 12:58 < svenl> vorlon: i don't understand why there is no more info, i though i replied to this bug report, i wonder if it has dissapeared or i did a mismanipulation. 12:58 < vorlon> Er... that's a crappy reason to raise the severity of a bug to RC when it's not an RC issue. 12:58 < svenl> vorlon: the one in question is open since 248 days or something such. 12:58 < svenl> vorlon: if i had not done it, we would not be discussing this. 12:59 < svenl> vorlon: and i disagree with you about this. Raising RC level on certain bugs we want fixed is a good thing to do, expecially as we will be multiplicating bug-fix-parties and such. 12:59 < vorlon> what failed when you tried to build the powerpc binaries for yourself? 12:59 < svenl> vorlon: but i know not everyone agrees with me because of that. 13:00 < svenl> vorlon: i don't know even how i should do it, it seem to me that a -source package was missing or something, i was fully unable to understand how even the x86 modules where built. 13:00 < svenl> vorlon: i mailed doko, but he also didn't remember how he managed to build them. 13:00 < vorlon> The release managers *and* the BTS admins disagree with you about this. You should not be raising the severity just because it's a pet bug of yours -- the RC severities are clearly defined. 13:01 < svenl> vorlon: sure, so you can downgrade them once you notice. 13:02 < svenl> vorlon: the package is fully unusable for me though. I mean, i do package a kernel module and am in the kernel maintainer team, and was not able to find the stuff to build it from, and the maintainer seems MIA, or at st not caring about the package, do we really want to ship a package like that ? 13:02 < vorlon> What the hell good did it do to have me notice it? If it wasn't RC (and you should have enough experience with the BTS to figure this out for yourself), all I was going to do with it when I saw it was downgrade it. If the package couldn't build from source, someone NMUing it would have noticed this anyway without you raising the severity of an unrelated bug. 13:02 < svenl> vorlon: what do you want to do about this ? just add a followup which will be mostly ignored ? 13:03 < svenl> vorlon: i said it, i thought i added more mail, i don't know where it went. it was some weeks ago, before christmas even i think. 13:03 < svenl> vorlon: and if it is x86 only, please mark it such in the control file, but i got RC bugs against packages for exactly that, so ... 13:06 < svenl> vorlon: and this driver is essential for wifi support on recent apple notebooks, and if we don't fix it, we will see a flurry of bogus "howto compile wifi drivers on my ibook G4" documents out there, which are more harm than anything else. 13:06 < svenl> vorlon: i have just apt-get sourced the package, and the control file has : 13:07 < svenl> Package: linux-wlan-ng 13:07 < svenl> Architecture: i386 powerpc arm alpha hppa 13:07 < svenl> Description: utilities for wireless prism2 cards 13:07 < svenl> Package: linux-wlan-ng-doc 13:07 < svenl> Where is the source of the linux-wlan-ng-0.2.1-modules package ? 13:07 < svenl> where is the -source package ? 13:07 < Zomb> svenl: it was a proof-of-concept package for apt-src, now joeyh dropped it 13:08 < svenl> Zomb: so what do i build the modules from ? 13:08 < vorlon> well, I'm looking at the package now and agree that we shouldn't have modules binary packages in the archive from this, because there's no way to build them from source. 13:08 < svenl> vorlon: see, this was the reason why i raised the RC level, i wonder where my explanation did go. 13:08 < Zomb> svenl: you get the source package and extract it manually. I did not look how to fix the download method for module-assistant yet. 13:09 < vorlon> I wonder that, too. :) 13:09 < vorlon> svenl: as for wifi support for apple notebooks, the *recent* ones all have Airport Extremes, which is not supported under Linux at all unless something has changed in the two weeks since I last looked. 13:10 < svenl> it was just for christmas. 