Bug#1029465: RFS: swapspace/1.18-1 -- dynamic swap space manager

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "swapspace":

 * Package name : swapspace
   Version  : 1.18-1
   Upstream contact : Jacob Adams 
 * URL  : https://github.com/Tookmund/Swapspace
 * License  : GPL-2+
 * Vcs  : https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund/swapspace-deb
   Section  : admin

The source builds the following binary packages:

  swapspace - dynamic swap space manager

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

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

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

  dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.18-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

 swapspace (1.18-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * New upstream version
   * Bump standards version to 4.6.2, no changes required

Regards,
-- 
  Jacob Adams

Bug#961246: RFS: swapspace/1.17-1 -- dynamic swap space manager

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

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

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.17-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams 
 * URL : https://github.com/Tookmund/Swapspace
 * License : GPL-2+
 * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund/swapspace-deb
   Section : admin

It builds those binary packages:

  swapspace - dynamic swap space manager

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

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

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

  dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.17-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

   * New upstream version
   * Bumped debhelper compat to 13
   * Move VCS to standard salsa namespace, instead of -guest

Regards,
Jacob



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#954349: Package Update

[Jacob Adams]

After uploading to mentors I realized I had missed some lintian tags (I didn't
have experimental tags enabled in my local version) and one of my changelog
lines was incorrect. Please upload the latest version, as available on salsa.d.o
or from mentors.d.o.

swapspace (1.16.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream version
  * Bumped debhelper compat to 12
- Use debhelper-compat Build-Depends instead of a compat file
  * Bumped 'Standards-Version' to 4.5.0
- Add NEWS file to docs to comply with 12.7
  * Add Rules-Requires-Root: no

 -- Jacob Adams   Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:38:10 -0400



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#954349: RFS: swapspace/1.16.1-1 -- dynamic swap space manager

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

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

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.16.1-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams 
 * URL : https://github.com/Tookmund/Swapspace
 * License : GPL-2+
 * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund-guest/swapspace-deb
   Section : admin

It builds those binary packages:

  swapspace - dynamic swap space manager

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

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

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

  dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.16.1-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

   * New upstream version
   * Add support for BTRFS
   * Enforce correct permissions on swapfile directory
   * Bumped debhelper compat to 12
   * Bumped 'Standards-Version' to 4.5.0 (No changes required)
   * Add NEWS file to docs

Regards,
Jacob



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

How to enforce non-standard permissions on files/directories

[Jacob Adams]

(Please CC me as I am not subscribed)

I'm updating swapspace and figured I should enforce correct permissions on the
swapfile directory. By default, debhelper seems to install directories as 755
which is what Debian Policy says to do. However, the swapfile directory
(/var/lib/swapspace) probably should be 700, because no one but root has any
need to access it.

In 1.14-1 I removed the postinst script that enforced these permissions,
assuming that upstream changes to enforce these permissions when installing
would work. This was incorrect, so I will need to enforce these permissions
differently. (And yes, I should have confirmed that this worked before removing
this script, my mistake)

I looked into how other packages do this and found NetworkManager, which uses a
simple chmod:

https://sources.debian.org/src/network-manager/1.14.6-2+deb10u1/debian/network-manager.postinst/#L28

Swapspace originally used dpkg-statoverride:
https://sources.debian.org/src/swapspace/1.10-4/debian/postinst/

Lintian warns me about using dpkg-statoverride without checking if the override
exists first
(https://lintian.debian.org/tags/unconditional-use-of-dpkg-statoverride.html ),
and policy says "There is one type of situation, though, where calls to
dpkg-statoverride would be needed in the maintainer scripts, and that involves
packages which use dynamically allocated user or group ids."  (10.9.1) This
would imply that I shouldn't use it for changing permissions in this way, though
the beginning of this section also says "This section is not intended as policy,
but as a description of the use of dpkg-statoverride."

So which approach should I be using? chmod or dpkg-statoverride? Or should I
just leave the permissions as they are?

There's no security issue here, as swapspace ensures all files it creates are
only readable/writable by root, and any user can see what swapspace is currently
used with the swapon command.

Thanks,
Jacob

Bug#897642: RFS: gpgme1.0/1.11.1-1~bpo9+1

[Jacob Adams]

> On Sep 1, 2018, at 12:45, Roger Shimizu  wrote:
> 
> I compiled this pkg under stretch, and meet the following error.
> 
> 
> cJSON.c:45:20: fatal error: gpgrt.h: No such file or directory
> # include 
>^
> 
> 
> I see you updated libgpg-error to 1.29, so I tried to compile with
> latest backported sid version, 1.32, and it succeeded.
> So I updated D-B on libgpg-error to >= 1.29.
> 

Should’ve mentioned that it required a newer version of libgpg-error sorry. 
Thanks for fixing that and updating the backport. 

> I uploaded this backported pkg to DELAYED=6.
> So If you don't like the backports upload, just kindly cancel it.
> 

Thank you!
Looking into why you did a gnupg2 backport I probably should use that too, to 
support newer ECC keys.

Thanks again,
Jacob

Bug#897642: RFS: gpgme1.0/1.11.1-1~bpo9+1

[Jacob Adams]

control: tag -1 -moreinfo

> On Sep 1, 2018, at 04:49, Roger Shimizu  wrote:
> 
> control: tag -1 +moreinfo
> 
> Dear Jacob,
> 
>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 3:27 AM, Jacob Adams  wrote:
>> Package: sponsorship-requests
>> Severity: normal
>> 
>>  Dear mentors,
>> 
>>  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gpgme1.0"
> 
> Thanks for your interest in contribution to debian!
> 
>>  Changes since the last upload:
>> 
>> gpgme1.0 (1.11.1-1~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium
>> 
>>  * Rebuild for stretch-backports.
>> 
>> -- Jacob Adams   Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:13:54 -0400
>> 
>> 
>> This package will also require libgpgerror, which you can find here:
>> 
>> https://mentors.debian.net/package/libgpg-error
>> 
>> https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libg/libgpg-error/libgpg-error_1.29-4~bpo9+1.dsc
>> 
>> It already has an RFS: #897045
>> 
>> I would like to be able to use the latest version of GPGME in my GSoC
>> 2018 project. In order to do that I would prefer to use a backport as
>> the PGP Clean Room CD is based off of stretch.
> 
> I see the project seems already released as beta [1], so maybe there's
> no need to do this backports upload?

