Bug#247734: /etc/hosts: Two lines with the same IP address?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:05, Joshua Kwan wrote: On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:03:53PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote: Marc Haber wrote: This is what somebody suggested on IRC. I have configured localhost to be 127.0.0.1, and hostname and fqdn to 127.0.1.1. Which hasn't shown any bad effects yet. This is the best idea so far, provided it works. Anyone see any problem with it Where does 127.0.1.1 fit in to the whole hostname of system must resolve into a usable IP thing? should we have an alias for the lo device that sets up 127.0.1.1? It sounds like a gross hack. It already *is* a usable IP. lo is 127/8. Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upcoming Lenny Point Release
Luk Claes wrote: Unfortunately I won't be available the next couple of days and Phil was rather busy up to now (and I expect that to continue for some time still), so the point release will be delayed for at least a week. Hopefully we will be able to do the point release next Saturday, I hope Phil or some of our Release Assistants can confirm that soon. Apologies for the slight delay, but just to confirm that the point release is now scheduled for this coming Saturday, June 27th. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Please unfreeze brltty
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 21:37 +0200, Mario Lang wrote: Hi. We have a major upstream release of brltty waiting in sid to propagate to testing. After a few bugs found, I think it is time to let this happen. The automatic transition is blocked due to an udeb though. Please let brltty transition to squeeze, thanks. -boot: Any objections? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please hint module-init-tools
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 18:45 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: please hint module-init-tools -boot? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: unblock request: mdadm 2.6.9-3
On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 19:19 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Otavio Salvador wrote: martin f krafft madd...@debian.org writes: Please unblock mdadm 2.6.9-3 to that I can move 3.0 into unstable. Ack Already unblocked since May 26th ... Looking more closely, the reason it's not migrating is that the changelog has made the BTS believe that mdadm 2.6.9-3 is a descendent of 3.0~devel3-1, and thus affected by #526806. The solution is to tell the BTS that the bug is fixed in 2.6.9-3 and then found again in 3.0~devel3-43-g2800528-1. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please hint module-init-tools
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 18:34 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 18:45 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: please hint module-init-tools -boot? Unblocked after confirmation from Otavio on IRC. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Please unfreeze brltty
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 11:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 21:37 +0200, Mario Lang wrote: Hi. We have a major upstream release of brltty waiting in sid to propagate to testing. After a few bugs found, I think it is time to let this happen. The automatic transition is blocked due to an udeb though. Please let brltty transition to squeeze, thanks. -boot: Any objections? Unblocked after confirmation from Otavio on IRC. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: unblock request: mdadm 2.6.9-3
martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk [2009.07.13.1938 +0200]: Looking more closely, the reason it's not migrating is that the changelog has made the BTS believe that mdadm 2.6.9-3 is a descendent of 3.0~devel3-1, and thus affected by #526806. [...] Thanks for spotting this. I hope I fixed it now. Not quite. It needs to be marked as /fixed/ in 2.6.9-3, rather than notfound. notfound simply removes the version from the list of versions in which the bug has been explicitly marked as present; it has no effect on the changelog parsing so 2.6.9-3 is still believed to contain the bug. Marking it as fixed in that version isn't right since the bug never existed there, but in this case it is the means of telling the BTS that it shouldn't be treated as containing the bug. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please allow debian-edu-install 0.677 into testing
On Sat, July 25, 2009 08:43, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: please allow debian-edu-install 0.677 into testing, which is blocked from migrating due to it's udebs. i do not believe the udebs are used in a default install, and thus shouldn't impact debian-installer. Unblocked after ack from otavio. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Please unblock ttf-dejavu
On Sat, July 25, 2009 13:16, Davide Viti wrote: Hi, ttf-dejavu 2.29-3 is now in good shape, please allow it into testing Unblocked after ack from otavio. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: zlib 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-14
On Thu, July 23, 2009 10:25, Mark Brown wrote: Could you pleas unblock zlib 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-14? It's been in unstable for getting on for a month without incident, the changelog is: zlib (1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-14) unstable; urgency=low * amd64 has finally abandoned /emul/ia32-linux so install the 32 bit binaries in lib32 as for other architectures (closes: #533015). Unblocked. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please allow usbutils 0.82-1 into testing
On Tue, July 28, 2009 19:29, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Hi, usbutils 0.82-1 is blocked from migration into testing to an udeb. It has been in unstable for more than 70 days without problems! Could you please hint it? Unblocked. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please allow cpuburn 0.82-1 into testing
On Tue, July 28, 2009 19:28, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Hi, cpuburn 0.82-1 is blocked from migration into testing to an udeb. It has been in unstable for more than 70 days without problems! Could you please hint it? Unblocked. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock libpng 1.2.38-1 (udeb)
On Thu, July 30, 2009 15:04, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: please unblock libpng 1.2.38-1 (udeb) Unblocked. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Unblock glib2.0
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 14:29 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: glib2.0 has been in unstable for 41 days, according to [1] Could it be unblocked so that it migrates to testing? Unblocked, after ack from Otavio. You'll need to get ftp-master to remove the old libgio-fam binaries on the Linux architectures before it will migrate though. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock rdate 1:1.2-3 (udeb)
On Sun, 2009-08-09 at 17:19 +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: please unblock rdate 1:1.2-3 (udeb) Unblocked after ack from Otavio. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: unblock freetype, cairo, pango1.0?
On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 15:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: Would it be appropriate to unblock freetype, cairo and pango1.0? All three seem to be frozen due to udebs (debian-boot CCed). Unblocking them's not a problem, although I'd prefer an ack (or at least a moo) from the maintainers. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock pciutils 1:3.1.3-2 (udeb)
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 06:24 +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: please unblock pciutils 1:3.1.3-2 (udeb) Unblocked (and just waiting for the powerpc build to be uploaded). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Please unblock gtk2-engines
On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 12:37 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: gtk2-engines 1:2.18.2-1 has been ready to migrate for quite a while, so could you please unblock it? Unblocked. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: unblock freetype, cairo, pango1.0?
