Bug#474073: silky: should this package be removed?
I absolutely agree. I recently checked, and I came to the same opinion, what can I do for it to be removed? On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 6:17 AM, Barry deFreese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: silky Version: 0.5.4-0.1 Severity: serious User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertags: proposed-removal Dear Maintainer, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a possible candidate for removal from Debian, because: * Out of date. * Buggy (1 RC). * Low popcon. ~30 installs. * RFH'd. * Slow/inactive upstream. Bring it back in if upstream gets going? If you think that it should be orphaned instead of being removed from Debian, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please just close this bug and do an upload also fixing the other issues. If you agree that it should be removed, send the following commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (replace nn with this bug's number): severity nn normal reassign nn ftp.debian.org retitle nn RM: packagename -- RoM; reasons thanks For more information, see http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt Thank you, Barry deFreese -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#471112: closed by Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#471112: fixed in tsocks 1.8beta5-9)
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that your only concern is the
warning/error message. Am I right? I don't think that it'd be a good idea
to surpress the fact that you're currently falling back to direct, unless
the user can find her/himself in a weird situation (think of tor).
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Tim Connors wrote:
reopen 471112
thanks.
tsocks (1.8beta5-9) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Applied `fallback' patch to allow to fall back to establish
direct connection instead of sockified if the fallback = yes
option found in the tsocks.conf to make sure that the user
won't open a direct one accidentally. (Closes: #471112)
I think you may misunderstand the bug report. I want the default
fallback case to be completely transparent -- no error messages or
warnings like the following:
48710,2 apt-src install lvm2
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Need to get 589kB of source archives.
0% [Working]01:57:37 libtsocks(27552): Connection needs to be made via
default server but the default server has not been specified. Falling back
to direct connection.
Get:1 http://ftp.debian.org unstable/main lvm2 2.02.33-2 (dsc) [758B]
Get:2 http://ftp.debian.org unstable/main lvm2 2.02.33-2 (tar) [574kB]
Get:3 http://ftp.debian.org unstable/main lvm2 2.02.33-2 (diff) [13.9kB]
Fetched 589kB in 12s (45.5kB/s)
gpg: Signature made Tue Mar 11 08:45:31 2008 EST using DSA key ID 58B1181E
gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found
dpkg-source: extracting lvm2 in lvm2-2.02.33
dpkg-source: unpacking lvm2_2.02.33.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: applying ./lvm2_2.02.33-2.diff.gz
dpkg-checkbuilddeps: Unmet build dependencies: libcman-dev ( 2)
libdevmapper-dev ( 2:1.02.24) libdlm-dev ( 2) quilt
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
diffstat libcman-dev libcman2 libdevmapper-dev libdlm-dev libdlm2 quilt
0 upgraded, 7 newly installed, 0 to remove and 119 not upgraded.
Need to get 511kB of archives.
After this operation, 1655kB of additional disk space will be used.
see the error message?-
0% [Working]01:57:51 libtsocks(27595): Connection needs to be made via
default server but the default server has not been specified. Falling back
to direct connection.
Get:1 http://mirror.internode.on.net testing/main diffstat 1.45-2 [22.3kB]
...
If the user has gone to the trouble of explicitly marking the default case
as fallback = yes, then they already know when they are passing
connections to external networks, they won't be going through a socks
server. They don't need reminding via an error/warning message.
In other words, the snippet would be something like this:
if (path-address == NULL) {
if (path == (config-defaultserver)) {
if (config-fallback) {
return(realconnect(__fd, __addr, __len));
} else {
show_msg(MSGERR, Connection needs to be made
via default server but
the default server has not
been specified. Fallback is 'no' so
coudln't establish the connection.\n);
}
}
I am using tsocks to get into specific networks behind firewalls. For
every other network, I want tsocks to just pass the connection straight
through to glibc. If it does this, then I can put tsocks into my
$LD_PRELOAD, and I don't have to do anything special when I chop and
change between any commands that need to access those firewalled networks,
and commands that need to access the greater internet at large (the
latter, with no noticable performance decrease or other bad effects when I
disable the above error message). In fact, I can set the LD_PRELOAD for
my entire window manager, and don't have to touch it for any of my
subshells! But it does rely on being able to tell libtsocks not to
complain about connections I have already told it that I don't want it
handling them.
Incidentally, my man page had two copies of the fallback paragraph, but I
can't see how this happened from the patches in the src-deb.
