Re: build for stable: bad-distribution-in-changes-file

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 9/9/23 09:17, Lorenzo wrote:

and at the end of the build I see the lintian error,
what I'm doing wrong?


You're not. lintian hasn't been updated in time to know about bookworm:

 https://bugs.debian.org/1033894

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: The following packages will be REMOVED: libhwy1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 8/29/23 10:38, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:

FTBFS on several architectures:


That's actually a related issue, I am working with upstream to fix
those. In order to do so, I'd like to co-install i386 and amd64. Right
now I can only install one *or* the other. I'd like to install *both*:


You can't because 1.0.5-1 is available for amd64, but not i386 where it 
FTBFS:


 https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=highway=amd64
 https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=highway=i386

# aptitude install libhwy1:amd64 libhwy1:i386
libhwy1:i386 is already installed at the requested version (1.0.4-1)
libhwy1:i386 is already installed at the requested version (1.0.4-1)
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libhwy1{b}
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/538 kB of archives. After unpacking 3471 kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 libhwy1 : Breaks: libhwy1:i386 (!= 1.0.5-1) but 1.0.4-1 is installed
 libhwy1:i386 : Breaks: libhwy1 (!= 1.0.4-1) but 1.0.5-1 is to be installed
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:

 Remove the following packages:
1) libhwy1:i386 [1.0.4-1 (now, unstable)]

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: The following packages will be REMOVED: libhwy1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 8/29/23 09:45, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:

Could someone please review what I did wrong for src:highway. For some
reason I cannot install libhwy1:amd64 + libhwy1:i386 on my system:


FTBFS on several architectures:

 https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=highway

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: autopkgtest : s390x is considered regression but out of sync

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/13/23 08:14, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:

This is a follow-up to my previous message. This time libjxl is build
on s390x but the autopkgtest does not seems to see the new binaries:

[...]
E: Unable to locate package libjxl-devtools
E: Unable to locate package libjpegxl-java
run-unit-testFAIL badpkg
[...]

https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/s390x/j/jpeg-xl/30151566/log.gz

Is there anything I should be doing on my side ?


Just wait.

Like the buildds, the autopkgtest runners have trouble keeping up with 
the changes in unstable.


The job is queued, see the pending jobs:

 https://ci.debian.net/packages/j/jpeg-xl/

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: src:jpeg-xl stuck in Needs-Build states / 7d

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 1/12/23 08:20, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:

I am trying to understand why src:jpeg-xl is in Needs-Build state for
the past 7 days:

* https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=jpeg-xl=sid

I cannot remember where else I should be looking for a hint of this
state ? I tried there but did not see anything related to jpeg-xl:

* https://release.debian.org/britney/hints/


The s390x buildds have a hard time to keep up with the many binNMUs for 
ongoing transitions, the Needs-Build queue is quite reasonable now that 
most of the python3.11 transition is done:


 https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=s390x=sid

The zandonai buildd also suffers from periodic network connectivity 
issues to deb.debian.org which results in the builds being given back, 
you can see that in the history:


 https://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?pkg=jpeg-xl=s390x

Also note the following in the footer on buildd.debian.org:

"
 Architecture specific issues should be sent to <$a...@buildd.debian.org>
"

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: How to request a package python-pyqt6.qsci?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/31/22 23:39, Barry wrote:

This is where i need help understanding what i do to get that deb.


Wait for it to migrate to testing. Keep an eye on the excuses:

 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/qscintilla2

Or install it from unstable in the meantime.

Testing migration is complicated by the ongoing qt6baseabi-6.4.2 
transition. pyqt6 is not rebuilt for that yet:


 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/qt6baseabi-6.4.2.html

Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Question on rm_conffile

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 2/22/21 3:08 PM, Tong Sun wrote:
> A follow up question, dpkg-maintscript-helper(1) suggests to use
> 
> Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= 1.17.14)
> 
> But of the several packages that use rm_conffile that I checked, none
> of them is using `Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= 1.17.14)` in their control
> file. Was I not looking at the correct place or there is something
> else (e.g., it's pretty safe not to do that nowadays)?

dpkg 1.17.27 is in oldoldstable, so the version requirement is met with
any reasonably recent Debian release:

 $ rmadison -a amd64 dpkg
 dpkg   | 1.17.27   | oldoldstable | amd64
 dpkg   | 1.18.25   | oldstable| amd64
 dpkg   | 1.19.7| stable   | amd64
 dpkg   | 1.20.7.1  | testing  | amd64
 dpkg   | 1.20.7.1  | unstable | amd64

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Question on rm_conffile

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 2/22/21 2:23 PM, Tong Sun wrote:
> However, when I did some research, I found that most packages put
> rm_conffile in the  .maintscript file. Where does that come from? It
> is even not in the man page. OK that I put rm_conffile in the
> .maintscript file as well, instead of in all 3 scripts (preinst,
> postinst, postrm)?

dpkg-maintscript-helper(1) refers to dh_installdeb(1) which documents
the .maintscript files, see:

 https://manpages.debian.org/buster/dpkg/dpkg-maintscript-helper.1.en.html
 https://manpages.debian.org/buster/debhelper/dh_installdeb.1.en.html

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: dh_link -p$(pkg_dev) usr/include/charls usr/include/CharLS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11/3/20 8:50 AM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> I am trying to use the following dh_link command:
> 
> $ cat d/rules
> [...]
> dh_link -p$(pkg_dev) usr/include/charls usr/include/CharLS
> 
> Which gives:
> 
> $ dpkg -c ../libcharls-dev_2.1.0+dfsg-5_amd64.deb
> [...]
> lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2020-10-29 17:58 ./usr/include/CharLS -> charls
> 
> It seems that the above *only* works (give expected results of
> directory symlink) when there is no existing /usr/include/CharLS
> directory.
> 
> What is the right black magic to get a nice upgrade path for
> libcharls-dev 2.0 (which provides a /usr/include/CharLS directory), to
> libcharls-dev 2.1 which provides a /usr/include/CharLS symlink to
> /usr/include/charls.

dpkg-maintscript-helper dir_to_symlink may do what you want, see:

 
https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dpkg/dpkg-maintscript-helper.1.en.html#Switching_a_directory_to_symlink

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Again question about migration to testing

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/24/20 12:01 AM, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> the TeX Live packages do not migrate to testing, although there is no RC
> bug and they are old enough. The only reason I see is:
> 
> autopkgtest for jupyter-sphinx-theme/0.0.6+ds1-9: amd64: Regression ♻ ,
> arm64: Regression ♻

It has a popcon below 5% so it's not a key package and can be
autoremoved from testing.

> I'm quite sure, this regression is not caused by the TL upload, but by
> the Sphinx upload. The last successful autopkgtest was with version
> Sphinx v1.8.5, it fails since v2.4.3. Is there anything I can do to
> clarify the situation? Do I have to file a bug anywhere?

Start by filing an RC bug against jupyter-sphinx-theme for the failing
autopkgtest [0], testing autoremoval should help get it out of testing
and unblocking migration of packages it blocked.

If that takes too long because of activity in the bugreport for example,
contact the release team [1] and ask them for help getting texlive to
migrate.

[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/07/msg2.html
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Package not migrating although status says 'Will attempt migration'

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 4/16/20 8:34 AM, mer...@debian.org wrote:
> schroedinger-coordgenlibs is not migrated although the delay is over
> [1]. Is there something I can do about it? This package prevents
> migration of other packages.

The britney update_output shows:

trying: schroedinger-coordgenlibs
skipped: schroedinger-coordgenlibs (228, 0, 297)
got: 26+0: a-1:a-0:a-0:a-0:i-20:m-0:m-0:p-0:s-5
* s390x: librdkit-dev, librdkit1, postgresql-12-rdkit, python3-rdkit

 https://release.debian.org/britney/update_output.txt

The excuses for rdkit show that it's blocked by gcc-10:

 https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=rdkit

And the excuses for gcc-10 show autopkgtest regressions:

 https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=gcc-10

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#931972: Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/13/19 9:11 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 7/13/19 8:25 AM, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 08:29:08 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg  
>> wrote:
>>> Please upload a new revision to unstable with source-only changes...
>>
>> Backport for Buster:
>> https://mentors.debian.net/package/monit
>> Please sponsor this package.
> 
> I will sponsor the upload as soon a buster-backports accepts packages.
> 
> All the backports I uploaded today were rejected because source is not
> accepted yet.

buster-backports is now open, but the monit package cannot be uploaded
to it in its current shape.

The version is not correct: 5.26.0-1~bpo9+1

For buster-backports '~bpo10+1` should be used.

Beware that `dch --bpo` still defaults to stretch-backports on buster,
so you need to change the distribution and changelog entry to
buster-backports too.

The .orig.tar.gz is not available on mentors, and there is no
buster-backports branch in the repo on Salsa yet, so the package cannot
be built currently.

Please push the buster-backports branch to Salsa, I'll take it from there.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#931972: Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 7/13/19 8:25 AM, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jul 2019 08:29:08 +0200 Sebastiaan Couwenberg  
> wrote:
>> Please upload a new revision to unstable with source-only changes...
> 
> Backport for Buster:
> https://mentors.debian.net/package/monit
> Please sponsor this package.

I will sponsor the upload as soon a buster-backports accepts packages.

All the backports I uploaded today were rejected because source is not
accepted yet.

> Sponsorship request:
> https://bugs.debian.org/931972

CC'ed.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: watch file for github

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/08/2018 10:41 AM, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
> Does anyone have a tip or a solution to the problem?

codesearch can help to find watch file examples.

> Or is there a package in which this has already been solved?

uversionmangle does the trick, see the attached watch files.

Kind Regards,

Bas

version=4
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/;s/\-/\./g;s/\_/\./g,\
filenamemangle=s/(?:.*?)?(?:rel|v|ipmitool|IPMITOOL)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))/ipmitool-$1.$2/
 \
https://github.com/ipmitool/ipmitool/releases \
(?:.*?/)?(?:rel|v|ipmitool|IPMITOOL)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))
 \
debian uupdate
#
# watch file for sane-backends
#
version=4
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/ 
\
https://gitlab.com/sane-project/backends/tags \
(?:.*?/)?(?:rel|v|sane-backends)[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Gitlab API question: Fetching group ID works not reliably

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/15/2018 08:18 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> If I try science-team or r-pkg-team it returns nothing.  Any idea
> what might be wrong here?