My project does require a newer version of GPGME than is shipped in stretch. 
However, I didn’t want to wait on the backport, so I’ve been including the deb 
files directly in my build:
https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund-guest/make-pgp-clean-room/tree/master/resources/config/packages.chroot

> 
> And what's the benefit for this backports pkg? Any new feature or
> bugfix you're particularly interested in?

There has been significant improvement in GPGME’s python binding since stretch, 
and my project relies on these features, such as the new key generation 
function. 

It would be nice to be able to pull these packages from backports instead of 
including them directly. 

Thanks,
Jacob

Bug#905791: RFS: swapspace/1.14-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

On 08/09/2018 04:25 PM, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:43:22PM -0400, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>  * Package name: swapspace
>>Version : 1.14-1
> 
>>   swapspace (1.14-1) unstable; urgency=medium
>>
>>   * New maintainer. (Closes: #725821)
>>   * Redo packaging with debhelper 11 (Closes: #866272)
>>   * Account for memory allocated to /dev/shm (Closes: #691128)
>>   * Removed swapd conflict as swapd was removed from Debian in 2010
>>   * Fix minor manual page typo
> 
> Hi!
> This is bad:
> Files in second .deb but not in first
> -
> -rw-r--r--  root/root   /lib/systemd/system/swapspace.service
> [...]
> 
> Files in first .deb but not in second
> -
> [...]
> -rwxr-xr-x  root/root   /etc/init.d/swapspace
> 
> 
> And this is not even an upstream change, but a regression in the packaging:
> --- swapspace-1.10/debian/swapspace.init2018-08-09 20:58:32.0 
> +0200
> +++ swapspace-1.14/debian/swapspace.init1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 
> +0100
> 
> 
> While some people may decide to use systemd, your change breaks the package
> for everyone else.  That shouldn't be done without a very good reason.

Apologizes. Accidentally dropped the file when reshuffling everything to
debhelper 11.

Fixed and reuploaded.

Thanks for keeping me accountable.

Jacob




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#905791: RFS: swapspace/1.14-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

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

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.14-1
   Upstream Maintainer : Jacob Adams 
 * URL : https://github.com/Tookmund/Swapspace
 * License : GPL-2+
   Section : admin

  It builds those binary packages:

swapspace  - dynamic swap space manager

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

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


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.14-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  swapspace (1.14-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New maintainer. (Closes: #725821)
  * Redo packaging with debhelper 11 (Closes: #866272)
  * Account for memory allocated to /dev/shm (Closes: #691128)
  * Removed swapd conflict as swapd was removed from Debian in 2010
  * Fix minor manual page typo

 -- Jacob Adams   Wed, 04 Jul 2018 12:53:34 -0400



  Regards,
   Jacob Adams



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#905666: RFS: pgpcr/1.0-1 [ITP] -- Utilities for the PGP Clean Room

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

  Dear mentors,

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

 * Package name: pgpcr
   Version : 1.0-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams 
 * URL : https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund-guest/pgpcr/
 * License : Expat
   Section : utils

  It builds those binary packages:

pgpcr-utils - PGP Clean Room Utilities
python3-pgpcr - Python module for the PGP Clean Room and its utilities

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

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


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pgpcr/pgpcr_1.0-1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

pgpcr (1.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Initial Release. (Closes: #904497)

 -- Jacob Adams   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 18:22:27 -0400

This package is designed for those who use the PGP Clean Room Live CD to
manage their PGP key:

https://salsa.debian.org/tookmund-guest/make-pgp-clean-room

Regards,
   Jacob Adams



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#897642: RFS: gpgme1.0/1.11.1-1~bpo9+1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gpgme1.0"

 * Package name: gpgme1.0
   Version : 1.11.1-1~bpo9+1
   Upstream Author : GnuPG developers <gnupg-de...@gnupg.org>
 * URL : https://gnupg.org/software/gpgme/index.html
 * License : LGPL-2.1+
   Section : libs

  It builds those binary packages:

 libgpgme-dev - GPGME - GnuPG Made Easy (development files)
 libgpgme11 - GPGME - GnuPG Made Easy (library)
 libgpgmepp-dev - C++ and Qt bindings for GPGME (development files)
 libgpgmepp-doc - C++ and Qt bindings for GPGME (documentation for
developers)
 libgpgmepp6 - C++ wrapper library for GPGME
 libqgpgme7 - library for GPGME integration with Qt
 python-gpg - Python interface to the GPGME GnuPG encryption library
(Python 2)
 python3-gpg - Python interface to the GPGME GnuPG encryption library
(Python 3)

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/gpgme1.0


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gpgme1.0/gpgme1.0_1.11.1-1~bpo9+1.dsc


  Changes since the last upload:

gpgme1.0 (1.11.1-1~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium

  * Rebuild for stretch-backports.

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:13:54 -0400


This package will also require libgpgerror, which you can find here:

https://mentors.debian.net/package/libgpg-error

https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libg/libgpg-error/libgpg-error_1.29-4~bpo9+1.dsc

It already has an RFS: #897045

I would like to be able to use the latest version of GPGME in my GSoC
2018 project. In order to do that I would prefer to use a backport as
the PGP Clean Room CD is based off of stretch.

Thanks,
Jacob



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#897045: RFS: libgpg-error/1.29-4~bpo9+1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libgpg-error"

 * Package name: libgpg-error
   Version : 1.29-4~bpo9+1
   Upstream Author : GnuPG developers <gnupg-de...@gnupg.org>
 * URL : https://www.gnupg.org/software/libgpg-error/index.html
 * License : LGPL-2.1+
   Section : libs

  It builds those binary packages:

gpgrt-tools - GnuPG development runtime library (executable tools)
 libgpg-error-dev - GnuPG development runtime library (developer tools)
 libgpg-error-mingw-w64-dev - library of error values and messages in
GnuPG (Windows developmen
 libgpg-error0 - GnuPG development runtime library
 libgpg-error0-udeb - library for common error values and messages in
GnuPG components (udeb)

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/libgpg-error


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libg/libgpg-error/libgpg-error_1.29-4~bpo9+1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

libgpg-error (1.29-4~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium

  * Rebuild for stretch-backports.

