Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 11:43:05AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:44:49AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:39:33AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > > ... > > > Looking for a tool, I've seen "debmake". > > > > > > "debmake -cc" merges the lists for all three authors (18 files), > > > which is misleading. debmake also gives incorrect information > > > for the configure/make scripts in a similar fashion. > > debmake misidentifies MIT/X11 license text as "Expat". see https://invisible-island.net/ncurses/ncurses-license.html#issues_expat -- Thomas E. Dickey https://invisible-island.net ftp://ftp.invisible-island.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1004200: RFS: memtest86+/5.31b+dfsg-3 [QA] -- thorough real-mode memory tester
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "memtest86+": * Package name: memtest86+ Version : 5.31b+dfsg-3 Upstream Author : Samuel Demeulemeester * URL : http://www.memtest.org/ * License : GPL-2 and Expat, GPL-2 * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/debian/memtest86plus Section : misc It builds those binary packages: memtest86+ - thorough real-mode memory tester To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/memtest86+/ Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/memtest86+/memtest86+_5.31b+dfsg-3.dsc Changes since the last upload: memtest86+ (5.31b+dfsg-3) experimental; urgency=medium . * QA upload. * d/control: replace genisoimage build-dep with xorriso * removed d/patches/make-iso-reproducible * d/patches/use-xorriso-instead-cdrkit.patch: cdrkit is not supported anymore, use xorriso instead also aded the modification of date part to make the build reproducible (Closes: #982240) * use SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH instead of add BUILD_DATE in d/rules * d/rules: - use dh_auto_build instead of make - restore a change for kfreebsd Regards, -- Fabio Fantoni OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
- Original Message - | From: "Thomas Dickey" | To: 1003...@bugs.debian.org | Cc: 1003770-submit...@bugs.debian.org | Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2022 11:43:05 AM | Subject: Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals | On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:44:49AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: |> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:39:33AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: |> ... |> > Looking for a tool, I've seen "debmake". |> > |> > "debmake -cc" merges the lists for all three authors (18 files), |> > which is misleading. debmake also gives incorrect information |> > for the configure/make scripts in a similar fashion. | | debmake misidentifies MIT/X11 license text as "Expat". | (It also misleads on "install-sh"). see this: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2018-09/msg1.html -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://ftp.invisible-island.net
Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:44:49AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:39:33AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: > ... > > Looking for a tool, I've seen "debmake". > > > > "debmake -cc" merges the lists for all three authors (18 files), > > which is misleading. debmake also gives incorrect information > > for the configure/make scripts in a similar fashion. debmake misidentifies MIT/X11 license text as "Expat". (It also misleads on "install-sh"). licensecheck does better (identifies the correct license), but gets confused about extracting license text from some commonly-used comment forms. -- Thomas E. Dickey https://invisible-island.net ftp://ftp.invisible-island.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1003855: RFS: kotlin-mode/20210917git0-1 [RFP] -- Major mode for kotlin
Control: tag -1 moreinfo I'm happy to see that my feeling that the technical side of your work was good was proven correct! It builds, dh-elpa tests pass, autopkgtests are good, and it's lintian clean. Please untag moreinfo when the issues raised in the previous email have been resolved. Apologies if my reply didn't get past your spam filter, I'm still working through the capabilities of my ISP's smarthost replay. A copy of the email is available at https://bugs.debian.org/1003855 If you'd like clarification about anything, please let me know.