On Fri, 2009-08-14 at 20:35 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 15:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: Would it be appropriate to unblock freetype, cairo and pango1.0? All three seem to be frozen due to udebs (debian-boot CCed). Unblocking them's not a problem, although I'd prefer an ack (or at least a moo) from the maintainers. For the record, all unblocked after one moo and a brief discussion. Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please allow ltsp 5.1.81-2 into testing
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 21:28 -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: ltsp 5.1.81-2 is blocked from migrating into testing, due to the ltsp-client-builder udeb, though this udeb is not used by debian-installer by default, and has no changes since the previous version. it has been in unstable for 9 days without introducing new problems. Unblocked. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Upcoming Lenny point release
Hi, The next Lenny point release (5.0.3) is scheduled for Saturday, September 5th. With the exception of already planned kernel and installer updates, stable NEW will be frozen during the weekend of August 29th - 30th. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock reiser4progs 1.0.7-4
On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 13:34 +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote: please unblock reiser4progs 1.0.7-4. This fixes an upcoming release goal. (Yes probable it would be better to include more changes, but I doubt that upstream makes another release and there are no open bug reports.) Unblocked, however... it's currently blocked from transition by util-linux, which is itself frozen and blocked by libselinux. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock libpng 1.2.39-1 pciutils 1:3.1.4-1 rdate 1:1.2-4 (udebs)
On Sat, 2009-08-29 at 12:03 +1000, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: please unblock libpng 1.2.39-1 [...] please unblock pciutils 1:3.1.4-1 Both unblocked. please unblock rdate 1:1.2-4 Changes: rdate (1:1.2-4) unstable; urgency=low . * Connect to an NTP server over IPv6 Patch by Jakub Wilk Closes: 515219 * Fix out-of-date-standards-version * Fix patch-system-but-no-source-readme * Update debian/watch -boot? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Upcoming Lenny point release
Adam D. Barratt wrote: The next Lenny point release (5.0.3) is scheduled for Saturday, September 5th. The point release has now been moved slightly forward - we'll be aiming to start around 19:00 UTC this evening so the updated packages should start appearing on mirrors overnight (UTC). Apologies for the short notice of the change. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [OSRM] D-I: major update of choose-mirror for oldstable (etch)
On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 09:33 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Saturday 28 November 2009, Frans Pop wrote: Unless there are objections I will also backport the changes for Etch as that version has the same issues and I think it's worth having the better support for installs from archive.d.o after Etch is moved there. As there have been no comments about this, I've now also uploaded an updated choose-mirror for Etch, version: 2.13etch3. My only comment was that the diffs would have been easier to review without so many whitespace changes. :-) Accepted for both stable and oldstable (already built everywhere for stable, oldstable is waiting for ftpmaster to process p-u-new again). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock debian-edu-install (udeb)
Hi, On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 14:03 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: please unblock debian-edu-install, it contains two udebs not used by the debian-installer by default. Otavio confirmed on IRC that he's happy to let britney handle migrating debian-edu-install. I've made that change, so d-e-i should migrate once d-e-config is ready. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [SRM] Update of clock-setup for D-I
Hi, On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 21:26 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: I've just uploaded an update of clock-setup (0.97lenny1) with a workaround for a bug in rdate (see changelog for bug numbers). [...] Please accept the new version. Accepted. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [OSRM] D-I: major update of choose-mirror for oldstable (etch)
On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 16:25 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Sunday 13 December 2009, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Accepted for both stable and oldstable (already built everywhere for Thanks. stable, oldstable is waiting for ftpmaster to process p-u-new again). Any chance of that happening soon? There was a manual run a short while ago; 2.13etch3 is now in o-p-u. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: binNMU request to correct libc dependencies for udebs
On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 00:20 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: There are only a few udebs left that still depend on libc6 rather than libc6-udeb. In most cases the reason is simply that they have not been uploaded since glibc got support for creating the correct dependencies. A binNMU should solve this. I'm therefore requesting a binNMU for the following source packages, for all architectures. devio/1.2-1 fribidi/0.10.9-1 linux-ntfs/2.0.0-1 mii-diag/2.11-2 pcmciautils/014-4 pwgen/2.06-1 sparc-utils/1.9-4 (sparc only) mac-fdisk/0.1-15 (powerpc only) All scheduled. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [(O)SRM] debian-installer update uploaded for Etch and Lenny
On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 18:57 +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Thursday 24 December 2009, Frans Pop wrote: As all packages needed to build D-I were now available, I have uploaded for both stable and oldstable. An accept is not needed; apparently D-I gets an automatic accept due to by-hand processing of the image tarballs. For stable (20090123lenny5) all arches except mips were successful. I've already mailed the mips buildd maintainers. I've not heard anything back from the mips buildd maintainers, despite sending several mails. Please retry on a different buildd than ball. Given back. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Upcoming lenny point release
Hi, The next Lenny point release (5.0.4) is scheduled for the evening of Friday, January 29th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the weekend of January 23rd - 24th. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: please unblock udev
On Sat, 2011-06-11 at 04:37 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: Unblocked. For the record, Otavio acked the unblock, but only on IRC... Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1307820496.15770.12.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Task installability and britney
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 12:57 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Adam D. Barratt wrote:
In order to ensure that packages marked as key for a task remain present
and installable in testing, britney uses a generated faux package which
depends on each of the packages.
[...]
We've therefore been looking at splitting the single faux package in to a
set of faux packages, one per task.
[...]
Before you spend too much time on that, I have been thinking about
converting tasksel's tasks back to real packages. Now that recommends
are installed by default, it should be possible to make tasks use
Recommends for normal contents, and Depends for Key components.
Time passed, and a version of tasksel which implements the real
package approach will migrate to testing in the next day or so.
joeyh / -boot - could you confirm that the task overrides {can,should}
be dropped (and thus the fields removed from the Packages files for
testing) once the current version of tasksel migrates?
From the britney point-of-view, I'm looking at dropping most of the
current tasksel-meta-faux-* generation in favour of a single faux
package which depends on all of the real task-* packages. This would
allow us to track co-installability of the tasks. I also think we
should move the tasksel-specific functionality in to the main generate
section, as we can simply ask dak for the list of binaries.
Comments / queries / whatever?
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1312568931.31497.10.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Updating linux-2.6 for point release 6.0.3
On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 03:05 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: Finally, there is a pending security update for squeeze (2.6.32-35squeeze1). I would like to see this released first so that the s-p-u upload (2.6.32-36) can include its fixes. Is there an (E)ETA for the security release? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1313527755.12895.28.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#639599: os-prober-udeb: uninstallable on armel, ia64, mips and s390 (grub-mount-udeb)
Package: os-prober-udeb Version: 1.48 Severity: serious Hi, The addition of the grub-mount-udeb dependency to os-prober-udeb in the latest upload renders the latter uninstallable on architectures where the former doesn't exist, namely armel, ia64, mips and s390. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a2d11bf29fe4a7c9513bca112e1bc...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#639599: os-prober-udeb: uninstallable on armel, ia64, mips and s390 (grub-mount-udeb)
On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 12:30 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 02:30:27PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: The addition of the grub-mount-udeb dependency to os-prober-udeb in the latest upload renders the latter uninstallable on architectures where the former doesn't exist, namely armel, ia64, mips and s390. Actually I think anna's response to that may well be to ignore the dependency, although britney probably disagrees. But regardless, fixing in 1.49; thanks. Yeah, I should probably have been slightly more specific and made that uninstallable according to britney; sorry about that. (And thanks for dealing with it so quickly). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1314622127.3574.10.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [SRM] proposed stable update grub-installer
On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 10:27 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: I don't have a bug number for this, but a friend of mine (CCed) is running into this as a problem for Debian users at his colo facility: they're using Xen and their PV-GRUB is set up to read from /boot/grub/menu.lst, so they need to install GRUB Legacy when installing the guests. Unfortunately, the ability to force the use of GRUB Legacy with preseeding was removed just before the release of squeeze, apparently by mistake as the purpose of the change in question was to remove a warning message in expert mode. The following patch restores this. I've just uploaded a matching patch to unstable, and would like to upload this to stable-proposed-updates. As discussed on IRC, please go ahead; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317067803.7282.25.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [SRM] proposed stable update grub-installer
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 22:05 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 09:10:02PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 10:27 +0100, Colin Watson wrote: [allowing use GRUB legacy to be pre-seeded] The following patch restores this. I've just uploaded a matching patch to unstable, and would like to upload this to stable-proposed-updates. As discussed on IRC, please go ahead; thanks. OK, uploaded. Thanks. For the record, the upload was accepted last night and has already built everywhere. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317116283.7282.40.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#637111: pu: package freebsd-libs/8.1-6
-boot: ping? On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 13:04 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 14:51 +, Robert Millan wrote: * Move libsbuf.so.0 to /lib (needed by /sbin/zfs and /sbin/zpool). (Closes: #637100) * Move libipx.so.2 to /lib (needed by ifconfig). Have the portions of this change which affect the udebs been run past the d-i team? They're in testing and being used for new builds already. In any case, D-I team please if you have any objection to libsbuf.so.0 and libipx.so.2 being in /lib, please let us know. These libraries are needed in /lib because zfs and zpool are linked with them, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636668#55 for the bug report. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317116801.7282.45.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#637111: pu: package freebsd-libs/8.1-6