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Tue, 24 Apr 2018 14:47:15 -0400

This package is a dependency for libgpgme which I would like to backport
for my GSoC 2018 project. I will file an RFS for libgpgme once the
latest version migrates to testing.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#895337: RFS: 9wm/1.4.1-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.4.1-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>
 * URL : https://github.com/9wm/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - X11 window manager inspired by Plan 9's rio

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.4.1-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:
9wm (1.4.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream version
  * Manual page now states that 9wm spawns a xterm by default (Closes:
#864194)
  * Bump standards version; no changes

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Mon, 09 Apr 2018 21:27:48 -0400


  Regards,
   Jacob Adams



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#862462: RFS: 9wm/1.4.0-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.4.0-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>
 * URL : https://github.com/9wm/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - X11 window manager inspired by Plan 9's rio

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.4.0-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.4.0-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release
  * Fix bug in border color handling (Closes: #862068)

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Fri, 12 May 2017 18:53:39 -0400

Bug#836709: RFS: 9wm/1.3.9-1 (For real this time)

[Jacob Adams]

Control: reopen -1

The upstream release issue has now been addressed. Apologies for posting
this before it was ready but everything is good to go now


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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.9-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.9-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release
  * Fix manpage typo (Closes: #836314)

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Sun, 04 Sep 2016 21:48:37 -0400


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#836709: RFS: 9wm/1.3.9-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.3.9-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>
 * URL : https://github.com/9wm/9wm/
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - X11 window manager inspired by Plan 9's rio

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.9-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.9-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release
  * Fix manpage typo (Closes: #836314)

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Sun, 04 Sep 2016 21:48:37 -0400



  Regards,
   Jacob Adams

Bug#836158: RFS: 9wm/1.3.8-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.3.8-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com> (neale asked me to
be maintainer as he does not use 9wm much anymore)
 * URL : https://github.com/9wm/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - X11 window manager inspired by Plan 9's rio

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.8-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream release
  * Upstream now uses a github organization

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Tue, 30 Aug 2016 21:20:58 -0400

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#833414: RFS: 9wm/1.3.7-1

[Jacob Adams]

Wow that was quick! 
Thank you Gianfranco!

Jacob 

> On Aug 4, 2016, at 03:26, Gianfranco Costamagna  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"
> 
> 
> sponsored.
> 
> G.

Bug#833414: RFS: 9wm/1.3.7-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.3.7-1
   Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
 * URL : https://github.com/nealey/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - X11 window manager inspired by the Plan 9's rio

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

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.7-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.7-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * New upstream version
  * Bump standards version to 3.9.8, no changes
  * md extension on README
 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Wed, 03 Aug 2016 22:32:34 -0400

  Regards,

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

> On Jul 12, 2016, at 8:08 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna  
> wrote:
> 
> sponsoring soon!
> 
> thanks for your contribution to Debian!

Thank you for sponsoring my package Gianfranco! 

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

control: retitle -1  RFS: setcolortemperature/1.3-1 ITP

On 07/08/2016 12:29 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:

> 
> the package is quite simple, but I would appreciate something more
> verbose when calling it with wrong parameters.
> e.g.
> sct
> sct -h
> sct -v
> sct 10
> sudo sct 10
> sudo sct 14
> 
> all gives no output.
> 
> After reading the manpage I discovered that numbers should be within a range.
> 
> I would appreciate a little help, and some error messages when bad input is 
> provided.

This has been fixed. Now when -h is passed usage is printed and if the
temperature passed is wrong usage will also be printed.

> other issues:
> $(CC) sct.c $(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) -Wall -lX11 -lXrandr -o sct
> 
> 
> missing CPPFLAGS
> 
> LDFLAGS should go at the bottom, to avoid link failures with wl,asneeded
> (e.g. on Ubuntu where it is the default)

Fixed.

> there is a missing license in the tarball, please ask upstream to provide one

Added.

> other stuff LGTM
> 
> G.
> 


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

control: tag -1 -moreinfo

On 07/07/2016 10:38 PM, Sean Whitton wrote:

> You didn't bump it in the Debian changelog :)
> 
> I consider this package ready to upload to Debian (packaging repo commit
> 6f964da0, main repo commit 00b97fee), except for:
> 
> - fix version in the Debian changelog
> - re-run `dch -r' to refresh the changelog timestamp
> 
> When you've done those, please remove the moreinfo tag from this bug.

I fixed up the changelog.
Thanks for all your help reviewing my package!

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

On 07/07/2016 10:13 PM, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Unfortunately your watch file doesn't seem to work now.
> 
> uscan warn: In directory ., downloading
>   
> https://github.com/Tookmund/setcolortemperature/releases/download/v1.1/setcolortemperature-1.1.tar.gz.asc
>   failed: 404 Not Found
> 

Should be fixed now.
I just signed the 1.1 tarball.
I'm not sure why uscan was trying to fetch that anyway as I bumped the
version number to 1.2 after my last changes.

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

control: retitle -1 RFS: setcolortemperature/1.2-1 ITP

On 07/07/2016 02:00 AM, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Since you are upstream, would you consider providing a changelog that
> you can install?  Lintian is saying no-upstream-changelog and it seems
> we can easily fix that :)
> 

I added a changelog. While I was at it I fixed the compiler warnings and
signed the release. 100% lintian clean now :)


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

On 07/05/2016 08:02 AM, Sean Whitton wrote:
> control: owner -1 !
> control: tag -1 +moreinfo
> 
> Dear Jacob,
> 
> This looks like a nice alternative to redshift-gtk.  Thanks for
> packaging it.  I can't sponsor the upload, but I hope this review is
> useful to you.

Thanks! The review definitely helped.
> 
> 1. Could you explain why you are packaging your fork rather then the
>original?  (This kind of thing should go in the ITP.)

The original was released in a blog post as a sort of code dump
(http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/sct-set-color-temperature )
I thought it would improve long term maintainability if there was a real
build system and active upstream. It's pretty hard to package software
without a tarball or VCS. If this is discouraged, I'd be happy to email
the real upstream about it, but I simply thought this would be easier
for everyone.
If I need to send a mail explaining this to the ITP I can do that.

> 
> 2. Could you put your Debian packaging in git, please?  It makes
>reviewing easier.  Perhaps as a 'debian' branch of your repo.

Whoops. Actually I already do this in a different git repo and I just
filled out the relevant fields of d/control incorrectly. Thanks for
catching that!

> 
> 3. The formatting of the long description in debian/control is a bit
>strange.  Please separate paragraphs using a line with the string
>" .".  Probably best to wrap at 70 chars, too.

I think I fixed this now.

> 
> 4. The wording of the long description could be improved.  The first
>sentence isn't really a sentence -- it would be better to write "sct
>is a small C program to change the screen color temperature.  It can
>be used to reduce or increase the amount of blue light produced by
>the screen."  Please take another look at your wording :)

Wow that description was a mess. I've fixed it up now and I think it's
much clearer.

> 5. Have you considered calling the binary package 'sct'?  That is what
>someone might guess when they want to install this with apt-get.

