On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 01:26:02PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote: > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:48:39AM +0300, Nanakos Chrysostomos wrote: > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 08:53:33AM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote: > Hi,
> Hi, > > > > The original problem was that fuse-utils wasn't available on kfreebsd > > The problem was not in kfreebsd but in hurd-i386. > > I have the slight feeling we're talking about different issue here. > > According to #613119, which you even close in your changelog, it's been > about kfreebsd, and as far as I can tell there's been no fuse-utils package > on kfreebsd nor hurd and there is now no fuse package on both of them. > So this problem isn't solved at all. > Yes, the problem remains on both of them. > I currently can't say if archivemount is of any use without the rest of > the fuse tools or not. Looking at the blocking bug #613300 I don't think > it is but I've not digged that deep yet. If it is indeed useful to have > on kfreebsd without fuse the dependency has to be adjusted accordingly > [!kfreebsd-i386 !kfreebsd-amd64]. Otherwise using linux-any seems to be > a good solution, it's not worth to build a package on architectures where > it can't be used anyway. As I can see the solution is using linux-any at the moment. > > > > The problem still remains even if Daniel Baumann has adopted and > > uploaded a new version of the fuse package. Please check [0] again to see > > that the status of hurd-i386 architecture has a dependency installability. > > So even with this change archivemount will remain in the current state > > and useless for all linux users. I prefer the package to be sponsored > > and used for now only from linux and kfreebsd users and when everything is > > ready we will upload the package again including the missing architecture. > > I included kfreebsd-any in the Architecture Field and re-uploaded the > > package. > > Please bare in mind that the package remains in the current state for more > > than 300 days waiting fuse-utils for the hurd-i386 arch. > > Uh since when is hurd a release architecture? The migration seems to be > stopped by the RC bug mentioned above.i You are right. > > > > > only a dummy package. This requires some re-evaluation of the situation > > > and > > > adjustmend of the archivemount depends. > > > > Do we need that for the moment? > > IMO it would make sense to do it now while you're at it, I'd guess that > Daniel would like to fate out the old fuse-utils package sooner or later > anyway. So switching now to a versioned depends on fuse >=2.8.5-2 is IMO > reasonable. > It seems reasonable. Fixed already. > Beside that: > There's still lintian barking at the issue with the description. I'm not sure > if lintian is 100% right there and if the deselect issue is still present but > double spaces in front of the * should do the trick. IMHO all the (useless) > dotted empty lines are a bit ugly, I would revert that. > Fixed by simply adding double spaces in front of the *. > You should also check your changelog, beside closing a bug which > isn't fixed with arch kfreebsd-any the changelog only states the change from > any to linux-any. The changes to debian/rules are also missing. I would like to keep my first change which was only linux-any. What do you mean that the changes to debian/rules are missing? I have made the changes you proposed and added the reverse one in clean. No more lintian errors. Maybe I'm missing something here, please enlighten me. I hope this time everything is fine and the package could be sponsored. Package re-uploaded to mentors. Cheers, Chris. > > Sven > -- > And I don't know much, but I do know this: > With a golden heart comes a rebel fist. > [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ] > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110528112602.GA2340@marvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
