On Tue, 27 May 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : >Send launchpad-users mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of launchpad-users digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem (Mackenzie Morgan) > 2. Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro > (Pau Garcia i Quiles) > 3. Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro (Celso Providelo) > 4. Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro (Celso Providelo) > 5. Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro (Celso Providelo) > 6. Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem (Myriam Schweingruber) > 7. Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem (Jacob Peddicord) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 16:04:20 -0400 > From: Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem >To: [email protected] >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 17:36 -0500, John Botscharow wrote: > > I am new here and fairly new to Ubuntu and Linux so I need a little > > help. I am trying to confirm my OpemPGP key. I've gotten to the part > > where you have to digitally sign the Code of Coduct text file from a > > terminal, but cannot get that part to work. > >IMO, the easy way to do it (the way I did it), is to enable the Seahorse >encryption plugin in Gedit. Paste the CoC into Gedit, then go to Edit >-> Sign. Choose your key, hit OK, enter your passphrase. Select All, >copy that, and paste it into Launchpad. > >-- >Mackenzie Morgan >http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com >apt-get moo >-------------- next part -------------- >A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >Name: not available >Type: application/pgp-signature >Size: 189 bytes >Desc: This is a digitally signed message part >Url : >https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/launchpad-users/attachments/20080526/4152b332/attachment-0001.pgp > >------------------------------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 22:11:06 +0200 > From: Pau Garcia i Quiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro >To: Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [email protected] >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" > >Quoting Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >[...] > >> - Automatically copying packages between two PPAs. For instance, for > >> Zumastor we have two PPAs, zumastor-team and zumastor-releases. Everytime a > >> svn commit is done to the Zumastor repository, a package is built and > >> published to the zumastor-team PPA. On the other hand, only the stable > >> releases are published to the zumastor-releases PPA (ATM, manually copied > >> from zumastor-team). Automating this would make life easier. > > > > Interesting setup, it seems to be the adopted pattern for all > > Product-related PPAs, development & release. > > > > Are you imagining something kind of programmatic way to trigger the > > copies once you are happy with QA ? a API ? > >I've forward this e-mail to Will Nowak, who is in charge of the script >which automates package building of Zumastor. He knows better than me. >One thing he'd surely like to have is an RSS feed of the packages a >PPA publishes (currently for Zumastor we are scraping). > > >> - Automatically building a package for more than one release (in the same > >> PPA or in a different one). For instance, I may want to build my package > >> for > >> Gutsy, Hardy and Intrepid. ATM, either I manually copy the package (which > >> does not work) or I upload the source three times (which is a PITA) > > > > Right, propagating source & binaries once they are built ... > > > > That's indeed a good idea. Can you file a bug about it, please ? > >I've filed bug #235064. This could be as easy as supporting the Debian >Policy as stated in >http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgchangelog >(it says you can specify several distro releases in the >debian/changelog file) > > > >-- >Pau Garcia i Quiles >http://www.elpauer.org >(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer) > > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 3 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 22:21:24 +0200 > From: "Celso Providelo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro >To: Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [email protected] >Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Launchpad checks if the binary version is 'publishable' anything else > >> can't be accurately checked, unfortunately. > >> Note that 'installable' and 'fully-functional' are also different > >> concepts. > > > > I meant "will be able to satisfy binary dependencies and install > > cleanly". I'm not sure if that would be "publishable" or > > "installable". > >Checking if binary dependencies can be satisfied in the archive domain >(PRIMARY + PPA), can be tricky. I'm not sure we want to go down in >this track full of race-conditions. We don't even do such checks for >ubuntu packages. > > >> It's not only about the archive topology, but mainly for packaging > >> consistency. > >> If foo-bin works fine for gutsy and hardy why would you have to > >> rebuild it and in case it doesn't