tag 637111 + confirmed thanks On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 10:04 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 08:04, Robert Millan r...@debian.org wrote: 2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 14:51 +, Robert Millan wrote: * Move libsbuf.so.0 to /lib (needed by /sbin/zfs and /sbin/zpool). (Closes: #637100) * Move libipx.so.2 to /lib (needed by ifconfig). Have the portions of this change which affect the udebs been run past the d-i team? They're in testing and being used for new builds already. In any case, D-I team please if you have any objection to libsbuf.so.0 and libipx.so.2 being in /lib, please let us know. These libraries are needed in /lib because zfs and zpool are linked with them, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636668#55 for the bug report. No problem from our POV. In that case, please go ahead. (Preferably sooner rather than later, as both libraries appear to be in the d-i initrd). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317218064.2999.12.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#637111: pu: package freebsd-libs/8.1-6
On Fri, 2011-09-30 at 21:08 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/28 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: In that case, please go ahead. (Preferably sooner rather than later, as both libraries appear to be in the d-i initrd). Uploaded. On Wednesday, in fact, and accepted the same day. We obviously just failed to update the bug; sorry. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317457647.2999.45.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Backporting ZFS installer support to kreebsd
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 18:09 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/22 Arno Töll deb...@toell.net: To achieve that, we would need to backport at least the following bug fixes and improvements. Note #635627 is already on its way to p-u (#637020): Bug # -- package -- title 635384 -- parted -- detection of ZFS volumes (ZVOL) Colin et al, any chance this can make it to Squeeze point release? It's the last non-DI package in Arno's list. If you mean in to 6.0.3, is there any particular benefit to trying to push that particular update at this late stage in the process, given that the partman-* changes won't be included? Might it not make more sense to look at the remaining changes as a set for 6.0.4? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317488903.2999.62.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 22:59 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 12:23 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: Please go ahead, bearing in mind that the upload window for the Squeeze point release closes over this weekend. Uploaded. Flagged for acceptance at the next dinstall; thanks. Thank you. Btw, how do we go about propagating this to kfreebsd-kernel-di-*? If there are changes which need propagating to the udebs - which isn't always the case, as evidenced by the fact that the last build was against 8.1+dfsg-7.1 - someone from -boot needs to upload both source packages; it looks like Aurelien has done that in the past. If the aim is to do that for 6.0.3 then those uploads need to happen within the next day, or they'll miss the cut-off. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317503521.2999.72.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Backporting ZFS installer support to kreebsd
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 23:02 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: If you mean in to 6.0.3, is there any particular benefit to trying to push that particular update at this late stage in the process, given that the partman-* changes won't be included? I didn't know if D-I followed the same release cycle. Given your reply, now I assume it does. d-i _in stable_ does, yes. The only time anything in stable changes is in a point release. (The udeb packages might get uploaded to proposed-updates in between, but there's no installer release that would be built to use them, afaik). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317503579.2999.73.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1
On Sun, 2011-10-02 at 14:37 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: If there are changes which need propagating to the udebs Yes. The if_msk update is specially important for the installer. If the aim is to do that for 6.0.3 then those uploads need to happen within the next day, or they'll miss the cut-off. I've uploaded a BinNMU for both packages. If I'd been sure that binNMUs would work then we could have scheduled them directly; the previous uploads have all been sourceful, so I assumed there was a reason for that. In any case, I've flagged the uploads for acceptance at the next dinstall. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317561661.2999.77.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
[tl,dr; these changes broke d-i in stable] On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 00:25 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/27 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: - Does this affect which modules end up in the udebs? It looks like this was missed in the original follow-up. As a related query, has a test build of kfreebsd-kernel-di-* been performed in order to find out whether any additional modules get pulled in to the packages? I just tried. The resulting file lists are identical. debian-installer was binNMUed earlier today in preparation for the point release, and FTBFS on kfreebsd-i386. The log finishes with: # Move the kernel image out of the way. mv -f ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/kfreebsd.gz ./tmp/cdrom/kfreebsd.gz; test -e ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/zfs || rmdir ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/ rmdir: failed to remove `./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/': Directory not empty make[7]: *** [stamps/tree-unpack-cdrom-stamp] Error 1 The problem appears to be that the contents of the kernel udeb have changed: $ debdiff kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6_kfreebsd-i386.udeb kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6+b1_kfreebsd-i386.udeb [...] Files in second .deb but not in first - -rw-r--r-- root/root /boot/acpi.ko This appears to be due to the fact that the new kfreebsd-8 +squeeze1 kernel on -i386 builds acpi.ko as a module, which is then picked up by existing install this module if it exists rules in kernel-wedge. A quick fix would be appreciated, whether from the kfreebsd or d-i side, given the increasingly short period of time we have remaining until the point release is scheduled. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317853200.4522.22.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 07:20:50 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/6 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: test -e ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/zfs || rmdir ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/ rmdir: failed to remove `./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/': Directory not empty [...] $ debdiff kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6_kfreebsd-i386.udeb kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6+b1_kfreebsd-i386.udeb [...] Files in second .deb but not in first - -rw-r--r-- root/root /boot/acpi.ko This appears to be due to the fact that the new kfreebsd-8 +squeeze1 kernel on -i386 builds acpi.ko as a module, which is then picked up by existing install this module if it exists rules in kernel-wedge. Actually, the problem is not presence of acpi.ko itself, but the fact that a symlink to this file exists in /boot/. This is due to an old postinst kludge from pre-GRUB time. Okay. A quick fix would be appreciated, whether from the kfreebsd or d-i side, given the increasingly short period of time we have remaining until the point release is scheduled. Attached patch should fix the problem. I can upload a fixed kfreebsd-8 this evening (feel free to NMU if someone has time to verify earlier than that). Forgive my ignorance on the precise mechanics, but is it correct that the /boot/kernel/kernel.gz symlink creation was also removed? Would you be able to also upload a kfreebsd-i386 build? That would help reduce the turnaround time before we can schedule a rebuild of kfreebsd-kernel-di-i386. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ac1933eacf629d91a4529827b879e...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#633561: kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 23:12 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/6 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 07:20:50 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Attached patch should fix the problem. I can upload a fixed kfreebsd-8 this evening (feel free to NMU if someone has time to verify earlier than that). What's the status of that upload? I realized the symlink in kfreebsd-8 had nothing to do with this. The actual problem was in kernel-wedge and kfreebsd-kernel-di-i386. Ah, okay. I've just NMUed both packages. Debdiffs attached. For the record, the NMUs were acked on IRC and accepted earlier today. I gave the kfreebsd-i386 d-i build back and it built successfully; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1318012540.29287.3.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Task installability and britney
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 14:37 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Adam D. Barratt wrote: Time passed, and a version of tasksel which implements the real package approach will migrate to testing in the next day or so. [...] From the britney point-of-view, I'm looking at dropping most of the current tasksel-meta-faux-* generation in favour of a single faux package which depends on all of the real task-* packages. This would allow us to track co-installability of the tasks. That sounds about right.. I finally found a relevant tuit, and just implemented this (having checked that task-* are currently co-installable in both testing and unstable). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1320590894.5736.9.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release
Hi, The next point release for squeeze (6.0.4) is scheduled for Saturday January 28th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceeding weekend (21st/22nd). As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. If there is a further kernel update planned for inclusion in the point release, it would be ideal if that could be uploaded over the coming weekend so that we can look at finalising the installer later next week. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/b0343660143780d37f8c02ff126c5...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Upcoming stable point release
[CC += -boot] On 16.01.2012 19:06, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2012-01-14 at 04:09 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2012-01-11 at 13:12 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: If there is a further kernel update planned for inclusion in the point release, it would be ideal if that could be uploaded over the coming weekend so that we can look at finalising the installer later next week. There are some more important changes pending, including a fix for a regression in 2.6.32-40 (currently in stable-proposed-updates). I can probably make an upload this weekend, but cannot promise that a further upload will not be needed. We need some testing of the isci driver (added in 2.6.32-40) and more generally regression testing. Thanks for the -41 upload. I accepted that in to p-u earlier today. Are there any current plans for a -42 upload? Looking at SVN there only appears to be one change listed in the changelog and it didn't immediately sound like it would need an upload on its own. If -41 is looking to be the final kernel for the point release, we should look at getting lkdi and any other pending d-i changes sorted out (although if there are pending changes then they should really have been raised on -release by now...) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/c3f10939f5368f0a74e77ac1f843f...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#630424: Maybe a Problem with tip22
On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 18:48 +0200, Guido Günther wrote: Hi Dann, On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 05:29:04PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: [...] 3) Finally, we need to do a d-i rebuild (which we usually do with each point release anyway). You can coordinate with me on that. Thanks for the heads up, besides 2) it's what Adam suggested: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=631007 That d-i rebuild, including the updated arcboot package, was included in 6.0.3, so I guess we can close this now... Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1327353109.25541.2.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Automatically identify the suite to use for udeb fetching
On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 17:43 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
To try to work out of box for most situations we use
/etc/debian_version information to detect from witch suite to
grab udebs from but allow for overriden by auto-builders.
