Bug#834313: RFS: dh-text/1.0 ITP

2016-08-16 Thread Paul Wise 
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:

>   * dh-text

I wonder if a mechanism for this should go directly into debhelper itself?

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Bug#834567: RFS: gxmessage/3.4.3-1 [QA upload]

2016-08-16 Thread Daniel Echeverry 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gxmessage"

 * Package name: gxmessage
 * Version : 3.4.3-1
 * Upstream Author : Tim Musson 
 * URL : http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gxmessage/
 * License : GPL-3.0+
   Section : gnome

  It builds those binary packages:

gxmessage  - xmessage clone based on GTK+

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/gxmessage

  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gxmessage/gxmessage_3.4.3-1.dsc

  More information about gxmessage can be obtained from
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gxmessage/

  Changes since the last upload:

  * QA Upload.
  * New upstream release. (Closes: #786751)
  * debian/control
+ Change to libgtk-3-dev in B-D.
  * debian/patches
+ Add missing dep3 header to 01_549822.diff
  * debian/copyright
+ Update to DEP5 copyright format 1.0.

Regards,
Daniel Echeverry

-- 
Daniel Echeverry
http://wiki.debian.org/DanielEcheverry
http://rinconinformatico.net
Linux user: #477840
Debian user

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Sean Whitton 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 08:43:05AM +0200, Ferenc Wágner wrote:
> Sean Whitton  writes:
> 
> > For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
> > might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
> > whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.
> 
> Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
> a monotonically increasing component before the hash?

Whoops, thanks.

I usually use: 0~git.MMDD.abc123d

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Adam Borowski 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:04:43PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:00:02PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > If the repository contains any tags, I'd strongly recommend the output of
> > "git describe --tags".  This will, beside DTRT when you're exactly on a
> > tag (ie, on a release), produce version numbers of the form:
> > -<# of commits>-g, which is both monotonic if you
> > fast-forward and can be given to git to unambigously refer to the commit
> > you're uploading even to users of other branches.
> > 
> > For example, one of my projects is currently at 0.17-128-g8606a54.
> This also will cause the package version to have nothing in common with
> the actual software version. I doubt we want this.

Eh?  How can you have _more_ in common with the actual version than "from
release X, add Y commits, of all branch tips Y commits later pick the one
whose hash starts with Z"?

It's both human and machine readable.

-- 
An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.

Bug#833187: RFS: yuma123/2.8-1 [ITP] -- netconf/YANG toolchain

2016-08-16 Thread Vladimir Vassilev 
Thank you for the review. I will prepare a new release 2.9 removing the 
copyrighted files (MIBs and MIB products) as it is done in the 2.8+dfsg 
. It is not important they are part of the project code anyway. Seems we 
are almost there.


On 08/16/2016 08:00 PM, Vincent Bernat wrote:

  ❦  8 août 2016 03:00 CEST, Vladimir Vassilev  :


   - d/watch: missing, please add one. It allows you (or me) to
 conveniently know if there is a new version available. This appears
 on various tools like tracker.debian.org or qa.debian.org.

[1] fixed

There is a slight error in it. You use "~" instead of "+", so it doesn't
work. You can test with "uscan --report --verbose". It should say:

uscan info:=> Package is up to date for from
   https://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/yuma123/yuma123_2.8.tar.gz


   - d/control: no need to Build-Depends on autotools-dev, dh-autoreconf
 already does everything.

[2] ! did try to remove autotools-dev but lintian was reporting error
without it. With updated pbuild environment.

Ack.


   - you may want to add a libyuma2.symbols file. It can be generated with
 dpkg-gensymbols (and modified manually to remove the debian part of
 the version number).

[16] !(generated the file 2067 lines, 63576 bytes. The "may" you use
and the size of the file tilted the scales on deciding not to add a
libyuma2.symbols file if you do not have it as a mandatory
requirement)

Ack.


.Some other files are generated
  From the MIB. You cannot use them, sorry. There may be some debate here
as MIB are used as an interface documentation. However, they are really
non-free material. Maybe bringing this to debian-legal@ may help.

[18] resolved by removing all MIBs and products generated from MIBs
from 2.8+dfsg

You need to document in some way how you got this +dfsg tarball from the
original tarball. The easiest way is to use the Files-Excluded field in
debian/copyright. You can find more details in the manual page of
uscan. This way, uscan will be able to download and repack the tarball
itself. Have a look at the repacksuffix option too (to add +dfsg). The
other way is to have a "get-orig-source" rule in the Makefile.

