Bug#734125: ITP missing for package deal.ii with RFS 734125 with ITP in title
According to [0], deal.ii has not its corresponding ITP bug, despite 734125 title. Please, could you file this ITP bug? Thanks for your work! [0] http://qa.debian.org/~bartm/wnpp-rfs-mentors/wnpp-inconsistencies.txt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140121103812.ga9...@debian.org
Bug#733022: ITP missing for package arnu with RFS 733022 with ITP in title
According to [0], arnu has not its corresponding ITP bug, despite 733022 title. Please, could you file this ITP bug? Thanks for your work! [0] http://qa.debian.org/~bartm/wnpp-rfs-mentors/wnpp-inconsistencies.txt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140121103959.ga9...@debian.org
postgres extensions and postgres multi-version support
Hi Christoph, hi Dimitri, (cc: dear mentors) finally, after quite a long break, I've taken up my work on the postgres extensions pgsphere and q3c. Christoph might remember this because he reviewed these packages about one year ago (thanks again for that!). Since both packages have similar issues, here I'll only refer to the q3c package, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=680222 and http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=debian-science/packages/q3c.git . I'm using pg_buildext, see http://manpages.debian.net/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=pg_buildext , for my build to allow for supporting several versions of postgres at the same time. Currently, my debian/control has the following structure: Source: q3c ... Package: postgresql-8.4-q3c ... Package: postgresql-9.0-q3c ... Package: postgresql-9.1-q3c ... While looking at other postgres extensions (e.g. ip4r, postgis, prefix), I noted that in all cases, the extension is built for one specific postgres version only, e.g. postgresql-9.1-postgis for the postgis source package or postgresql-9.3-prefix for the prefix source package in jessie, so what I'm doing does not seem to be common practice. Hence my question is: does it make sense to use pg_buildext for the multi-version support of postgres, or will this do more harm than good and should therefore be dropped? Thanks in advance for your help, Florian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52de8102.8040...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de
Re: postgres extensions and postgres multi-version support
Re: Florian Rothmaier 2014-01-21 52de8102.8040...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de Currently, my debian/control has the following structure: Source: q3c ... Package: postgresql-8.4-q3c ... Package: postgresql-9.0-q3c ... Package: postgresql-9.1-q3c ... While looking at other postgres extensions (e.g. ip4r, postgis, prefix), I noted that in all cases, the extension is built for one specific postgres version only, e.g. postgresql-9.1-postgis for the postgis source package or postgresql-9.3-prefix for the prefix source package in jessie, so what I'm doing does not seem to be common practice. Hence my question is: does it make sense to use pg_buildext for the multi-version support of postgres, or will this do more harm than good and should therefore be dropped? Hi Florian, pg_buildext makes sense indeed, but you are missing one bit here, debian/control is regenerated from debian/control.in at clean time. This will rewrite the control file to include the supported PostgreSQL versions only. Have a look at any package build-depending on postgresql-server-dev-all to see how it works. Let me know if you have further questions. Christoph -- c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: postgres extensions and postgres multi-version support
Florian Rothmaier froth...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de writes: Currently, my debian/control has the following structure: While looking at other postgres extensions (e.g. ip4r, postgis, prefix), I noted that in all cases, the extension is built for one specific postgres version only, e.g. Have a look at the debian/rules files for some extensions and you will see that debian/control depends on debian/control.in. pg_buildext comes with a makefile that you can include in debian/rules to produce the right debian/control file for you. Regards, -- dim -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/m28uu92xdd@tapoueh.org
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
Hi,
I hope this is the correct list to ask this questions - if not please
redirect me (and also please CC me in your reply). [debian-mentors in
CC as well - may be some other people have a similar problem.]
I know that qiime has a serious bug (#731190) where I was seeking for
help six weeks ago with no real result. So I would have expected to
become kicked from testing because of this bug which would be fine.
However, it is kicked because of an old libffi dependency. I realised
that it had in fact
libffi6 (= 3.0.4)
in its dependencies which was included via
${shlibs:Depends} or
${misc:Depends}
but I have no idea, how to prevent this. Would a rebuild be sufficient
to get the new libffi dependency or do I need to do more?