[...]
- If /etc/buildd_target exists, use this for suite (to be used by
buildds)
- Otherise, use /etc/debian_version to detect the suite to use.
+BUILDD_TARGET=$(shell [[ -e /etc/buildd_target ]] sed 's,sid,unstable,g'
/etc/buildd_target || echo )
+ifeq (${BUILDD_TARGET},)
+USE_UDEBS_FROM=$(shell grep -q '/sid$' /etc/debian_version echo unstable
|| cat /etc/debian_version)
Right now, on a stable system, that will result in USE_UDEBS_FROM being
set to 6.0.4. That doesn't seem like it will do anything useful,
particularly as there's no such directory in dists/ (there's a
Debian6.0.4 symlink, but I imagine that trying to get apt to use that
is unlikely to work well).
I realise that the plan is for it to be handled via the new variable, I
just wonder if there's an alternative approach that doesn't rely on
changes to every {old,}stable, testing and experimental build chroot. I
pondered suggesting parsing sources.list, but then realised that won't
work if sources.list.d files are in use.
This would allow us to have the experimental building working, using
experimental buildds, and use unstable for beta and rc releases. When
stable comes, buildds can set the suite according too.
Has this been discussed with the buildd folks yet, given they'd need to
be the ones adding all the flag files?
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1329113880.27786.84.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Automatically identify the suite to use for udeb fetching
On 13.02.2012 11:02, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 04:18, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
+BUILDD_TARGET=$(shell [[ -e /etc/buildd_target ]] sed
's,sid,unstable,g' /etc/buildd_target || echo ) +ifeq
(${BUILDD_TARGET},)
+USE_UDEBS_FROM=$(shell grep -q '/sid$' /etc/debian_version echo
unstable || cat /etc/debian_version)
Right now, on a stable system, that will result in USE_UDEBS_FROM
being
set to 6.0.4. That doesn't seem like it will do anything
useful,
particularly as there's no such directory in dists/ (there's a
Debian6.0.4 symlink, but I imagine that trying to get apt to use
that
is unlikely to work well).
Ok; I can fix this using lsb_release -c -s in case it is not
unstable.
For the avoidance of any possible ambiguity, right now means on a
system without the new build_target file.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/f611e23f8c8c8883dc8e6c0421e8b...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 23:05 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Working on the four-monthly schedule for oldstable, the next lenny point
release would be due in early February.
As the security team have recently confirmed that security support for
lenny will end on February 6th (a year after the release of squeeze) it
makes sense to schedule 5.0.10 to be after that date and make it the
final roll-up point release for lenny.
So, security EOL for lenny has now passed. We're in sync with the
security archive and the only missing packages are
openjdk-6/{alpha,ia64} and opie/{arm,armel}. AIUI the chances of those
ever building are remote but, given that we've nothing to lose we might
as well go ahead and accept them in to o-p-u and see what happens[tm].
I can't see any outstanding o-p-u package bugs in the BTS. If there's
any I missed on the list, please yell.
-kernel, -boot - were there any plans for a final kernel and/or d-i
upload for lenny? If so we need to get those sorted asap.
In terms of scheduling for the point release itself, the current
suggestions are:
25-26/2 - Steve's not available for CDs
3-4/3 - Cambridge BSP. Should be do-able as long as I can get decent
connectivity at the right time. :-)
10-11/3 - Joerg mentioned he's not available on the Sunday, but that's
only really an issue if stuff breaks and it then transpires that Mark's
also unavailable to help fix the world.
Thoughts / preferences / anything I missed?
Cheers,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1329255398.939.29.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 21:36 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: -kernel, -boot - were there any plans for a final kernel and/or d-i upload for lenny? If so we need to get those sorted asap. *prod*? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329772320.30721.10.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
[Cc list trimmed] On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 15:03 -0700, dann frazier wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 04:55:32PM -0700, dann frazier wrote: On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 09:36:38PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: -kernel, -boot - were there any plans for a final kernel and/or d-i upload for lenny? If so we need to get those sorted asap. There are some security fixes for the kernel queued - nothing major. I had planned to see if the CVE-2011-4127 fix from the recent 2.6.27.y update applied cleanly/sanely. But, I'd also be ok w/ shipping what we have now. Evidently this reply got dropped somewhere by listz, at any rate... I prepared the above, tested it on amd64, and I'm currently preparing a build for hppa. I don't know of anything else that needs to change in d-i. My recommendation would be to either: fwiw, the packages in o-p-u right now which contain udebs are freetype, libpng and openssl. Those all appear to be used in the gtk initrd at least (openssl only on some architectures) although I'm not sure if that makes a difference to whether we want to do a respin. A) upload this build to security. If we have all builds by Monday (02.27), go ahead and release a DSA and proceed with a d-i spin. If not, reject go w/ what we have. Assuming the technical side still works, I do worry a little that a new DSA three weeks after the announced EOL for security support might confuse people. I suppose we could do a last-minute kernel update via o-p-u, although I don't know if we have any idea how many people actually upgrade to EOL point releases in the relatively short period before the move to archive.d.o. Phil: any thoughts / preferences? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330116286.27081.23.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
On 14.02.2012 21:36, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 23:05 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: As the security team have recently confirmed that security support for lenny will end on February 6th (a year after the release of squeeze) it makes sense to schedule 5.0.10 to be after that date and make it the final roll-up point release for lenny. [...] 3-4/3 - Cambridge BSP. Should be do-able as long as I can get decent connectivity at the right time. :-) 10-11/3 - Joerg mentioned he's not available on the Sunday, but that's only really an issue if stuff breaks and it then transpires that Mark's also unavailable to help fix the world. Based on responses so far, I'm plumping for the 10th. If that doesn't work for anyone, please yell really soon, because I'd like to get an announcement of the date sent out. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/b168fce3b60d7a96d901dca87a6c9...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Upcoming oldstable point release
Hi, The next - and final - point release for lenny (5.0.10) is scheduled for Saturday March 10th. Oldstable NEW will be frozen during the coming weekend (3rd/4th). As this will be the last point release for lenny, it will be moved to archive.debian.org in the near future (most likely on or after March 24th). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330499137.12939.49.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
On 27.02.2012 01:12, dann frazier wrote: Ok - sounds like no DSA, but maybe an upload via o-p-u. My vote is to do no kernel upload if the release gets scheduled for the first weekend in march - that's one week out, and I'll have spotty availability beginning mid-week. For later weekends, I'm for it. As you most likely saw already, we've scheduled the point release for the 10th; i.e. a week and a bit from now. Feel free to go ahead with the kernel upload, so we can get it chucked at the buildds. If we could look at getting lkdi and d-i sorted fairly quickly after the kernel builds are in, that would be great, so we don't end up with any last minute surprises; let us know if there's anything you'd like us to assist with there. I was hoping we could get away with binNMUing d-i, but we'd need a manual upload for hppa anyway, so we might as well start with a source+hppa upload I suppose... Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5af2f18beb5e18a15a737a13cd52c...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Planning for final lenny point release (5.0.10)
On 29.02.2012 17:20, dann frazier wrote: On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 01:20:32PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Feel free to go ahead with the kernel upload, so we can get it chucked at the buildds. [...] Ack. Unfortunately, the powerpc build died: CC [M] arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.o arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.c: In function 'pmc_overflow': arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.c:273: error: 'PV_POWER7' undeclared (first use in this function) arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.c:273: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.c:273: error: for each function it appears in.) make[4]: *** [arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_power4.o] Error 1 This appears to be a consequence of the patch for CVE-2011- 4347 (URL:http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/kernel/dists/lenny-security/linux-2.6/debian/patches/bugfix/powerpc/oprofile-handle-events-that-raise-an-exception-without-overflowing.patch?view=markuppathrev=18552). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9fdeafc2033b22182aa272de7a4a6...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Proposal to get Wheezy Alpha1 done
Hi, On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 14:55 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: I'd like to propose following timeline for alpha1 of installer: Thanks for this. * until 03/14 get all translation-only changed udebs uploaded * until 03/14 get pending fixes commited uploaded * on 03/17 try to get the packages migrated to testing Are there any non-installer-specific packages on that list that either haven't been uploaded yet, or have non-small changes that haven't been in unstable for very long? Does this also imply a new kernel upload to fix the mips* ext3-modules issue? (r18812 in kernel SVN) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1331581657.22055.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Proposal to get Wheezy Alpha1 done
On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 14:37 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Please age the following packages: [list re-ordered for ease] arcboot-installer cdrom-detect cdrom-retriever colo-installer elilo-installer finish-install fonts-samyak fonts-smc grub-installer installation-report iso-scan mdcfg media-retriever net-retriever network-console nobootloader partman-auto partman-auto-crypto partman-auto-lvm partman-auto-raid partman-basicmethods partman-btrfs partman-crypto partman-efi partman-ext3 partman-jfs partman-md partman-newworld partman-partitioning partman-prep partman-reiserfs partman-ufs partman-xfs prep-installer quik-installer rescue sibyl-installer silo-installer yaboot-installer zipl-installer Done brltty cdebconf debootstrap flash-kernel os-prober partman-zfs user-setup Done after looking at the changes. partman-ext2r0 Done. Note that the new source package appears to be full of .git cruft. partman-nbd Not done. The files client.c, oef and opdr have all disappeared and a chunk of code has changed in resolv.c, without any mention in the changelog. pkgse Did you mean pkgsel? linux-2.6 Nope. It's plenty old enough, but FTBFS on s390*. There's no way it can migrate until that's fixed. win32-loader Not done yet, pending confirmation from ftp-master that it's okay to do so before the corresponding files in /tools/ have been updated. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1332009459.5909.17.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Proposal to get Wheezy Alpha1 done
On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 15:42 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 15:37, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: pkgse Did you mean pkgsel? yes, sorry. Okay; done. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1332009819.5909.19.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: GRUB version in testing
On 2014-09-10 11:17, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Is the PTS playing tricks again? https://packages.qa.debian.org/g/grub2.html No, it's not dealing with Extra-Source-Only sources correctly. oldstable 1.98+20100804-14+squeeze1 stable 1.99-27+deb7u2 testing 2.02~beta2-11 unstable 2.02~beta2-11 Package: grub2 Binary: grub2, grub-linuxbios, grub-efi, grub-common, grub2-common, grub-emu, grub-emu-dbg, grub-pc-bin, grub-pc-dbg, grub-pc, grub-rescue-pc, grub-coreboot-bin, grub-coreboot-dbg, grub-coreboot, grub-efi-ia32-bin, grub-efi-ia32-dbg, grub-efi-ia32, grub-efi-amd64-bin, grub-efi-amd64-dbg, grub-efi-amd64, grub-efi-ia64-bin, grub-efi-ia64-dbg, grub-efi-ia64, grub-ieee1275-bin, grub-ieee1275-dbg, grub-ieee1275, grub-firmware-qemu, grub-yeeloong-bin, grub-yeeloong-dbg, grub-yeeloong, grub-theme-starfield, grub-mount-udeb Version: 2.00-22 [...] Package: grub2 Binary: grub2, grub-linuxbios, grub-efi, grub-common, grub2-common, grub-emu, grub-emu-dbg, grub-pc-bin, grub-pc-dbg, grub-pc, grub-rescue-pc, grub-coreboot-bin, grub-coreboot-dbg, grub-coreboot, grub-efi-ia32-bin, grub-efi-ia32-dbg, grub-efi-ia32, grub-efi-amd64-bin, grub-efi-amd64-dbg, grub-efi-amd64, grub-efi-ia64-bin, grub-efi-ia64-dbg, grub-efi-ia64, grub-efi-arm-bin, grub-efi-arm-dbg, grub-efi-arm, grub-efi-arm64-bin, grub-efi-arm64-dbg, grub-efi-arm64, grub-ieee1275-bin, grub-ieee1275-dbg, grub-ieee1275, grub-firmware-qemu, grub-uboot-bin, grub-uboot-dbg, grub-uboot, grub-xen-bin, grub-xen-dbg, grub-xen, grub-yeeloong-bin, grub-yeeloong-dbg, grub-yeeloong, grub-theme-starfield, grub-mount-udeb Version: 2.02~beta2-11 [...] Extra-Source-Only: yes Directory: pool/main/g/grub2 Priority: source Section: admin Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/a8d66ccb6f0068815c9886e513750...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
7.7 planning
Hi, We're (over)due another wheezy point release; this time, 7.7. I propose we go for one of: 11/12 October 18/19 October 25/26 October Cheers, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1411214371.18186.39.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 7.7 planning
On Tue, 2014-09-23 at 12:56 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 08:38:37AM +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: We're (over)due another wheezy point release; this time, 7.7. I propose we go for one of: 11/12 October 18/19 October 25/26 October All of these are still good for me. All fine for me too. Thanks for the responses. Based on those and comments on IRC, I'm going for the 18th / 19th. I'll get a proper announcement sent out soon. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1411499625.18186.65.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.7)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.7) is scheduled for Saturday, October 18th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1411585956.15708.2.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
7.8 dates
Hi, In theory the 7.8 point release should be in December, but that's often a pain to organise. So let's look at January instead: 3rd / 4th - I'm busy on the Saturday 10th / 11th - Fine for me 17th / 18th - jmw's BSP 24th / 25th - I can do Saturday morning, but will be afk from early afternoon to Sunday afternoon 31st / 1st - Fine for me Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1418157231.5790.50.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Upcoming Lenny point release
Hi, The next Lenny point release (5.0.8) is scheduled for Saturday, January 22nd. Stable NEW will be frozen during Monday 17th. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6ba4cd83372f56a95d2e9019930044d8.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#603554: Bug#603552: Update theme SpaceFun and wiki page
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 18:10 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: reopen 603554 reassign 603554 debian-installer thanks On jeu., 2010-12-09 at 16:36 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 07:29:40PM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: On mer., 2010-12-08 at 19:12 +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote: regarding squeeze, i'll only sync those from debian-cd, so if debian-cd uses the correct things, so will syslinux-themes-debian. Nice to know that. Adding the debian-cd bug to the list then. For debian-cd people, the SpaceFun isolinux artwork is at http://svn.debianart.org/themes/spacefun/isolinux/ Do you plan to include it? There's nothing needed in debian-cd at all; we just include whatever graphics are provided by the d-i folks. Ok, so maybe in the end we'll manage to do it, one step at a time. I'm not sure if Otavio reply applies to d-i or not, though. So, the d-i side of this appears to be done with RC1, afaict. Is there anything that still needs to happen on the syslinux side and, if so, could it either happen soon or for 6.0.1, please? :) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294955561.1480.247.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#610885: default install fails on kfreebsd-amd64
user release.debian@packages.debian.org tag 610885 + squeeze-ignore usertag 610885 + squeeze-can-defer thanks On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 18:49 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: Default install fails on kfreebsd-amd64 with the following error: The attempt to mount a file system with type swap in SCSI1, partition #5 (da0s5) at none failed. You may resume partitioning from the partitioning menu. Do you want to resume partitioning? It should be da0s2, not da0s5. It seems that partman is counting logical partitions starting with 5 as on Linux. A workaround is to disable swap in the default partition layout and enabling it manually after the install. As a workaround is available, although it's not exactly ideal, this isn't a blocker for the release. Should a d-i RC3 be needed for some reason before release this could probably be fixed as part of that, otherwise is likely to be 6.0.1 material (although in that case should be documented somewhere that can be pointed to as part of the release announcement). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295896672.2202.66.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#611045: debian-installer: GRUB always installs in /dev/sda
severity 611045 wishlist retitle 611045 debian-installer: find a better way of detecting default GRUB bootloader install location thanks Hi, On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 03:23 +0100, Tobias Bußmann wrote: serverity 611045 wishlist retitle 611045 debian-installer: find a better way of detecting default GRUB bootloader install location thanks You need to (B)CC control@bugs.d.o in order for the commands to take effect (BCC generally preferred as it means that the address doesn't end up being CCed on replies to subsequent mails); I've done so with this mail, thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295938099.2202.2923.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#603554: Bug#603552: Bug#603554: Bug#603552: Update theme SpaceFun and wiki page
On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 14:54 +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote: On 01/21/2011 02:32 PM, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: Assuming your back from [VAC], is there any news from this? like i said[0].. i'm on the last steps of testing and upload RSN. That was a few days ago; how's the testing going? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1296077491.31957.653.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 23:13 +, Jurij Smakov wrote: I have prepare some branches that has what I am intending to upload to stable-proposed-updates. The modules I have changed are the following: The below shouldn't be assumed to be an ack or nack for the particular uploads at this point. grub-installer There doesn't appear to be a squeeze branch for this listed on gitweb; for a stable update, the hurd fixes wouldn't be appropriate for instance. linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 This should probably be uploaded once the update kernel for 6.0.1 is available? Yes; or at least it will need rebuilding once a final(ish) kernel for 6.0.1 is in place; Dann's often uploaded lkdi-* nearer to the point release to get it built against the kernel we're including. tasksel Would this include all of the changes between 2.88 and 2.89, or just some subset? As I think I've mentioned before, changes which might affect what ends up on CD1 for any given CD set worry me, particularly given the last minute problems we had for 6.0.0 with getting the release notes on to the CDs and trying to get all of the packages required for KDE CD1 to fit on a single CD for some architectures. cdebconf debootstrap kernel-wedge Please include debian-installer as well, I've committed a patch targeting 6.0.1. I'd imagine this would want to be uploaded closer to the point release, or at least we'll need to rebuild it later on to pick up any further builds of lkdi-* or other udebs. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1297555390.27877.4029.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 11:23 +, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 00:03, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: grub-installer There doesn't appear to be a squeeze branch for this listed on gitweb; for a stable update, the hurd fixes wouldn't be appropriate for instance. I uploaded the branch. Thanks. My fault. Please take a look. Just the debconf title fix so far? That looks fine; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1297712959.401.76.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Task installability and britney
Hi, In order to ensure that packages marked as key for a task remain present and installable in testing, britney uses a generated faux package which depends on each of the packages. This approach has, with the odd minor niggle, worked fine for some time but breaks down as soon as the set of packages involved are not completely coinstallable; this is now the case due to the gnome-desktop task indirectly depending on gdm3, and the xfce and lxde desktop tasks depending on gdm. The net effect is that the faux package becomes useless for the purpose of determining installability of the set of key packages, as it is itself uninstallable. We've therefore been looking at splitting the single faux package in to a set of faux packages, one per task. This maintains the overall property of requiring all of the packages to be installable but only requires that the packages within each task are co-installable; if there are particular combinations of tasks which are expected / desired to remain co-installable then we could add further faux packages depending on sets of the task packages. Comments on or problems with the above welcome. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6a041fd7c998cd418d362973020d5db8.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Task installability and britney
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 12:57 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Adam D. Barratt wrote: [the gnome task depends on gdm3, the xfce and lxde tasks depend on gdm; gdm and gdm3 conflict] That's unfortunate. I doubt that the light desktop tasks will continue to use gdm for too long, as it seems unlikely gdm 2 will remain in Debian. That (gdm remaining in Debian) is roughly where the discussion that lead to my mail began - I mentioned to one of the GNOME maintainers that removing gdm from wheezy would require dropping it from the tasks and it was later pointed out to me that the lack of co-installability rendered that untrue. Co-installability of tasks is also a desirable property in general. I suspected it might be. We've therefore been looking at splitting the single faux package in to a set of faux packages, one per task. [...] Before you spend too much time on that, I have been thinking about converting tasksel's tasks back to real packages. [...] This has been a longterm plan, and one I wanted to discuss more broadly. But I can try to move up the implementation if it avoids duplicate work. The basic implementation on the britney side exists (in my local setup) since a few hours ago, after I tinkered with it during my lunch break. The interesting work of extracting the information required from the version of tasksel-data currently in unstable already exists in order to create the current composite list and the changes for moving from (essentially) a list to a list of lists weren't particularly complex. I'm quite happy for that work to remain an interesting diversion from debugging customer systems, but thought it was worth discussing how we best resolve the current situation regarding the tasksel-meta-faux package being broken by the non co-installability of the tasks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1297971038.17695.103.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#613910: apt-setup: Improve squeeze-updates behaviour during installations with no network mirror
Package: apt-setup Version: 1:0.53 Severity: important Hi, Thanks very much for including my rather last minute apt-setup patch to add $codename-updates to sources.list when volatile is selected for = squeeze installs. Unfortunately, the behaviour is somewhat suboptimal when an install is performed using no network mirror, leading to malformed sources.list entries as the relevant debconf entries are unset and there isn't a default HTTP / FTP mirror entry to fall back on. In itself this isn't an issue as the entries fail to validate and are commented out as part of the install process, albeit with an annoying warning message. However, it appears that some users are either uncommenting the lines themselves, or doing so via tools such as update-manager, and then filing bugs or raising queries on #debian when the entries do not dtrt. It would be good if we could make the behaviour in this case saner, ideally as part of a squeeze point release. We could simply skip the sources.list addition if no network mirror was selected, but I fear that may simply swap the existing set of bugs / issues for a set of I asked for volatile but got no sources.list entry. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a9efefc0a5c76fc857eb1ae5f6141f2f.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: [SRM] Approval for finish-install_2.28squeeze1
On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 15:36 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: I would like to fix a bug in finish-install, which doesn't enable the serial console on MIPS Swarm machines during installation, as the serial devices are called duart0 or duart1 instead of tty*. This bug is quite important to fix as these machines are used as build daemons in Debian, and thus should be able to be reinstalled easily. Please consider the diff below for finish-install in stable. Please go ahead; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1298128713.2648.2741.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [SRM] Seeking approval for hw-detect changes for 6.0.1
On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 16:42 +, Jurij Smakov wrote: We would like to push the following changes to 6.0.1 to fix a problem with not waiting long enough for SCSI subsystem to be initialized, and disk detection failing in d-i on the first try as a result. These have been committed to the hw-detect squeeze brance: [...] +hw-detect (1.84squeeze1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low ^^ I'm assuming that will be fixed before upload. :-) + + * Increase the number of attempts to detect the new disk devices in +disk_found() of disk-detect.sh to 15, bringing the total waiting time +to 28 seconds. Current timeout of 4 seconds is not sufficient for +some SCSI subsystems with long driver/disk initialization time. This will need fixing in testing before the point release happens, otherwise (assuming the dak code still works as-designed) it's going to end up in unstable and testing automagically in order to ensure the inter-suite version constraints are preserved. Other than that and the changelog note, please go ahead. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1298577883.22974.247.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#613910: Bug #613910: apt-setup: Improve squeeze-updates behaviour during installations with no network mirror
tag 613910 + patch
thanks
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 08:28 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Thanks very much for including my rather last minute apt-setup patch to
add $codename-updates to sources.list when volatile is selected for =
squeeze installs.
Unfortunately, the behaviour is somewhat suboptimal when an install is
performed using no network mirror, leading to malformed sources.list
entries as the relevant debconf entries are unset and there isn't a
default HTTP / FTP mirror entry to fall back on.
Attached is a patch which aims to remedy (or at least significantly
improve) the behaviour mentioned above.
If a network mirror was not selected during install, commented entries
are added to the target sources.list for $codename-updates, pointing at
ftp.debian.org and including an explanation of why the entries are
commented out and that the mirror in use should be adjusted as
appropriate for the system if the entry is enabled. This means that the
entries added to sources.list are always syntactically valid and are
likely to work if uncommented, and avoids the ugly error message
presented to users.
There is still the issue that users installing in such a manner and
requesting volatile will not get an enabled sources.list entry but I
think this is acceptable; if it's not then the ftp.d.o entry could be
inserted without being commented out.
The explanatory comments are also non-translat{ed,able} but imho that's
preferable to them not existing; they're easy to remove if you'd rather
they not be included.
Regards,
Adam
diff -Nru apt-setup-0.53/debian/changelog apt-setup-0.53+squeeze1/debian/changelog
--- apt-setup-0.53/debian/changelog 2011-01-16 18:50:09.0 +
+++ apt-setup-0.53+squeeze1/debian/changelog 2011-02-25 16:11:49.0 +
@@ -1,3 +1,14 @@
+apt-setup (1:0.53+squeeze1) stable; urgency=low
+
+ * If no network mirror was selected during install, add a (commented-out)
+entry pointing at ftp.debian.org, together with a comment explaining why
+the entry is commented out and that it should be updated to use a relevant
+mirror. The comment is not translated, but this is still preferable to
+the previous behaviour of creating clearly broken entries under such
+circumstances which users then re-enabled. (Closes: #613910)
+
+ -- Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:04:21 +
+
apt-setup (1:0.53) unstable; urgency=low
* Support cd_type bluray. In particular, don't prompt at high priority
diff -Nru apt-setup-0.53/generators/92volatile apt-setup-0.53+squeeze1/generators/92volatile
--- apt-setup-0.53/generators/92volatile 2010-12-07 21:22:43.0 +
+++ apt-setup-0.53+squeeze1/generators/92volatile 2011-02-25 19:02:33.0 +
@@ -47,7 +47,17 @@
if [ $codename = lenny ]; then
echo deb http://$host/debian-volatile $codename/volatile $dists $file
else
- echo deb $protocol://${host}${directory} ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ echo # ${codename}-updates, previously known as 'volatile' $file
+
+ if [ -n $protocol ] [ -n $host ]; then
+ echo deb $protocol://${host}${directory} ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ else
+ echo # A network mirror was not selected during install. The following entries $file
+ echo # are provided as examples, but you should amend them as appropriate $file
+ echo # for your mirror of choice. $file
+ echo # $file
+ echo # deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ fi
fi
if db_get netcfg/dhcp_options \
[ $RET = Do not configure the network at this time ]; then
@@ -68,7 +78,11 @@
if [ $codename = lenny ]; then
echo deb-src http://$host/debian-volatile $codename/volatile $dists $file
else
- echo deb-src $protocol://${host}${directory} ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ if [ -n $protocol ] [ -n $host ]; then
+ echo deb-src $protocol://${host}${directory} ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ else
+ echo # deb-src http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ ${codename}-updates $dists $file
+ fi
fi
exit $CODE
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 22:46 +, Otavio Salvador wrote:
I have prepare some branches that has what I am intending to upload to
stable-proposed-updates. The modules I have changed are the following:
For the record, after a discussion on #-boot earlier this evening, we
concluded that checksum-related fixes for d-i components, or software
used by them, will be skipped for 6.0.1 due to time constraints.
In order to allow us to be confident that nothing in the installer
breaks when such changes are introduced, we plan to introduce them
shortly after the point release, giving us at least a month to get the
fixes tested and updated if required. From the packages which have been
discussed so far, this would mean deferring the checksum-related
components of fixes for:
{c,}debootstrap
base-installer
libdebian-installer
If the above doesn't match your recollection of the discussion, or
anyone has strong objections to the above, please yell. :-)
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1298927928.24807.668.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Uploading linux-2.6 (2.6.32-31) for point release 6.0.1
On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 18:19 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:23:42AM +, Otavio Salvador wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:53, Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk wrote: ... I know that I need to upload in time for the installer team to rebuild the installer with the new kernel version, addressing the known issues with the kernel used in 6.0.0. Please could you let me know what the deadline is for that? ... It depends on the ETA for 6.0.1. I'd a week before the targeted date assuming it builds fine on all arches. For a confort level, I'd say a cuple of weeks like a good time for we to update the installer for it. OK, so what's the targeted date? We're still working out the precise details, but the general plan is to aim for 6.0.1 being during FTPMaster's upcoming meeting in Essen. That starts on the 21st so, working backwards, two weeks would take us to the coming weekend. If it's possible to get the source upload in by the end of the weekend, that would be great. Hopefully getting all the builds in for squeeze quickly will be no problem; we sometimes ended up cutting things rather fine in the past for lenny (e.g. arm taking several days to build and a race condition somewhere in the build setup process which meant some architectures needed three attempts at the build for some uploads). Otavio: other than lkdi and the d-i build itself (which I guess could be a binNMU this time?) which obviously need to come afterwards, are any of your other proposed uploads dependent on the timing of the kernel uploads? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299007033.10572.59.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 22:46 +, Otavio Salvador wrote: I have prepare some branches that has what I am intending to upload to stable-proposed-updates. The modules I have changed are the following: grub-installer Doesn't look like this got uploaded yet? The relevant fix is in unstable but not testing yet; could we unblock the unstable package? linux-kernel-di-sparc-2.6 Presumably needs the kernel to be in before uploading. Also, I'd assumed that each of the l-k-d-i-* would get re-uploaded after the kernel had been updated? That's certainly what tended to happen for lenny. tasksel We agreed to skip this. cdebconf Was this a checksum-related change? I can't immediately find a repository for it in order to check. debootstrap Uploaded and accepted minus the checksum changes, as agreed. kernel-wedge Not uploaded yet? - kernel Planned for this weekend, although not uploaded yet afaics. - libdebian-installer tbm's fixes for the new devices look fine. Not updated in unstable yet though, so you'll end up with the squeeze version being propagated upwards. - debian-installer Needs everything else (except d-i-n-i) to be in place first. Is the current proposed upload everything between the 20110106 tag and the head of the squeeze branch? (i.e. up to 60f4ca5) As there hasn't been a d-i upload in unstable since the release, and assuming there isn't one beforehand, the updated images from p-u should get copied to testing and unstable during the point release; not sure how you (-boot) and ftp-master feel about that. - debian-installer-netboot-images Needs updating for #616014, both for sanity and license compliance reasons. See above r.e. versioning. - colo-installer Updated in both p-u and unstable, but not in testing yet as it's on britney's needs-approval list. Could we unblock it? Otherwise 1.17 +squeeze1 will end up in testing during the point release. - console-setup Looks okay, other than the version number should be 1.68+squeeze1. Fixed in unstable but not migrated to testing yet; could we unblock it? - hw-detect The fix for #611314 was previously acked and is fine. The comment removed as part of 4b40c64 says # Loading snd-powermac locks up G5 systems; is that no longer the case? Again, this has been fixed in unstable but not unblocked for testing yet. - apt-setup Admittedly I have a slight vested interest here, but getting #613910 fixed in squeeze (and preferably unstable and testing) should help reduce the support burden on #debian from people who chose not to use a network mirror during install uncommenting the broken sources.list entries, either manually or using e.g. update-manager, and then being surprised when they don't work. - anything I missed? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299424851.25972.11607.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 11:39 -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote: On 06/03/11 11:20 AM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: - anything I missed? netcfg. #614884 blocks #606268 against network-manager. We have a working solution with the two fixes I mentioned in 614884 and my supplied patch for NM's ifblacklist_migrate.sh filed against 606268. The NM bug is RC but had no immediate solution forthcoming and was therefore deferred. For over a month I've hung out on #debian and have seen plenty of users affected by this bug, which is why I made the effort to fix both the netcfg and NM halves of the problem myself. But now it seems both the d-i and gnome teams have been rather busy and unable to do anything with my patches. Is there anything more I can do to help ensure this makes it? Well, having it fixed in unstable would be a good start. The problem doesn't just affect stable so having the first time the patch is in the archive be a stable point release isn't generally appropriate. Where would one find the patch for #614884? Is it purely the snippet in your message #21 in the bug log? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299427710.25972.11809.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 15:20 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 22:46 +, Otavio Salvador wrote: I have prepare some branches that has what I am intending to upload to stable-proposed-updates. The modules I have changed are the following: grub-installer Doesn't look like this got uploaded yet? The relevant fix is in unstable but not testing yet; could we unblock the unstable package? It looks like this got uploaded, but targeted at unstable where there's already a newer version, so it got rejected: grub-installer_1.60+squeeze1.dsc: old version (1.62) in unstable = new version (1.60+squeeze1) targeted at unstable. The earlier question regarding unblocking the unstable version still stands. [...] kernel-wedge Not uploaded yet? Uploaded, but to (I assume) the wrong target: kernel-wedge | 2.74+squeeze1 | unstable | source, all Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299434998.25972.12296.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#617204: installation-report: /usr/sbin/debootstrap reports sha1sum: not found
On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 19:17 +0100, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Rick Thomas (rbtho...@pobox.com): Package: installation-reports Version: 2.44 Severity: grave Tags: d-i Justification: renders package unusable That should be fixed once busybox providing sha256sum reaches testing. fwiw, that won't happen automagically, as busybox is on britney's needs approval from d-i RM list. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299528521.25195.297.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming squeeze point release
Hi, The first Squeeze point release (6.0.1) is scheduled for Saturday, March 19th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the weekend of the 12/13th. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299615077.9459.397.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Preparation of fixes to 6.0.1
On Wed, March 9, 2011 15:12, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: Excerpts from Adam D. Barratt's message of 2011-03-06 16:20:51 +0100: - console-setup Looks okay, other than the version number should be 1.68+squeeze1. Fixed in unstable but not migrated to testing yet; could we unblock it? I prepared a squeeze branch for this and pushed it to the repo[1], but was told that I should not upload myself because this will be done in a mass upload. The squeeze branch only contains the fix for #610843 and not all the other changes that are in unstable. In case there was any confusion, my looks okay above was in reference to the contents of the squeeze branch. The unstable package should ideally probably also be unblocked so that it can reach testing before the point release, otherwise the squeeze package will end up being pushed in to testing to ensure that stable isn't newer than testing. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/d83f3218df153c0bda3a0f656ec7c2ac.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Unblocks for d-i beta4
On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 21:52 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: please unblock/unblock-udeb/urgent the following packages: netcfg/1.101 rootskel/1.101 yaboot-installer/1.1.25 grub-installer/1.83 All done. netcfg also needs libdebian-installer. The changes there appear to be adding versatile support and a bunch of .gitignore noise; I'm assuming that also wants pulling in? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1352841366.27968.143.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Unblocks for d-i beta4
On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 22:35 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk (13/11/2012): netcfg also needs libdebian-installer. The changes there appear to be adding versatile support and a bunch of .gitignore noise; I'm assuming that also wants pulling in? Yes, please. Done. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1352842492.27968.144.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#695505: os-prober: does not work on non-Linux kernels
On Sun, 2012-12-09 at 19:55 +0800, Michael Tsang wrote: The script of os-prober states that it does not work on non-Linux kernels. It makes the whole thing on the non-Linux ports useless. Please fix that. Where does it say that? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1355056756.19225.38.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: unblock(-udeb)s for d-i wheezy rc1, round 1
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 05:00 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: time for another round of unblocks/unblock-udebs! Here's a first list, basically things I thought I could review way past bedtime. Some more packages need review, at least according to the testing summary page: http://d-i.debian.org/testing-summary.html [...] unblock debootstrap/1.0.44 unblock-udeb debootstrap/1.0.44 unblock grub2/1.99-23.1 unblock-udeb grub2/1.99-23.1 unblock mountmedia/0.22 unblock-udeb mountmedia/0.22 Done. unblock partman-nbd/0.18 unblock-udeb partman-nbd/0.18 britney says partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb partman-nbd/s390x unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb but I guess that's always been the case? Unblocked. ### data unblock choose-mirror/2.44 unblock-udeb choose-mirror/2.44 unblock pciutils/1:3.1.9-6 unblock-udeb pciutils/1:3.1.9-6 Done ### l10n All done. No urgenting as yet because they mostly looked old enough; we can always add some urgents if need be. # no objection but not directly useful: unblock fontconfig/2.9.0-7.1 unblock-udeb fontconfig/2.9.0-7.1 Already unblocked; should be of age on Sunday night. unblock sysfsutils/2.1.0+repack-2 unblock-udeb sysfsutils/2.1.0+repack-2 Unblocked, fwiw. unblock util-linux/2.20.1-5.3 unblock-udeb util-linux/2.20.1-5.3 Has an unblock request already; hopefully whoever looks at that will spot the ack here. :-) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1355984766.21310.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#695851: [SRM] Re: Bug#695851: choose-mirror compilation error
On 20.12.2012 11:36, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Prathibha B prathib...@cdac.in (13/12/2012): Package: choose-mirror Version: 2.37 When compiling the package, it throws the following error: Modification of non-creatable array value attempted, subscript -1 at ./mirrorlist line 52, IN line 8. [...] SRM, ACK on principle for the following trivial update in squeeze? [...] -MIRRORLISTURL=http://cvs.debian.org/*checkout*/webwml/english/mirror/Mirrors.masterlist?rev=HEADcvsroot=webwmlcontent-type=text/plain | +MIRRORLISTURL=http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/webwml/webwml/english/mirror/Mirrors.masterlist?revision=HEAD [...] In which case I'll prepare a proper debdiff. Looks reasonable to me. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/0fc94f206e52993e7ffd400840373...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: unblock(-udeb)s for d-i wheezy rc1, round 1
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 22:25 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34:13AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +, Adam Barratt wrote: partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb partman-nbd/s390x unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb [...] Hmmm. That's surprising (to me). Ah, looking at the nbd package I can see that the udeb is not Architecture: any or even Architecture: linux-any like I'd expect. That's why. Wouter, could you fix that or at least add armhf and s390x please? [...] Fix uploaded. It also contains a tightening of the build-dependencies to what's effectively already there (but not specified as such in the changelog), but (other than the Architecture: linux-any) no functional changes. Unblocked, but needs an explicit ack for the udeb hint. There's also this oddity, fwiw: + nbd (1:3.2-1) unstable; urgency=low + + * New upstream release. Includes many stability fixes, so hopefully nbd (1:3.2-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release. Includes many stability fixes, so hopefully Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1356039431.24016.2.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: unblock(-udeb)s for d-i wheezy rc1, round 1
On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 10:31 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk (20/12/2012): On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 22:25 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: Fix uploaded. It also contains a tightening of the build-dependencies to what's effectively already there (but not specified as such in the changelog), but (other than the Architecture: linux-any) no functional changes. Unblocked, but needs an explicit ack for the udeb hint. Here's an “explicit ack for the udeb hint”. Thanks. ;p Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1356082593.24016.11.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#695851: [SRM] Re: Bug#695851: choose-mirror compilation error
On 22.12.2012 00:43, Cyril Brulebois wrote: assuming +squeezeN is still customary for squeeze, here's a source debdiff. That is really: Makefile |2 +- debian/changelog | 10 ++ 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) but the list is updated during the source package build. It looks to me like this update is safe, since no code was added to choose-mirror to handle changes in its format, so I guess any breakages due to an updated list would have been spotted in testing/unstable already. Please go ahead; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a3ed9b6144f58fcf743bdba45b024...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: unblock(-udeb)s for d-i wheezy rc1, round 2
On 22.12.2012 13:33, Cyril Brulebois wrote: unblock apt-setup/1:0.77 unblock-udeb apt-setup/1:0.77 unblock espeakup/1:0.71-12 unblock-udeb espeakup/1:0.71-12 [...] unblock cdebconf/0.180 unblock-udeb cdebconf/0.180 [...] unblock live-installer/38 unblock-udeb live-installer/38 [...] unblock netcfg/1.103 unblock-udeb netcfg/1.103 All done. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/363073f218984b6385e8806574c48...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
