Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 12:14 -0300, elementar wrote: > Where do I find kFreeBSD-amd64 isos, from testing or unstable? > > Em sex, 12 de abr de 2019 17:49, Joerg Jaspert > escreveu: > > Hi > > > > back in August 2018 we discussed architecture inclusion into > > unstable/experimental. > > > > Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and > > both kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable > > and experimental 2 weeks from now. You can find an old image you can upgrade from at: https://people.debian.org/~jrtc27/debian-unofficial-kfreebsd-amd64-NETINST-1.iso and then use (selected parts of) for sources.list for upgrades: deb http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports sid main deb http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports unreleased main deb-src http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports unreleased main deb http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports experimental main deb-src http://ftp.se.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Where do I find kFreeBSD-amd64 isos, from testing or unstable? Em sex, 12 de abr de 2019 17:49, Joerg Jaspert escreveu: > Hi > > back in August 2018 we discussed architecture inclusion into > unstable/experimental. > > Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both > kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and > experimental 2 weeks from now. > > -- > bye, Joerg > The sun? That’s the hottest place on Earth. >
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Aurelien Jarno writes: > kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports. As > hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures > have now been moved. I removed kfreebsd-* and hurd-i386 from ftp-master's unstable and experimental suites yesterday. The move should be completed with this. Ansgar
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 5/26/19 1:22 PM, Bastian Blank wrote: > [SN: Trimmed Cc list] > > Hi John My name is Adrian. Thanks. > On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 06:48:36AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> Could you PLEASE stop posting to debian-ports@? You are sending these mails >> to every Debian Ports architecture mailing list. > > Please stop shouting. Please fix your MUA to produce readable mails. > Thank you. Please stop sending mails to users which are not affected by your discussion. I'm sorry but after kindly asking two times not to use this address for this discussion as you are reaching way too many unrelated lists, I think it's a fair thing to spell that "please" in capital letters. > Also -ports goes to all port specific mailing lists. No, debian-ports goes to every architecture list which is really annoying when you're on all these lists. I got this email through the following mailing lists: debian-arm, debian-alpha, debian-hppa, debian-ia64, debian-68k, debian-powerpc, debian-sparc, debian-superh, debian-riscv. None of these are related to BSD or Hurd yet the discussion was on these lists. It's not related to Debian Ports and therefore not too much to ask to reduce the noise on unrelated mailing lists. And I would also like to continue using Thunderbird without having to mess with the configuration now. Thanks, Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
[SN: Trimmed Cc list] Hi John On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 06:48:36AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Could you PLEASE stop posting to debian-ports@? You are sending these mails > to every Debian Ports architecture mailing list. Please stop shouting. Please fix your MUA to produce readable mails. Thank you. Also -ports goes to all port specific mailing lists. Bastian -- Without facts, the decision cannot be made logically. You must rely on your human intuition. -- Spock, "Assignment: Earth", stardate unknown
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Could you PLEASE stop posting to debian-ports@? You are sending these mails to
every Debian Ports architecture mailing list.
I already asked for the third time now.
Thank You,
Adrian
> On May 26, 2019, at 5:34 AM, wrote:
>
> Sorry if this is off-topic, but I can't help asking if that "15381 March
> 1977" was on purpose or just from some wonky email client: 15380 days after
> March 1st 1977 happens to be April 10th 2019, so...
>
> --
> Pengcheng Xu
> https://jsteward.moe/
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Aurelien Jarno
>> Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2019 4:56 PM
>> To: debian-h...@lists.debian.org; debian-...@lists.debian.org; debian-
>> de...@lists.debian.org; debian-po...@lists.debian.org; ftpmaster@ports-
>> master.debian.org
>> Subject: Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On 2019-04-24 12:34, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>>> On 15381 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> ^^^ HERE
>>>
>>>>>> It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.
>>>>> Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how
>>>>> long this is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its
>>>>> 2
>> or 8.
>>>>> Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
>>>>> "sometime in the future" point.
>>>> The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday.
