Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> (2015-11-10): > I've hit a bug¹ in a non-package part of Debian, identified that it is > tied to variations not in package releases but web-facing parts of > official Debian: > http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/stretch/main/installer-armhf/$timestamp/images/netboot/SD-card-images/ > > I filed a bugreport against the pseudo-package seeming most appropriate, > but then got no (maintainer) response for a week. That delay might be > perfectly fine (I often have far worse reaction time myself), but made > me wonder: Did I file it wrongly, so that the bug isn't "heard"? > > Which pseudo-package do ARM netboot image slices belong to? > > or more generally: > > Is there some way of verifying which pseudo-package(s) is(/are) > appropriate for targeting a bugreport, when web address is known? > > For real packages where I have located a file involved, I can verify if > a proper package is targeted by use of "dpkg -L ..." or "apt-file search > ..." or similar tools. Do we have similar ways to check (preferrably > without needing login to specific Debian hosts) which pseudo-package > some official area of Debian web services belong to? E.g. a public list > of which team has write access to which parts of our web-facing > services? > > I am aware of https://www.debian.org/Bugs/pseudo-packages but that's > comparable to grep'ing package descriptions to pinpoint where a bug > belongs, nowhere as accurate a verification as "dpkg -L ..." or > "apt-file search ...".
Karsten, Ian, and other arm people, This makes me wonder whether those sd card images should be packaged and shipped somehow (through d-i-n-i or elsewhere), instead of just being published through the installer-* directories. What's your take on this? Mraw, KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
