Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns
On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 11:44 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Adam D. Barratt > wrote: > > > > what is the reason why that package is not moving forward? > > > > I assume you're referring to the dpkg upload that's in proposed- > > updates > > waiting for the point release in two weeks time? > > i don't know: i'm an outsider who doesn't have the information in > short-term memory, which is why i cc'd the debian-riscv team as they > have current facts and knowledge foremost in their minds. which is > why i included them. It would have been wiser to do so *before* stating that nothing was happening as if it were a fact. > > I'm also getting very tired of the repeated vilification of SRM > > over > > this, and if there were any doubt can assure you that it is not > > increasing at least my inclination to spend my already limited free > > time on Debian activity. > > ah. so what you're saying is, you could really do with some extra > help? I don't think that's ever been in dispute for basically any core team in Debian. That doesn't change the fact that the atmosphere around the change in question has made me feel very uncomfortable and unenthused about SRM work. (I realise that this is somewhat of a self-feeding energy monster.) Regards, Adam
Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns
On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 10:20 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] > debian-riscv has been repeatedly asking for a single zero-impact > line > to be included in *one* file in *one* dpkg-related package which > would > allow riscv to stop being a NMU architecture and become part of > debian/unstable (and quickly beyond), for at least six months, now. > cc'ing the debian-riscv list because they will know the details about > this. it's really quite ridiculous that a single one-line change > having absolutely no effect on any other architecture whatsover is > not > being actioned and is holding debian-riscv back because of that. > > what is the reason why that package is not moving forward? I assume you're referring to the dpkg upload that's in proposed-updates waiting for the point release in two weeks time? Please check your facts before ranting, particularly with such a wide cross-posting. Also, ttbomk, the dpkg change landing in stable is not likely to magically lead to the architecture being added to unstable - a decision which is not the release team's to make or block. Again, please ensure you've actually done your research. I'm also getting very tired of the repeated vilification of SRM over this, and if there were any doubt can assure you that it is not increasing at least my inclination to spend my already limited free time on Debian activity. Regards, Adam
Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch
On Fri, 2016-09-30 at 19:04 +, Niels Thykier wrote: > As for "porter qualification" > = > > We got burned during the Jessie release, where a person answered the > roll call for sparc and we kept sparc as a release architecture for > Jessie. However, we ended up with a completely broken and unbootable > sparc kernel. fwiw, you mean wheezy. Regards, Adam
Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care
On 2015-10-23 11:56, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: I didn't say once per arch. I said once per package, which is worse. I normally schedule binNMUs for several dozens packages. Multiply that by several But you need to look the number up anyway? The wanna-build --binNMU parameter gets the number to use as argument. wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb" wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each architecture. Regards, Adam
Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care
On 2015-10-23 13:28, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
[...]
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[...]
It's also not quite that simple, even working things out by hand - see
#599128
for example.
Hm, I’m still under the impression that the +bN suffix to the Debian
version of the package in the archive is the authoritative source for
what binNMU version a package currently has, as that’s taking porter
uploads into account which is a requirement. If the current code
doesn’t do that I consider it a bug which must be fixed (at the same
time, or before doing this change), which makes it more tricky, yes.
Specifically, wanna-build doesn't expose the binNMU version information
for suites other than unstable / experimental (actually, it might be
that it doesn't for suites that have an overlay - either way, it affects
{,old}stable and testing), so the only way to be certain what binNMU
number to use is to check manually. In practice what actually happens is
that people forget about the bug, schedule the binNMUs and then grumble
when either dak rejects the packages or something gets confused.
Regards,
Adam
Re: binNMUs: please exercise some care
On 2015-10-23 12:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote: wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb" wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each architecture. Ah, cool – so we have only to patch this tool to automatically use the highest number per batch on all affected architectures (or even to use the highest number if all architectures would be touched, but that’s probably an unreasonable amount of code change). Well, except you only really want to do it for libraries that are ma:same, as that's the only case where it actually matters and otherwise you're pointlessly losing versions. It's also not quite that simple, even working things out by hand - see #599128 for example. Where’s the source code to that tool? http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-release/release-tools.git/ (in scripts/). Regards, Adam
Re: possibility of jessie-kfreebsd suite
On 2015-03-10 12:38, Christoph Egger wrote: Ansgar and me have been discussing the archive setup for jessie-kfreebsd yesterday. Basically there's going to be a jessie-kfreebsd and jessie-p-u-kfreebsd thing on ftp-master where the jessie-p-u-kfreebsd automatically pulls in new uploads from jessie-p-u via some dak script (allowing special +kbsd versions and local packages for -bsd@ as well). For our preferred setup we'd need a bit of your help: When accepting security uploads from stable/new into jessie-p-u would it be possible to also trigger the sync from updates/jessie-kfreebsd [0] to -p-u-kfreebsd? This should avoid having different binaries in the seucirity and -p-u jessie-kfreebsd suites. I have to admit that I'm confused as to how this would work in practice. For the avoidance of any possible doubt, the Release Team don't (and can't) sync anything from the security archive. Uploads are pushed from security, and then hit the stable-NEW queue and are processed from there. If jessie-p-u-kfreebsd will also include packages that aren't in jessie-pu then someone will presumably need to be managing a policy queue for that. Who's that expected to be? Would it not make more sense just to have uploads from updates/jessie-kfreebsd mapped on ftp-master to the policy queue for jessie-p-u-kfreebsd and then have them processed as usual from there? Based on the above, I'm not sure it makes sense to couple the updates-stable-new-pu migration to the updates/kbsd-stable-new-kbsd-pu-kbsd migration. As an additional point, I can easily see cases arising where the packages from security-kfreebsd are all present but there are missing uploads for the Linux architectures, or vice-versa. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/9de72c308bde27d5d4e6c654887fd...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Plan B for kfreebsd
On 2014-11-10 7:05, Andrew McGlashan wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Steven, On 10/11/2014 10:15 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: We discussed kfreebsd at length, but are not satisfied that a release with Jessie will be of sufficient quality. We are dropping it as an official release architecture, Thank you for all your enthusiasm and support of kFreeBSD. [...] So sad that Debian is no longer going to be the universal Linux and that kFreeBSD is to suffer the consequences of the ... at best, controversial, systemd decision by the TC ... :( This really shouldn't need stating, but as people appear to be unable to separate issues and insist on dragging everything down to the same level - the Release Team decision on kFreeBSD was based on our opinion of the current status and supportability of that architecture, not a belief that Linux is somehow superior, nor any opinion on the merits of particular init systems, nor the phase of the moon. I'd appreciate an apology for having our motives impugned and this unfortunate situation used as yet another stick in an unrelated dispute, but I won't be holding my breath. Unhappily, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2746ccc44ef81d2d7fefd5310fd14...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#764897: kfreebsd-kernel-headers: net/route.h fails to compile in userland, squid3 FTBFS
On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 13:16 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 12/10/14 02:00, Steven Chamberlain wrote: kfreebsd-kernel-headers = 10.1~ adds a sys/counter.h, used in various places including net/route.h. It requires a kernel type uint64_t (from sys/kglue/sys/types.h) without which any userland code using net/route.h could break This also caused squid3 to FTBFS; it should be fixed by a new upload of kfreebsd-kernel-headers today. Any news on that? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1413827429.12967.13.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: Bug#753781: Heads up: transition: xserver 1.16
