On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:48:39AM +0300, Nanakos Chrysostomos wrote: > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 08:53:33AM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
Hi, > > The original problem was that fuse-utils wasn't available on kfreebsd > The problem was not in kfreebsd but in hurd-i386. I have the slight feeling we're talking about different issue here. According to #613119, which you even close in your changelog, it's been about kfreebsd, and as far as I can tell there's been no fuse-utils package on kfreebsd nor hurd and there is now no fuse package on both of them. So this problem isn't solved at all. I currently can't say if archivemount is of any use without the rest of the fuse tools or not. Looking at the blocking bug #613300 I don't think it is but I've not digged that deep yet. If it is indeed useful to have on kfreebsd without fuse the dependency has to be adjusted accordingly [!kfreebsd-i386 !kfreebsd-amd64]. Otherwise using linux-any seems to be a good solution, it's not worth to build a package on architectures where it can't be used anyway. > The problem still remains even if Daniel Baumann has adopted and > uploaded a new version of the fuse package. Please check [0] again to see > that the status of hurd-i386 architecture has a dependency installability. > So even with this change archivemount will remain in the current state > and useless for all linux users. I prefer the package to be sponsored > and used for now only from linux and kfreebsd users and when everything is > ready we will upload the package again including the missing architecture. > I included kfreebsd-any in the Architecture Field and re-uploaded the package. > Please bare in mind that the package remains in the current state for more > than 300 days waiting fuse-utils for the hurd-i386 arch. Uh since when is hurd a release architecture? The migration seems to be stopped by the RC bug mentioned above. > > only a dummy package. This requires some re-evaluation of the situation and > > adjustmend of the archivemount depends. > > Do we need that for the moment? IMO it would make sense to do it now while you're at it, I'd guess that Daniel would like to fate out the old fuse-utils package sooner or later anyway. So switching now to a versioned depends on fuse >=2.8.5-2 is IMO reasonable. Beside that: There's still lintian barking at the issue with the description. I'm not sure if lintian is 100% right there and if the deselect issue is still present but double spaces in front of the * should do the trick. IMHO all the (useless) dotted empty lines are a bit ugly, I would revert that. You should also check your changelog, beside closing a bug which isn't fixed with arch kfreebsd-any the changelog only states the change from any to linux-any. The changes to debian/rules are also missing. Sven -- And I don't know much, but I do know this: With a golden heart comes a rebel fist. [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110528112602.GA2340@marvin