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 04:39:17PM +, Debian testing watch wrote:
FYI: The status of the qiime source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 1.4.0-2
Current version: (not in testing)
Hint: http://release.debian.org/britney/hints/jcristau
# 20140120
# still depend on old libffi
The script that generates this mail tries to extract removal
reasons from comments in the britney hint files. Those comments
were not originally meant to be machine readable, so if the
reason for removing your package seems to be nonsense, it is
probably the reporting script that got confused. Please check the
actual hints file before you complain about meaningless removals.
--
This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of
new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive
later changes on the next day.
See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information.
___
Debian-med-packaging mailing list
debian-med-packag...@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140121184540.ga13...@an3as.eu
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
On 2014-01-21 19:45, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi,
Hi Andreas and d-mentors,
I hope this is the correct list to ask this questions - if not please
redirect me (and also please CC me in your reply). [debian-mentors in
CC as well - may be some other people have a similar problem.]
Seems like a reasonable choice for clarifying removals from testing. :)
I know that qiime has a serious bug (#731190) where I was seeking for
help six weeks ago with no real result. So I would have expected to
become kicked from testing because of this bug which would be fine.
It could have been kicked out for that reason. Possibly, it would have
been eventually, but qiime would have blocked the transition in question
until then. I will not rule out that the bug was an enabler for an
earlier manual removal - personally, I have kicked packages out for
having RC bugs if those bugs stalled the transitions longer than my
patience lasted[0].
However, it is kicked because of an old libffi dependency. I realised
that it had in fact
libffi6 (= 3.0.4)
in its dependencies which was included via
${shlibs:Depends} or
${misc:Depends}
but I have no idea, how to prevent this. Would a rebuild be sufficient
to get the new libffi dependency or do I need to do more?
Kind regards
Andreas.
[...]
As you correctly conclude, a binNMU would usually have been sufficient
to update the dependency. However, qiime currently FTBFS on
kFreeBSD[1]. This makes it impossible to binNMU qiime with the purpose
of completely getting rid of the libffi6 dependency (in testing).
The slightly longer story. In order to finish the transition, qiime
would have to stop depending on libffi6 in testing. This generally
happens in one of two ways:
1. qiime gets removed (as it happened here)
2. qiime gets updated on *ALL* architectures with a libffi6 dependency
to no longer depend on libffi6 and this update migrates to testing.
The problem with doing 2. in this case, is that the package FTBFS on
kFreeBSD. So even if binNMUed on all (other) architectures, the
dependency would remain on the kFreeBSD and thus stall the transition.
Now, by the looks of it, this FTBFS has not been filed. For that, I
believe you have suffered from the problem mentioned in [2].
~Niels
[0] My patience for RC bugs stalling transitions may be a function over
how much time / energy I have to keep track of the transition in
question or how fed up I am with it still not being done yet.
[1] https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=qiime
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/12/msg00611.html
On a related note, I suspect a good part of this problem would go
away if we had an automated tool to deal with the case where a
(sid-only) FTBFS is ignored. It happens sometimes that the maintainer
does nothing (or, maybe, does not realise the package FTBFS on arch X)
and neither the porters nor the buildd admins filed a bug for it.
