Processed: submitter 789564, submitter 537819, submitter 653675, submitter 658764, submitter 771615 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > submitter 789564 ! Bug #789564 [spambayes] spambayes: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 537819 ! Bug #537819 [kino] kino: crashes when no space left on device Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 653675 ! Bug #653675 [phlipple] phlipple: Segmentation fault on startup Bug #664707 [phlipple] phlipple: Segmentation fault on startup Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 658764 ! Bug #658764 [src:linux] linux-image-3.1.0-1-amd64: free ATI driver corrupts output on Radeon HD 6310 Bug #646306 [src:linux] corrupted display on Asus 1215b (device [1002:9802]) Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 771615 ! Bug #771615 [python-lamson] python-lamson: non-functioning email address for Maintainer Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789549 ! Bug #789549 [dnssec-trigger] dnssec-trigger: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789553 ! Bug #789553 [nagios2mantis] nagios2mantis: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789560 ! Bug #789560 [python-lamson] python-lamson: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789561 ! Bug #789561 [python-libcloud] python-libcloud: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789565 ! Bug #789565 [taskcoach] taskcoach: API breakage in 'python-lockfile' version 0.9 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789903 ! Bug #789903 [python-lamson] python-lamson: Obsolete ‘daemon.pidlockfile’ API migrated to ‘python-lockfile’ library Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 789906 ! Bug #789906 [pybit] pybit: Obsolete ‘daemon.pidlockfile’ API migrated to ‘python-lockfile’ library Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 829439 ! Bug #829439 [trac-codecomments] trac-codecomments: bundles third-party library ‘jquery.ba-throttle-debounce.js’ Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 829440 ! Bug #829440 [phpmyadmin] phpmyadmin: bundles third-party library ‘jquery.debounce-1.0.5.js’ Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 439440 ! Bug #439440 [pyg] pyg: debian/rules should generate md5sums control file Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 821363 ! Bug #821363 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Allow line-end comments in all Debian packaging control files Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 728063 ! Bug #728063 [bzr-builddeb] bzr-builddeb: fails to get upstream version string via uscan “dversionmangle” Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 423132 ! Bug #423132 [initscripts] initscripts: package scripts should not create directory in root Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 462691 ! Bug #462691 [partman-auto] debian-installer: fails to partition hard drives on powermac g5 Bug #462809 [partman-auto] installation-report: successful installation of 'lenny' to Powermac G5, but required manual partitioning Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 488770 ! Bug #488770 [debian-maintainers] debian-maintainers: Wrong email address for key 9CFE12B0791A4267887F520CB7AC2E51BD41714B Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 512613 ! Bug #512613 [namazu2-index-tools] mknmz: Use of uninitialized value $utc in numeric eq (==) at /usr/bin/mknmz line 477 Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 516692 ! Bug #516692 [audacity] audacity: no PulseAudio devices presented Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 517494 ! Bug #517494 [bzr-builddeb] bzr-buildpackage: Does not have a useful manpage Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 525105 ! Bug #525105 [evolution-common] evolution-common: help files cause “namespace error : colon are forbidden from PI names” Bug #521892 [evolution-common] evolution-common: help files cause “namespace error : colon are forbidden from PI names” Bug #529539 [evolution-common] evolution-common: help files cause “namespace error : colon are forbidden from PI names” Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 551555 ! Bug #551555 [initscripts] mountnfs.sh: start should declare dependency on name resolver Changed Bug submitter to 'Ben Finney ' from 'Ben Finney '. > submitter 561997 ! Bug #561997 [bind9] bind9: intermittent hang of ‘named’ dur
Processed: Re: Bug#834607: lintian: /usr/lib/ vs /usr/libexec
Processing control commands: > block -1 with 787816 Bug #834607 [lintian] lintian: /usr/lib/ vs /usr/libexec 834607 was not blocked by any bugs. 834607 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 834607: 787816 -- 834607: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=834607 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed (with 1 error): Re: Bug#835052: base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forcemerge 795402 835052 Bug #795402 [debian-policy] base-files: Please add Creative Commons license texts Unable to merge bugs because: package of #835052 is 'base-files' not 'debian-policy' Failed to forcibly merge 795402: Did not alter merged bugs. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 795402: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795402 835052: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835052 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Processed (with 1 error): Re: Bug#835052: base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 835052 debian-policy Bug #835052 [base-files] base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses Bug reassigned from package 'base-files' to 'debian-policy'. No longer marked as found in versions base-files/9.6. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #835052 to the same values previously set > forcemerge 795402 835052 Bug #795402 [debian-policy] base-files: Please add Creative Commons license texts Bug #835052 [debian-policy] base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses Merged 795402 835052 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 795402: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795402 835052: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835052 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: block 829085 with 767839
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 829085 with 767839 Bug #829085 [src:freeipmi] freeipmi: not binNMU safe 829085 was not blocked by any bugs. 829085 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 829085: 767839 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 829085: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=829085 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#823910: debian-policy: document Build-Depends-Arch/Build-Conflicts-Arch and when it's safe to use them
Processing control commands: > tag -1 + patch Bug #823910 [debian-policy] debian-policy: document Build-Depends-Arch/Build-Conflicts-Arch and when it's safe to use them Added tag(s) patch. -- 823910: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=823910 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: reassign 840002 to debian-policy
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 840002 debian-policy Bug #840002 [packaging-manual] [5.6.12 Version] Wrong version ordering with "+" suffixes Warning: Unknown package 'packaging-manual' Bug reassigned from package 'packaging-manual' to 'debian-policy'. Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #840002 to the same values previously set Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #840002 to the same values previously set > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 840002: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840002 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#841877: Don't recommend contacting base-passwd maintainer for dynamic UIDs
Processing control commands: > tag -1 patch Bug #841877 [debian-policy] Don't recommend contacting base-passwd maintainer for dynamic UIDs Added tag(s) patch. -- 841877: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=841877 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: block 837565 with 837478
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 837565 with 837478 Bug #837565 [liblpsolve55-dev] liblpsolve55-dev: Please build liblpsolve55.a with -fPIC 837565 was not blocked by any bugs. 837565 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 837565: 837478 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 837565: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=837565 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#842059: cssmin: diff for NMU version 0.2.0-3.1
Processing control commands: > block -1 by 687900 Bug #842059 [cssmin] cssmin: diff for NMU version 0.2.0-3.1 842059 was not blocked by any bugs. 842059 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 842059: 687900 -- 842059: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=842059 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: retitle
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 844431 debian-policy: Packages should be reproducible Bug #844431 [debian-policy] Packages should be reproducible Changed Bug title to 'debian-policy: Packages should be reproducible' from 'Packages should be reproducible'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 844431: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=844431 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#845369: marked as done (debian-policy: [5.6.8] Not fully updated for "any all")
Your message dated Tue, 22 Nov 2016 19:24:33 -0800 with message-id <87d1hmc1zi@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#845369: debian-policy: [5.6.8] Not fully updated for "any all" has caused the Debian Bug report #845369, regarding debian-policy: [5.6.8] Not fully updated for "any all" to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 845369: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=845369 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: minor In policy 3.9.3.0 (at least according to upgrading-checklist.txt): 5.6.8 The `Architecture' field in `*.dsc' files may now contain the value `any all' for source packages building both architecture-independent and architecture-dependent packages. The current 5.6.8 does describe `any all`, but unfortunately it also still contains this paragraph which is no longer correct since this change: In the main `debian/control' file in the source package, this field may contain the special value `all', the special architecture wildcard `any', or a list of specific and wildcard architectures separated by spaces. If `all' or `any' appears, that value must be the entire contents of the field. Most packages will use either `all' or `any'. I'd suggest updating this to: In the main `debian/control' file in the source package, this field may contain the special value `all', the special architecture wildcard `any', the special combination `any all`, or a list of specific and wildcard architectures separated by spaces. If `all', `any', or `any all` appears, that value must be the entire contents of the field. Most packages will use either `all', `any', or `any all`. (Credit for noticing this should go to sarnold on #launchpad). Cheers, Olly --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Olly Betts writes: > In policy 3.9.3.0 (at least according to upgrading-checklist.txt): > 5.6.8 > The `Architecture' field in `*.dsc' files may now contain the > value `any all' for source packages building both > architecture-independent and architecture-dependent packages. > The current 5.6.8 does describe `any all`, but unfortunately it also still > contains this paragraph which is no longer correct since this change: > In the main `debian/control' file in the source package, this field > may contain the special value `all', the special architecture wildcard > `any', or a list of specific and wildcard architectures separated by > spaces. If `all' or `any' appears, that value must be the entire > contents of the field. Most packages will use either `all' or `any'. This paragraph isn't talking about that file. As it says at the top of the paraagraph, this is about the debian/control file. The *.dsc file of a source package is not the debian/control file. If you read down two more paragraphs, you'll find: In the Debian source control file .dsc, this field contains a list of architectures and architecture wildcards separated by spaces. When the list contains the architecture wildcard any, the only other value allowed in the list is all. which does indeed allow the behavior that you expect. Unfortunately, the Debian control file format contains multiple fields that have different allowable values and different semantics in the various possible files, and one has to read carefully to see whether a particular value is allowed in that context. One could imagine a world in which this was designed differently and different fields were used in those different contexts, but that's water under the bridge at this point. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: tag patch
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 835520 + patch Bug #835520 [debian-policy] Policy 9.3.1 is inaccurate to the point of being harmful Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835520: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835520 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 835520
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > # we use tags weirdly in Policy -- patch implies that it has been seconded > tags 835520 - patch Bug #835520 [debian-policy] Policy 9.3.1 is inaccurate to the point of being harmful Removed tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835520: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835520 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: tagging 820197, tagging 793999
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 820197 + patch
Bug #820197 [debian-policy] spelling correction (git) diff to debian-policy
(3.9.7.0)
Added tag(s) patch.
> tags 793999 + patch
Bug #793999 [debian-policy] debian-policy: description of binary* targets
suggests that build-{arch,indep} are optional
Added tag(s) patch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
793999: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793999
820197: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=820197
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: tagging 819660
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 819660 + patch Bug #819660 [debian-policy] explicitly allow building automatic debug symbols packages not listed in control Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 819660: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819660 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 849483 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 849483 packaging There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: packaging. > tags 849483 + pending Bug #849483 [debian-policy] debian-policy: emacs build dependencies probably need adjustment Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 849483: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=849483 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 742364 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 742364 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > severity 742364 wishlist Bug #742364 [debian-policy] Please clarify if how sourceless file could be corrected and how Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'important' > retitle 742364 Guidance on how to include missing upstream source Bug #742364 [debian-policy] Please clarify if how sourceless file could be corrected and how Changed Bug title to 'Guidance on how to include missing upstream source' from 'Please clarify if how sourceless file could be corrected and how'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 742364: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742364 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 726998 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 726998 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > severity 726998 wishlist Bug #726998 [debian-policy] [debian-policy] debian-policy for privacy breach Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'important' > retitle 726998 Require packages avoid privacy breaches via web trackers Bug #726998 [debian-policy] [debian-policy] debian-policy for privacy breach Changed Bug title to 'Require packages avoid privacy breaches via web trackers' from '[debian-policy] debian-policy for privacy breach'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 726998: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=726998 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 776557 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 776557 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > severity 776557 normal Bug #776557 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please clarify 2.5 'unix heritage >= important' Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' > retitle 776557 Less ambiguous guidance on Priority: important Bug #776557 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please clarify 2.5 'unix heritage >= important' Changed Bug title to 'Less ambiguous guidance on Priority: important' from 'debian-policy: Please clarify 2.5 'unix heritage >= important''. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 776557: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=776557 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 802501 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 802501 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > severity 802501 normal Bug #802501 [debian-policy] init script failures during postinst and related scripts Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 802501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=802501 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 790949 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 790949 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > severity 790949 normal Bug #790949 [debian-policy] conditional-restart from postinst and related scripts of plugin packages Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 790949: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=790949 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#831047: marked as done (debian-policy: two Debian Policy versions were released, but not announced on d-devel-announce)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 14:25:25 -0800 with message-id <87inpzbusq@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#831047: debian-policy: two Debian Policy versions were released, but not announced on d-devel-announce has caused the Debian Bug report #831047, regarding debian-policy: two Debian Policy versions were released, but not announced on d-devel-announce to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 831047: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=831047 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: important Hello and thanks for maintaining the Debian Policy manual. I have just found out that two Debian Policy versions (3.9.7.0 and 3.9.8.0) were released without any announce on debian-devel-announce@l.d.o ! At least, I wasn't able to find any announce on debian-devel-announce@l.d.o since the announce [1] of version 3.9.6.0 [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/09/msg0.html I found the announce [2] of version 3.9.7.0, but it was apparently sent to debian-devel@l.d.o, rather than to debian-devel-announce@l.d.o ! [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/02/msg00016.html I cannot find any announce for version 3.9.8.0 ! Where can I read the corresponding upgrading checklist, by the way? Lintian has recently started to complain about out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.6, but I was not aware of the release of version 3.9.8.0 ... :-( The distro tracker seems to be still silent about outdated std-ver 3.9.6, though... What's going on? I assumed that keeping an eye on debian-devel-announce@l.d.o would be enough to be informed about new Debian Policy versions... Is there anything I misunderstood? Could you please clarify? Thanks for your time. Bye. --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Control: tags 831047 wontfix Francesco Poli writes: > Bill, maybe you could take the opportunity and announce both versions > (3.9.7.0 and 3.9.8.0) on debian-devel-announce@l.d.o, including both > upgrading checklist... 3.9.8 was a somewhat special circumstance. At this date, I think we can just fix this forward by announcing 3.9.9 and including a note about where to find previous upgrading checklists. I'm therefore going to close out this specific bug. I'm hoping to do a 3.9.9 upload before too much longer, containing only (for the sake of getting something out) merges of changes that have already been seconded and should be uncontroversial. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 773557 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 773557 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: proposal normative. > severity 773557 normal Bug #773557 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' > tags 773557 - patch Bug #773557 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH Removed tag(s) patch. > retitle 773557 Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH Bug #773557 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH Changed Bug title to 'Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH' from 'debian-policy: Avoid unsafe RPATH/RUNPATH'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 773557: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=773557 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 810381 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 810381 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > severity 810381 wishlist Bug #810381 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to reflect the need for security Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'important' > tags 810381 - patch Bug #810381 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to reflect the need for security Removed tag(s) patch. > retitle 810381 Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to recommend encryption Bug #810381 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to reflect the need for security Changed Bug title to 'Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to recommend encryption' from 'debian-policy: Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to reflect the need for security'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 810381: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810381 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 837478 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 837478 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > severity 837478 normal Bug #837478 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Allow (encourage?) PIC static libraries Severity set to 'normal' from 'important' > retitle 837478 Clarify Policy requirements for relocatable (-fPIE or -fPIC) > static libraries Bug #837478 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Allow (encourage?) PIC static libraries Changed Bug title to 'Clarify Policy requirements for relocatable (-fPIE or -fPIC) static libraries' from 'debian-policy: Allow (encourage?) PIC static libraries'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 837478: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=837478 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 452393 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 452393 = normative proposal Usertags were: informative. Usertags are now: proposal normative. > tags 452393 - patch Bug #452393 [debian-policy] Clarify difference between required and important priorities Removed tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 452393: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=452393 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 688220 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 688220 = informative Usertags were: informative proposal. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 688220 + pending Bug #688220 [debian-policy] dpkg-query --control-path will be deprecated. Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 688220: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=688220 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 781654 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 781654 = informative Usertags were: proposal informative. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 781654 + pending Bug #781654 [debian-policy] copyright-format: "IBM CPL" -> "CPL" in license short names table Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 781654: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=781654 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 728200 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 728200 discussion Usertags were: wording normative. Usertags are now: discussion wording normative. > retitle 728200 Clarify requirements for how to put a source package in a > modifiable state Bug #728200 [debian-policy] debian-policy: force build tools to ensure source trees are build-ready Changed Bug title to 'Clarify requirements for how to put a source package in a modifiable state' from 'debian-policy: force build tools to ensure source trees are build-ready'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 728200: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=728200 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#768292: marked as done (debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate files)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 15:18:53 -0800
with message-id <8737h3bsbm@hope.eyrie.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#768292: Add the MPL licenses to common-licenses
has caused the Debian Bug report #768292,
regarding debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text
in separate files
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
768292: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768292
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
[X-Debbugs-Cc: ftpmas...@debian.org because I know the Policy maintainers
don't actually control what is or isn't acceptable in the archive in this
respect.]
Some packages currently have stanzas like this in their copyright files:
License: MPL-2.0
The complete text of the Mozilla Public License 2.0 can be found in
the `MPL-2.0' file in the same directory as this file.
It is not clear to me whether Debian Policy allows this. I would like it
to be specifically allowed, unless there is some good reason not to; if
ftp-master tools like whatever tool generates
<https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html> need to be able to extract these
files, it would be OK to prescribe some fixed naming convention, such as
/usr/share/doc/${package}/${name}.license or (if they are also required
to have a prescribed location in the source package)
debian/${name}.license.
One package that would benefit from this is adwaita-icon-theme. It currently
has an 87K copyright file[1], mechanically generated from a Perl script[2]
and four verbatim Creative Commons licenses[3] which are re-indented for
copyright-format by the script. If I'd known it was OK to do so, I would
much rather have shipped those four licenses as-is and just made the
copyright file refer to them.
If the licenses are allowed to be compressed (see also [4]) then
so much the better.
Regards,
S
[1]
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-gnome/desktop/unstable/adwaita-icon-theme/debian/copyright?revision=43390&view=markup
[2]
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-gnome/desktop/unstable/adwaita-icon-theme/debian/copyright.pl?revision=43390&view=markup
[3]
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-gnome/desktop/unstable/adwaita-icon-theme/debian/
[4] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=491055
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Santiago,
It looks like there was a breakdown of communication from Policy
maintenance to you with an addition to common-licenses. Following
discussion in Bug#768292, we decided to add MPL-1.1 and MPL-2.0 to
common-licenses, and the relevant Policy change landed in 3.9.7.0. But
something went wrong and the Policy bug was never closed, and I don't
think you were ever told for inclusion of those files in base-files.
I'll go ahead and file a bug against base-files for your tracking, and am
closing out the Policy bug with this message. Policy says to include:
/usr/share/common-licenses/MPL-1.1
/usr/share/common-licenses/MPL-2.0
You can find canonical copies of those files in, among other places,
/usr/share/doc/firefox in the current (5.1.0-1) firefox package in
unstable.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 768292 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 768292 + pending Bug #768292 [debian-policy] debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate files Added tag(s) pending. > tags 792853 + pending Bug #792853 [debian-policy] debian-policy: please disallow colons in upstream_version Added tag(s) pending. > tags 746514 + pending Bug #746514 [debian-policy] Autoreconf during build Added tag(s) pending. > tags 820197 + pending Bug #820197 [debian-policy] spelling correction (git) diff to debian-policy (3.9.7.0) Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 746514: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746514 768292: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768292 792853: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=792853 820197: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=820197 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#768292: Add the MPL licenses to common-licenses
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #768292 {Done: Russ Allbery } [debian-policy]
debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate
files
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #768292 to the same values
previously set
--
768292: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768292
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, unmerging 835052
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > unmerge 835052 Bug #835052 [debian-policy] base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses Bug #795402 [debian-policy] base-files: Please add Creative Commons license texts Disconnected #835052 from all other report(s). > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 795402: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795402 835052: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835052 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#835052: marked as done (base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 15:35:09 -0800 with message-id <87shp3ad02@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#835052: base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses has caused the Debian Bug report #835052, regarding base-files: Add to licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 835052: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835052 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: base-files Version: 9.6 Severity: wishlist Dear Maintainer, The machine-readable debian/copyright file format has a list [1] of licenses with a "short name" so that code under those licenses is easy to identify. It also insists that the full license text be included in debian/copyright anyway unless the text is in /usr/share/common-licenses. However, most of the licenses on the list aren't in /usr/share/common-licenses, so debian/copyright becomes huge, and you have to format the license text specially to match the format of debian/copyright. Please could the list of licenses in /usr/share/common-licenses be extended to match all the short license names (if possible)? Thanks, George Bateman. [1][https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification] -- System Information: Debian Release: stretch/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 4.6.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) Versions of packages base-files depends on: ii gawk [awk] 1:4.1.3+dfsg-0.1 ii mawk [awk] 1.3.3-17 base-files recommends no packages. base-files suggests no packages. -- no debconf information --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Control: tags 835052 wontfix George Bateman writes: > The machine-readable debian/copyright file format has a list [1] of > licenses with a "short name" so that code under those licenses is easy > to identify. It also insists that the full license text be included in > debian/copyright anyway unless the text is in > /usr/share/common-licenses. > However, most of the licenses on the list aren't in > /usr/share/common-licenses, so debian/copyright becomes huge, and you > have to format the license text specially to match the format of > debian/copyright. Please could the list of licenses in > /usr/share/common-licenses be extended to match all the short license > names (if possible)? I'm afraid not. This isn't the purpose of common-licenses. The "common" part there is important, and many of those licenses are quite rare in practices. The files in base-files are installed on every single Debian system, so we try to keep the contents of it relatively minimal. While we're currently (slowly) debating where to set the thresholds for when to include a license in common-licenses, and they possibly should be somewhat lowered, I'm sure that we'll never put the bar low enough to include every license mentioned in the copyright-format specification. It's okay for debian/copyright to become huge if upstream uses huge, complicated licenses. That's what it's there for. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 768292 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 768292 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > retitle 768292 Include MPL 1.1 and MPL 2.0 in common-licenses Bug #768292 [debian-policy] debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate files Changed Bug title to 'Include MPL 1.1 and MPL 2.0 in common-licenses' from 'debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate files'. > usertags 792853 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > usertags 793493 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > usertags 819660 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > usertags 841877 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 841877 + pending Bug #841877 [debian-policy] Don't recommend contacting base-passwd maintainer for dynamic UIDs Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 768292: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768292 841877: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=841877 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 845715 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 845715 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > tags 845715 - patch Bug #845715 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please document that packages are not allowed to write outside their source directories Removed tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 845715: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=845715 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 567033 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 567033 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > retitle 567033 Decide if we should continue recommending /usr/games Bug #567033 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Clarify status of /usr/games Changed Bug title to 'Decide if we should continue recommending /usr/games' from 'debian-policy: Clarify status of /usr/games'. > usertags 727754 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > retitle 727754 New "security-aware-resolver" virtual package Bug #727754 [debian-policy] New "security-aware-resolver" virtual package. Changed Bug title to 'New "security-aware-resolver" virtual package' from 'New "security-aware-resolver" virtual package.'. > usertags 734662 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 734662 + pending Bug #734662 [debian-policy] Please add an example of arch-specific dependency with more than one architecture Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 567033: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=567033 727754: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=727754 734662: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734662 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 732445 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 732445 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > tags 732445 - patch Bug #732445 [debian-policy] debian-policy should encourage verification of upstream cryptographic signatures Removed tag(s) patch. > usertags 759260 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > usertags 821363 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > tags 821363 - patch Bug #821363 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Allow line-end comments in all Debian packaging control files Removed tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 732445: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732445 821363: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821363 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 823348 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 823348 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > usertags 823910 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 823910 + pending Bug #823910 [debian-policy] debian-policy: document Build-Depends-Arch/Build-Conflicts-Arch and when it's safe to use them Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 823910: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=823910 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 830989 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 830989 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 830989 + pending Bug #830989 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Typos "the the" in "4.4 Debian changelog: debian/changelog" and "8.6.3.2 The symbols File Format" Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 830989: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=830989 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: reassign 822059 to debian-policy
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 822059 debian-policy Bug #822059 [src:debian-policy] Wrong date in upgrading-checklist Bug reassigned from package 'src:debian-policy' to 'debian-policy'. No longer marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #822059 to the same values previously set > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 822059: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822059 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 822059 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 822059 packaging There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: packaging. > tags 822059 + pending Bug #822059 [debian-policy] Wrong date in upgrading-checklist Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 822059: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822059 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 793999 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy'
> usertags 793999 informative
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: informative.
> tags 793999 + pending
Bug #793999 [debian-policy] debian-policy: description of binary* targets
suggests that build-{arch,indep} are optional
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
793999: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793999
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 821365 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 821365 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 821365 + pending Bug #821365 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Clarify which characters constitute the syntax of control files Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 821365: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821365 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 794902 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 794902 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 794902 + pending Bug #794902 [debian-policy] debian-policy: obsolete footnote about liblockfile1 dependency Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 794902: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=794902 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 816249 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 816249 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 816249 + pending Bug #816249 [debian-policy] debian-policy: C.2.4 does not reflect current practises Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 816249: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=816249 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 661496 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 661496 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > usertags 601455 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > retitle 661496 Standardize how to disable an init script Bug #661496 [debian-policy] multiple, annoyingly different ways to disable an init script Bug #601455 [debian-policy] can't stop daemon using /etc/init.d/foo stop when disabled via /etc/default/foo Changed Bug title to 'Standardize how to disable an init script' from 'multiple, annoyingly different ways to disable an init script'. Changed Bug title to 'Standardize how to disable an init script' from 'can't stop daemon using /etc/init.d/foo stop when disabled via /etc/default/foo'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 601455: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=601455 661496: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=661496 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#729325: marked as done (debian-policy: [FHS] /usr/local/lib/firmware not a good directory for hardware plugged in at sytsm boot)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:26:52 -0800 with message-id <87inpz7bwz@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#729325: Debian Wiki: Re: Bug#729325: debian-policy: [FHS] /usr/local/lib/firmware not a good directory for hardware plugged in at sytsm boot has caused the Debian Bug report #729325, regarding debian-policy: [FHS] /usr/local/lib/firmware not a good directory for hardware plugged in at sytsm boot to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 729325: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=729325 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: normal -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear Maintainer, https://wiki.debian.org/Firmware recommends to place manually installed firware to /usr/local/lib/firmware. If the hardware is plugged in during boot, the firware cannot be loaded by udev because it tries to load the firware before /usr is mounted. It does not try a second time. See bug #729252 (duplicate?). Thanky, Sebastian - -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.2 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/3 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlKBPSkACgkQqVj5VlP9Od3IhwCeMicePTFiUo7ci274K3oQ+BGt UTUAn2djQNx0TVbJIJRUF3paqDr2xMHQ =SXyt -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Control: tags -1 wontfix Bill Allombert writes: > It is not unreasonnable per se to document locations where user firmware > will be searched by packaged softwares, but this is moot now that the > path for manually-installed firmware and package-provided firmware is > identical: documenting the search path for package-provided firmware is > useful for interoperability between kernel and firmware-providing > package. > At the very least, the change need to be more publicized to avoid > systems to fail to boot due to misplaced firmware after an upgrade. Thanks for the additional background. This seems to be outside the scope of Policy and more of a question for installation documentation, documentation of the firmware system, or private agreement between firmware maintainers and kernel maintainers. I'm closing out the Policy bug accordingly. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Bug#736943: marked as done (debian-policy: PHP draft policy and wiki out of date WRT filesystem layout)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:27:54 -0800 with message-id <87eg0n7bv9@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#736943: debian-policy: PHP draft policy and wiki out of date WRT filesystem layout has caused the Debian Bug report #736943, regarding debian-policy: PHP draft policy and wiki out of date WRT filesystem layout to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 736943: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736943 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: normal Apparently, PHP extensions/modules should now install their .ini files into into /etc/php5/mods-available and include a priority header, then run phpenmod to enable the module. This expected behavior is not documented anywhere that I can find, however; neither at https://wiki.debian.org/PHP/ nor at http://webapps-common.alioth.debian.org/draft-php/html/index.html. -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.3 Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-vserver-amd64 (SMP w/16 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Bill Allombert writes: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:17:06AM -0700, Dan Urist wrote: >> Apparently, PHP extensions/modules should now install their .ini files >> into into /etc/php5/mods-available and include a priority header, then >> run phpenmod to enable the module. This expected behavior is not >> documented anywhere that I can find, however; neither at >> https://wiki.debian.org/PHP/ nor at >> http://webapps-common.alioth.debian.org/draft-php/html/index.html. > Hello Dan, > Theses document are not managed by the Debian policy team. > Your request should be forwarded to the PHP maintainers. Closing for the reasons given in Bill's message, since the Policy team does not maintain the PHP Policy. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Bug#742532: marked as done (Document media type declarations)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 18:30:22 -0800 with message-id <878tqv7br5@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#742532: Document media type declarations has caused the Debian Bug report #742532, regarding Document media type declarations to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 742532: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742532 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Version: 3.9.6.0 Dear developers, To reduce clutter in the BTS log, I am opening a new bug for the second half of the proposal "Document media type declarations" by Charles Plessy in #707851, since I did not find specific objections registered about it. I join the patch. There is one undefined reference to "desktop entries" due to the cut that I will sort out before doing a release. Please check and second it again. Sorry for the delay and duplication, and thanks to Charles for having drafted it. Cheers, -- Bill. Imagine a large red swirl here. diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml index f4e4281..3ab5912 100644 --- a/policy.sgml +++ b/policy.sgml @@ -8092,42 +8092,109 @@ Reloading description configuration...done. Multimedia handlers - MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions, RFCs 2045-2049) - is a mechanism for encoding files and data streams and - providing meta-information about them, in particular their - type (e.g. audio or video) and format (e.g. PNG, HTML, - MP3). + Media types (formerly known as MIME types, Multipurpose Internet Mail + Extensions, RFCs 2045-2049) is a mechanism for encoding files and + data streams and providing meta-information about them, in particular + their type and format (e.g. image/png, text/html, + audio/ogg). - Registration of MIME type handlers allows programs like mail + Registration of media type handlers allows programs like mail user agents and web browsers to invoke these handlers to - view, edit or display MIME types they don't support directly. + view, edit or display media types they don't support directly. - Packages which provide programs to view/show/play, compose, edit or - print MIME types should register them as such by placing a file in - format (RFC 1524) in the directory - /usr/lib/mime/packages/. The file name should be the - binary package's name. + There are two overlapping systems to associate media types to programs + which can handle them. The mailcap system is found on a + large number of Unix systems. The FreeDesktop system is + aimed at Desktop environments. In Debian, FreeDesktop entries are + automatically translated in mailcap entries, therefore packages + already using desktop entries should not use the mailcap system + directly. - - The mime-support package provides the - update-mime program, which integrates these - registrations in the /etc/mailcap file, using dpkg - triggers - Creating, modifying or removing a file in - /usr/lib/mime/packages/ using maintainer scripts will - not activate the trigger. In that case, it can be done by calling - dpkg-trigger --no-await /usr/lib/mime/packages from - the maintainer script after creating, modifying, or removing - the file. - . - Packages using this facility should not depend on, - recommend, or suggest mime-support. - + + Registration of media type handlers with desktop entries + + + Packages shipping an application able to view, edit or point to + files of a given media type, or open links with a given URI scheme, + should list it in the MimeType key of the application's + desktop entry. For URI schemes, + the relevant MIME types are x-scheme-handler/* (e.g. + x-scheme-handler/https). + + + + + Registration of media type handlers with mailcap entries + + + Packages that are not using desktop entries for registration should + install a file in format (RFC + 1524) in the directory /usr/lib/mime/packages/. The + file name should be the binary package's name. + + + + The mime-s
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 742532 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org
Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org).
> limit package debian-policy
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy'
Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy'
> usertags 742532 normative
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: normative.
> tags 742532 + patch
Bug #742532 {Done: Russ Allbery } [debian-policy] Document
media type declarations
Added tag(s) patch.
> usertags 747320 normative discussion
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: normative discussion.
> usertags 749826 normative issue
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: normative issue.
> usertags 758234 normative proposal
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: proposal normative.
> usertags 759491 normative discussion
There were no usertags set.
Usertags are now: normative discussion.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
742532: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742532
759491: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759491
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 769273 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 769273 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > retitle 769273 Allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority Bug #769273 [debian-policy] bsdutils: Dependency on libsystemd0 violates policy Bug #758234 [debian-policy] debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority Changed Bug title to 'Allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority' from 'bsdutils: Dependency on libsystemd0 violates policy'. Changed Bug title to 'Allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority' from 'debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 758234: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758234 769273: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=769273 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 768117 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 768117 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 768117 + pending Bug #768117 [debian-policy] debian-policy: WSGI API must distinguish between Python 2 and 3 Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 768117: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=768117 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 780725 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 780725 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: proposal normative. > usertags 787816 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > usertags 794653 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > severity 794653 wishlist Bug #794653 [debian-policy] debian-policy: [lintian] Debian policy of debian devref should recommend of suggest to use dpkg-maintscript-helper Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > retitle 794653 Recommend use of dpkg-maintscript-helper where appropriate Bug #794653 [debian-policy] debian-policy: [lintian] Debian policy of debian devref should recommend of suggest to use dpkg-maintscript-helper Changed Bug title to 'Recommend use of dpkg-maintscript-helper where appropriate' from 'debian-policy: [lintian] Debian policy of debian devref should recommend of suggest to use dpkg-maintscript-helper'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 794653: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=794653 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#796642: marked as done (debian-policy: hardening is an afterthought and should never be)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 19:01:35 -0800 with message-id <87vatz5vqo@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#796642: debian-policy: hardening is an afterthought and should never be has caused the Debian Bug report #796642, regarding debian-policy: hardening is an afterthought and should never be to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 796642: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796642 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: normal Tags: newcomer upstream security Hardening according to many devs I have spoken with is an afterthought, especially post install. This is like reccommending Debian to be hacked. Im not saying one move can stop a hacker, security is always an ongoing situation, either you are ahead of the curve, or you have fallen behind. Programming like this and packaging with this mindset is just no good. There are MANY ways one can harden a debian install, most are common sense items. Others are easy to implement solutions that could be setup by the installer or its packages BY DEFAULT. Many of these solutions protect the end user and help to secure a network environment. IGNORING ME is asking for trouble. Simple things: SELinux ENABLED and ENFORCING and INSTALLED WITH SeTroubleshoot [like Fedora has] Harden flags set AND ENFORCED on build environment(harden package) Use of RELRO and PIE where possible NOEXEC and NOSUID on /tmp and /var/tmp VA.randomize(HEAP?) set by default in /etc/sysctl.conf [I have many tweaks here, some for gigabit ethernet] ENCRYPTED SWAP enabled by DEFAULT with a RANDOM key /etc/securetty set to near nothing or nothing with comments on why nothing is here and the local login methods commented. ufw/gufw installed and set on startup fail2ban installed and base configured password backups disabled (why is this even a thought to enable this?) grub password protection should work (it doesnt and not only that but users and admins should have a clear cut method to enable this) Documentation of mainline system installed and linked to in ~/Desktop. (Like a pdf of the debian handbook...) non-free video (and other hardware) detection and installation help offered post install [like ubuntu has] This is what is on the top of my head, as I have BEEN IGNORED in the past by people saying "well this isnt our policy, make a hardening reccomends..." GUESS WHAT? IM MAKING IT. Debian is INSECURE by default. Neither admins nor end-users want the headache of figuring out all of these things by themselves, and all of this takes TIME to implement. PEOPLE FORGET. ADMINS get busy with other tasks like merging in a user database. USERS get busy with packages and putting all thier files back on the system. Dunno about you, it usually takes me DAYS to get all of my packages installed and setup correctly. And AM I the only one to semi-automate a lockdown and install method? (even if invoked by hand) -- System Information: Debian Release: stretch/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.0.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Richard Jasmin writes: > Hardening according to many devs I have spoken with is an afterthought, > especially post install. This is like reccommending Debian to be hacked. > Im not saying one move can stop a hacker, security is always an ongoing > situation, either you are ahead of the curve, or you have fallen behind. > Programming like this and packaging with this mindset is just no good. I completely agree with your concerns and with many of your recommendations, but I'm afraid that this is more of a position statement than an actionable bug report. There isn't any good path forward for using this as a bug report to make changes to Debian Policy, since it's such a broad wishlist of different requests. I'm therefore closing it out as unactionable. However, more specific, targeted proposals for how to add specific security and hardening requirements to Policy's requirements for Debian packages are very welcome! As a start, you (or anyone else who is interested in this) may want to look at which of your wishlist items aren't already in place, and try to figure out how Debian Policy wording could be changed to make this a requirem
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 795783 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 795783 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > severity 795783 wishlist Bug #795783 [debian-policy] Applications should not use socket below $HOME by default Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > usertags 796660 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > severity 796660 wishlist Bug #796660 [debian-policy] Binaries in binary packages match the architecture Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 795783: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=795783 796660: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796660 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 835876 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 835876 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 835876 + pending Bug #835876 [debian-policy] debian-policy: please suggest dbus-run-session to run tests Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835876: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835876 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 798309 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 798309 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 798309 + pending Bug #798309 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Adjustments to perl policy for multi-arch Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 798309: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=798309 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: reassign 835876 to debian-policy
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > reassign 835876 debian-policy Bug #835876 [src:debian-policy] debian-policy: please suggest dbus-run-session to run tests Bug reassigned from package 'src:debian-policy' to 'debian-policy'. No longer marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #835876 to the same values previously set > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835876: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835876 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#806161: marked as done (Deprecating menu files and transition to desktop files)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 19:14:57 -0800 with message-id <87h95j5v4e@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#806161: Implementing #741573 in policy via NMU has caused the Debian Bug report #806161, regarding Deprecating menu files and transition to desktop files to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 806161: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806161 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: tech-ctte Severity: normal Dear technical comittee, I am asking for your arbitration on an unresolvable conflict on the subject of Desktop menu systems, between a broad number of developers including on one hand maintainers of the Debian packages for the GNOME and KDE desktop systems and the mime-support package (myself), and on the other hand Bill Alombert on his quality of Policy Editor (DPL delegate). Over almost one year of work and discussion, including a call for comments on the debian-devel mailing list, we have shaped a modification to the Debian Policy that 1) incorporates the description of the FreeDesktop menu system and its use in Debian for listing program in desktop menus and associating them with media types, and 2) softens the wording on the Debian Menu system to reflect that in Jessie it will be neither displayed nor installed by default on standard Debian installations. The proposal reached consensus through the Policy Changes process, was seconded by me, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer, Cyril Brulebois and Russ Allbery, who is also Policy Editor and assessed that the consensus was obtained. Apparently without coordination with the other Policy Editors, Bill then canceled the change and has been avoiding any concrete discussion the change. You can find the proposal at the following URL. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=dbnpolicy/policy.git;a=commitdiff;h=ba679bff76f5b9152f43d5bc901b9b3aad257479;hp=f6997b3ba793c9a9e463cca9f7e7b138add8b788 The whole discussion is at https://bugs.debian.org/707851. I will not describe Bill's behaviour in further details unless you ask me to do so, but the end result is that me and others are stongly dissatisfied by his obstructive attitude and unilateral veto, to the point that we do not think that discussion is possible and we need a decision from a third party. I am asking you to overrule Bill and let me or the Policy Editors upload an updated version of the Policy containing our changes. I will inform Bill and the debian-policy mailing list in the thread for #707851 once I have a bug number for this appeal. Please let me know if there is further information you need. Cheers, and many thanks for your work. -- Charles Plessy Maintainer of the 'mime-support' package Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Version: 3.9.8.0 Don Armstrong writes: > Attached, please find a diff for the NMU which I will upload to resolve > #806161 and implement #741573 in policy in the next few days. Closing this bug to reflect that this has happened. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 809637 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 809637 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > usertags 813471 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative discussion. > usertags 814156 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > severity 814156 minor Bug #814156 [debian-policy] Extra-Source-Only field in Sources index Severity set to 'minor' from 'normal' > usertags 816515 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 816515 + pending Bug #816515 [debian-policy] Disallow (< ...) and (> ...) package relations Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 814156: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814156 816515: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=816515 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 822430 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 822430 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: proposal normative. > severity 822430 important Bug #822430 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please update 8.1.1 to use the "ldconfig" trigger instead Severity set to 'important' from 'normal' > usertags 823256 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: proposal normative. > usertags 824922 informative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: informative. > tags 824922 + pending Bug #824922 [debian-policy] debian-policy: d/copyright examples give dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique lintian warning Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 822430: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822430 824922: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=824922 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 829367 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 829367 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 829367 + patch Bug #829367 [debian-policy] Please add virtual-mysql-* packages to the official list of virtual packages Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 829367: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=829367 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 833177 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 833177 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > severity 833177 important Bug #833177 [debian-policy] 9.3.3.2: Remove /etc/init.d/ Severity set to 'important' from 'normal' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 833177: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=833177 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 835451 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 835451 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: issue normative. > usertags 835490 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > severity 835490 minor Bug #835490 [debian-policy] debian-policy: remove references to upstart Severity set to 'minor' from 'normal' > usertags 835520 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 835520 + patch Bug #835520 [debian-policy] Policy 9.3.1 is inaccurate to the point of being harmful Added tag(s) patch. > severity 835520 important Bug #835520 [debian-policy] Policy 9.3.1 is inaccurate to the point of being harmful Severity set to 'important' from 'normal' > usertags 838777 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > usertags 844431 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > usertags 845255 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > usertags 846970 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835490: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835490 835520: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835520 846970: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=846970 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#840002: marked as done ([5.6.12 Version] Wrong version ordering with "+XXXX" suffixes)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2016 22:52:23 -0800 with message-id <87d1g746hk@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#840002: [5.6.12 Version] Wrong version ordering with "+" suffixes has caused the Debian Bug report #840002, regarding [5.6.12 Version] Wrong version ordering with "+" suffixes to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 840002: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840002 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: packaging-manual When a package uses a changed tarball (by removing some files from the original one), this is usually indicated by adding a "+dfsg" or "+repack" to the upstream version number. This, however, may lead to a wrong version ordering of version numbers, as seen in the "saods9" package: The old package version is 7.5rc by upstream, which translates to 7.5~rc+repack for the (squeezed) debian orig tarball. After that, upstream released a 7.5rc2, which would translate to 7.5~rc2+repack using the same rules. However, they have the wrong order: $ dpkg --compare-versions 7.5~rc+repack lt 7.5~rc2+repack && \ echo lt || echo ge ge dbkg is not to blame here, since this order is determined by the Debian Policy, § 5.6.12. IMO the policy should be changed here to handle the "+" differently according to its common use: analogous to the "~" it should be sorted before everything else, but /after/ the end of a part. Best regards Ole --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Control: tags -1 wontfix Ole Streicher writes: > When a package uses a changed tarball (by removing some files from the > original one), this is usually indicated by adding a "+dfsg" or > "+repack" to the upstream version number. > This, however, may lead to a wrong version ordering of version numbers, > as seen in the "saods9" package: > The old package version is 7.5rc by upstream, which translates to > 7.5~rc+repack for the (squeezed) debian orig tarball. > After that, upstream released a 7.5rc2, which would translate to > 7.5~rc2+repack using the same rules. Yes, 7.5rc is an unfortunate version number from a Debian perspecive if you're adding suffixes to it. It's hard to realize until you run into this, but in Debian you probably want to package this as 7.5rc0 for reasons like this. > However, they have the wrong order: > $ dpkg --compare-versions 7.5~rc+repack lt 7.5~rc2+repack && \ > echo lt || echo ge > ge > dbkg is not to blame here, since this order is determined by the Debian > Policy, § 5.6.12. > IMO the policy should be changed here to handle the "+" differently > according to its common use: analogous to the "~" it should be sorted > before everything else, but /after/ the end of a part. I agree that this is unfortunate and confusing in this specific case. But I'm afraid there's just no way that we can change the sort order at this point. This is foundational everything that manipulates packages in Debian, and years of package uploads have been done on the basis of the current sort order. It would be hugely disruptive to redefine it now. The only change we've made is to assign meaning to a character that was previously prohibited. Any future change would have to be similarly backward-compatible. This is the sort of standard that, once set, you're pretty much stuck with, for good or for ill. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 737796 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 737796 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > usertags 754744 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > usertags 756835 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 756835 + patch Bug #756835 [debian-policy] Extension of the syntax of the Packages-List field. Added tag(s) patch. > usertags 757760 normative proposal There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative proposal. > usertags 758124 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 758124 + patch Bug #758124 [debian-policy] Documenting the Testsuite field in the Policy. Added tag(s) patch. > usertags 759186 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 759186 + pending Bug #759186 [debian-policy] debian-policy: please consider adding "nodoc" as a possible value for DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS to policy Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 756835: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=756835 758124: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=758124 759186: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759186 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 759316 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 759316 normative discussion There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: discussion normative. > usertags 759492 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 759492 + pending Bug #759492 [debian-policy] File conflicts between /bin and /usr/bin Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 759492: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759492 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 821859 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 821859 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 821859 + patch Bug #821859 [debian-policy] debian-policy: New virtual package ‘adventure’ Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 821859: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821859 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 779506 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 779506 normative There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 779506 + patch Bug #779506 [debian-policy] per-protocol virtual packages for boardgame AI engines and GUI Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 779506: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=779506 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 829367
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 829367 + pending Bug #829367 [debian-policy] Please add virtual-mysql-* packages to the official list of virtual packages Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 829367: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=829367 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 819660
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 819660 + pending Bug #819660 [debian-policy] explicitly allow building automatic debug symbols packages not listed in control Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 819660: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819660 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 793493
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 793493 + pending Bug #793493 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Update dpkg-architecture flags information Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 793493: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=793493 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#833177: 9.3.3.2: Remove /etc/init.d/
Processing control commands: > tags -1 pending Bug #833177 [debian-policy] 9.3.3.2: Remove /etc/init.d/ Added tag(s) pending. -- 833177: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=833177 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: block 850000 with 757760
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 85 with 757760 Bug #85 [libdebian-source-perl] libdebian-source-perl: fails to parse build-depends restriction formulas 85 was not blocked by any bugs. 85 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 85: 757760 and 830524 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 85: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=85 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: reopening 759260
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 759260
Bug #759260 {Done: "FedEx Ground Support"
} [debian-policy] Remove priority
"extra", make all corresponding packages priority "optional"
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #759260 to the same values
previously set
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
759260: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=759260
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 850289 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 850289 normative issue There were no usertags set. Usertags are now: normative issue. > tags 850289 - patch Bug #850289 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Patch so that there is an Example section in manual pages Removed tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 850289: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850289 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, merging 850171 850289
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > merge 850171 850289 Bug #850171 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Addition of having an 'EXAMPLES' section in manual pages debian policy 12.1 Bug #850289 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Patch so that there is an Example section in manual pages Merged 850171 850289 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 850171: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850171 850289: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850289 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#823348: Limit the strongest dependencies on supplemental -doc packages
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #823348 [debian-policy] Limit the strongest dependencies on supplemental -doc packages Added tag(s) pending. -- 823348: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=823348 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#821859: debian-policy: New virtual package ‘adventure’
Processing control commands: > tags -1 pending Bug #821859 [debian-policy] debian-policy: New virtual package ‘adventure’ Added tag(s) pending. -- 821859: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821859 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed (with 1 error): Re: Bug#850729: debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes
Processing control commands: > severity -1 wishlist Bug #850729 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > tags -1 patch Bug #850729 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes Added tag(s) patch. > merge -1 542288 Bug #850729 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes Unable to merge bugs because: summary of #542288 is 'I believe there is widespread agreement in this bug that Policy should document the +bN standard for binNMUs and the +nmuN standard for NMUs of native packages. I believe it should also document the N.N standard for NMUs of non-native packages, since people don't seem inclined to change to +nmu and there's probably no reason to do so. The stable release managers at DebConf seemed amenable to switching to a standard of +sNN where NN is the Debian major and minor release versions for updates of packages in stable to address the mostly theoretical concern of ordering of updates if the code names don't sort neatly. If the security team agrees, that should also be documented.' not '' Failed to merge 850729: Did not alter merged bugs. -- 542288: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542288 850729: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850729 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > forcemerge 542288 850729 Bug #542288 [debian-policy] Versions for native packages, NMU's, and binary only uploads Bug #850729 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Documenting special version number suffixes Summary recorded from message bug 850729 message Marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.8.3.0. Merged 542288 850729 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 542288: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542288 850729: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850729 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#850646: [copyright-format] Allow https version of Format URI
Processing control commands: > tags -1 pending Bug #850646 [debian-policy] [copyright-format] Allow https version of Format URI Added tag(s) pending. -- 850646: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=850646 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Force merge my duplicate bug
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forcemerge 181123 851708 Bug #181123 [debian-policy] Regulate init script behavior in unusual cases Bug #208010 [debian-policy] Require init.d scripts comply with LSB Bug #208010 [debian-policy] Require init.d scripts comply with LSB There is no source info for the package 'debian-policy' at version '3.5.2.0' with architecture '' Unable to make a source version for version '3.5.2.0' There is no source info for the package 'debian-policy' at version '3.6.1.0' with architecture '' Unable to make a source version for version '3.6.1.0' Marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0. Marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0. Bug #851708 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Add try-restart action for init script 822753 was blocked by: 181123 208010 822753 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 822753: 851708 There is no source info for the package 'debian-policy' at version '3.5.2.0' with architecture '' Unable to make a source version for version '3.5.2.0' There is no source info for the package 'debian-policy' at version '3.6.1.0' with architecture '' Unable to make a source version for version '3.6.1.0' Marked as found in versions 3.5.2.0 and 3.6.1.0. Merged 181123 208010 851708 > -- Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 181123: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=181123 208010: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=208010 822753: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822753 851708: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851708 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: severity of 852523 is wishlist
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > severity 852523 wishlist Bug #852523 [developers-reference] Central section commont to (old)stable and (old)stable-security regarding versioning recommendations Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 852523: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852523 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: retitle 852523 to Central section common to (old)stable and (old)stable-security regarding versioning recommendations
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 852523 Central section common to (old)stable and (old)stable-security > regarding versioning recommendations Bug #852523 [developers-reference] Central section commont to (old)stable and (old)stable-security regarding versioning recommendations Changed Bug title to 'Central section common to (old)stable and (old)stable-security regarding versioning recommendations' from 'Central section commont to (old)stable and (old)stable-security regarding versioning recommendations'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 852523: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852523 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Running initscripts: invoke-rc.d is now in an essential package
Processing control commands: > forcemerge 833177 852542 Bug #833177 [debian-policy] 9.3.3.2: Remove /etc/init.d/ Bug #833177 [debian-policy] 9.3.3.2: Remove /etc/init.d/ Marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0. Added tag(s) patch. Bug #852542 [debian-policy] Running initscripts: invoke-rc.d is now in an essential package Severity set to 'important' from 'normal' Added tag(s) pending. Merged 833177 852542 -- 833177: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=833177 852542: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852542 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#854721: marked as done (debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant)
Your message dated Thu, 09 Feb 2017 18:10:03 -0800 with message-id <87shnmiyo4@hope.eyrie.org> and subject line Re: Bug#854721: debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant has caused the Debian Bug report #854721, regarding debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 854721: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=854721 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist Version: 3.9.8.0 X-Debbugs-CC: a...@debian.org, ballo...@debian.org, jrnie...@gmail.com, r...@debian.org Please read #854679; it is about the ScummVM-game-License. As I analyze, that license breaks DFSG #6 (no discrimination against fields of endeavor). Author's intent is clear since he states that using the game "in things like commercial adventure game collections without asking is just playing dirty". The preamble is not legally binding, but sections 3 and 4 of the license are. This forbids this possible use case: a businessman hires some developers, translators and voice actors to translate the game to his language, and wants to sell the result. The pattern "cannot sell the software itself" restricts commercial purposes, thus it is not DFSG compliant. ScummVM-game-License, Bitstream Vera font license, and Artistic License 1.0 are affected. The question is whether the alleged poor wording of a clause is internationally a solid defense in a copyright infringement suit. Debian-based distros themselves are not threatened because they are larger in scope, but commercial Debian users of this software are menaced. (This report will not reach the debian-policy list.) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Javier Serrano Polo writes: > Please read #854679; it is about the ScummVM-game-License. As I analyze, > that license breaks DFSG #6 (no discrimination against fields of > endeavor). Author's intent is clear since he states that using the game > "in things like commercial adventure game collections without asking is > just playing dirty". The preamble is not legally binding, but sections 3 > and 4 of the license are. Regardless of the merits of this concern, this is not an actionable bug against Debian Policy. I'm therefore closing it. Please note that this is not a judgement on whether or not your concerns about the Artistic License are correct; rather, this is simply outside the bailiwick of the Debian Policy process. We aren't the body in Debian that judges the DFSG compatibility of licenses (that's ftp-master), nor do we own or can modify the DFSG itself. You either need to convince ftp-master or you (or someone) need to propose a GR to change Debian's evaluation of the Artistic License. In fact, this may require a GR given the DFSG specifically calls out the Artistic License as an example of a free license, so depending on one's interpretation this may require a foundational document change, which is a supermajority GR. But that too is outside the scope of the Policy process; that's a call for the Project Secretary to make. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>--- End Message ---
Processed: ftp.debian.org: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Processing control commands:
> clone -1 -2
Bug #854721 {Done: Russ Allbery } [debian-policy]
debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Bug 854721 cloned as bug 854825
> reassign -2 ftp.debian.org
Bug #854825 {Done: Russ Allbery } [debian-policy]
debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Bug reassigned from package 'debian-policy' to 'ftp.debian.org'.
No longer marked as found in versions debian-policy/3.9.8.0.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #854825 to the same values
previously set
> retitle -2 ftp.debian.org: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Bug #854825 {Done: Russ Allbery } [ftp.debian.org]
debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Changed Bug title to 'ftp.debian.org: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG
compliant' from 'debian-policy: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant'.
> reopen -2
Bug #854825 {Done: Russ Allbery } [ftp.debian.org]
ftp.debian.org: Artistic License 1.0 is not DFSG compliant
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #854825 to the same values
previously set
--
854721: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=854721
854825: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=854825
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: developers-reference: Please do not recommend debrsign
Processing control commands: > tags -1 patch Bug #855320 [developers-reference] developers-reference: Please do not recommend debrsign Added tag(s) patch. > affects -1 devscripts Bug #855320 [developers-reference] developers-reference: Please do not recommend debrsign Added indication that 855320 affects devscripts -- 855320: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=855320 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#568374: debian-policy: section "8.4 Development files" not explicit enough regarding libraryname[soversion]-dev
Processing control commands: > tag -1 pending Bug #568374 [debian-policy] debian-policy: section "8.4 Development files" not explicit enough regarding libraryname[soversion]-dev Bug #708566 [debian-policy] library -dev naming policy encourages unnecessary transitions Added tag(s) pending. Added tag(s) pending. -- 568374: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568374 708566: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708566 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#181123: [PATCH 0/2] Mention try-reload and status actions
Processing control commands: > tag 181123 pending Bug #181123 [debian-policy] Regulate init script behavior in unusual cases Bug #208010 [debian-policy] Require init.d scripts comply with LSB Bug #851708 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Add try-restart action for init script Added tag(s) pending. Added tag(s) pending. Added tag(s) pending. -- 181123: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=181123 208010: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=208010 851708: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=851708 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#852314: stable release of debian now supports /run
Processing control commands: > tags 852314 pending Bug #852314 [debian-policy] stable release of debian now supports /run Added tag(s) pending. -- 852314: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=852314 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 698012
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 698012 + patch Bug #698012 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please update 10.6 "Device files" for udev and the like Added tag(s) patch. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 698012: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=698012 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: block 859724 with 787816
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 859724 with 787816 Bug #859724 [debhelper] debhelper: please consider using a non-multiarch libexecdir in new compat levels 859724 was not blocked by any bugs. 859724 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 859724: 787816 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 859724: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=859724 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 698012 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 698012 = normative Usertags were: normative. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 698012 + pending Bug #698012 [debian-policy] debian-policy: Please update 10.6 "Device files" for udev and the like Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 698012: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=698012 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, usertagging 835490 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > usertags 835490 = normative Usertags were: issue normative. Usertags are now: normative. > tags 835490 + pending Bug #835490 [debian-policy] debian-policy: remove references to upstart Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 835490: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835490 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy ..., usertagging 522163
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > notfound 522163 apt-cacher/1.6.8 Bug #522163 [debian-policy] standard for disabling daemons in /etc/default No longer marked as found in versions apt-cacher/1.6.8. > usertags 522163 issue discussion Usertags were: discussion normative. Usertags are now: discussion issue normative. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 522163: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=522163 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org, limit package to debian-policy, tagging 175064 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > user debian-pol...@packages.debian.org Setting user to debian-pol...@packages.debian.org (was r...@debian.org). > limit package debian-policy Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 'debian-policy' Limit currently set to 'package':'debian-policy' > tags 175064 = pending Bug #175064 [debian-policy] Debian policy documents should use DocBook XML in UTF-8 Bug #613946 [debian-policy] Debian policy should use DocBook XML for source Added tag(s) pending; removed tag(s) patch. Added tag(s) pending; removed tag(s) patch. > tags 700532 = pending Bug #700532 [debian-policy] Fonts in footnote #6 of PS/PDF awry Added tag(s) pending. > tags 809382 = pending Bug #809382 [debian-policy] add Table of Contents or some way to get at anchors Added tag(s) pending. > usertags 700532 = informative Usertags were: packaging discussion. Usertags are now: informative. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 175064: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=175064 613946: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=613946 700532: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700532 809382: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=809382 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