On 2014-07-10 12:38, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 10/07/14 09:07, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: That package is not marked as auto-buildable, which means it doesn't build on the Debian buildds and thus it can't be binNMUed. So you'll have to upload it manually, or ask the wanna-build team to make it auto-buildable. Strange, I thought someone had previously requested this... the latest build is 1:2.1.20-2+b1 which looks like it was binNMUd once before? Not on the buildds: projectb= select distinct u.name from changes c inner join fingerprint fpr on c.fingerprint=fpr.fingerprint inner join uid u on u.id=fpr.uid where changesname like 'xserver-xorg-video-nv%' and version = '1:2.1.20-2+b1'; name --- Robert Millan (1 row) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/f4ad95f1ab738beb29d7877a6b676...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: please remove kfreebsd-any from Architecture
On Sat, 2014-05-31 at 00:42 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: On 30/05/14 17:57, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 16:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: Just a reminder: there are still various things depending on the removed packages, preventing things from migrating to testing. Do you agree it's just the two metapackages from src:meta-gnome3 that need changes, or is there anything else? http://lists.debian.org/53863f46.2050...@pyro.eu.org There's that and also #749888. I don't know if there are other things, I haven't looked in detail. There's also gnome-session. gnome-core depends on gnome-session, which in turn depends on gnome-shell. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1401716207.4230.16.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#725304: pu: package kfreebsd-9/9.0-10+deb70.5
Control: tags -1 + pending On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 22:12 +, Robert Millan wrote: Adam D. Barratt: Please feel free to upload; the package will then be processed after the point release. Fine. Thank you! Flagged for acceptance; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1381607450.13031.33.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#725304: pu: package kfreebsd-9/9.0-10+deb70.5
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 20:58 +, Robert Millan wrote: Adam D. Barratt: There is a 9.0-10+deb70.4 upload in Secre^WSecurity Team's queue since 23 days ago but I've no idea the status if this. [rt.debian.org #4671] In that case, the status of that package needs clarifying. Releasing .5 via p-u if .4 is then going to appear via security doesn't really work. .4 just went into proposed-updates. No. It's in wheezy-security, but it's _not_ in proposed-updates because it reached pu-NEW after the window for 7.2 closed. Does this address your concerns? Yes, thanks. Please feel free to upload; the package will then be processed after the point release. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1381354276.29291.39.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#725304: pu: package kfreebsd-9/9.0-10+deb70.5
On Wed, 2013-10-09 at 22:12 +, Robert Millan wrote: Adam D. Barratt: In that case, the status of that package needs clarifying. Releasing .5 via p-u if .4 is then going to appear via security doesn't really work. .4 just went into proposed-updates. No. It's in wheezy-security, but it's _not_ in proposed-updates because it reached pu-NEW after the window for 7.2 closed. Uhm sorry then, I got confused by e1vtrz5-0001cf...@franck.debian.org which said otherwise. Ah, I see the confusion. Although it's not obvious from the body, the subject says kfreebsd-9_9.0-10+deb70.4_kfreebsd-amd64.changes ACCEPTED into proposed-updates-stable-new, with the -stable-new indicating it's not gone to p-u directly. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1381379974.29291.48.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: RM: kfreebsd-headers-9.2-1-486 [i386] -- ANAIS; obsolete package
On 2013-10-07 14:08, Robert Millan wrote: Steven Chamberlain: http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=kfreebsd-9 Updating kfreebsd-9 makes 5 non-depending packages uninstallable on i386: cuse4bsd-dkms, fuse4bsd-dkms, kfreebsd-headers-486, kfreebsd-headers-686, kfreebsd-headers-xen Note that britney tests i386 first, then aborts without checking other architectures. cuse4bsd-dkms and fuse4bsd-dkms are Arch: all so I'm not sure why that's a problem. I think Britney considers uninstallability of an Arch: all package on i386 a regression, and therefore doesn't allow it. Specifically, britney requires arch:all packages to be installable on i386, and only checks them on that architecture. I guess this part will require manual handling by -release? (CCing) Otherwise we'd have to make those packages kfreebsd-any... It'd need a force-hint, which says ignore any installability issues created by migrating this source package and only applies to the particular version of the package. That's obviously not ideal for something that's going to want to migrate on a fairly regular basis. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2611b9d75ecfc3d471d048ac55b68...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: RM: kfreebsd-headers-9.2-1-486 [i386] -- ANAIS; obsolete package
On Mon, 2013-10-07 at 20:00 +, Robert Millan wrote: Adam D. Barratt: I guess this part will require manual handling by -release? (CCing) Otherwise we'd have to make those packages kfreebsd-any... It'd need a force-hint, which says ignore any installability issues created by migrating this source package and only applies to the particular version of the package. That's obviously not ideal for something that's going to want to migrate on a fairly regular basis. We make it kfreebsd-any then? For the sake of one (or was it two) extra binary package build, that would seem the easiest solution all round, yes. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1381177019.6288.18.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#714324: pu: package grub2/1.99-27+deb7u2
On 2013-10-01 11:53, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Is it going to be a problem that testing still has only 1.99-27+deb7u1 and this stable pu has higher version number? What will happen; must it be copied to testing first as part of the point release process? If testing still has +deb7u1 at the time of the point release then, yes, +deb7u2 will be propagated up to testing as part of the process. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1925b5ff43e7b3f294aced8a6842d...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#718490: freebsd-net-tools: ifconfig segfaults on Jessie
On Fri, 2013-08-02 at 21:59 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 02/08/13 21:47, Robert Millan wrote: Meh, looks like something went wrong with the BTS. Not sure what, but it turns out 9.1-2 migrated to testing today, despite having RC bugs in it :-( Yes that's odd, freebsd-utils/9.1-2 was specifically marked as having this RC bug, and AFAIK its migration didn't fix any other RC-severity bugs in testing: http://bugs.debian.org/718490 Essentially, the BTS status file generated at 18:00+ on the 1st didn't include that bug. The file from 00:00 today /did/ include it, but that was after britney had run so too late. I'll prepare a new upload with higher urgency... Could the release team perhaps age freebsd-utils/9.1-3 instead? That may take care of this faster than doing a new upload. Aged to two days (equivalent to urgency=high). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1375478762.2947.26.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#714324: pu: package grub2/1.99-27.1+deb7u1
Control: tags -1 + pending On Tue, 2013-07-02 at 01:13 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2013/7/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: Thanks; please go ahead. Uploaded. Thank you. and flagged for acceptance. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1372801625.1015.7.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#714324: pu: package grub2/1.99-27.1+deb7u1
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo +confirmed On Mon, 2013-07-01 at 19:39 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2013/6/29 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: grub2 (1.99-27.1) unstable; urgency=medium Hmmm, this looks to have been based on the wrong version? wheezy has 1.99-27+deb7u1 currently. Yeah, sorry. The wheezy branch in our bazaar repo was tracking the wrong version. Here's a fixed diff. Thanks; please go ahead. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1372701880.23327.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#714324: pu: package grub2/1.99-27.1+deb7u1
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo wheezy On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 01:09 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Version of grub currently in wheezy could break bootability when kernel is upgraded to 9.1. This will become specially relevant for upgrade path when jessie is released. +grub2 (1.99-27.1+deb7u1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low + + * Backport from upstream: +- Fix booting FreeBSD = 9.1 amd64 kernels (closes: #699002). + + -- Robert Millan r...@debian.org Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:12:51 +0200 + grub2 (1.99-27.1) unstable; urgency=medium Hmmm, this looks to have been based on the wrong version? wheezy has 1.99-27+deb7u1 currently. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1372501721.25916.9.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: unblock request for kfreebsd-downloader 9.0-3+deb70.1
On 2013-06-20 0:25, Robert Millan wrote: +kfreebsd-downloader (9.0-3+deb70.1) stable; urgency=low + + * Switch to people.debian.org URL for kernel.txz download. +(Closes: #712816) Out of interest, where did you get the version scheme +deb70.1 from? I don't think I've seen that one before (our suggested version would have been +deb7u1, as per dev-ref). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a9e261f01df9935943734325b2b31...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#704227: pu: freebsd-utils/9.0+ds1-11~deb7u1
Control: tags -1 + pending On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 11:53 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 17:19 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: The version needs to be lower than that in testing, so either -10+deb7u1 or -11~deb7u1. I think we'll go with the latter; that should be more descriptive as it is a trivial backport of -11 from sid/jessie. Attached is an updated debdiff; only the version number and target suite has changed. Please go ahead; thanks. Flagged for acceptance. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1369773475.18388.10.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#704227: pu: freebsd-utils/9.0+ds1-11~deb7u1