Then it is not until the package gets in way of a transition (or some
other RC bug fix), that the package gets its RC bug. I have seen a
package stuck in sid for at least 90 days and still no RC bug - the
only thing wrong was an Out of date binaries on some architecture
(don't remember which package nor which architecture).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ded41a.7050...@thykier.net
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
On 21/01/14 20:10, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-01-21 19:45, Andreas Tille wrote: I know that qiime has a serious bug (#731190) where I was seeking for help six weeks ago with no real result. So I would have expected to become kicked from testing because of this bug which would be fine. Please, please Cc: debian-...@lists.debian.org for help with something like this. I only noticed that bug today because I happen to read -release@ Now, by the looks of it, this FTBFS has not been filed. For that, I believe you have suffered from the problem mentioned in [2]. On a related note, I suspect a good part of this problem would go away if we had an automated tool to deal with the case where a (sid-only) FTBFS is ignored. It happens sometimes that the maintainer does nothing (or, maybe, does not realise the package FTBFS on arch X) and neither the porters nor the buildd admins filed a bug for it. That would be extremely useful, and even better if it could Cc: porters of that arch and/or apply relevant BTS (user)tags. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ded6bb.5050...@pyro.eu.org
Bug#733022: ITP missing for package arnu with RFS 733022 with ITP in title
I'm working yet. Thanks Em 21-01-2014 08:39, Mònica Ramírez Arceda escreveu: According to [0], arnu has not its corresponding ITP bug, despite 733022 title. Please, could you file this ITP bug? Thanks for your work! [0] http://qa.debian.org/~bartm/wnpp-rfs-mentors/wnpp-inconsistencies.txt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ded2da.6060...@gmail.com
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 19:45:40 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi, I hope this is the correct list to ask this questions - if not please redirect me (and also please CC me in your reply). [debian-mentors in CC as well - may be some other people have a similar problem.] I know that qiime has a serious bug (#731190) where I was seeking for help six weeks ago with no real result. So I would have expected to become kicked from testing because of this bug which would be fine. However, it is kicked because of an old libffi dependency. I realised that it had in fact libffi6 (= 3.0.4) No, the version that got removed from testing depended on libffi5, which we got rid of. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
Hi Julien, On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 09:39:03PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: libffi6 (= 3.0.4) No, the version that got removed from testing depended on libffi5, which we got rid of. Ahh, thanks for the clarification. I was actually chacking the qiime version in unstable which obviously does not have that problem (but others we are working on). Kind regards and thanks for all your work in keeping testing in a releasable state Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140121210854.gd13...@an3as.eu
Bug#734125: marked as done (RFS: deal.ii/8.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library)
Your message dated Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:09:48 +0100 with message-id 87r481jb37@deep-thought.43-1.org and subject line Re: Bug#734125: RFS: deal.ii/8.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library has caused the Debian Bug report #734125, regarding RFS: deal.ii/8.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 734125: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734125 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-scie...@lists.debian.org Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package deal.ii * Package name: deal.ii Version : 8.1.0-1 * URL : http://www.dealii.org * License : LGPL-2.1+ Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libdeal.ii-8.1.0 - Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library libdeal.ii-dbg - Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library libdeal.ii-dev - Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library libdeal.ii-doc - Finite Element Differential Equations Analysis Library To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/deal.ii Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/deal.ii/deal.ii_8.1.0-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: Reintroduces the package to Debian, packageing redone from scratch. This is a first version for a deal.II package with some fundamental external dependencies (libtbb, libsuitesparse). I plan to (re)introduce some further (optional) dependencies of deal.Ii to Debian (trilinos, p4est) in order to provide a final package with mpi support in the near future. Regards, Matthias Maier ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Hi, Matthias Maier tamiko+deb...