--
TimC
Jun 26 14:08:17 kernel: troll-o-meter (pid 15134) killed: memory exhausted
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#373642: No way to specify no SOCKS by default
valid point, ATM i'm considering a similar patch against the upstream so, soon it'll be implemented. On 10/30/06, Joachim Breitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, On Sa, 28.10.2006, 14:08, Kapil Hari Paranjape sagte: There are situations when one would *not* want to connect directly at all! For example, one may be using tor to make anonymous connections. If for some reason the tor server dies then one would not want to inadvertently make a direct connection. For these reasons the default behaviour of tsocks is desirable. Well, I'm not talking about fallback solution. If a server is configured, and it is not reachable, then no connection should be made. We agree on this one. Moreover, if you *do* want to connect directly, then tsocks provides a feature which permits this. You can use the local directive in the configuration file to declare some networks as local. Admittedly creating netmasks to make all except a few connections directly requires many local directives. That is my point. It is not reasonable to create these local directives. I rather see the tsocks configuration as a decision tree, going from the most specific netmask subconfiguration to the global one. On all of these level, it should be possible to specify any server or none at all. I think it is a valid usecase to have, e.g., all IM traffic going through a tor proxy, but using no proxy for everything else. Thank you, Joachim -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#387471: RFH: neverball -- 3D arcade games: neverball neverputt
IMHO no special thing. Only the dependencies. Good luck, and thanks! I'll let you know when I won't be snowed under. Tamas On 9/22/06, Alexander Schmehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tags 387471 +pending thanks Hi! * Mohammed Adnène Trojette [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060914 16:55]: The current maintainer of neverball, Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED], has been busy recently. He needs help for his packages until he is back. I guess that is a job for the pkg-games team :) Anything special I should take care of? As far as I can see, it's up to date and #275649 and #354395 are easy to fix. Beside that... well, there's #330089 which should be reported upstram... and #298485 is quite old and might have been a problem of sdl or something so one would ping the submitter. Oh, and #295130, which I will try to reproduce later in the evening. So, your package isn't in a bad shape (which is of course good :) But I wonder if I missed something? Yours sincerely, Alexander PS: I promise not to do any intrusive changes ;) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFE/xNBxd04ADYzRYRAnIzAJ4gRTLrqNOX/I4l3frH/nkyXurLCACeJWL0 kevQmZjFOxKAJu3NHj7CgGM= =EkFW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#295130: neverball: No text displayed on menus
no idea, but if you could check the output of strace -fF -o foo.log neverball's output and you could send me, it might be useful. anyway, real men can live w/o any font. ;) On 6/16/06, Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 09:19:49PM +, Roger Leigh wrote: Running neverball, the program starts correctly, but the main menu and all submenus are simply a series of white boxes: there's no text at all. Perhaps there's a missing dependency on a particular font? Or soemthing else entirely. This bug is still present (I've got the exact same symptoms), and it looks like it's indeed a missing dependency -- but I fail to find what, no obvious error message, nor an obvious missing file. Tamas, what's up? Do you have any idea what font this might be? This makes playing the game much harder. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#348977: libapache-mod-witch: post-removal fails with sed reference failure
Lukas,Next time if you found similar bug just put an exit 0 at the beginning of those prepost scripts and dpkg won't complain anymore.Steve, thanks for your help anyway. On 22/01/06, Lukas Ruf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-Hash: SHA1hi Steve, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-20 12:39]: On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 09:18:08AM +0100, Lukas Ruf wrote: Package: libapache-mod-witch Version: 0.0.4-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable I want to remove libapache-mod-witch.This fails because of an error in the post-removal script. How can I remove libapache-mod-witch?Thanks for any help! Since this package no longer exists in stable, testing, or unstable, I would suggest that you simply remove /var/lib/apt/lists/libapache- mod-witch.postrm from your system and then try again to remove the package.Please don't forget to remove any references to this module from your apache config by hand.thanks very much for your help.I found it in /var/lib/dpkg/info. There, I simply removed all filed with the *apache-mod-witch* pattern.dpkg complained -- but it worked :)Thanks!wbr,Lukas- --Lukas Ruf http://www.lpr.ch | Ad Personamrbacshttp://wiki.lpr.ch | Restaurants, Bars and ClubsRaw IP http://www.rawip.org | Low Level Network Programming Stylehttp://email.rawip.org | How to write emails-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)iD8DBQFD09pvXf8zDoH8+EURAl7aAJ0YLYnqBRfPVj/nUo33szH79BDvewCgg+dy VVRpzo4URnpLqEpQczPpXN0==vCNK-END PGP SIGNATURE--- VWOLTamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#325505: Intent to NMU
as you wish, but FYI, i won't continue the development of this software, and it will be out of debian b/c of this. On 28/09/05, dann frazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As these bugs have been open for 30 days without a response from the maintainer, I intend to NMU them in 1 week (or earlier, at the maintainer's request). -- dann frazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#323035: Fwd: Processed: referring issue to technical committee
