Bug#955791: RFS: libkqueue/2.3.1-1 -- cross-platform library for kernel event notification
Hi Boyuan, On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 6:06 PM Boyuan Yang wrote: > > X-Debbugs-CC: m...@heily.com > > Hi Mark, > > On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 18:10:30 -0400 Mark Heily wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libkqueue" > > > > * Package name: libkqueue > >Version : 2.3.1-1 > >Upstream Author : Mark Heily > > * URL : https://github.com/mheily/libkqueue/wiki > > * License : BSD-2-clause > > * Vcs : > https://github.com/mheily/debian-packages/tree/libkqueue > >Section : libs > > > > It builds those binary packages: > > > > libkqueue0 - cross-platform library for kernel event notification > > libkqueue-dev - Development files for libkqueue > > > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > > following URL: > > > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/libkqueue > > > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > > > dget -x > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libk/libkqueue/libkqueue_2.3.1-1.dsc > > > > Changes since the last upload: > > > >* New upstream release > > > > Regards, > > Could you please also acknowledge the previous NMU made onto libkqueue on > Debian, as indicated at https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/libkqueue ? With the > missing changelog information added, I can help to sponsor this upload. > I've uploaded a new version to Mentors that includes the missing changelog entry. Thanks! - Mark
Re: Ouput of reprotest under salsa-ci
Hi Iñaki, On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:53:26AM +0200, Inaki Malerba wrote: > Hi Elías, > > There's a tool to compare this kind of differences called Diffoscope[0]. > > You can download both packages from the Salsa CI pipeline (from the > build job and from the reprotest job) and use Diffoscope to compare them. > > Also, you can enable 2 features on the Salsa CI pipeline to help you > debugging this: you can run diffoscope directly on the reprotest job [1] > which will tell you more details about the problem directly on the log, > and you can split reprotest variations [2] into different jobs to > identify which one is causing the problems on your package. > > Abrazos! > > > 0_ https://diffoscope.org/ > 1_ > https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#running-reprotest-with-diffoscope > 2_ > https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#breaking-up-the-reprotest-job-into-the-different-variations Thanks for your help! Listo. ¡Muchas gracias! :) Best regards. Elías Alejandro
Bug#956416: RFS: sipxtapi/3.3.0~test17-3.1 [NMU, RC] -- SIP stack, RTP media framework and codecs
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sipxtapi" * Package name: sipxtapi Version : 3.3.0~test17-3.1 Upstream Author : sipXtapi community * URL : http://www.sipxtapi.org * License : LGPL-2.1 * Vcs : https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-voip/sipxtapi.git Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libsipxtapi - SIP stack, RTP media framework and codecs libsipxtapi-dev - SIP stack, RTP media framework and codecs (headers) libsipxtapi-doc - SIP stack, RTP media framework and codecs (API documentation) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/sipxtapi Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sipxtapi/sipxtapi_3.3.0~test17-3.1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Non-maintainer upload. * Fix FTBFS. (Closes: #954547) -- Regards Sudip
Bug#956414: RFS: eudev/3.2.9-7+debian1: [ITP] /dev/ and hotplug management daemon
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "eudev" * Package name: eudev Version : 3.2.9-7+debian1 Upstream Author : NA * URL : https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/eudev.git * License : GPL-2+ * Vcs : Section : admin It builds those binary packages: eudev- /dev/ and hotplug management daemon libeudev1- libeudev shared library libeudev-dev - libeudev development files eudev-udeb - libeudev shared library (minimal version) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/eudev Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/eudev/eudev_3.2.9-7+debian1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Initial Debian Release (closes: #765971) Thanks!