>>>> I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least
>>>> 4 more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some
>>>> margin to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that
>>>> (especially in the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk
>>>> space for the debian-ports machine.
>>>
>>> Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest!
>>
>> kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports.
>> As
>> hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures have
>> now been moved.
>>
>> Aurelien
>>
>> --
>> Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
>> aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
RE: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Sorry if this is off-topic, but I can't help asking if that "15381 March 1977"
was on purpose or just from some wonky email client: 15380 days after March 1st
1977 happens to be April 10th 2019, so...
--
Pengcheng Xu
https://jsteward.moe/
> -Original Message-
> From: Aurelien Jarno
> Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2019 4:56 PM
> To: debian-h...@lists.debian.org; debian-...@lists.debian.org; debian-
> de...@lists.debian.org; debian-po...@lists.debian.org; ftpmaster@ports-
> master.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-04-24 12:34, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > On 15381 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
^^^ HERE
> >
> > > > > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.
> > > > Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how
> > > > long this is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if
> > > > its 2
> or 8.
> > > > Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
> > > > "sometime in the future" point.
> > > The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday.
> > > I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least
> > > 4 more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some
> > > margin to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that
> > > (especially in the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk
> > > space for the debian-ports machine.
> >
> > Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take.
> >
> > Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest!
>
> kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports.
> As
> hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures have
> now been moved.
>
> Aurelien
>
> --
> Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
> aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
openpgp-digital-signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 15413 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take. Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest! kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports. As hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures have now been moved. Thank you! -- bye, Joerg
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019-05-25 13:00, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > Hi, > > Em sáb, 25 de mai de 2019 às 10:57, Aurelien Jarno > escreveu: > > > > kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports. As > > hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures > > have now been moved. > > Nice :-) > > Not sure who's the admin (I couldn't find the admin address in the > main pages), but they're not registered in the graphs (while > powerpcpse, recently removed, still is). > > https://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-ports-week-big.png There are still available on the on the main graph: https://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-week-big.png I'll move hurd and kbsd-* plots from the main one to the ports one, but unless we do not keep the history, it's not a trivial task as it requires migrating the data from one text database to the other database. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 5/25/19 1:00 PM, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > Not sure who's the admin (I couldn't find the admin address in the > main pages), but they're not registered in the graphs (while > powerpcpse, recently removed, still is). Could you please not use debian-ports@ unless you actually want to send a mail that is supposed to reach the mailing lists for every single ports architecture? Every time someone posts in this thread, I am receiving 9 identical mails -.-. Thanks, Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Hi, Em sáb, 25 de mai de 2019 às 10:57, Aurelien Jarno escreveu: > > kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports. As > hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures > have now been moved. Nice :-) Not sure who's the admin (I couldn't find the admin address in the main pages), but they're not registered in the graphs (while powerpcpse, recently removed, still is). https://buildd.debian.org/stats/graph-ports-week-big.png -- Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Hi, On 2019-04-24 12:34, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15381 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. > > > Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this > > > is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8. > > > Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear > > > "sometime in the future" point. > > The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday. > > I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least 4 > > more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some margin > > to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that (especially in > > the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk space for the > > debian-ports machine. > > Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take. > > Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest! kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 have now been moved to debian-ports. As hurd-i386 has been moved earlier, it means that all the 3 architectures have now been moved. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 15381 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8. Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear "sometime in the future" point. The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday. I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least 4 more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some margin to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that (especially in the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk space for the debian-ports machine. Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take. Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest! -- bye, Joerg
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019-04-13 17:01, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the > > > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. > > > The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the > > deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and > > associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll > > also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes > > files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. > > > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. > > Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this > is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8. > Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear > "sometime in the future" point. The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday. I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least 4 more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some margin to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that (especially in the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk space for the debian-ports machine. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Jonathan Carter, le lun. 22 avril 2019 21:42:33 +0200, a ecrit: > On 2019/04/22 20:00, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > So I could produce some hurd CD images with the archive from this > > week-end. Aurélien injected the hurd-i386 archive to debian-ports, and > > we got the buildds running. Various scripts will start breaking but at > > least package building will continue like before. Perhaps I'll have time > > to fix the CD image building scripts before the Buster release, to make > > more recent image builds, but as I said I can't promise anything. > > That's fantastic news, is that image somewhere public where we can > download it? I'm not really at ease with widely publishing an image which has "Buster" labels on it while Buster hasn't been published yet. As a reminder, installation & preinstalled images are produced from times to times, the latest (20th february) is available on http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/ports/latest/hurd-i386/ as usual. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019/04/22 20:00, Samuel Thibault wrote: > So I could produce some hurd CD images with the archive from this > week-end. Aurélien injected the hurd-i386 archive to debian-ports, and > we got the buildds running. Various scripts will start breaking but at > least package building will continue like before. Perhaps I'll have time > to fix the CD image building scripts before the Buster release, to make > more recent image builds, but as I said I can't promise anything. That's fantastic news, is that image somewhere public where we can download it? -Jonathan -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Developer - https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org ⠈⠳⣄ Be Bold. Be brave. Debian has got your back.
