Re: Moving a package (to non-free)

2014-02-02 Thread Craig Small
On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 05:19:12PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
   File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 136,
 in binary_component_func
 .join(Component).one()
   File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/sqlalchemy/orm/query.py, line
 2193, in one
 Multiple rows were found for one())
 MultipleResultsFound: Multiple rows were found for one()
The program was expecting only one row but there was more than one
there in the database.  I personally don't like one() for this reason.

Checking the count and/or using first() is usually better, unless
this is pointing to something else breaking (e.g. the thing that let the
database have duplicate rows in the first place.)

 (assuming you haven't implemented it already)
Indeed.

Not really the uploaders fault though, to answer his question.

 - Craig
-- 
Craig Small (@smallsees)   http://enc.com.au/   csmall at : enc.com.au
Debian GNU/Linux   http://www.debian.org/   csmall at : debian.org
GPG fingerprint:5D2F B320 B825 D939 04D2  0519 3938 F96B DF50 FEA5


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140202215456.ga4...@enc.com.au



Re: Moving a package (to non-free)

2014-02-01 Thread Niels Thykier
On 2014-01-30 09:33, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr wrote:
 Hi,
 

Hi,

CC'ing the FTP masters.

 I was trying to move a package (iausofa-c) from main to non-free with a
 new version. In the developers reference [1], the according paragraph is
 5.9.1:
 
 
 If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change
 the package control information to place the package in the desired
 section, and re-upload the package
 
 So, I changed the section to non-free, and uploaded the new version
 2013.12.02-1 (resp. I asked my sponsor to do so). However, this was
 followed by some unexpected things:
 
 1. I got a traceback with a rejection [2]

Looks like dak is not too happy with this case.  Dear FTP masters, I
think we could use a more human-readable message for this case:


An exception was raised while processing the package:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 98,
in wrapper
function(upload, srcqueue, comments, transaction)
  File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 155,
in comment_accept
transaction.copy_binary(db_binary, suite,
binary_component_func(db_binary), allow_tainted=allow_tainted,
extra_archives=[upload.target_suite.archive])
  File /srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_policy.py, line 136,
in binary_component_func
.join(Component).one()
  File /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/sqlalchemy/orm/query.py, line
2193, in one
Multiple rows were found for one())
MultipleResultsFound: Multiple rows were found for one()



(assuming you haven't implemented it already)

 2. Someone then removed the old binary packages [3]
 3. Then the package got accepted  [4]
 3. After a few days, I got a serious bug that the source is still in
main [5]
 

The uploaded package (from your [4]) does indeed seem to say it wants to
be in non-free:
  [...] non-free/science optional iausofa-c_2013.12.02-1.dsc

My local apt-cache also recognise them as in non-free:


$ aptitude show libsofa-c0 libsofa-c-dev | grep Section
Section: non-free/libs
Section: non-free/libdevel


But the source is located in the main pool!

http://debian.morphium.info/debian/pool/main/i/iausofa-c/iausofa-c_2013.12.02-1.dsc

Note the pool/*main*/, which should pool/*non-free*/ (minus my
emphasis).  This probably means that some part of dak still thinks the
package should be in main...

 No I am unsure what to do. I followed the reference, but it was somehow
 not recognized. The real procedure to move a package seems to be
 different from the documentation. Is this a bug in the manual? And, if
 yes, what is the correct way? If not, should I file a bug against
 ftp-masters saying that the implementation to move a package is wrong?
 
 Or did I something fundamentally misunderstand here? Do I refer to the
 right section of the reference manual and do I interpret it correctly?
 
 Best regards
 
 Ole
 
 [1] 
 https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#moving-pkgs
 [2] 
 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022351.html
 [3] http://bugs.debian.org/735677
 [4] 
 http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022360.html
 [5] http://bugs.debian.org/737055
 
 

I think we could use some help from the FTP masters side in figuring out
what went wrong here and how to move forward from here.

~Niels



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ed1e80.2000...@thykier.net



Moving a package (to non-free)

2014-01-30 Thread Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr
Hi,

I was trying to move a package (iausofa-c) from main to non-free with a
new version. In the developers reference [1], the according paragraph is
5.9.1:


 If you need to change the section for one of your packages, change
 the package control information to place the package in the desired
 section, and re-upload the package

So, I changed the section to non-free, and uploaded the new version
2013.12.02-1 (resp. I asked my sponsor to do so). However, this was
followed by some unexpected things:

1. I got a traceback with a rejection [2]
2. Someone then removed the old binary packages [3]
3. Then the package got accepted  [4]
3. After a few days, I got a serious bug that the source is still in
   main [5]

No I am unsure what to do. I followed the reference, but it was somehow
not recognized. The real procedure to move a package seems to be
different from the documentation. Is this a bug in the manual? And, if
yes, what is the correct way? If not, should I file a bug against
ftp-masters saying that the implementation to move a package is wrong?

Or did I something fundamentally misunderstand here? Do I refer to the
right section of the reference manual and do I interpret it correctly?

Best regards

Ole

[1] 
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#moving-pkgs
[2] 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022351.html
[3] http://bugs.debian.org/735677
[4] 
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-January/022360.html
[5] http://bugs.debian.org/737055


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87txclrhqr@news.ole.ath.cx