[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Ubuntu 8.04 is near to be unsupported on the desktop. Users should upgrade to 10.04 if they want a recent amule on a LTS release. Closing. ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu Hardy) Status: Confirmed => Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 Title: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Description changed: - The current version of aMule in Ubuntu 8.04 is not a stable version + The current version of aMule in Ubuntu 8.04 LTS is not a stable version (2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4, it is a svn snapshot). Yet at the time was more stable than 2.1.3 so it was included. + + Please, read: http://www.amule.org/amule/index.php?topic=15834.0 Now it has published the final version 2.2.2 that can be considered stable. - The main reasons (ARE NOT ALL. I continued looking for specific errors) - why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as follows: + The main reasons why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as + follows: * High importance: - -> Version 2.2.2 has fixes to defy routing attacks + - Version 2.2.2 has several changes were made to Kad in order to defy + routing attacks. - -> The extended version of the Kademlia network, Kad2, wasn't complete - in the svn ubuntu has. That was Bad (tm), to the extent of damaging the + - The extended version of the Kademlia network, Kad2, wasn't complete in + the svn ubuntu has. That was Bad (tm), to the extent of damaging the network, especially when dealing with firewalled users, but also when indexing files >4GB. that's serious, from the network perspective. (from Kry, aMule dev) - -> Also the new network code reinforces the security of the network - about attacks to its nodes, and it's important not to have old clients - around. (from Kry, aMule dev) + - Also the new network code reinforces the security of the network about + attacks to its nodes, and it's important not to have old clients around. + (from Kry, aMule dev) - -> In the connection process amulegui exchanges some information with - the target, including some 'protocol version'. If the client and server + - In the connection process amulegui exchanges some information with the + target, including some 'protocol version'. If the client and server don't agree on this number the connection is rejected. The number interchanged is different in the SVN version. In the function ExternalConn::Authenticate it states that // For release versions, we don't want to allow connections from any arbitrary SVN client. It seems that a SVN version gui cannot communicate with a 'release' version daemon. (bug #206648) * Medium importance: - -> It solves many problems of stability of svn that caused unexpected falls. - + https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 + - It solves many problems of stability of svn that caused unexpected falls. + + (bug #230015/comments/3) + Also bug #230015, bug #213586, bug #207178 + in 2.2.2: bug #242220 * Low importance: - -> Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (bug #244670) - -> aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (bug #94231) - -> amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (bug #209810) - -> Shared files priority don't get updated on amulegui - -> 100% of CPU used by amuleweb - -> broken log view - -> disable upnp in preferences if library loading fails + - Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (bug #244670) + - aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (bug #94231) + - amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (bug #209810) + - Shared files priority don't get updated on amulegui + - 100% of CPU used by amuleweb + - broken log view + - disable upnp in preferences if library loading fails Possible bugs to be solved: - -> bug #234422, bug #214100, bug #260078, bug #228704, bug #219671, bug #175284, bug #106009 - -> in 2.2.2: bug #210554 + - bug #234422, bug #214100, bug #260078, bug #228704, bug #219671, bug #175284, bug #106009 + - in 2.2.2: bug #210554 Old reasons (Not so Disabled): * This release could be considered a bugfix release since most of the new features of aMule 2.2.1 are already included in the latest svn. Indeed! Some features are incomplete in the svn snapshot - * Version 2.2.1, to be an official launch, can be reported hypothetical errors in the program. A snapshot is svn, from the standpoint of developers, a lot of provisional code and that is no longer present at the launch stable. + * Version 2.2.2, to be an official launch, can be reported hypothetical errors in the program. A snapshot is svn, from the standpoint of developers, a lot of provisional code and that is no longer present at the launch stable. * Ubuntu 8.04 is a LTS release so it will be in use at least 3 years for desktops. I do not think it good maintain a snapshot svn for 3 years since "svn snapshot" is not synonymous of stability. * At least in the forum of aMule have been reported numerous problems with the svn snapshot where developers can only advise compile a stable version or an svn latest snapshot. The end user should avoid the process of compiling whenever possible. Some of these problems are in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 And the
