Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 February 2014 22:18, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Vincent, Many thanks for uploading this. However, the package has been stuck in NEW for the last few weeks. I'm not sure what the problem is, but possibly it's because the 0install package didn't contain any files (it was just a meta-package for pulling in the GUI dependencies), which someone mentioned might be a problem. I've uploaded a new version now which puts the GUI plugin files in the 0install package while leaving the rest in 0install-core: https://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Any chance you could upload that version to (hopefully) unstick the process? Your updated package FTBFS in a clean sid pbuilder chroot; it looks like you might need to add unzip to build-depends? I've attached the build log. Oops. Sorry about that. I've uploaded a new version that now builds correctly under pbuilder. http://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Built, signed, and uploaded, thanks! Some (somewhat pedantic) nitpicks for future uploads: - please be more verbose in d/changelog; e.g. mention that you've added a bunch of new build dependencies to your package - debian/patches/ is empty, remove it - debian/copyright: similarly to your LGPL license header/appendix text, you need to include that for the GPL as well since your debian packaging is covered under GPL and not LGPL (alternatively, license everything under the same license) And lintian has a fair bit to complain about: P: zeroinstall-injector source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0alias W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0desktop W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0install W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0launch W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store-secure-add P: 0install-core: no-upstream-changelog I: 0install-core: package-contains-empty-directory usr/lib/0install.net/ W: 0install-core: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/0alias I: 0install-core: desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry usr/share/applications/0install.desktop W: 0install: hardening-no-relro usr/lib/0install.net/gui_gtk.cmxs I: 0install: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/lib/0install.net/gui_gtk.cmxs I: 0install: capitalization-error-in-description GTK GTK+ (since you're upstream, you can easily fix some of these issues, e.g. by signing your release tarballs with gpg, including a manpage for /usr/bin/0alias) Regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
On 9 February 2014 09:27, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 February 2014 22:18, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Vincent, Many thanks for uploading this. However, the package has been stuck in NEW for the last few weeks. I'm not sure what the problem is, but possibly it's because the 0install package didn't contain any files (it was just a meta-package for pulling in the GUI dependencies), which someone mentioned might be a problem. I've uploaded a new version now which puts the GUI plugin files in the 0install package while leaving the rest in 0install-core: https://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Any chance you could upload that version to (hopefully) unstick the process? Your updated package FTBFS in a clean sid pbuilder chroot; it looks like you might need to add unzip to build-depends? I've attached the build log. Oops. Sorry about that. I've uploaded a new version that now builds correctly under pbuilder. http://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Built, signed, and uploaded, thanks! Some (somewhat pedantic) nitpicks for future uploads: - please be more verbose in d/changelog; e.g. mention that you've added a bunch of new build dependencies to your package - debian/patches/ is empty, remove it - debian/copyright: similarly to your LGPL license header/appendix text, you need to include that for the GPL as well since your debian packaging is covered under GPL and not LGPL (alternatively, license everything under the same license) And lintian has a fair bit to complain about: P: zeroinstall-injector source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0alias W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0desktop W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0install W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0launch W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store-secure-add P: 0install-core: no-upstream-changelog I: 0install-core: package-contains-empty-directory usr/lib/0install.net/ W: 0install-core: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/0alias I: 0install-core: desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry usr/share/applications/0install.desktop W: 0install: hardening-no-relro usr/lib/0install.net/gui_gtk.cmxs I: 0install: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/lib/0install.net/gui_gtk.cmxs I: 0install: capitalization-error-in-description GTK GTK+ (since you're upstream, you can easily fix some of these issues, e.g. by signing your release tarballs with gpg, including a manpage for /usr/bin/0alias) Regards, Vincent Thanks! Note that some of these are false positives (it's up to the ocaml compiler whether it includes hardening or relies on its own static type and bounds checking). I'll get it to check the signature though. -- Dr Thomas Leonardhttp://0install.net/ GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1 GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
Hi, On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: On 9 February 2014 09:27, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: And lintian has a fair bit to complain about: W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0alias W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0desktop W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0install W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0launch W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store W: 0install-core: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/0store-secure-add [...] Thanks! Note that some of these are false positives (it's up to the ocaml compiler whether it includes hardening or relies on its own static type and bounds checking). I'll get it to check the signature though. FYI: https://wiki.debian.org/HardeningWalkthrough#My_package_is_.28partly.29_written_in_OCaml Regards, Prach -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
On 7 February 2014 22:18, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Vincent, Many thanks for uploading this. However, the package has been stuck in NEW for the last few weeks. I'm not sure what the problem is, but possibly it's because the 0install package didn't contain any files (it was just a meta-package for pulling in the GUI dependencies), which someone mentioned might be a problem. I've uploaded a new version now which puts the GUI plugin files in the 0install package while leaving the rest in 0install-core: https://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Any chance you could upload that version to (hopefully) unstick the process? Your updated package FTBFS in a clean sid pbuilder chroot; it looks like you might need to add unzip to build-depends? I've attached the build log. Oops. Sorry about that. I've uploaded a new version that now builds correctly under pbuilder. http://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector -- Dr Thomas Leonardhttp://0install.net/ GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1 GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
On 18 January 2014 06:35, Vincent Cheng vch...@debian.org wrote: Control: tag -1 moreinfo Hi, Would you consider changing the name of the source package back to zeroinstall-injector? This won't impact end users (the binary package is 0install now; that's what end users will see, and that's what they'd install), but it makes this transition less of a hassle if you revert to the same source package name. Done: https://mentors.debian.net/package/zeroinstall-injector Thanks, -- Dr Thomas Leonardhttp://0install.net/ GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1 GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
Control: tag -1 moreinfo Hi, Would you consider changing the name of the source package back to zeroinstall-injector? This won't impact end users (the binary package is 0install now; that's what end users will see, and that's what they'd install), but it makes this transition less of a hassle if you revert to the same source package name. Regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
I'm not sure what you mean. Do I need to file a bug somewhere as well? According to http://mentors.debian.net/sponsor/rfs-howto: ITP stands for Intend to package. These are packages which not exist in Debian yet. Such packages need to go through NEW. That is the queue on ftp-master for packages uploaded for the first time, which need to be reviewed first. This includes renames, packages moving between areas, and source-packages that build new binary packages. So, ITP seemed the right tag for a rename. Let me know if I need to do something else. To recap: I've been maintaining this package as a DM for several years; just I need someone to approve the rename as I don't have permission to do it myself. https://mentors.debian.net/package/0install Thanks, -- Dr Thomas Leonardhttp://0install.net/ GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1 GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
A doubt: where is the ITP bug??? Thanks! Regards, Eriberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am a DM, maintaining the zeroinstall-injector package. I have split it into separate packages to avoid pulling in GTK on headless servers. This saves around 100 MB when deploying to a fresh server. Could someone check it and approve the new package names? My previous mentor (Jens Peter Secher) is no longer a DD. * Package name: 0install Version : 2.3.3-2 Upstream Author : Thomas Leonard tal...@gmail.com * URL : http://0install.net/ * License : GNU Lesser General Public License 2.1 Section : admin It now builds these binary packages: 0install - cross-distribution packaging system 0install-core - cross-distribution packaging system (non-GUI parts) zeroinstall-injector - transitional package for 0install I updated the name as injector is no longer used, and the main command is now 0install. To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/0install Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/0/0install/0install_2.3.3-2.dsc More information about 0install can be obtained from http://0install.net Regards, Thomas Leonard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