Re: Uploaded packages not showing up on mentors.debian.net
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 1:10 PM Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:55:32PM -0400, Aaron Boxer wrote: > > Hello! > > > > Is there a delay between when I upload a new package and when it shows > > up on the web site? I just uploaded a new package but I don't see it in > "My > > Packages". > Yes. Wait for the confirmation email (assuming you did everything > correctly). > Great, thanks! > > -- > WBR, wRAR >
Re: Uploaded packages not showing up on mentors.debian.net
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:55:32PM -0400, Aaron Boxer wrote: > Hello! > > Is there a delay between when I upload a new package and when it shows > up on the web site? I just uploaded a new package but I don't see it in "My > Packages". Yes. Wait for the confirmation email (assuming you did everything correctly). -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Uploaded packages not showing up on mentors.debian.net
Hello! Is there a delay between when I upload a new package and when it shows up on the web site? I just uploaded a new package but I don't see it in "My Packages". Thanks very much, Aaron Boxer
Bug#954760: RFS: lighttpd/1.4.53-5 {SPU, RC] -- backport security, bug fixes from upstream
Control: tags -1 +moreinfo X-Debbugs-CC; gs-debian@gluelogic.com Hi Glenn, On Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:09:15 -0400 Glenn Strauss wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: important > > Dear mentors, > > Please release lighttpd 1.4.53-5 as a stable-update to Buster. > > I am a lighttpd developer (upstream) and have prepared lighttpd 1.4.53-5 > on the 'buster' branch at > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/lighttpd/-/tree/buster > The debian/changelog entry for 1.4.53-5 is currently marked UNRELEASED. > > The patches added to debian/patches do the following: > * backport security, bug, portability fixes from lighttpd 1.4.54, 1.4.55 > > Numerous important fixes have been backported to Debian Buster package > for lighttpd 1.4.53, including: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=954759 > > This is my first submission to sponsorship-requests, so your guidance is > appreciated. For any updates to packages in Stable, an approval from Debian Stable Release Managers (Release Team) is necessary. Please consider opening a buster-pu bug against release.debian.org (see examples at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=release.debian.org and instructions at https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#upload-stable ) and get their approval first. When communicating with the Release Team, please mention that you are from the lighttpd upstream. After approved by the Release Team, I can help to sponsor this upload. -- Thanks, Boyuan Yang signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#956395: RFS: openscap/1.2.17-0.1 [NMU, RC] -- Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "openscap" * Package name: openscap Version : 1.2.17-0.1 Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : http://www.open-scap.org/ * License : [fill in] * Vcs : None Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libopenscap-dev - Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards libopenscap8 - Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards python3-openscap - Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards libopenscap-perl - Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards libopenscap8-dbg - Set of libraries enabling integration of the SCAP line of standards To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/openscap Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/openscap/openscap_1.2.17-0.1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Non-maintainer upload * New upstream release This is the first version with full python3 compatibility. * Update package to python3 closes: #937211 * d/control - Change to debhelper-compat - Bump to debhelper 10 Being able to parallelize build - Remove autotools-dev and dh_autotools from build dependencies * Add apt-1.9.0.patch closes: #930673 * Add apt-1.9.11.patch use pkgCacheFile instead of mmap Patches from Julian Andres Klode on Ubuntu * Add use_sys-xattr.patch closes: #953916 also remove libattr1-dev as build-dependency * Disable 010-install-cpe-oval.patch * Add d/source/lintian-override for file with very_long_line_lenghts_in_source_file * Add d/libopenscap8.lintian-overrides for man page with long line length * d/missing-sources - Update jquery.js - Add bootstrap.js The changelog became a bit longer than I expected. Though I believe it is only the debhelper part that is excessive. The bump to debhelper 10 was so i could take advantage to parallelize the build. It also meant I could clean up some no longer needed build-dependencies. I also made a lintian-override because of a long line in manpage, not sure if I should have split up the line instead. Regards, Håvard
