Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
2012/7/11 Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org: Hi, We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. Usually, we ask the maintainer to prepare an upload based on testing's source package and targeting testing-proposed-updates. But for this specific case, I'm not sure what would the best step forward as you seem not interested in fixing #674386 (cf. [1]). Since the package has not been part of any previous stable release, one solution could be to remove this package from testing. What do you think? Regards, [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674386#10 Hi - On closer inspection, #654506 is already fixed in wheezy's version 1:3.4.5-1 -- the waf file was removed by upstream. There is still a wscript file but it contains no binary code and is not used in the build process. So I don't think we need any repack. I've created a git branch 3.4debianfixes with the fix for #674386 in. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-multimedia/supercollider.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/3.4debianfixes I don't have a machine with the right arch to test for sure, however. Dan ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
Am 11.07.2012 14:20, schrieb Mehdi Dogguy: We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. Usually, we ask the maintainer to prepare an upload based on testing's source package and targeting testing-proposed-updates. But for this specific case, I'm not sure what would the best step forward as you seem not interested in fixing #674386 (cf. [1]). From a quick glance it looks like fixing #674386 would be as easy as doing 's/DEB_BUILDDIR/DEB_SRCDIR/' in debian/rules. - Fabian ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
Hi - It's easy to fix #654506 because supercollider never used waf so the file can simply be deleted in repacking a ~dfsg version, and build will still work fine. I don't want to work on #674386 because working on the scons build is a waste of time when we've junked it long ago, and the bug is apparently caused by a limitation in dh's handling of scons, i.e. not code I have any expertise in. Does anyone have a patch that might fix it? If so then maybe we can go for it. Dan 2012/7/11 Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org: Hi, We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. Usually, we ask the maintainer to prepare an upload based on testing's source package and targeting testing-proposed-updates. But for this specific case, I'm not sure what would the best step forward as you seem not interested in fixing #674386 (cf. [1]). Since the package has not been part of any previous stable release, one solution could be to remove this package from testing. What do you think? Regards, [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674386#10 -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
2012/7/11 Fabian Greffrath fab...@greffrath.com: Am 11.07.2012 14:20, schrieb Mehdi Dogguy: We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. Usually, we ask the maintainer to prepare an upload based on testing's source package and targeting testing-proposed-updates. But for this specific case, I'm not sure what would the best step forward as you seem not interested in fixing #674386 (cf. [1]). From a quick glance it looks like fixing #674386 would be as easy as doing 's/DEB_BUILDDIR/DEB_SRCDIR/' in debian/rules. Aha thanks - will try this later. Dan ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org wrote: Hi, We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. I think you mean 1:3.5.3~repack-1? That is what's currently in unstable, and 1:3.5.2-1 was uploaded before the freeze. Unfortunately, it couldn't migrate because it failed to build on non-x86 archs. We are currently working on fixing that. So, in a way, the changes are not that large ;). I had planned to mail d-r after we got the last round of fixes ready. Is there a chance we can convince you to let 3.5.3 migrate to testing? -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
On 11/07/12 16:01, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Mehdi Dogguyme...@dogguy.org wrote: Hi, We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. I think you mean 1:3.5.3~repack-1? Yes, sorry. It was a bad copy/paste :/ That is what's currently in unstable, and 1:3.5.2-1 was uploaded before the freeze. Unfortunately, it couldn't migrate because it failed to build on non-x86 archs. We are currently working on fixing that. So, in a way, the changes are not that large ;). We don't seem to have the same definition of large. For this specific case, the changes between the unblocked version and sid's current version look like: $ debdiff supercollider_3.5.2-1.dsc supercollider_3.5.3~repack-1.dsc \ | diffstat | tail -n1 3040 files changed, 5266 insertions(+), 581639 deletions(-) This pretty looks as large. Ignoring the bits that were deleted when repacking, the debian/ directory, etc… this leads us to: 53 files changed, 746 insertions(+), 701 deletions(-) which is nicer indeed but still qualifies as large. Why did you import 3.5.3 instead of working on fixing 3.5.2? (I'm not sure it is relevant now but that might help us to understand the situation better). I had planned to mail d-r after we got the last round of fixes ready. Is there a chance we can convince you to let 3.5.3 migrate to testing? We would prefer targeted fixes based on the version of testing. Kind Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: Fixing #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Mehdi Dogguy me...@dogguy.org wrote: On 11/07/12 16:01, Felipe Sateler wrote: On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Mehdi Dogguyme...@dogguy.org wrote: Hi, We would like to fix #654506 and #674386 in Wheezy. Unfortunately, we are not able to accept supercollider/1:3.5.2-1 from Unstable since the changes are quite large. I think you mean 1:3.5.3~repack-1? Yes, sorry. It was a bad copy/paste :/ That is what's currently in unstable, and 1:3.5.2-1 was uploaded before the freeze. Unfortunately, it couldn't migrate because it failed to build on non-x86 archs. We are currently working on fixing that. So, in a way, the changes are not that large ;). We don't seem to have the same definition of large. For this specific case, the changes between the unblocked version and sid's current version look like: $ debdiff supercollider_3.5.2-1.dsc supercollider_3.5.3~repack-1.dsc \ | diffstat | tail -n1 3040 files changed, 5266 insertions(+), 581639 deletions(-) This pretty looks as large. Ignoring the bits that were deleted when repacking, the debian/ directory, etc… this leads us to: 53 files changed, 746 insertions(+), 701 deletions(-) which is nicer indeed but still qualifies as large. I made some local git branches with the upstream source of 3.5.2 and 3.5.3, with patches applied. Updating to 3.5.3 allowed us to drop all the 3.5.2 patches: $ git show --stat 3.5.2-withpatches'^' | tail -1 7 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-) So, taking into account this, the stat becomes: $ git diff 3.5.2-withpatches..3.5.3-withpatches --stat \ | tail -1 52 files changed, 631 insertions(+), 198 deletions(-) However, a big chunk of that is documentation updates: $ git diff 3.5.2-withpatches..3.5.3-withpatches --stat \ -- HelpSource/| tail -1 18 files changed, 439 insertions(+), 131 deletions(-) That leaves as with a diff of: 34 files changed, 192 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-) Of that, most of it is bugfixes, and an un-deprecation of a few methods. Why did you import 3.5.3 instead of working on fixing 3.5.2? (I'm not sure it is relevant now but that might help us to understand the situation better). Mostly because it allowed us to drop the patches we had. Also, upstreams release management seems sane enough, commits on the 3.5 branch are mostly cherry-picked from the master branch plus documentation fixes. I had planned to mail d-r after we got the last round of fixes ready. Is there a chance we can convince you to let 3.5.3 migrate to testing? We would prefer targeted fixes based on the version of testing. I understand. But on the other hand, we would prefer shipping upstreams latest version, which is why I asked if there was a chance we could convince you. In particular, since 3.5 sc has a new Qt based widget system, and debian does not have any other sc widget system (AFAICT, they were all third party), wheezy users would not be able to build SC GUIs. Dan can probably tell of more advantages of 3.5 over 3.4. That's why I asked if there was a chance that we could convince you. I wasn't asking if we had clearance yet. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