Control: tags - 1 + confirmed On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 17:19 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: The version needs to be lower than that in testing, so either -10+deb7u1 or -11~deb7u1. I think we'll go with the latter; that should be more descriptive as it is a trivial backport of -11 from sid/jessie. Attached is an updated debdiff; only the version number and target suite has changed. Please go ahead; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1369565632.18864.62.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#706414: CVE-2013-3266: Insufficient input validation in the NFS server
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 23:05 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Adam D. Barratt: On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 22:20 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Steven Chamberlain: I notice a problem though when this was (I think - I'm unsure of the security team's processes here) copied to the main archive, probably so that it can be included in stable-proposed-updates: [...] Could you contact ftpmaster and/or the stable release managers about this? I don't think we can do anything about it on the security side. We (SRM) can't; we don't have any particular access to the upload queues and none to security.d.o. I still have access to the original .changes files. If you think that uploading again would fix things, I can try that. I'd be surprised if resolving this were so simple, though. 8-/ The package is now in p-u-NEW, so it looks like someone sorted this. Thanks. :) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1369478620.18864.22.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#706414: CVE-2013-3266: Insufficient input validation in the NFS server
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 22:20 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: * Steven Chamberlain: I notice a problem though when this was (I think - I'm unsure of the security team's processes here) copied to the main archive, probably so that it can be included in stable-proposed-updates: Thanks for noticing. [...] Could you contact ftpmaster and/or the stable release managers about this? I don't think we can do anything about it on the security side. We (SRM) can't; we don't have any particular access to the upload queues and none to security.d.o. When there have been similar issues in the past, someone from the security team has re-copied the packages over, but I'm not sure if that was anything more involved than simply dputting or ftping the files. I'll see if anyone on IRC can have a look. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1369427656.18864.12.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#704227: pu: freebsd-utils/9.0+ds1-11
On Sun, 2013-05-12 at 18:50 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: This went into sid with version 9.0+ds1-11 and has migrated to jessie. For a pu upload, would the version number have to be 9.0+ds1-11+deb7u1 ? The version needs to be lower than that in testing, so either -10+deb7u1 or -11~deb7u1. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1368384564.9574.6.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#706414: CVE-2013-3266: Insufficient input validation in the NFS server
user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 706414 + wheezy-can-defer tags 706414 + wheezy-ignore thanks On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 23:53 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: I've applied upstream's patch in SVN, I'm running it now on my NFS server and seems okay. Christoph, would you be able to do an upload of this to unstable please? Given how close we are to the release, and the fact that kfreebsd-9 builds udebs, I'm afraid we'll have to postpone a fix in wheezy until after the release. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1367355292.18698.17.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#705435: Gnome installability vs. GNU/kFreeBSD
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:17 +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Le jeudi, 18 avril 2013 12.55:09, Steven Chamberlain a écrit : It would be really helpful if you are able to test again with pulseaudio (+ libpulse0) patched with: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=20;filename=kfreebsd-bug70 5435.patch;att=1;bug=705435 For me, it fixes all of the issues above. Indeed; compiled pulseaudio with that patch and could then successfully start gdm3 and then Gnome. Couldn't reliably test the audio though. It's in any case an improvement over what's now in kFreeBSD, I suggest to NMU pulseaudio with it soon. Soon would be good, indeed... Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366829516.18536.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#674806: freebsd-glue: Breaks on freebsd-buildutils renders the latter unbuildable
Package: freebsd-glue Version: 0.0.2 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid Hi, The recent freebsd-glue upload added a Breaks: freebsd-buildutils ( 9.0-10). However, most architectures only have 9.0-9 and as freebsd-buildutils Build-Depends on freebsd-glue on !kfreebsd-any, -10 is currently completely unbuildable on those architectures. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1338150776.4419.3.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
kfreebsd-i386 qualification for Wheezy
Hi, With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears, we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release architectures for the Wheezy release. Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html would be appreciated, as would any other information you think is relevant to helping us determine kfreebsd-i386's status for the release. Regards, Adam pp the Release Team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1sudcl-00058l...@kaa.jungle.funky-badger.org
kfreebsd-amd64 qualification for Wheezy
Hi, With the sound of the ever approaching freeze ringing loudly in our ears, we're (somewhat belatedly) looking at finalising the list of release architectures for the Wheezy release. Comments on / additions and corrections to the content of http://release.debian.org/wheezy/arch_qualify.html would be appreciated, as would any other information you think is relevant to helping us determine kfreebsd-amd64's status for the release. Regards, Adam pp the Release Team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1sudck-00058f...@kaa.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: kfreebsd-i386 qualification for Wheezy
Hi, Thanks for the quick response. On 16.05.2012 13:38, Steven Chamberlain wrote: The table seems to be missing portbox: io aiui, io's still down to all intents and purposes; if that's correct then it doesn't really qualify as a porterbox right now. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/c861606a5f828361fc2d43b446ca2...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#660022: transition status
On 03.03.2012 16:19, Adam D. Barratt wrote: out of date on kfreebsd-amd64: libcam0, libsbuf0, libsbuf0-udeb, libusb2, libusb2-udeb, libusbhid4 (from 8.3~svn229725-3) out of date on kfreebsd-i386: libcam0, libsbuf0, libsbuf0-udeb, libusb2, libusb2-udeb, libusbhid4 (from 8.3~svn229725-3) The final uploads to make the latter go away were made earlier today, so I've asked for them to be decrufted. freebsd-libs itself and most of its r-deps migrated last night, with a few more migrating this morning. The last package keeping the old libraries in testing now is mednafen, which was mising a build; that's now been uploaded so hopefully we should be able to get this finished with tonight's britney run. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/519569ea4cf14210e8e5db5fd71c0...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: transition status
On 03.03.2012 16:07, Robert Millan wrote: AFAICS the only remaining issues are: freebsd-buildutils is only 8 days old. It must be 10 days old to go in. kfreebsd-kernel-headers is only 4 days old. It must be 10 days old to go in. Well, there's also freebsd-utils (5/10 days) and: out of date on kfreebsd-amd64: libcam0, libsbuf0, libsbuf0-udeb, libusb2, libusb2-udeb, libusbhid4 (from 8.3~svn229725-3) out of date on kfreebsd-i386: libcam0, libsbuf0, libsbuf0-udeb, libusb2, libusb2-udeb, libusbhid4 (from 8.3~svn229725-3) The final uploads to make the latter go away were made earlier today, so I've asked for them to be decrufted. Instead of waiting one more week, perhaps it'd make sense to force migration of those two packages? In both cases the majority of changes in update have been tested in unstable for more than 10 days already. Oddly enough, we'd already had that idea... :) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/44b0143bbf55c9ccb919f34ccd5e3...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#660022: [Pkg-opt-media-team] Bug#660403: transition status
tag 660403 + pending
thanks
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 23:06 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 18:59 -0300, Rogério Brito wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 18:07, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk
wrote:
The packages which have not been successfully rebuilt thus far are:
- cdparanoia - maintainers, are there plans for an upload to resolve
#660403? If not, would you be averse to an NMU purely containing the
updated kBSD patch?
Feel free to go ahead. Let us get kFBSD in shape. I'm OK with a 0-day NMU.
Thanks. I'll look at that over the next couple of days or so.
As agreed, please find attached the diff for the NMU which I'll be
uploading shortly.
Regards,
Adam
diff -Nru cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog
--- cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog 2010-11-06 16:55:13.0 +
+++ cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog 2012-02-29 18:41:09.0 +
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+cdparanoia (3.10.2+debian-10.1) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload with maintainer's consent.
+ * Urgency medium for transition-related RC bug fix.