Bug#1004134: RFS: ddupdate/0.6.6-1 -- Tool updating DNS data for dynamic IP addresses
On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 14:41:09 +0100 Bastian Germann wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:08:31 +0100 Alec Leamas wrote: > > Changes since the last upload: > > > > ddupdate (0.6.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium > > . > > * New upstream bugfix release > > * Drop upstreamed FTBFS setup.py patch > > > > This is minor update to a standard python package, nothing complicated. > > Thanks for providing this update! > On 22/01/2022 16:12, Bastian Germann wrote: > Am 22.01.22 um 15:36 schrieb Debian FTP Masters: >> Version check failed: >> Your upload included the source package ddupdate, version 0.6.6-1, >> however unstable already has version 0.6.6-1. >> Uploads to unstable must have a higher version than present in unstable. > > Adam was faster than me... Thanks to all of you for uploading! Cheers! --alec
Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 10:39:33AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: ... > Looking for a tool, I've seen "debmake". > > "debmake -cc" merges the lists for all three authors (18 files), > which is misleading. debmake also gives incorrect information > for the configure/make scripts in a similar fashion. https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ says that a single paragraph "may" be used in this instance, but does not require it. In the merges noted above, the result is misleading, hence not an improvement. -- Thomas E. Dickey https://invisible-island.net ftp://ftp.invisible-island.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 03:54:37PM +0100, Bastian Germann wrote: > On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 09:31:08 -0500 Thomas Dickey wrote: > > Changes for the initial release: > > > > luit (2.0.20220111-1) unstable; urgency=low > > . > >* Initial package release (Closes: #1003130) > > > > Regards, > > d/copyright: Juliusz Chroboczek's copyright notice is only mentioned for one > of the files. odd, but I never noticed that, when copying the information from x11-utils. It's incorrect there. His name appears on 10 files: charset.c:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek charset.h:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek iso2022.c:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek iso2022.h:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek luit.c:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek luit.h:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek parser.c:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek parser.h:4:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek sys.c:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek sys.h:5:Copyright (c) 2001 by Juliusz Chroboczek Looking for a tool, I've seen "debmake". "debmake -cc" merges the lists for all three authors (18 files), which is misleading. debmake also gives incorrect information for the configure/make scripts in a similar fashion. > Several other files include this as well. Tomohiro KUBOTA's copyright is also > misrepresented. I see his name on two files: other.c other.h However, inspecting the change history from XFree86, https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/ajax/xfree86 git://people.freedesktop.org/~libv/xfree86 there are changes to these: charset.c charset.h iso2022.c iso2022.h > I have invited you to https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit. Please use > thatrepo goingforward. > > Thanks, > Bastian > -- Thomas E. Dickey https://invisible-island.net ftp://ftp.invisible-island.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1003770: RFS: luit/2.0.20220111-1 [ITP] -- locale and ISO 2022 support for Unicode terminals
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 09:31:08 -0500 Thomas Dickey wrote: Changes for the initial release: luit (2.0.20220111-1) unstable; urgency=low . * Initial package release (Closes: #1003130) Regards, d/copyright: Juliusz Chroboczek's copyright notice is only mentioned for one of the files. Several other files include this as well. Tomohiro KUBOTA's copyright is also misrepresented. I have invited you to https://salsa.debian.org/debian/luit. Please use thatrepo goingforward. Thanks, Bastian
Bug#1003406: RFS: simple-scan/40.7-1 -- Simple Scanning Utility
Control: tags -1 moreinfo On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 02:56:46 +0100 Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 06:49:08PM +0100, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote: >Package name: simple-scan >Version : 40.7-1 > simple-scan (40.7-1) unstable; urgency=medium > . >* New upstream release. >* debian/copyright: > - Add year 2022 to myself. >* Declare compliance with Debian Policy 4.6.0.1 (No changes needed). >* New .gitignore. Hi! It fails to build: ../data/meson.build:11:5: ERROR: Function does not take positional arguments. Please untag moreinfo when you have provided a fixed version.
Re: Do autopkgtest for non-listed architectures prevent migration?
Am 22.01.2022 um 15:06 teilte Markus Blatt mit: Hi, I limit the architecture to only 64bit architectures by having "Architecture: amd64 arm64 ia64 mips64el ppc64el" in d/control. Yet this does not seem to respected for autopkgtest as it still tries to run the test for i386 and armhf. The d/control is for building the package, it will be ignored by the autopkg test. The control file for the autopkg test knows the same field, see https://salsa.debian.org/ci-team/autopkgtest/-/blob/master/doc/README.package-tests.rst H. -- sigfault OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Do autopkgtest for non-listed architectures prevent migration?