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Hello, Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 12:16:54 +0200, a ecrit: > Holger Levsen, le sam. 13 avril 2019 09:50:25 +, a ecrit: > > I can see how the ftpteam doesnt want to delay this *after* the Buster > > release, > > Ok, if it can't be after Buster releases because e.g. ftpmaster wants to > clean the archive before it, the discussion is moot, I can just make the > non-official Hurd release this week (since the scripts currently work > it's really quick to do) with the RC bugs, and we can make the move and > let scripts etc. be broken for a couple of months until I have time to > fix them back. So I could produce some hurd CD images with the archive from this week-end. Aurélien injected the hurd-i386 archive to debian-ports, and we got the buildds running. Various scripts will start breaking but at least package building will continue like before. Perhaps I'll have time to fix the CD image building scripts before the Buster release, to make more recent image builds, but as I said I can't promise anything. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 13.04.19 17:01, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > >>> How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the >>> time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. > >> The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the >> deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and >> associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll >> also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes >> files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. > >> It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. > > Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this > is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8. > Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear > "sometime in the future" point. well, please go back in history to see the same short notice for the hppa removal, and then do the exercise how long it took to integrate that architecture on debian-ports. >
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Aurelien Jarno, le dim. 14 avril 2019 16:08:20 +0200, a ecrit: > On 2019-04-12 23:01, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the > > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. > > Note that there is no need for the removed architectures to be hosted on > debian-ports, especially if you are not satisfied by the way it works. > Feel free to get them hosted somewhere else. I don't see a reason for not hosting it on debian-ports, it'll make it way simpler for the rest of the workflow with buildd etc. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019-04-12 23:01, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. Note that there is no need for the removed architectures to be hosted on debian-ports, especially if you are not satisfied by the way it works. Feel free to get them hosted somewhere else. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Hello! Just as a heads-up: Sending mail to debian-ports@l.d.o ends up sending the mail to debian-alpha@, debian-hppa@, debian-ia64@, ... simultaneously, so it would be better to avoid using this address in the discussion. Thanks, Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote: How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8. Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear "sometime in the future" point. -- bye, Joerg
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019-04-13 13:07, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 4/13/2019 12:49 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the > > deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and > > associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll > > also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes > > files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. > I'm curious how the GPG bit works given that there is no guarantee that > the signature can be validated at any other point in time than ingestion > on ftp-master - especially considering the rotation/expiry of subkeys > and buildd keys. All the old buildd keys can be fetch from fasolo and can be used to validate the signatures. > In this case the files already come from a trusted > source and should be ingested as-is, I guess? (Not that I particularly > like the fact that it's only a point in time validation.) Yes in that case, it's possible to resign the changes files, or let the buildds to rebuild the corresponding packages. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 4/13/2019 12:49 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the > deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and > associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll > also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes > files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. I'm curious how the GPG bit works given that there is no guarantee that the signature can be validated at any other point in time than ingestion on ftp-master - especially considering the rotation/expiry of subkeys and buildd keys. In this case the files already come from a trusted source and should be ingested as-is, I guess? (Not that I particularly like the fact that it's only a point in time validation.) Kind regards Philipp Kern