+ * Fix FTBFS on kfreebsd caused by libcam API changes. (Closes: #660403)
+
+ -- Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:34:44 +
+
cdparanoia (3.10.2+debian-10) unstable; urgency=low
[ Rogério Brito ]
diff -Nru cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch
--- cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch 2010-11-06 15:16:33.0 +
+++ cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch 2012-02-29 18:41:13.0 +
@@ -686,7 +686,7 @@
/* process a complete scsi command. */
static int sg2_handle_scsi_cmd(cdrom_drive *d,
unsigned char *cmd,
-@@ -432,6 +455,88 @@
+@@ -432,6 +455,91 @@
return sg2_handle_scsi_cmd(d,cmd,cmd_len,in_size,out_size,bytefill,bytecheck,sense);
}
@@ -740,8 +740,11 @@
+ return TR_EREAD;
+ }
+
-+ if (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.error_code SSD_ERRCODE) {
-+ switch (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY) {
++ int errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode, addSenseCodeQual;
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ if (errorCode) {
++ switch (senseKey) {
+ case SSD_KEY_NO_SENSE:
+ errno = EIO;
+ return TR_UNKNOWN;
@@ -752,8 +755,8 @@
+ return TR_BUSY;
+ case SSD_KEY_MEDIUM_ERROR:
+ errno = EIO;
-+ if (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code == 0x0c
-+ d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual == 0x09)
++ if (addSenseCode == 0x0c
++ addSenseCodeQual == 0x09)
+return TR_STREAMING;
+ else
+return TR_MEDIUM;
@@ -813,34 +816,43 @@
static int mode_sense_atapi(cdrom_drive *d,int size,int page){
unsigned char sense[SG_MAX_SENSE];
-@@ -1080,9 +1209,15 @@
+@@ -1080,10 +1210,20 @@
+ sprintf(b,scsi_read error: sector=%ld length=%ld retry=%d\n,
begin,sectors,retry_count);
cdmessage(d,b);
- sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
+#if defined(__linux__)
+ sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
(int)(sense[2]0xf),
(int)(sense[12]),
(int)(sense[13]));
+#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__)
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual);
++ int errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode, addSenseCodeQual;
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
++senseKey,
++addSenseCode,
++addSenseCodeQual);
+#endif
cdmessage(d,b);
sprintf(b, Transport error: %s\n,strerror_tr[err]);
cdmessage(d,b);
-@@ -1092,9 +1227,15 @@
+@@ -1092,10 +1228,19 @@
+
fprintf(stderr,scsi_read error: sector=%ld length=%ld retry=%d\n,
begin,sectors,retry_count);
- fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
+#if defined(__linux__)
+ fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
(int)(sense[2]0xf),
(int)(sense[12]),
(int)(sense[13]));
+#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__)
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual);
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
++senseKey,
++addSenseCode
Re: transition status
On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 11:08 +, Robert Millan wrote: Btw, would a new freebsd-libs upload disrupt anything? A fix for #661274 is required, although this isn't a transition blocker AFAICT. That rather depends on how long we think it's likely to take to get the rest of the transition done, and whether britney's happy to migrate the vlc binNMUs with the new source in unstable FTBFS. The packages which have not been successfully rebuilt thus far are: - cdparanoia - maintainers, are there plans for an upload to resolve #660403? If not, would you be averse to an NMU purely containing the updated kBSD patch? - mednafen, xine-lib - binNMUs now scheduled Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330463273.12939.14.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [Pkg-opt-media-team] Bug#660403: transition status
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 18:59 -0300, Rogério Brito wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 18:07, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: The packages which have not been successfully rebuilt thus far are: - cdparanoia - maintainers, are there plans for an upload to resolve #660403? If not, would you be averse to an NMU purely containing the updated kBSD patch? Feel free to go ahead. Let us get kFBSD in shape. I'm OK with a 0-day NMU. Thanks. I'll look at that over the next couple of days or so. Unfortunately the other two remaining binNMUs for the transition both FTBFS; bugs on their way shortly. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330470381.12939.43.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: [Pkg-opt-media-team] Bug#660403: cdparanoia (Re: transition status)
On 25.02.2012 16:03, Rogério Brito wrote: Hi there. On Feb 25 2012, Robert Millan wrote: El 25 de febrer de 2012 13:46, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk ha escrit: On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 12:20 +, Robert Millan wrote: 660403: cdparanoia: FTFBS on kfreebsd-* - Unless there's further activity I recommend removing of kfreebsd-* binaries from testing. See http://bugs.debian.org./cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660403#12 That doesn't work. The choices would be removing the kfreebsd-* binaries from unstable, and letting that propagate, or removing the entire package from testing. Is an upload needed in first case? Is there anything that I can do helping with this? Well, I sent a patch... :) I must admit to not being able to check whether it works, but it at least makes the package build on kfreebsd-amd64 again on the porter-box. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/f11cbfd7d694400a3fc6349c8fdc5...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: transition status
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 12:20 +, Robert Millan wrote: 660403: cdparanoia: FTFBS on kfreebsd-* - Unless there's further activity I recommend removing of kfreebsd-* binaries from testing. See http://bugs.debian.org./cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660403#12 That doesn't work. The choices would be removing the kfreebsd-* binaries from unstable, and letting that propagate, or removing the entire package from testing. 660397: qpxtool: FTBFS on kfreebsd-* 660401: dvd+rw-tools: FTBFS on kfreebsd-* - (eglibc bug) Tagged pending by maintainer since 20th Feb. Should it be NMUed? CCing maintainer. That's still less than a week. Aurelien, are there any plans for an upload in the near future? 660396: sane-backends: FTBFS on kfreebsd-* - (kfreebsd-kernel-headers bug) Fixed today in 0.75. BinNMU? They were already binNMUed, that's how I discovered the bug. ;-p I'll give them back with a dependency on the new k-k-h. btw, http://bugs.debian.org/src:kfreebsd-kernel-headers still lists two outstanding RC bugs. You need to use versioned -done mails, not just add fixed versions. There's also mednafen and xine-lib, which I think have transitive dependencies via libsdl1.2? The latter still seems to be FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64, despite the patch from #659615 being applied. I've just given it back for one last try. fwiw, there's a possibility that vlc might be a blocker, given that the new upstream version is FTBFS on multiple architectures (including kfreebsd-*). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330177567.27081.51.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: cdparanoia (Re: transition status)
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 15:44 +, Robert Millan wrote: El 25 de febrer de 2012 13:46, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk ha escrit: On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 12:20 +, Robert Millan wrote: 660403: cdparanoia: FTFBS on kfreebsd-* - Unless there's further activity I recommend removing of kfreebsd-* binaries from testing. See http://bugs.debian.org./cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660403#12 That doesn't work. The choices would be removing the kfreebsd-* binaries from unstable, and letting that propagate, or removing the entire package from testing. Is an upload needed in first case? That would depend on whether you could convince ftp-master to remove them as-is. However, the build failure doesn't look like it's unfixable (or incredibly hard to fix), so I imagine they'd suggest fixing the bug instead; it's certainly what I'd suggest. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330186796.27081.65.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: cdparanoia (Re: transition status)
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 16:19 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: However, the build failure doesn't look like it's unfixable (or incredibly hard to fix), so I imagine they'd suggest fixing the bug instead; it's certainly what I'd suggest. Specifically, all of the failures appear to be inside code introduced by 05-kfreebsd.patch, so presumably it just needs porting from the old libcam API to the new one (which really should have been done *before* the new API was uploaded to unstable). Is there a direct replacement in the new API for (cdrom_drive *)-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data ? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1330187526.27081.68.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: cdparanoia (Re: transition status)
tag 660403 + patch
thanks
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 16:19 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
However, the build failure doesn't look like it's unfixable
(or incredibly hard to fix), so I imagine they'd suggest fixing the bug
instead; it's certainly what I'd suggest.
