Re: Unblock openssl
Kurt Roeckx wrote: Hi, Can openssl 0.9.8g-16 be hinted to testing? It fixes a security issue. It has a udeb. unblocked Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#509371: installation-guide: Installation guide accessibility sections
Hello, Frans Pop, le Tue 07 Apr 2009 05:02:08 +0200, a écrit : Here is an updated patch. I've reviewed the patch Thanks for the the review! I'm OK with your changes. - titleHardware Speech Syntheses/title + titleHardware Speech Synthesis/title Oops I missed that one indeed. Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Fwd: Alioth Project Denied
Salam Hello I love to add to translator list what must i do? -- Forwarded message -- From: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org Date: Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:27 PM Subject: Re: Alioth Project Denied To: H M goodlinuxu...@gmail.com Cc: ad...@alioth.debian.org, debian-i...@lists.debian.org On Mon, 06 Apr 2009, H M wrote: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/doc/i18n/apb.html but in http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/doc/i18n/apbs03.html After doing so, the public part of that keypair must be put in your account on alioth.debian.org. For this, you need to output the contents of .ssh/id_dsa.pub and paste it in the relevant field of the account management page on alioth.debian.org (https://alioth.debian.org/account), in the section named *Shell account informations*, by clicking on *Edit keys*. could not find section named *Shell account informations I guess you need to be part of the project first, otherwise you don't have an Unix account and thus you don't need SSH keys. The shell account informations are directly on the mentioned page once that is the case. Get in touch with debian-boot@lists.debian.org to be added as translator of the debian-installer. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Contribuez à Debian et gagnez un cahier de l'admin Debian Lenny : http://www.ouaza.com/wp/2009/03/02/contribuer-a-debian-gagner-un-livre/
Bug#509371: installation-guide: Installation guide accessibility sections
tags 509371 pending thanks On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Samuel Thibault wrote: Thanks for the the review! I'm OK with your changes. Committed now. Thanks a lot for providing the initial patch and your quick responses to my not so quick review. It's a good addition to the manual. It would be great if you could revisit the documentation sometimes, especially when there are changes in accessibility support and in the run-up to a new Debian release (or a D-I RC release), and provide updates if needed. General note: because this change adds a new section in chapter 5, it broke the links to installation report on the website [1]. I've preventively updated these, but that means they are now broken until the next daily build of the manual (IIRC later today). It's not impossible that there are other links to that elsewhere, but I can't remember where off the top of my head. Cheers, FJP [1] http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/report-template -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#509371: installation-guide: Installation guide accessibility sections
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 509371 pending Bug#509371: installation-guide: Installation guide accessibility sections Tags were: patch Tags added: pending thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 22:20 +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, William Pitcock said: The only way it is feasible to do so is to drop all of the Debian patches. Without this, upstream is not cooperative with us. Why is this? See my other mail, basically, lilo upstream view is that our patches broke it and that we have to fix it ourselves. I've seen him on various threads saying basically that over the years. But regardless, a lilo release has not been made in some time. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 18:46 +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: Quoting Frans Pop (elen...@planet.nl): I'm not sure where the original mail comes from, but IMO this should be From lilo package BTS which I was tracking for l10n purposes. So I just happened to notice William's answer to a bug report and thought it would be good for this to be discussed in public. Clearly, I didn't choose the right place to discuss and the topic has wider implications than just D-I, as the followups show. Good thing that you made the discussion wider. Don't we have some install paths that still depend on LILO? Yes: /boot on LVM is the main one. Anyway, even if we don't, I think we should track that lilo removal and coordinate with William, in order to stop providing lilo-installer. And, I think this should be mentioned as a release goal (dropping lilo). Either high priority if we have install paths depending on lilo, or normal priority otherwise. D-I release goal or Debian release goal [1]? Clearly Debian release goal. IMO the latter could well be justified as there will also need to be some kind of upgrade strategy for existing users that does not make uncontrolled changes on their hard disk or loses them the ability to boot alternative OSes on dual (or multi) boot systems. Which might be very tricky But, as William mentioned in his original mail, upstream activity seems to be low so we need to figure out if we want to keep yet another unmaintained software in Debian. What later puzzled me if the mention in non collaboratve upstream *if we don't drop Debian patches*. That's not exactly inactive upstream so it would be good to clarify the situation of lilo upstream. Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix problems in our version. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, William Pitcock said: The only way it is feasible to do so is to drop all of the Debian patches. Without this, upstream is not cooperative with us. Why is this? I think because of William Pitcock with: - his very strong words, - his attitude: perfect or nothing (in design, in management, ...), - his lack to listen upstreams and their needs: needs of other distributions, old compatibility needs, or simply time constrain and limited interest of upstream. ciao nenolod ;-) ciao cate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#509371: installation-guide: Installation guide accessibility sections
Frans Pop, le Tue 07 Apr 2009 11:09:32 +0200, a écrit : It would be great if you could revisit the documentation sometimes, Sure! Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#522928: debian-installer: partman/early_command in manual, but not present in the installer
Package: debian-installer Severity: normal partman/early_command doesn't work as described in the manual. The command is never executed (no log entry for even trying), and when I 'grep'ed for partman/early_command on the install media there were no hits. It looks like it is missing. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable'), (1, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core) Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
D-I not using grub (was: lilo about to be dropped?)
