Re: Is there a way to set up a sid environment at this time?
Hi! Am 2024-03-12 14:55, schrieb Shriram Ravindranathan: Unfortunately, my SD card got corrupted (SD Card moment) and I do not have access to a sid environment right now. Is there a way to debootstrap a sid environment for packaging (from trixie perhaps) while the time_t transition is going on? Untested, just as an idea: You can debootstrap via snapshot.debian.org from a point before the transition started? Best regards, Alexander
Re: Set upload permits for monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles
Hi! * Hilmar Preuße [221124 09:10]: > I'm a DM with upload permits. Recently I pushed > monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles to the archive. Would be nice if > anybody could set the upload permissions for my user id so I can > maintain the package myself: Should be done. Best regards, Alexander
Bug#1023590: RFS: monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles/4.1.0.1-1 [ITP] -- Nagios plugin check_logfiles
Hi! Am 2022-11-16 21:17, schrieb Hilmar Preuße: Just two small remarks: * I think it would be relatively easy to add autopkgtest to the package, allowing automatic verification of the functionality. * Feel free to ping me for additinal pointers / examples. As you did an non-source only upload I probably have to do another upload anyway. Maybe I'm wrong here. Good question: But as your package has to pass NEW processing by the ftp-team, it has to be an upload including the binary packages. That's makes it easier for them to review the package. But you are right: You'll have to follow with a "real" source only upload, so that your package can propagate to testing. If it also contains autpkgtsts: Perfect, but it may also be a reupload. Best regards, Alexander
Bug#1023590: RFS: monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles/4.1.0.1-1 [ITP] -- Nagios plugin check_logfiles
Hi! * Hilmar Preuße [221108 18:42]: > > We are using that plugin at the company, so thanks for packaging! > > > > I'm willing to sponsor and will try to take a closer look at it in the > > evening. > > > Good. Thanks! I didn't noticed any showstoppers, so just uploaded. You should receive a mail about it soonish, and then your package will have to be accepted by the ftp-master, but I guess you know that part (if not feel free to ask for details). Just two small remarks: * I think it would be relatively easy to add autopkgtest to the package, allowing automatic verification of the functionality. * Feel free to ping me for additinal pointers / examples. * I know that there is a maintainers team for several icinga / monitoring related packages, but I don't know how they are organized. Please consider joining them; team maintainership is usually a very good idea for various reasons. Best regards, Alexander
Re: Advice - tomboy-ng
Hi David, * David Bannon [221116 08:13]: > When first submitted to Debian, back in 2020, I was advised to use Qt5 > instead of GTK2, its built with FPC and Lazarus, so switching is trivial. > Sadly, in the rush to make a deadline, I submitted a GTK2 by mistake and it > was accepted. Updates since then have been GTK2 > > A new update is ready, easy to switch for me, should I do QT5 this time ? > > I assume it will not cause any underlying problems ? Technical it will not cause any problems, however some of the old users might get confused. I'm not using tomboy and haven't looked at the packaging, but wouldn't it be possible to introduce a second binary package with the QT flavour? Maybe also rename tomboy-ng to tomboy-ng-gtk (and have tomboy-ng as a transistational package), for clarity? Best regards, Alexander
Bug#1023590: RFS: monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles/4.1.0.1-1 [ITP] -- Nagios plugin check_logfiles
Hi! Am 2022-11-07 09:52, schrieb Hilmar Preuße: I am looking for a sponsor for my package "monitoring-plugins-check-logfiles": We are using that plugin at the company, so thanks for packaging! I'm willing to sponsor and will try to take a closer look at it in the evening. But just a first question: Mentors service says, that you didn't added a watch file to it. Is there a specific reason for it? Best regards, Alexander
Re: Questions about creating package with epoch number
Hi Debbie, Am 13.10.22 um 17:16 schrieb Debora Velarde: I have been trying to create an update to an existing package. It currently doesn't use an epoch number and I need to add on Just for more contest: Which package are you talking about, and why do you think you'll require to introduce an epoch? A couple questions: 1. Is there a good package that uses an epoch number that I could look to for an example? The package "python-django" comes to my mind, which is now at epoch 3, and also has some explanation in its changelog at https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/p/python-django/python-django_4.1.2-1_changelog. 2. When I create the tarball, would the epoch number be included in the name of the package subdirectory? No, the epoch is just in the debian/changelog and - if you have any dependencies - in debian/control. Best regards, Alexander
Re: Package does not show up and no REJECT e-mail
Hi! Am 27.08.22 um 18:34 schrieb Steve M: Note that there is already a package called "swift" in the archive. [..] So then maybe I did it all correctly to have my package named "swiftlang" and my upstream named "swift"? It took me a while to get the build tools to be happy so I thought I must have. The buildtools might be happy, but Debian's archive software won't. The names of source (and binary packages) must be unique. And as there is already a source package named "swift" you'll have to change the name of yours. Best regards, Alexander
Re: Should I give up?
Hi Fransico, * Francisco M Neto [220815 11:36]: > So, I turn to the mentors present in this discussion list for > incentive. Should I try again? Is there anything to say? That's a tough question, and I can see why what happend can be demotivating. But in the end regardless of what you will receive as answer: You will have to find the question to that for yourselve. Surely it is a comittment to maintain a package in Debian, and that's why the easy answer would be: If you currently don't think, that you'll be able to have the motivation to maintain it properly, it is best to give up now. But you can also take a look back: You arleady learned a lot of the technical part and convinced someone that your package(s) should be part of Debian. That is already quite a lot. Now you only have to fix the remaining thing. And the good thing about that is, that you got a reason and know where you have to invest some more work. And you have this mailing lists, which might be able to help you, if you share the reject reason. And if you get the problem fixed fast and a new package uploaded, I would say it is worth a try to ask the ftp-team to recheck the package while they have fresh memory of the issue. That's not unheard of, but of course I can't promise anything. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1016594: RFS: anonip/1.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Anonymize IP-addresses in log-files
tags 1016594 +pending thanks * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl [220803 21:26]: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "anonip": Uwe Kleine-König kinldy reviewed the package and sponsored the upload. Best regards, Alexander
Bug#1016594: RFS: anonip/1.1.0-1 [ITP] -- Anonymize IP-addresses in log-files
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "anonip": * Package name: anonip Version : 1.1.0-1 Upstream Author : https://github.com/DigitaleGesellschaft/Anonip * URL : https://github.com/DigitaleGesellschaft/Anonip * License : BSD-3-Clause * Vcs : [fill in URL of packaging vcs] Section : admin The source builds the following binary packages: anonip - Anonymize IP-addresses in log-files To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/anonip/ Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/anonip/anonip_1.1.0-1.dsc Changes for the initial release: anonip (1.1.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * Initial release (Closes: #930471) Regards, -- Alexander Reichle-Schmehl
Bug#673096: Bug#674850: Bug#675167: Bug#674850: RM: figlet -- RoQA; license which specifically excludes the right to re-distribute
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi! On 04.06.2012 19:56, Julien Cristau wrote: There seems to be just about 0 creative content in that file. What exactly is the problem with it? Figlet 2.2.5 has just been released with the following changelog [1]. That doesn't seem to answer the above question. The problem is that someone claims that he has copyrights on some of these files. It doesn't actually matter, what I or anyone else thinks about that, unless it's a judge ruling that said files are not copyrightable. Best regards, Alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJPzQzPAAoJEMJLZaJnLIsSpR0P+gPw6X5ZoP32wMnlqJB8dKA7 wXAaoHDSsWn8oGQXvHOI9tysic+jcjKnjbbaqXlyr+YMeTNPWlxFieHtmRMhNv7l komcM7ckMfFQyhNHGMHk8cSQlEPBW9+0YFVp4bknSqAsGKWAzJWTZBLxXv1il/+o aKuGVK1v6aQjh271/vGNYUzzA5TzBrJsRnruIm4wIapZrXdPzvaKz5JY7Cr+4mnE bAI+/6EdGBjP9/4w2fIQZp+w5jL1rUJPaYfme3kiLTLZna9DKFZt3mOCWdbl0U3w 8n+9MB3HsVBEB5+xn/Dy96da83GNp+9PYT38nxSG24NwaLu6FAwKrLGg2aYumA8L qQcKMwyZ8MURL7JiW7+VgyRZWiFm9XIb/eJUoYY0epRHP9ecamSHfwBrmnggpGRb Ro0Ze52geLU2osmqghOiwU3wkrBJPuOxW8SYrokLZsPLrA9hILqWxxhJQF9MqIt2 8MyV7nfaMouwrypPTTHJy81ZzIoKKNG68M0B8IGD84jUDi2HuHCpzKFYphZjYzhi xpMBkvTCYEseHUSG4xPprro2B4bYg+YZDNoqsP6mMdIo+2IsDnmpxfkvQrFJO4J5 xiraUo8trC+YsgO49EfeEuo5O4i+RMefVmO8x7fgkyYalE96yvwwECQ56vPUm9O2 Si26VsLe0Wzt85OSoNNN =ya74 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fcd0cd4.9050...@debian.org
Bug#673096: Bug#674850: RM: figlet -- RoQA; license which specifically excludes the right to re-distribute
clone 674850 -1 clone 674850 -2 retitle -1 Please remove figlet 2.2.2-1 from stable retitle -2 Please remove all versions of src:figlet from snapshots.d.o reassing -1 release.debian.org reassing -2 snapshot.debian.org thanks Hi! * Bart Martens ba...@debian.org [120528 10:58]: Please remove figlet 2.2.2-1 from unstable, testing, stable and oldstable. The package contains material that must not be distributed. One example is that the file fonts/8859-3.flc contains a license which specifically excludes the right to re-distribute. Okay, I'll to the removal from unstable in a second. The removal from unstable will also propagate to testing, once no packages in testing depend on figlet anymore. As for stable and oldstable: That's done by the release team. So I clone this bug for them and also clone one for the snapshot team. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120530104544.ga25...@iara.alphamar.org
Re: why does debian packaging think ITP is still open?
Hi! Am 07.02.2012 17:11, schrieb Thibaut Paumard: Why does packaging not see this? Have I made a mistake? Was this initial version actually uploaded to the Debian archive? .. or the uploaded package build with -v to include older changelog entries? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f314de6.50...@schmehl.info
Re: Flash in debian
Hi! * Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com [120128 19:14]: Well in general I would opposed including any sources that cannot be built using free and approved tools, that is basically saying there is no source, or no means to get from source to binary. lets imagine that you have rebol, a language that has no specification and no source code, you can release a rebol package and say : it is free software , but you should not be able to make a free debian package with that in my humble opinion because it would no be buildable. That's also the stance of the ftp team: swf-files, even their source is available and licendes under a DFSG-free license, are consider not suitable for main. We regularily reject packages because of that. Usually the source is repacked and the swf files are removed. also, we are on the mentors list, are we really going to mentor non-free software and use up our time resources for helping people package non free software? We acknowledge that some of our users require the use of works that do not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. [..] Thus, although non-free works are not a part of Debian, we support their use and provide infrastructure for non-free packages (such as our bug tracking system and mailing lists). Debian Social contract, Number 5. However, if you don't like non-free / contrib software, you are free to ignore the discussions about them. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120128202026.gb32...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: bibtool
Hi! Am 26.01.2012 11:31, schrieb Etienne Millon: d/changelog: * New upstream version. * Several bugfixes in the upstream version (Closes: #535581). You can probably merge those two ones (New upstream version (Closes: #535581)). Please don't do that, as that doesn't really describe what change satisfies the bug to be closed. Better is: * New upstream version. * Change handling of nockenwellen to solve problem with Aussenspiegeln (Closes: #123456) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f213657.3090...@debian.org
Re: What to do if FTBFS bug is not reproducible?
Hi! Am 25.01.2012 08:58, schrieb Vasudev Kamath: I'm working on to prepare QA upload for surf which is orphaned by its previous maintainer. There is a FTBFS bug reported against this package [1]. But I'm not able to reproduce this bug. Package builds fine on the pbuilder clean chroot. I've already reported this on the bug and also have provided my build log. How can I proceed shall I manually close this bug and prepare a normal QA upload or I need to wait for some reply on the bug. I just tried it, and verified, that the package indeed builds in pbuilder. You could try to compare your build log, and one from the build that failed (haven't taken a look at them). If you can't find any significant differences, which could explain the FTBFS, I would downgrade the bug to important (so it's no longer considered release critical) and tag it unreproducible, till the submitter confirms the problem has been solved somehow (and the bug can be closed). If you are going to do an QA upload keep an eye on the build logs: You'll see if the package can be build by the autobuilders. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f1fc3b8.8060...@schmehl.info
Re: GREAT news: My First Debian Package ! - vpcs
Hi! Am 20.01.2012 10:59, schrieb Alex Mestiashvili: It seems to me that your lintian is rather old . IMO it is always better to use lintian from sid . ... or just the one from backports.debian.org Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f193d9d.9050...@debian.org
Re: proposed new pseudo-package 'debian-mentors' for handling sponsoring requests
Hi! Am 19.01.2012 12:26, schrieb Arno Töll: On 19.01.2012 05:32, Michael Gilbert wrote: Second concern i have here is that (AFAIK) everyone can upload everything to mentors.debian.net. Which would mean we then would/could distribute non-distribiteable material under the debian.org domain. How can this issue be resolved? [..] We're not doing any license checks, although pabs was pushing use of automated license checks. We're aware of that problem, but we're not having any implementation right now. Yet we're deleting packages where we notice they're not distributable (i.e. not even non-free). Yes, that's a post-publishing removal. Hmmm... What about making the orig tarballs only accessible from Debian machines? In theory only sponsors need it, and sponsors have access to these machines. diff.gz/debian.tar.gz could still be accessible to all, so non-DDs could still at least do (limited) reviews. And with a proper get-orig-source rule (or a way on mentors to provide a link to the source tarball?) even full reviews by non-DDs would be possible. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f180554@schmehl.info
Re: proposed new pseudo-package 'debian-mentors' for handling sponsoring requests
Hi! Am 19.01.2012 14:22, schrieb Arno Töll: Hmmm... What about making the orig tarballs only accessible from Debian machines? In theory only sponsors need it, and sponsors have access to these machines. I am not sure if that's the right message to send to people. We want and push anyone, including non-sponsors to review packages. We believe everyone can learn from other people's packaging styles - for good or not. There are quite a lot of people doing reviews and look at packages. Your workaround complicates handling with source packages to non-developers a lot, and even developers can be scared off by that requirement. A substantial problem in our whole approach is to attract Debian Developers to sponsoring again. If we're complicating access to packages, that's sort of counterproductive. Well, don't take it wrong: Mentors is a very usefull service, it was a just an idea which might allow you to become mentors.debian.org. As said, I don't think there's a problem distribute .dsc and diff.gz/debian.tar.gz files. (which still allows a limited review.) About the orig tarball... Well, in many cases it's available somewhere else for download already. So maybe mentors could have a Get tarball here entry where sponsorees can place an URL. (No security risk; you can sill verify if the sponsorees and the downloaded tarball match.) And then it's only a minor step to a dget-mentors-Script (or maybe a patch for dget to automatically take a look at the url field, when downloading from mentors). Granted, not a really good solution, but doable. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f18290d.3070...@schmehl.info
Re: How to handle software which needs huge modification when packaging for Debian
Hi! Am 17.01.2012 02:55, schrieb Adam Borowski: Even binaries that don't have their sources in this package but are shipped somewhere else in Debian are ok. Sorry, but written that way it is wrong.. Or at least could be interpreted wrong. For _everything_ Debian ships in main we must have the corresponding source code. That means unless you are really, really, really sure, that your binary in package a is really build with sources from package b it's not okay. (Some packages build on a specific foo-source package and therefore use an other packages sources, that's tricky but okay.) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f1548d6.8030...@debian.org
Re: Question about licenses
Hi! Am 14.01.2012 19:34, schrieb fre...@free.fr: When the file is distributed in the source package, yes, then it needs to be covered in debian/copyright. It does not matter whether this bit of code is for Windows or Linux. Whether it is being distributed, that matters. Of course, your package can leave this file out. Teus. Ok, thank you very much. In these cases please also note down, that the file is not used in your package, but shipped in the upstream tarball. Or you risk your package being rejected by the ftp team due to non-free licenses. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f13d52c.7090...@schmehl.info
Re: RFS: logkeys (fixing RC bugs)
tags 624991 +pending thanks Hi! Am 12.01.2012 10:33, schrieb Helmut Grohne: The current unstable package has: * 1 lintian error * 2 lintian warnings * 2 RC bugs (FTBFS and missing dep) * out of date standards version The upload above fixes a non-rc bug, it also seems to solve the FTBFS without mentioning in the changelog. FWIW: It is mentioned in the changelog entry for 0.1.1a-1. Not sure if the -2 upload to mentors was build without -v or if mentors just ignored it. Regarding the other RC bug (#652826): Fix seems to be trivial. I'd say it is very high time to act on this package. Options are: * Upload the version on mentors. * Explain why the mentors version is unsuitable and upload the NMU debdiff attached to #624991 fixing the FTBFS. * File a removal request since noone is willing to sponsor this package at all. In any case you can polish your RCBW statistics. Apparently the maintainer tries it's best (well, could have tagged the one bug pending), so I see no point in an NMU or a removal. So to answer his question in #652826: Hey, since you're DD, and I am not, would you be so kind and sponsor the upload? I am and I would be willing. Could you please provide a package also fixing that RC bug? I'll upload it as soon as I could test it, however so far logkeys fails for me with the following error message: $ sudo /etc/init.d/logkeys start Starting logkeys: /usr/bin/logkeys: LC_CTYPE locale must be of UTF-8 type However, I do have such a locale: $ locale|grep LC_CTYPE LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f0eb43e.9030...@schmehl.info
Re: NMU done but unresponsive maintainer
Hi! Am 08.12.2011 21:03, schrieb Emilien Klein: Is there anyone available to sponsor my NMU from 2011-10-27? I'm sorry, but personally I don't like to sponsor your NMU. Some of the reasons are: * Only fixing a wishlist bug, nothing else * The wishlisht bug is a new version not detailing why the new version is needed * No apparent consent of the maintainer for the NMU * Not a minimal NMU, changing other stuff, too * Python package, I'm not really familiar with However, given that: a) There was only _one_ maintainer upload b) This upload was 9 month ago c) The upload was at that point already outdated (as 0.8 was released in February according to the homepage) d) Your (wishlist) bug was without answer for over three month e) You say the maintainer is unresponsive f) You seem to have an interest in the package Have you considered taking over maintenance of the package, probably in the python packaging team (which might help you find new sponsors)? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ee1dbbc.8030...@debian.org
Re: NMU done but unresponsive maintainer
Hi! Am 09.12.2011 13:17, schrieb David Bremner: * Only fixing a wishlist bug, nothing else * The wishlisht bug is a new version not detailing why the new version is needed * No apparent consent of the maintainer for the NMU I agree with the first two points. But I think the third is OK, according to Emilien's previous message, the maintainer did bless the NMU. Ah, right. Missed that. However, his mail seems to underline my point: This package should have at least a new co-maintainer, or even better: Be team maintained :) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ee20592.9090...@debian.org
Re: NMU done but unresponsive maintainer
Hi! Am 09.12.2011 15:39, schrieb Jakub Wilk: Ah, right. Missed that. However, his mail seems to underline my point: This package should have at least a new co-maintainer, Eh, why? Because the maintainer failed to respond to a wishlist bug? No, because he seems to be busy with his baby, while there's someone else interested in helping with the package. Best regards, Alexander PS: Note that with at least a new co-maintainer I meant: Either that or team maintained. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ee222a7.5010...@schmehl.info
Re: How to correct BTS error statistics
Hi! Am 07.12.2011 19:53, schrieb Don Armstrong: [..] affects 618125 + src:globus-gram-job-manager-setup-condor [..] Martin is talking about bugs like #618138, which was opened against globus-rsl/7.2-2 but closed with doxygen/1.7.3-6. Oh. These are actually bugs in doxygen/1.7.3-5 (I think?) which affected these packages. What actually has to happen here is the bugs need to be reassigned to doxygen, merged, then marked as found and fixed in the appropriate versions, and then marked as affecting the original package. The preceding control instructions do this. Thanks for the explanation! I didn't knew of the affects command. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ee074e9.1040...@schmehl.info
Re: How to correct BTS error statistics
Hi! Am 06.12.2011 23:32, schrieb Don Armstrong: Found in version package-a/a.a-x Fixed in version package-b/b.b-y The Bugs show up in the UDD (1); the PTS (2) is clean (now bugs are shown); new versions of package-a have already been built. I was told to use the notfound control for the bug server, but I did not understand which version to use: x or x+1. It depends on precisely which bug you're talking about. The BTS itself is the definitive record of whether a bug is closed in a particular version or not. Martin is talking about bugs like #618138, which was opened against globus-rsl/7.2-2 but closed with doxygen/1.7.3-6. Martin the mail you send to 618125 was in principle correct, however it should have been send to cont...@bugs.debian.org. Mails send to 123...@bugs.debian.org are _not_ scanned for commands, they will just appear in the bug log. Please also note that mails send to cont...@bugs.debian.org will change a bugs state, but won't show up in the bug log. So please send such mails to 12345@bugs.debian,org and BCC them also to cont...@bugs.debian.org. Please also note, that there are quite a couple of bugs affected not just the one you tried to fix, which would need some bts cleanup, Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4edf270f.6030...@schmehl.info
Re: RFS: lbzip2
Hi! Am 06.12.2011 23:17, schrieb Mikołaj Izdebski: I am looking for a sponsor for my package lbzip2. [..] Uploaded. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4edf2c03.5050...@debian.org
Re: RFS: Duplicati - encrypted online backups
Hi! Am 24.11.2011 09:35, schrieb Rene Stach: Download: http://code.google.com/p/duplicati/downloads/list Source Code: http://code.google.com/p/duplicati/source/browse/ Web site: http://www.duplicati.com/ Sounds interesting, but could you please provide a link to the actual source package? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece08d0.8050...@schmehl.info
Re: How to suppress expected lintian warnings?
Hi! Am 24.11.2011 12:51, schrieb Ole Wolf: I'm getting some lintian warnings on one of my packages (at http://mentors.debian.net/package/nemid): ]..] The reason is quite evident: the nemid package doesn't include a library; instead, the postinst and postrm scripts download a library from an external web page and call ldconfig afterwards. Lintian obviously can't know that a library is being installed and removed, hence the warning. Uhm... Others already commented on the lintian warning thing, however looking at your package it doesn't qualify for main; as long as it downloads some stuff it qualifies at most contrib, your changelog doesn't actually describe your changes, you seem to install a copy of the GPL, and you use md5sums, which are considered weak, so please use stronger checksums. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece3f2d.5060...@schmehl.info
Re: How to suppress expected lintian warnings?
Hi! Am 24.11.2011 13:57, schrieb Alexander Reichle-Schmehl: Others already commented on the lintian warning thing, however looking at your package it doesn't qualify for main; as long as it downloads some stuff it qualifies at most contrib, your changelog doesn't actually describe your changes, you seem to install a copy of the GPL, and you use md5sums, which are considered weak, so please use stronger checksums. ... and I think your check for the 32-Bit architecture is incomplete, but I miss the machine to test that ;) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece4017.9010...@schmehl.info
Re: How to suppress expected lintian warnings?
Hi! Am 24.11.2011 14:41, schrieb Ole Wolf: I actually thought I was required to include a copy of the GPL, but removing it is easy. :) For the binary package take a look at /usr/share/common-licenses/. And IMHO should your debian/copyright make it clear, that the GPL is just for your packaging work, not for the downloaded scripts. I'm building the package by simply issuing debuild, with no options. This seems to provide both md5, sha1, and sha256 checksums. Are you suggesting I should try to get rid of the md5sums entirely (if so, how), or did I misunderstand you? I'm talking about your postinst-Script, which only checks the md5sums of the downloaded files. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece4f49.3000...@schmehl.info
Re: How to suppress expected lintian warnings?
Hi! Am 24.11.2011 14:19, schrieb Ole Wolf: ... and I think your check for the 32-Bit architecture is incomplete, but I miss the machine to test that ;) I'm not sure what you mean by that. Which check do you think is missing? You do the following: machine=`uname -m` [..] elif [ $machine = i686 ]; then architecture=32 md5sums=$md5sums32 else echo Error: NemID is not supported for your computer: $machine exit 1 fi And I'm not sure, but I could think that there are 32-Bit machines out there, which don't report i686 but something less, which would make your check too restrict - unless the downloaded library is indeed i686 only. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece50af.20...@schmehl.info
Re: preserving user changes while managing configuration files
Hi! Am 23.11.2011 09:18, schrieb Dennis van Dok: My question is whether this method sufficiently implements the policy, or if there are other ways to go about it. Hmmm... I'm not entirely sure about this. But you might want to look at the ucf utility and it's usage in maintainer scripts. The workflow would basically be, that you call debconf and your script, but not instantly replace the configuration file, but save it in into a temporary file. Then you call ucf, which either replaces the configuration file, if it hasn't been changed, or asks the administrator what to do (including an option to show a diff between the files). Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eccc552.6070...@schmehl.info
Re: Where to place man-pages, when building multiple packages
Hi! Am 10.11.2011 10:37, schrieb Björn Esser: Newer versions of lintian (around 2.5.1 or so) will check direct dependencies (that are built from the same source) if said dependencies are processed together. [..] So what shall I try to get things fixed? What version of lintian are you using? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ebba045.9080...@schmehl.info
Re: Where to place man-pages, when building multiple packages
Hi! Am 10.11.2011 11:02, schrieb Björn Esser: What version of lintian are you using? lintian -V shows me: Lintian v2.4.3+squeeze1 It's the one which is shipped on default with Squeeze. http://backports-master.debian.org/ has an updated lintian package for squeeze, please always use that one, as lintian is rapidly developed. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ebba315.2060...@schmehl.info
Re: [RFH] libxmlezout : out of date on many archs
Hi! Am 08.11.2011 15:09, schrieb Xavier Grave: I have uploaded one of the packages I maintain and in the PTS [1] I have many out of date on i386 and so on messages. It seems that was the reason why the previous version (1.01.1-4) didn't reach testing. Since I don't understand this problem, I don't know how can I solve it. Any help, advices, url welcome, Thanks in advance, xavier [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/libx/libxmlezout.html Ha, that's a tricky one. First guess would have been: Not yet build on all archs, however looking at [1] (also linked from the qa site) show's all archs (but hurd) are build successfully and in the archive. So look again at the qa page: It says out of date on i386: libxmlezout0, libxmlezout1-dev (from 1.06-2). It seems you recently droped these two packages. They are still in wheezy and used there, so your package can't migrate without the old packages being removed. That's job of the ftp-team, and usually you don't have to care about that, as the ftp-team get's notified about this cruft, and tries to remove it. See [2] for the current Cruft report which also mentiones your package. As said: Normally the ftp-team does that for you, and you don't have to do anything special. However, in this case the ftp-team could do anything about it. When trying to remove your old package, one sees the following (AFAIK you could try that out on ries.debian.org, if you are an DD, if not apt-cache rdepends might help you): Checking reverse dependencies... # Broken Depends: liblog4ada: liblog4ada1-dev narval: libnarval-dbg [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] libnarval1-dev [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] libnarval1.10.1 [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-generic-actors [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-servers [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-tests-actors [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] # Broken Build-Depends: liblog4ada: libxmlezout1-dev narval: libxmlezout1-dev So, your package can't be removed, because that would break other packages. Brolen Depends can usually be solved by requesting binary NMUs (binNMUs). AFAIK that's easiest done with bug against the release.debian.org apckage. Broken Build-Depends usually means that you have to tell the maintainers of these packages to fix their packages. Once they are uploaded, the old package may be removed, and may migrate to testing. Also note that you don't have to request binNMUs, if the package needs a sourceful upload anyway. 1: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libxmlezout 2: http://ftp-master.debian.org/cruft-report-daily.txt Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eb9437a.1050...@debian.org
Re: [RFH] libxmlezout : out of date on many archs
Hi! Am 08.11.2011 16:24, schrieb Xavier Grave: Checking reverse dependencies... # Broken Depends: liblog4ada: liblog4ada1-dev narval: libnarval-dbg [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] libnarval1-dev [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] libnarval1.10.1 [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-generic-actors [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-servers [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] narval-tests-actors [amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc s390 sparc] # Broken Build-Depends: liblog4ada: libxmlezout1-dev narval: libxmlezout1-dev [..] liblog4ada is a package of mine, so if I upload it also, it should solve part of the problem ? (I will have to fix narval, polyorb, also) Yes, you have to upload liblog4ada. As it build depends on libxmlezout1-dev, which you droped in one of your last uploads, there's no way libxmlezout can migrate to testing without breaking the existing liblog4ad in testing. Same with narval. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eb950bf.7010...@debian.org
Re: What is the proper way to rename scripts?
Hi! Am 02.11.2011 11:36, schrieb Paul Elliott: Because of Debian Policy Manual section 10.4 (Scripts) I must rename a script. What is the proper way to accomplish this when using dh 7? Use a dh_install_override to install normaly, and rename the file afterwards. It seems to me to be a useless waste of time an energy. Somebody will have to maintain this change. Oh, what a waste of time to add three lines to your rules file, which you'll never have to change again, unless upstream decides to change something... Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eb12075.6030...@schmehl.info
Re: package errors requiring human judgment to detect?
Hi! Am 01.11.2011 19:07, schrieb Jakub Wilk: - debian/copyright is incomplete or inadequate. FWIW: That's by far the most common reason for a Reject from the NEW queue. Best regards, Alexander, who by incident didn't had to reject a package today ;) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eb14356.20...@debian.org
Re: Overriding .desktop file with localized version (QasMixer)
Hi! Am 01.11.2011 14:14, schrieb Sebastian H.: In the progress of separating localizations for QasMixer into a separate package qasmixer-l10n I've stumbled over the following linitan warning: W: qasmixer-l10n: desktop-command-not-in-package usr/share/applications/qasmixer.desktop qasmixer [..] qasmixer-l10n installs a new version of /usr/share/applications/qasmixer.desktop with additional localized strings and diverts the original file to /usr/share/qasmixer/qasmixer.desktop.no_l10n Why? Why not install the desktop file with the localized strings in with the proper package? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ea8.1050...@debian.org
Re: Overriding .desktop file with localized version (QasMixer)
Hi! Am 01.11.2011 15:34, schrieb Sebastian H.: Why? Why not install the desktop file with the localized strings in with the proper package? 1. It allows to add new translations or update existing ones without having to change/revalidate the (fat) qasmixer package. And how often does that happen? 2. The l10n package can be used for all architectures. This should save some precious bytes on the package servers. In theory yes, but they desktop files are usually rather small. So I don't really see the benefit for this. Best regards, Alexander PS: No need to CC me, I read the list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4eb00ac9.1070...@debian.org
Re: Fwd: installing dependencies along with deb package
Hi! Am 11.10.2011 13:15, schrieb karunakar medamoni: This is karunakar. I was developed one package. i want convert that package into deb package. i was created deb package with my source code. i got the error when i install that package. it saying this package needs apache2 package . how can i install dependencies which are mentioned in control file. i need to install all packages which are required and mentioned in control file at the time of deb package installation automatically . Try debi from the devscripts package: are@pc2177:~$ debi --help|grep depends --with-dependsInstall packages with their depends. are@pc2177:~$ dpkg -S $(which debi) devscripts: /usr/bin/debi Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e942bfb.2050...@debian.org
Re: experimental or unstable
Hi! * Tony Houghton h...@realh.co.uk [110903 17:32]: There's a new release ready; should I switch back to unstable for it? Well, ask yourself this question: Do you think the upcoming release is fit to be part of a stable release? If the answer is yes upload to unstable. If the answer is No, but I'd like to have pacakges ready for testing anyway upload to experimental. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110903190152.gb1...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: assimp
Hi! Am 19.08.2011 11:01, schrieb IOhannes zmölnig: +dfsg would be preferable over ~dfsg, but you might have good reasons for your choice? im using that because in the pkg-multimedia team (where i partake), we use ~. doing a quick stats on my system, i have 32 $(VER)+dfsg 28 $(VER)~dfsg 28 $(VER).dfsg 5 $(VER)dfsg 4 $(VER)-dfsg You do know the differences on these version numbers and how to check them, do you? $ dpkg --compare-versions 1~dfsg lt 1 echo Is smaller Is smaller $ dpkg --compare-versions 1+dfsg gt 1 echo Is greater Is greater So the order would be 1~dfsg 1 1+dfsg. You usually use ~ for smaller pre versions and similar, where you have 0.9pre1, and later a 0.9 which should be a higher version number. However, I can't think of a scenario, where ~dfsg makes sense. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e4e2b38.3040...@debian.org
Re: Version number adjustment needed?
Hi! * Stefan Denker stefan+deb...@dn-kr.de [110623 10:03]: Upstream of a software package releases only a .zip-File containing only both source and binaries. So, I need to build my own orig.tar.gz . Now, if i build my orig-Tarball and exclude the binaries, do I have to append something to the version string to mark that I modified the source tarball? Yes please. That way, you a) make sure everyone knows that you changes something and b) in case you did something wrong when creating the modified tarball you cann still create a new one, without using a awkward version: If you create 1.2.3.debian.1 you can always bump that to 1.2.3.debian.2. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110623093646.gi18...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: Version number adjustment needed?
Hi! * Thomas Preud'homme robo...@celest.fr [110623 11:37]: Now, if i build my orig-Tarball and exclude the binaries, do I have to append something to the version string to mark that I modified the source tarball? Usually we use upstreamversion+dfsg1-1. dfsg is used when the tarball was modified to satisfy the Debian Free Software Guidelines. If the modification was not strictly necessary, but is convenient, using plain debian instead of dfsg is quite common, and makes IMHO Much more sense. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110623094417.gj18...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: Package purging left files on system
Hi! Am 31.05.2011 09:49, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: I am looking at the following error from piuparts: ... 0m34.6s ERROR: FAIL: Package purging left files on system: /etc/apache2 owned by: dcmtk-www, apache2.2-common /etc/apache2/conf.d owned by: dcmtk-www, apache2.2-common /etc/apache2/conf.d/dcmtknot owned ... Maybe I'm missing something, but that error message is about files being left behind. The postrm debian script is currently: purge|remove|upgrade) # Restart Apache to register configuration for dcmtk if apache2ctl configtest 2/dev/null; then [..] I do not understand why purge/remove are calling a reload on apache2. Do I need to keep this behavior ? While that part and your questions have to do with apache being or not being reloaded, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with the previous problem. To the best of my knowledge piuparts doesn't actually start any daemons at all, so a restart / reload of a daemon will naturally fail in piuparts. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4de4a1e7.3030...@debian.org
Re: RFS: JLDrill
Hi Mike! Am 31.05.2011 10:16, schrieb Mike Charlton: [..] I have made a lintian clean debian package available here: http://sakabatou.dyndns.org/devel/jldrill/jldrill-0.5.1/jldrill_0.5.1-8_all.deb Thanks for your interest in Debian, however to review (and later upload) your package we'll need a source package (the .dsc orig.tar... and diff.gz or debian.tar.gz). Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4de4a57a.90...@debian.org
Re: How to close open security issues
Hi! Am 23.05.2011 18:26, schrieb sils: There are a bug in BTS related with 3 of these CVEs [..] I found out that It would be needed to add, also, in debian/changelog the mention of this bug number. Please also contact the security team, to coordinate a securty update for them, as it seems that the versions in oldstable and stable are affected by those CVEs, too. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ddb8c6e.8080...@debian.org
Re: Bizzar error with dpkg-buildpackages
Hi! * Michelle Konzack linux4miche...@tamay-dogan.net [110405 01:23]: Ehm, on the top, dpkg-deb say signfile xmem_1.20-29+b1.dsc and then at dpkg-genchanges I get ../xmem_1.20-29.dsc can't be read. I compiled the last two days 16 Packages and it was working and now not more. Any suggestions what it can be that the +b1 is cut off? Do you know what the +b1 means? A +b1 never has an actual source package, therefore the b1 is cut off. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405175123.gc...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: On diverting an ITP to non-free
Hi! * Mats Erik Andersson mats.anders...@gisladisker.se [110323 12:29]: Not imagining myself to ever intend to bother about the non-free category, I am now prepared to make an exception, butvI run into the problem of understanding whether my packaging should mark this as non-free, or if my sponsor simply deposits the package in a non-regular NEW-queue? You set that debian/control. Just add 'non-free/' to the existing section entry. But as others have said: Why not split the package into two, if upstream is not willing to change that? Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110323155805.gi9...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: john (updated package)
Hi! Am 17.03.2011 16:25, schrieb Ruben Molina: Won't that create a ppc64 binary if I have such a CPU, even if I try to build on a normal ppc? Yes, it will. Isn't that the expected behavior? I'm not a powerpc porter or user myself, but I don't think so. Builds should be deterministic and reproducible. Think for example about the following scenario: The Debian project has several buildds for it's powerpc architecture. Some of them a 64-Bit CPU, some of them have only 32-Bit archs. Now assume your package get's build on the ppc64 machine. We'll have a ppc64 bit binary, correct? But nothing prevents me from installing it on my ppc32 system, but if I do so, I can't use it, can I? Similar for the detection of your detection of MMX and SSE, which is even less clear to me: You install a script to do runtime detection of MMX and SSE/2 support, but you also have compile time checks for that. The script you mention is no longer used. Even if preserved in the package sources, it is not installed in the binary package. Should it be deleted? Yes, please. Having unused stuff in your package can be confusing for others, who need to do something with your package (think of Securty updates, NMUs, or someone who needs to take it over, after you've been abducted by aliens). Instead of a script, CPU fallbacks (provided by upstream) are used. A optimized binary tries to run and it fallback into a less optimized binary as needed: john (sse2) → john-non-sse (mmx) → john-non-mmx (any). [..] Is it a bit clearer now? Ah, okay, I see. But the optimized binaries are only build, if the CPU I'm building the package on, supports it? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d832007.6090...@debian.org
Re: Subject: RFS: john (updated package)
Hi! Am 16.03.2011 18:26, schrieb Ruben Molina: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.7.6-1 of my package john. [..] I took a look at it, however, I'm not sure about the following in your debian/rules: CPU := $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU) [..] else ifeq ($(CPU),powerpc) TARGET := linux-ppc32 else ifeq ($(CPU),ppc64) TARGET := linux-ppc64 Won't that create a ppc64 binary if I have such a CPU, even if I try to build on a normal ppc? Similar for the detection of your detection of MMX and SSE, which is even less clear to me: You install a script to do runtime detection of MMX and SSE/2 support, but you also have compile time checks for that. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d81d60f.9010...@debian.org
Re: RFS: b43-fwcutter (updated package)
Hi! * Fabrizio Regalli fab...@fabreg.it [110308 22:34]: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1:013-4 of my package b43-fwcutter. I just looked briefly through your package. And noticed, that while your debian/changelog just reads: * New maintainer. Closes: #581798. * Now it's recognized similar devices. (Closes: #599741) * Remove BCM4312 from long description. (Closes: #617394) + Thanks to Geoff Simmons for these patches! debdiff seems to disagree: $ debdiff b43-fwcutter_013-3.dsc b43-fwcutter_013-4.dsc|diffstat NEWS |4 - b43-fwcutter.debhelper.log | 77 + b43-fwcutter.dirs |1 changelog |9 +++ compat |2 control| 13 +++- dirs |1 docs |1 firmware-b43-installer.debhelper.log | 77 + firmware-b43-installer.postinst| 59 +- firmware-b43-lpphy-installer.debhelper.log | 77 + firmware-b43-lpphy-installer.postinst | 26 ++--- firmware-b43legacy-installer.debhelper.log | 77 + firmware-b43legacy-installer.postinst | 24 ++--- patches/debian-changes-1:013-4 | 42 +++ patches/series |1 rules |4 - source/lintian-overrides |1 watch |2 19 files changed, 448 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) You'd probably want to clean that package up first. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110309102449.gc28...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: ncrypt
Hi! * Vincent Cheng vincentc1...@gmail.com [110219 12:50]: * Package name: ncrypt [..] python-ncrypt - Python wrapper for OpenSSL [..] My motivation for maintaining this package is: Dropbox, another package which I plan to upload, depends on this package. Uhm... AFAIK dropbox used some lgpl libraries, and now we add openssl stuff? Did anyone checked, if that's okay license wise? Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110219150340.gp11...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: sima (autoqueue MPD client, find similar artists to queue)
Hi! * Geoffroy Youri Berret ef...@azylum.org [101209 18:01]: I was thinking posting on 594...@bugs.debian.org with the following: retitle 518494 ITP: mpd-sima -- Automagically add tracks to mpd playlist thanks That needs to be send to cont...@bugs.debian.org to take effect. But as that won't be shown on the web interface, usually the bug is also CCd. Should I close the report and open a new ITP? No, why closing if you can recylce it? ;) Or may be I should leave it like that. Retitling the bug doesn't hurd, and so you won't get the same comment again ;) Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101209211742.gj2...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: RFS: googleearth-package (updated package)
Hi! Am 06.12.2010 11:54, schrieb Holger Levsen: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.6.1 of my package googleearth-package. I'll take care of this package, however I wouldnt mind people testing it on amd64 (or ia64) as I dont have access to these archs as desktops. Work's for me on amd64. Package builds, is installable and creates a working googleearth package. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cfcd780.1060...@debian.org
ITS: webfs (updated package)
Hi! Am 02.12.2010 23:53, schrieb Mats Erik Andersson: I am looking for a sponsor for the version 1.21+ds1-8 of my package webfs. [..] The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 605690, 605691. I'm looking at it now... Just one question, is there a reason why you use rm $TEMPCONFFILE 2/dev/null || true instead of rm -f $TEMPCONFFILE? It's not wrong, but longer ;) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cf8dae8.6040...@schmehl.info
Re: ITS: webfs (updated package)
Hi Mats! Am 03.12.2010 13:21, schrieb Mats Erik Andersson: I'm looking at it now... Just one question, is there a reason why you use rm $TEMPCONFFILE 2/dev/null || true instead of rm -f $TEMPCONFFILE? It's not wrong, but longer ;) No really valid reason at all, only that the policy mandates maintainer scripts to append the or-true construct to capture exceptional states. Yes, as many other programs don't allow you to catch things properly. As said: Using ||true is not false, it's just uncommon ;) My first formulation used rm -f. Then I came to think of lintian complaining on this within the rules file, and again pointing to the or-true mechanism. Huh? Which version of lintian are you using? I just played a bit with the following: --- webfs-1.21+ds1/debian/rules 2010-11-30 18:54:59.0 +0100 +++ webfs-1.21+ds1/debian/rules 2010-12-03 13:29:00.0 +0100 @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ dh_install --sourcedir=$(builddir) dh_installchangelogs -a -k README dh --after dh_auto_install $@ + rm -f /tmp/this/file/doesnt/exist and the following in your posinst: - rm $TEMPCONFFILE 2/dev/null || true + rm -f $TEMPCONFFILE lintian 2.4.3 didn't complained about any of these two. And I would have been suprised, if it had. I could use a piece of advice here, and I do not object to changing the formulation back again! Too lazy to look up policy, but in general you should handle errors gracefully. Which means: rm $probably_existing_file is wrong, as it bails out, if the file doesn't exist. rm -f $probably_existing_file handles this situation, as it doesn't give an error, if the file is not there. lintian, smart as it is, knows that ;) An other example: Your rules file calls a Makefile, generated by a configure script. In your clean rule, you could call $(MAKE) clean, which would give an error, if Makefile is not present (which is possible). You could use -$(MAKE) clean (which was BTW, recommended for some time), but that would not only the error caused by Makefile not being present, but ALL errors. Therefore you should first test if there is a Makefile, and only call the clean target, if there is one. There is a lintian test for that. Does that explanation help? Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cf8e5f8.60...@debian.org
Re: RFS: webfs (updated package)
Hi! Am 30.11.2010 20:37, schrieb Mats Erik Andersson: It builds these binary packages: webfs - lightweight http server for static content [..] The upload would fix these bugs: 601044 603926. The first is an FTBFS with respect to binutils-gold, the second is an RC-Bug regarding overwritten configur- ation file. I'm looking at it now. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cf620d4.4090...@schmehl.info
Re: RFS: webfs (updated package)
Hi! Am 01.12.2010 11:17, schrieb Alexander Reichle-Schmehl: It builds these binary packages: webfs - lightweight http server for static content [..] The upload would fix these bugs: 601044 603926. The first is an FTBFS with respect to binutils-gold, the second is an RC-Bug regarding overwritten configur- ation file. I'm looking at it now. Uploaded, no remarks. Thanks for fixing the RC bug! Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cf627f0.2080...@schmehl.info
Re: RFS: clipit
HI! Am 11.11.2010 12:48, schrieb Mònica Ramírez Arceda: * Lintian: W: clipit source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.8.4 (current is 3.9.1) You should change this version in debian/control file I think you mean the right thing, but for the sake of clarity: One should not only bump the version in debian/control but also check /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz (package debian policy; please always use the latest version) and to the proper changes before doing so! Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cdbd909.7040...@debian.org
Re: Java library license problem
Hi! Am 04.11.2010 12:11, schrieb Mònica: This program uses a library that is not free (AppleJavaExtensions.jar). Apparently, the use of this library is only to build the MacOS version of the program. So the rest of it is free and could be part of Debian main if it wasn't for this library? I think I could change the upstream source and achieve that the software won't be dependent on this library (now it is). But I don't know if it's worth to do it... If you want to get your package in main, you'll have to, otherwise it won't pas the ftp-team ;) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cd29653.4010...@debian.org
Re: Time of a package to be processed by FTP-masters
Hi! /me takes his ftp-assistant hat on. Am 27.10.2010 15:50, schrieb Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo: So I am wondering whether my package has a specific problem (though I was not contacted by ftp masters in any way), [..] If you have a working e-mail address, we'll contact you, if there is a problem ;) or it's just a matter of time before it gets processed (e.g. they are busy with updates related with the freeze), or what. Part of us busy preparing the archive software for the release, yes. An other part of us is working on other improvements of said software, but mostly NEW processing isn't top priority during a freeze, as these packages won't end up in the release anyway (and some of them might even hinder the release), so we currently mostly process NEW packages fixing RC bugs or upon request of release mangagers / d-i developers / kernel developers or packages ending up in experimental anyway. What I would want to know, in particular: 1- If this is normal, or if having to wait for 1 week indicates that the package has some kind of problem. In general: No. Even if there isn't a freeze, packages might need to wait longer than a week on NEW before getting processed. 2- In the latter case, do FTP contact you (even by receiving some kind of REJECT notification), or are you supposed to ask them what's the problem after some time? You'll get a mail if your package get's rejected, or if we see a problem which needs to be addressed / clarified before it can be accepted. 2.1- If so, what's would be the time appropriate to ask? 1 month for example? 1 Month sounds reasonable to me under normal circumstances. 2.2- What would be the correct way to contact them -- some email emailing list or a bug report to the pseudo-package? Per e-mail or via irc in #debian-ftp on irc.debian.org. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cc83626.2040...@debian.org
Re: Uploading during freeze time
Hi! Am 13.10.2010 15:11, schrieb Lucas Nussbaum: On 11/10/10 at 09:14 -0700, PJ Weisberg wrote: 2010/10/11 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso jord...@gmail.com: Why do fixes to testing have to go through unstable, even during freeze time? Because a lot more people use Unstable than use Testing Citation needed. Looking at http://popcon.debian.org/ , I see 21548 reports for the Version in testing and only 383 for the version in unstable. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cb5bcc3.7070...@schmehl.info
Re: Uploading during freeze time
Hi! Am 13.10.2010 16:05, schrieb Alexander Reichle-Schmehl: Why do fixes to testing have to go through unstable, even during freeze time? Because a lot more people use Unstable than use Testing Citation needed. Looking at http://popcon.debian.org/ , I see 21548 reports for the Version in testing and only 383 for the version in unstable. Cancel that argument; I just noticed that the newer popcon package was uploaded just four days ago. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cb5bd72.3010...@schmehl.info
Re: creating a manpage from a GFDL text
Hi! Am 05.10.2010 17:17, schrieb gustavo panizzo gfa: i would like to create a man page for vavoom, based on a wiki page licensed as GNU Free Documentation License 1.2. What can i do? GFDL is not free for debian, and my pkg is for main. Well... As a starting point you could read the outcome of http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_001 or http://www.debian.org/News/2006/20060316 ;) Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cab4797.2040...@schmehl.info
Re: creating a manpage from a GFDL text
Hi! Am 05.10.2010 17:54, schrieb Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.: i would like to create a man page for vavoom, based on a wiki page licensed as GNU Free Documentation License 1.2. What can i do? GFDL is not free for debian, and my pkg is for main. You could package the documentation in a separate -doc package that is in non-free and Suggest (or maybe Recommend) it from the core package. Just for completeness: A package in main must not recommend a package not in main. Don't know the spot in the policy about that, but it was a release goal for Lenny. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4cab4c81.4020...@debian.org
Re: lintian output meanning
Hi! * Zvi Dubitzky d...@il.ibm.com [100812 15:22]: As an output from the pbuilder operation I got a .deb file When I apply lintian to it I get the following errors: Run lintian -i to get a more detailed explanation. . Also don't run it solely on the deb, but on the .changes file, so lintian will check both: Source and binary packages. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100812132648.gf31...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Re: Unknown architecture linux-any
Hi! Am 14.07.2010 04:09, schrieb Paul Wise: Yes, it seems that it is bug: #582804, but the mentors site does not have an updated lintian version. Always run lintian from sid over your .changes file before uploading to mentors. BTW: As ftp-master uses lintian, too, there's (nearly) always an update backport of lintian available via backports.org. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c3d7260.2000...@schmehl.info
[done] RFS: nc6 (updated package)
Hi! Am 28.06.2010 23:24, schrieb Guillaume Delacour: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.0-7 of my package nc6. [..] I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Uploaded. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c29f70b.3040...@debian.org
[uploaded] RFS: nc6 (updated package)
Am 16.06.2010 22:17, schrieb Guillaume Delacour: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.0-6 of my package nc6. Uploaded. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c19e6d8.3070...@debian.org
Re: Asking for DMUA: Yes while seeking first sponsor
Hi! Am 15.06.2010 21:08, schrieb Russ Allbery: The current DM implementation is weird in that it's dictated by a GR. It might be worth getting a ruling from the project secretary on whether we need another GR to change the details of it (or, better, to make the details of it up to existing core teams to implement). Interesting, GR 2007 003 mentions The initial policy for ...; the wording makes me think, that someone may change these policies (or why would they initial?) but it doesn't specify who may do so and to what extend... Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c1887f3.8010...@debian.org
Re: Asking for DMUA: Yes while seeking first sponsor
Hi! Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: [..] [ uploading a package multiple times without DMUA:Yes] Thankfully I was under the debian-med umbrella, otherwise I would have gone mad, if every time I would have had to search for a DD. [..] Uhm... Why? I guess it's more the rule than the exception to contact the previous sponsor for an uploaded, and only seek a new one, should the first one be busy. At least it was that way, when I wasn't DD and I do I that way with my sponsorees. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c1766fb.5050...@debian.org
Re: Asking for DMUA: Yes while seeking first sponsor
Hi! Am 15.06.2010 12:16, schrieb Mathieu Malaterre: Speaking of experience I had to re-upload 5 times the exact same packages (GDCM) because in between each upload: Why 5 times? - HPPA uploaded a Java package with dangling symnlink, - arm/armel updated the java package and libraries moved around, - vtk upload a libvtk-java with dangling symlink, - cmake was uploaded with a broken findjni.cmake. ref: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=562775 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=579959 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544674#115 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544674#167 Looking at these bug reports it seems at a first glance I see no reason for an upload of gdcm. #562775 seems to be a bug in vtk, got solved there. #579959 seems to have been a bug in cmake. #544674 and #544674 where again bugs in cmake. If I'm not mistaken, all these bugs could have been solved without sourceful uploads by requesting binNMUs. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c176982.6040...@debian.org
Asking for DMUA: Yes while seeking first sponsor
Hi! I noticed that recently some people seem to seek first time sponsors while asking for setting the DM-Upload-Allowed: yes flag at the very same time. While I can certainly understand Maintainers want to upload their packages ASAP themselves, I would like to point out that I consider that quite against the spirit of the Debian Maintainer Concept. The idea is, that you convince an (experienced) Developer, that you can do your work on your own on a per package basis. As Debian Maintainers don't need to pass the regular procedures to check their technical capabilities (so to speak), the idea is to select the packages you are allowed to upload on a case by case basis. Or to give you an example: Just because you can package simple game doesn't necessarily mean you can package and maintain a shared library. So I think asking for DMUA:Yes while seeking an initial sponsor is just plain wrong, as convincing a DD shouldn't be a one timer. I therefore ask DMs not to ask to set this flag on the first upload, and DDs not to do so. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c165527.20...@debian.org
Re: RFS: nmu gnupg2(grave bug)
Hi! On 07.05.2010 10:49, M. van Brummelen wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for a nmu of the package gnupg2. [..] The upload would fix a grave bug: 567926 [1] Thanks for fixing RC bugs. But could you provide an an nmudiff (which you need also send to the BTS; see developers reference 5.11.1). Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be3e025.2090...@debian.org
[Uploaded] RFS: fig2sty (QA upload, solves RC bug)
Hi! Johann Felix Soden schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for a QA-upload with version 1:0.1-14 of the package fig2sty. [..] The upload would fix these bugs: 572631, 574230 [..] I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Uploaded, good work. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4baa0355.3080...@schmehl.info
Re: New developer.
Hi! * Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net [091125 19:06]: Why the harsh answer? Sorry, the answer was not intended as such (but can indeed be seen as such). Sorry again :( Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Can /usr/share/doc/pkg be deleted on upgrade ?
Hi! * Lucas B. Cohen mli...@free.fr [091126 14:40]: Why exactly do you want to do that? What do you want to achieve? I'm triaging bugs opened against the Bacula package, and a patch has been submitted to a .preinst file that can swipe /usr/share/doc/bacula during upgrades. Could you explain what problem the patch (tries to?) address? I still don't understand why one needs to clean /usr/share/doc/bacula instead of let it be done by the package management. Or could you give us the bug number? Best Regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: New developer.
Hi! * Nuno Paquete nunopaqu...@gmail.com [091125 14:18]: How can I get GnuPG key? You create one yourself. I don't know anybody in the team and You know, that you need someone to advocate you? I've read that I need someone to give me one. Where did you read this? I'm thinking about doing this: - Read all the necessary documentation (I need to read a lot yet) - Get a GnuPG key No, you create a key and get it signed by soomeone in the project. - Submit myself as a maintainer of a project Before you do that, you should already have contributed to the project. e.g. being part of a (packaging) team or getting packages uploaded for you by a sponsor. Best Regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: how to upload a debian binary for lyx
[ Keeping full quote for added Cc: ] [ Keeping you in copy, since I assume to don't read the mentors list ] Hi Bela! There's a team maintaining the lyx package. You can reach it by e-mail via Debian LyX Maintainers pkg-lyx-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org. Please ask them if you can help them / join their team. Best Regards, Alexander * Jonathan Wiltshire deb...@jwiltshire.org.uk [090827 12:43]: You want the debian-mentors list. Setting Mail-Followup-To and keeping the full text below. Please upload your package somewhere for the mentors to review, and drop the other lists when you reply. On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:24:47AM +0100, belahcene wrote: Hi, I generate a debian package for the more recent lyx (1.6.4), I want to share it, how and where to upload it. The file is generated for debian lenny (5.0) and can normally used on recent ubuntu . I am not a guru for creating debian package, so I need feed back. Thanks for testing and help best regards bela signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: How to specify a command to run if SELinux is installed subsequent to installing a package
Hi! K.S. Bhaskar schrieb: GT.M requires the ability to execute dynamically compiled code (it's a feature of the MUMPS language). To give GT.M this permission with SELinux, the usual installation of GT.M executes a command such as chcon -t texrel_shlib_t libgtmshr.so. But this presumes that SELinux is installed and operational. If SELinux is installed or configured later, this command will need to be run at that time. Is there a way to tell the Debian package manager, if SELinux is installed or turned on, run this command? AFAIK this is not possible. With my quite non existance knowlegde on selinux, I think you should contact the maintainers of the sepolicy to ship it with your changes by default. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[uploaded] RFS: hwinfo (updated package)
William Vera schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 16.0-1 of my package hwinfo. No remarks. Uploaded. Many thanks! Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: PapaFactory
Hi! Narinder Claire schrieb: At the given link, the third file down is a debian package which passes the lintian test. That's a binary package. A sponsors (and Debian) need access to the Source Package. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Upload just to fix a watch file?
Hi! Andrea Bolognani schrieb: Since the upstream website has been redesigned, the watch file for one of my packages[1] has stopped working. The fix is a trivial one-line patch, so I was wondering if such a minor change could warrant a new upload. IMHO this doesn't warrant an upload; but if you want to make sure that everyone is aware, that you are aware, you might fill a bug report against your package tagging it pending. Best Regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Upload just to fix a watch file?
Felipe Sateler schrieb: No. The cost of wasting buildd and user time has to be factored in. Not any bug is worth of making a new release for. Not to forget bandwidth / transfer volume for our mirror network. Even for arch: all packages uploads are not always justified. Best Regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: hwinfo (updated package)
Hi! William Vera schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 15.3-2 of my package hwinfo. Uploaded; many thanks for your contribution! Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: chroot
Hi! Jaromír Mikeš schrieb: Od: Jaromír Mikeš mira.mi...@seznam.cz process stay on line P: Configuring helper cdebootstrap-helper-apt Sorry for this question ... it is quite known issue Is there other way how to test .change file with lintian in sid e.g. pbuilder? Yould either use pbuilder --login to log into your pbuilder chroot or install the lintian backport from www.backports.org. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: siege (updated package, diffs majorly slimmed down) - attempt 2
Hi! Tristan Greaves schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.68b7-1 of my package siege. I took a quick look at your package. Some comments bellow: - You build-depend on cdbs, but you don't use it? - Your debian/rules has a lot of commented dh_foo calls which should be removed - Why do you build-depend on ed? And why on autotools-dev? - You package a beta version; a specific reason for that? - Especially since your watch file only scans the real versions? Rest seems fine to me. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ITS: rednotebook
Hi! Jonathan Wiltshire schrieb: The dsc is on mentors at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rednotebook/rednotebook_0.6.4-1.dsc and is lintian clean. If you're able to review or sponsor, thanks in advance. I can take a look at it after lunch. Best regards, Alexander -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
[done] RFS: rednotebook
Alexander Reichle-Schmehl schrieb: The dsc is on mentors at http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rednotebook/rednotebook_0.6.4-1.dsc and is lintian clean. I can take a look at it after lunch. Colleagues are busy; uploaded ;) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: galculator
Hi Marco! Marco Rodrigues schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for my package galculator. [..] - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/galculator/galculator_1.3.3-1.dsc Your package fails to build from source: checking dependency style of cc... none checking whether NLS is requested... yes checking for intltool-update... no checking for intltool-merge... no checking for intltool-extract... no configure: error: The intltool scripts were not found. Please install intltool. make: *** [config.status] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: failure: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package Seems to need intltool listed in the build-depends ;) Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Question about bug hunting
Hi! Laurent Guignard schrieb: Is there any means to know if someone work on a bug from RC bug ? rc-alert or popbugs show all RC bugs of our packages but if someone is already on, it isn't necessary to work to solve the bug. Are all works in progress referenced somewhere ? The unoffical release critical bug tracker at http://bts.turmzimmer.net/details.php contains information about claimed bugs. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: diverse tasks = more than one advocate?
Hi! Andre Felipe Machado schrieb: Is it possible to have more than one advocate at the NM? I ask because of different task profiles, at different teams, some not involving code. What is the correct approach? Yes and no. Technically, you may only have one advocate. However, other DDs may of course tell their opinion about you, too. Actually, once you have your Application Manager, he will most likely ask people you have worked with for their opinion about you. Hope that helps, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: fig2sxd
Hi! Alexander Bürger schrieb: You might want to investigate the 'pbuilder' package for maintaining a chroot specifically to build your packages inside. You should also test your packages in unstable too. So how would I do that efficiently? It is highly unlikely that I buy a second computer, or that I replace ubuntu on the existing one... You don't need a second computer. Ben already mentioned one tool you could use: pbuilder. You can set up an chroot environment with that tool, build packages in a clean sid environment and you can test (some) things when using pbuilder --login and installing your package there. Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: lunar (NMU)
Hi! LI Daobing (???) schrieb: I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.2-3.1 of package lunar. Uploaded. Thanks for your contribution! Best regards, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: sclapp and pytagsfs (updated packages)
HI Giridhar! Y Giridhar Appaji Nag schrieb: python-sclapp (0.5.2-1) - framework for Python command-line applications * New upstream release + sclapp.txt is now licensed under GPLv2+ * Update Standards-Version to 3.8.0 http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sclapp That one is fine... pytagsfs (0.7.0-1) - maps media files to an arbitrary directory structure * New upstream release + Needs python-fuse = 0.2 * Remove patch 02_fuse_exceptions merged upstream * Update Standards-Version to 3.8.0 (no changes required) ... but that one fails to build from source (tested with an up to date sid using pbuilder): == dpatch cat-all patch-stampT mv -f patch-stampT patch-stamp dh_testdir python setup.py build Traceback (most recent call last): File setup.py, line 22, in module from tests.common import TEST_DIR, TEST_DATA_DIR File tests/common.py, line 17, in module from sclapp.util import importName ImportError: No module named sclapp.util make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: failure: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package - Aborting with an error == Yours sincerely, Alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