Also, another detail, in d/changelog, you need to close the ITP, not the
RFS. The RFS will be closed once the package is uploaded. The ITP needs
to be closed once the package reaches the archive, through
debian/changelog.

For a first upload, keep d/changelog with just "Initial release
...".

Otherwise, everything is OK.

Bug#834539: RFS: zuki-themes/3.20-1-1 [ITP]

2016-08-16 Thread James Lu 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "zuki-themes"

* Package name: zuki-themes
* Version : 3.20-1-1
* Upstream Author : Mattias 
* URL : https://github.com/lassekongo83/zuki-themes
* License : GPL-3
* Section : x11

It builds those binary packages:

zuki-themes - Zuki themes for GNOME, Xfce and more

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

https://mentors.debian.net/package/zuki-themes

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/z/zuki-themes/zuki-themes_3.20-1-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:
* Initial Debian release. (Closes: #834278)

One particular note: I'm not quite sure why the debian/watch check on
mentors fails: on my system running stretch/sid, uscan works fine.

Best,
James



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#834530: RFS: telepathy-ring/2.1.0-1.1 [NMU] [RC]

2016-08-16 Thread Adrian Heine 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: important

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my NMU to the package "telepathy-ring"

* Package name: telepathy-ring
  Version : 2.1.0-1.1
  Upstream Author : Freedesktop.org
* URL   : https://cgit.freedesktop.org/telepathy/telepathy-ring/
* License : LGPL-2.1
  Section : net

It builds those binary packages:

  telepathy-ring - GSM and 3G UMTS Telepathy connection manager

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

https://mentors.debian.net/package/telepathy-ring


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/t/telepathy-ring/telepathy-ring_2.1.0-1.1.dsc

I fixed all reported non-wishlist bugs, of which 3 are RC. My minimal
changes are tracked at [github].

The original uploader removed himself from uploaders. The maintaining
team (in CC) didn't respond to my mail [pkg-telepathy-maintainers] in
the last 2,5 weeks.

[github] https://github.com/adrianheine/telepathy-ring-debian
[pkg-telepathy-maintainers]
https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-telepathy-maintainers/2016-July/006523.html

Changes since the last upload:

  [ Jonny Lamb ]
  * Remove myself from Uploaders.

  [ Hideki Yamane ]
  * debian/control
- set it as "Architecture: linux-any" since ofono requires udev and the
  BlueZ stack (Closes: #620544).

  [ Adrian Heine ]
  * Non-maintainer-upload.
  * Drop manual dbg package (Closes: #824740).
  * Import patch by Michael Biebl for including glib.h instead of individual
headers (Closes: #665616).
  * build-depend on autotools-dev so that CDBS regenerates config.guess
and config.sub (Closes: #791370).

Regards,
 Adrian Heine

Bug#833187: RFS: yuma123/2.8-1 [ITP] -- netconf/YANG toolchain

2016-08-16 Thread Vincent Bernat 
 ❦  8 août 2016 03:00 CEST, Vladimir Vassilev  :

>>   - d/watch: missing, please add one. It allows you (or me) to
>> conveniently know if there is a new version available. This appears
>> on various tools like tracker.debian.org or qa.debian.org.
> [1] fixed

There is a slight error in it. You use "~" instead of "+", so it doesn't
work. You can test with "uscan --report --verbose". It should say:

uscan info:=> Package is up to date for from
  https://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/yuma123/yuma123_2.8.tar.gz

>>   - d/control: no need to Build-Depends on autotools-dev, dh-autoreconf
>> already does everything.
> [2] ! did try to remove autotools-dev but lintian was reporting error
> without it. With updated pbuild environment.

Ack.

>>   - you may want to add a libyuma2.symbols file. It can be generated with
>> dpkg-gensymbols (and modified manually to remove the debian part of
>> the version number).
> [16] !(generated the file 2067 lines, 63576 bytes. The "may" you use
> and the size of the file tilted the scales on deciding not to add a
> libyuma2.symbols file if you do not have it as a mandatory
> requirement)

Ack.