In fact, it wasn't particularly hard at all, especially given the k3b
patch to use for inspiration. The attached diff makes the package build
again, although I don't have a suitable kfreebsd-* system available
right now to test it on.
Testing and comments welcome.
Regards,
Adam
diff -Nru cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog
--- cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog 2010-11-06 16:55:13.0 +
+++ cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/changelog 2012-02-25 17:36:55.0 +
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+cdparanoia (3.10.2+debian-10.1) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Update for new libcam API (Closes: #660403)
+
+ -- Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk Sat, 25 Feb 2012 17:35:40 +
+
cdparanoia (3.10.2+debian-10) unstable; urgency=low
[ Rogério Brito ]
diff -Nru cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch
--- cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch 2010-11-06 15:16:33.0 +
+++ cdparanoia-3.10.2+debian/debian/patches/05-kfreebsd.patch 2012-02-25 17:35:21.0 +
@@ -686,7 +686,7 @@
/* process a complete scsi command. */
static int sg2_handle_scsi_cmd(cdrom_drive *d,
unsigned char *cmd,
-@@ -432,6 +455,88 @@
+@@ -432,6 +455,91 @@
return sg2_handle_scsi_cmd(d,cmd,cmd_len,in_size,out_size,bytefill,bytecheck,sense);
}
@@ -740,8 +740,11 @@
+ return TR_EREAD;
+ }
+
-+ if (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.error_code SSD_ERRCODE) {
-+ switch (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY) {
++ int errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode, addSenseCodeQual;
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ if (errorCode) {
++ switch (senseKey) {
+ case SSD_KEY_NO_SENSE:
+ errno = EIO;
+ return TR_UNKNOWN;
@@ -752,8 +755,8 @@
+ return TR_BUSY;
+ case SSD_KEY_MEDIUM_ERROR:
+ errno = EIO;
-+ if (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code == 0x0c
-+ d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual == 0x09)
++ if (addSenseCode == 0x0c
++ addSenseCodeQual == 0x09)
+return TR_STREAMING;
+ else
+return TR_MEDIUM;
@@ -813,34 +816,43 @@
static int mode_sense_atapi(cdrom_drive *d,int size,int page){
unsigned char sense[SG_MAX_SENSE];
-@@ -1080,9 +1209,15 @@
+@@ -1080,10 +1210,20 @@
+ sprintf(b,scsi_read error: sector=%ld length=%ld retry=%d\n,
begin,sectors,retry_count);
cdmessage(d,b);
- sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
+#if defined(__linux__)
+ sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
(int)(sense[2]0xf),
(int)(sense[12]),
(int)(sense[13]));
+#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__)
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual);
++ int errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode, addSenseCodeQual;
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ sprintf(b, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
++senseKey,
++addSenseCode,
++addSenseCodeQual);
+#endif
cdmessage(d,b);
sprintf(b, Transport error: %s\n,strerror_tr[err]);
cdmessage(d,b);
-@@ -1092,9 +1227,15 @@
+@@ -1092,10 +1228,19 @@
+
fprintf(stderr,scsi_read error: sector=%ld length=%ld retry=%d\n,
begin,sectors,retry_count);
- fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
+#if defined(__linux__)
+ fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
(int)(sense[2]0xf),
(int)(sense[12]),
(int)(sense[13]));
+#elif defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__)
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.flags SSD_KEY,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code,
-+d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data.add_sense_code_qual);
++ scsi_extract_sense( (d-private_data-ccb-csio.sense_data), errorCode, senseKey, addSenseCode,
++ addSenseCodeQual );
++ fprintf(stderr, Sense key: %x ASC: %x ASCQ: %x\n,
++senseKey,
++addSenseCode,
++addSenseCodeQual);
+#endif
fprintf(stderr, Transport error: %s\n,strerror_tr[err]);
fprintf(stderr, System error: %s\n,strerror(errno));
transition: freebsd-libs
Package: release.debian.org Tags: pending User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Filing this as a transition bug so we can block related issues against it. Will fix up submitter once I have a bug number. On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 19:09 +, Robert Millan wrote: FYI after freebsd-libs 8.3 has migrated to testing, freebsd-libs 9.0 has been uploaded to unstable. -release: Please can you take appropiate measures to begin the transition? El 29 de gener de 2012 14:43, Robert Millan r...@debian.org ha escrit: [ Please CC me, not subscribed! ] Hi! We have an incoming soname bump in freebsd-libs (libusb, libusbhid, libcam and libsbuf). Should we wait until the current transition is over, or upload to unstable with the new sonames as soon as possible? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329338248.9773.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: freebsd-libs transition
On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 20:45 +, Robert Millan wrote: El 14 de febrer de 2012 20:53, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk ha escrit: I've scheduled binNMUs for the first level of packages on the transition tracker (URL above). Note that in the process I discovered that freebsd-libs no longer builds on Linux architectures, which will need to be resolved as part of the transition; see #659913. As explained the culprit is freebsd-buildutils, not freebsd-libs. I believe freebsd-buildutils 9.0-6 should now build on Linux-based systems, but I still have no feedback from the buildds. You uploaded less than an hour ago, less than five minutes before the start of a dinstall, so it's not even in the archive yet. Be patient... :) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329338824.9773.7.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#659913: freebsd-libs: FTBFS on Linux architectures
Source: freebsd-libs Version: 9.0-1 Severity: serious Hi, The new upload of freebsd-libs FTBFS on all Linux architectures. From the amd64 build log: debian/rules build COPTS=-Wall -g -pipe -fPIC -I. -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/sys -D_GNU_SOURCE -isystem /usr/include/bsd -DLIBBSD_OVERLAY -D__va_list=__builtin_va_list -O2 CFLAGS=-Wall -g -pipe -fPIC -I. -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/sys -D_GNU_SOURCE -isystem /usr/include/bsd -DLIBBSD_OVERLAY -D__va_list=__builtin_va_list -O2 -isystem /usr/include/freebsd -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/debian/local/include NO_WERROR=1 NOGCCERROR=1 NOSHARED=NO NO_SHARED=NO NO_PROFILE=1 DESTDIR=/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/debian/tmp make -C /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf SHLIBDIR=./ Warning: Object directory not changed from original /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf cc -Wall -g -pipe -fPIC -I. -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/sys -D_GNU_SOURCE -isystem /usr/include/bsd -DLIBBSD_OVERLAY -D__va_list=__builtin_va_list -O2 -isystem /usr/include/freebsd -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/debian/local/include -I/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/../../sys -std=gnu99 -fstack-protector -Wsystem-headers -Wall -Wno-format-y2k -W -Wno-unused-parameter -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wreturn-type -Wcast-qual -Wwrite-strings -Wswitch -Wshadow -Wunused-parameter -Wcast-align -Wchar-subscripts -Winline -Wnested-externs -Wredundant-decls -Wold-style-definition -Wno-pointer-sign -c /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/../../sys/kern/subr_sbuf.c In file included from /usr/include/freebsd/unistd.h:3:0, from /usr/include/bsd/unistd.h:35, from /usr/include/bsd/stdlib.h:53, from /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/../../sys/kern/subr_sbuf.c:47: /usr/include/unistd.h:1154:14: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'ctermid' [-Wredundant-decls] /usr/include/stdio.h:878:14: note: previous declaration of 'ctermid' was here In file included from /usr/include/bsd/stdlib.h:53:0, from /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/../../sys/kern/subr_sbuf.c:47: /usr/include/bsd/unistd.h:45:12: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'optreset' [-Wredundant-decls] /usr/include/freebsd/unistd.h:7:12: note: previous declaration of 'optreset' was here /usr/include/bsd/unistd.h:52:5: warning: redundant redeclaration of 'bsd_getopt' [-Wredundant-decls] /usr/include/freebsd/unistd.h:6:5: note: previous declaration of 'bsd_getopt' was here building static sbuf library ranlib libsbuf.a cat /build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/Symbol.map | cpp - - | awk -v vfile=/build/buildd-freebsd-libs_9.0-1-amd64-6Fe1Hd/freebsd-libs-9.0/lib/libsbuf/Version.def -f /usr/share/mk/version_gen.awk Version.map E: Caught signal 'Terminated': terminating immediately make: *** [build-sbuf-stamp] Terminated Build killed with signal TERM after 150 minutes of inactivity Full logs available via https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=freebsd-libs Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329252195.939.10.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: freebsd-libs transition
On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 16:23 +, Robert Millan wrote: El 12 de febrer de 2012 12:53, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk ha escrit: Looking at http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/freebsd-libs.html , there are several packages which build-depend on a -dev package produced by freebsd-libs but don't have a run-time dependency; what's the situation with them? [...] kfreebsd-*: libsbuf-dev is needed for a build system component, which is not installed in kfreebsd package. So there's no need to binNMU them? libsdl1.2: It was built without usb support because configure probe failed, most likely due to breakage in kfreebsd-kernel-headers which isn't present anymore. With up-to-date sid configure probe succeeds but it FTBFS later due to API change (filed as #659615). Fun... zfsutils: gratuitous build-dependency (fixed in SVN). totem: gratuitous build-dependency (filed as #659622). etc. Thanks for checking those. I've scheduled binNMUs for the first level of packages on the transition tracker (URL above). Note that in the process I discovered that freebsd-libs no longer builds on Linux architectures, which will need to be resolved as part of the transition; see #659913. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329252828.939.15.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: freebsd-libs transition
On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 20:07 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 20:00 +, Robert Millan wrote: Anyhow, is there something I can do to help at this point? Just let me know. Being prepared to handle any issues quickly when they come up, mainly. Looking at http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/freebsd-libs.html , there are several packages which build-depend on a -dev package produced by freebsd-libs but don't have a run-time dependency; what's the situation with them? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1329051221.27786.33.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: freebsd-libs transition