work as expected in a later series > >> the issue should be fixed and documented as a new version of the > > > > It would be useful to have a different binary for Hardy (even when the > > Gutsy binary works) in the cases when Hardy provides updated libraries > > that the package uses. Say libfoo1 is available both in Gutsy and > > Hardy, but Hardy also provides libfoo2. The source package may not > > care (it requires either libfoo1 | libfoo2). But the Gutsy .deb cannot > > depend on libfoo2 (only libfoo1 is available on Gutsy), while the > > Hardy .deb can. So two .deb's would be very beneficial. > >"Build-depends: libfoo1-dev | libfoo2-dev" would work just fine and >libfoo2 should be a shared-lib and replace libfoo1 automatically in >hardy. I can't clearly see the benefit of having bin-NMUs, specially >compared with all the confusion it might cause. > > >> package. So the evolution goes on, step by step. > > > > How would this work? Would I need to maintain three separate source > > packages (one for Debian unstable, one for Hardy and one for Gutsy)? > > Even though the exact same source package would build fine on all > > distros and create different .deb's with different functionality (see > > point above)? > >The rule is actually can be as simple as: When you have to change >either packaging data or the upstream source itself to make it work in >a specific series, you need to create, upload and build another source >version. The opposite is not always true, when the binary from a >previous series installs fine in all other newer series you don't need >to rebuild the source, copying source & binaries will be okay, unless >there is a problem somewhere else, like pathological ABI changes that >are either well known and documented or went in unnoticed :(. > >I'm sure MOTU guys will be happy to help you with specific issues >about your packages, to minimize the number of packages while keeping >them consistent across multiple ubuntu series. > >[] >-- >Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >IRC: cprov, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Skype: cprovidelo >1024D/681B6469 C858 2652 1A6E F6A6 037B B3F7 9FF2 583E 681B 6469 > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 4 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 22:24:12 +0200 > From: "Celso Providelo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro >To: "Pau Garcia i Quiles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: Christian Robottom Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [email protected] >Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quoting Christian Robottom Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 09:09:19PM +0200, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote: > >>> > >>> I know but I'm not sure copying a binary between different > >>> distributions (for instance, Gutsy and Hardy) makes sense, as the > >>> binary would probably not work due to linkage issues. > >> > >> Copying forwards should be okay. Copying backwards will usually not work > >> (unless the libraries really didn't break binary compat). > > > > Not necessarily. If I build for Gutsy but the library breaks ABI > > compatibility in Hardy, the Gutsy binary won't work in Hardy (and of course > > the Hardy binary won't work on Gutsy, either). > >That's a 'pathological' case and should be documented as such. It >certainly will affect more than PPA copies. > >-- >Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >IRC: cprov, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Skype: cprovidelo >1024D/681B6469 C858 2652 1A6E F6A6 037B B3F7 9FF2 583E 681B 6469 > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 5 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 22:29:13 +0200 > From: "Celso Providelo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Copy packages to same PPA, different distro >To: "Pau Garcia i Quiles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [email protected] >Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quoting Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > [...] > >>> > >>> - Automatically copying packages between two PPAs. For instance, for > >>> Zumastor we have two PPAs, zumastor-team and zumastor-releases. Everytime > >>> a > >>> svn commit is done to the Zumastor repository, a package is built and > >>> published to the zumastor-team PPA. On the other hand, only the stable > >>> releases are published to the zumastor-releases PPA (ATM, manually copied > >>> from zumastor-team). Automating this would make life easier. > >> > >> Interesting setup, it seems to be the adopted pattern for all > >> Product-related PPAs, development & release. > >> > >> Are you imagining something kind of programmatic way to trigger the > >> copies once you are happy with QA ? a API ? > > > > I've forward this e-mail to Will Nowak, who is in charge of the script which > > automates package building of Zumastor. He knows better than me. One thing > > he'd surely like to have is an RSS feed of the packages a PPA publishes > > (currently for Zumastor we are scraping). > >RSS feeds would be a great improvement. > > >>> - Automatically building a package for more than one release (in