On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:19 AM Paul Wise wrote:
> 1. the ecosystems I'm talking about include cargo, npm, browser
> extensions, rubygems, pypi, CPAN etc.
Examples of what current Debian practices are for these ecosystems:
(Amost?) all rust-* packages come from crates.io.
Many/most browser exte
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 8:25 PM Pirate Praveen wrote:
> Many node modules don't tag their releases so its really hard to get
> exact source code corresponding to an npmjs.com release.
It is probably worth filing upstream issues when you discover that.
> Also with mono repos becoming more popular
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 11:05:00PM -0500, Daniel Lewart wrote:
> Debian Developers,
>
> First, thank you to Ansgar, et al, for changing
> /updates to -security !
>
> There are a variety of Debian security repository URIs published.
> Below are four of them and some authoritative URLs that use the
Debian Developers,
First, thank you to Ansgar, et al, for changing
/updates to -security !
There are a variety of Debian security repository URIs published.
Below are four of them and some authoritative URLs that use them.
This inconsistency is confusing.
Which URI is best?
#2 and #4 are elimin
Hi Tianon,
On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 11:56:35 -0700
Tianon Gravi wrote:
> Just to close the loop,
> https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pull/10730 (for
> anyone who wants to follow along). :)
Thanks! :)
Now release-notes CI works.
https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/release-notes/-/jobs
> "Marco" == Marco d'Itri writes:
Marco> This is a legitimate but very minor goal which could also be
Marco> achieved by changing dpkg.
I'm focus on your statement because I think you'll take the time to
consider what I have to say even if you ultimately disagree. I think
statements
On 17/08/21 1:43 am, Sean Whitton wrote:
> I agree with this, and already do it for all or almost all of the
> packages I maintain. There will probably need to be lots of exceptions,
> however.
Many node modules don't tag their releases so its really hard to get
exact source code corresponding
Hello,
On Mon 16 Aug 2021 at 09:18AM +08, Paul Wise wrote:
> I noticed that sometimes Debian's choice of upstream source for
> packaging can be suboptimal. This is especially apparent for the
> different per-language upstream packaging ecosystems[1], where the
> upstream packaging differs from th
On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 08:17, Tianon Gravi wrote:
> I'll be working on an updated build first thing tomorrow morning.
>
> (What I would suggest in the meantime and even generally is using
> either "buster" or "bullseye" explicitly instead of the "stable"
> square wheel, as both tags should still b
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 04:47:32PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:59:50PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > > because here, our focus would be to publish things :)
> > Sure. But also to find problems early rather than late, no?
>
> no.
Well, then we disagree (and that's
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:59:50PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > because here, our focus would be to publish things :)
> Sure. But also to find problems early rather than late, no?
no.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀
Hi,
this is the call for the next video conference of the Debian Med team
that are an established means to organise the tasks inside our team.
We do these conferences twice per month on every
2th and 17th
of a month. Usually it takes us only 15-20min depending what we are
talking about and
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 04:17:01PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 16, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 07:53:20AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > Implementations with real /bin /sbin /lib* directories and symlink farms
> > > are not useful because they would negate the majo
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 01:19:23PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 01:12:37AM -0500, Brian Thompson wrote:
> > Would you agree that there is an issue with sudo access that is enabled
> > by default on most Debian and Debian-based distributions? The bug may
> > not be in apt, b
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 07:48:06AM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> Backports is not analogous to the concepts Timothy was presenting. It's
> *one* repository, not a system where people (not just Debian maintainers)
> can create repos.
extrepo tries to help there, and now that bullseye is released
On Aug 16, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 07:53:20AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Implementations with real /bin /sbin /lib* directories and symlink farms
> > are not useful because they would negate the major benefits of
> > merged-/usr, i.e. the ability of sharing and indep
Before Valve's Steam game distribution platform became available on
Linux, the Debian source package name 'steam' was used by an unrelated
package sTeam, an "environment for cooperative knowledge managment"
(a wiki and related software). sTeam was removed from Debian in 2010,
and from Ubuntu in 201
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:16:57AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-08-13 at 07:53 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > Implementations with real /bin /sbin /lib* directories and symlink farms
> > are not useful because they would negate the major benefits of
> > merged-/usr, i.e. the ability
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 07:53:20AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Implementations with real /bin /sbin /lib* directories and symlink farms
> are not useful because they would negate the major benefits of
> merged-/usr, i.e. the ability of sharing and independently updating
> /usr.
In those cases,
Hi Holger,
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 05:12:54PM +, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi Wouter,
>
> sorry for the late reply but I think it's still relevant...
> (just thus rather leaving almost full quote as context.)
>
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 11:25:26AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 0
> "Paul" == Paul Wise writes:
Paul> Hi all, I noticed that sometimes Debian's choice of upstream
Paul> source for packaging can be suboptimal. This is especially
Paul> apparent for the different per-language upstream packaging
Paul> ecosystems[1], where the upstream packaging
> "Paul" == Paul Wise writes:
Paul> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 2:22 AM Antonio Russo wrote:
>> "Can one advertise non-free services in a Debian package? Is
>> doing so a violation of some Debian policy?
Paul> There is no specific rule against this, but I feel that
Paul> cul
On Aug 16, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> Is perhaps pure existence not enough, do I need to provide an upgrade
> path as simple as possible as well?
If you have specific ideas about how the upgrade path could be improved
then I am interested in hearing them.
I think that it is hard to beat "apt in
On Mon, 2021-08-16 at 11:47 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:59:31AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > BTW: the usrmerge package has been in the archive for 6 years now.
>
> /usr/bin/apt exists for 8 years now and the release notes advice using
> it in every section. So,
Package: general
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
see below:
Get:1 http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security InRelease
[44.1 kB]
Hit:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease
Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease
Hit:4 http://deb.debian.or
Quoting Paul Wise (2021-08-16 05:06:05)
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 2:22 AM Antonio Russo wrote:
>
> >"Can one advertise non-free services in a Debian package?
> > Is doing so a violation of some Debian policy?
>
> There is no specific rule against this, but I feel that culturally
> Debian
On Sun, 2021-08-15 at 20:16 -0600, Antonio Russo wrote:
> I have a question that I originally posed in debian-vote, but was
> directed here instead:
>
> "Can one advertise non-free services in a Debian package?
Yes. I guess this would be up to the maintainer to decide what is
reasonable with t
On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 08:04:53 +, "Andrew M.A. Cater"
wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 09:14:18PM -0600, Antonio Russo wrote:
>> I feel like if we are forced to rebrand Debian's browser to ensure user
>> freedoms, then we simply must do so. I'd rather support Firefox/Mozilla,
>> but I don't thin
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:59:31AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> BTW: the usrmerge package has been in the archive for 6 years now.
/usr/bin/apt exists for 8 years now and the release notes advice using
it in every section. So, how come people are still typing apt-get
interactively to upgrade?
Is
On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 05:52:06PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 11:52:21 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> One way out of this would be to say that it is a RC bug for packages
> in bookworm to have different contents when built in equivalent
> merged-/usr and unmerged-/usr
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2021 10:49:44 +0200
with message-id <878s11wz87@hands.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#992237: general: dpkg broken, so no security updates
available
has caused the Debian Bug report #992237,
regarding general: dpkg broken, so no security updates available
to be mar
On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 09:14:18PM -0600, Antonio Russo wrote:
> On 8/15/21 9:06 PM, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 2:22 AM Antonio Russo wrote:
> >
> >>"Can one advertise non-free services in a Debian package?
> >> Is doing so a violation of some Debian policy?
> >
> > Ther
32 matches
Mail list logo