You're not parsing the other pages of results.

 https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/api/#pagination

Kind Regards,

Bas

Re: Different symbols files on different architectures

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 04/06/2018 05:48 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Bas,
> 
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 02:18:03PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 04/06/2018 02:08 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>> after adding a symbols file to libbpp-core all other architectures are
>>> failing due to different symbols (see below for ppc64el[1]) but others
>>> are failing as well.  What is the correct way to fix this?
>>
>> Use (arch=ppc64el) tags for the symbols, or something more generic like
>> arch-bits or arch-endian if those symbols differ based on 32/64 bits
>> CPUs or big/little endian.
>>
>> See: dpkg-symbols(1)
>> https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dpkg-dev/dpkg-gensymbols.1.en.html#Standard_symbol_tags
> 
> I've checked this and I think I understand the task in principle but
> in practice for libbpp-core that's a no-go for manual adaption to
> edit about 1000 entries (may be per architecture).  Is there some
> tool that helps here?  If not my proposed solution would be to
> provide a symbols file for amd64 only and move it out of the way
> in debian/rules for other architectures.
> 
> (I gave it a very minimal shot in branch symbols_i386 but gave up
> after some 20+x entries.)

Since it's a C++ library, I suggest pkgkde-tools:

 http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org/symbolfiles.html

Or just not bother with symbols and use `dh_makeshlibs -V`.

Kind Regards,

Bas

Re: Different symbols files on different architectures

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 04/06/2018 02:08 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> after adding a symbols file to libbpp-core all other architectures are
> failing due to different symbols (see below for ppc64el[1]) but others
> are failing as well.  What is the correct way to fix this?

Use (arch=ppc64el) tags for the symbols, or something more generic like
arch-bits or arch-endian if those symbols differ based on 32/64 bits
CPUs or big/little endian.

See: dpkg-symbols(1)
https://manpages.debian.org/unstable/dpkg-dev/dpkg-gensymbols.1.en.html#Standard_symbol_tags


Kind Regards,

Bas

Re: Testsuite of package squizz fails for d/compat > 9

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

The parallel option is enabled by default for compat level >= 10, try
setting `dh --no-parallel` to disable the parallel option again.

Kind Regards,

Bas

Bug#886501: RFS: qwt/6.1.3-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Gudjon,

Please also fix #886171 with qwt (6.1.3-1) by incorporating the attached
changes, specifically the dh_makeshlibs override.

Kind Regards,

Bas
diff -Nru qwt-6.1.2/debian/changelog qwt-6.1.2/debian/changelog
--- qwt-6.1.2/debian/changelog  2016-09-05 14:05:19.0 +0200
+++ qwt-6.1.2/debian/changelog  2018-01-11 07:47:48.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+qwt (6.1.2-6.1) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+  * Non-maintainer upload.
+  * Update symbols files with buildds' logs. Yet again.
+(closes: #886171)
+  * Override dh_makeshlibs to not fail on symbols changes,
+and set upstream version.
+
+ -- Bas Couwenberg   Thu, 11 Jan 2018 07:47:48 +0100
+
 qwt (6.1.2-6) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * Non-maintainer upload.
diff -Nru qwt-6.1.2/debian/libqwt6abi1.symbols 
qwt-6.1.2/debian/libqwt6abi1.symbols
--- qwt-6.1.2/debian/libqwt6abi1.symbols2016-09-05 14:01:51.0 
+0200
+++ qwt-6.1.2/debian/libqwt6abi1.symbols2018-01-11 07:47:48.0 
+0100
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 6.1.2 alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf hppa hurd-i386 
i386 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 mips mips64el mipsel powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 
ppc64el s390x sparc64 x32
+# SymbolsHelper-Confirmed: 6.1.2 alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf hppa hurd-i386 
i386 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 m68k mips mips64el mipsel powerpc powerpcspe 
ppc64 ppc64el s390x sh4 sparc64 x32
 libqwt.so.6abi1 libqwt6abi1 #MINVER#
  _Z11qwtTickListRK11QwtScaleDiv@Base 6.1.2
  _Z15qwtBoundingRectRK13QwtSeriesDataI10QwtPoint3DEii@Base 6.1.2
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
  (optional=templinst|arch=!mips 
!mipsel)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI10QwtPoint3DE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base 
6.1.2
  
(optional=templinst)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI12QwtSetSampleE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base
 6.1.2
  
(optional=templinst)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI13QwtOHLCSampleE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base
 6.1.2
- (optional=templinst|arch=alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf hppa hurd-i386 i386 
kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 mips64el powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 ppc64el s390x 
sparc64 
x32)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI13QwtPointPolarE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base 
6.1.2
+ (optional=templinst|arch=alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf hppa hurd-i386 i386 
kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 m68k mips64el powerpc powerpcspe ppc64 ppc64el 
s390x sh4 sparc64 
x32)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI13QwtPointPolarE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base 
6.1.2
  
(optional=templinst)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI17QwtIntervalSampleE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base
 6.1.2
  (optional=templinst|arch=!mips 
!mipsel)_Z16qwtBoundingRectTI7QPointFE6QRectFRK13QwtSeriesDataIT_Eii@Base 6.1.2
  _Z19qwtNormalizeDegreesd@Base 6.1.2
@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@
  _Z9qwtGetMinPKdi@Base 6.1.2
  _ZGVZNK18QwtPlainTextEngine11PrivateData10findAscentERK5QFontE5dummy@Base 
6.1.2
  _ZGVZNK18QwtPlainTextEngine11PrivateData10findAscentERK5QFontE5white@Base 
6.1.2
- (arch=alpha armel armhf mips mips64el mipsel s390x)_ZN10QByteArrayD1Ev@Base 
6.1.2
- (arch=alpha armel armhf mips mips64el mipsel s390x)_ZN10QByteArrayD2Ev@Base 
6.1.2
+ (arch=alpha armel armhf m68k mips mips64el mipsel 
s390x)_ZN10QByteArrayD1Ev@Base 6.1.2
+ (arch=alpha armel armhf m68k mips mips64el mipsel 
s390x)_ZN10QByteArrayD2Ev@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN10QwtClipper10clipCircleERK6QRectFRK7QPointFd@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN10QwtClipper11clipPolygonERK5QRectRK8QPolygonb@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN10QwtClipper11clipPolygonERK6QRectFRK8QPolygonb@Base 6.1.2
@@ -233,8 +233,8 @@
  
(optional=templinst)_ZN12QtConcurrent41VoidStoredConstMemberFunctionPointerCall4Iv18QwtPlotSpectrogramRK11QwtScaleMapS2_S4_S2_RK5QRectS5_P6QImageS9_ED1Ev@Base
 6.1.2
  
(optional=templinst)_ZN12QtConcurrent41VoidStoredConstMemberFunctionPointerCall4Iv18QwtPlotSpectrogramRK11QwtScaleMapS2_S4_S2_RK5QRectS5_P6QImageS9_ED2Ev@Base
 6.1.2
  _ZN12QwtLegendMap12removeWidgetEPK7QWidget@Base 6.1.2
- (optional=gccinternal|arch=!alpha !arm64 !armel !armhf !hppa !mips !mips64el 
!mipsel !powerpc !powerpcspe !ppc64 !ppc64el !s390x 
!sparc64)_ZN12QwtLegendMap5EntryD1Ev@Base 6.1.2
- (optional=gccinternal|arch=!alpha !arm64 !armel !armhf !hppa !mips !mips64el 
!mipsel !powerpc !powerpcspe !ppc64 !ppc64el !s390x 
!sparc64)_ZN12QwtLegendMap5EntryD2Ev@Base 6.1.2
+ (optional=gccinternal|arch=!alpha !arm64 !armel !armhf !hppa !m68k !mips 
!mips64el !mipsel !powerpc !powerpcspe !ppc64 !ppc64el !s390x !sh4 
!sparc64)_ZN12QwtLegendMap5EntryD1Ev@Base 6.1.2
+ (optional=gccinternal|arch=!alpha !arm64 !armel !armhf !hppa !m68k !mips 
!mips64el !mipsel !powerpc !powerpcspe !ppc64 !ppc64el !s390x !sh4 
!sparc64)_ZN12QwtLegendMap5EntryD2Ev@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN12QwtLegendMap6insertERK8QVariantRK5QListIP7QWidgetE@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN12QwtLegendMap6removeERK8QVariant@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN12QwtMagnifier10setEnabledEb@Base 6.1.2
@@ -1313,8 +1313,8 @@
  _ZN21QwtIntervalSeriesDataD1Ev@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN21QwtIntervalSeriesDataD2Ev@Base 6.1.2
  _ZN21QwtStyleSheetRecorder11updateStateERK17QPaintEngineState@Base 6.1.2
- (optional=gccinternal|arch=!alpha !arm64 !armel !armhf !hppa 

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/01/2016 07:39 PM, Klaus Zimmermann wrote:
> Am 30.09.2016 um 14:46 schrieb Gianfranco Costamagna:
>> So, if you can answer the above points and ping back, I'll be happy to do a 
>> review and maybe an upload.
>
> Thanks, that would be great!

Regarding package review, please also build the module for Python 3 per
the Python Policy:

 https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/

Since the package uses pybuild, supporting Python 3 in addition is trivial.

>> BTW you should be member of the Team, and create a repo there if you want to 
>> maintain it
>> under that umbrella [1].
>
> I am already a member and the repository is available under the team
> facilities, i.e. the MR thing with ./checkout cf-python should work.
> In fact I already received a number of comments, particularly from
> bignose and mapreri, that improved the quality of the package (I hope),
> and of the software itself, since some of the necessary patches have
> already moved upstream.
> 
> If it's preferable to keep the package in the GIS team, I will also be
> happy to do that. I am inexperienced in Debian politics and submit to
> your better judgment.

As long as cf-python is properly maintained within the Python Modules
team I'm happy to see it there. The Debian GIS team is low on manpower,
so all packages taken care of by someone other than me is very welcome.
Many of the netcdf reverse dependencies are maintained outside of the
Debian GIS team, so having cf-python maintained elsewhere is in line
with that.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/30/2016 02:46 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> "the netcdf package. There was an ITP for the netcdf-libcf package, but
> development of this source upstream is stalled.
> 
> cf-python depends on netcdf-python being packaged first, and will be 
> maintained
> within the Debian GIS team."
> 
> this is what Ross said, where is netcdf-python package?