That's a good idea. I just changed it.

> 
> 6. 'sct' is a very short command name for /usr/bin ... have you
>confirmed that it doesn't clash with any other packages in Debian?
>You might have to set the priority to 'extra'.

Is there any way to check if other packages have binaries called sct? A
quick search of packages.d.o would seem to indicate there is not but is
there a better way to check?

> 
> 7. The language in d/copyright ("I doubt if it's copyrightable" etc.)
>isn't appropriate.  You need to determine whether or not it is
>copyrightable and make a clear statement of that.

That wording is not mine, but written by Ingo Thies, who would have
copyright over the whitepoints data if it is copyrightable. Putting it
there was the advice I got from debian-legal (see below).

> 
> 8. This doesn't make sense (doesn't follow DEP-5 machine-readable
>copyright file format) -- please check:
> 
> Files: sct.c
> Copyright: 2016 Ted Unangst <t...@openbsd.org>
>whitepoints data copyright 2013 Ingo Thies 
> <ith...@astro.uni-bonn.de>
> License: public-domain-sct and public-domain-colorramp

This was based off of a discussion in debian-legal (starts here:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2016/06/msg00018.html ). They did
not explain how to properly format this except to say I should
explicitly put the license grant from Ingo (the "I doubt if it's
copyrightable" stuff) into d/copyright. I have no idea how to properly
format this.Any ideas you have on how to write this up correctly are
welcome.
I've read DEP-5 but this is complicated because part of sct.c is
copyright Ingo Thies but the rest is copyright Ted Unangst.

> 
> 9. Please install the README into /usr/share/doc.

Done.

> 10. You're missing at least one build dependency.  Please try building
> in a clean sid chroot (see the pbuilder or sbuild tools).

Yep. Was missing libx11-dev and libxrandr-dev (dpkg -S is the best :) ).
I've fixed it now. Thanks for finding that.

Thanks again for the review! I've now uploaded a new package to mentors.



-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

On 07/05/2016 07:46 PM, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Hello Peter and Jacob,
> 
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 11:19:55PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>> Actually I don't see a problem with the machine-readable copyright
>> specification here; if you're referring to the fact that the contents
>> of the "Copyright" field is not in the usual "list of  "
>> format, this is perfectly fine: the Copyright field is free-form text as
>> described in:
>>
>>   
>> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#copyright-field
>>
>> It is true that the examples in the copyright-format specification also
>> follow the "list of  " format, but it is not codified in
>> the text.
> 
> You're right -- thanks for your input.  I was wrong to say that it
> doesn't satisfy DEP-5.  However, I still think that the text could be
> more clearly laid out so the division of sct.c is obvious.  You could
> write something like "remainder of C code copyright Ted Unangst".

I've phrased it that way for now. Not sure I'm a huge fan of that
wording, but I can't think of anything else that doesn't lose clarity.
(I tried "everything else copyright..." but that seems too vague)

> 
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 04:51:51PM -0400, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>> 1. Could you explain why you are packaging your fork rather then the
>>>original?  (This kind of thing should go in the ITP.)
>>
>> The original was released in a blog post as a sort of code dump
>> (http://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/sct-set-color-temperature )
>> I thought it would improve long term maintainability if there was a real
>> build system and active upstream. It's pretty hard to package software
>> without a tarball or VCS. If this is discouraged, I'd be happy to email
>> the real upstream about it, but I simply thought this would be easier
>> for everyone.
>> If I need to send a mail explaining this to the ITP I can do that.
> 
> This is perfectly reasonable :) It would be good to append it to the ITP
> in case anyone else is wondering.

Done.

> 
>>>
>>> 2. Could you put your Debian packaging in git, please?  It makes
>>> reviewing easier.  Perhaps as a 'debian' branch of your repo.
>>
>> Whoops. Actually I already do this in a different git repo and I just
>> filled out the relevant fields of d/control incorrectly. Thanks for
>> catching that!
> 
> Great.  Since you are the upstream maintainer and the (prospective)
> Debian package maintainer, is there any reason you're using two seprate
> git repos?  You could just add a debian/ directory to your main repo.
> 
> What you are doing is completely acceptable (and there are some Debian
> Developers who think that that is the way it should be done) but as
> someone who is the upstream maintainer and Debian maintainer (of
> git-remote-gcrypt), I find it a lot easier just to have one repo.  Or
> you can have a debian branch containing the debian/ subdir and you can
> merge master into that branch periodically.

I separated the two because that's what the upstream guide in the debian
wiki recommends. I can see the benefits of having it all in the same
repo but for this package I think I will keep them separate for now. I
might try the combined approach later if the separated one becomes too
much of a burden.

> 
>>>
>>> 3. The formatting of the long description in debian/control is a bit
>>> strange.  Please separate paragraphs using a line with the string "
>>> .".  Probably best to wrap at 70 chars, too.
>>
>> I think I fixed this now.
> 
> Sorry for the pedantry but you're missing a period at the end of line 19 :)

Fixed.
> 
>>> 4. The wording of the long description could be improved.  The first
>>> sentence isn't really a sentence -- it would be better to write "sct
>>> is a small C program to change the screen color temperature.  It can
>>> be used to reduce or increase the amount of blue light produced by
>>> the screen."  Please take another look at your wording :)
>>
>> Wow that description was a mess. I've fixed it up now and I think it's
>> much clearer.
> 
> I agree.  Good job.
> 
>>>
>>> 6. 'sct' is a very short command name for /usr/bin ... have you
>>>confirmed that it doesn't clash with any other packages in Debian?
>>>You might have to set the priority to 'extra'.
>>
>> Is there any way to check if other packages have binaries called sct? A
>> quick search of packages.d.o would seem to indicate there is not but is
>> there a better way to check?
> 
> There are sever

Bug#829151: RFS: setcolortemperature/1.1-1 ITP

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

  Dear mentors,

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

 * Package name: setcolortemperature
   Version : 1.1-1
   Upstream Author : Ted Unangst <t...@openbsd.org> (I am upstream
maintainer though)
 * URL : https://github.com/Tookmund/setcolortemperature
 * License : public domain
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

setcolortemperature - Set screen color temperature

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

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


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

dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/setcolortemperature/setcolortemperature_1.1-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

setcolortemperature (1.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Initial release (Closes: #828028)

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Sat, 04 Jun 2016 22:00:43 -0400


  Regards,
-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#812446: RFS: 9wm/1.3.5-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

* Package name: 9wm
* Version : 1.3.5-1
* Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
* URL : https://github.com/nealey/9wm
* License : Expat
* Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm - X11 window manager inspired by the Plan 9's rio