>> .Some other files are generated
>>  From the MIB. You cannot use them, sorry. There may be some debate here
>> as MIB are used as an interface documentation. However, they are really
>> non-free material. Maybe bringing this to debian-legal@ may help.
> [18] resolved by removing all MIBs and products generated from MIBs
> from 2.8+dfsg

You need to document in some way how you got this +dfsg tarball from the
original tarball. The easiest way is to use the Files-Excluded field in
debian/copyright. You can find more details in the manual page of
uscan. This way, uscan will be able to download and repack the tarball
itself. Have a look at the repacksuffix option too (to add +dfsg). The
other way is to have a "get-orig-source" rule in the Makefile.

Also, another detail, in d/changelog, you need to close the ITP, not the
RFS. The RFS will be closed once the package is uploaded. The ITP needs
to be closed once the package reaches the archive, through
debian/changelog.

For a first upload, keep d/changelog with just "Initial release
...".

Otherwise, everything is OK.
-- 
Debian package sponsoring guidelines:
 https://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:00:02PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> If the repository contains any tags, I'd strongly recommend the output of
> "git describe --tags".  This will, beside DTRT when you're exactly on a
> tag (ie, on a release), produce version numbers of the form:
> -<# of commits>-g, which is both monotonic if you
> fast-forward and can be given to git to unambigously refer to the commit
> you're uploading even to users of other branches.
> 
> For example, one of my projects is currently at 0.17-128-g8606a54.
This also will cause the package version to have nothing in common with
the actual software version. I doubt we want this.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Adam Borowski 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:54:19AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 07:50:37AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > > > For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
> > > > might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
> > > > whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.
> > > 
> > > Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
> > > a monotonically increasing component before the hash?
> > 
> > Generally speaking, is there a recommended Debian version format for
> > git snapshots?
> 1.1+20160816, or ~ instead of +, as usual.
> Unless you are packaging two different snapshots committed at the same
> day.

If the repository contains any tags, I'd strongly recommend the output of
"git describe --tags".  This will, beside DTRT when you're exactly on a
tag (ie, on a release), produce version numbers of the form:
-<# of commits>-g, which is both monotonic if you
fast-forward and can be given to git to unambigously refer to the commit
you're uploading even to users of other branches.

For example, one of my projects is currently at 0.17-128-g8606a54.

-- 
An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.

Bug#822634: marked as done (RFS: magit-svn/2.1.1-1 [ITP])

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 12:57:47 +
with message-id <20160816125745.67nvuy2v4n7ud...@chase.mapreri.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#822634: RFS: magit-svn/2.1.1-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #822634,
regarding RFS: magit-svn/2.1.1-1 [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.)


-- 
822634: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822634
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "magit-svn"

 * Package name: magit-svn
   Version : 2.1.1-1
   Upstream Author : The Magit Project Contributors
 * URL : https://magit.vc
 * License : GPL

  It builds those binary packages:

elpa-magit-svn - git-svn extension for magit

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/magit-svn


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/magit-svn/magit-svn_2.1.1-1.dsc

  More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.example.com.

  Regards,
   Alberto Luaces
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 01:03:26PM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> 1,5 months ago I provided a review of this.
> 
> Are you still interested in getting this package into debian?

Closing as no activity happened.

Feel free to come back if you feel like it.

-- 
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540  .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---

Bug#777651: RFS: syncterm/1.0+dfsg-1 [ITP]

2016-08-16 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna 
control: tags -1 moreinf

Hi,

>* Initial release (Closes: #739035)
lets try a review:

1) std-version is 3.9.8 now

2) debhelper (>= 9), libncurses5-dev (>= 5.9),
 unzip (>= 6.0), libsdl2-dev (>= 2.0.2), libsdl1.2-dev (>= 1.2.15),
 gcc (>= 4:4.9)


do you really need both sdl1.2 and sdl2?
do you really need the version constraints for each dependency?
why gcc is listed here?

please  drop versions when already satisfied in jessie, or wheezy in case you 
want to try
a backport-sloppy (I would really avoid that)

3)
Architecture: i386 amd64
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}, libncurses5 (>= 5.9),
 libsdl2-2.0-0 (>= 2.0.2), libsdl1.2debian (>= 1.2.15)

why only two architectures? why aren't the runtime dependencies picked up with 
shlibs:Depends?
ldd debian/syncterm/usr/bin/syncterm 
linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x7ffeca745000)
libutil.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libutil.so.1 (0x7efc98d79000)
libncurses.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libncurses.so.5 
(0x7efc98b57000)
libtinfo.so.5 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.5 
(0x7efc9892d000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x7efc98729000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x7efc9842)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 
(0x7efc98202000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7efc97e39000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x560b91261000)


at least they seems to be mostly not linked at runtime.