On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 19:09 +, Robert Millan wrote: FYI after freebsd-libs 8.3 has migrated to testing, freebsd-libs 9.0 has been uploaded to unstable. Out of interest, how did the lack of an ACK or NACK to your question, less than a week ago, of: Should we wait until the current transition is over, or upload to unstable with the new sonames as soon as possible? lead you assume that the latter was the case? I thought it was fairly well established by now that one should wait for a response; I realise they don't always arrive as quickly as one would like, but there's also little point in asking a question if one isn't going to wait for an answer. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1328384183.2616.23.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: freebsd-libs transition
On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 20:00 +, Robert Millan wrote: El 4 de febrer de 2012 19:44, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk ha escrit: The libraries produced by freebsd-libs are used by other packages, some of which will at various points be involved in other transitions (and indeed may be right now), so the more appropriate thing to do would have been to ask when would be a good time to upload and then wait for a response to that. Sorry about that. That I can recall, this is is the first time I go through this. It didn't occur to me that this situation had the potential to be problematic as well. Hopefully it won't be; the reverse-dependencies certainly have the potential to be affected by changes in other packages though. (One of them, gpsd, had its own transition not that long ago in fact.) A quicker reply would have helped too, in putting me out of my ignorance. Yep, I already mentioned that in my first mail. We should be better at at least following up with a we haven't had chance to look in to this; please bear with us type mail. Anyhow, is there something I can do to help at this point? Just let me know. Being prepared to handle any issues quickly when they come up, mainly. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1328386076.2616.35.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: RM: gpe-shield/testing [kfreebsd-i386 kfreebsd-amd64] -- ANAIS; Linux-specific
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011 14:13:24 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: I believe manual removal of kfreebsd-* binaries from testing is needed so that gpe-shield can migrate (if that's not the case then sorry for bothering) For details, see http://bugs.debian.org/647655 Close - manual removal of kfreebsd-* binaries from unstable would be needed. For that, you'll need to report a bug against ftp.d.o as normal. As a rule of thumb, the only things that get removed from testing by direct action of the release team are source packages. Anything else needs unstable's state sorting out first and the results then automatically getting synced to testing (assuming britney's happy with them). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9c96d2acca9afab3d4c50031556ca...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#633561: kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 23:12 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/6 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 07:20:50 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Attached patch should fix the problem. I can upload a fixed kfreebsd-8 this evening (feel free to NMU if someone has time to verify earlier than that). What's the status of that upload? I realized the symlink in kfreebsd-8 had nothing to do with this. The actual problem was in kernel-wedge and kfreebsd-kernel-di-i386. Ah, okay. I've just NMUed both packages. Debdiffs attached. For the record, the NMUs were acked on IRC and accepted earlier today. I gave the kfreebsd-i386 d-i build back and it built successfully; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1318012540.29287.3.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
On Thu, 6 Oct 2011 07:20:50 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/6 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: test -e ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/zfs || rmdir ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/ rmdir: failed to remove `./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/': Directory not empty [...] $ debdiff kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6_kfreebsd-i386.udeb kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6+b1_kfreebsd-i386.udeb [...] Files in second .deb but not in first - -rw-r--r-- root/root /boot/acpi.ko This appears to be due to the fact that the new kfreebsd-8 +squeeze1 kernel on -i386 builds acpi.ko as a module, which is then picked up by existing install this module if it exists rules in kernel-wedge. Actually, the problem is not presence of acpi.ko itself, but the fact that a symlink to this file exists in /boot/. This is due to an old postinst kludge from pre-GRUB time. Okay. A quick fix would be appreciated, whether from the kfreebsd or d-i side, given the increasingly short period of time we have remaining until the point release is scheduled. Attached patch should fix the problem. I can upload a fixed kfreebsd-8 this evening (feel free to NMU if someone has time to verify earlier than that). Forgive my ignorance on the precise mechanics, but is it correct that the /boot/kernel/kernel.gz symlink creation was also removed? Would you be able to also upload a kfreebsd-i386 build? That would help reduce the turnaround time before we can schedule a rebuild of kfreebsd-kernel-di-i386. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ac1933eacf629d91a4529827b879e...@adsl.funky-badger.org
kfreebsd-i386 d-i/squeeze FTBFS (was Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1)
[tl,dr; these changes broke d-i in stable] On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 00:25 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/27 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: - Does this affect which modules end up in the udebs? It looks like this was missed in the original follow-up. As a related query, has a test build of kfreebsd-kernel-di-* been performed in order to find out whether any additional modules get pulled in to the packages? I just tried. The resulting file lists are identical. debian-installer was binNMUed earlier today in preparation for the point release, and FTBFS on kfreebsd-i386. The log finishes with: # Move the kernel image out of the way. mv -f ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/kfreebsd.gz ./tmp/cdrom/kfreebsd.gz; test -e ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/zfs || rmdir ./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/ rmdir: failed to remove `./tmp/cdrom/tree/boot/': Directory not empty make[7]: *** [stamps/tree-unpack-cdrom-stamp] Error 1 The problem appears to be that the contents of the kernel udeb have changed: $ debdiff kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6_kfreebsd-i386.udeb kernel-image-8.1-1-486-di_0.6+b1_kfreebsd-i386.udeb [...] Files in second .deb but not in first - -rw-r--r-- root/root /boot/acpi.ko This appears to be due to the fact that the new kfreebsd-8 +squeeze1 kernel on -i386 builds acpi.ko as a module, which is then picked up by existing install this module if it exists rules in kernel-wedge. A quick fix would be appreciated, whether from the kfreebsd or d-i side, given the increasingly short period of time we have remaining until the point release is scheduled. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317853200.4522.22.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Backporting ZFS installer support to kreebsd
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 18:09 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/9/22 Arno Töll deb...@toell.net: To achieve that, we would need to backport at least the following bug fixes and improvements. Note #635627 is already on its way to p-u (#637020): Bug # -- package -- title 635384 -- parted -- detection of ZFS volumes (ZVOL) Colin et al, any chance this can make it to Squeeze point release? It's the last non-DI package in Arno's list. If you mean in to 6.0.3, is there any particular benefit to trying to push that particular update at this late stage in the process, given that the partman-* changes won't be included? Might it not make more sense to look at the remaining changes as a set for 6.0.4? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317488903.2999.62.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 22:59 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 12:23 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: Please go ahead, bearing in mind that the upload window for the Squeeze point release closes over this weekend. Uploaded. Flagged for acceptance at the next dinstall; thanks. Thank you. Btw, how do we go about propagating this to kfreebsd-kernel-di-*? If there are changes which need propagating to the udebs - which isn't always the case, as evidenced by the fact that the last build was against 8.1+dfsg-7.1 - someone from -boot needs to upload both source packages; it looks like Aurelien has done that in the past. If the aim is to do that for 6.0.3 then those uploads need to happen within the next day, or they'll miss the cut-off. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317503521.2999.72.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Backporting ZFS installer support to kreebsd
On Sat, 2011-10-01 at 23:02 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/10/1 Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk: If you mean in to 6.0.3, is there any particular benefit to trying to push that particular update at this late stage in the process, given that the partman-* changes won't be included? I didn't know if D-I followed the same release cycle. Given your reply, now I assume it does. d-i _in stable_ does, yes. The only time anything in stable changes is in a point release. (The udeb packages might get uploaded to proposed-updates in between, but there's no installer release that would be built to use them, afaik). Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1317503579.2999.73.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: libgeom1 transition
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:49:03 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: It seems that libgeom1 (freebsd-libs) won't migrate to testing because this would render many packages uninstallable: http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=freebsd-libs which in turn won't migrate because they depend on libgeom1. Does this situation require some kind of intervention? It needs a hint, which I've just added. That won't make any difference for a few more days, however, as freebsd-utils needs to migrate together with -libs and was uploaded with urgency=low, five days ago. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/852b3496b24fc30f33bc50a4d50ec...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Re: Upcoming Squeeze point release 6.0.2
[I'm not subscribed to -bsd; please Cc me on any replies originating
from there, if relevant]
On Sat, 2011-06-25 at 12:55 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 00:09 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
the second Squeeze point release (6.0.2) is now scheduled for
Saturday, June 25th.
