Hi Nicholas, I've uploaded again to mentors, the (now gone) lintian warning complained about missing the SystemD service for the package. I've added one from scratch and upon initial testing it performs OK. I modified debian/rules to take the service into consideration though this raises some concerns for non-systemd Debian installations. I assume further modifications are required to intelligently enable or ignore the service (use old init.d mechanism). mini-httpd already depends on init-system-helpers so that might not be an issue, I'll have to test on a non systemd system. As for the old bugs, at least #491078 and #1018900 are stil present, I shall test a user submitted patch for the first one. I'll also create a salsa account soon. I hope this mail finds you well !
Kind regards, Alexandru Mihail On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 00:53, Alexandru Mihail <[alexandru_mih...@protonmail.ch](mailto:On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 00:53, Alexandru Mihail <<a href=)> wrote: > Hello again, Nicholas > > ProtonMail wins this time, I shall send directly to the bug as of now. > >> Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa >> account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously >> collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means: > > Sure, I'm absolutely fine with that > >> That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't >> that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009. >> Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there >> are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or >> upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian. > > I'll check if those are resolved, of course; I'll add a suitable systemd > service to resolve "missing-systemd-service-for-init.d-script". > >> >> Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine! >> > Sure was, thank you too and have a great day/night ! > > Best, > Alexandru > > ------- Original Message ------- > On Wednesday, May 31st, 2023 at 00:06, Nicholas D Steeves <s...@debian.org> > wrote: > >> Hello Alexandrus, >> >> It appears that your mail user agent (possibly webmail) is encrypting >> emails to me when you "reply all" to the bug; the effect is non-public. >> It may be that the only way to fix that effect is to either 1. not CC me >> (just send to the bug) 2. Make that interface forget my key, because it >> always encrypts when a key is available. 3. Maybe there's a config >> toggle that disables unconditional encryption, for use with mailing >> lists? >> >> Alexandru Mihail alexandru_mih...@protonmail.ch writes: >> >> > Hello Nicholas, >> > Of course, please quote the first email at the bug. My apologies for >> > omitting to reply all :) >> >> >> -- Re PM follows: >> >> > Thank you a lot for taking the time to sponsor my work, it is a great >> > pleasure and honor for me to finally contribute to Debian packages, after >> > 11 years of daily usage :) . Sorry for the later reply, it's morning here. >> >> >> You're welcome! :) No worries with taking time to reply, and feel free >> to ping me if I take to long to reply. >> >> > > "Do you intend to continue to maintain mini-httpd at this location (Vcs >> > > location), or do you have a new one in mind?" >> > >> > Do you have any preferences/suggestions regarding this question? >> > I am comfortable with git so forking on git wouldn't be a problem. I have >> > no remote to share so far. >> >> >> Since you're comfortable with git, please consider creating a Salsa >> account and continuing to maintain the package in the Debian (previously >> collab-maint) group. Here's more info on what that means: >> >> https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group >> >> It's ok if you don't want to; however, in this case we'll need to update >> the Vcs links in the package. >> >> > > "On the topic of work, has upstream resolved any of these old bugs" >> > >> > The latest upstream release is still mini_httpd-1.30.tar.gz. ACME >> > produces quality releases in general, but their release cycle is >> > pretty lethargic as they are a small team working on many tools. >> >> >> That's ok, and totally understandable. What I meant is that 1.30 isn't >> that old compared to Bug #437932 (14 Aug 2007), #516307 from 2009. >> Those look like they may have already been fixed upstream. Then there >> are ones like #491078 that may have been fixed in Debian and/or >> upstream, or could be fixed in the next upload to Debian. >> >> > As context, I've worked professionally on patches for mini-httpd for about >> > 9 months, adding PAM support and AAA authentication. Sadly, the license of >> > my work is evidently proprietary. If I have the time I can try to tackle >> > all the bugs alone, as I know everything that's happening in mini_httpd.c. >> > I'll try mailing Jef (from ACME) to see if any fixes are in the pipeline. >> >> >> Nice, it sounds like you're the ideal maintainer for Debian's >> mini-httpd! It also sounds like you already know work to get things >> merged upstream whenever possible. >> >> > I might need a wee bit of assistance with lintian errors/Debian >> > conventions as I mainly come from RPM land. I've packaged debs before >> > for my employer, but Debian's standards and procedures are very >> > different (and that's a good thing !). >> >> >> Oh good, you're already using lintian :) Please take care to use a >> recent version like 2.116.3 or 2.115.1~bpo11+1 (bullseye backport). Run >> it with the "--info" argument to get explanations. There is currently >> one warning (W) that needs to be fixed before this package is ready to >> upload. >> >> > I'm looking forward to your input and have a great weekend ! >> >> >> Thank you, I hope yours was as good as mine! >> >> Regards, >> Nicholas