That's the python-netcdf4 package in the Build-Depends:

 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/netcdf4-python

It provides the modern Python bindings for libnetcdf, unlike the old
python-netcdf package from python-scientific which does not support
numpy >= 1.9. For some discussion about these see #778417 & #821221.

> I also fail to see where Ross gave you permission to work and ask for 
> sponsorhip on this package
> (this isn't an issue, but it wouldn't be the first time that somebody steals 
> a package
> to another person, so I prefer a written sentence where permission to do it 
> is granted).

The annoying bot that changes ITPs into RFPs after a certain time
without progress is most likely at fault. See the history of #777315.
Anyone is free to take over an RFP, so I don't think explicit consent
from Ross is required for cf-python.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 18:15:08 +0200 Klaus Zimmermann wrote:
> Mattia already declined sponsoring on grounds of not sponsoring Debian 
> virgins like myself.

Ross Gammon's initial ITP intended to maintain this package in the
Debian GIS team alongside the netcdf packages where I'm available for
sponsoring as is Andreas Tille's Sponsoring of Blends initiative.

Since the package has been moved to the Python Modules team, finding a
sponsor within the team is your best option. Please contact
debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org as documented in the Python Modules Team
policy:

 http://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/policy.html#joining-the-team

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Any reason why sphinx does not migrate to testing?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/16/2016 10:01 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> So what might be the problem here?

The strict dependencies on sphinx in cdist-doc apparently.

>From the britney output:

 Trying easy from autohinter: clustalo/1.2.3-1 sphinx/1.4.6-1
 start: 57+556: a-3:i-18:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 orig: 57+556: a-3:i-18:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 easy: 59+556: a-4:i-19:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 * amd64: cdist-doc
 * i386: cdist-doc

 FAILED

https://release.debian.org/britney/update_output.txt

The new cdist has not aged sufficiently to migrate:

 Excuse for cdist

 * Too young, only 4 of 5 days old
 * Depends: cdist sphinx
 * Not considered

https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=cdist

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: .desktop file handling

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/15/2016 10:02 AM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> On 15/09/16 08:53, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>>> I know this approach
>>> works, but is it the "right" way? Does it matter?
>>
>> your way is the best  one if you also add a patch to automatically
>> install the file
>> inside the upstream build system.
>>
>> Otherwise you can avoid a patch and add the desktop file inside the
>> debian directory,
>> and ask upstream to integrate it.
> 
> In my personal experience, upstream usually prefers to be asked about
> where to put the .desktop file. So writing a patch that blindly places
> it in the root of the source tree may be rejected as is.
> 
> Instead you should rather first embed it in the debian/ folder and
> discuss with upstream where to put it in a subsequent PR.

A desktop file without application icons doesn't make a lot of sense,
placing the desktop relative to icons is common.

Related policy:

 https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-menus

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#836373: marked as done (RFS: ismrmrd/1.3.2-4 [RC])

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> (can you please check for other hdf breakages in the archive?)

The archive rebuilds resulted in some similar bugreports, the
outstanding one is mathgl (#835680), I've submitted a patch to the
bugreport last Sunday.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#832985: RFS: svgsalamander/1.0.0+dfsg1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Felix,

Thanks for your changes.

On 08/06/2016 04:35 PM, Felix Natter wrote:
> Sebastiaan Couwenberg writes:
>> Consider adding the --parallel option to dh in debian/rules to enable
>> the use of parallel builds with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=".
> 
> done. (although compilation takes less than a few seconds).

The benefit of parallel builds for small packages is limited, adding the
--parallel option is mostly a best practice because without it debhelper
won't enable parallel support even when it's beneficial. I maintain a
couple of big packages for which you don't won't non-parallel builds as
those take several hours, instead of under an hour with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=3".

debhelper compat level 10 defaults to --parallel for all buildsystems
that support parallel building, which is a nice improvement. But compat
level 10 is not well supported in stable yet.

>> The watch file can also be improved to handle common issues [0], like
>> the attached version for example.
> 
> I added your watch file, thank you.
> So that I understand this:
> - version=3 is preferred
> - make archive type variable
> - make dversionmangle more general (backports etc.)
> - make uversionmangle more general:
> +uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/,\
> --> is this best practice for github tarballs? Otherwise I think this is
> difficult because every upstream project has different terminology.
> 
> --> Maybe the uscan man page should be extended regarding this?
> (it contains a github example hard-coded for tar.gz)

Because uscan in jessie doesn't support version=4 yet, I prefer
version=3 watch files until stretch is stable. The downgrade for
svgSalamander is appreciated.

The uversionmangle is a best practice in general, and is documented on
the wiki [0]. Because the gbp import-orig complains about uppercase RC
that is additionally translated to lowercase.

Because the version captured in debian/watch included non-digets
(\d+\S+) you need to handle pre-releases with the uversionmangle rule,
otherwise version 1.0.0-rc1 will not precede version 1.0.0.

[0] https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes

>> Also consider adding upstream metadata [1].
> 
> I added this.

I've committed a few improvements to the upstream metadata before
sponsoring the upload. Most importantly fixing the Repository URL to
include the .git suffix required for `git clone`. I've also added the
Repository-Browse field (without the .git suffix).

I've also added a gbp.conf file to use pristine-tar by default, to not
require the --(git-)pristine-tar options for the git-buildpackage commands.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#832985: RFS: svgsalamander/1.0.0+dfsg1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Felix,

I've had a look at your package and some comments follow. In general the
package looks good, but there is room for improvement.

Please consider bumping the debhelper compatibility to 9.

Also change the LGPL-2.0 shortname to LGPL-2+ to better reflects the "or
(at your option) any later version" clause.

The Forwarded header in
0004-Use-system-awt-gradient-instead-of-the-embedded-batik.patch &
0006-modify-broken-upstream-pom.patch can also be improved. For the
former "not-needed" is more appropriate than "no" with note, not-needed
is probably also appropriate for the latter.

The README.source should be updated to reflect the change to GitHub
tarballs.

Consider adding the --parallel option to dh in debian/rules to enable
the use of parallel builds with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=".

The watch file can also be improved to handle common issues [0], like
the attached version for example.

Also consider adding upstream metadata [1].

[0] https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
version=3
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/,\
filenamemangle=s/(?:.*?)?(?:rel|v|svgSalamander)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))/svgSalamander-$1.$2/
 \
https://github.com/blackears/svgSalamander/releases \
(?:.*?/)?(?:rel|v|svgSalamander)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))

Re: Missing latest version of libgtk-3-common in unstable?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/22/2016 02:39 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Any hint?

The arch:all package cannot be built on the buildds:

https://bugs.debian.org/824999

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: change of username

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/20/2016 03:34 PM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> When I signed up some years ago, I got a user name with -guest appended. I
> guess that was the policy at the time. In any case, how can I change that?

You can get rid of the -guest suffix by becoming a DD or DM.

See also:

Alioth FAQ: 1.1. Why do I have a "-guest" suffix on my account ?

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#Why_do_I_have_a_.22-guest.22_suffix_on_my_account_.3F

> I wouldn't mind an entirely new account either, even if I have to sign up
> for all my groups again.

After getting your DD or DM account, you'll need to join the groups
again with that account and request the project admins to remove your
-guest account.

See: Alioth FAQ 1.4 & 1.5:

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#How_can_I_migrate_my_-guest_account_to_my_new_official_Debian_account_.3F

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#How_can_I_remove_my_old_-guest_account_.3F_an_unused_project_.3F

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Trying to disable error=format-security for clapack

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/16/2016 11:07 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> When reading the code it seems to me that actually a test whether this
> code works or not is intended and thus fixing the format is not in the
> intention of the authors.  So I tried 
> 
> export DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_FORMAT:=0
> DPKG_EXPORT_BUILDFLAGS = 1
> 
> but the build keeps on failing.  Any idea?

If you want to disable the format-security option, you can try this in
debian/rules:

 CFLAGS += -Wno-error=format-security

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Infrastructure Inquiry -- please advise

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Brian,

This question is not very suitable for the mentors list, this list is
intended for help with packaging and other developer-related issues.

On 04/14/2016 09:17 PM, Brian M Hamlin wrote:
> I am writing this email, not as a Debian Developer in-training, but instead 
> asking advice from 
> the Debian Project, on behalf of OSGeo.org -- a software foundation modeled 
> on the Apache Foundation, 
> for free and open geospatial software development. 
> 
> OSGeo.org Systems Administration (SAC) is building a new infrastructure for 
> ** git repositories **.. 
> the Debian Project core is clearly experienced here, so I am writing to ask 
> for advice and.or feedback 
> on our own efforts. As with Apache Foundation and others, infrastructure is 
> security-related, 
> so experienced advice is very welcome.

I suspect the recent 'What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?'
[0] thread is the trigger for your question.

The experiences of the Alioth administrators [1] is probably what you're
looking for.

The Alioth administrators are very busy, so you may not get a reply from
them in the short term. Prodding an admin on #alioth may get you
feedback sooner.

The git infrastructure on Alioth uses pretty standard git components
like cgit, nothing fancy like gogs. The major benefit is its integration
with Fusion Forge, the software running on Alioth [2]. This takes care
of user/group and SSH key management. This is not very relevant for the
proposed git service for OSGeo.

Do you have specific questions for the Alioth admins?

[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-April/015890.html
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Alioth
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#813917: RFS: node-leaflet-formbuilder/0.2.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work kosmtik and its dependencies.

I've reviewed the package, and it needs a few changes.

Please update the Source URL in the copyright file to use the URL from
the watch file, the homepage link is not as appropriate for the
copyright file.

The Bug-* URLs in upstream/metadata need to be fixed too.

Also consider filing an issue upstream to have them include a proper
license file, the only reference to the license is package.json which is
a bit sparse.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#809312: RFS: otb/5.2.0+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- Orfeo Toolbox [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 29-12-15 11:54, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> should I fix the spelling and reupload now or wait for the NEW queue.

I'd fix it in git now, and wait for the next upload until it passes the
NEW queue.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#805656: RFS: node-leaflet-hash/0.2.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 20-11-15 20:25, Ross Gammon wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-leaflet-hash"

I pushed some changes to document the license & copyright for the
embedded copy of leaflet-src.js, and update the Vcs-Browser URL to use
HTTPS.

