Re: Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

[Taylor Kline]

It's all good. Thanks a lot, Sean 

On Jan 11, 2017 4:13 PM, "Sean Whitton" <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> wrote:

Dear Taylor,

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:51:56PM -0600, Taylor Kline wrote:
> Ooh okay. Thank you 
>
> So how do non-DDs help out with providing patches?

My last e-mail was overly curt.  Sorry about that.

As others have said, you can just submit the patch to the bug.  You will
generally be credited by the maintainer in the Debian changelog.

If you think the maintainer is taking too long to respond to your fix,
though, you can prepare an NMU, and then get a sponsor to upload it
(though this would be unusual for a bug of 'wishlist' severity).  Please
read up on our conventions for NMUs in the Debian Developer's Reference.

Thank you for your contribution.

--
Sean Whitton

Re: Bug#850789: Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

[Taylor Kline]

I see, thank you, Gianfranco.

So if I'm getting this correctly, only providing the output of nmudiff is
enough, without needing to upload anything?

On Jan 11, 2017 1:36 AM, "Gianfranco Costamagna" 
wrote:

control: tags -1 patch

>It's not useful for me to spare the maintainer(s) the work?  I figured
if I could do the footwork and let the maintainer just review and approve
the patch, they >would be happy.


you already opened a bug, provided a patch and I'm tagging this bug
accordingly.
The maintainer will probably upload the package with some more changes in
some days
(uploading a src:python3 package with just a change in watch file is an
overkill, people will
upgrade their pc with MB of stuff, just because of a "useless to them"
packaging change).
Moreover the Debian Maintainer is also upstream developer, so he knows when
a new version is out :)

thanks for the patch, I'm sure it will be eventually added!

G.

Re: Bug#850789: Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

[Taylor Kline]

It's not useful for me to spare the maintainer(s) the work?  I figured if
I could do the footwork and let the maintainer just review and approve the
patch, they would be happy.

On Jan 10, 2017 5:45 PM, "Matthias Klose" <d...@debian.org> wrote:

On 11.01.2017 00:37, Taylor Kline wrote:
> I uploaded a patch for Python3 about ~15 hours ago, but it's not
> showing up on https://ftp-master.debian.org/deferred.html
>
> Attempting to upload again does indicate that it should have
> successfully uploaded:
> 

> $ dput -e 10 python3-defaults_3.5.1-4.1_amd64.changes
> Trying to upload package to ftp-master (ftp.upload.debian.org)
> Package has already been uploaded to ftp-master on ftp.upload.debian.org
> Nothing more to do for python3-defaults_3.5.1-4.1_amd64.changes
> 

>
> Does it take > 15 hours for an upload to show up? Is there something I
> am missing?

please don't upload this package.  You filed a bug report with severity
wishlist
today, so you should give maintainers a chance to react to it.

Thanks, Matthias

Re: Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

[Taylor Kline]

Ooh okay. Thank you 

So how do non-DDs help out with providing patches?


On Jan 10, 2017 6:06 PM, "Sean Whitton" <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> wrote:

Dear Taylor,

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 05:37:33PM -0600, Taylor Kline wrote:
> I uploaded a patch for Python3 about ~15 hours ago, but it's not
> showing up on https://ftp-master.debian.org/deferred.html

It's because you're not a Debian Developer.

--
Sean Whitton

Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

[Taylor Kline]

I uploaded a patch for Python3 about ~15 hours ago, but it's not
showing up on https://ftp-master.debian.org/deferred.html

Attempting to upload again does indicate that it should have
successfully uploaded:

$ dput -e 10 python3-defaults_3.5.1-4.1_amd64.changes
Trying to upload package to ftp-master (ftp.upload.debian.org)
Package has already been uploaded to ftp-master on ftp.upload.debian.org
Nothing more to do for python3-defaults_3.5.1-4.1_amd64.changes


Does it take > 15 hours for an upload to show up? Is there something I
am missing?

Thanks,
-Taylor Kline

Bug#849521:

[Taylor Kline]

Thank you 

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, JCF Ploemen  wrote:
> your watch file issue is caused by the presence of a colon in the url,
> at the start of every filename:
> https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/:ruTorrent-3.7.zip
>
> Once you account for that things start moving on the uscan front.

Re: How can I get my watch file macros working?