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm

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

dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.5-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.5-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * rules: Build in parallel
  * patches/*: Remove patches applied upstream
  * control and watch: Upstream moved to Github
  * control: Update description to match upstream's description in README

 -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Sat, 23 Jan 2016 15:51:58 -0500


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#812430: RFS: 9wm/1.3.5-1

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

* Package name: 9wm
* Version : 1.3.5-1
* Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
* URL : https://github.com/nealey/9wm
* License : Expat
* Section : x11

 It builds those binary packages:

   9wm - X11 window manager inspired by the Plan 9's rio

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

 http://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm

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

   dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.5-1.dsc

 Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.5-1) unstable; urgency=medium

 * rules: Build in parallel
 * patches/*: Remove patches applied upstream
 * control and watch: Upstream moved to Github
 * control: Update description to match upstream's description in README

-- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Sat, 23 Jan 2016 15:51:58 -0500


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9

Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.4-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/11/2015 09:21 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 08:47:15PM -0500, Jacob Adams wrote:
>> On 12/11/2015 06:43 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 05:19:01PM -0500, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>>> On 12/06/2015 09:05 AM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> How are you catching these? I don't mean to leave them and I don't mind
>> fixing them, but I can't see trailing whitespace  (because it looks like
>> blank space :) ) and so seem to accidentally leave it everywhere.
> I find trailing whitespaces quite annoying, they can too easily lead to
> diff noise, can make unecessary hard to understand why a patch doesn't
> apply between different versions, etc.
>
> I set up vim (that's my editor :P) to show me them with a bullet.
>
> listchars=trail:·
>
> ↑ this should be enough to show them.

I couldn't get that to work but I don't use vim often anyway.
I also found a quick sed script that removes trailing whitespace:

#!/bin/sh
# Strip trailing whitespace

sed -i 's/[  \t]*$//' "$@"

>>> Btw, you added 2 trailing whitespaces at line 5 and 11.
> You got another one at line 12 :P
>
Fixed
>>>>> * even if you try to enable the hardening in d/rules, that doesn't work,
>>>>>   and blhc still complains (and also lintian)
>>>> I'm not sure what to do about this. Should I just have a patch that
>>>> appends $(shell dpkg-buildflags --get $VAR) for CFLAGS and LDFLAGS?
>>> The problem is that that makefile overwrites CFLAGS from the env.  This
>>> is enough to deal with it (it's on top of the other patch of yours):
>>>
>>> --- a/Makefile
>>> +++ b/Makefile
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>> -CFLAGS = -DSHAPE -Wall -Werror -fPIC
>>> +CFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -DSHAPE -Wall -Werror -fPIC
>>>  LDLIBS = -lXext -lX11
>>>  BIN = $(DESTDIR)/usr/bin/
>>>  
>> Ok I used that. Lintian still complains however, so I'm not sure what
>> else to do.
> This is weird.  With that on both lintian and blhc shut up here.
>
> Though not sure what you meant by "I used that", because it's not in the
> patch in the package.
Oh. Whoops. I didn't actually use it. Actually applying the patch fixes
the Lintian warning :)
>
>>>>> Please also triage the debian bugs:
>>>>>   + #681740 was fixed in 1.2-10
>>>> Should I just close it?
>>> yes, and also settinging the correct "fixed" value :)
>> Ok I marked it as fixed in 1.2-10 and then closed it.
>> Obviously I need to learn the BTS. The next thing I'll do for Debian is
>> fix a few bugs in other packages to get the hang of it.
> For example, to do that in one single email you could have:
> * put control@ in (b)cc to the 681740-done@ email
> * used the Version: pseudo-header, that when used in -done@ emails means
>   "this got fixed in this version".  That's what happens with
>   automatically close emails at package uploads (even if those use
>   Source-Version instead of Version, but that's the same).
>
>> Any other bits of Debian infrastructure I should learn? I'm relatively
>> familiar with the package tracker and sources.
> Guess that's good enough for now; just go around all the links that are
> in tracker.d.o pages and you'll get a good overview.
> Then if you haven't already please have a look at the policy and devref:
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/
>
>>> tools, guess you did packaging work somewhere else?
>> I did some packaging before on a few things for Debian but never got a
>> sponsor. In both cases I never got a response from upstream so I gave up
>> as I felt overwhelmed by all the stuff I had to do. Third time's the
>> charm I guess :)
> :)
> Maybe try again now? ;)
Sure. After this I've gotten a much better idea of all the stuff
surrounding packaging and will be much more prepared for the next one.
>
>> I've add Author fields. Should I add you to the Author field of the
>> CFLAGS patch?
> No need.
>
>
> So, there is only that thing about CFLAGS to sort out.  Note that I'm
> fine as it is now, btw, just tell me that ain't an error.
Actually using the CFLAGS patch fixes that Lintian warning.
There is no upstream changelog and they don't sign releases so that
should be it.

I've uploaded another version to mentors.

I've also been in communication with upstream and they will probably
apply the last two patches. They did said they were busy so it might be
a little while. I think at this point 1.3.4 should just be uploaded and
if they release a new version I'm sure it wouldn't take much for me to
update it (just remove the patches and add a changelog entry for
removing each patch)

Thanks,
Jacob



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.4-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/06/2015 09:05 AM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> control: owner -1 !
> control: tag -1 + moreinfo
>
> Hi!
>
> First, please be a bit more patiente with your pings; following up only
> 5 days later is very much not helpful.
Sorry about that. I should have realized how soon it was before I pinged.
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 03:10:28PM -0500, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>   I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"
>>
>>  * Package name: 9wm
>>Version : 1.3.4-1
>>Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
>>  * URL : https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm
>>  * License : Expat
>>Section : x11
>
> The review:
>
> * trailing whitespace on debian/control:29
Fixed
> * please be a lot more verbose on the changelog.  "Redo packaging" is
>   not satisfactory at all.  Every change should be documented.
I've updated it to reflect all changes. Should I update the timestamp?
(It was generated by dch when I first made the changelog).
> * debian/patches/*: if possible a URL of the forwarded patch would be
>   nice
They've all been forwarded via email, so no urls unfortunately. I did,
however, have one unnecessary patch in there so I've removed it. I just
emailed upstream about the two patches I'm still using (The FHS one was
rejected without any reasoning as it was with a few others and simply
not applied so I've asked for a reason. The -fPIC one is new).
> * debian/rules:
>   + trailing whitespace at line 11
>   + with debhelper compat 9 exporting the build flags that way is not
> needed anymore, so lines 3-4-5 can go away
Fixed.
> * you removed the postinst and prerm with the update-alternatives calls,
>   that looks useful to me; why?
Because I did not look over the previous packaging closely enough :)
I've added them back. I've also modified them slightly to call set -e in
order to avoid a lintian warning.
> * even if you try to enable the hardening in d/rules, that doesn't work,
>   and blhc still complains (and also lintian)
I'm not sure what to do about this. Should I just have a patch that
appends $(shell dpkg-buildflags --get $VAR) for CFLAGS and LDFLAGS?
After removing the unecessary lines from d/rules the buildflags appear
to somewhat work but I've had to add a patch to compile objects with
-fPIC as otherwise I get

cc -fPIE -pie -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now  9wm.o event.o manage.o menu.o
client.o grab.o cursor.o error.o  -lXext -lX11 -o 9wm
/usr/bin/ld: 9wm.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata' can not be
used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
9wm.o: error adding symbols: Bad value