@kyomu.43-1.org writes: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/deal.ii/deal.ii_8.1.0-1.dsc I uploaded the package, but lintian found a few things that could be fixed easily in the next upload: I: deal.ii source: unused-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright lgpl-2.1 (paragraph at line 40) It should say LGPL-2.1+ as in the earlier paragraphs. W: libdeal.ii-doc: extra-license-file usr/share/doc/libdeal.ii-doc/LICENSE.gz Please remove the extra file from the binary package. The license is already documented in the copyright file. I: libdeal.ii-8.1.0: spelling-error-in-binary usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdeal_II.so.8.1.0 allows to allows one to A trivial upstream bug. E: libdeal.ii-doc: privacy-breach-w3c-valid-html usr/share/doc/libdeal.ii-doc/html/authors.html The documentation contains external images. It might be good to remove them (and they won't be displayed without an internet connection anyway). Also /tmp gets used in an unsafe way in doc/license/replace.sh (though it doesn't seem to be used): | sed -e s/@YEAR@/$YEAR/ doc/license/header-template /tmp/foobar22.temp Programs shouldn't use predictable filenames in /tmp and make sure they don't overwrite existing files. Ansgar---End Message---
Bug#736282: RFS: mandos/1.6.3-1 [RC] -- do unattended reboots with an encrypted root file system
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package mandos * Package name: mandos Version : 1.6.3-1 Upstream Author : Mandos Maintainers man...@recompile.se * URL : http://www.recompile.se/mandos * License : GPL-3+ Section : admin It builds those binary packages: mandos - server giving encrypted passwords to Mandos clients mandos-client - do unattended reboots with an encrypted root file system To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mandos Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mandos/mandos_1.6.3-1.dsc More information about Mandos can be obtained from http://www.recompile.se/mandos Changes since the last upload: Last upload was 1.6.0-1, and since then a number of bugs have been fixed in non-uploaded versions: 1.6.1 fixed #690639 and #721903, and 1.6.2 fixed #702120. These account for all bugs in the Debian BTS. Since our previous sponsor can no longer sponsor us, we would appreciate a new regular sponsor for the forseeable future. Regards, Teddy Hogeborn -- The Mandos Project http://www.recompile.se/mandos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87a9ep6lry@tower.recompile.se
Re: qiime REMOVED from testing
On 21/01/14 18:45, Andreas Tille wrote:
However, it is kicked because of an old libffi dependency. I realised
that it had in fact
libffi6 (= 3.0.4)
in its dependencies which was included via
${shlibs:Depends} or
${misc:Depends}
but I have no idea, how to prevent this. Would a rebuild be sufficient
to get the new libffi dependency or do I need to do more?
When I rebuilt it just now on kfreebsd-amd64, the .deb picked up these
dependencies:
Depends: libc0.1 (= 2.17-91), libffi6 (= 3.0.4), libgmp10, python (= 2.7),
python ( 2.8), pynast (= 1.2), python-cogent (= 1.5.3), king,
python-biom-format
So presumably that's fine, libffi6/3.0.13-10 in jessie+sid satisfies this.
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52df0617.7030...@pyro.eu.org
Bug#736288: RFS: libnftnl/1.0.0-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libnftnl * Package name: libnftnl Version : 1.0.0-1 Upstream Author : Pablo Neira Ayuso pa...@netfilter.org * URL : http://www.netfilter.org * License : GPL-2+ Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libnftnl-dev - Development files for libnftnl0 libnftnl0 - Netfilter nftables userspace API library libnftnl0-dbg - Debugging symbols for libnftnl0 To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/libnftnl Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libn/libnftnl/libnftnl_1.0.0-1.dsc This package includes the first Netfilter oficial release of libnftnl. The library is the userspace, low-level, API to the nftables kernel subsystem. So, for using nftables, you need libnftnl, the nft CLI tool, and a proper Linux kernel. Note that nftables is supported in Linux kernel since 3.13. [ Previous to the 1.0.0 release, Netfilter renamed libnftables to libnftnl ] Regards, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140121235859.25648.47018.reportbug@nostromo
Bug#735685: marked as done (RFS: libnftables/0.0.0~20131209-1 [ITP])
Your message dated Wed, 22 Jan 2014 01:02:02 +0100 with message-id CAOkSjBjv_cGq2mB3M_oewyKA2QjHkDLq7VNnsp60eSy8Ln=r...@mail.gmail.com and subject line has caused the Debian Bug report #735685, regarding RFS: libnftables/0.0.0~20131209-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 735685: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735685 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package libnftables * Package name: libnftables Version : 0.0.0~20131209-1 Upstream Author : Pableo Neira Ayuso pa...@netfilter.org * URL : http://netfilter.org/projects/nftables/index.html * License : GNU GPL v2 Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libnftables-dev - Development files for libnftables0 libnftables0 - Netfilter nftables userspace API library libnftables0-dbg - Debugging symbols for libnftables0 To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/libnftables Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libn/libnftables/libnftables_0.0.0~20131209-1.dsc Please, note that this is a snapshot version, previous to the official release of the first version of libnftables. libnftables will be a dependency of the next upstream release of the 'iptables' tool. Regards, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Superseded by libnftnl RFS. -- Arturo Borrero González---End Message---