[Taylor Kline]

Figured it out! The ':' character was literal. So now I have this working:
.*ru[tT]orrent@ANY_VERSION@@ARCHIVE_EXT@

https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes gave me the idea

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Taylor Kline <taylor.kl...@utexas.edu> wrote:
> My debian/watch file is not matching anything, and I'm not sure why.
>
> Here's the file:
> version=4
> https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/ ru[tT]orrent@ANY_VERSION@@ARCHIVE_EXT
>
> I would think this should match the website which has hrefs such as:
> ruTorrent-3.7.zip
> rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
>
> Unfortunately, it does not. Below is the output of uscan -vvd.
> Assistance greatly appreciated:
>
> uscan info: uscan (version 2.16.13) See uscan(1) for help
> uscan info: Scan watch files in .
> uscan debug: Found ./debian
> uscan info: Check debian/watch and debian/changelog in .
> uscan info: package="rutorrent" version="3.7-1" (as seen in debian/changelog)
> uscan info: package="rutorrent" version="3.7" (no epoch/revision)
> uscan info: ./debian/changelog sets package="rutorrent" version="3.7"
> uscan info: Process ./debian/watch (package=rutorrent version=3.7)
> uscan debug: $options{'pgpmode'}=default, $options{'pgpsigurlmangle'}=undef
> uscan info: Last orig.tar.* tarball version (from debian/changelog): 3.7
> uscan info: Last orig.tar.* tarball version (dversionmangled): 3.7
> uscan info: Requesting URL:
>https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/
> uscan debug: received content:
> 
> 
> 
> //1483974648596
> function navi(e){
> location.href = e.target.href.replace('/:','/'); e.preventDefault();
> }
> 
> 
> 
>  rel="nofollow">S2EngEditor.zip
>  rel="nofollow">S2SteamPatch.zip
>  rel="nofollow">plugins-3.6.tar.gz
>  rel="nofollow">plugins/
>  rel="nofollow">ruTorrent-3.7.zip
>  rel="nofollow">rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
> 
> 
>
> [End of received content] by HTTP
> uscan debug: processed content:
> 
> 
> 
> //1483974648596
> function navi(e){
> location.href="e.target.href.replace('/:','/');" e.preventDefault();
> }
> 
> 
> 
>  rel="nofollow">S2EngEditor.zip
>  rel="nofollow">S2SteamPatch.zip
>  rel="nofollow">plugins-3.6.tar.gz
>  rel="nofollow">plugins/
>  rel="nofollow">ruTorrent-3.7.zip
>  rel="nofollow">rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
> 
> 
>
> [End of processed content] by fix bad HTML code
> uscan info: Matching pattern:
>
> (?:(?:https://dl.bintray.com)?\/novik65\/generic\/)?ru[tT]orrent[-_]?(\d[\-+\.:\~\da-zA-Z]*)(?i)\.(?:tar\.xz|tar\.bz2|tar\.gz|zip)
> uscan debug: Checking href :S2EngEditor.zip
> uscan debug: Checking href :S2SteamPatch.zip
> uscan debug: Checking href :plugins-3.6.tar.gz
> uscan debug: Checking href :plugins/
> uscan debug: Checking href :ruTorrent-3.7.zip
> uscan debug: Checking href :rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
> uscan warn: In debian/watch no matching files for watch line
>   https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/
> ru[tT]orrent[-_]?(\d[\-+\.:\~\da-zA-Z]*)(?i)\.(?:tar\.xz|tar\.bz2|tar\.gz|zip)
> uscan info: Scan finished

How can I get my watch file macros working?

[Taylor Kline]

My debian/watch file is not matching anything, and I'm not sure why.

Here's the file:
version=4
https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/ ru[tT]orrent@ANY_VERSION@@ARCHIVE_EXT

I would think this should match the website which has hrefs such as:
ruTorrent-3.7.zip
rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz

Unfortunately, it does not. Below is the output of uscan -vvd.
Assistance greatly appreciated:

uscan info: uscan (version 2.16.13) See uscan(1) for help
uscan info: Scan watch files in .
uscan debug: Found ./debian
uscan info: Check debian/watch and debian/changelog in .
uscan info: package="rutorrent" version="3.7-1" (as seen in debian/changelog)
uscan info: package="rutorrent" version="3.7" (no epoch/revision)
uscan info: ./debian/changelog sets package="rutorrent" version="3.7"
uscan info: Process ./debian/watch (package=rutorrent version=3.7)
uscan debug: $options{'pgpmode'}=default, $options{'pgpsigurlmangle'}=undef
uscan info: Last orig.tar.* tarball version (from debian/changelog): 3.7
uscan info: Last orig.tar.* tarball version (dversionmangled): 3.7
uscan info: Requesting URL:
   https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/
uscan debug: received content:



//1483974648596
function navi(e){
location.href = e.target.href.replace('/:','/'); e.preventDefault();
}



S2EngEditor.zip
S2SteamPatch.zip
plugins-3.6.tar.gz
plugins/
ruTorrent-3.7.zip
rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz



[End of received content] by HTTP
uscan debug: processed content:



//1483974648596
function navi(e){
location.href="e.target.href.replace('/:','/');" e.preventDefault();
}



S2EngEditor.zip
S2SteamPatch.zip
plugins-3.6.tar.gz
plugins/
ruTorrent-3.7.zip
rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz



[End of processed content] by fix bad HTML code
uscan info: Matching pattern:
   
(?:(?:https://dl.bintray.com)?\/novik65\/generic\/)?ru[tT]orrent[-_]?(\d[\-+\.:\~\da-zA-Z]*)(?i)\.(?:tar\.xz|tar\.bz2|tar\.gz|zip)
uscan debug: Checking href :S2EngEditor.zip
uscan debug: Checking href :S2SteamPatch.zip
uscan debug: Checking href :plugins-3.6.tar.gz
uscan debug: Checking href :plugins/
uscan debug: Checking href :ruTorrent-3.7.zip
uscan debug: Checking href :rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
uscan warn: In debian/watch no matching files for watch line
  https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/
ru[tT]orrent[-_]?(\d[\-+\.:\~\da-zA-Z]*)(?i)\.(?:tar\.xz|tar\.bz2|tar\.gz|zip)
uscan info: Scan finished

Bug#849521: RFS: rutorrent/3.7-1 [ITP] -- A front-end for the rTorrent torrent client

[Taylor Kline]

Hi!

Thanks a lot for taking a look over the package.

As this is my first package, forgive me if I need a little
hand-holding here, especially with regards to the filesystem hierarchy
and safe permissions:

> I'm not overly joyed by seeing the symlink farm in /etc pointing
> to /usr/share though. This is simply wrong as the files are
> not configuration files (which is why they don't live in
> /etc to begin with). Whatever needs these files should IMHO
> be fixed up to look for the in the correct location (so
> you can drop the symlinks).
>
> Making /usr/share/ruTorrent world-writable is the main issue though.
> This will never end well. You need to think about security and
> how you manage permissions somehow. This is in my opinion a
> blocker for uploading your package.

So ruTorrent/share/settings, ruTorrent/share/torrents, and
ruTorrent/share/users are all supposed to be "accessible for reading
and writing for both rtorrent and webserver users."

This is why I placed them in /usr/share/ruTorrent/{settings, torrents,
users} and gave world-writable permissions.

But this was mostly just guesswork based on the filesystem hierarchy
standard manpages. Could you give me some advice on the correct
placement and permissions of such files that should be modifiable by
both the web-server and the user who is running the rtorrent CLI?

[Note: rTorrent != ruTorrent]

Reference: 
https://github.com/Novik/ruTorrent/wiki/Config#multiuser-and-singleuser-configuration

> Not sure but if nginx has '*-available' '*-enabled' configuration
> pattern but I think it does and then maybe there's a way to
> provide a snippet for '*-available' that a user can in normal
> cases just enable. This should simplify for the user over having
> to read up and manually configure nginx.

Great idea. So just placing an nginx config file in rutorrent.examples
and suggesting that the user create a symlink from
/etc/nginx/sites-enabled to this file if they wish to use nginx +
default configuration?

Thanks so much for your help,
-Taylor

Re: Build-Depends vs Depends

[Taylor Kline]

On Jan 3, 2017 9:33 PM, "Paul Wise" <p...@debian.org> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Taylor Kline wrote:

> Thanks, that does help a lot, and it helped me to realize that the
packages
> are built on the Debian machines and sent to users already built, so
there's
> no need for the users to install the Build-Depends, right?

Right, except users might want to build packages themselves, in that
case they would have to install the Build-Depends on the machine or
chroot where they are doing the building. There are several tools to
setup an isolated environment and install build-depends automatically.

https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild
https://wiki.debian.org/pbuilder
https://wiki.debian.org/cowbuilder
https://wiki.debian.org/qemubuilder
https://packages.debian.org/whalebuilder

There are a few reasons users might want to build packages:

Customising the packages for their needs.

Rebuilding packages against newer versions of dependencies.

Rebuilding packages for older Debian releases.