4) rules: to understand the platform you are building, I suggest to use 
dpkg-architecture
dpkg-architecture -qDEB_TARGET_*

5) override_dh_strip:
dh_strip --dbg-package=syncterm-dbg


please avoid dbg packages, they are auto generated now


6) ls src/
build  comio  conio  sbbs3  smblib  syncterm  uifc  xpdev

some (most) of them looks like embedded libraries

7) disabled_cryptlib needs to end in .patch (also in series file you should 
change it)
---
The information above should follow the Patch Tagging Guidelines, please
checkout http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/ to learn about the format. Here
are templates for supplementary fields that you might want to add:

this seems useless

8) the license is non dfsg

 The files sbbs3/zmodem.h and sbbs3/zmodem.c are derived from the
 zmtx/zmrx package available at
 ftp://ftp.netsw.org/net/modem/protocols/zmodem/zmtx-zmrx/
 .
 The licence contained in the archive is:
 .
 MCS allows you to use and copy/modify this source under the following
 conditions:
 .
  - MCS or Jacques Mattheij shall not be liable for any damages arising
from the use of this code
  - the archive must be distributed as a whole leaving version numbers intact.
please do not distribute modifications; mail them back to us for inclusion
in the next release which should follow each other fairly quickly in
the beginning
  - you will not use this software for commercial purposes.
(commercial licenses are available contact us for info)
 .
 As such, this program may not be redistributable.  YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
 .
 If anyone can put me (sh...@sasktel.net) in contact with the authours,
 that would be greatly appreciated.


9) LGPL with no versioning is wrong.

10) many missing licenses: e.g. BSD-4-clause
11) many missing copyrights, e.g.
grep copyright . -Ri

stopping here the review, because of 8, that needs to be fixed upstream I think


automatic checks from check-all-the-things:

$ env PERL5OPT=-m-lib=. cme check dpkg
[lots]
$ codespell --quiet-level=3
[lots]
$ cppcheck -j1 --quiet -f .
[lots]
$ find -type f -iname '*.desktop' -exec desktop-file-validate {} \;
[some]
$ fdupes -q -r . | grep -vE 
'/(\.(git|svn|bzr|hg|sgdrawer)|_(darcs|FOSSIL_)|CVS)(/|$)' | cat -s
[lots]
$ flawfinder -Q -c .
[some]

and so on
$ suspicious-source
./src/uifc/uifc.c
./src/syncterm/ooii.c

# Prevents reproducible builds: https://reproducible-builds.org/
$ grep -rE ' __DATE__|__TIME__|__TIMESTAMP__' .
./src/xpdev/xptime.c:   printf("Rev %s Built " __DATE__ " " __TIME__ " with 
%s\n\n", revision, str);

$ grep -r '/tmp/' .
./src/xpdev/dirwrap.h:  #define _PATH_TMP   "/tmp/"

$ grep -riE 'fixme|todo|hack|xxx+|broken' .
./.pc/disabled_cryptlib/src/build/Common.gmake:  CFLAGS+= 
-D_THREAD_SUID_BROKEN
./3rdp/build/js_src_jsnativestack_cpp.patch:  * FIXME: this function is 
non-portable;
./src/xpdev/sdlfuncs.c:  * This ugly hack attempts to prevent this... 
of course, remote X11
./src/xpdev/SDL_win32_main.c:/* Special Dynamic/Static hackery */
./src/xpdev/SDL_win32_main.c:  keep them open.  This is a hack.. hopefully 
it will be fixed 
./src/xpdev/sockwrap.h:// Borland C++ builder 6 comes with a broken ws2tcpip.h 
header for GCC.
./src/xpdev/sockwrap.h:#define sendsocket   write   /* 
FreeBSD send() is broken */
./src/xpdev/xpdatetime.c:/* TODO: adjust times in 24:xx:xx format */
./src/xpdev/xpprintf.c:  *

Bug#825302: marked as done (RFS: usbguard/0.5.11-1 [ITP])

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:17:48 + (UTC)
with message-id 
<1496426134.25055327.1471346268909.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#825302: RFS: usbguard/0.4-2 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #825302,
regarding RFS: usbguard/0.5.11-1 [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.)