Why do you install lib/leaflet-src.js?

It seems to be included only for its use in test/index.html, and that
test isn't used by the package. I don't think this files needs to be
installed, and if it does libjs-leaflet should be used instead.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: dev-pkg-without-shlib-symlink lintian warning for libtool library using -release & -version-info

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11-10-15 22:22, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl>, 2015-10-08, 21:01:
>> To deal with the external usage of liblwgeom built from the postgis
>> sources, the upstream developers now use the -release libtool option
>> along with -version-info to better support installation of multiple
>> postgis versions.
>>
>> The -release option was added to support the multiple version use case
>> on Windows, for the Debian package the shared library approach with
>> -version-info is sufficient.
> 
> https://autotools.io/libtool/version.html suggests that instead of
> combining -release and -version-info, one should encode the version in
> the library's name.

Yeah, that my suggestion to upstream too [0], but they thought of it as
a feature that you can still link with -llwgeom [1].

>> Lintian currently warns about the missing symlinks from
>> liblwgeom-2.2.so to liblwgeom-2.2.so.2.2.0, because libtool only
>> creates the liblwgeom.so (and liblwgeom-2.2.so.2) symlink.
> 
> The code to determine name of the dev symlink name looks like this:
> 
> $link_file =~ s/-[\d\.]+\.so$/.so/o;
> $link_file =~ s/\.so.+$/.so/o;
> 
> So it doesn't seem to support the combination of -release and
> -version-info.

Thanks for this confirmation, I hadn't dug into the lintian source.

>> Am I correct in my assumption that this is a false positive?
> 
> Probably (sort of) yes...

Should we recommend upstream to follow the advice from Autotools Mythbuster?

I'm unable to suggest a good solution to the concerns raised by the
Windows maintainer of PostGIS, which is the reason for the current
compromise combining -release & -version-info. The Autotools Mythbuster
says:

"
 The first reaction would be to combine the two options, -release and
 -version-info; this would, though, be wrong. When using -release the
 static archive, the one with .a extension, the libtool archive (see
 Section 5, “Libtool Archives”) and the .so file used by the link
 editor would not have a revision appended, which means that two
 different version of the library can't be installed at the same time.
"

While this is true on Linux at least, I don't think is true for Windows.

PostGIS 2.2.0 final was shipped a bit too quickly, so there's going to
be an ABI break in 2.2.1, which seems a good opportunity to further
change the SONAME and library version handling.

[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2015-October/025274.html
[1] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2015-October/025279.html

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

dev-pkg-without-shlib-symlink lintian warning for libtool library using -release & -version-info

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

To deal with the external usage of liblwgeom built from the postgis
sources, the upstream developers now use the -release libtool option
along with -version-info to better support installation of multiple
postgis versions.

The -release option was added to support the multiple version use case
on Windows, for the Debian package the shared library approach with
-version-info is sufficient.

Before PostGIS 2.2.0 the SONAME for liblwgeom used to include the full
upstream version (e.g. liblwgeom-2.1.8.so), for 2.2.0rc1 it briefly used
the liblwgeom.so.2 SONAME.

Lintian currently warns about the missing symlinks from
liblwgeom-2.2.so to liblwgeom-2.2.so.2.2.0, because libtool only creates
the liblwgeom.so (and liblwgeom-2.2.so.2) symlink.

Am I correct in my assumption that this is a false positive?

The libtool manual seems to suggest that this is the expected and
correct behaviour, but lintian expects liblwgeom-2.2.so instead of
liblwgeom.so which may just be a naive assumption.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Java problem when upgrading pixelmed

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Emmanuel,

On 09-10-15 00:05, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 08/10/2015 13:40, Bas Couwenberg a écrit :
> 
>> Due to the difficulties getting JCS [0] and its dependencies [1]
>> packaged, I've not been able to update to any of the newer JOSM upstream
>> releases making the josm package increasingly irrelevant. And if I
>> remain unable to get JCS packaged, I'll have josm removed from the
>> archive before the freeze.
> 
> I packaged geronimo-jcache-1.0-spec and it's now in the NEW queue. I
> started completing your commons-jcs package to fix the remaining issues,
> I'll let you know when it's ready.

Thanks for your work on this, it's much appreciated!

I didn't expect that fixing jcache would be as easy as adding
true to the pom.xml.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Java problem when upgrading pixelmed

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09-10-15 00:58, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 08/10/2015 13:40, Bas Couwenberg a écrit :
> 
>> Due to the difficulties getting JCS [0] and its dependencies [1]
>> packaged, I've not been able to update to any of the newer JOSM upstream
>> releases making the josm package increasingly irrelevant. And if I
>> remain unable to get JCS packaged, I'll have josm removed from the
>> archive before the freeze.
> 
> I noticed that JOSM imports directly the sources from the trunk of JCS
> using svn externals. JCS is still in a beta state, the API isn't stable,
> so if we upload the version 2.0-beta-1 there is no guarantee it will
> work with JOSM. In this case I think you should just go ahead and use
> the version of JCS bundled with JOSM.
> 
> Note that JOSM fetches only the jcs-core module, so you don't need the
> jcache stuff and you don't have to wait for geronimo-jcache-1.0-spec to
> enter unstable.

Thanks for these hints too.

I've already raised my concerns about the JCS requirement in JOSM which
in my opinion is premature due to the beta stage of JCS 2.0 and its
alpha stage dependency on jcache. But JOSM upstream doesn't care much
about building from source by downstreams.

I'll see what I can do with the embedded dependency, although we need it
for the current upstream releases for both JOSM and JMapViewer. I'd
rather not duplicate JCS for both.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: +dfsg extension with Files-Excluded: in d/copyright

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01-09-15 12:24, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> Quoting Sebastiaan Couwenberg (2015-09-01 12:13:07)
>> Add the repacksuffix option, e.g.:
>> 
>> version=3 opts=\ dversionmangle=s/\+dfsg//,\ 
>> uversionmangle=s/$/+dfsg/,\ repacksuffix=+dfsg \ 
>> http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/FTP/software/lheasoft/fv/ \ 
>> fv(.+\..+)_src\.tar\.gz
>> 
> 
> is the uversionmangle option still needed with repacksuffix?

No, repacksuffix is sufficient to have uscan append it to upstream
version (and only when it actually repacks the upstream sources, if no
Files-Excluded match no repacking is done). uversionmangle is mostly
usefull for mangling pre-releases.

For this specific software I'd use the following watch file:

version=3
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/,\
repacksuffix=+dfsg \
http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/FTP/software/lheasoft/fv/ \
(?:.*?/)?fv(\d\S+)_src\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))

This handles the common issues documented on the Wiki:

https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: +dfsg extension with Files-Excluded: in d/copyright

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01-09-15 11:51, Ole Streicher wrote:
> when using the Files-Excluded: tag in debian/copyright, in the past
> there was an "+dfsg" suffix added to the version number
> automatically. This seems to have changed; is there a reason for that?
> Is there any case to use Files-Excluded: *without* actually adding the
> suffix?
> 
> What is recommended way for the watch file that it automatically
> generated to correct version number for a newly created orig.tar file?
> 
> I tried to add "uversionmangle", but it didn't work well:
> 
> version=3
> opts=dversionmangle=s/\+dfsg//,uversionmangle=s/$/+dfsg/ \
>  http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/FTP/software/lheasoft/fv/fv(.+\..+)_src\.tar\.gz

Add the repacksuffix option, e.g.:

version=3
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+dfsg//,\
uversionmangle=s/$/+dfsg/,\
repacksuffix=+dfsg \
http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/FTP/software/lheasoft/fv/ \
fv(.+\..+)_src\.tar\.gz

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: +dfsg extension with Files-Excluded: in d/copyright

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01-09-15 14:22, Ole Streicher wrote:
> Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebas...@xs4all.nl> writes:
>> On 01-09-15 11:51, Ole Streicher wrote:
>>> What is recommended way for the watch file that it automatically
>>> generated to correct version number for a newly created orig.tar file?
>> Add the repacksuffix option
> 
> Is the empty default value for repacksuffix a good choice here? I cannot
> imagine a case where one removes something from the upstream tarball and
> does not add a suffix to the version. Specifically, I had the case that
> I first (last year) added a few Files-Excluded and created a "+dfsg"
> tarball, and when I later update with the new devscripts version, I
> forgot to check the suffix and accidently created a package without the
> suffix. This could be avoided if either the suffix defaults to +dfsg if
> files are excluded, or if uscan fails with some error in this case. Or
> Lintian would report this.

An empty value for the repacksuffix is not a good idea, in your case
repacksuffix=+dfsg is appropriate. When only auto cleaned build
artifacts are excluded for example, repacksuffix=+ds is more appropriate.

uscan will only apped the repacksuffix if it actually excluded files
from the repacked upstream tarball. uscan reports the number of files
it excluded, if that's 0 the repacksuffix isn't used.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#796998: RFS: sfcgal/1.1.0

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Sven,

Thanks for your work on sfcgal.

On 26-08-15 20:17, Sven Geggus wrote:
 I have just uploaded a new Version of sfcgal to mentors.debian.net.
 
 This is a very minor change. I included a patch from upstream which will
 make it compile again using boost boost 1.58 and gcc5

The Tracker reports a missing symbols in the builds logs, see:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/sfcgal
https://qa.debian.org/bls/packages/s/sfcgal.html

To fix this you need to update the symbols file again using the build
logs (with pkgkde-getbuildlogs  pkgkde-symbolshelper). I took the
liberty to fix this for you.

Because of the switch to GCC 5 after the will very likely be more
symbols changes on the other architectures. Keep an eye on the build
status and update the symbols if any of the logs report dh_makeshlibs
symbols diffs.

https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=sfcgal

The BTS also reports an outstanding bug that you should address in this
upload, no need to postpone the fix. See:

https://bugs.debian.org/src:sfcgal
https://bugs.debian.org/794317

Because of the architecture dependent sfcgal-config Multi-Arch: same
cannot be used for libsfgcal-dev, it will have to be Multi-Arch: foreign.

https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation

Also be aware that sfcgal will soon be part of the cgal GCC 5 transition
that still needs to start.

https://bugs.debian.org/790996

Please address the Multi-Arch bugreport and update the symbols for GCC
5, it should be ready for upload then.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Bug#796191: RFS: libharu/2.3.0+dfsg-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 20-08-15 12:52, Jakub Wilk wrote:
 * Gianfranco Costamagna costamagnagianfra...@yahoo.it, 2015-08-20, 10:29:
 Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends} should be added,
 
 FWIW, ${misc:Pre-Depends} was required for partial squeeze-wheezy
 upgrades. It is no longer necessary.
 
 and the dev package should not marked as multiarch same.
 