Let's move this subthread back to d-boot. Reply-to set. Please let us know if you'd like to be CCed. Martin Wuertele wrote: * Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl [2009-04-07 02:54]: Martin Wuertele wrote: Actually lilo is installed by lenny d-i if you use root-sw-raid with LVM, even if your /boot is an differen partition/sw-raid. Therefore lilo should at least remain for sqeeze to ensure a proper upgrade path. I'm afraid you're mistaken here. Lenny D-I should (and AFAIK does) default to grub for that setup. /boot on normal partition or RAID1 + / on whatever combination of RAID+LVM is supported fine by grub. Unless there is some other factor that you've not mentioned D-I does not fall back to lilo for that. I wonder what it could be. I don't user XFS just plain ext3 and had to manually install grub for 2 recent setups. One is an IBM X3560 with harware-raid, /boot on one partitione, rest for lvm, the other is an X3220 with /boot on md0 and lvm on md1. For both D-I installed lilo. Next time you get in that situation, please add a 'set -x' in /var/lib/dpkg/info/grub-installer.isinstallable and then run it from one of the debug shells. That should tell you why D-I skips grub and falls back to lilo. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#522928: debian-installer: partman/early_command in manual, but not present in the installer
On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Daniel Dickinson wrote: partman/early_command doesn't work as described in the manual. The command is never executed (no log entry for even trying), and when I 'grep'ed for partman/early_command on the install media there were no hits. It looks like it is missing. 1) Where exactly did you find this in the manual? 2) This is a feature that has been added only very recently. So it will definitely not work for Lenny images, and if the package(s) that contain the change have not yet been uploaded (which is quite possible), then it is correct that it does not (yet) work for daily images either. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, William Pitcock neno...@sacredspiral.co.uk wrote: Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix problems in our version. Ok but you could try to push those patches upstream. This is how grub has been improved and also parted. This works most of time. This way we reduce the amount of patches we keep in Debian and also you could try to get in touch with other distros to share the load and avoid reworking at same things. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 10:52 +0200, Giacomo A. Catenazzi wrote: Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, William Pitcock said: The only way it is feasible to do so is to drop all of the Debian patches. Without this, upstream is not cooperative with us. Why is this? I think because of William Pitcock with: - his very strong words, - his attitude: perfect or nothing (in design, in management, ...), - his lack to listen upstreams and their needs: needs of other distributions, old compatibility needs, or simply time constrain and limited interest of upstream. ciao nenolod ;-) Actually, the damage was done years ago, long before I ever maintained lilo. But thanks for the flame. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: lilo about to be dropped?
On Tue, 2009-04-07 at 13:06 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:21 PM, William Pitcock neno...@sacredspiral.co.uk wrote: Lilo upstream is dead (no release in quite a while), but the lilo maintainer has also been seen as saying in various mailing lists etc, that since Debian patches lilo that he has no interest in helping to fix problems in our version. Ok but you could try to push those patches upstream. This is how grub has been improved and also parted. This works most of time. This way we reduce the amount of patches we keep in Debian and also you could try to get in touch with other distros to share the load and avoid reworking at same things. lilo is officially unmaintained now. The canonical website of lilo now points to a 404 error page, see http://lilo.go.dyndns.org/ . So at this point, our only option seems to be taking over upstream lilo maintainance ourselves (which could be a good thing in some ways, I am not denying that), or find a way to transition these use-cases to grub/grub2/extlinux. However, if we are to maintain lilo ourselves, then we need to flesh out exactly what usecases we're going to be using it for. I recommend if we go that route that we come up with a list of improvements that we want to see and get to hacking. If some of the people who like lilo a lot got around to helping with a fork, we could create a much less buggy bootloader than the current lilo. Alternatively, we can just leave it and let it become another XMMS. I don't like this solution very much. William signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: D-I not using grub (was: lilo about to be dropped?)
On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Martin Wuertele wrote: Data from /var/log/installer is available at http://asteria.debian.or.at/~maxx/.var_log_installer.tar.gz The syslog shows: Mar 6 17:19:36 grub-installer: /boot is a lvm volume (/dev/mapper/kronos0-root), cannot install grub Which is confirmed by the hardware summary, which does not show a separate /boot partition. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: D-I not using grub (was: lilo about to be dropped?)