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Carsten Schoenert, le sam. 13 avril 2019 12:41:25 +0200, a ecrit: > Am 13.04.19 um 12:06 schrieb Samuel Thibault: > >> Both architectures haven't seen any major development in the past years > > > > They have. > > O.k. need to be more specific, so the same as you mentioned further > down, ..."in the context of Debian, the packages of Debian and it releases". In the context of Debian as a distribution itself, there is not much more to be done actually: the distro can be installed with the normal debian installer, we don't depend on unreleased patches to have a working system. We even have gotten llvm working recently. In a broader Debian meaning, for instance with Helmut we have achieved cross-bootstrappability of hurd-i386 from amd64, which is really a great thing, because we know that we can now reboostrap the whole distribution thanks to this if needed. > > Patching software should be handled upstream indeed. > > Yes, but most upstreams are a bit reserved You mean, more than the Debian maintainers? Well, at some point, "so be it, you won't have the works-on-Hurd badge". For base packages like librsvg, the question is of a bigger importance, for the port of course, but also for computer science in general: if base packages can't easily be ported to new operating systems, the whole computer science will be just stuck with Linux, and I don't think it's a good thing. That reminds me a recent paper about the requirement for fork() in the Unix interface (https://lwn.net/Articles/785430/), which notably says that because of the complexity for implementing it, it's hard to create new operating systems with new ideas while providing a POSIX interface for being useful in general. > >> So I disagree on "One person is enough" > > > > I meant only for the Debian-specific things, I am the only DD who > > currently uses its key for signing packages, making CD images, etc. > > That's what I meant by "the daily ports things". > > Well, I guess it's not that easy I fear as there are no parts that can > be seen as separate standalone things, it's all connected in various ways. Yes, these are very intertwinned, but I like working on it and the current Debian infrastructure makes it easy enough to do. > But realistically it's not enough in my eyes to keep Hurd on even > tracking the normal evolving of Debian. I have since long stopped hoping that the Hurd port would ever be an arch released in Debian (see previous threads in the past years about moving to debian-ports). Just for the security guarantees it would require, that can't work. But as a debian-ports, I believe it can continue working just like it has in the past years. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 2019-04-12 23:01, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 22:48:42 +0200, a ecrit: > > back in August 2018 we discussed architecture inclusion into > > unstable/experimental. > > > > Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both > > kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and > > experimental 2 weeks from now. > > Just before the Buster release? That's far from the easiest timing. > > I was hoping to do a non-official relase of Debian Hurd along Buster as > usual, but a change of archive, which means uploading packages, fixing > scripts, etc. will take a lot of time, which I simply just will not have > within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time > to do what I engaged to). Basically, it means no non-official release of > Debian Hurd along Buster. Or at best I could just make that non-official > release now, with all the still pending RC bugs. > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive. It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Svante Signell, le sam. 13 avril 2019 12:36:54 +0200, a ecrit: > On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 12:18 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > He rightfully means he does not want patches, but patches getting > > submitted upstream, so he does not have to maintain them. A Debian > > package maintainer is not supposed to maintain patches long-term. > > Then the question of which responsibilities a package maintainer has > should be investigated by the CTTE. Please stop discussing about this, pulling CTTE in won't help with anything, you can't force volunteers to be doing work. This was already discussed before, and is out of scope from this thread, and not the time to discuss about it. Really, you need to learn to stop trying to bully people into the way you want things to happen. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Samuel, Am 13.04.19 um 12:06 schrieb Samuel Thibault: >> I can't follow that style of discussion. > > Please don't, Svante is only trolling here, please don't feed him. yes, this is true. As you've answered in your other email, such emails bringing no real gain or progress. >> I haven't seen a broader supporting from the people who wanting these >> architectures to stay in Debian on some important packages. > > I can only agree. I hear a lot of people saying that the Hurd port > existing is a great thing, but a lot less people helping with it. > > (I do thank all the people who work on it without necessarily being > noticed). > >> Both architectures haven't seen any major development in the past years > > They have. O.k. need to be more specific, so the same as you mentioned further down, ..."in the context of Debian, the packages of Debian and it releases". > Patching software should be handled upstream indeed. Yes, but most upstreams are a bit reserved especially if it's about Hurd as they have no knowledge about (but I also don't) and fearing that patches will break and complicate other things, kFreeBSD is a bit easier or more accepted and known. But I here also see the porters to get also in touch with upstream as I'm as the maintainer of a package not necessarily have the knowledge to keep the specific architecture up to date in the upstream project or simply have no time or interest on this. >> So I disagree on "One person is enough" > > I meant only for the Debian-specific things, I am the only DD who > currently uses its key for signing packages, making CD images, etc. > That's what I meant by "the daily ports things". Well, I guess it's not that easy I fear as there are no parts that can be seen as separate standalone things, it's all connected in various ways. As I've not written this in my previous email, so to state it now, I've a big respect on your work on Hurd! But realistically it's not enough in my eyes to keep Hurd on even tracking the normal evolving of Debian. > For the non-Debian-specific things like patching packages, I am > thankfully really not alone, and I completely agree it can't be a > one-person thing. Sometimes it's amazing to see with what people can came up with, and gladly there are also porter people where I get patches for other ports to keep packages building successful. -- Regards Carsten Schoenert
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 12:18 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > He rightfully means he does not want patches, but patches getting > submitted upstream, so he does not have to maintain them. A Debian > package maintainer is not supposed to maintain patches long-term. Then the question of which responsibilities a package maintainer has should be investigated by the CTTE. It is not reasonable that a porter should submit patches to multiple upstreams (really many) when the package maintainer is (and should be) the natural interface to a single upstream...
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Svante Signell, le sam. 13 avril 2019 12:13:41 +0200, a ecrit: > On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 11:51 +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote: > > So I disagree on "One person is enough" as long this one person can > > not keep track on all the required main and corner cases so other > > maintainers get to do the workload here alone. > > Have you seen this? Look at the age of these bugs. Note also that > several bugs have patches attached to them. He rightfully means he does not want patches, but patches getting submitted upstream, so he does not have to maintain them. A Debian package maintainer is not supposed to maintain patches long-term. Really, this was already discussed in the past, can't you just accept it? Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Holger Levsen, le sam. 13 avril 2019 09:50:25 +, a ecrit: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 09:31:46AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 00:11:15 +0200, a ecrit: > > > Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:30:31 +0200, a ecrit: > > > > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > > > > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. > > > Within a two-week timeframe only? > > (while everybody is supposed to be busy fixing RC bugs) > > would 6 weeks work be better for you? It's actually exactly the time frame I still can not afford due to personal scheduling that I can't do anything about. > I can see how the ftpteam doesnt want to delay this *after* the Buster > release, Ok, if it can't be after Buster releases because e.g. ftpmaster wants to clean the archive before it, the discussion is moot, I can just make the non-official Hurd release this week (since the scripts currently work it's really quick to do) with the RC bugs, and we can make the move and let scripts etc. be broken for a couple of months until I have time to fix them back. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 11:51 +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote: > Am 13.04.19 um 11:15 schrieb Svante Signell: > > > Please give up on Debian. They clearly have no interest in anything > > non-linux or non-systemd, that is fully clear. Let's make a joint > > effort to make a Guix release of Hurd (and kFreeBSD) happen. Or, if > > you > > still want to continue using apt-style distributions, join Devuan. > > Please, don't support the non-universal OS movement driven by > > Debian people! > > > Both architectures haven't seen any major development in the past > years Yes they have, see for example Samuels answer on the latest Hurd release: 20190109! > So I disagree on "One person is enough" as long this one person can > not keep track on all the required main and corner cases so other > maintainers get to do the workload here alone. Have you seen this? Look at the age of these bugs. Note also that several bugs have patches attached to them. Debian maintainers just don't want to help with non-linux bugs. So your complaint is not valid at all. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-h...@lists.debian.org;tag=hurd