 Why not?

A -dev package may contain an architecture dependent -config executable,
that cannot be included in a M-A: same package. The same goes for
headers which vary across architectures.

If there are no architecture dependent files in a -dev package M-A: same
should be fine.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 20-08-15 00:51, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
 I keep getting the error message:
 
 Error: Unable to check the signature or the signature was invalid:
 == class 'userdir_exceptions.UDFormatError': UDFormatError: Signing key 
 (80BFC3820C4B26E3, Jerome) has expired
 
 But my key has not expireed. On the other hand, it was renewed a few month 
 ago.
 
 https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindexsearch=0x80BFC3820C4B26E3

I suspect you didn't push your updated key to the Debian keyserver.

Make sure to send it to keyring.debian.org:

 gpg --keyserver keyring.debian.org --send-keys your key id

See also: https://www.debian.org/events/keysigning

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 19-08-15 13:38, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
 Hello Forum:
 
 I recently got the right to access to some Debian porter machines.
 Now I want to connect to them via SSH. I guess that some SSH key
 must be deposited somewhere: any idea ?

You can change your SSH key via the LDAP mail gateway:


 Part of the replicated dataset is a virtual .ssh/authorized_keys file
 for each user. The change address is the simplest way to set the RSA
 key(s) you intend to use. Simply place a key on a line by itself, the
 full SSH key format specification is supported, see sshd(8). Probably
 the most common way to use this function will be

  cat .ssh/id_rsa.pub | gpg --clearsign | mail chan...@db.debian.org

 which will set the authentication key to the identity you are using.
 Multiple keys per user are supported, but they must all be sent at
 once. Keys can be exported to a subset of machines by prepending
 allowed_hosts=$fqdn,$fqdn2 to the specific key. The allowed machines
 must only be separated by a comma. Example:

  allowed_hosts=ravel.debian.org,gluck.debian.org ssh-rsa
B3Nz..mOX/JQ== user@machine
 ssh-rsa B3Nz..uD0khQ== user@machine


https://db.debian.org/doc-mail.html

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 19-08-15 23:30, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
 On 19/08/15 14:02, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 On 19-08-15 13:38, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
 I recently got the right to access to some Debian porter machines.
 Now I want to connect to them via SSH. I guess that some SSH key
 must be deposited somewhere: any idea ?

 You can change your SSH key via the LDAP mail gateway:

 [...]
 https://db.debian.org/doc-mail.html
 
 So I went there and I done: my feed backs from the mail gateway are errors:
 is this service also meant for non-DD contributors ?

It should be, I added my SSH key via a mail to changes@ back when I
first got a guest account and I wasn't a DM nor DD yet.

Make sure the message to changes@ is signed with the key you used to
request the guest account and signed the DMUP with.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Pbuilder broken due to aptitude: symbol lookup error

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05-08-15 21:32, Andreas Tille wrote:
 Setting up pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (0.invalid.0) ...
 aptitude: symbol lookup error: aptitude: undefined symbol: 
 _ZN7cwidget7widgets5pager8set_textERKSsPKc
 [...]
 This is for a package that only Build-Depends debhelper.  Other packages
 with more Build-Dependencies are failing to install any of them.
 
 Any hint?

aptitude needs a rebuild for the cwidget transition:

https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-cwidget.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2015/08/msg00120.html

In the mean time you can use the classic resolver by setting it in
.pbuilderrc:

PBUILDERSATISFYDEPENDSCMD=/usr/lib/pbuilder/pbuilder-satisfydepends-classic

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55c267d9.7090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#794019: RFS: sfcgal/1.1.0

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Sven,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 29-07-15 22:48, Sven Geggus wrote:
 * Package name: sfcgal
   Version : 1.1.0-2~exp1

It looks like someone may have sponsored the upload already, I got a
bunch of 553 Could not create file messages from dput:

Good signature on ../sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc.
Uploading to ftp-master (via ftp to ftp.upload.debian.org):
  Uploading sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc: 553 Could not create file.
Leaving existing sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc on the server and continuing
NOTE: This existing file may have been previously uploaded partially.
   For official Debian upload queues, the dcut(1) utility can be
   used to remove this file, and after an acknowledgement mail is
   received in response to dcut, the upload can be re-initiated.

Did you perhaps upload to ftp-master instead of mentors?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55b9452a.3030...@xs4all.nl

Bug#794019: RFS: sfcgal/1.1.0

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 29-07-15 23:33, Sven Geggus wrote:
 Sebastiaan Couwenberg schrieb am Mittwoch, den 29. Juli um 23:27 Uhr:
 
 Did you perhaps upload to ftp-master instead of mentors?
 
 Unfortunately I already closed the terminal where I did the upload, but I do 
 definitely have mentors.debian.net in my .dput.cf

Unless you've made mentors the default dput target, you need to specify
it explicitly:

 dput mentors changes

 Would I be even able to upload to ftp-master? My gpg key should be available 
 on
 mentors.debian.net only.

The actual file transfer should work, but because your signature is not
in the keyring the upload will be rejected.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55b94bd4.90...@xs4all.nl

Bug#792701: RFS: saga/2.2.0+dfsg-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

I noticed some updates to the copyright file were required to include
the changes in the new upstream release, I took the liberty to commit
those changes.

Unfortunately I cannot build the package because the pristine-tar branch
hasn't been updated for saga_2.2.0+dfsg.orig.tar.xz. Maybe you forgot to
push the branch?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55aa8936.40...@xs4all.nl

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 07/19/2015 12:01 AM, Christopher Baines wrote:
 On 18/07/15 22:42, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 Try to not use an annotated tag next time to keep all the changes
 on the branch.
 
 Regarding the debian tag, I just used gbp buildpackage --git-tag
 to generate it. Is your suggestion just to make a lightweight tag?

Because you cannot upload the package yourself, it's better to only
set the distribution in the changelog (using `dch -r`) and leave the
tagging (with `debcommit -ar`) for after the upload. There may be more
changes need before the upload, so this prevent the need to modify the
tag (which is especially problematic for signed tags).

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=y1E7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55aad15a.10...@xs4all.nl

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/18/2015 10:35 PM, Christopher Baines wrote:
 The package is maintained in a git repository that can be found
 here:
 
 https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/osrm.git/

You still need to finalize the package by setting the distribution:

 dch -r -D unstable
 git commit -m Set distribution to unstable. -a

See also:

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-release-upload

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/18/2015 10:46 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 On 07/18/2015 10:35 PM, Christopher Baines wrote:
 The package is maintained in a git repository that can be found 
 here:
 
 https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/osrm.git/
 
 You still need to finalize the package by setting the
 distribution:
 
 dch -r -D unstable git commit -m Set distribution to unstable.
 -a
 
 See also:
 
 http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-release-upload

PS,
 
be sure to also read the relevant section from the Policy:

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgchangelog

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Pbuilder requests Build-Depends on local machine - why this?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

 since I'm back from vacation and upgraded my testing system I realised
 that when using pbuilder the Build-Depends of some package seem to be
 required also on the machine that is creating the pbuilder chroot
 (=where you start pdebuild).  I regard this a bug but may be I'm missing
 something so before creating noise I would like to make sure whether its
 just me ...

This is usually because those build dependencies are required to run the
clean target that is execute first outside the chroot.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/4d2e562e87d562d740e50ea359e135e7.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#788986: RFS: geolinks/0.1.0-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package too.

On 06/16/2015 09:18 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package geolinks

This package also as small copyright issue. Please add a Files section
for debian/* with your copyright unless you want to assign this to upstream.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55809b23.5000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788984: RFS: owslib/0.9.0-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 06/16/2015 09:10 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package owslib

The copyright for several authors is missing from the debian/copyright
file, among them Luís de Sousa for the newly added wcs111.py for example.

Please add the missing copyright holders. Other than that the package
looks good.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/558093aa.1090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788850: RFS: python-cligj/0.2.0-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 06/15/2015 05:20 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package python-cligj

I've sponsored the upload, and since it was a straightforward new
upstream release I have not further comments.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/557f178a.3010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788385: RFS: fiona/1.5.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package too.

On 06/10/2015 10:22 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
  Package name: fiona
  Version : 1.5.1-1

The package cannot be built from git because the upstream  pristine-tar
branches have not been pushed.

Please run `git push --all  git push --tags` to get it all to Alioth.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5578a41c.40...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788385: RFS: fiona/1.5.1-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/10/2015 10:54 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 On 06/10/2015 10:22 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
  Package name: fiona
  Version : 1.5.1-1
 
 The package cannot be built from git because the upstream  pristine-tar
 branches have not been pushed.
 
 Please run `git push --all  git push --tags` to get it all to Alioth.

Thanks for the push, I've just sponsored the upload.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5578a919.6050...@xs4all.nl

Re: Upload new version of a package waiting in NEW

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

  c) upload immediately.
 i)   use a new version?

Because NEW processing takes such a long time now, I don't wait for FTP
master to review my packages in NEW before working on them again.

When I have a new revision of the package ready I just upload it so that
the latest revision will get into the archive when FTP master finally gets
around to accept the package.

It's not uncommon to have multiple revisions of the same package in NEW,
as you can see in the current state of the NEW queue:

https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/38a802dd06333cb51117568f165a417a.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#786571: RFS: osm-gps-map/1.0.2-3 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 05/23/2015 12:21 AM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package osm-gps-map

I've sponsored the uploaded, but there are a couple of unused
substitution variables in the control file you may want to have a look at.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/555fd18e.7040...@xs4all.nl

Re: http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/ not accessible any more

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

 It seems it is forbidden to read the web dir directly.  Any reason for
 this and if it is intentional what would be the alternative to fetch
 data about packages in new?