The archive side of the point release has now finished. The next
scheduled archive update begins in a couple of hours time, after which
updated packages will start appearing on mirrors.
Unfortunately, during the generation of the CD images, a problem was
discovered which meant that the kfreebsd-{amd64,i386} Packages file
contained the wrong information for a particular package.
That issue has been corrected, and the point release is being
re-published this morning as 6.0.2.1. There are no changes in package
content; the only difference from the original 6.0.2 (aside from
versioning in Release files, etc.) is the fix to the Packages files.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1309083451.2622.46.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Upcoming Squeeze point release 6.0.2
On Sun, 2011-06-26 at 23:32 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote: Adam D. Barratt wrote: That issue has been corrected, and the point release is being re-published this morning as 6.0.2.1. There are no changes in package content; the only difference from the original 6.0.2 (aside from versioning in Release files, etc.) is the fix to the Packages files. Then, shouldn't that be 6.0.2a just like which occurred previously to result in 6.0.1a to replace 6.0.1 The a suffix has previously been used to indicate CD-only rebuilds - i.e. where no changes were made on the archive side (with one exception during etch's stable lifetime). As this involved a change to the archive (albeit a minor one) we decided to use a version which distinguished it from a CD-only change. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1309099577.2622.53.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: GCC-4.5 as the default for (at least some) architectures
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many surprises on at least the common architectures. About 50% of the build failures exposed by GCC-4.5 are fixed [1]. I didn't see issues on amd64 and i386, armel (although optimized for a different processor) and powerpc (some object files linked into shared libs had to be built as pic). It looks like kfreebsd-* also made the switch and there's been a request to switch for mips and mipsel. Looking through the bug list for src:gcc-4.5, none of the open issues seem to be specific to the remaining release architectures which haven't switched yet - i.e. ia64, s390 and sparc. Are you aware of any issues which would preclude switching the default on those architectures? Has there been any discussion with the port maintainers regarding switching? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1303068791.3489.499.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#616323: segfaults when serving HTTP requests (including non-PHP ones) on kfreebsd-i386
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 15:11 +0100, Robert Millan wrote: 2011/3/4 Petr Salinger petr.salin...@seznam.cz: After rebuild of php5 against such header, apache responds. build-rdeps libapr1-dev lists 25 more packages, how would we go about having all them binNMUed, contact buildd admins? No, you ask debian-release. However, http://lists.debian.org/20110305204400.24459.21254.report...@k.lan suggests that the majority of packages will already be dtrt and don't need rebuilding. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1299425906.25972.11672.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#605777: status of backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
user release.debian@packages.debian.org found 605605 8.1+dfsg-7.1 tag 605605 + squeeze-ignore usertag 605605 + squeeze-can-defer found 605777 8.1+dfsg-7.1 tag 605777 + squeeze-ignore usertag 605777 + squeeze-can-defer thanks On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 21:56 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: 1) plain cons25 variant: current sysvinit, ncurses 5.7+20100313-4 or 5.7+20100313-5 and kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-6 (or 8.1+dfsg-7.1), freebsd-utils 8.1-2 [...] freebsd-utils has also been re-uploaded (as 8.1-3.1) to revert the change made there; am I correct that unblocking kfreebsd-8, freebsd-utils and ncurses would give us option 1 on your list and that basically puts us back where we were to start with? [...] Hereby I am asking for unblock for freebsd-utils 8.1-3.1 kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-7.1 ncurses 5.7+20100313-5 Done. And squeeze-ignore tag for 605065, 605777. The 607662 already have it. Done, along with marking both bugs as present in kfreebsd-8 8.1 +dfsg-7.1. If it's possible to get this fixed for a point release, that would be great. If not, at least people now have a work-around until we can fix this properly in wheezy; thanks for all of your work on this. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294515370.2903.6744.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Processed: Re: status of backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
found 605605 8.1+dfsg-7.1 Bug #605605 [apt] apt: uninteresting NEWS.Debian *sigh* Let's fix that... user release.debian@packages.debian.org notfound 605605 8.1+dfsg-7.1 tag 605605 - squeeze-ignore usertag 605605 - squeeze-can-defer found 605065 8.1+dfsg-7.1 tag 605065 + squeeze-ignore usertag 605065 + squeeze-can-defer thanks Sorry for the noise. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294516180.2903.6818.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#605777: status of backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 10:15 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: The plain FreeBSD kernel generates different sequences for Backspace and Delete keys compared to Linux (and required by Policy). Generated sequences can be altered by kbdcontrol (from freebsd-utils source package) and the default sequences are of course in kernel (kfreebsd-8 source package). I together with Aurelien prepared patches for changing them into same sequences as on Linux, both uploaded. Unfortunately, it have been shown, that it does not suffice. Thanks for the summary. [...] 1) plain cons25 variant: current sysvinit, ncurses 5.7+20100313-4 or 5.7+20100313-5 and kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-6 (or 8.1+dfsg-7.1), freebsd-utils 8.1-2 [...] 2) cons25-debian variant: needs patched sysvinit, ncurses 5.7+20100313-5, and kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-7, freebsd-utils 8.1-3 [...] 3) mixture of both above current sysvinit, ncurses 5.7+20100313-5, kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-6 (or 8.1+dfsg-7.1) patched freebsd-utils As a default use the plain cons25 variant. Additionaly provide cons25-debian entry in ncurses and special debian keymap in freebsd-utils. By default it will work as variant 1, but there is a possibility to set TERM to cons25-debian and set keymap which would generate the correct sequences for cons25-debian. 4) backport TEKEN_XTERM from FreeBSD 9.x needs patched sysvinit, patched kfreebsd-8, patched freebsd-utils My personal order of preferences in deep freeze is 3, 1, 4, 2. Just to make sure I understand correctly, option 3 is roughly doesn't conform to Policy but can be made to without significant effort and a sysvinit update would be necessary in order to make the default Policy compliant? If so, how large is the change required to sysvinit? All are better compared to current status. Long term solution is 4. I asked Robert to upload kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-7.1 to implement option 1. Unfortunately freebsd-utils 8.1-3 migrated into testing, despite http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2010/12/msg00128.html Unfortunately it got re-unblocked by someone else and I didn't notice until it was too late. If they are going to revert the changes in freebsd-utils as well (which is one of the proposed solutions), there is little point in unblocking ncurses at all. No, the unblocking of ncurses allows us to implement option 3. The problem exists only on local text console, the delete/backspace keys work correctly when logged on local X console or remotely. The quickest solution is to disable 032_delete_key.diff in freebsd-utils and unblock it and unblock kfreebsd-8 8.1+dfsg-7.1 aka option 1. freebsd-utils has also been re-uploaded (as 8.1-3.1) to revert the change made there; am I correct that unblocking kfreebsd-8, freebsd-utils and ncurses would give us option 1 on your list and that basically puts us back where we were to start with? If so, what other changes would be required (and how large would be they be) to allow us to implement option 3? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294256848.29309.336.