Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Simon Richter

Hi,

On 06.05.23 07:11, Luca Boccassi wrote:


- every package is forcefully canonicalized as soon as trixie is open
for business


You will also need to ship at least

 - /lib -> usr/lib (on 32 bit)
 - /lib64 -> usr/lib64 (on 64 bit)

as a symlink either in the libc-bin package or any other Essential 
package, to fulfill the requirement that unpacked Essential packages are 
operational.


   Simon


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Luca Boccassi
On Fri, 5 May 2023 at 17:38, Andreas Metzler  wrote:
>
> On 2023-05-05 Simon Richter  wrote:
> [...]
> > My proposal would be to put the onus on the client registering the
> > diversion:
> [...]
> >  - packages are encouraged to register both diversions
>
> Hello,
>
> That seems to be a rather ugly user interface, ("There is dpkg-divert on
> Debian, but because the usrmerge you need to invoke it twce to be
> sure"). Will we need to have a meta-transition years from now trying to
> get get rid of the double diversions?

It is not the prettiest thing but it is a very clever solution.
Perhaps it could be mitigated with an addendum that makes it optional,
and to be used only when strictly needed, after all moving files
within the same package is fine, it's only the combination of moving
location _and_ package that causes problems. In other words:

- every package is forcefully canonicalized as soon as trixie is open
for business
- the moratorium on moving files from bin/ sbin/ lib/ _and_ to other
packages at the same time is maintained from bookworm till trixie, and
will lifted after trixie ships, and applies implicitly to all the
~2000 binary pkgs that are affected by the above
- the moratorium can be bypassed by a maintainer if and only if the
appropriate conflicts/replaces/diverts as discussed in this thread are
put in place and left there for as long as needed (TBD whether this
means for trixie's cycle or for trixie+1)

In practice, I suspect that out of ~2000 packages shipping bin/ sbin/
lib*/, only a small fraction would end up needing to further move
files out to other packages, so the divert dance requirement can be
restricted only to those. This way impact is minimized, required
testing is smaller, and we get in the final state on day one of trixie
dev cycle.
Moving files between packages already requires busywork anyway, so a
bit more won't hurt that much, especially if we figure out a way to
provide the functionality with a dh addon or such to do the heavy
lifting.

Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi



Re: Work-needing packages report for May 5, 2023

2023-05-05 Thread Gabriel Collado Rodríguez
If you write to me again or one of yours, I'm going to denounce youuu

El vie, 5 may 2023 2:42,  escribió:

> The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested
> through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the
> last week.
>
> Total number of orphaned packages: 1221 (new: 1)
> Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 157 (new: 0)
> Total number of packages requested help for: 58 (new: 0)
>
> Please refer to https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ for more information.
>
> 
>
> The following packages have been orphaned:
>
>rbdoom3bfg (#1035299), orphaned 4 days ago
>  Description: Doom3 BFG edition game engine
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 82
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/1035299
>
> 1220 older packages have been omitted from this listing, see
> https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/orphaned for a complete list.
>
> 
>
> No new packages have been given up for adoption, but a total of 157
> packages
> are awaiting adoption.  See
> https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/rfa_bypackage
> for a complete list.
>
> 
>
> For the following packages help is requested:
>
>apache2 (#910917), requested 1664 days ago
>  Description: Apache HTTP Server
>  Reverse Depends: apache2 apache2-ssl-dev apache2-suexec-custom
>apache2-suexec-pristine backuppc bfh-container-server
>courier-webadmin cvsweb debbugs-web debian-edu-router-deployserver
>(125 more omitted)
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 96337
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/910917
>
>apparmor (#1006872), requested 423 days ago
>  Description: user-space parser utility for AppArmor
>  Reverse Depends: apparmor-notify apparmor-profiles
>apparmor-profiles-extra apparmor-utils content-hub-testability
>dbus-broker dbus-daemon dbus-tests debian-cloud-images-packages
>dovecot-core (24 more omitted)
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 192263
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/1006872
>
>autopkgtest (#846328), requested 2346 days ago
>  Description: automatic as-installed testing for Debian packages
>  Reverse Depends: debci-worker sbuild-qemu
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 1177
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/846328
>
>balsa (#642906), requested 4239 days ago
>  Description: An e-mail client for GNOME
>  Reverse Depends: balsa
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 590
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/642906
>
>cargo (#860116), requested 2214 days ago
>  Description: Rust package manager
>  Reverse Depends: dh-cargo python3-setuptools-rust rust-all
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 2914
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/860116
>
>chromium (#1016047), requested 282 days ago
>  Description: web browser
>  Reverse Depends: chromium chromium-driver chromium-l10n
>chromium-shell node-puppeteer qunit-selenium
>x2gothinclient-minidesktop
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 24559
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/1016047
>
>courier (#978755), requested 854 days ago
>  Description: Courier mail server
>  Reverse Depends: courier-faxmail courier-filter-perl courier-imap
>courier-ldap courier-mlm courier-mta courier-pcp courier-pop
>courier-webadmin couriergrey (3 more omitted)
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 747
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/978755
>
>cron (#984736), requested 788 days ago
>  Description: new maintainer need
>  Reverse Depends: apticron autolog backintime-common bcron
>btrfsmaintenance buildd checksecurity clamtk cricket cron (25 more
>omitted)
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 207983
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/984736
>
>cyrus-imapd (#921717), requested 1546 days ago
>  Description: Cyrus mail system - IMAP support
>  Reverse Depends: cyrus-admin cyrus-caldav cyrus-clients cyrus-dev
>cyrus-imapd cyrus-murder cyrus-nntpd cyrus-pop3d cyrus-replication
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 387
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/921717
>
>debtags (#962579), requested 1058 days ago
>  Description: Debian Package Tags support tools
>  Reverse Depends: packagesearch
>  Installations reported by Popcon: 1345
>  Bug Report URL: https://bugs.debian.org/962579
>
>dee (#831388), requested 2484 days ago
>  Description: model to synchronize multiple instances over DBus
>  Reverse Depends: dee-tools gir1.2-dee-1.0 gir1.2-unity-7.0
>libdee-dev libunity-dev libunity-protocol-private0 libunity-tools
>libunity9 zeitgeist-core
>  Installations reported by 

Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Andreas Metzler
On 2023-05-05 Simon Richter  wrote:
[...]
> My proposal would be to put the onus on the client registering the
> diversion:
[...]
>  - packages are encouraged to register both diversions

Hello,

That seems to be a rather ugly user interface, ("There is dpkg-divert on
Debian, but because the usrmerge you need to invoke it twce to be
sure"). Will we need to have a meta-transition years from now trying to
get get rid of the double diversions?

cu Andreas



Bug#1035570: ITP: omemo-dr -- OMEMO double ratchet for Python

2023-05-05 Thread Martin
Package: wnpp
Owner: deba...@debian.org
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, 
pkg-xmpp-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org

* Package name: omemo-dr
  Version : 0.99.1
  Upstream Author : Philipp Hörist 
* URL or Web page : https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/omemo-dr/
* License : GPL3
  Programming Lang: Python
  Description : OMEMO double ratchet for Python

Initial codebase was forked from python-axolotl, which is a Python 3
port of libaxolotol-android. The library is defined as a ratcheting
forward secrecy protocol that works in synchronous and asynchronous
messaging environments.

This is a new dependency of Gajim >= 1.8.



Bug#1035566: ITP: gl4es -- OpenGL 2.1/1.5 to GLES 2.0/1.1 translation library title

2023-05-05 Thread 李程
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Cheng Li 
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org

* Package name: gl4es
  Version : 1.1.4
  Upstream Author : ptitSeb
* URL : https://github.com/ptitSeb/gl4es
* License : MIT
  Programming Lang: c
  Description : OpenGL 2.1/1.5 to GLES 2.0/1.1 translation library

 This is a library provide OpenGL 2.x functionality for GLES2.0 accelerated
Hardware
 (and of course also support OpenGL 1.5 function, so metimes better than
when using
 GLES 1.1 backend) There is also support for GLES 1.1 Hardware, emulating
OpenGL 1.5,
 and some OpenGL 2.x + extensions.
 This package contains the shared libraries


Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Simon Richter

Hi,

On 05.05.23 18:36, Timo Röhling wrote:

- it is not an error to register a diversion for an alias of an 
existing diversion, provided the package and target matches, this is a 
no-op
- it is not an error to unregister a diversion for an alias of a path 
that has been unregistered previously, that is a no-op as well



How do you distinguish between aliased diversions and "real" ones?
Because if you allow the registration of duplicate diversions, the
following can happen:



- Package A is installed, preinst creates a diversion
- Package B is installed, preinst creates the same diversion
- Package A is uninstalled, postrm removes the diversion


That's why the package and target need to match -- so by extension 
package B may not divert a path that package A already diverts.


With dpkg-divert as it is, this works because no aliasing support 
exists. A diverted dpkg-divert that generates additional diversions 
would need to catch this case, reject it and restore the previous state, 
same as an aliasing aware dpkg-divert.


   Simon


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Timo Röhling

Hi,

* Simon Richter  [2023-05-05 17:59]:
- it is not an error to register a diversion for an alias of an 
existing diversion, provided the package and target matches, this is a 
no-op
- it is not an error to unregister a diversion for an alias of a path 
that has been unregistered previously, that is a no-op as well

How do you distinguish between aliased diversions and "real" ones?
Because if you allow the registration of duplicate diversions, the
following can happen:

- Package A is installed, preinst creates a diversion
- Package B is installed, preinst creates the same diversion
- Package A is uninstalled, postrm removes the diversion

Now package B has lost its diversion. 



Cheers
Timo

--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   ╭╮
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   │ Timo Röhling   │
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀   │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1  23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │
⠈⠳⣄   ╰╯


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg

2023-05-05 Thread Simon Richter

Hi,

On 04.05.23 20:26, Helmut Grohne wrote:


From my point of view, the ultimate goal here should be moving all files

to their canonical location and thereby make aliasing effects
irrelevant. Do you confirm?