> * From piuparts:
>   0m51.6s INFO: Running adequate version 0.12.1 now.
>   0m51.8s ERROR: WARN: Inadequate results from running adequate!
>  9wm: missing-alternative x-window-manager
>
>   0m51.8s ERROR: WARN: Running adequate resulted in inadequate tags found:  
> missing-alternative 
>   0m59.0s INFO: PASS: Installation and purging test.
>   1m1.2s INFO: apt-cache knows about the following packages: 9wm
>   1m8.3s INFO: Installation of ['tmp/9wm_1.3.4-1_amd64.deb'] ok
>   1m15.4s INFO: Running adequate version 0.12.1 now.
>   1m21.1s ERROR: WARN: Broken symlinks:
> /usr/bin/x-window-manager -> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager
> /usr/share/man/man1/x-window-manager.1.gz -> 
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager.1.gz
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager.1.gz -> /usr/share/man/man1/9wm.1.gz
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager -> /usr/bin/9wm
>   1m22.9s ERROR: FAIL: Package purging left files on system:
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager -> /usr/bin/9wm not owned
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager.1.gz -> /usr/share/man/man1/9wm.1.gz   
>  not owned
> /usr/bin/x-window-manager -> /etc/alternatives/x-window-managernot 
> owned
> /usr/share/man/man1/x-window-manager.1.gz -> 
> /etc/alternatives/x-window-manager.1.gz   not owned
>
>   1m22.9s ERROR: FAIL: Installation, upgrade and purging tests.
>   1m24.3s ERROR: piuparts run ends.
All these should be fixed by the above.
>
>
> Please also triage the debian bugs:
>   + #681740 was fixed in 1.2-10
Should I just close it?
>   + #349680 not sure what to do, but sice you're becoming the maintainer
> that's your call.  probably the best course of action, given where
> the links in that bug end, is to just close the bug.
I've closed it. plan9port and 9wm are two different things.

I've uploaded a new version of 9wm to mentors.

Thanks for your help!
Jacob





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.4-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/11/2015 06:43 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 05:19:01PM -0500, Jacob Adams wrote:
>> On 12/06/2015 09:05 AM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>>> First, please be a bit more patiente with your pings; following up only
>>> 5 days later is very much not helpful.
>> Sorry about that. I should have realized how soon it was before I pinged.
> No worries, just be aware we (in debian, that's general) we're not used
> to reply in real time or few hours or 1 day...
>
>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 03:10:28PM -0500, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>> * trailing whitespace on debian/control:29
>> Fixed
> oops, there is also one in debian/control:25 (sorry)
How are you catching these? I don't mean to leave them and I don't mind
fixing them, but I can't see trailing whitespace  (because it looks like
blank space :) ) and so seem to accidentally leave it everywhere.
>
>>> * please be a lot more verbose on the changelog.  "Redo packaging" is
>>>   not satisfactory at all.  Every change should be documented.
>> I've updated it to reflect all changes. Should I update the timestamp?
>> (It was generated by dch when I first made the changelog).
> The timestamp down there is not really relevant, though you might
> consider updating it right before uploading (usually I do a dummy commit
> before start working on the package, keeping the distribution UNRELEASED
> and an empty changelog, and at the end I do `gbp dch --auto -R`, which
> also updates the timestamp.
Ok I just updated it as it wasn't hard.
>
> Btw, you added 2 trailing whitespaces at line 5 and 11.
> Anyway, the changelog looks nearly good to me now, see below.
>
>>> * debian/patches/*: if possible a URL of the forwarded patch would be
>>>   nice
>> They've all been forwarded via email, so no urls unfortunately. I did,
>> however, have one unnecessary patch in there so I've removed it. I just
>> emailed upstream about the two patches I'm still using (The FHS one was
>> rejected without any reasoning as it was with a few others and simply
>> not applied so I've asked for a reason. The -fPIC one is new).
> ok, if they where private email, then 'yes' is totally fine.
>
>>> * debian/rules:
>>>   + trailing whitespace at line 11
>>>   + with debhelper compat 9 exporting the build flags that way is not
>>> needed anymore, so lines 3-4-5 can go away
>> Fixed.
> cool!  I love how cute they look packages with that quasi-empty d/rules!
>
>>> * you removed the postinst and prerm with the update-alternatives calls,
>>>   that looks useful to me; why?
>> Because I did not look over the previous packaging closely enough :)
>> I've added them back. I've also modified them slightly to call set -e in
>> order to avoid a lintian warning.
> :)
>
>>> * even if you try to enable the hardening in d/rules, that doesn't work,
>>>   and blhc still complains (and also lintian)
>> I'm not sure what to do about this. Should I just have a patch that
>> appends $(shell dpkg-buildflags --get $VAR) for CFLAGS and LDFLAGS?
> The problem is that that makefile overwrites CFLAGS from the env.  This
> is enough to deal with it (it's on top of the other patch of yours):
>
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -CFLAGS = -DSHAPE -Wall -Werror -fPIC
> +CFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -DSHAPE -Wall -Werror -fPIC
>  LDLIBS = -lXext -lX11
>  BIN = $(DESTDIR)/usr/bin/
>  
Ok I used that. Lintian still complains however, so I'm not sure what
else to do.
>> After removing the unecessary lines from d/rules the buildflags appear
>> to somewhat work but I've had to add a patch to compile objects with
>> -fPIC as otherwise I get
> yeah, of course you need -fPIC (google can give you thousands of posts
> that explain why it is needed).
>
>>> * From piuparts:
>> All these should be fixed by the above.
> yeah, it is.
>
>>> Please also triage the debian bugs:
>>>   + #681740 was fixed in 1.2-10
>> Should I just close it?
> yes, and also settinging the correct "fixed" value :)
> I realize that this might seems mean, but I don't feel ok at sponsoring
> a package in debian to a person that doesn't grasp the basis of the
> debian infra/tooling/procedures like basic bugs handling in the Debian
> tracker, like this; even if it's actually difficult to have such
> knowledge *before* starting doing stuff.
>
> It's hard to verify before uploading the very first package of the
> sponsoree, so I'm happy to have these 2 bugs to check this :)
Ok I marked it as fixed in 1.2-10 and then closed it.
Obviously I need to learn the BTS. The next thing I'll do for Debian is
fix a 

Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.4-1 [ITA]

[Jacob Adams]

Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.3.4-1
   Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
 * URL : https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - Emulation of the Plan 9 window manager 8-1/2

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.4-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

9wm (1.3.4-1) unstable; urgency=low

* New Maintainer (Closes: #660496 
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660496>)
* New Upstream (https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm/)
* Redo packaging
-- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Mon, 02 Nov 2015 23:15:00 -0500

 Regards,
   Jacob Adams




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#804390: Fwd: Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.3-1 [ITA] -- emulation of the Plan 9 window manager 8-1/2

[Jacob Adams]

This is still open. 
A review would be appreciated. 

Thanks,
Jacob 

Begin forwarded message:

> Resent-From: Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>
> From: Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>
> Date: November 7, 2015 at 10:28:41 PM EST
> Resent-To: debian-bugs-d...@lists.debian.org
> To: sub...@bugs.debian.org
> Resent-Cc: 660...@bugs.debian.org, Debian Mentors 
> <package-sponsorship-reque...@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.3-1 [ITA] -- emulation of the Plan 9 window 
> manager 8-1/2
> Reply-To: Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>, 804...@bugs.debian.org
> 
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
> Control: block 660496 by -1
> X-Debbugs-CC: 660...@bugs.debian.org
> 
> Dear mentors,
> 
>  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"
> 
> * Package name: 9wm
>   Version : 1.3.3-1
>   Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
> * URL : https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm
> * License : Expat
>   Section : x11
> 
>  It builds those binary packages:
> 
>9wm   - Emulation of the Plan 9 window manager 8-1/2
> 
>  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
> URL:
> 
>  http://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm
> 
> 
>  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
> 
>dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.3-1.dsc
> 
>  More information about 9wm can be obtained from 
> https://woozle.org/neale/src/9wm/
> 
>  Changes since the last upload:
> 
>  9wm (1.3.3-1) unstable; urgency=low
> 
>* New Maintainer (Closes: #660496)
>    * New Upstream (https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm/)
>* Redo packaging
> 
>  -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Mon, 02 Nov 2015 23:15:00 -0500
> 
> 
>  Regards,
>   Jacob Adams
> 
> 

Bug#804390: RFS: 9wm/1.3.3-1 [ITA] -- emulation of the Plan 9 window manager 8-1/2

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Control: block 660496 by -1
X-Debbugs-CC: 660...@bugs.debian.org
 
Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "9wm"

 * Package name: 9wm
   Version : 1.3.3-1
   Upstream Author : Neale Pickett <ne...@woozle.org>
 * URL : https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm
 * License : Expat
   Section : x11

  It builds those binary packages:

9wm   - Emulation of the Plan 9 window manager 8-1/2

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/9wm


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

dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/9/9wm/9wm_1.3.3-1.dsc

  More information about 9wm can be obtained from 
https://woozle.org/neale/src/9wm/

  Changes since the last upload:

  9wm (1.3.3-1) unstable; urgency=low

* New Maintainer (Closes: #660496)
* New Upstream (https://woozle.org/neale/g.cgi/x11/9wm/)
* Redo packaging

  -- Jacob Adams <tookm...@gmail.com>  Mon, 02 Nov 2015 23:15:00 -0500


  Regards,
   Jacob Adams




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Fwd: Package 9wm was rejected

[Jacob Adams]

I just created a new subkey today and so it wasn't part of the original
export to mentors.
Do I need to re-export my key even though the master key (I think that's
the term) hasn't changed?


 Forwarded Message 
Subject:Package 9wm was rejected
Date:   Sat, 7 Nov 2015 02:46:32 + (UTC)
From:   mentors.debian.net 
To: tookm...@gmail.com



Hello,

Unfortunately your package "9wm" was rejected because of the following
reason:

Your upload does not contain a valid signature. Output was:

gpg: Signature made Sa 07 Nov 2015 02:25:18 UTC using RSA key ID 1DBC5996
gpg: Can't check signature: public key not found


Please try to fix it and re-upload. Thanks,

-- 
mentors.debian.net





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Processes for new maintainer and upstream

[Jacob Adams]

I have just filed an ITA on 9wm (#660496)

It has been orphaned for a while and in that time the old upstream sadly
passed away. A new upstream has popped up and continues to maintain the
package.
Is there any special process I need to follow here because upstream changed?

Thanks,
Jacob

Bug#776120: RFS: beret/1.2.1+git4e2f21bf4eeabfd137b2b846756a368b42456675-1 [ITP]

[Jacob Adams]

I have been busy and put this aside for too long.

On 01/25/2015 11:25 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
 On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Jacob Adams wrote:
 
 At this point the only remaining problems with my package appear to be
 binary-without-manpage and debian-watch-file-is-missing which also shows
 up in fonts-averia-sans.
 That sounds like a bug in lintian, it should not emit that warning for
 watch files containing only comments.

The watch file has been fixed. It wasn't a bug in lintian, I simply did
not comment properly.

My only remaining issue is installation of the manpage. There is a
debian/beret.6 file but it is not installed for some reason. How can I
install it?


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#776120: RFS: beret/1.2.1+git4e2f21bf4eeabfd137b2b846756a368b42456675-1 [ITP]

[Jacob Adams]

On 01/25/2015 12:40 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
 On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Jacob Adams wrote:
 
   It builds those binary packages:

 beret - Adventures of a telekinetic scientist
 beret-data - Data for Beret, the adventures of a telekinetic scientist
 fonts-averia - Averia TrueType Font
 
 The Averia font appears to be a separate project and should be
 packaged from a separate source package rather than the embedded copy
 of the font being packaged.
 
 http://iotic.com/averia/
 
Fixed.
http://mentors.debian.net/package/fonts-averia-sans

I am also now uploading a fixed version of beret that uses fonts-averia-sans

At this point the only remaining problems with my package appear to be
binary-without-manpage and debian-watch-file-is-missing which also shows
up in fonts-averia-sans.

beret has a manpage, so should I override that?