If indexes are forbidden intentionally now, extracting the links from
new.html may be reasonable alternative.

https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
https://ftp-master.debian.org/backports-new.html

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/078240a66aa7b2afe99f3ffa6909dc61.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#784132: RFS: pyshp/1.2.1-2

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

On 05/03/2015 01:21 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 * Package name: pyshp
   Version : 1.2.1-2

Because version 1.2.1+ds-1 was the actual version to be uploaded to the
archive, the packages for version 1.2.1-2 was not automatically removed
from mentors.

Can you remove it to get rid of the TODO list item on the DMD page?

https://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-grass-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.org#todo

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/554e89fe.3000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781763: RFS: node-coffeeify/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 04/03/2015 05:56 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 Thanks again for another review Bas.
 
 On 02/04/15 19:59, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 You may want to consider extending Use_through2.patch to cover all files
 that use the through module, there are some tests that require it too.
 Since the test dependencies cannot be satisfied in Debian strictly
 required.
 I have fixed (I hope) all the other issues, but have one question before
 I finish. The package.json file also requires through. Should we leave
 this pristine so users know what upstream intended to be used (through),
 or also patch it to show what we used (through2)?

I think the package.json installed by the Debian package should reflect
the dependencies used by the package not npm.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/551eca5e.9010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781701: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#781701: RFS: node-convert-source-map/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 04/01/2015 08:53 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package node-convert-source-map

There are some minor issues that needs to be addressed before the upload
to the archive.


debian/control:

Testsuite: autopkgtest

AFAIK this is not an official header yet, it should be XS-Testsuite.


debian/copyright:

It contains an incorrect copyright year, npm2deb tends to get this
wrong. The LICENSE file specifies 2013.


The upstream sources contain an example, you should consider including
it in the package.


Since inline-source-map is not packaged yet, you can't run the tests. If
it get packaged in the future you should consider running the tests
during the build process.


Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/551d80c7.5000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781763: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#781763: RFS: node-coffeeify/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Also thanks for your work on this package.

This package a few minor issues just like node-convert-source-map (#781701).

The Testsuite header in the control file should be XS-Testsuite.

The copyright year by npm2deb is not reflected in the upstream source,
it doesn't list any so I suggest to drop the year and keep the author.

The upstream sources contain several examples, you should consider
including them in the package.

You may want to consider extending Use_through2.patch to cover all files
that use the through module, there are some tests that require it too.
Since the test dependencies cannot be satisfied in Debian strictly required.

Patching the readme.markdown to replace node executable with nodejs as
it's called in Debian is also something you may want to consider. But
the commands in question also require some of the missing test
dependencies, so it's also not strictly required.

The project name in the upstream metadata uses the node- prefix, but
upstream doesn't. Dropping the prefix is better.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/551d8392.7080...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 03/04/2015 09:58 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 On 03/04/2015 08:11 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 I think reverting this change and adding a lintian
 override instead is a better idea.
 
 Fixed

Thanks for the fixes. I've pushed some more changes for various things
I encountered.

Did you notice that the upstream build process requires itself?

The tools/build.js script also does some modifications to the source
when it generates the js/main/ code from the source.

If installing the unmodified source is not sufficient, we may need to
find a different solution to replace build.js to bootstrap this package.

I haven't tested this yet.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=56rf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54f78b93.6090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on the bluebird packaging!

On 03/03/2015 09:01 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
   * Fix duplicate package descriptions

You may want to tweak these a bit to be more in line with other node-*
and libjs-* packages.

See for example node-q:

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-q.git/tree/debian/control

And also what npm2deb generates.

I pushed a change with my suggested improvement.

   * Remove async.js and use packaged version instead

This looks a lintian false positive, the async.js in bluebird is quite
different from the node-async one.

Compare:

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-async.git/tree/lib/async.js

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-bluebird.git/tree/src/async.js

I think reverting this change and adding a lintian override instead is a
better idea.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54f61a85.9070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 03/04/2015 07:53 AM, Ross Gammon wrote:
 On 03/03/2015 09:33 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 * Remove async.js and use packaged version instead
 
 This looks a lintian false positive, the async.js in bluebird is
 quite different from the node-async one.
 
 Compare:
 
 http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-async.git/tree/lib/async.js


 
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-bluebird.git/tree/src/async.js
 
 I think reverting this change and adding a lintian override
 instead is a better idea.
 
 Whoops - I should of checked that. I was in a hurry to finish -
 that is never a good thing. I have a few family commitments
 tonight, but after that I will fix.

There is no hurry getting the the openlayers dependency tree packaged,
there is a lot of work to do which will take quite some time and
that's not a problem. Remember: Good things come to those who wait. :-)

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=adMa
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54f6b015.9000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#778488: RFS: python-geojson/1.0.9-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/15/2015 08:26 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package python-geojson

I'm partially done with the review, but I have to leave for work now.
I'll continue tonight after I get back.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54e1a9c8.60...@xs4all.nl

Bug#777146: Fiona does not build

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 10:22 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 I: pybuild base:170: python3.4 setup.py clean 
 WARNING:root:Failed to get options via gdal-config: [Errno 2] No such file or 
 directory: 'gdal-config'
 CRITICAL:root:Cython.Build.cythonize not found. Cython is required to build 
 from a repo.
 E: pybuild pybuild:256: clean: plugin distutils failed with: exit code=1: 
 python3.4 setup.py clean 

Looks like you don't have all build dependencies installed locally
(libgdal-dev includes gdal-config).

My builds on sid succeeded without issues.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54d3e408.9000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#777146: Fiona does not build

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 10:33 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 It works for me in unstable. You will need a recent update of unstable
 as fiona relies on python-cligj which was only added yesterday.

You don't need to have python-cligj installed locally to build the
package with pbuilder, you do need cython and libgdal-dev.

 Also fiona requires a recent version of Cython, so building under
 jessie is not possible without further tweaking.

jessie  sid have the same cython version, so it should work. The wheezy
version is not sufficient though.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54d3e5d6.6010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#777146: RFS: fiona/1.5.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on fiona and related packages!

Some comments regarding the package based on my review.

lintian reported two issues with the copyright file, both having the
same cause:

I: fiona source: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright
docs/data/tests/data/* (paragraph at line 13)
I: fiona source: unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at
line 13

Upstream moved the data in 1.5.0, which requires changing
Files: docs/data/tests/data/* to Files: tests/data/*

Have you configured the lintian hook in pbuilder, and have you enabled
the lower severity tags as documented in the Debian GIS Policy?

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-pbuilder-hooks

This should catch similar issues in the future.


You've used the git format-patch format for the patches, which is not a
problem because DEP3 explicitly supports its field names as an
alternative, but I found it a bit confusing. I initially thought they
were patches cherry-picked from the upstream git repo, but they were
authored by you for Debian specific customizations. I tend to use git
format-patch for patches cherry-picked from upstream, and plain quilt
patches for Debian specific changes, because I like the distinction.
This not something you have to adopt, but you may want to consider it.

http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/

We should investigate the git patch helpers to standardize a recommended
practice for patches in the Debian GIS team, so we can benefit from the
git workflow while still having plain quilt patches in the resulting
source package. This is a little off topic for your RFS, but it's where
my train of thought lead me, so I'll leave it at this.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54d3aaea.8020...@debian.org

Bug#777146: RFS: fiona/1.5.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 06:39 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 [...] I'll leave it at this.

Famous last words. There is just one more thing.

The doc-base control file has an unusual suffix:
.docbase instead of .doc-base.

It also uses an unusual Document ID: fiona.docbase, using the (source)
package name is more common for Document IDs.

The doc-base control file references the HTML documentation included in
the fiona-doc package, but the control file is used for the fiona package.

For references see:

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#doc-base
http://manpages.debian.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=dh_installdocs

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54d3b608.2060...@debian.org

Bug#775693: RFS: python-cligj/0.1.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Sorry for not doing this sooner, but I have reviewed the package now.
Some comments follow.

The copyright file only documents the upstream copyright, documenting
the copyright  license for debian/* is a good idea unless you want to
assign the copyright to MapBox.

There seems to be an issue with the setup.py and Python 3.2, the package
fails to build because the clean target fails before even starting the
build:

running clean
removing
'/home/bas/git/pkg-grass/python-cligj/.pybuild/pythonX.Y_2.6/build' (and
everything under it)
'build/bdist.linux-x86_64' does not exist -- can't clean it
'build/scripts-2.6' does not exist -- can't clean it
I: pybuild base:170: python3.2 setup.py clean
  File setup.py, line 12
description=uClick params for GeoJSON CLI,
  ^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
E: pybuild pybuild:256: clean: plugin distutils failed with: exit
code=1: python3.2 setup.py clean
dh_auto_clean: pybuild --clean -i python{version} -p 3.2 --dir .
returned exit code 13
make: *** [clean] Error 13
debuild: fatal error at line 1358:
couldn't exec fakeroot debian/rules:
gbp:error: Couldn't run 'debuild -d clean': debuild -d clean returned 2

This is on one of my wheezy systems, the package builds fine with Python
3.4 on sid.

lintian reports a duplicate short description. Because the short
description is already 60 characters long this doesn't leave much room
to add something like Python 3 module for  Appending for Python
V would fall within 80 characters, although the line length including
field name exceeds it.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54beb41b.5060...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/16/2015 10:20 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
 I've push some changes on the split-c-f-cxx branch.
 
 I've created upstream pull requests for the patches you added. Let's
 see if they make it in for the 4.3.3 release.

I'm still working on the changes to support Policy 3.9.4 and up, and
have just pushed last nights work. It includes some more patches that
should be forwarded upstream.

 http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/policy.html#cme
 
 Great tip! I hadn't known about this one. This'll help me out on a
 number of other projects, too. Thanks!
 
 I fixed all errors and warnings in debian/control, except
 ```
 Warning in 'source Vcs-Browser' value
 'http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git': URL to debian
 system is not the recommended one
 ```
 No idea what is recommended instead. Can you enlighten me?

The current values are correct (although could use HTTPS), but lintian
on Ubuntu uses a different vendor profile.

When running lintian on Ubuntu on a package for Debian, also use the
option `--profile debian`.

 `lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E path/to/netcdf.changes`.
 
 Will look at those later.

The initial list has shrunk significantly with my changes from last
night. There isn't much left anymore.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54b8f9d5.1030...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/16/2015 10:49 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
 `lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E path/to/netcdf.changes`.
 