* Frans Pop elen...@planet.nl [2009-04-07 14:51]: Let's move this subthread back to d-boot. Reply-to set. Please let us know if you'd like to be CCed. CC me if you need any more details than below: The system runs Lenny, details: pratitions: Disk /dev/sda: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000499b4 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 1 62 497983+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sda2 63 30401 243698017+ fd Linux raid autodetect Disk /dev/sdb: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Disk identifier: 0x0004d5a4 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 62 497983+ fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 63 30401 243698017+ fd Linux raid autodetect mdadm.conf: DEVICE partitions CREATE owner=root group=disk mode=0660 auto=yes HOMEHOST system MAILADDR root ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=4c231024:ab99e89e:bec82efd:c5de058d ARRAY /dev/md1 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=090f297e:5b63c3ee:5dff2f75:fa5589b2 D-I installed lilo however I moved to grub2. Data from /var/log/installer is available at http://asteria.debian.or.at/~maxx/.var_log_installer.tar.gz yours Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#522928: partman/early_command not supported in Lenny
After reading through this link I thought that the partman/early_command was supported in Lenny: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/example-preseed.txt But this is not the link the to the official Lenny preseeding example. That link is here: http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/example-preseed.txt The official example-preseed.txt file clearly does not have a reference to partman/early_command. So I guess that this command is not supported under Lenny. Thanks, Kevin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#523034: busybox: Please enable CONFIG_LOGIN and CONFIG_GETTY
Package: busybox Version: 1:1.10.2-2 Severity: wishlist I'm working on another thin client framework (like LTSP) called TCOS [1] In past I have used tinylogin [2] and now I want to upload my software to Debian. Tinylogin is no longer mantained and is merged with busybox. My thin clients need 2 applets (CONFIG_LOGIN and CONFIG_GETTY) to protect ttys. Thin client works inside initramfs. Enabling these configs only grows 12Kb: $ du -h /bin/busybox /tmp/paquete/tmp/bin/busybox 372K/bin/busybox 384K/tmp/paquete/tmp/bin/busybox I have uploaded another new packages (that my project need) you can see all in TCOS_into_Debian Roadmap at [3] Another projects like mindi use another busybox compilation [4], I talk some time ago with Andree Leidenfrost and...@d.o and he want to merge it. I think that busybox mantainers could merge mindi-busybox requirements or generate more bin packages from the same sources. Today busybox sources are 2 times (or more) in Debian repositories [5]. Only providing one source package can made the compilation more simple with a new upstream version or security fixes. Thanks for your work at Debian. Greetings [1] http://www.tcosproject.org [2] http://tinylogin.busybox.net [3] http://wiki.tcosproject.org/Tcos_Into_Debian [5] http://packages.debian.org/sid/mindi-busybox [5] http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/pool/main/m/mindi-busybox/ and http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/pool/main/b/busybox/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
[D-I Manual] Build log for en (07 Apr 2009)
A build of the Debian Installer Manual was triggered by an update to SVN.
There were no errors during the build process.
The new version of the manual has been uploaded successfully.
A log of the build is available at:
- http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/logs/en.log
===
It is possible to use RSS to track changes to the manual.
For more information, see:
http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/translators.html
===
Note: PDF output is not yet supported for some languages; help
with this would be appreciated.
===
If you have any questions about the build or this message, feel
free to contact me at faw AT funlabs DOT org.
===
Updated files ('svn up')
Uen/hardware/hardware-supported.xml
Aen/hardware/accessibility.xml
Aen/boot-installer/accessibility.xml
Uen/boot-installer/boot-installer.xml
Updated to revision 58170.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#522928: partman/early_command not supported in Lenny
On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Kevin Schwartz wrote: After reading through this link I thought that the partman/early_command was supported in Lenny: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/example-preseed.txt Ah, OK. That means there is a bug in the script that generates that file as, given the current settings, partman/preseed should not be included yet. I'll take a look at that. But this is not the link the to the official Lenny preseeding example. That link is here: http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/example-preseed.txt The official example-preseed.txt file clearly does not have a reference to partman/early_command. So I guess that this command is not supported under Lenny. Correct. Cheers, FJP -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.changes
debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to ftp.upload.debian.org along with the files: debian-installer_20070308etch5.dsc debian-installer_20070308etch5.tar.gz debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.deb debian-installer-images_20070308etch5_amd64.tar.gz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Processing of debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.changes
debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: debian-installer_20070308etch5.dsc debian-installer_20070308etch5.tar.gz debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.deb debian-installer-images_20070308etch5_amd64.tar.gz Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.changes ACCEPTED
Mapping oldstable to oldstable-proposed-updates. Accepted: debian-installer-images_20070308etch5_amd64.tar.gz byhand debian-installer_20070308etch5.dsc to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20070308etch5.dsc debian-installer_20070308etch5.tar.gz to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20070308etch5.tar.gz debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.deb to pool/main/d/debian-installer/debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.deb Changes: debian-installer (20070308etch5) oldstable; urgency=low . * Rebuild to avoid .svn files in the tarball Override entries for your package: debian-installer_20070308etch5.dsc - source devel debian-installer_20070308etch5_amd64.deb - optional devel Announcing to debian-chan...@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