the same > >>> PPA or in a different one). For instance, I may want to build my package > >>> for > >>> Gutsy, Hardy and Intrepid. ATM, either I manually copy the package (which > >>> does not work) or I upload the source three times (which is a PITA) > >> > >> Right, propagating source & binaries once they are built ... > >> > >> That's indeed a good idea. Can you file a bug about it, please ? > > > > I've filed bug #235064. This could be as easy as supporting the Debian > > Policy as stated in > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgchangelog (it > > says you can specify several distro releases in the debian/changelog file) > >Good catch, thank you. > >[] >-- >Celso Providelo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >IRC: cprov, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Skype: cprovidelo >1024D/681B6469 C858 2652 1A6E F6A6 037B B3F7 9FF2 583E 681B 6469 > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 6 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 22:30:59 +0200 > From: "Myriam Schweingruber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem >To: [email protected], " moira br?lisauer " > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > >Hi all, > >On 26/05/2008, Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 17:36 -0500, John Botscharow wrote: > > > I am new here and fairly new to Ubuntu and Linux so I need a little > > > help. I am trying to confirm my OpemPGP key. I've gotten to the part > > > where you have to digitally sign the Code of Coduct text file from a > > > terminal, but cannot get that part to work. > >Hm, I ran accross that problem with a friend of mine who tried to >upload the signed Code of Conduct: we verified the key, the signed >.asc file and everything looks ok, the key is on the keyserver, but >she still gets the message "non-valid signature" when she tries to >upload the signed text > >Looks rather like a bug to me... > >Greets > >Myriam > >PS. please copy your answers to Moira too, she is not on the list >-- >Protect your freedom, join the Fellowship of FSFE! >http://www.fsfe.org >Please don't send me proprietary file formats, >use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300) > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 7 >Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 16:52:55 -0400 > From: "Jacob Peddicord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Launchpad OpenPGP Cnofirmation problem >To: "Myriam Schweingruber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: moira br?lisauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [email protected] >Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > >Depending on where you published your PGP keys, it might be a while until >they are sync'd with keyserver.ubuntu.com. Though, after writing that, I >noticed that the keys are already there: > >http://keyserver.ubuntu.com:11371/pks/lookup?search=moosline%40gmail.com&op=vindex > >Check to make sure that it was signed with the key there >(779D8ECC<http://keyserver.ubuntu.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x29B32D0D779D8ECC>). >If it isn't that key, you might just have to wait for the key servers to >sync, which is 24h from what I recall. > >Does LP cache keys at all? > > > > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Myriam Schweingruber > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> On 26/05/2008, Mackenzie Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 17:36 -0500, John Botscharow wrote: > >> > > I am new here and fairly new to Ubuntu and Linux so I need a little > >> > > help. I am trying to confirm my OpemPGP key. I've gotten to the part > >> > > where you have to digitally sign the Code of Coduct text file from a > >> > > terminal, but cannot get that part to work. > >> > >> Hm, I ran accross that problem with a friend of mine who tried to > >> upload the signed Code of Conduct: we verified the key, the signed > >> .asc file and everything looks ok, the key is on the keyserver, but > >> she still gets the message "non-valid signature" when she tries to > >> upload the signed text > >> > >> Looks rather like a bug to me... > >> > >> Greets > >> > >> Myriam > >> > >> PS. please copy your answers to Moira too, she is not on the list > >> -- > >> Protect your freedom, join the Fellowship of FSFE! > >> http://www.fsfe.org > >> Please don't send me proprietary file formats, > >> use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300) > >> > >> -- > >> launchpad-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Jacob Peddicord > > http://jacob.peddicord.net > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > >-- >Jacob Peddicord >http://jacob.peddicord.net >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: >https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/launchpad-users/attachments/20080526/4923805b/attachment.htm > >------------------------------ > >-- >launchpad-users mailing list >[email protected] >Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users > > >End of launchpad-users Digest, Vol 30, Issue 24 >***********************************************
-- launchpad-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/launchpad-users