-- 
825302: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825302
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usbguard"

* Package name: usbguard
  Version : 0.4-2
  Upstream Author : Daniel Kopeček 
* URL : https://github.com/dkopecek/usbguard
* License : GPL-2
  Section : utils

It builds those binary packages:

 usbguard   - Framework for implementing USB device authorization policies
 usbguard-dev - Framework for implementing USB device authorization policies

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/usbguard


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/u/usbguard/usbguard_0.4-2.dsc

More information about usbguard can be obtained from
https://dkopecek.github.io/usbguard/.

Changes since the last upload:

* fixing some shortcomings of the package regarding the lintian checks

Regards,
-- 
muri




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,

>i've just uploaded a new version of usbguard to mentors. Its now version
>0.5.11, which removes the build dependency on quex, and uses pegtl
>(pegtl-dev) instead, which i already packaged and Gianfranco kindly
>sponsored. The other unresolved build dependency, json
>(nlohmann-json-dev) i've also packaged and is also sponsored by Gianfranco.
>In addition, the built packages now also include the qt-applet
>(usbguard-applet-qt).



seems good to me, just a nitpick:
rm -rf src/ThirdParty
rm -rf aclocal.m4 config
rm -rf src/ThirdParty


you are removing the same directory twice :p



thanks for your contribution to Debian!
G.--- End Message ---

Bug#827582: marked as done (RFS: lua-torch-xlua/0~20160617-g0dd5f4c-1 [ITP])

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:21:13 + (UTC)
with message-id <83278355.24938116.1471342873729.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#827582: RFS: lua-torch-xlua/0~20160617-g0dd5f4c-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #827582,
regarding RFS: lua-torch-xlua/0~20160617-g0dd5f4c-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.)


-- 
827582: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827582
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lua-torch-xlua"

 * Package name: lua-torch-xlua
   Version : 0~20160617-g0dd5f4c-1
   Upstream Author : Torch Devs
 * URL : github.com/torch/xlua
 * License : BSD-3-Clause
   Section : interpreters

  It builds those binary packages:

lua-torch-xlua - Lua Extension Package for Torch Framework

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/lua-torch-xlua


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lua-torch-xlua/lua-torch-xlua_0~20160617-g0dd5f4c-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:
lua-torch-trepl (0~20160613-g06128f9-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * Initial release. Closes: #826791



-- 
Best,
Lumin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,


>* arch is changed to all
>* updated extended description


good, uploaded

>Debomatic is still failing ...


sad, but I have no time/knowledge to fix it in the next few days...

I hope I'll be able to reproduce locally and send a fix when I find the time

G.--- End Message ---

Bug#834313: RFS: dh-text/1.0 ITP

2016-08-16 Thread Dmitry Bogatov 

> I'd be more than happy to replace the custom recipes in my rules files
> with your dh-text solution, it seems very neat.  Just let me point out a
> copy mistake in the head of dh-text:
>
> # dh_text --- debhelper to create system users
>
> Please give it its own synopsis.

Nice catch. Fixed & uploaded on mentors.

-- 
Accept: text/plain, text/x-diff
Accept-Language: eo,en,ru
X-Web-Site: sinsekvu.github.io

Bug#834322: RFS: phatch/0.2.7.1-3.2 [NMU] [RC]

2016-08-16 Thread Gianfranco Costamagna 
Hi,

>   I am looking for a sponsor for my package "phatch"
>   Changes since the last upload:
>
> * Non-maintainer upload.
>   * debian/patches:
> + Add fix-loading.patch to fix load with latest version of 
>python-imaging

>and python-pil. (Closes: #811184, LP: #1567827)
this looks good to me


>   * Drop debian/phatch.menu>   * debian/control:
> + Use secured links for VCS.
> + Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.8. (no changes needed)
>   * Drop debian/phatch.lintian: it is useless.


usually out of an NMU scope, but since the package is team maintained, I think
we can also get them in, with a cc of the maintainers in this email
(note: I sponsored in deferred/15, please Emilio or Piotr ack the changes!)

thanks for the nice contribution to Debian, and for bringing the package back
into a good shape :)

G.

Bug#834325: marked as done (RFS: lua-torch-graph/0~20160415-g34d7128-1 [ITP])

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:07:12 + (UTC)
with message-id 
<1609059385.25071994.1471342032342.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#834325: RFS: lua-torch-graph/0~20160415-g34d7128-1 
[ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #834325,
regarding RFS: lua-torch-graph/0~20160415-g34d7128-1 [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.)