 This doesn't show anything serious for me:
 ```
 $ lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E
 netcdf_4.3.3~20150116-utopic2_source.changes
 E: netcdf changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file utopic
 P: netcdf source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
 ```
 What do you get?

I got a whole lot more initially, see the attached list.

With last nights changes most of the issues are fixed now, but I'm not
done yet.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

I: netcdf source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field section in 
package netcdf-bin
I: netcdf source: vcs-field-not-canonical 
git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/netcdf.git 
git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-grass/netcdf.git
I: netcdf source: vcs-field-not-canonical 
http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-grass/netcdf.git 
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git
W: netcdf source: changelog-should-mention-nmu
W: netcdf source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1:4.3.3~rc3-1
I: netcdf source: quilt-patch-missing-description link-private.patch
P: netcdf source: no-dep5-copyright
W: netcdf source: ancient-standards-version 3.9.4 (current is 3.9.6)
P: netcdf source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/nccopy
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/nccopy
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncdump
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncdump
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncgen
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncgen
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncgen3
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncgen3
P: netcdf-bin: no-upstream-changelog
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:19
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:20
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:21
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:22
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz 12 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:17
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:42
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:124
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz 10 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:9
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:17
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:56
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:63
I: netcdf-bin: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz absense 
absence
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz 33 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign 

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Nico,

On 01/15/2015 09:52 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
 I'd be great if you could have a look at the branch `split-c-f-cxx` on
 alioth to see if there are any obvious shortcomings. If we can fix
 those, we should be finally able to upgrade from the several years old
 4.1.3.

I only find netCDF 4.3.3-rc3 in the upstream branch, but no branch into
which it's merged.

The split-c-f-cxx branch still lists 4.3.2 in the changelog. 4.3.3-rc3
is also missing from the pristine-tar branch, which makes me suspect
that you still have local changes not pushed to Alioth?

`git push --all  git push --tags` should push all local branches and
tags back to Alioth.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54b8051e.6030...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/15/2015 07:57 PM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
 that you still have local changes not pushed to Alioth?
 
 Right; fixed now.

Thanks for the push!

Can you also update the pristine-tar branch with your upstream tarballs
as imported into the upstream branch?

I've push some changes on the split-c-f-cxx branch. First I updated the
changelog for 4.3.3-rc3, I also updated the watch file to use GitHub
releases, and added a gbp.conf to have git-buildpackage use pristine-tar
by default. Once the split-c-f-cxx branch is merged back into master the
debian-branch in gbp.conf needs to be updated to reflect this.

My build of the package produced a lot of lintian issues that need to be
addressed. You can see the full list with:
`lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E path/to/netcdf.changes`.

You should also add yourself to Uploaders field in the control file. The
control can also do with a restructuring by cme. See:

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/policy.html#cme

I'm willing to help you with some of these issues, but I'm currently
also working on updating the grass package for the 7.0 pre-releases. So
I'd need to divide my attention a bit more to include netcdf too.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54b81c0d.6090...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Nico,

First of all thanks for your work on NetCDF!

 The package I'm looking at is netCDF [1] which – apart from the
 library and headers – installs the file
 ```
 $ cat /usr/share/doc-base/netCDF

Interestingly there is no doc-base file in the souce package. Do you have
local changes not yet available in the git repository?

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git

 Document: netCDF
 Title: NetCDF Manual
 Author: Russ Rew, Glenn Davis, Steve Emmerson, Harvey Davies, Ed
 Hartnett, Dennis Heimbigner, Ward Fisher
 Abstract: This manual describes what netCDF is, and how it can be used.
 Section: File Management

 Format: HTML
 Index: /usr/share/doc/netCDF/index.html
 Files: /usr/share/doc/netCDF/*.html
 ```
 and of course a bunch of files in
 ```
 $ ls /usr/share/doc/netCDF/*
 [...]
 ```
 Up until now, I've always put all files of `/usr/share/doc/netCDF/*`
 into libnetcdf-doc, and the file `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF` into the
 libnetcdf-dev package. With this, however, I'm getting

The doc-base file should be in the same package as the documention it
references, moving the doc-base file to libnetcdf-doc should be the right
way forward.

 ```
 $ install-docs --verbose --check /usr/share/doc-base/netCDF
 Warning in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 1: invalid value of
 `Document' field.
 Warning in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 9: file
 `/usr/share/doc/netCDF/index.html' does not exist.
 Error in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 9: all `Format' sections
 are invalid.
 ```
 The second warning I understand, but I'm not sure how to best fix it.
 Move `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF` into the doc package?
 The first warning and the error I don't understand.

 Ideas, anyone?

I wanted to reproduce your problem, but was unable because the source
package in git is different from the source you're working with.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/dc1865af115c87de23ff214a21d330eb.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

 I see the file
 ```
 libnetcdf-dev.doc-base
 ```
 in the debian/ folder [1]. I suppose renaming that to
 ```
 netcdf-doc.doc-base
 ```
 will do the trick. Is that your intention, too?

Yes. Although the warnings may need to be fixed with additional changes to
the file.

The Document field produces a warning because it doesn't conform to the
specification (see /usr/share/doc/doc-base/doc-base.txt.gz):


 Legal characters for the document ID are lower case letters (a-z),
 digits (0-9), plus (+) or minus (-) signs, and dots (.) (the same
 characters allowed in package names).1


Using the (source) package name instead should fix the warning for the
Document field.

The paths in to the documentation files also need to be corrected to use
/usr/share/doc/netcdf-doc/ instead of /usr/share/doc/netCDF/.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/19806aa4c1748e9139818b2f86d1154f.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#774512: RFS: python-osmapi/0.5.0-1~exp1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/05/2015 09:57 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
 On 01/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 On 01/04/2015 03:55 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 Can this package be used by Osgeo live or is there a reason not to do
 so (Angelos recently packaged version 0.4.1)?
 This package can be used by OSGeo Live (and UbuntuGIS, or even Ubuntu
 itself). Although I was not aware of Angelos' work a package for osmapi,
 so I've not merged any changes. I'll have have a look at that.

 @Angelos, would you like to co-maintain this package in Debian too?
 I have recently created a 0.4.1 package to avoid pip usage during the
 OSGeoLive build process :)
 Sorry I missed your 0.5 package, I would be happy to help.

Cool, I'll add you to the Uploaders then so the package will show up on
your Packages overview too.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54aafc5e.2090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#774512: RFS: python-osmapi/0.5.0-1~exp1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/04/2015 03:55 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 Is there a specific reason you are targeting experimental and not unstable?

Mostly because it's not targeted for migration to jessie.

 Can this package be used by Osgeo live or is there a reason not to do
 so (Angelos recently packaged version 0.4.1)?

This package can be used by OSGeo Live (and UbuntuGIS, or even Ubuntu
itself). Although I was not aware of Angelos' work a package for osmapi,
so I've not merged any changes. I'll have have a look at that.

@Angelos, would you like to co-maintain this package in Debian too?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54a95644.8050...@xs4all.nl

Bug#773505: RFS: python-descartes/1.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Do you intent to add this RFS to SoB wiki page?

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianPureBlends/SoB

Both python-descartes and python-geopandas were added to the Debian GIS
Blend.

http://blends.debian.org/gis/tasks/workstation#python-descartes
http://blends.debian.org/gis/tasks/workstation#python-geopandas

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54940fa7.5020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

Are you able to build the package using the master branch?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54889d3e.6070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 12/10/2014 10:19 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 I had some real life things to do and bad bandwidth.

That's perfectly understandable, I was worried there might be another
problem with the build.

 I'll do the build over night and try to upload tomorrow morning.

Take your time, there is no hurry. It will take a while to pass through
NEW anyway.

Thanks for your continued effort sponsoring Debian GIS (and other
Blends) packages!

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5488b9ea.2080...@xs4all.nl

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/09/2014 09:03 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 qgis(master) $ git branch
 * master

This is correct. For qgis, the packaging targeting experimental lives on
the master branch.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5486b015.6000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#770521: RFS: rasterio/0.15.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11/22/2014 12:40 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 Feel free to review and/or sponsor.
 In case you wonder, I have disabled the python3 package because there
 are a lot of problems when using LANG=C . I may add support later if
 python3-click has a solution.

Your package looks good in general, I have only two minor improvements
to suggest.


You may want to specify the supported Python version in the control file
in the X-Python-Version field.

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-specifying_versions


Because uscan uses the tags on Github, it's recommended to mangle the
filename to not download 'vversion.tar.gz' like it does now:

-- Successfully downloaded updated package 0.15.1.tar.gz
-- Successfully symlinked ../0.15.1.tar.gz to
../rasterio_0.15.1.orig.tar.gz.

I suggest to use the attached watch file, which results in:

-- Successfully downloaded updated package rasterio-0.15.1.tar.gz
-- Successfully symlinked ../rasterio-0.15.1.tar.gz to
../rasterio_0.15.1.orig.tar.gz.


Other than the above it looks like a pretty straight forward Python
package. I suggest you email Francesco directly to ask for sponsorship
because Andreas is currently unavailable.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
version=3
opts=dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/_/./g;s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha|b|a)[\-\.]?\d*)$/$1~$2/,\
filenamemangle=s/(?:.*?)?v?(\d[\d\.]*)\.tar\.gz/rasterio-$1.tar.gz/ \
https://github.com/mapbox/rasterio/releases \
(?:.*/)*(?:rel|v|rasterio|)[\-\_]?(\d[\d\-\.]+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))

Bug#769604: RFS: pktools/2.5.4-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Francesco,

Can you sponsor the upload of pktools? Andreas is unavailable until
December 5th.

Kind Regards,

Bas

On 11/14/2014 11:44 PM, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
 Package: sponsorship-requests
 Severity: normal
 
 Dear mentors,
 
 I am looking for a sponsor for my package pktools
 
  Package name: pktools
  Version : 2.5.4-1~exp1
  Upstream Author : Pieter Kempeneers kempe...@gmail.com
  URL : http://pktools.nongnu.org/
  License : GPL-3.0+
  Section : science
 
 It builds those binary packages:
 
  pktools  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing
  pktools-dev  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 development files
  libalgorithms1   - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 libalgorithms
  libbase1 - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 libbase
  libfileclasses1  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 libfileClasses
  libimageclasses1 - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 libimageClasses
  liblasclasses1   - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
 liblasClasses
 
 To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
 URL:
 
 http://mentors.debian.net/package/pktools
 
 
 Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
 
   dget -x 
 http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pktools/pktools_2.5.4-1~exp1.dsc
 
 More information about pktools can be obtained from 
 http://pktools.nongnu.org/.
 