Verifying that the source corresponds to the binaries:

https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


Extremely helpful, Paul, thanks so much for clearing that up 

Re: Build-Depends vs Depends

[Taylor Kline]

On Jan 2, 2017 4:56 PM, "Octavio Alvarez"  wrote:

If you are using "apt install" then the packages under Build-Depends are
not installed at all, only those under Depends, and, because they are
needed for the program to work, those are not uninstalled after
installation.

If you are using "apt build-dep" then you are specifically requesting
APT to install packages lised under Build-Depends.

Hope this clarifies everything.

Best regards.


Thanks, that does help a lot, and it helped me to realize that the packages
are built on the Debian machines and sent to users already built, so
there's no need for the users to install the Build-Depends, right?

Re: Build-Depends vs Depends

[Taylor Kline]

On Jan 2, 2017 10:06 PM, "Paul Wise"  wrote:

You might be interested in looking at some of these diagrams to
discover more about how Debian works:

https://wiki.debian.org/Diagrams

You can look up any confusing jargon you find in this glossary:

https://wiki.debian.org/Glossary

--
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


Very cool, thanks!

Re: Build-Depends vs Depends

[Taylor Kline]

Thank you, Octavio. Does this mean apt will temporarily install the
Build-Depends
packages and remove them after the installation completes?

Build-Depends vs Depends

[Taylor Kline]

What is the difference? How are they treated differently during the
apt installation process? Thanks :)

Bug#849521: Package updated

[Taylor Kline]

Removed moreinfo tag since I have corrected or overrode all lintian
errors/warnings.

Rationale for my changes should be evident from the email exchanges above.

Looking forward to any feedback and potential sponsorship  thanks so much!

-Taylor

Bug#849521: Assistance with packaging ruTorrent

[Taylor Kline]

> Remove the file from the tarball, you shouldn't use it anyway, use the
> libjs-jquery-flot package instead.

Oh, nice! Thank you for pointing that out! Got it :)

> > 2. Two source-is-missing errors that are false positives because of a long
> > line in the source file.
> Why do you think they are false positives? Very long lines aren't usually
> user-editable.

They are false positives because the long lines are strings with HTML tags, i.e.

   ""

> > But if I create a
> >
> >   debian/rutorrent.lintian-overrides
> >
> > with the contents:
> >
> >   rutorrent source: source-is-missing plugins/extsearch/init.js
> >
> > then I get an error:
> >
> >   rutorrent: malformed-override Override of source-is-missing for package
> > type source (expecting binary)
> >
> > How can I successfully override these?
> debian/rutorrent.lintian-overrides contains overrides for the rutorrent
> binary package. The manual says "If the override is for a source package,
> you have to place it at debian/source/lintian-overrides or
> debian/source.lintian-overrides (the former path is preferred)."

Now I continue to get the lintian error and then have a warning:

  rutorrent source: unused-override source-is-missing plugins/extsearch/init.js

 any idea why lintian will not use the override?

- ACTUALLY, GOT IT --
I left the above for future reference for anyone else confused, but I
had to copy the entire line:

  rutorrent source: source-is-missing plugins/extsearch/init.js line
length is 288 characters (>256)

Looks like lintian is very particular in this way.

Now I just have my questions from part 3 remaining  I was actually
able to drop-in a excanvas and libphp-snoopy, so it's only
libjs-jquery that I cannot drop in version 3 without breaking the
entire system. I would really like to push forward with including
jquery v1.11.2 in the missing-sources if possible.

Thanks so much for your help so far.

-Taylor

Bug#849521: Assistance with packaging ruTorrent

[Taylor Kline]

Hello JavaScript Team,

I have a package pending with a Request for Sponsorship (my first package),
and I am blocked with the following lintian errors:

1. A source-is-missing error:

  js/jquery.flot.js line length is 3134 characters (>512)

This one occurs because the library flot (https://github.com/flot/flot),
which does not have a later release from the included release in 2014, has
an inlined function of 3134 characters:
https://github.com/flot/flot/blob/master/jquery.flot.js

Any tips on a good way to correct this?

---

2. Two source-is-missing errors that are false positives because of a long
line in the source file.

But if I create a

  debian/rutorrent.lintian-overrides

with the contents:

  rutorrent source: source-is-missing plugins/extsearch/init.js

then I get an error:

  rutorrent: malformed-override Override of source-is-missing for package
type source (expecting binary)

How can I successfully override these?

---

3. embedded-javascript-library warnings because upstream has packaged their
dependencies. The dependency versions are very old, for example:

Based on the md5sum of jquery.js, upstream is using jQuery v1.11.2.

libjs-jquery is 3.1.1-2, two major versions ahead, thus I doubt I can drop
in this replacement and test thoroughly enough to ship it with any
confidence that there won't be many run-time bugs.