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Any news ¿? -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
About my las post: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/amule/+bug/244670/comments/41 These changes are not improvements in the package. Only is a file that is trying to show the changes between version svn and 2.2.2 -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Attached main changes from svn to 2.2.2 I remove of this diff the following folders: * aMule.app Folder for Mac OS X related files * debian-upstream, docs, po (translations) Not relevant * MSVC Solution Folder for MicroSoft Visual C++ IDE related files ** Attachment added: "amule-2.2.2.diff" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/22026904/amule-2.2.2.diff -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
The main task tracks the *current* development release, and there exists a hardy task already, so I'm closing the jaunty task. ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Any news? -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Citando Surfaz Gemon Meme : > http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/universe/a/amule/amule_2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4/changelog > > " * debian/control: > - Do not build-depend on libupnp-dev as the headers needed are shipped > by upstream and not used from the system, and make amule depend on > libupnp2 as it uses dlopen() to call the library. > Changes taken from the Debian package, thanks to Adeodato Simó > for letting me know about this." OK, older version of amule didn't Build-Depends on the libupnp*-dev packages (but Depends on binary version of libupnp). > And see this: http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs- > d...@lists.debian.org/msg596361.html > > "It seems from version 2.2.2 on, aMules configure is able to correctly detect > the presence of libupnp3-dev and use it accordingly. > > Earlier versions (=< 2.2.1) seem to try to unconditionally dlopen() > libupnp.so.3, but the version from experimental does it right by checking at > compile time, if the library is available. > > Please apply attached patch to correctly use libupnp3, as current version > in experimental depends on libupnp3 but the binary does not use it, because > libupnp3-dev was not present during build." From 2.2.2 amule appears to be able to link to libupnp at build time, so libupnp3-dev was added to Build-Depends (and libupnp3 removed from explicit Depends). Apparently 2.2.2 only support libupnp linked during built time and not dlopened, see comments from 2008-11-07 of: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/201624 -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/universe/a/amule/amule_2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4/changelog " * debian/control: - Do not build-depend on libupnp-dev as the headers needed are shipped by upstream and not used from the system, and make amule depend on libupnp2 as it uses dlopen() to call the library. Changes taken from the Debian package, thanks to Adeodato Simó for letting me know about this." And see this: http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs- d...@lists.debian.org/msg596361.html "It seems from version 2.2.2 on, aMules configure is able to correctly detect the presence of libupnp3-dev and use it accordingly. Earlier versions (=< 2.2.1) seem to try to unconditionally dlopen() libupnp.so.3, but the version from experimental does it right by checking at compile time, if the library is available. Please apply attached patch to correctly use libupnp3, as current version in experimental depends on libupnp3 but the binary does not use it, because libupnp3-dev was not present during build." -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
> the library libupnp3-dev is not available in Hardy What about libupnp-dev ? -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Fabio Pedretti, that is not possible because the library libupnp3-dev is not available in Hardy -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Citando Surfaz Gemon Meme : > Also, this sru will fix: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/201624 I think that for this bug you should use at least 2.2.2-2 (note the -2) or 2.2.3, due to this change: amule (2.2.2-2) experimental; urgency=low * The "The Luckiest Guy on the Lower East Side" release. > * Build-Depend on libupnp3-dev: configure now detects its presence at build >time and links against it, instead of the program dlope'ing it at run time. >(Thanks Sven Hartge for the heads-up, closes: #509218). * Make amule Replace: old versions of amule-common as found in Ubuntu (they used to ship the skins in amule-common for some time). -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Also, this sru will fix: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/201624 -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