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Carsten Schoenert, le sam. 13 avril 2019 11:51:51 +0200, a ecrit: > > Please give up on Debian. They clearly have no interest in anything > > non-linux or non-systemd, that is fully clear. Let's make a joint > > effort to make a Guix release of Hurd (and kFreeBSD) happen. Or, if you > > still want to continue using apt-style distributions, join Devuan. > > Please, don't support the non-universal OS movement driven by Debian > > people! > > I can't follow that style of discussion. Please don't, Svante is only trolling here, please don't feed him. > I haven't seen a broader supporting from the people who wanting these > architectures to stay in Debian on some important packages. I can only agree. I hear a lot of people saying that the Hurd port existing is a great thing, but a lot less people helping with it. (I do thank all the people who work on it without necessarily being noticed). > Both architectures haven't seen any major development in the past years They have. > for me as a maintainer of packages the workload on supporting these > architectures between the new upstream releases costs a lot of time Patching software should be handled upstream indeed. > So I disagree on "One person is enough" I meant only for the Debian-specific things, I am the only DD who currently uses its key for signing packages, making CD images, etc. That's what I meant by "the daily ports things". For the non-Debian-specific things like patching packages, I am thankfully really not alone, and I completely agree it can't be a one-person thing. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 11:57:20 +0200, a ecrit: > That kind of mail is useless. I actually meant: it is also harmful. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
That kind of mail is useless. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Am 13.04.19 um 11:15 schrieb Svante Signell: > Please give up on Debian. They clearly have no interest in anything > non-linux or non-systemd, that is fully clear. Let's make a joint > effort to make a Guix release of Hurd (and kFreeBSD) happen. Or, if you > still want to continue using apt-style distributions, join Devuan. > Please, don't support the non-universal OS movement driven by Debian > people! I can't follow that style of discussion. You seems to really want to not accept some facts about the kFreeBSD and Hurd architectures. On the one hand you complaining about Debian is a *non*-universal OS, on the other side I haven't seen a broader supporting from the people who wanting these architectures to stay in Debian on some important packages. Please stop to complain on non specific things and start to solve the problems you see or have! You know: Someone means YOU, it's all up to the people to keep things running. Or simply move over to other projects were you feel more comfortable with. There is enough space for all of us. Both architectures haven't seen any major development in the past years and for me as a maintainer of packages the workload on supporting these architectures between the new upstream releases costs a lot of time with no real gain in the end as the build dependencies later can not be fulfilled or most of the time while importing new source I'm working on readjust the patch queue! So I disagree on "One person is enough" as long this one person can not keep track on all the required main and corner cases so other maintainers get to do the workload here alone. -- Regards Carsten Schoenert
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 09:31:46AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 00:11:15 +0200, a ecrit: > > Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:30:31 +0200, a ecrit: > > > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > > > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. > > Within a two-week timeframe only? > (while everybody is supposed to be busy fixing RC bugs) would 6 weeks work be better for you? I can see how the ftpteam doesnt want to delay this *after* the Buster release, but maybe they can agree on giving you a bit more time, so you can a.) still do the move and b.) not neglect polishing buster for https://wiki.debian.org/accessibility -- tschau, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 10:58 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Joerg Jaspert, le sam. 13 avril 2019 10:24:53 +0200, a ecrit: > > On 15371 March 1977, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > > Well, it's very odd that a team decision is suddenly made with a > two-week effect without asking whether the schedule will be fine. > > I guess I have to explicitly confirm here that yes, I know that the > decision _whether_ to move is not sudden. Again, I'm talking about > the schedule here. Asking a Debian team to do something time- > consuming within a two-week timeframe in the middle of the full > freeze, really... > > I won't have the time to discuss with ftpmaster about it in the > coming days anyway. Samuel, Please give up on Debian. They clearly have no interest in anything non-linux or non-systemd, that is fully clear. Let's make a joint effort to make a Guix release of Hurd (and kFreeBSD) happen. Or, if you still want to continue using apt-style distributions, join Devuan. Please, don't support the non-universal OS movement driven by Debian people! Thanks!