Hi, still an newbie and so many questions. Please bear with me. My package opm-common list as one of the blocking migration that autopkgtest fails for armhf and i386. https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=opm-common The reason is that there are no packages built for these architecture as I limit the architecture to only 64bit architectures by having "Architecture: amd64 arm64 ia64 mips64el ppc64el" in d/control. Yet this does not seem to respected for autopkgtest as it still tries to run the test for i386 and armhf. Does that mean that no packages will migrate for any architecture? Then I would need to change this. Or will the binaries for passing architectures migrate? For why 32bit architectures are not listed: Many tests of the buildsystem of the upstream package fail because of Y2K38 bugs. Upstream does not see that as a problem as running a simulation on these architectures or simulations of just 16 years is not a goal. Fixing this in Debian would be much hard work and might not be worth it. Which is why would like to prevent it. If limiting the architectures to 64bit is a problem an alternative would be to skip the tests of the build system on 32bit architectures. I just need to find out how to do this. Markus
Bug#1004134: marked as done (RFS: ddupdate/0.6.6-1 -- Tool updating DNS data for dynamic IP addresses)
Your message dated Sat, 22 Jan 2022 14:41:09 +0100 with message-id <233d116a-0323-facd-003f-b4cb175e2...@debian.org> and subject line Re: RFS: ddupdate/0.6.6-1 -- Tool updating DNS data for dynamic IP addresses has caused the Debian Bug report #1004134, regarding RFS: ddupdate/0.6.6-1 -- Tool updating DNS data for dynamic IP addresses 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.) -- 1004134: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1004134 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 "ddupdate": * Package name: ddupdate Version : 0.6.6-1 Upstream Author : https://github.com/leamas/ddupdate/issues * URL : https://github.com/leamas/ddupdate * License : Expat * Vcs : https://github.com/leamas/ddupdate/tree/debian Section : net It builds one binary packages: ddupdate - Tool updating DNS data for dynamic IP addresses More info at https://mentors.debian.net/package/ddupdate/ or using: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/ddupdate/ddupdate_0.6.6-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: ddupdate (0.6.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream bugfix release * Drop upstreamed FTBFS setup.py patch This is minor update to a standard python package, nothing complicated. Regards, -- Alec Leamas --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:08:31 +0100 Alec Leamas wrote: Changes since the last upload: ddupdate (0.6.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream bugfix release * Drop upstreamed FTBFS setup.py patch This is minor update to a standard python package, nothing complicated. Thanks for providing this update!--- End Message ---
Bug#1003849: marked as done (RFS: dwm/6.3-0.1 [NMU] -- dynamic window manager)
Your message dated Sat, 22 Jan 2022 14:09:01 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: RFS: dwm/6.3-0.1 [NMU] -- dynamic window manager has caused the Debian Bug report #1003849, regarding RFS: dwm/6.3-0.1 [NMU] -- dynamic window manager 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.) -- 1003849: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1003849 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 "dwm": * Package name: dwm Version : 6.3-0.1 Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream] * URL : https://dwm.suckless.org/ * License : Expat * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/hle/dwm Section : x11 It builds those binary packages: dwm - dynamic window manager To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/dwm/ Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/dwm/dwm_6.3-0.1.dsc Changes since the last upload: dwm (6.3-0.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload. * New upstream release. * debian/local/*: - Refresh config files for new upstream release. * debian/patches/*: - Refresh patches for new upstream release. * debian/rules: - Fix FTCBFS by letting dh_auto_build pass cross tools to make, thanks to Helmut Grohne for the patch (Closes: #901091). Regards, -- Matteo Bini --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 20:47:46 + Matteo Bini wrote: Changes since the last upload: dwm (6.3-0.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload. * New upstream release. * debian/local/*: - Refresh config files for new upstream release. * debian/patches/*: - Refresh patches for new upstream release. * debian/rules: - Fix FTCBFS by letting dh_auto_build pass cross tools to make, thanks to Helmut Grohne for the patch (Closes: #901091). Thanks. You seem to care more about the package than the maintainer. Please ask him if he would like to make you an Uploader.--- End Message ---