 Changes since the last upload:
 
   * New upstream release.
   * Add myself to Uploaders.
   * Drop fann-va_list.patch, applied upstream.
   * Update copyright file, add autotools files.
   * Split binaries and libraries into separate packages.
   * Override dh_install to list missing files.
   * Update symbols for amd64.
   * Add upstream metadata.
   * Include config.h  pktools.pc in pktools-dev.
   * Remove .la files before install.
   * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.6, changes: symbols.
 
 
 Regards,
  Bas Couwenberg
 
 ___
 Pkg-grass-devel mailing list
 pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
 


-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5466987d.6020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/25/2014 09:58 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:25:21AM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 I've just filed a binnmu bug to have it rebuilt (#766694).
 
 As usual ping me once I should retry the build (even if stuff in
 experimental should not be that urgent). 

While the binnmu by the Release Team was sufficient to build
libgdal-grass, the recent upload of gdal/1.11.1+dfsg-1~exp2 is even
better due to the updated symbols.

Can you try libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1 once more now that the buildds
are done with gdal?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/545e5018.3010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#767763: RFS: ossim/1.8.16-3 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi Tobias,

On 11/02/2014 08:26 PM, Tobias Frost wrote:
 I will upload this once build is complete, thanks for providing the
 fix.

Thanks for sponsoring the upload, I've removed the entry from the
Sponsoring of Blends wiki.

 For the long evenings during freeze: (Sorry for the long list, but
 the package takes ages to build and therefore I looked closer to
 kill time)
 
 maybe you* want to update the package a little, for example
 d/copyright to dep5 format, or the patch could have a dep3-header
 and (if applicable) forwared to upstream, d/rules could have use of
 a get-orig-source as there is no watchfile and according to
 README.source its taken from svn. IMHO the upstream version should
 also reflect that, like ossis-upstreamversion+svnrev, what do
 you think?) There are also tons of trailing whitespaces in
 d/control, libossim-dev.install has a duplicate line, and the
 library itself is not made with multiarch-support (which is a
 release goal since long)
 
 But during the freeze, thats only something for to be prepared for 
 experimental...
 
 Thanks for fixing this RC-bug!
 
 *or your team

Because this revision only contains the targeted fix for the RC bug, I
didn't fix the copyright, patches, and other issues you reported.

Post release I'll update the package more thoroughly unless someone
beats me to it.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUVob/AAoJEGdQ8QrojUrxAvgP/iUXYV9oBRctnY6s/4kuBBlV
+lo2d3RjrTUNplCB14wa8yiEEQ14z3PZ2EAKa59JTIuvwzk2UChPURGVfqBLcgIl
EPI0varheJZSaUpy9EWBN6J2ZHb5qAB8veCOzb4q95bfgNauaSN3IXDTdpNy4VRe
/ygMMxJrYsuzThzzUy1SYfov6JcM26F5fTM6LNyhrathjZ3x/+y/5Lu2EcslgYV+
BADYvZHm+J2DVgZCpZVtb0yNaBdfLE4Hg6XSonMS+9zOOGAcIfO7eKNwGqp0MxOg
QW5uG88hjrQt8+0izUGzpwOEEmiXOsLIZzsAUohJk8Q8RSCkwaYPB3yO2Dond6+u
9wJumdpfbOwcV3QjhMk+oH+v7YcqrVBDAWoJlf4F9ea7HxNoNH135twBwz+pJbqF
L06r7v0dXBuBXLZwLaf44x7anJC60l8uKpuaiqsYxfoWHEP7+q/sZIjvaH5ilqLw
HfpRmas1ybhBpMaYfwK9aqZXH9MoCP+VRh65B0kCc/9yqulSrWGySfxUQo8K6cRi
6UhhG2Qm+eJMlSTd3HFqgZwe7cGZhPA7BxM6Eik7/B04FPe8CPhWRliyjNedrIfI
0Kf38saqrYD5/0RA1GcHIsqbclDP9gxtu1OtuhVmeCTu27w6a79+3vbPnUXWe3Fj
vK9VGgQj6olzlQQ5RC87
=C3bf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/545686ff.1010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766662: RFS: josm-plugins/0.0.svn30763+ds1-1 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/24/2014 06:54 PM, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
   * Bump JOSM dependency to 7643.
 (closes: #764176)

JOSM 7643 has hit the mirrors, so josm-plugins can be built now.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544acf70.9020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/24/2014 11:03 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 -Need to get 35.1 MB/116 MB of archives. After unpacking 494 MB will be used.
 -The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 - libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is to be installed.
 - libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-10 is to be 
 installed.
 -Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...

This seems to be caused by gdal 1.11.1 in experimental not having been
rebuilt for the jpeg-turbo transition.

I've just filed a binnmu bug to have it rebuilt (#766694).

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544ad1d1.1030...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766662: RFS: josm-plugins/0.0.svn30763+ds1-1 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/25/2014 12:38 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 Hi Bas,
 
 thanks for the hint.
 
 Do you know any method to get pinged about such updates?

Unfortunately I don't, I just periodically check the version in latest
the Packages file on the mirror.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/544adaa9.3020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766508: Libjpeg trouble in jmapviewer

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/23/2014 08:20 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 unfortunately there is some conflict in the Build-Depends:
 
 
 0 packages upgraded, 132 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
 Need to get 62.8 MB/92.4 MB of archives. After unpacking 210 MB will be used.
 The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is to be installed.
  libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-10 is to be 
 installed.
 Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
 The following NEW packages will be installed:

This is caused by the build-dependency on default-jdk which needed an
update for the jpeg-turbo transition. It was earlier today reported on
debian-release in the gettext is BD-Uninstallable thread:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2014/10/msg00445.html

It should be fixed with the latest openjdk-7 upload, but it hasn't hit
the mirrors yet.

 Kind regards
 
  Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54494dc5.3090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/23/2014 09:26 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 Hi Bas,
 
 On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 09:10:43PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 [no love for enigmail today]
 
 try mutt ;-)

Should be fixed with manual configuration now.

 switched to public discussion anyway.
  
 For very strange reasons I get
 
 0 packages upgraded, 228 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
 Need to get 37.7 MB/115 MB of archives. After unpacking 491 MB will be used.
 The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: libgdal-dev (= 1.11.0-1~) but 
 1.10.1+dfsg-8+b3 is to be installed.
 Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
 The following NEW packages will be installed:
 
 
 and yes, I have experimental sources.list enabled in my pbuilder
 environment and updated cowbuilder.  I vaguely remember that we had such
 a case before but I forgot how we solved this.

It looks like your experimental branch is outdated, gdal-grass 1.11.1
build depends on libgdal-dev (= 1.11.1-1~).

Pulling the experimental branch should suffice to fix this specific issue:

 git fetch origin
 git checkout experimental
 git pull

Unfortunately this packages also suffers from the libjpeg62-turbo unmet
build dependency, so it cannot be built at the moment.

 Thanks for the preparation
 
  Andreas.

Thanks for your all your sponsorship efforts.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5449610f.7040...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/23/2014 10:22 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:11:59PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:

 It looks like your experimental branch is outdated, gdal-grass 1.11.1
 build depends on libgdal-dev (= 1.11.1-1~).

 Pulling the experimental branch should suffice to fix this specific issue:

  git fetch origin
  git checkout experimental
  git pull
 
 I did so:
 
 $ git log
 commit 4b4b0f7a63c8d35f86489e9ed515372dc35ef650
 Author: Bas Couwenberg sebas...@xs4all.nl
 Date:   Sun Oct 12 16:17:07 2014 +0200
 
 Set distribution to experimental.
 
 [...]
 
 Unfortunately this packages also suffers from the libjpeg62-turbo unmet
 build dependency, so it cannot be built at the moment.
 
 ... so we can keep on sorting out since the problem seems to remain.
 
 0 packages upgraded, 228 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
 Need to get 36.9 MB/115 MB of archives. After unpacking 491 MB will be used.
 The following packages have unmet dependencies:
  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: libgdal-dev (= 1.11.1-1~) but 
 1.10.1+dfsg-8+b3 is to be installed.
 Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
 The following NEW packages will be installed:
 
 
 I even fetched a fresh clone via gbp-clone and did the steps you
 suggested above. :-(

The git repo looks good, and the version in the unmet Depends too.

I cannot reproduce this problem with my sid+experimental chroot which is
setup like yours as described in:

http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-September/021973.html

Interestingly here apt reports 229 newly installed, yours one less. I've
attached my build log for comparison.

 Thanks for your all your sponsorship efforts.
 
 I admit I'm waiting for the time when three or four of you new activists
 in Debian GIS will become DM.  I also tried to encourage Ross and Johan
 to apply.  You all do pretty good work and it is time to gain the
 official status.

I just pinged my AM again to see if we can get moving again.

 Kind regards
 
Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



libgdal-grass_1.11.1-1~exp1_amd64.build.gz
Description: application/gzip

Bug#764831: RFS: geolinks/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/11/2014 04:41 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
  * Package name: geolinks
Version : 0.0.1-1

The package doesn't have Vcs-* URLs in debian/control, and the git
repository doesn't seem to exist yet under pkg-grass on Alioth.

Can you create the repository on Alioth and push your changes?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54394b8b.5070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764831: RFS: geolinks/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/11/2014 05:23 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
 On 10/11/2014 04:41 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
  * Package name: geolinks
Version : 0.0.1-1
 
 The package doesn't have Vcs-* URLs in debian/control, and the git
 repository doesn't seem to exist yet under pkg-grass on Alioth.
 
 Can you create the repository on Alioth and push your changes?

The git repo was there, so I've push a change to add the Vcs-* URLs.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54394d63.7060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#760725: lintian: File without copyright info in gdal-grass

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 09/07/2014 06:12 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
 it seems lintian found a new target and gdal-grass is affected:

It looks like a recent change in lintian.

 Since I think this is easy to fix this should be done.

Keep an eye out for updated copyright files in git.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/540c885f.8050...@xs4all.nl