-- 
834325: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=834325
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lua-torch-graph"

 * Package name: lua-torch-graph
   Version : 0~20160415-g34d7128-1
   Upstream Author : torch developers
 * URL : github.com/torch/graph
 * License : bsd-3-clause
   Section : interpreters

  It builds those binary packages:

lua-torch-graph - Graph Computation Package for Torch Framework

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/lua-torch-graph

  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lua-torch-graph/lua-torch-graph_0~20160415-g34d7128-1.dsc

  More information about hello can be obtained from https://www.example.com.

  Changes since the last upload:

lua-torch-graph (0~20160415-g34d7128-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * Initial release. Closes: #827432


-- 
Best,
Lumin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,

>lua-torch-graph - Graph Computation Package for Torch Framework


in new queue.


G.--- End Message ---

Bug#834332: marked as done (RFS: lua-torch-optim/0~20160808-g6c59c35-1 [ITP])

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 09:23:35 + (UTC)
with message-id 
<1772874509.24995288.1471339415741.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#834332: RFS: lua-torch-optim/0~20160808-g6c59c35-1 
[ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #834332,
regarding RFS: lua-torch-optim/0~20160808-g6c59c35-1 [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.)


-- 
834332: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=834332
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lua-torch-optim"

 * Package name: lua-torch-optim
   Version : 0~20160808-g6c59c35-1
   Upstream Author : torch developers
 * URL : github.com/torch/optim
 * License : bsd-3-clause
   Section : interpreters

  It builds those binary packages:

lua-torch-optim - Numeric Optimization Package for Torch Framework

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/lua-torch-optim

  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lua-torch-optim/lua-torch-optim_0~20160808-g6c59c35-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

lua-torch-optim (0~20160808-g6c59c35-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * Initial release. Closes: #827435


-- 
Best,
Lumin
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,



>  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lua-torch-optim"


LGTM,

done--- End Message ---

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:09:48AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > > Generally speaking, is there a recommended Debian version format for
> > > git snapshots?
> > 1.1+20160816, or ~ instead of +, as usual.
> > Unless you are packaging two different snapshots committed at the same
> > day.
> 
> I have always thought that people kept the git hash so that their
> get-orig-source target can grab it from parsing the Debian version
> string and fetch the corresponding git snapshot.
You don't need get-orig-source when you use the upstream git and gbp
though.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Ghislain Vaillant 

On 16/08/16 07:54, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 07:50:37AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:

For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.


Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
a monotonically increasing component before the hash?


Generally speaking, is there a recommended Debian version format for
git snapshots?

1.1+20160816, or ~ instead of +, as usual.
Unless you are packaging two different snapshots committed at the same
day.


I have always thought that people kept the git hash so that their
get-orig-source target can grab it from parsing the Debian version
string and fetch the corresponding git snapshot.

Ghis

Bug#834433: marked as done (RFS: id3/1.0.0-1 [ITA] (adopt, adopt upstream, fix bugs, refresh packaging))

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:50:59 + (UTC)
with message-id 
<1054726257.25079936.1471337459672.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#834433: RFS: id3/1.0.0-1 [ITA] (adopt, adopt upstream, 
fix bugs, refresh packaging)
has caused the Debian Bug report #834433,
regarding RFS: id3/1.0.0-1 [ITA] (adopt, adopt upstream, fix bugs, refresh 
packaging)
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.)


-- 
834433: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=834433
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for adopting the "id3" package:

* Package name: id3
  Version : 1.0.0-1
  Upstream Author : Peter Pentchev 
* URL : https://devel.ringlet.net/audio/id3/
* License : GPL-2+
  Section : sound

It builds a single binary package that has been tested with Lintian, sbuild,
cme, and most of the programs in check-all-the-things:

  id3   - Editor for ID3 tags

Please note that the *.dsc file also contains a reference to an upstream
signature, id3_1.0.0.orig.tar.gz.asc; it would be nice to have that
included in the final upload once we get to that point.