Bug#1003612: marked as done (RFS: libview/0.6.6-3 [ITA] -- VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets)
Your message dated Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:19:56 +0100 with message-id <46f0ec05-bae5-8517-ac27-10b113315...@gmx.de> and subject line Re: Bug#1003612: RFS: libview/0.6.6-3 [ITA] -- VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets has caused the Debian Bug report #1003612, regarding RFS: libview/0.6.6-3 [ITA] -- VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets 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.) -- 1003612: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1003612 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 "libview": * Package name: libview Version : 0.6.6-3 Upstream Author : Alex Graveley, Christian Hammond , Philip Langdale, Régis Duchesne * URL : http://view.sourceforge.net * License : MIT * Vcs : http://git.brad-smith.co.uk/?p=debian/pkg-libview.git Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libview2 - VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets libview-dev - VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets libview2-dbg - VMware's Incredibly Exciting Widgets To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/libview/ Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libv/libview/libview_0.6.6-3.dsc Changes since the last upload: libview (0.6.6-3) unstable; urgency=medium . [ Ileana Dumitrescu ] . * New maintainer (Closes: #674884) * debian/control: Updated to dh version 13 * debian/copyright: Updated to dep5 version 1.0 format * debian/compat: Removed to update dh version * debian/rules: Updated to use dh $@ and run on all architectures (Closes: #727446, #744625, #976498) . [ Andreas Moog ] . * debian/patches: Added patch to fix libview.pc (Closes: #650253) Regards, -- Ileana Dumitrescu --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 14:09:18 + Ileana Dumitrescu wrote: > So you do not use it? Why would you then adopt it? No I do not currently use libview. The debian manual suggests that new members adopt orphaned packages in order to become a debian maintainer. I have been porting packages that are not working with RISC-V and adopting them if they are orphaned. Since I saw libview was orphaned in addition to not building with RISC-V, I thought I should also adopt the package. > Should this RFS then be closed and the ITA set back to orphaned? If it is best for debian that libview remains as a debian package, then I would like to be the maintainer since I would have the most recent packaging updates. Ileana Ilena, I do not think it is a good idea to keep a package alive when nobody (including the prospective maintainer) uses it. I am going to request a removal.--- End Message ---
Bug#1002649: RFS: check-mk-agent/1:2.0.0p17+dfsg-4 [ITP] -- general purpose monitoring plugin for retrieving data
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:55:38 +0100 Bastian Germann wrote: Control: tags -1 moreinfo On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 17:24:19 +0100 Juri Grabowski wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "check-mk-agent": > > * Package name: check-mk-agent > Version : 1:2.0.0p17+dfsg-4 I have not looked at the package. Just by looking at the RFS, the -4 revision is wrong for the initial version. It has to be -1. While you are changing your package according to the remarks, please always keep the -1. When you have fixed this, please untag moreinfo. Note that the new -1 version is only available on salsa, not on mentors. I am not claiming to sponsor this.
Bug#1004024: RFS: fig2sxd/0.23-2 -- convert XFig files to OpenOffice.org format
Control: tags -1 moreinfo On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:00:12 +0100 =?UTF-8?Q?Hilmar_Preu=c3=9fe?= wrote: Am 20.01.2022 um 08:49 teilte Alexander Bürger mit: Hi, > I do not see any solution to this problem: > > - rewriting the commit history on gitlab is not an option > Why not? You just have to remove the tag and rewrite the commit message. Then fix the debian/changelog and try again. > - decreasing the version number (debian revision) is not an option > Why not? We just have to make sure that 0.23-2 & 0.23-1 have been removed from Debian Mentors upload queue. Please untag moreinfo when you have provided 0.23-1.
Bug#1001769: Missing ITP
On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 01:10:41 +0100 Bastian Germann wrote: On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 09:55:09 +0100 Fabien Steinmetz wrote: > Done, see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1002004 That is not an ITP for synkron. When you have fixed that, please untag moreinfo.