I build aMule 2.2.2 for Ubuntu 8.04, please, test https://launchpad.net/~surfaz28/+archive/ppa I just had to change libupnp3 by libupnp2: amule (2.2.2-1ubuntu1~hardy1) hardy; urgency=low * New upstream stable release (LP: #244670) - Change libupnp3 for libupnp2 because in Hardy only exists libupnp2 -- Surfaz Gemon MemeSun, 01 Feb 2009 21:15:14 + Attached diff ** Attachment added: "2.2.2-1ubuntu0.diff" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21886075/2.2.2-1ubuntu0.diff -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
This bug has not yet been fixed for Hardy ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Released => Confirmed -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Is there something holding this SRU? BTW, 2.2.3 is now in jaunty. ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu Hardy) Status: New => Confirmed -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
When clicking a e2k link in web browser (I tried Firefox and Epiphany), there is a message that no application is registered for this protocol. I use Intrepid 8.10 and aMule 2.2.2 from the repo. -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Hello Luca, Sorry for disturb you with this but why did you change it to Fix Released? The "fix" was indeed released for 8.10 but the bug was requesting a fix for the LTS 8.04 that still is a svn snapshot Cheers JD Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 7:39:01 PM, you wrote: > ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) >Importance: Undecided => Wishlist >Status: In Progress => Fix Released -- Best regards, JDmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided => Wishlist Status: In Progress => Fix Released -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
The fix was released for Intrepid not for Hardy (a LTS( ** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) Status: Fix Released => In Progress -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Changed in: amule (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
This bug was indeed a SRU request. The reasons for the SRU are listed (and kept updated) in the first post of this bug. -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Fabio Pedretti ha scritto: > amule 2.2.2-1ubuntu1 is now also in intrepid. Can we make an SRU for > hardy? At a first glance, I'd say go for a backport instead. There have been some new features in Kademilia and I think they're most suitable for the backport process, but if you can provide motu-sru team a good rationale, it can be reviewed properly. -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
amule 2.2.2-1ubuntu1 is now also in intrepid. Can we make an SRU for hardy? -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Description changed: - Binary package hint: amule - - Hi all! :D - The current version of aMule in Ubuntu 8.04 is not a stable version (2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4, it is a svn snapshot). Yet at the time was more stable than 2.1.3 so it was included. - Now it has published the final version 2.2.2 that can be considered stable (at least more than a snapshot svn) - - The main reasons (ARE NOT ALL. I continued looking for specific errors) why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as follows: + Now it has published the final version 2.2.2 that can be considered + stable. + + The main reasons (ARE NOT ALL. I continued looking for specific errors) + why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as follows: * High importance: -> Version 2.2.2 has fixes to defy routing attacks -> The extended version of the Kademlia network, Kad2, wasn't complete in the svn ubuntu has. That was Bad (tm), to the extent of damaging the network, especially when dealing with firewalled users, but also when indexing files >4GB. that's serious, from the network perspective. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> Also the new network code reinforces the security of the network about attacks to its nodes, and it's important not to have old clients around. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> In the connection process amulegui exchanges some information with the target, including some 'protocol version'. If the client and server don't agree on this number the connection is rejected. The number interchanged is different in the SVN version. In the function ExternalConn::Authenticate it states that // For release versions, we don't want to allow connections from any arbitrary SVN client. It seems that a SVN version gui cannot communicate with a 'release' version daemon. (bug #206648) * Medium importance: -> It solves many problems of stability of svn that caused unexpected falls. + https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 + Also bug #230015, bug #213586, bug #207178 + in 2.2.2: bug #242220 * Low importance: -> Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (bug #244670) -> aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (bug #94231) -> amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (bug #209810) -> Shared files priority don't get updated on amulegui -> 100% of CPU used by amuleweb -> broken log view -> disable upnp in preferences if library loading fails Possible bugs to be solved: - -> bug #234422, bug #214100 + -> bug #234422, bug #214100, bug #260078, bug #228704, bug #219671, bug #175284, bug #106009 -> in 2.2.2: bug #210554 Old reasons (Not so Disabled): * This release could be considered a bugfix release since most of the new features of aMule 2.2.1 are already included in the latest svn. Indeed! Some features are incomplete in the svn snapshot * Version 2.2.1, to be an official launch, can be reported hypothetical errors in the program. A snapshot is svn, from the standpoint of developers, a lot of provisional code and that is no longer present at the launch stable. * Ubuntu 8.04 is a LTS release so it will be in use at least 3 years for desktops. I do not think it good maintain a snapshot svn for 3 years since "svn snapshot" is not synonymous of stability. * At least in the forum of aMule have been reported numerous problems with the svn snapshot where developers can only advise compile a stable version or an svn latest snapshot. The end user should avoid the process of compiling whenever possible. Some of these problems are in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 And these are just one example (if I am put a full list would be too large). Such is the problem with this svn snapshot that aMule devs are already tired of Ubuntu. http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15259.0 Discussion here: http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15317.0 They blame the Ubuntu patches in wxGTK and crypto + + packages. But in my opinion, Ubuntu users reports of bugs never stopped and was in this svn when the devs are tired. I do not say that 2.2.1 is a "panacea" but at least is a stable version. I am using self since he left and it seems to be more stable than version repositories -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
Subscribing motu-sru so they can evaluate this for SRU. I'm working on the sync now. -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Description changed: Binary package hint: amule Hi all! :D The current version of aMule in Ubuntu 8.04 is not a stable version (2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4, it is a svn snapshot). Yet at the time was more stable than 2.1.3 so it was included. Now it has published the final version 2.2.2 that can be considered stable (at least more than a snapshot svn) The main reasons (ARE NOT ALL. I continued looking for specific errors) why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as follows: * High importance: -> Version 2.2.2 has fixes to defy routing attacks -> The extended version of the Kademlia network, Kad2, wasn't complete in the svn ubuntu has. That was Bad (tm), to the extent of damaging the network, especially when dealing with firewalled users, but also when indexing files >4GB. that's serious, from the network perspective. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> Also the new network code reinforces the security of the network about attacks to its nodes, and it's important not to have old clients around. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> In the connection process amulegui exchanges some information with the target, including some 'protocol version'. If the client and server don't agree on this number the connection is rejected. The number interchanged is different in the SVN version. In the function ExternalConn::Authenticate it states that // For release versions, we don't want to allow connections from any arbitrary SVN client. It seems that a SVN version gui cannot communicate with a 'release' version daemon. (bug #206648) * Medium importance: -> It solves many problems of stability of svn that caused unexpected falls. + https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 + Also bug #230015, bug #213586, bug #207178 + in 2.2.2: bug #242220 * Low importance: -> Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (bug #244670) -> aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (bug #94231) -> amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (bug #209810) -> Shared files priority don't get updated on amulegui -> 100% of CPU used by amuleweb -> broken log view -> disable upnp in preferences if library loading fails Possible bugs to be solved: - (bug #234422) + -> bug #234422, bug #214100 + -> in 2.2.2: bug #210554 Old reasons (Not so Disabled): * This release could be considered a bugfix release since most of the new features of aMule 2.2.1 are already included in the latest svn. Indeed! Some features are incomplete in the svn snapshot * Version 2.2.1, to be an official launch, can be reported hypothetical errors in the program. A snapshot is svn, from the standpoint of developers, a lot of provisional code and that is no longer present at the launch stable. * Ubuntu 8.04 is a LTS release so it will be in use at least 3 years for desktops. I do not think it good maintain a snapshot svn for 3 years since "svn snapshot" is not synonymous of stability. * At least in the forum of aMule have been reported numerous problems with the svn snapshot where developers can only advise compile a stable version or an svn latest snapshot. The end user should avoid the process of compiling whenever possible. Some of these problems are in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 And these are just one example (if I am put a full list would be too large). Such is the problem with this svn snapshot that aMule devs are already tired of Ubuntu. http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15259.0 Discussion here: http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15317.0 They blame the Ubuntu patches in wxGTK and crypto + + packages. But in my opinion, Ubuntu users reports of bugs never stopped and was in this svn when the devs are tired. I do not say that 2.2.1 is a "panacea" but at least is a stable version. I am using self since he left and it seems to be more stable than version repositories -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