To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/id3

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/i/id3/id3_1.0.0-1.dsc

More information about id3 can be obtained from 
https://devel.ringlet.net/audio/id3/

Changes since the last upload:

id3 (1.0.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New maintainer.  Closes: #770258
  * Declare compliance with Debian Policy 3.9.8 with no changes.
  * Point the Vcs-* fields to the new collab-maint Git repository and
switch to the HTTPS scheme.
  * Point to the new upstream at devel.ringlet.net in the control,
copyright, and watch files.
  * Convert the copyright file to version 1.0 of the machine-readable
copyright file format and add my debian/* copyright notice.
  * Convert the watch file to format version 4, use pgpmode=auto, and
add the devel.ringlet.net signing key.
  * Turn on all the build hardening options.
  * New upstream release:
- drop all the Debian patches, incorporated upstream
- drop the "no upstream changelog" Lintian override
- pass the empty STRIP variable to the upstream build
- add my upstream copyright notice
  * Add Multi-Arch: foreign to the binary package.
  * Add the debian/upstream/metadata file.
  * Bump the debhelper compatibility level to 10 and override the Lintian
debhelper version warning.

 -- Peter Pentchev   Mon, 15 Aug 2016 17:50:16 +0300

Thanks in advance for your time and attention!

G'luck,
Peter

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers oldoldstable
  APT policy: (500, 'oldoldstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.7.0-rc7-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=bg_BG.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=bg_BG.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,

>  * New maintainer.  Closes: #770258

thanks for the nice work!


Sponsored,

G.--- End Message ---

Bug#834429: marked as done (RFS: arrayfire/3.3.2+dfsg1-4)

2016-08-16 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Tue, 16 Aug 2016 08:30:06 + (UTC)
with message-id <271185032.24974994.1471336206766.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#834429: RFS: arrayfire/3.3.2+dfsg1-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #834429,
regarding RFS: arrayfire/3.3.2+dfsg1-4
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.)


-- 
834429: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=834429
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "arrayfire"

* Package name: arrayfire
  Version : 3.3.2+dfsg1-4
  Upstream Author : ArrayFire
* URL : http://arrayfire.com/
* License : BSD
  Section : science

It builds those binary packages:

  libarrayfire-cpu-dev - Development files for ArrayFire (CPU backend)
  libarrayfire-cpu3 - High performance library for parallel computing 
(CPU backend)

  libarrayfire-dev - Common development files for ArrayFire
  libarrayfire-doc - Common documentation and examples for ArrayFire
  libarrayfire-opencl-dev - Development files for ArrayFire (OpenCL 
backend)
  libarrayfire-opencl3 - High performance library for parallel 
computing (OpenCL backend)
  libarrayfire-unified-dev - Development files for ArrayFire (unified 
backend)
  libarrayfire-unified3 - High performance library for parallel 
computing (unified backend)


To access further information about this package, please visit the 
following URL:


  https://mentors.debian.net/package/arrayfire

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arrayfire/arrayfire_3.3.2+dfsg1-4.dsc


Changes since the last upload:

  * Build with compute library from Boost 1.61.
  * d/rules: disable build of examples.
  * d/rules: remove superfluous nocheck guards.

Regards,
Ghislain Vaillant
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,


>I am looking for a sponsor for my package "arrayfire"

its in :)

G.--- End Message ---

Bug#834313: RFS: dh-text/1.0 ITP

2016-08-16 Thread Ferenc Wágner 
Hi,

I'd be more than happy to replace the custom recipes in my rules files
with your dh-text solution, it seems very neat.  Just let me point out a
copy mistake in the head of dh-text:

# dh_text --- debhelper to create system users

Please give it its own synopsis.
-- 
Thanks,
Feri

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin 
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 07:50:37AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> > > For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
> > > might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
> > > whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.
> > 
> > Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
> > a monotonically increasing component before the hash?
> 
> Generally speaking, is there a recommended Debian version format for
> git snapshots?
1.1+20160816, or ~ instead of +, as usual.
Unless you are packaging two different snapshots committed at the same
day.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Ghislain Vaillant 

On 16/08/16 07:43, Ferenc Wágner wrote:

Sean Whitton  writes:


For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.


Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
a monotonically increasing component before the hash?


Generally speaking, is there a recommended Debian version format for
git snapshots?

Ghis

Re: create Debian Source from GIT repository without tag

2016-08-16 Thread Ferenc Wágner 
Sean Whitton  writes:

> For example, support I'm packaging 0~git.abc123d.  This version number
> might be used because I'm basing my packaging on upstream git commit
> whose hash is uniquely identified by the string 'abc123d'.

Such version numbers won't order correctly.  Didn't you mean to include
a monotonically increasing component before the hash?
-- 
Regards,
Feri