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#605065: Bug#605777: Bug#607662: Bug#605777: Bug#607662: ncurses-base: backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 20:07 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2010-12-29 00:36 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 20:44 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2010-12-27 19:51 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: So best option for now seems be to prevent freebsd-utils 8.1-3 from entering testing and a new upload of kfreebsd-8. For the record, freebsd-utils 8.1-3 will migrate in three days if not hindered. [...] I have added the proposed patch for the cons25-debian terminfo entry to ncurses git¹. Once this is in unstable, the kFreeBSD people may choose to implement any of the suggested solutions. That's now happened; thanks. Is the ncurses change suitable for migration in its own right, or does it need an associated change on the kFreeBSD side still? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294178961.15682.1014.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#605065: Bug#605777: Bug#607662: Bug#605777: Bug#607662: ncurses-base: backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 00:17 +0200, Modestas Vainius wrote: Hello, On trečiadienis 05 Sausis 2011 00:09:21 Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 20:07 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2010-12-29 00:36 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 20:44 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2010-12-27 19:51 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: So best option for now seems be to prevent freebsd-utils 8.1-3 from entering testing and a new upload of kfreebsd-8. For the record, freebsd-utils 8.1-3 will migrate in three days if not hindered. Hmmm, in fact it looks like someone else unblocked it, so it's migrated anyway. I have added the proposed patch for the cons25-debian terminfo entry to ncurses git¹. Once this is in unstable, the kFreeBSD people may choose to implement any of the suggested solutions. That's now happened; thanks. Is the ncurses change suitable for migration in its own right, or does it need an associated change on the kFreeBSD side still? Huh, looks like kfreebsd kernel change was reverted [1]. [1] http://lists.debian.org/e1pa9a9-00028v...@franck.debian.org Indeed. I'm now thoroughly confused. :-) As the freebsd-utils change has hit testing after all, is unblocking ncurses to go with it sufficient, or do we need further changes? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1294180873.15682.1180.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#605065: Bug#605777: Bug#607662: ncurses-base: backspace key deletes forwards on the kFreeBSD console
On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 20:44 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2010-12-27 19:51 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: So best option for now seems be to prevent freebsd-utils 8.1-3 from entering testing and a new upload of kfreebsd-8. For the record, freebsd-utils 8.1-3 will migrate in three days if not hindered. To be precise, it would have migrated tomorrow. I've just commented out my unblock hint for freebsd-utils, but that means that #605777 still isn't fixed in Squeeze so I'd appreciate this getting resolved one way or another asap. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1293579417.3459.7610.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Bug#586539: gdm and GNU/kFreeBSD
On Mon, November 15, 2010 15:58, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 16:51:37 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le lundi 15 novembre 2010 Ã 13:20 +0100, Robert Millan a écrit :
I'd recommend removing kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} gdm binaries
from testing and then forgetting about this problem.
Sounds fair. Dear RMs, what's the best way to achieve that?
- File a bug against ftp.debian.org.
Requesting the removal of the binaries _from unstable_ (in case there was
any doubt).
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/ec93718077b11ace552187e1971d84fb.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#594940: Includes binary-only and obfuscated C code
Sorry for the slight delay in responding to this. On Sun, 2010-11-07 at 14:16 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: Now we have to somehow prune current source tree and disable some modules. Could we get squeeze-ignore tag for some of the affected files or is it necessary to prune all affected files ? Ben's original lists included some files which we don't appear to be able to distribute at all. If his analysis is correct then those files at least would need to be removed rather than ignored. The question is whether pruning following files suffices: Apologies if this question has already been asked (I couldn't find the previous occurrence if it has), but what would the effect on the kfreebsd-* kernel be of removing all of the files which were originally mentioned in Ben's mails in this bug report, and is that an option which has been considered by the porters? fwiw, if the current firmware-loading mechanism could be extended to support using the firmware-* packages, the SRMs would be prepared to look at introducing the updated mechanism - and any necessary new firmware packages - as part of a Squeeze point release, if desired / required. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1289668709.11930.1366.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#594940: Includes binary-only and obfuscated C code
On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 10:48 +0100, Petr Salinger wrote: For the remainder of the files, whilst we may consider granting a squeeze-ignore tag, we would like to come to an agreement as to how we can resolve these issues in the medium term. We appreciate that the BSD kernel has not received the same level of upstream attention that the Linux kernel has in recent years in terms of ensuring that all content is freely distributable. We believe that working with them on these issues can only be of benefit for free software, and would help to move the kfreebsd-* architectures from technology previews towards fully supported stable releases with everything we have to come to expect from the Linux architectures. [...] Now we have to somehow prune current source tree and disable some modules. Could we get squeeze-ignore tag for some of the affected files or is it necessary to prune all affected files ? Ben's original lists included some files which we don't appear to be able to distribute at all. If his analysis is correct then those files at least would need to be removed rather than ignored. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1289134240.27850.6039.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#594940: Includes binary-only and obfuscated C code
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 13:04 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (30/08/2010): The following C files contain firmware images in binary-equivalent form but are not obviously accompanied by the corresponding source code: […] Hi, and thanks for your report. I'm not sure we're going to have time and manpower to fix this bug in time for squeeze; that's why I'm wondering whether it could be granted a squeeze-ignore exception. Cc-ing the release team. Hi, Apologies for not getting back to you sooner regarding this. Firstly, we'd like to thank Ben for his offer to help incorporate those files which we are able to distribute into the existing firmware-nonfree package. Sadly, the list mentioned in the bug log includes some files which we cannot distribute for various reasons; these appear to be a couple of sound drivers, some network card drivers, firmware for an ATM card (which Google suggests is intended for use in Alpha machines) and some serial multiplexers and adapters. Without the ability to distribute the affected files, there is not a great deal we can do to resolve these issues other than removing them. For the remainder of the files, whilst we may consider granting a squeeze-ignore tag, we would like to come to an agreement as to how we can resolve these issues in the medium term. We appreciate that the BSD kernel has not received the same level of upstream attention that the Linux kernel has in recent years in terms of ensuring that all content is freely distributable. We believe that working with them on these issues can only be of benefit for free software, and would help to move the kfreebsd-* architectures from technology previews towards fully supported stable releases with everything we have to come to expect from the Linux architectures. Does the kfreebsd kernel include the ability to load firmware from external files, akin to /lib/firmware on Linux? If so, this would hopefully make the process of moving the firmware files out-of-kernel much less painful, particularly for those cases where firmware-non-free already includes the affected files. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1288132333.21348.303.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