Re: package prevented from migration due to "regression", but regression bug is fixed
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 04:51:01PM +0200, Stephen Sinclair wrote: > An update to my package siconos was recently uploaded to fix some > outstanding bugs. However, I have noticed that it has been blocked > and prevented from migration to testing: > > https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=siconos > > The reason given is "introduces new bugs", however the bug indicated, > #954497, is one that was _fixed_ by my update. That's because you didn't close the bug in the upload. * debian/rules: Remove use of ccache. (Closes: #945613 #954497) > Is this not the correct syntax for fixing multiple bugs? you'd need a comma to list more than bug after the 'Closes:', so it wasn't closed. > If I manually close the bug, will it then migrate automatically? yes, that's exactly what you'll need to do. Also, it would be better if you closed it with a fixed version as well. -- 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
package prevented from migration due to "regression", but regression bug is fixed
Hello mentors, An update to my package siconos was recently uploaded to fix some outstanding bugs. However, I have noticed that it has been blocked and prevented from migration to testing: https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=siconos The reason given is "introduces new bugs", however the bug indicated, #954497, is one that was _fixed_ by my update. I created a fresh sbuild chroot and rebuilt the package without errors, moreover it appears to build fine on buildd. It is possible my update simply did not trigger a close on the bug? In the changelog I wrote, "(Closes: #945613 #954497)" Is this not the correct syntax for fixing multiple bugs? If I manually close the bug, will it then migrate automatically? thanks, Steve
Bug#956386: RFS: genwqe-user/4.0.18-3.1 [NMU, RC] -- accelerated libz implementation (development headers)
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: important Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "genwqe-user" * Package name: genwqe-user Version : 4.0.18-3.1 Upstream Author : * URL : https://github.com/ibm-genwqe/genwqe-user/releases * License : Apache-2.0 * Vcs : None Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libzadc-dev - accelerated libz implementation (development headers) libzadc4 - accelerated libz implementation (Accelerated Data Compression/ADC) genwqe-tools - utilities for accelerated libz implementation To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/genwqe-user Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/genwqe-user/genwqe-user_4.0.18-3.1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Non-maintainer upload. * Fix FTBFS. (Closes: #954611) -- Regards Sudip
Bug#954186: marked as done (RFS: libxtrxdsp/0.0.1+git20190830.eec2864-2 [ITP] -- Library of DSP functions, developed for XTRX SDR)
Your message dated Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:30:03 +0200 with message-id <20200410113003.gb2357...@msg.df7cb.de> and subject line Re: Bug#954186: RFS: libxtrxdsp/0.0.1+git20190830.eec2864-2 -- Library of DSP functions, developed for XTRX SDR has caused the Debian Bug report #954186, regarding RFS: libxtrxdsp/0.0.1+git20190830.eec2864-2 [ITP] -- Library of DSP functions, developed for XTRX SDR 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.) -- 954186: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=954186 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, Hamradio Team, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libxtrxdsp" * Package name: libxtrxdsp Version : 0.0.1+git20190830.eec2864-2 Upstream Author : Sergey Kostanbaev * URL : https://github.com/xtrx-sdr/libxtrxdsp * License : LGPL-2.1+ * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian-hamradio-team/libxtrxdsp Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libxtrxdsp-dev - Library of DSP functions, developed for XTRX SDR: development libxtrxdsp0 - Library of DSP functions, developed for XTRX SDR To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/libxtrxdsp Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libx/libxtrxdsp/libxtrxdsp_0.0.1+git20190830.eec2864-2.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New patch with syntax error fix. * Bump standards version. The pipeline for this release is failed due to Lintian's false positive error (see bug #954146). Regards, -- Sepi Gair --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Re: Sepi Gair 2020-04-09 > On 19/03/2020 09:44, Christoph Berg wrote: > > I suggest we wait with this upload until the -1 version has passed > > NEW. > > Hello, Christoph. It's passed. Uploaded. Christoph--- End Message ---