And if I can't drop in a replacement, I would feel quite a hindrance to the
developer bothering him with updating his JavaScript dependencies that
currently work just fine.

I have noticed that, for example, the "wordpress" package has overrides:
# Opportunistic replacement is in place but the Debian version does
# not match the wordpress version
wordpress: embedded-javascript-library
usr/share/wordpress/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.form.js please use
libjs-jquery-form
wordpress: embedded-javascript-library
usr/share/wordpress/wp-includes/js/jquery/jquery.form.min.js please use
libjs-jquery-form
...

Is it acceptable for me to do the same, at least for the time being?

---

Package can be seen here:

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

and the associated RFS:

  https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=849521

Bug#849521: RFS: rutorrent/3.7-1 [ITP] -- A front-end for the rTorrent torrent client

[Taylor Kline]

Thank you for your prompt attention! I will email the JS mailing list.

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name>
wrote:

> control: tag -1 +moreinfo
>
> Dear Taylor,
>
> Thanks for this package.  Looks interesting.
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 11:26:30PM -0500, Taylor Kline wrote:
> > lintian is throwing the following 'serious' errors that I haven't been
> entirely
> > sure what to do with:
> >
> >   jquery.flot.js source missing - this file has an inlined function of
> 3134
> > characters. Unfortunately this cannot be corrected in a straightforward
> manner
> > because the flot library has not been maintained since 2014.
>
> It would violate DFSG if you didn't include the source.  The upload
> would be rejected by the ftp-masters.  So you need to replace this file
> with something that has source code.  The Debian javascript team might
> be able to help.
>
> > There are also a few warnings about using embedded js libraries. The
> versions
> > included are much older than the libjs versions available in the Debian
> > packaging system. Thus it may take some conversations with upstream to
> > integrate these wishlist items.
>
> You need to have these conversations with upstream before this can go
> into Debian: all Debian packages need to use the packaged versions of
> libraries.
>
> If you're able to resolve these issues, please remove the moreinfo tag
> from this bug.
>
> --
> Sean Whitton
>

Bug#849521: RFS: rutorrent/3.7-1 [ITP] -- A front-end for the rTorrent torrent client

[Taylor Kline]

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Hello fine mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for "rutorrent"

Package name: rutorrent
Version : 3.7-1
Upstream Author : Novik <novi...@gmail.com>
URL : https://github.com/Novik/ruTorrent
License : GPL-3
Section : net

---

It installs the files for the front-end in:

  /etc/ruTorrent  - server files

  /usr/share/ruTorrent  - user-set configuration files chmod'd to a+rwX

I also provided a detailed manpage for the configuration, including how to
configure from scratch using nginx.

lintian is throwing the following 'serious' errors that I haven't been
entirely sure what to do with:

  jquery.flot.js source missing - this file has an inlined function of 3134
characters. Unfortunately this cannot be corrected in a straightforward
manner because the flot library has not been maintained since 2014.

The other two errors are because the source files have lines longer than
expected (288 characters and 553 characters), but these are just long lines.

I also was not able to create an override for any of these lintian errors;
overriding any of these generated an error that source-is-missing was
expecting binary files and I gave it source files.

There are also a few warnings about using embedded js libraries. The
versions included are much older than the libjs versions available in the
Debian packaging system. Thus it may take some conversations with upstream
to integrate these wishlist items.

I am also experiencing a small error with 'watch.' uscan -vv outputs:

  uscan debug: Checking href :S2EngEditor.zip
  uscan debug: Checking href :S2SteamPatch.zip
  uscan debug: Checking href :plugins-3.6.tar.gz
  uscan debug: Checking href :plugins/
  uscan debug: Checking href :ruTorrent-3.7.zip
  uscan debug: Checking href :rutorrent-3.6.tar.gz
  uscan warn: In debian/watch no matching files for watch line
https://dl.bintray.com/novik65/generic/
ru[tT]orrent[-_]?(\d[\-+\.:\~\da-zA-Z]*)(?i)\.(?:tar\.xz|tar\.bz2|tar\.gz|zip)

I'm not sure why:
  ru[tT]orrent@ANY_VERSION@@ARCHIVE_EXT@
would not match any of these files.

---

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

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


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

  dget -x
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rutorrent/rutorrent_3.7-1.dsc

---

This closes this ITP:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=671744

---

This is my first package! I did my best to follow all policy, and I foresee
no problems continuing to maintain it!

Regards,
Taylor Kline