** Description changed: Binary package hint: amule Hi all! :D The current version of aMule in Ubuntu 8.04 is not a stable version (2.2.0~svn20080218-0ubuntu4, it is a svn snapshot). Yet at the time was more stable than 2.1.3 so it was included. Now it has published the final version 2.2.2 that can be considered stable (at least more than a snapshot svn) The main reasons (ARE NOT ALL. I continued looking for specific errors) why I am requesting that the upgrade program are as follows: * High importance: -> Version 2.2.2 has fixes to defy routing attacks -> The extended version of the Kademlia network, Kad2, wasn't complete in the svn ubuntu has. That was Bad (tm), to the extent of damaging the network, especially when dealing with firewalled users, but also when indexing files >4GB. that's serious, from the network perspective. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> Also the new network code reinforces the security of the network about attacks to its nodes, and it's important not to have old clients around. (from Kry, aMule dev) -> In the connection process amulegui exchanges some information with the target, including some 'protocol version'. If the client and server don't agree on this number the connection is rejected. The number interchanged is different in the SVN version. In the function ExternalConn::Authenticate it states that // For release versions, we don't want to allow connections from any arbitrary SVN client. It seems that a SVN version gui cannot communicate with a 'release' - version daemon. (LP: #206648) + version daemon. (bug #206648) * Medium importance: -> It solves many problems of stability of svn that caused unexpected falls. + https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 - + Also (LP: #230015) (LP: #213586) (LP: #207178) + + Also bug #230015, bug #213586, bug #207178 + + in 2.2.2: bug #242220 * Low importance: - -> Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (LP: #244670) - -> aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (LP: #94231) - -> amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (LP: #209810) + -> Copy ED2K link to clipboard works strange (bug #244670) + -> aMule makes bad hashlinks (ed2k://) (bug #94231) + -> amule have by default konqueror browser in ubuntu (bug #209810) -> Shared files priority don't get updated on amulegui -> 100% of CPU used by amuleweb -> broken log view -> disable upnp in preferences if library loading fails Possible bugs to be solved: - (LP: #234422) + (bug #234422) Old reasons (Not so Disabled): * This release could be considered a bugfix release since most of the new features of aMule 2.2.1 are already included in the latest svn. Indeed! Some features are incomplete in the svn snapshot * Version 2.2.1, to be an official launch, can be reported hypothetical errors in the program. A snapshot is svn, from the standpoint of developers, a lot of provisional code and that is no longer present at the launch stable. * Ubuntu 8.04 is a LTS release so it will be in use at least 3 years for desktops. I do not think it good maintain a snapshot svn for 3 years since "svn snapshot" is not synonymous of stability. * At least in the forum of aMule have been reported numerous problems with the svn snapshot where developers can only advise compile a stable version or an svn latest snapshot. The end user should avoid the process of compiling whenever possible. Some of these problems are in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/amule/+bug/230015/comments/3 And these are just one example (if I am put a full list would be too large). Such is the problem with this svn snapshot that aMule devs are already tired of Ubuntu. http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15259.0 Discussion here: http://forum.amule.org/index.php?topic=15317.0 They blame the Ubuntu patches in wxGTK and crypto + + packages. But in my opinion, Ubuntu users reports of bugs never stopped and was in this svn when the devs are tired. I do not say that 2.2.1 is a "panacea" but at least is a stable version. I am using self since he left and it seems to be more stable than version repositories -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 244670] Re: [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release
2.2.2 is now in debian / experimental. Once it get synced to intrepid a SRU can be done for 8.04. -- [hardy] Request of update of aMule to 2.2.2 final release https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/244670 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