13:10 < vorlon> Hrm? Someone has the AE working under Linux now? 13:10 < Zomb> vorlon: what is the key to get support? Nothing like ndiswrapper for OS-X drivers? 13:11 < svenl> Zomb, vorlon: in any case, such a package is not fit to be distributed by debian, at least i would have 13:11 < svenl> Zomb, vorlon: in any case, such a package is not fit to be distributed by debian, at least i would have nothing to do with such a thing, and would prefer it dropped than shipped in the current state. 13:11 < svenl> vorlon: not that i know. 13:11 < vorlon> Zomb: hah, you think apple is going to provide a standard driver interface for OSX that we could wrap around? They couldn't even be bothered to use a standard *hardware* interface for the damn thing. 13:11 < vorlon> Zomb: anyway, from what you said there is no source package corresponding to the modules packages in the archive, correct? 13:11 < svenl> vorlon: so the next best thing is a usb-wifi dongle, and the wlang stuff is the best next thing. 13:12 < svenl> vorlon: i am investigatting a project to build airport-extreme compatible boards from the rallink chip though. 13:12 < Zomb> vorlon: unless something has changed in the last monts since I looked at it, there was no -source deb for linux wlan ng 13:12 < svenl> So, it should be kicked out of the archive for breaking the DFSG. 13:12 < Zomb> svenl: no, the stuff can be built from source 13:12 < liw> er, no support for the builtin wifi on apple *books? that would be inconvenient 13:12 * liw hugs his laptop, again :) 13:13 < Zomb> svenl: you just need to construct the debian/rules call to make it create module packages 13:13 < svenl> Zomb: but the source is not in debian. 13:13 < vorlon> liw: the Apple AirPort Extreme is beyond proprietary. The original AirPort is well supported, but is already deprecated. 13:13 < svenl> liw: airport-extreme is broadcom, which will never be supported. 13:13 < Zomb> svenl: apt-cache showsrc linux-wlan-ng | grep gz 13:14 < svenl> liw: which is why i got a second hand ibook G3. 13:14 < svenl> Zomb: that is no excuse. stuff in main need to be buildable from main, and even autobuildable for the most part. 13:14 < vorlon> Zomb: it cannot be built from *this* source. It's not supportable in its current state for security updates. 13:14 < svenl> Zomb: or i am going to insist about having ppc64 kernels in sarge. 13:14 < Zomb> oh, I see 13:15 < svenl> Zomb: and remember, the prefered form of modification include the debian/rules and other stuff. 13:16 < svenl> vorlon: so, you want me to fill a new bug, add some info, or can you handle. 13:17 < svenl> vorlon: i am doing parted stuff right now, which will add RAID and LVM support for apple boxes. 13:18 < vorlon> svenl: I think I have enough information without another bug report at this point. 13:18 < svenl> vorlon: yeah, if you intent to fix it, if not all this part of the log should be added to the bug report or something ? 13:19 < vorlon> svenl: but I'm not NMUing it for this, I'm kicking it out of testing; it's too much of a mess. If you want this package fixed for sarge, please look into it yourself, or find someone else with an interest in this package. 13:20 < svenl> vorlon: do you keep a log and can add this discussion to the bug report ? 13:20 < vorlon> svenl: a follow-up to 286305 seems more appropriate than a new bug report, if you want to send more info. 13:20 < svenl> as i would rather not rewrite another time all this. 13:20 < svenl> Zomb, vorlon: it is ok to include your part of it ? 13:20 < vorlon> yes, you can quote me. 13:21 < Zomb> svenl: sure 13:21 < Zomb> svenl: wait a moment 13:21 < svenl> Mmm, does one of you keep logs, i don't. 13:21 < vorlon> no. 13:22 < svenl> Ok, will do some copy pasting . 13:22 < Zomb> svenl: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=184899&archive=yes 13:22 < Zomb> svenl: I have submitted a patch there to make it work as all other module packages do 13:23 < Zomb> for what I have been flamed to death by joeyh on d-d :( Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]