Bug#956290: marked as done (RFS: xtrx-dkms/0.0.1+git20190320.5ae3a3e-1 [ITP] -- XTRX PCI driver for linux)
Your message dated Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:26:38 +0200 with message-id <20200410112638.ga2357...@msg.df7cb.de> and subject line Re: Bug#956290: RFS: xtrx-dkms/0.0.1+git20190320.5ae3a3e-1 [ITP] -- XTRX PCI driver for linux has caused the Debian Bug report #956290, regarding RFS: xtrx-dkms/0.0.1+git20190320.5ae3a3e-1 [ITP] -- XTRX PCI driver for linux 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.) -- 956290: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=956290 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, HAM Radio Team, I am looking again for a sponsor for my package "xtrx-dkms" * Package name: xtrx-dkms Version : 0.0.1+git20190320.5ae3a3e-1 Upstream Author : Sergey Kostanbaev * URL : https://github.com/xtrx-sdr/xtrx_linux_pcie_drv * License : GPL-2.0+ * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian-hamradio-team/xtrx-dkms Section : kernel It builds those binary packages: xtrx-dkms - XTRX PCI driver for linux To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/xtrx-dkms Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xtrx-dkms/xtrx-dkms_0.0.1+git20190320.5ae3a3e-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Initial release (Closes: #945156) This package was oreviously rejected due to the incorrect `debian/copyright`. I fixed this without bumping the package's version since it's not yet in the unstable. Please tell me if I requesting a re-upload wrong way. Regards, -- Sepi Gair --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Re: Sepi Gair 2020-04-09 > This package was oreviously rejected due to the incorrect > `debian/copyright`. I fixed this without bumping the package's version since > it's not yet in the unstable. Please tell me if I requesting a re-upload > wrong way. I deleted the old git tag and pushed a new one. Uploaded & cheers, Christoph--- End Message ---
Re: Ouput of reprotest under salsa-ci
Hi Elías, El 10/4/20 a las 01:05, Elías Alejandro escribió: > Hello all, > I have a dummy question about the output of reprotest under the salsa-ci > process. > -How can I interpret or understand the following output log?: > > Binary files > > /builds/elias-guest/gpick/debian/output/reprotest/control/source-root/gpick-dbgsym_0.2.6~rc1-3+salsaci_amd64.deb > > and > > /builds/elias-guest/gpick/debian/output/reprotest/experiment-1/source-root/gpick-dbgsym_0.2.6~rc1-3+salsaci_amd64.deb > differ > > The complete log is[1] I've downloaded the artifacts to look into the files > and > I've found that the binary executables are differ with pkgdiff but with hex > numbers. > Do you know where are the 'diff issues' for fix them? or > How can I get a complete information about them? There's a tool to compare this kind of differences called Diffoscope[0]. You can download both packages from the Salsa CI pipeline (from the build job and from the reprotest job) and use Diffoscope to compare them. Also, you can enable 2 features on the Salsa CI pipeline to help you debugging this: you can run diffoscope directly on the reprotest job [1] which will tell you more details about the problem directly on the log, and you can split reprotest variations [2] into different jobs to identify which one is causing the problems on your package. Abrazos! 0_ https://diffoscope.org/ 1_ https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#running-reprotest-with-diffoscope 2_ https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#breaking-up-the-reprotest-job-into-the-different-variations -- - ina signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#956360: RFS: libbpf/0.0.6-1 -- eBPF helper library (development files)
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libbpf" * Package name: libbpf Version : 0.0.6-1 Upstream Author : NA * URL : https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf * License : LGPL-2.1 or BSD-2-Clause * Vcs : https://github.com/sudipm-mukherjee/libbpf Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libbpf-dev - eBPF helper library (development files) libbpf0 - eBPF helper library (shared library) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/libbpf Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libb/libbpf/libbpf_0.0.6-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Package from github. (Closes: #948041) Note: This is a re-upload to NEW. Previous upload was rejected by ftp-masters becuase of a missing licence information in debian/copyright. debian/copyright has been redone for this upload adding all the missing information. -- Regards Sudip