Here I am. Please notice what I repied to Robert's email. -- Forwarded message -- From: Robert McQueen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 31-Aug-2005 03:49 Subject: Re: Processed: referring issue to technical committee To: Toma [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please re-send this message to the bug in question (CC to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) so that the relevant people can follow the discussion. Regards, Rob Toma wrote: Hello, Yes, definitely this is the situation, I simply disagree to ename' the package to follow the debian policy because I think this is a wrong direction of a straight library like silc. If there is a plan to use soname as version not in the name of the package, I will gladly follow this direction, but not like this, since this package is very straight forward, simply, and I believe every developer should compile his/her code agains the current, up-to-date libsilc. And just for the record, the initial version of this library, w/o any version in the name space was allowed to get into the debian repository, as it is in now. So cut this short, I won't follow this policy, so I'll let the package anyone unless the policy or the idea behind it won't change. In any case, i'm gladly help. Cheers, Tamas On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 10:47:38PM +0100, Robert McQueen wrote: Raul Miller wrote: It's not clear to me why this was assigned to the technical committee. There's definitely some issues here. For example, it sounds like libsilc has some bugs that need to be fixed. But is there any problem that the technical committee needs to decide on? If so, could someone clearly and simply state what this problem is? The problem is that the maintainer refuses to concede that his packages are in violation of Debian's shared library packaging policy, or believes that this policy is incorrect or somehow irrelevant to his package. I was hoping that the technical committee might be able to discern which of these is the case, and then decide which elements need to be fixed and by whom, in order that the adoption of SILC-based software may continue in Debian. However, it now seems that he's willing for someone else to maintain the package (see his mail on #273871), so it might be in order to orphan the package and close this technical committee bug. Thanks, Regards, Rob -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#273871: referring issue to technical committee
I can't maintain libsilc due several reasons: a) the silc upstream targz reflects its soname perfectly, but I disagree to maintain 1) a meta-package referring this one, 2) maintain a package which (strictly in my opinion) has a simple API differing the methodology to the debian one. b) personal things So I'm gladly give it to anybody who is interested in it. On 14/08/05, Robert McQueen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: clone 273871 -1 reassign -1 tech-ctte thanks (cloning bug to leave RC bug open on libsilc) The bug is reasonably self-explanatory - on top of the package itself being incorrectly named (not reflecting the SONAME), this library does not increment its version when symbols are added, or change the shlibs values to ensure the appropriate version is depended on. The maintainer has amply demonstrated that he doesn't understand the issue and has made it exceedingly clear that he doesn't care, and that it's apparently not a problem because nobody on -devel replied to his message. As indicated by Steve Langasek, this is not a theoretical problem - previous uploads of silc clients to unstable have broken because they do not have tight enough dependencies on the version of the library that they were built against. I do not wish to make Gaim depend on this library while it is so poorly maintained, because it will cause an excess burden of support next time it breaks. I personally am not interested in silc functionality otherwise I might've tried to fix it and NMU or hijack the package, but I do recieve occasional user requests for the silc functionality to be enabled in Gaim. This problem has caused there to be no silc clients whatsoever in the sarge release, because they are all blocked on this library which will not migrate to testing until this bug is closed, and the same problem looks set to happen for etch unless something happens. Regards, Rob -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#295568: tsocks: . tsocks on gives bash exec: on not found
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Ricky Ng-Adam wrote: please try: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ . tsocks -on [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ii tsocks 1.8beta5-2 transparent network access through a SOCKS 4 in man: . tsocks -on -- add the tsocks lib to LD_PRELOAD (don't forget the leading dot!) Package: tsocks Version: 1.8beta5-2 Severity: important Running `. tsocks on` as suggested by the man page spits out bash: exec: on not found and exits the console or terminal where it is run. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10.mt-m8305-42u Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages tsocks depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an -- no debconf information __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250 -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG public key: http://people.debian.org/~toma/gpgkey-toma.asc GPG ID: 69C0FA93 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#291616: snort-pgsql: debconf asks me to cd /usr/share/doc/snort-pgsql/contrib when it not exists
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005, Javier [iso-8859-1] Fernndez-Sanguino Pea wrote: I'd like to thank you. :) keep the great work! merge 205683 291616 thanks On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 10:31:13PM +0100, Szerb Tamas wrote: Package: snort-pgsql Version: N/A Severity: normal When the snort-pgsql's debconf asks me to run cd /usr/share/doc/snort-pgsql/contrib zcat create_pgsql.gz | psql -U user -h host -W databasename Please review the BTS before submitting bugs, this has been already reported. Thanks Javier -- VWOL Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG public key: http://people.debian.org/~toma/gpgkey-toma.asc GPG ID: 69C0FA93