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Joerg Jaspert, le sam. 13 avril 2019 10:24:53 +0200, a ecrit: > On 15371 March 1977, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > > > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > > > > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. > > > Within a two-week timeframe only? > > (while everybody is supposed to be busy fixing RC bugs) > > I just jumped over old threads - its not actually a new thing what we > discuss now. Sure. But last time we discussed it in september the debian-ports workload issue wasn't settled. > It never ever moved despite knowing that we want it off. Personally, I never took the initiative of doing it because of the debian-ports workload question. > I don't believe that anything changes just because we wait again. What now changed is that we have a deadline, so somehow it will have to be done. That's the difference. But the deadline is two-week in the middle of the full freeze... > Also, note, that it is a team decision, not me alone, I am just the > messenger. Sure, no problem with that. > If you want us to change it, mail the team with the reasons, and we at > least discuss it again. No guarantees on outcome. Well, it's very odd that a team decision is suddenly made with a two-week effect without asking whether the schedule will be fine. I guess I have to explicitly confirm here that yes, I know that the decision _whether_ to move is not sudden. Again, I'm talking about the schedule here. Asking a Debian team to do something time-consuming within a two-week timeframe in the middle of the full freeze, really... I won't have the time to discuss with ftpmaster about it in the coming days anyway. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 15371 March 1977, Samuel Thibault wrote: > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. Within a two-week timeframe only? (while everybody is supposed to be busy fixing RC bugs) I just jumped over old threads - its not actually a new thing what we discuss now. Its always the same. This next release. Just this one thing over there, then. Now, hurd does have double usage (ftp-master and ports) for *years*. And it never ever moved despite knowing that we want it off. I don't believe that anything changes just because we wait again. Also, note, that it is a team decision, not me alone, I am just the messenger. If you want us to change it, mail the team with the reasons, and we at least discuss it again. No guarantees on outcome. -- bye, Joerg
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 00:11:15 +0200, a ecrit: > Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:30:31 +0200, a ecrit: > > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. > > Within a two-week timeframe only? (while everybody is supposed to be busy fixing RC bugs) samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Bernd Zeimetz, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:32:32 +0200, a ecrit: > On 4/12/19 11:21 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Time will. I will have time later, but that'll be after the Buster > > release, i.e. a *way* less coherent set of packages since a flurry > > of package updates will happen, thus less usable, if installable at > > all. The only alternative I have is to make the release now with the RC > > bugs. > > There is no real difference between the normal archive and ports. Sure. But again, scripts for releasing hurd-i386 Buster images will need to be fixed in all kinds of places and packages. Experience has taught me that it takes a lot of time to debunk that kind of thing, which I won't have until Buster releases. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:30:31 +0200, a ecrit: > On 15370 March 1977, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > > Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both > > > kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and > > > experimental 2 weeks from now. > > Just before the Buster release? That's far from the easiest timing. > > There is never an easy timing. Sure, but the deep freeze really is a least easy timing. > [...] > > within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time > > to do what I engaged to). Basically, it means no non-official release of > > Debian Hurd along Buster. Or at best I could just make that non-official > > release now, with all the still pending RC bugs. > > It all depending on the amount of people the above shows (one) is one > good reason why its not viable. Again, I'm not talking about moving to debian-ports or not, but about now really not being a good time. Just after the Buster release would be completely fine. Also, "one" is really enough to do the daily ports things. But when it's about moving the archive, "one" is not enough. It's not the sustainability of the ports which is at question here, but suddenly having to fix all kinds of scripts in all kinds of places before Buster releases. This is a unexpected burst of work that you can not hope to see resolved by any kind of Debian team. > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the > > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. > > I honestly wonder if it really needs to be anywhere. It does. > It itself doesn't seem to have many developers, probably less users, There aren't many developers and users indeed, but it still does and moves forward, not backward. > and heck, last upstream kernel seems to be from 2016. Releases don't mean anything for such kind of project, just like projects on github nowadays often don't bother much with doing releases, they just say "take the master". If you really want a release, let's just make one. The actual releases that matter are the snapshots I make, the latest is dated 20190109. > While it sure has some nice ideas and concepts in it somewhere, > it doesn't seem to go anywhere, at all. Not just in Debian, but > anywhere. It does. In terms of isolation and flexibility at the same time, Linux is still lagging behind it, due to its very monolithic nature. > But then, I am not involved in Debian Ports. So no idea. Then please don't FUD, that can't help the discussion. > It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and > is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. Within a two-week timeframe only? Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 4/12/19 11:21 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Time will. I will have time later, but that'll be after the Buster > release, i.e. a *way* less coherent set of packages since a flurry > of package updates will happen, thus less usable, if installable at > all. The only alternative I have is to make the release now with the RC > bugs. There is no real difference between the normal archive and ports. Uploads will happen after buster was released. If your binary packages are built on official debian machines or the debian-ports machines does not make a big difference. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 15370 March 1977, Samuel Thibault wrote: Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and experimental 2 weeks from now. Just before the Buster release? That's far from the easiest timing. There is never an easy timing. [...] within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time to do what I engaged to). Basically, it means no non-official release of Debian Hurd along Buster. Or at best I could just make that non-official release now, with all the still pending RC bugs. It all depending on the amount of people the above shows (one) is one good reason why its not viable. How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. I honestly wonder if it really needs to be anywhere. It itself doesn't seem to have many developers, probably less users, and heck, last upstream kernel seems to be from 2016. While it sure has some nice ideas and concepts in it somewhere, it doesn't seem to go anywhere, at all. Not just in Debian, but anywhere. But then, I am not involved in Debian Ports. So no idea. It seems to exist there, so probably someone who can upload there and is interested in hurd-i386 goes and uploads stuff. -- bye, Joerg
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Bernd Zeimetz, le ven. 12 avril 2019 23:14:10 +0200, a ecrit: > On 4/12/19 11:01 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > I was hoping to do a non-official relase of Debian Hurd along Buster as > > usual, but a change of archive, which means uploading packages, fixing > > scripts, etc. will take a lot of time, which I simply just will not have > > within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time > > to do what I engaged to). > > While I appreciate your efforts, I have to be honest and say: If there > are no other people to help here, you've just proven that this > architecture should be moved to ports. I am not saying that the hurd-i386 port shouldn't be moved to ports (see the report I made on https://lists.debian.org/debian-hurd/2018/09/msg0.html , my only potential concern was with the workload of debian-ports). I am only saying that this is really a bad timing. > Nothing will stop you from releasing a hurd buster release using > ports. Time will. I will have time later, but that'll be after the Buster release, i.e. a *way* less coherent set of packages since a flurry of package updates will happen, thus less usable, if installable at all. The only alternative I have is to make the release now with the RC bugs. Samuel
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
On 4/12/19 11:01 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > I was hoping to do a non-official relase of Debian Hurd along Buster as > usual, but a change of archive, which means uploading packages, fixing > scripts, etc. will take a lot of time, which I simply just will not have > within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time > to do what I engaged to). While I appreciate your efforts, I have to be honest and say: If there are no other people to help here, you've just proven that this architecture should be moved to ports. Nothing will stop you from releasing a hurd buster release using ports. -- Bernd ZeimetzDebian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.dehttp://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal
Hello, Joerg Jaspert, le ven. 12 avril 2019 22:48:42 +0200, a ecrit: > back in August 2018 we discussed architecture inclusion into > unstable/experimental. > > Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both > kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and > experimental 2 weeks from now. Just before the Buster release? That's far from the easiest timing. I was hoping to do a non-official relase of Debian Hurd along Buster as usual, but a change of archive, which means uploading packages, fixing scripts, etc. will take a lot of time, which I simply just will not have within the coming two-three months (I am already struggling to find time to do what I engaged to). Basically, it means no non-official release of Debian Hurd along Buster. Or at best I could just make that non-official release now, with all the still pending RC bugs. How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks. Samuel