Yes, that would solve the problem for the current transition without any 
changes in dpkg.


There will be some small aliasing effects still, e.g. ldd will probably 
output the linker path from the ELF ABI instead of the canonical linker 
path, but nothing major.


What I'm concerned about is that, whether we like it or not, we're still 
(d|r)efining interfaces here, and that affects future development, 
including future transitions.



As such, I do not see aliasing support in dpkg as complementing the
forced file move approach with lots of workarounds such as diverting
dpkg-divert. Rather, I see them as exclusive strategies.


Yes, absolutely. No one can coordinate two groups that don't even agree 
on the scope of the work or whether a definition of the scope is even 
necessary before beginning.



Each of these
strategies has significant downsides. In combining the different
strategies, we combine their downsides, but since their benefit is
shared, we do not gain anything in return but increase the price to pay.


For this transition, yes, but we need to think beyond that. Any 
workaround we introduce here will need one release to be rolled out, one 
release to be stable, and one release to disappear. We can, in many but 
not all cases, introduce dependencies to enforce a particular ordering 
and reduce that by one release cycle.


We're too late to roll out workarounds in the bookworm cycle, so we can 
deploy them with trixie at the earliest. Essential packages cannot 
contain diversions, so we need support from all installers (debootstrap, 
cdebootstrap, mmdebootstrap) or leave file paths for Essential packages 
as they are, delaying the end of the transition until forky.


Making the workarounds obsolete before that will allow us to finish the 
transition earlier and thus reduce the effort of future transitions. For 
the users, nothing changes, they have had the files moved forcefully 
years ago.


At the same time, there is little overlap in the groups that would 
implement the different strategies, so there is no person who would need 
to decide what they are working on to the detriment of the other option.



On the flip side, if dpkg (and thus dpkg-divert) is to gain aliasing
support, I see no reason (and benefit) to diverting dpkg-divert.


Me neither. The problem is, we have no commitment from anyone to 
implement aliasing support. Volunteering Guillem hasn't worked, I don't 
really have time to do more than "best effort", and I don't know many 
other people even looking into that, so we cannot decide on that strategy.



Can you explain why you see combining these strategies as something
worth exploring?


It will get something done on the way to finishing the transition until 
forky, even if dpkg changes don't manifest, but can provide a solution 
in trixie if they do.



then a package containing /bin/foo and a package containing /usr/bin/foo now
have a file conflict in dpkg. Not sure if that is a problem, or exactly the



This case already is prohibited by policy section 10.1. It can only
happen as a temporary state during a file move (from / to /usr and from
one package to another).


Yes, but from a technical point of view we cannot rely on Policy, it 
only allows us to assign blame, but that will not fix the error message 
a user is experiencing.


With the status quo, dpkg will not detect the file conflict, which may 
or may not be the desired result, but it will not flag an error during 
execution.


With two file names being diverted to the same name, it is likely 
(again, I haven't tested) that installation of the conflicting package 
will be aborted unless there is a Replaces: in effect, which is 
something that whatever tool is calling dpkg will need to deal with.



behaviour we want. Probably the latter, which would allow us to define a
policy "if aliased paths are diverted, the diversion needs to match", which
in turn would allow the conflict checker during alias registration to verify
that the aliased diversions are not in conflict.



If we do not modify dpkg to improve aliasing support, then yes, such a
scenario will require a Conflicts declaration or a different measure
averting this problem.


No, that would require the package declaring the diversion to conflict 
with itself, that makes no sense. We need to clarify the interface for 
dpkg-divert here (i.e. create Policy), and that interface will need to 
be supported by both the diverted dpkg-divert and the one shipped with dpkg.


As of now, the one in dpkg will happily register diversions for aliased 
paths, but to my knowledge, none have been registered, and the diverted 
dpkg-divert does not exist yet, so we have full freedom to define what 
the policy should be.


My proposal would be to put the onus on the

Re: ssh-audit: Please update the debian package

2023-05-05 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Robert Ernst (2023-05-05 08:24:00)
> I already sent a MR a week ago. But the maintainer  ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) 
>  replied with cryptic messages via E-Mail, never 
> accepted the Merge Request and then stopped replying to mails. I also 
> would be interested to have progress here.

Please have a bit more patience; "a week ago" is not "never".


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private



Re: Bug#1035528: ssh-audit: Please update the debian package

2023-05-05 Thread 陳昌倬
On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 06:24:00AM +, Robert Ernst wrote:
> Hello Martin,
> 
> thank you for creating Bug report #1035528
> 
> The missing update might be due to a broken watchfile.
> I already sent a MR a week ago. But the maintainer  ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬)
>  replied with cryptic messages via E-Mail, never accepted
> the Merge Request and then stopped replying to mails. I also would be
> interested to have progress here.

Sorry, I did not submit review result into salsa. Please check
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ssh-audit/-/merge_requests/4 again.


-- 
ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) czchen@{czchen,debian}.org
https://czchen.org/
Key fingerprint = BA04 346D C2E1 FE63 C790  8793 CC65 B0CD EC27 5D5B


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature