Re: Proper handling of Lintian warnings due to other packages

On Wed, 2024-01-31 at 10:49 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: > > Note: I don't discourage usage of debbugs.  It's just that I'm unlikely to > notice bugs immediately due to the way debbugs notifications work. You should be able to use tracker.debian.org to subscribe to teams or individual packages

Re: Potential MBF: packages failing to build twice in a row

On Sun, 2023-08-13 at 22:59 +0200, Timo Röhling wrote: > There's talk on #d-python if pybuild could/should deal with it; I'd > give it a few days and see if that pans out. https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/dh-python/-/merge_requests/46 seems to be the one to watch. Ian.

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

On Sat, 2021-02-27 at 17:30 -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > I don't know if I understand the pushback I'm seeing > against using a debconf question for this. FWIW I don't think I've read any actual pushback on that in this thread although I can see how it might appear that way to another

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

On Sat, 2021-02-27 at 11:21 -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > On Saturday, February 27 2021, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > FWIW that would be my personal preference too (probably with some sort > > of cache, maybe once per library or executable or some granularity like

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

On Sat, 2021-02-27 at 11:47 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 03:55:17PM -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > As I said in the announcement message, I have proposed a Merge > Request > against elfutils in order to enable the automatic usage of our > debuginfod server.  I know that

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

Thank you both for your replies. Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Do these considerations overcome the concerns, so as to provide a > comfortable out-of-the-box experience for most users? I'm not totally convinced about silently enabling it by default, but... On Thu, 2021-02-25 at 15:55 -0500, Sergio

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

Frank's original reply didn't make it to the list for some reason and has also gone missing on his end so resending on his request. On Wed, 2021-02-24 at 15:23 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: --- Hi, Ian - ijc wrote: > [...] > What are the security implications for users/clients of using this

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

On Wed, 2021-02-24 at 16:58 +, Ian Campbell wrote: Ugh, sorry, the quoting seems to have gone quite wrong there, let me try again... > On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 22:53 -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > Hello there, > > I would like to announce a new service that I have jus

Re: New service: https://debuginfod.debian.net

On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 22:53 -0500, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: Hello there, I would like to announce a new service that I have just configured for Debian: https://debuginfod.debian.net. debuginfod is a new-ish project whose purpose is to serve ELF/DWARF/source-code information over HTTP.  It is

Bug#958806: ITP: cmake-format -- source code formatter for cmake listfiles

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Ian Campbell * Package name: cmake-format Version : 0.6.10 Upstream Author : Josh Bialkowski * URL : https://github.com/cheshirekow/cmake_format * License : GPL-3 Programming Lang: Python Description : source

Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?

On Sat, 2020-02-22 at 22:40 +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Honestly though, I don't think going and clicking "subscribe" in a "few > dozens" package pages is too much. It looks like we have a pts-subscribe command in devscripts these days, so it can also be scripted. (I've never used it, just

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-8 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 21:09:59 +0800 Source: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-8 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Closes: 943297 Changes: xss-lock (0.3.0-8) unstable

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git [and 1 more messages]

On Thu, 2019-05-09 at 12:51 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 01:46:19PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > debcheckout *certainly* doesn't do this. It just gives you the > > current master which may not have been uploaded anywhere. > > nope: > > $ debcheckout munin > declared

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git

On Thu, 2019-05-09 at 11:19 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > What I remain unconvinced of is the worth of abandoning the clean > separation between an upstream source repository (whether Git repository > or not) and a VCS repository for Debian packaging (typically in Git). I think there's a common

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git

On Tue, 2019-05-07 at 11:01 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > That said, I think Ansgar has some really valid points. I think that > dgit (or git-dpm) are the hardest work flows to teach. I think perhaps you meant `git-debrebase` rather than `dgit` throughout the remainder of your mail, since

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git

On Tue, 2019-04-30 at 12:05 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Sean Whitton writes ("Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves > from tarballs to git"): > > On Mon 29 Apr 2019 at 02:12PM +01, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > > > I think (but don't kno

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 13:50 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > > dgit-maint-merge -> dgit-maint-debrebase would indeed be the > convert-from-dgit-view subcommand. If I were dealing with this, for > simplicity, I would start from the point of just having made an upload. > That way you know your HEAD is

Re: Preferred git branch structure when upstream moves from tarballs to git

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 13:25 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Look at the intro to each of these and see which one you think might > be best: > https://manpages.debian.org/stretch-backports/dgit/dgit-maint-merge.7.en.html > >

Re: gbp-buildpackage showing change outside debian/, possibly after DEP-14 conversion

On Tue, 2019-03-12 at 08:10 +, Ian Campbell wrote: > > I have no idea where the line terminators difference in one single > > branch in one single file that is never used in Debian builds comes > > from. I don't think it's the pristine-tar data, when I remove the > &g

Re: gbp-buildpackage showing change outside debian/, possibly after DEP-14 conversion

> I have no idea where the line terminators difference in one single > branch in one single file that is never used in Debian builds comes > from. I don't think it's the pristine-tar data, when I remove the > generated orig.tar.xz and have it regenerated with --git-no-pristine-tar > it has a

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.6-4 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2019 13:37:59 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.6-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description: qcontrol

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-3 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2019 12:14:53 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-7 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2019 12:07:33 + Source: xss-lock Binary: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-7 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description: xss-lock - invoke

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-2 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2019 12:07:16 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.6-3 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2019 17:28:51 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.6-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description: qcontrol

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2018 15:02:19 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.2+git20181114.6d598a-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description

Accepted flexbackup 1.2.1-6.4 (all source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2018 14:05:52 + Source: flexbackup Binary: flexbackup Architecture: all source Version: 1.2.1-6.4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Kurt B. Kaiser Changed-By: Ian Campbell Closes: 872057 916602

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.2~git20181114.6d598a-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 21:00:47 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.2~git20181114.6d598a-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-6 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 19:42:20 + Source: xss-lock Binary: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-6 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description: xss-lock - invoke

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.6-2 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2018 14:42:37 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.6-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell Changed-By: Ian Campbell Description: qcontrol

Re: Upcoming Qt switch to OpenGL ES on arm64

On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 12:07 +0100, bret curtis wrote: > The hardware that supports GLES also supports OpenGL because GLES is > a subset of OpenGL. I'm confused by this inference. If GLES is a subset of OpenGL then surely hardware which claims to implement GLES is at liberty to only implement that

Re: I resigned in 2004

On Sat, 2018-11-10 at 11:25 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Mattia Rizzolo (2018-11-09 21:29:30) > [a range of fine details snipped] > > Good bye, and thank you for your contributions you made back then! > > Thank you, Mattia. I found above to be a decent and polite post when I > read

Re: Debian Buster release to partially drop non-systemd support

On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 09:48 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 08:59:16AM +0200, Narcis Garcia wrote: > > I'm using this express-made address because personal addresses > > aren't > > masked enough at this mail public archive. Public archive > > administrator > > should fix

Re: Debian Buster release to partially drop non-systemd support

On Mon, 2018-10-15 at 22:31 -0700, Alessio Treglia wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 9:51 PM Enzo Nicosia > wrote: > > Please, just tell us who we should contact (current/last > > maintainer?) to start working on that. > > That's easy [1]. It is, but the link you gave is a rather cryptic way of

Re: Bug#906250: ITP: execline -- small and non-interactive scripting language

On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 10:17 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/xrat/V4_xcu_chap01.html#tag_23_01_07 TIL: there is a (slightly, but not insanely so) roundabout rationale for having a non-builtin `cd`... thanks! Ian.

Re: Concerns to software freedom when packaging deep-learning based appications.

On Thu, 2018-07-12 at 19:03 +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 02:16:01PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > > (3) CUDA Deep Neural Network library (cuDNN)[4] is NVIDIA's > > > > **PROPRIETARY**, > > > > stacked on CU

Re: Concerns to software freedom when packaging deep-learning based appications.

On Thu, 2018-07-12 at 13:09 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 12:35:24PM +, Lumin wrote: > > (3) CUDA Deep Neural Network library (cuDNN)[4] is NVIDIA's > > **PROPRIETARY**, > > stacked on CUDA, and requires NVIDIA GPU exclusively. > > so what? Debian runs on

Re: MemberBenefits - Steam Keys (Was: Bits from the DPL (May 2018))

On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 11:31 -0400, Alexandre Viau wrote: > On 2018-05-31 12:33 PM, Chris Lamb wrote: > > [11] https://wiki.debian.org/MemberBenefits > > Oh, this reminds me of something. > > Has anyone gotten replies to their requests sent to > debian-st...@collabora.com for the Steam

Re: Removing packages perhaps too aggressively?

On Tue, 2018-05-29 at 15:00 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2018-05-22 15:19:50 +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:43:31AM +0200, Heinz Repp wrote: > > > Just stumbled over some removals: > > > > > > GnuCash removed from testing in August 2017 > > > FreeCad removed

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.6-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 11:22:20 +0100 Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.6-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.1-2 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 13 May 2018 14:15:12 +0100 Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.1-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-5 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 06:31:52 +0100 Source: xss-lock Binary: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@d

Re: Lucas Kanashiro and Athos Ribeiro salvaged my package

On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 09:00 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Fixing the package when it was removed from testing with RC bugs seems > entirely reasonable. What bothers me is just adding onself as > comaintainer without any discussion, and thus making that upload not an > NMU. > > By all means NMU to

Re: Urging for solution to the slow NEW queue process

On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 07:08 +, Lumin wrote: > [2] https://ftp-master.debian.org/stat/new-5years.png Does this graph show the length of the NEW queue over time or the numbers of packages passing through NEW over time? Ian.

Re: interpretation of wontfix

On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 14:02 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Don Armstrong writes ("Re: interpretation of wontfix"): > > 2) wontfix+help: this bug requires too much effort to fix, so I won't be > >working on it, but patches will be accepted. > > I dislike the use of "help" in this context. If the

Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process

On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:05 -0600, Steve Robbins wrote: > I think the suggestion of randomized spot checking is meant to > replace - not add - to the present system of checking that penalizes > uploads of existing source but new binaries. So human resources > should not be the issue. Yes, that's

Re: Updated proposal for improving the FTP NEW process

On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 19:18 +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 06:34:28PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > What might be reasonable is making the separation between binNEW and srcNEW > > more obvious, especially for us on the other side. This would also > > encourage the

Re: alias in maintainer scripts?

On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 08:29 +0100, Ralf Treinen wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 04:15:18AM +0300, kact...@gnu.org wrote: > > > Is it true? When invoked as /bin/sh, GNU Bash works in Posix-emulation > > mode, and it is not that bad: > > Indeed, Bash manual section 6.11. Thanks for pointing this

Re: salsa SSH fingerprint

On Thu, 2018-03-01 at 13:40 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:23 PM, Alberto Luaces wrote: > > > Great! After passing those keys trough `ssh-keygen -lf`, I get the > > confirmation I was looking for. > > Why do you need ssh-keygen when you can just add the ssh key to your >

Re: Debian part of a version number when epoch is bumped

On Wed, 2018-02-14 at 12:53 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > But nobody > should be afraid of using an epoch when the upstream version number > changes incompatibly, because *that's what they're for*. Much of the discussion in this thread (and the recommendations not to use them) seem to be for

Re: Debian part of a version number when epoch is bumped

On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 11:50 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 08 Feb 2018, Ian Campbell wrote: > > Is it also the case that today we implicitly require that all > versions > > used in a source package name's history are unique even once the > epochs > > are

Re: Debian part of a version number when epoch is bumped

On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 13:51 +, Ian Jackson wrote: > I suggest something like this wording to replace the following > paragraphs about the epoch: > >Epochs exist to cope with changes to the upstream version numbering >scheme, and some other difficult cases. The epoch is a powerful >

Re: Maintaining a custom out-of-tree patched Debian kernel for specific hardware

On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 18:20 +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 10:27:06AM -0200, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 07:38:41PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > > > Dear Debian Developers, > > > > > > I am part of a team working on getting Debian on low cost

Re: Maintaining a custom out-of-tree patched Debian kernel for specific hardware

On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 17:53 +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > > You should definitately give the package a distinct version and you > > should _probably_ give it either a distinct ABI or flavour (or possibly > > both). You will probably also want to put a digit in your distinct ABI > > so you can rev

Re: Maintaining a custom out-of-tree patched Debian kernel for specific hardware

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 19:38 +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > 1. The laptop will ship with stretch preinstalled, but with a custom > kernel built using the linux-source-x.xx.xx package with a custom > version number, such as linux-image-4.14.13-iitb-amd64. A silly nitpick but the "4.14.13-iitb-amd64"

Re: Release Critical Kernel bug - Lenovo E550 laptop locks up repeatedly running systemctl daemon-reload

On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 20:31 +1300, Matt Grant wrote: > My guess as a developer this is a release critical show stopper > bug. Please see https://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-bugs.html#s9.2 and https://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelReportingBugs for guidance on reporting a bug against

Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile

On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 05:03 +, Wookey wrote: > And the reason why you'd use it for something like this is that it > lets you upstream patches (which change dependencies) in a reasonably > clean way. And is the reason this is preferable to `dpkg-vendor` based stuff because `dpkg-vendor` cannot

Bug#886238: closed by Bastian Blank <wa...@debian.org> (Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile)

On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 08:46 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > All of that said, if you are interested in Debian supporting a nosystemd > build profile, continuing to escalate conflicts with other developers is > not helping your cause. It would be more helpful if people on _both_ sides would stop

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.5-3 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2018 12:11:17 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.5-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Bug#883133: Bug#883134: general: Add new package header Upstream-Version:

On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 06:06 +0200, Victor Porton wrote: > For this I need the upstream versions of "python2.7" and "xsltproc". The upstream version of a Debian package can be deterministically extracted from the package version, see https://www.debian.org/doc/debi an-policy/#s-f-version for the

Re: e2fsprogs as Essential: yes?

On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 06:57 -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 11:50:37AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 06:27 -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 11:03:18AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > > > Thi

Re: e2fsprogs as Essential: yes?

On Mon, 2017-10-02 at 06:27 -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 11:03:18AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > This is a fair point, but I think the perfect is the enemy of the good. > > > > I agree that moving badblocks, lsattr and chattr to another package or > > inside

Re: Summary of the Arm ports BoF at DC17

On Sun, 2017-09-17 at 12:59 -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On 2017-09-15, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-09-14 at 03:40 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > [...] > >> There is optional kernel support to trap the exceptions here > >> and emulate the instructions, but it's really not

Re: Raising the severity of reproduciblity issues to "important"

On Fri, 2017-09-01 at 12:43 +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Whatever point you were trying to make around NEW, your argument is not > very convincing. I think Holger is right here: Where the package is > built should not matter. Presence of .buildinfo and reproducibility > does. Appollogies if this

Re: sse{2,3,4.2}, altivec, neon, ...

On Sun, 2017-08-06 at 17:27 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 09:16:48AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > What is the expected interaction with the hwcaps based library > > installed paths? (/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/{sse2,cmov}). > > Presumably >

Re: sse{2,3,4.2}, altivec, neon, ...

On Sun, 2017-08-06 at 01:13 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > As for a foreign machine: > * ISA_IGNORE=y apt install »package« How about: ASSUME_ISAS=sse2 apt install »package« i.e. with the ability to specify the set you expect/know that the target machine will have. It could support "all" as

Re: Naming of network devices - how to improve it in buster

On Sat, 2017-07-15 at 10:46 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 09:36:58 -0700, Josh Triplett > wrote: > >But if you run into a command that accepts filenames but for which > >bash-completion doesn't complete filenames, *please* report it as a > bug > >on the

Re: Git hosting for code that provides Debian services

On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 09:53 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > Dear Lars, > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 05:18:38PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > I personally don't find "open core" projects to be fully free > > software, even if they follow current DFSG, OSI, and FSF criteria. I > > may be in a

Re: Release impact of introducing a new archive section?

On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 21:39 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > I've now written and submitted all of these patches. Might it be useful to have this list of names and descriptions in some canonical packaged location, such that updating these tools is just a version bump on a build dep, or even a

Re: dpkg no longer installs conffiles??

On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 12:16 +, Ian Campbell wrote: > I think it would be really cool if etckeeper could create and maintain > a dpkg-dist branch with all the pristine stuff in it, no idea what > hooks or integration would be needed for that though! Oh, looks like I'm not the

Re: dpkg no longer installs conffiles??

On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 12:54 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Hi Svante, > > On Tue, 2016-11-29 at 17:58 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > > > > After upgrading to sid the conffiles don't seem to be installed any > > longer? > > I think it would be nice to make restoring the original configuration

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.5-2 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 18:39:43 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.5-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Re: Static linking and fPIC (Was: Re: "PIE by default" transition is underway -- wiki needs updating)

On Tue, 2016-11-01 at 22:54 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > I do not see any reason for waiting instead of sending the binNMU  > request right now. I didn't see any movement on the dpkg front so I went ahead and did so: #843139. Thanks, Ian.

Re: Static linking and fPIC (Was: Re: "PIE by default" transition is underway -- wiki needs updating)

On Mon, 2016-10-31 at 12:17 +0100, Bálint Réczey wrote: > 2016-10-31 10:38 GMT+01:00 Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org>: > > If possible I'd also prefer a solution which fixed qcontrol-static > > without opting out for the normal dynamic/non-udeb binary. > > I r

Re: Static linking and fPIC (Was: Re: "PIE by default" transition is underway -- wiki needs updating)

On Mon, 2016-10-31 at 10:27 +0100, Jérémy Lal wrote: > export DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS = hardening=+all,-pie > ? Thanks, but that doesn't appear to help, I think the issue is to do with the changed default in gcc rather than the hardening settings injected into the build by

Static linking and fPIC (Was: Re: "PIE by default" transition is underway -- wiki needs updating)

Hi, I maintain qcontrol[0] which builds on armel and armhf only (it's a tool specific to certain NAS machines). It links a version against liblua statically for use in a udeb (the resulting binary is dynamic, it is only liblua5.1 which is linked statically). It seems that on armhf my latest

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-4 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 13:35:41 + Source: xss-lock Binary: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@d

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.4.1-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 13:36:07 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.4.1-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.5-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 14:41:08 + Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.5-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Re: Bug#820036: No bug mentioning a Debian KEK and booting use it.

On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 14:44 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > I think there are also physical arm64 systems using EDK2/Tianocore as > > their firmware. > > Unmodified upstream versions that you can re-flash? Some of the

Re: Bug#820036: No bug mentioning a Debian KEK and booting use it.

On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 12:22 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > > If there are machines with free firmware that also support secure boot, > > we can look at this.  So far, I don't believe there are any. > > Tianocore (edk2 in Debian) supports

Re: When should we https our mirrors?

On Thu, 2016-10-20 at 13:25 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Ian Campbell  > > > > > Have we gotten to the point where we consider deb.d.o suitable for > > production use? The web page still says Experimental (so I would assume > > "not production yet"

Re: When should we https our mirrors?

On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 18:47 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Oct 17, Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> wrote: > > > Have we gotten to the point where we consider deb.d.o suitable for > > production use? The web page still says Experimental (so I would assume > I do not t

Re: When should we https our mirrors?

On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 15:24 +, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > TL;DR: Would we now recommend deb.d.o over httpredir.d.o for production > > use e.g. in base images (including for Jessie)? > > Yes. Thanks!

Re: When should we https our mirrors?

TL;DR: Would we now recommend deb.d.o over httpredir.d.o for production use e.g. in base images (including for Jessie)? On Sun, 2016-10-16 at 09:11 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > httpredir.d.o is not well maintained There still seems to be general grumbling (including a persistent drip of CI failures

Accepted xss-lock 0.3.0-3 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2016 13:02:31 +0100 Source: xss-lock Binary: xss-lock Architecture: source Version: 0.3.0-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@d

Re: Key collisions in the wild

On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 12:19 +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Samuel Thibault , 2016-08-10, 01:17: > > > > Samuel Thibault, on Wed 10 Aug 2016 00:47:43 +0200, wrote: > > > > > > € gpg --search-key samuel.thiba...@gnu.org > > > ... > > > (1) Samuel Thibault

Re: Genesis of the git.d.o/gitlab.d.o confusion (Was: Next steps for gitlab.debian)

On Wed, 2016-06-08 at 20:29 +0530, Balasankar C wrote: > Tell me an "easy" way to do merging in alioth, I think perhaps it hasn't been made clear to folks on this thread that gitlab is more like a github style thing (with a webui for PRs and whatnot) rather than a more "traditional"/"simple" git

Accepted flexbackup 1.2.1-6.3 (source all) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 10:14:56 + Source: flexbackup Binary: flexbackup Architecture: source all Version: 1.2.1-6.3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Kurt B. Kaiser <k...@shore.net> Changed-By: Ian Campb

Accepted xen 4.6.0-1+nmu2 (source) into unstable

-hypervisor-4.6-armhf xen-system-armhf Architecture: source Version: 4.6.0-1+nmu2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Xen Team <pkg-xen-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Description: libxen-4.6 - Public libs for Xen libxen-

Accepted xen 4.6.0-1+nmu1 (source) into unstable

-hypervisor-4.6-armhf xen-system-armhf Architecture: source Version: 4.6.0-1+nmu1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Xen Team <pkg-xen-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Description: libxen-4.6 - Public libs for Xen libxen-

Re: Going ahead with non-free-firmware

On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 10:49 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 05:43:45PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > > > So you don't want another component, but something that looks like a > > > component in some places only?  

Re: support for merged /usr in Debian

On Fri, 2016-01-08 at 10:11 +, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:21:00AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote: > > The upside of this is that this will free up space in / which will be > > needed for a dedicated recovery image. Too bad that we don't have such > > a thing ourselves and

Accepted sunxi-tools 1.3-1 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:27:33 + Source: sunxi-tools Binary: sunxi-tools Architecture: source Version: 1.3-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell <i...@debian.org> Changed-By: Ian Campbell <i...@d

Re: Linux kernels v3.18.x and v4.2.x in sid

On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 23:00 +0100, Dmitry Katsubo wrote: > On 27/10/2015 10:31, Ian Campbell wrote: > > > Hm, kernel.org says that 3.18 is the long-term support kernel. > > > > I'm afraid that LTS from kernel.org != stable support from Debian. > > > > De

Re: Linux kernels v3.18.x and v4.2.x in sid

On Mon, 2015-10-26 at 14:55 +0100, Dmitry Katsubo wrote: > On 2015-10-25 07:11, Adam Borowski wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:59:47PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > > On 24/10/15 22:17, Dmitry Katsubo wrote: > > > > I would be happy to. However it does not allow me to use the latest > > >

Re: Ad-hoc survey of existing Debian git integration tools

On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 14:37 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Jul 21, 2015, at 06:46 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: That is, the dgit git tree contains the patches in debian/patches/ but also contains the implied changes in the main source code. If you add commits yourself to the dgit git tip, new

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.4-5 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 17:01:05 +0100 Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.4-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell i...@debian.org Changed-By: Ian Campbell i

Accepted grub-installer 1.125 (source) into unstable

-By: Ian Campbell i...@debian.org Description: grub-installer - Install GRUB on a hard disk (udeb) Closes: 792247 Changes: grub-installer (1.125) unstable; urgency=medium . [ Ian Campbell ] * Correctly propagate grub-installer/force-efi-extra-removable to installed system. (Closes

Accepted qcontrol 0.5.4-4 (source) into unstable

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 19:54:06 +0100 Source: qcontrol Binary: qcontrol qcontrol-udeb Architecture: source Version: 0.5.4-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Ian Campbell i...@debian.org Changed-By: Ian Campbell i

  1   2   3   >