Neither package uses tarballs, and lintian suggests explain why I cannot
use a watch file in a watch file but doing so brings up a even more
severe warning (debian-watch-file-missing-version). What should I do?

Thanks for the help!

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

How do I split a source package into several binaries?

[Jacob Adams]

I have a source package, a game, that has a lot of resources. I was
installing these at /usr/share/beret but I then received a lintian
warning, arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share, which recommends that I
split up the package.
How can I spilt this package into binary and data packages?
I am using dh and initially set single binary

(While I am at it, is that the correct place to install resources for a
game? It is map files, music, a few pngs, etc.)

Thanks,

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#776120: RFS: beret/1.2.1+git4e2f21bf4eeabfd137b2b846756a368b42456675-1 [ITP]

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel-ga...@lists.debian.org

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package beret

 * Package name: beret
   Version : 1.2.1+git4e2f21bf4eeabfd137b2b846756a368b42456675-1
   Upstream Author : Nigel Kilmer
 * URL : https://gitorious.org/beret/beret/
 * License : LGPL-3
   Section : games

  It builds those binary packages:

beret - Adventures of a telekinetic scientist
beret-data - Data for Beret, the adventures of a telekinetic scientist
fonts-averia - Averia TrueType Font

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/beret


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

dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/beret/beret_1.2.1+git4e2f21bf4eeabfd137b2b846756a368b42456675-1.dsc

  More information about beret can be obtained from
http://kiwisauce.com/beret/.

  Changes since the last upload:

  * Initial release (Closes: #652580)
  * Package included Averia Font (Closes: #776110)




  Regards,
-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

RFS: swapspace/1.12-1 [ITA] -- dynamic swapspace manager

[Jacob Adams]

Dear mentors,

  Once again, I am looking for a sponsor for my package swapspace

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.12-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams tookm...@gmail.com
 * URL : https://github.com/tookmund/swapspace
 * License : GPL-2+
   Section : admin

  It builds those binary packages:

swapspace  - dynamic swap space manager

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/swapspace


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

dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.12-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

swapspace (1.12-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * New Maintainer (Closes: #725821)
  * New upstream
  * Account for tmpfs (Closes: #691128)
  * Redo packaging to use new upstream build system

Regards,

Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: debian-watch-file-missing-version

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/31/2014 01:55 AM, Riley Baird wrote:
 * d/copyright does not list all copyright holders/years. Look in
 each source file, and try to note the copyright data for each
 file.
 I assume you are referring here to the Software Industry Promotion 
 Agency which I have now added to d/copyright
 
 Yep! Except, I just noticed one more thing :) The license is GPL-2+,
 not GPL-2.
Whoops! Nice catch!
 Good luck getting sponsored.
Thanks!

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: debian-watch-file-missing-version

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/30/2014 05:45 AM, Riley Baird wrote:
 I'm not a DD, so I can't sponsor your package, but if you want,
 I'll take a look at it over the next couple of days.

 That would be great! I have just uploaded an updated version that
 is lintian clean although the watchfile still appears to be
 broken.

 Thank you for your quick response!
 
 As promised, here is my review:
 
 * Remove d/README.source, since you don't have anything to say there
 * Remove the unnecessary commented out lines in d/rules
Done.
 * d/copyright does not list all copyright holders/years. Look in each
 source file, and try to note the copyright data for each file.
I assume you are referring here to the Software Industry Promotion
Agency which I have now added to d/copyright
 * d/watch still appears to be broken - it seems to be having
 difficulties differentiating between the different ways of versioning
 - v1.xx, and swapspace-1.xx. 
It turns out that the v1.xx files are github's source tarballs so I have
changed the regex to only match my released tarballs (i.e. swapspace-1.xx)

Thanks for the review!

-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#773071: (no subject)

[Jacob Adams]

Dear mentors,

  swapspace is now lintian clean so once again I am looking for a sponsor.

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.12-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams tookm...@gmail.com
 * URL : https://github.com/tookmund/swapspace
 * License : GPL-2
   Section : admin

  It builds those binary packages:

swapspace  - dynamic swap space manager

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/swapspace


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

dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.12-1.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  * New Maintainer (Closes: #725821)
  * New upstream
  * Account for tmpfs (Closes: #691128)
  * Redo packaging to use new upstream build system

  Regards,
   Jacob Adams
-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#773071: fix title

[Jacob Adams]

control: retitle -1 RFS: swapspace/1.12-1 [ITA]
-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: debian-watch-file-missing-version

[Jacob Adams]

On 12/28/2014 09:35 PM, Riley Baird wrote:
 The version field refers to the watch file format, not the package
 version.

 You should have version=3.

Oh that's what that means! Thank you for the clarification!

 I'm not a DD, so I can't sponsor your
 package, but if you want, I'll take a look at it over the next couple
 of days.

That would be great! I have just uploaded an updated version that is
lintian clean although the watchfile still appears to be broken.

Thank you for your quick response!


-- 
Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

debian-watch-file-missing-version

[Jacob Adams]

I have been working to fix all the lintian warnings for my package
swapspace ( http://mentors.debian.net/package/swapspace )

The only outstanding warning is debian-watch-file-missing-version which
I cannot figure out how to fix. My watchfile has a version= line.
However mentors.d.n reports that the watchfile is broken so this could
simply be a result of that.

Could someone please help me understand what I did wrong with my watchfile?

(And while you are at it a complete review of my package would be
appreciated :)

Thanks for your help!

Jacob Adams
GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#773071: RFS: swapspace/1.11-1 [ITP]

[Jacob Adams]

Package: sponsorship-requests
  Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package swapspace

 * Package name: swapspace
   Version : 1.11-1
   Upstream Author : Jacob Adams tookm...@gmail.com (I have forked
this project as upstream has stopped working on it)
 * URL : https://github.com/Tookmund/swapspace
 * License : GPL-2
   Section : admin

  It builds those binary packages:

swapspace  - dynamic swap space manager

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

  http://mentors.debian.net/package/swapspace


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

dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/swapspace/swapspace_1.11-1.dsc

  More information about hello can be obtained from
https://github.com/swapspace-deb.

  Changes since the last upload:

  * New maintainer (Closes: #725821)
  * New upstream
  * Autotools build system
  * Account for tmpfs (Closes: #691128)
  * SystemD Service
  * Split up README


  Regards,
Jacob Adams

GPG Key: AF6B 1C26 E2D0 A988 432B  94F4 24C0 2B85 B59F E5A9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature