Re: Bug#562945: Bug#582755: Bug#562945: fails to install

2010-06-18 Thread Holger Levsen
reassign 562945 tech-ctte # unmerge 506898 224509 # policy-maintainers, I think you should do this ^ thanks Hi, for those coming late to the party: this bug is about a package which fails to install cleanly: Unpacking runit-run (from .../runit-run_1.1.1_all.deb) ... dpkg: error processing

Re: Bug#562945: Bug#582755: Bug#562945: fails to install

2010-06-18 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, please cc: me, I'm not subscribed. On Freitag, 18. Juni 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: I think policy is unclear here: this part of policy was added per #224509, while there is #506898 (which is unfortuantly merged with 224509, as I read it should conflict with #506898), which says that

Bug#595652: db packages failing to install...

2010-09-19 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Sonntag, 19. September 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: I do think it's okay to require that one answer a debconf prompt saying no, I really don't want any configuration in order to get that opt-out behavior, though, so I'm not sure that quite addresses Holger's problem. if it would be a

Bug#595652: lists of affected packages

2010-11-11 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, http://piuparts.debian.org/squeeze/db_setup_error.html displays a list of packages affected by this problem now, currently there are 26 of those. One or two months ago it were ~40. IOW: less than 0.1%. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message

Bug#587279: Bug#603680: libnautilus-extension1: breaks nautilus-share upgrade from lenny

2010-11-17 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, if you intend to reply to this subthread, please use the 587279 bug. On Mittwoch, 17. November 2010, Bill Allombert wrote: I do not think it is correct to ever upgrade a free package to a non-free one. Now, apt is not at fault, the problem rather lie in a strange interpretation of policy

Bug#587279: Bug#603680: Bug#587279: Bug#603680: libnautilus-extension1: breaks nautilus-share upgrade from lenny

2010-11-20 Thread Holger Levsen
On Freitag, 19. November 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: I believed that because that's what Debian has done for as long as I've been involved in it, so I always assumed that was the intended meaning. You convinced me with this. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#587279: libnautilus-extension1: breaks nautilus-share upgrade from lenny

2010-11-22 Thread Holger Levsen
On Montag, 22. November 2010, Bill Allombert wrote: Part of the problem is what happens when the free alternative is not installable. then the package becomes rc-buggy just like when it stops to compile. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#595652: Bug#606790: typo3-dummy: package fails to upgrade properly from lenny

2010-12-16 Thread Holger Levsen
severity 606790 important thanks Hi Lucas, On Mittwoch, 15. Dezember 2010, Christian Welzel wrote: Am 11.12.2010 18:50, schrieb Lucas Nussbaum: While testing the installation of all packages in squeeze, I ran into the following problem: This doesn't seem to be a problem of typo3-dummy or

are packages allowed to per default not purge on purge?

2011-04-29 Thread Holger Levsen
reopen 618885 reassign 618885 tech-ctte thanks Hi, please read #618885 which is about whether sasl2-bin can kept files on the system after purging it. Policy 6.8 says that files must be removed on purge, Roberto says sasl2-bin is an exception. I disagree. There are some packages in the

Bug#624586: Bug#618885: sasl2-bin: unowned files after purge (policy 6.8, 10.8)

2011-04-30 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Steve, On Samstag, 30. April 2011, Steve Langasek wrote: 10.7.3: If the existence of a [configuration] file is required for the package to be sensibly configured it is the responsibility of the package maintainer to provide maintainer scripts which correctly create, update and maintain the

Re: Emdebian Policy

2011-08-08 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Neil, applause, thanks good luck to making grip official! just one tiny comment: On Sonntag, 7. August 2011, Neil Williams wrote: 9.8 Keyboard configuration - Note that many Emdebian devices will not have a keyboard of any kind (except on-screen after installation), so packages should

Bug#595652: any news?

2012-01-14 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, any news on how to solve this issue? Anything I could do? cheers, Holger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive:

Bug#568313: Bug#673301: useless use of dpkg-statoverride

2012-06-01 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Bertrand, On Sonntag, 20. Mai 2012, Bertrand Marc wrote: I am trying to make up my mind about using or not dpkg-statoverride. The most useful info I found is in bug #568313 [1]. Indeed, thats a good discussion, which actually changed my mind a bit :) They seem to conclude 2 things

Bug#770016: further reasoning

2014-11-18 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, this has also already been documented as best practice (to say at least) in https://wiki.debian.org/buildd which says: most buildds will have no network access available. Your package build+test process must not attempt to use the network or assume that any network interface is available.

Bug#230217: should packages begin using /srv ?

2006-01-30 Thread Holger Levsen
block 340609 by 230217 block 340608 by 230217 block 311524 by 230217 block 315080 by 230217 block 336650 by 230217 thanks Hi, On Wednesday 21 December 2005 19:05, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:13 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: [...] Anyway, shall I file a bug against policy

Bug#230217: should packages begin using /srv ?

2006-02-02 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Monday 30 January 2006 18:31, Holger Levsen wrote: BTW, the fai maintainer said he will wait til this has been resolved before fixing #340609, #340608, #311524, #315080, #336650. (Which are serious (or should be) as they are against policy.) FWIW those bugs are also present against FHS

Bug#230217: seriously wrong pathes in FAI and #230217

2006-02-05 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, Manoj is Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED], h01ger is me. from #debian-devel on OFTC: h01ger Manoj, any comment on #230217 ? Manoj h01ger: well, we need to come up with language that spell out which (perhaps optional) parts of FHS 2.3 are to be ignored by debian packages, and then

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy

2006-11-07 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Monday 06 November 2006 18:07, Russ Allbery wrote: + required under POSIX, hence this explicit addition. Also, + rumour has it that this shall be mandated under the LSB + anyway. I dont think the debian policy should spread rumours about the LSB.

Bug#399331: please define howto set urgency

2006-11-19 Thread Holger Levsen
package: debian-policy version: 3.7.2.2 severity: wishlist Hi, http://www.us.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Urgency doesn't give any indication how the urgency should be set. So it's arbitrary to the maintainers will? I don't think so :) regards, Holger

Re: Bug#508644: mass bugfiling (against 8 packages) and/or new package default-mta

2009-02-27 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Marc, hi Andreas, On Freitag, 27. Februar 2009, Steve Langasek wrote: Also, I haven't seen the exim4 maintainers comment on this proposal until now. Obviously we would want to get that package to Provide: default-mta before filing bugs on other packages. Could you please take a look at

Re: Bug#508644: mass bugfiling (against 8 packages) and/or new package default-mta

2009-03-01 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Sonntag, 1. März 2009, Carsten Hey wrote: In my opinion it is a way better practise to first update the policy and then adapt n packages instead of first change them in a way which is possibly against the policy and expect the policy to be updated accordingly. There is nothing

Re: Bug#508644: mass bugfiling (against 8 packages) and/or new package default-mta

2009-03-01 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Sonntag, 1. März 2009, Carsten Hey wrote: And using stable and testing repositories together, e.g. during dist-upgrades, will be forbidden? If not, it can't be avoided. So what? It's not supported and the user has to fix manually. No big deal. regards, Holger signature.asc

Bug#206684: mandatory use of debconf for user prompting a release goal for squeeze

2009-03-18 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, sadly this didden happen in 2003-2009, but I'd like this to become a reality for our next release sometime in 2010 or hopefully not 2011 ;-) Any takers? (To propose this as a release goal bringing this into policy.) Sadly I'm too busy for this, but I thought I'd at least remark it.

Bug#206684: mandatory use of debconf for user prompting a release goal for squeeze

2009-03-19 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Donnerstag, 19. März 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Package maintainer scripts may prompt the user if necessary. Prompting must be done by communicating through a program, such as debconf, which conforms to the Debian Configuration Management

Bug#206684: mandatory use of debconf for user prompting a release goal for squeeze

2009-03-19 Thread Holger Levsen
On Freitag, 20. März 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: Here's an updated patch to apply the following wording: Seconded. me too. (not quoted as this aint a GR. :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-06 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, while testing the archive with piuparts I found a failure reported by piuparts, that after purge /var/games existed on the system while it wasnt there before installing+purging the package. See http://piuparts.debian.org/squeeze/fail/slashem-common_0.0.7E7F3-1.3.log (at the end..)

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-07 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Russ, On Montag, 6. April 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: We'd then have a similar problem with any other /var directory that holds files mostly created at runtime and only deleted on purge, such as /var/log, except that the rest are always in existence. According to the FHS the other 4

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-07 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Dienstag, 7. April 2009, Paul Wise wrote: A single rmdir in every game using /var/games isn't that hard, especially since they have to remove the files from there. I agree and plan to file RC bugs on this. (There have been 24781 binary packages been successfully tested in sid and

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-08 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Mittwoch, 8. April 2009, Paul Wise wrote: How about this: Game a gets installed and ships /var/games Game b gets installed and ships /var/games Game a gets purged and removes /var/games User starts game b and gets a high score Game b tries to save the high score but fails because

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-08 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Mittwoch, 8. April 2009, Adeodato Simó wrote: Additionally, what happens if package A and B both ship an empty /var/games (they both write their score files directly there, rather than a subdirectory), get both installed, then B gets purged and its postinst removes /var/games, and then

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-08 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Bill, On Mittwoch, 8. April 2009, Bill Allombert wrote: Unless policy is changed to make clear that /var/games can be removed at any time, and thus that package cannot just ship /var/games in the deb and expect it to be available when running the postinst, or at any latter time, I have to

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2009-04-09 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Montag, 6. April 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: I don't see much real benefit in going out of our way to remove /var/games and it looks like it would be a bit annoying (at the least, require adding purge code to all games that put files in /var/games that would usually never be triggered).

bless /var/games

2009-04-17 Thread Holger Levsen
package: debian-policy x-debbugs-cc: debian...@lists.debian.org, debian-policy@lists.debian.org On Donnerstag, 9. April 2009, Holger Levsen wrote: On Montag, 6. April 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: I don't see much real benefit in going out of our way to remove /var/games and it looks like

Bug#524461: bless /var/games

2009-04-17 Thread Holger Levsen
package: debian-policy x-debbugs-cc: debian...@lists.debian.org, debian-policy@lists.debian.org sorry for post to the wrong address... On Donnerstag, 9. April 2009, Holger Levsen wrote: On Montag, 6. April 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: I don't see much real benefit in going out of our way

Bug#206684: missed one legacy sentence...

2009-05-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, it seems we missed on legacy advice in the fix #206684: See http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s-maintscripts and there the last but one paragraph of 3.9.1, which #206684 does not suggest to change: --quote- If a package has a vitally important piece of

Bug#206684: missed one legacy sentence...

2009-05-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Russ, On Montag, 4. Mai 2009, Russ Allbery wrote: How about: it should display this in the config or postinst script and prompt the user for acknowledgement. See ref id=maintscriptprompt. Great! We don't require that the program use debconf, only that it use something that

Re: Bug#528021: maintainer scripts put files in /usr/local/ (policy 9.1.2)

2009-05-11 Thread Holger Levsen
reassign 528021 debian-policy severity 528021 important thanks Hi Norbert, On Sonntag, 10. Mai 2009, Norbert Preining wrote: The problem is that it seems you don't have an idea about what ls-R files are and how they are created. I wouldnt call it _the_ problem here, but it surely has been

Bug#528021: maintainer scripts put files in /usr/local/ (policy 9.1.2)

2009-05-11 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Bill, On Montag, 11. Mai 2009, Bill Allombert wrote: But policy allows creating directory like /usr/local/share/texmf in the postinst. [...] It seems to me that mktexlsr could honour policy if /usr/local/share/texmf/ls-R was only created when it would be not empty (i.e. the user installed

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

2009-08-09 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Sonntag, 9. August 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote: The link to the wiki page was missing http://wiki.debian.org/AutomaticDebugPackages this link was also missing in #508585. regards, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [Piuparts-devel] Unclear failure for asclock (left over files in /var)

2009-11-28 Thread Holger Levsen
[resent, added cc: to debian-policy@, feedback welcome on how piuparts should treat certain left over files after purging a package..] Hi Helge, thank you for bringing up this issue here. On Mittwoch, 25. November 2009, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: Package purging left files on system:

Re: [Piuparts-devel] Unclear failure for asclock (left over files in /var)

2009-11-30 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Guillem, Collin, On Sonntag, 29. November 2009, Colin Watson wrote: Ignoring /var/cache/man/ seems the most reasonable course of action to me. The man-db package is the one handling those databases, it just seems logical to me that it should be the one in charge of removing it when

Bug#558804: remove db cache if language has been removed

2009-11-30 Thread Holger Levsen
package: man-db x-debbugs-cc: debian...@lists.debian.org, debian-policy@lists.debian.org On Sonntag, 29. November 2009, Colin Watson wrote: It makes sense for mandb to observe that a hierarchy of manual pages has gone away entirely (e.g. no more /usr/share/man/pt) and remove the corresponding

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2010-01-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Montag, 4. Januar 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: and what the requirements of a package are around preserving or removing its data other than log files and configuration files on purge? If so, that would be the relevant place to talk about whether or not directories like /var/games

Re: does /var/games have to be deleted on purge? (if it's empty..)

2010-01-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, On Montag, 4. Januar 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: There are several arguments that say that such data shouldn't be deleted on purge. I don't know how persuasive they are. I'll answer them in reverse order :-) * Whether it makes sense given Debian semantics or not, users just don't

Bug#780725: PATH used for building is not specified

2015-03-18 Thread Holger Levsen
package: debian-policy affects: simutrans-pak128.britain x-debbugs-cc: ans...@debian.org, reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, I've just noticed and filed #780724: simutrans-pak128.britain ftbfs if PATH does not contain /usr/games which made me notice that PATH is not specified in

Bug#780725: references

2015-03-18 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi, #780724 is the bug about simutrans-pak128.britain failing to build if PATH does not contain /usr/games, #780725 is the bug about debian-policy not defining PATH. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#780725: PATH used for building is not specified

2015-03-18 Thread Holger Levsen
) On Mittwoch, 18. März 2015, Bill Allombert wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:48:13PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: package: debian-policy affects: simutrans-pak128.britain x-debbugs-cc: ans...@debian.org, reproducible-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, I've just noticed and filed #780724

Bug#687900: document multiarch for stretch

2015-03-20 Thread Holger Levsen
block 687900 by 621050 block 687900 by 684672 block 687900 by 650974 block 687900 by 636383 thanks Hi, filing these as blockers for #687900 so that there is one place to track all the bits to be documented. cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message

[developers-reference] branch master updated (5393ab0 -> 9bb10f0)

2016-05-10 Thread Holger Levsen
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. holger pushed a change to branch master in repository developers-reference. from 5393ab0 changed »Paketverfolgung« to »Paketverfolgungssystem« new 9bb10f0 rephrase to be less inviting to send private mails

[developers-reference] 01/01: rephrase to be less inviting to send private mails (instead of using established channels)

2016-05-10 Thread Holger Levsen
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. holger pushed a commit to branch master in repository developers-reference. commit 9bb10f08a1dae9791413931420bf78ffcd916734 Author: Holger Levsen <hol...@layer-acht.org> Date: Tue May 10 17:06:26 2016 +0200 re

Bug#835520: Andreas Henriksson's 11 patches are awesome

2017-08-02 Thread Holger Levsen
hi, $ git log master..for-holger --oneline -11 a8e08d5 Bug#835520: [PATCH v2 11/11] Drop entire section 9.4 Console messages from init.d scripts dfa8fae Bug#835520: [PATCH v2 10/11] Add reference to systemd integration examples 658c3c2 Bug#835520: [PATCH v2 09/11] Drop obsolete paragraph about

Bug#835520: Andreas Henriksson's 11 patches are awesome

2017-08-02 Thread Holger Levsen
On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 06:57:03PM +, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hereby I'm formally seconding them and thus I'm attaching those commits signed > by myself. this time with an actuall attachment. -- cheers, Holger commit 596521413f7577ee959a4eee1449f146e43cd9c0 Author: A

Bug#835520: Seconding nine patches & seeking seconds for two more

2017-08-03 Thread Holger Levsen
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 10:55:30AM -0400, Sean Whitton wrote: > I second all of Andreas' patches except the 5th and 8th. I've attached > the diff to which my second applies. > > The 5th and 8th patches introduce a normative requirement to use > debhelper. This is a first for policy, which up to

Bug#798476: Returning to the requirement that Uploaders: contain humans

2017-08-03 Thread Holger Levsen
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 06:04:17PM -0400, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 12:11:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > […] > Thanks for putting my thoughts (again!) into better words than I ever > could! +1 > > (I am entirely in favor of giving the MIA team more actual power.) > (Me too.

Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds

2017-08-15 Thread Holger Levsen
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 09:05:29PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Is identical building on any kernel required (and tested)? no and no. it's only required that the results is reproducible, that is bit by bit identical… > Will every reproducible package in buster build identical on the >

Bug#872288: debian-policy: document .buildinfo files

2017-08-15 Thread Holger Levsen
package: debian-policy severity: wishlist x-debbugs-cc: reproduciblle-bui...@lists.alioth.debian.org Hi, On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:49:22AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > I believe the planned next step here is to publish the *.buildinfo files, > which contain a specification of the environment

Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds

2017-08-15 Thread Holger Levsen
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:09:30PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > I would expect the reproducible builds team to not submit any bugs > > > regarding varied environment variables as long as as the official > > > definition of reproducibility in policy states that this is not required > > > for a

Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds

2017-08-13 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 03:34:35PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > Here is an updated patch addressing these. I reworded it to use > 'recommended' and changed the tone to better suit policy. > > Thank you Ximin, Russ and Johannes! > > > "precisification" -> "more precise version" > > Our

Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds

2017-08-12 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 11:23:14AM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > I am seeking formal seconds for this patch, from any DD. > > In particular: > > - for now, we only require reproducibility when the set of environment > variable values set is exactly the same > > This is because > > - the

Bug#844431: Revised patch: seeking seconds

2017-08-12 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 01:18:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > +Packages are encouraged to produce bit-for-bit identical binary packages > > even > > +if most environment variables and build paths are varied. This is > > technically > > +more difficult at the time of writing, but it is

Bug#844431: Reproducibility in Policy

2017-08-12 Thread Holger Levsen
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 08:35:47PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Daniel Kahn Gillmor writes: > > I don't like the idea of hard-coding a fixed build path requirement into > > debian policy. I don't *like* it neither but I think it's the sensible thing to do now. > > We're

Bug#798476: Returning to the requirement that Uploaders: contain humans

2017-08-05 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 09:05:46PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I think using the uploaders: field to guess who's a team member is just a > > work-around / an estimate, as we have nothing better. > It is the official place to list co-maintainers. you keep repeating this but its still broken by

Bug#732445: debian-policy should encourage verification of upstream cryptographic signaturse

2017-08-07 Thread Holger Levsen
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:40:22AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > In an ideal world, we would have a documented set of metadata for finding > upstream releases, of which uscan is just one implementation, and document > that in Policy. This patch doesn't attempt to do that; it tries to find a >

Bug#798476: Bug#870788: Extract recent uploaders from d/changelog

2017-08-05 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 04:35:35PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > Note that a prerequisite for such debian/changelog parsing would be > > > that policy sets strict syntax and semantics requirements. > > > > No, we do not need to block such a feature that would work for 90% of > > packages

Bug#798476: Returning to the requirement that Uploaders: contain humans

2017-08-05 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 10:39:02AM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I don't understand this suggestion. If it can be automatically > > generated, just generate it when you need it -- why store it in the > > source package? > > What cannot be automatically generated is the other side of the >

Bug#844431: debian-policy: Packages should be reproducible

2017-08-18 Thread Holger Levsen
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 09:12:12PM -0700, Chris Lamb wrote: > > Nix builds packages in isolation from each other. This ensures that > > they are reproducible > (As Georg writes, we are using different usages of reproducible.) …though NixOS is also working on creating bit by bit reproducibly

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > OK, but how can I check that my package build is reproducible before uploading > it ? in general you cannot find out with 100% certainity whether a given source package will be reproducible. You can only find out with certainity

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 09:58:12PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 15:20:54 +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > > Bill, did you do this for your packages? on re-reading what I wrote here, it occurred to me that this could be read *hostile* despite me having *zero* i

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:17AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 03:20:54PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > > On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 05:05:36PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > a.) go to http://reproducible.debian.net/$srcpkg and see if its > > repro

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 02:42:43PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > I really think there should be an official tool to do build packages > reproducibly with an interface like cowbuilder. the official tool to build packages reproducible in sid is called "dpkg-buildpackage" (since dpkg 1.18.16 in

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 04:51:47PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > > the official tool to build packages reproducible in sid is called > > "dpkg-buildpackage" (since dpkg 1.18.16 in sid since 2016-12-17). > So if your package builds with "dpkg-buildpackage" then the build is > reproducible and any

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-14 Thread Holger Levsen
On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 06:15:38PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > > unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now. > Actually, yes, why were we waiting for stretch to be released? :) good question. I guess because of a mental barrier against doing changes targeted post-stretch

Bug#844431: policy: packages should be reproducible

2017-05-07 Thread Holger Levsen
hi, unsurprisingly I'm also in favor of making this policy change, now. I also believe there is quite a consensus (definitly a rough one…) in Debian for making this change, judging by the feedback we got at 3 DebConfs since 2013, several mini Debconfs and other events, plus the general feedback

Bug#515856: [debhelper-devel] Bug#515856: debhelper: please implement dh get-orig-source

2017-09-18 Thread Holger Levsen
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 06:52:27AM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote: > According to codesearch.d.n, get-orig-source is implemented by less than > 3000 source packages. This is not very low, but neither a high adoption > rate. It certainly makes using get-orig-source somewhat useless on a >

Bug#810381: debian-policy: Update wording of 5.6.26 VCS-* fields to reflect the need for security

2017-08-25 Thread Holger Levsen
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:20:39PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > --- a/policy/ch-controlfields.rst > +++ b/policy/ch-controlfields.rst > @@ -962,6 +962,10 @@ repository where the Debian source package is developed. > > More than one different VCS may be specified for the same package. > >

Bug#877674: [debian-policy] update links to the pdf and other formats of the documentation

2017-10-22 Thread Holger Levsen
On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:08:01AM +0200, Laura Arjona Reina wrote: > From 044e61f437e74fad6ce7e7d19b52419402c53881 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Laura Arjona Reina > Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 08:32:38 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] update the links to the other formats of the