Bug#735244: New version 0.3 uploaded to pypi
This version removes the jar files from the package. I've also fixed debian packaging so that egg-info and C source files are not included in the final binary. BR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52df2022.2070...@canonical.com
Bug#723626: marked as done (RFS: worklog/1.8-7 [ITA])
Your message dated Wed, 22 Jan 2014 04:26:25 + with message-id e1w5pot-0002gi...@quantz.debian.org and subject line closing RFS: worklog/1.8-7 [ITA] has caused the Debian Bug report #723626, regarding RFS: worklog/1.8-7 [ITA] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 723626: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=723626 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the package worklog, which was orphaned by ema@debian a while back, and due to some recent interest in the package by people other than myself, I've packaged up some bug fixes and ema@debian says he is too busy to sponsor it, and so I'm hoping someone else can take this on. * Package name: worklog Version : 1.8-7 Upstream Author : trux...@truxton.com * URL : http://www.truxton.com/~trux/software/ * License : Public domain Section : misc It builds those binary packages: worklog- Keep Track of Time worked on Projects To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/worklog Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/w/worklog/worklog_1.8-7.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New maintainer (Closes: #628157) * Fix extra second added (Closes: #548349) * Fix rounding error (Closes: #548347) * Use negative times correctly (Closes: #571718) Thanks. ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Package worklog has been removed from mentors.---End Message---
Bug#735182: RFS: fuseloop/1.0.1-1 ITP -- loopback mount using FUSE
Hello, * I had to modify the hardening patch to get fuseloop to build, modified patch is attached. * I think it would be useful to install upstream's README.md (just add it in debian/fuseloop.docs) * The README isn't clear about how to actually mount the exposed partition -- أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy) Digital design engineer GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7 GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#735182: RFS: fuseloop/1.0.1-1 ITP -- loopback mount using FUSE
Hi Ahmed, Quoting أحمد المحمودي (2014-01-22 06:51:13) * I had to modify the hardening patch to get fuseloop to build, modified patch is attached. I think you forgot to attach your patch but notice that after informing upstream of the issue, they fixed it for fuseloop 1.0.2 which is packaged on https://mentors.debian.net/package/fuseloop * I think it would be useful to install upstream's README.md (just add it in debian/fuseloop.docs) Good idea! Added in 1.0.2-2 on mentors. * The README isn't clear about how to actually mount the exposed partition It is clear for me. Maybe if you tell me how it is not clear for you I can fix it accordingly. I especially like how the README even includes steps to use fdisk to figure out the partition offsets. Thanks for your comments! cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140122063905.2407.47299@hoothoot
Bug#735182: RFS: fuseloop/1.0.1-1 ITP -- loopback mount using FUSE
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 07:39:05AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: Hi Ahmed, Quoting أحمد المحمودي (2014-01-22 06:51:13) * I had to modify the hardening patch to get fuseloop to build, modified patch is attached. I think you forgot to attach your patch but notice that after informing upstream of the issue, they fixed it for fuseloop 1.0.2 which is packaged on https://mentors.debian.net/package/fuseloop ---end quoted text--- Sorry, that I forgot to attach it. Please find it attached in this email. -- أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy) Digital design engineer GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7 GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1,5 +1,8 @@ +CFLAGS:=$(shell pkg-config --cflags fuse) $(CFLAGS) +LDFLAGS:=$(shell pkg-config --libs fuse) $(LDFLAGS) -lpthread + fuseloop: fuseloop.c - $(CC) $^ `pkg-config --cflags --libs fuse` -lpthread -o $@ + $(CC) $^ $(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ .PHONY: clean clean: signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#735182: RFS: fuseloop/1.0.1-1 ITP -- loopback mount using FUSE
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 07:39:05AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: It is clear for me. Maybe if you tell me how it is not clear for you I can fix it accordingly. I especially like how the README even includes steps to use fdisk to figure out the partition offsets. ---end quoted text--- At the end of the README it says to use mountlo, but there isn't such a utility in Debian. -- أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy) Digital design engineer GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7 GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
