Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
On 16/04/13 01:49, Michael Biebl wrote: > The recommends is pointless, task-gnome-desktop depends on gnome-core > which already has a Recommends on network-manager-gnome. That is probably true but it is not going to cause harm by staying there? So it may as well stay now and can be removed post-wheezy? Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
Am 15.04.2013 12:14, schrieb Cyril Brulebois: > For unrelated reasons, d-i will need a new upload, so I can update > tasksel today as well, before rc2 images get built again. I don't want to sound like a broken record, but seeing that network-manager-gnome in task-gnome-desktop was demoted to Recommends in 3.14+nmu2, let me repeat it again: The recommends is pointless, task-gnome-desktop depends on gnome-core which already has a Recommends on network-manager-gnome. The dependency in task-gnome-desktop only made sense as long as it was a real Depends. Given that the NM-on-CD1 problem has been solved via debian-cd, the sanest thing to do is to just drop that from tasksel again. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
Steven Chamberlain (15/04/2013): > I replied to your mail same day and used the words 'should work'... Well, maybe that's just me, but that “should work” is no certainty at all, nobody says “works for me” (quite the contrary, given Didier's feedback after that). This “should work” was also drown in a big “it's better to use xfce on kbsd at the moment” mail. That's why I initially suggested Christian not to touch tasksel at all, and why he downgraded the bug report the way he did. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:23:09AM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >On 15/04/13 11:14, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >> But you should have made it clear when I asked. I thought I made it >> clear I needed feedback, and I wrote “*right now*”. > >I replied to your mail same day and used the words 'should work'... > >> For unrelated reasons, d-i will need a new upload, so I can update >> tasksel today as well, before rc2 images get built again. > >That would be really appreciated if you do have time. > >Is the necessary debian-cd change in effect yet though? > >http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-cd/trunk/tasks/wheezy/Debian-gnome?r1=2363&r2=2541 Yes, that's the one that we need AFAIK. It forces network-manager and network-manager-gnome to be included early onto Gnome CD/DVD sets, assuming that the packages exist. If they don't exist, that will be ignored. Also, for clarity: debian-cd builds use the version from svn rather than what's in the package. We don't need to wait for an upload or unblock. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Into the distance, a ribbon of black Stretched to the point of no turning back -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
On 15/04/13 11:14, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > But you should have made it clear when I asked. I thought I made it > clear I needed feedback, and I wrote “*right now*”. I replied to your mail same day and used the words 'should work'... > For unrelated reasons, d-i will need a new upload, so I can update > tasksel today as well, before rc2 images get built again. That would be really appreciated if you do have time. Is the necessary debian-cd change in effect yet though? http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-cd/trunk/tasks/wheezy/Debian-gnome?r1=2363&r2=2541 Thank you, Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
Steven Chamberlain (15/04/2013): > For all the problems OdyX mentioned from testing, I've found a single > cause and filed bug #705435. I've updated this page to demonstrate a > functioning GNOME desktop on GNU/kFreeBSD: > https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD_Desktop#Wheezy_GNOME > > On 15/04/13 05:53, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > I was balanced about working in tasksel to upload with the simple > > "move to Recommends" fix but a brief discussion on IRC discouraged me. > > For something as important as dropping a desktop environment from the > release, I'd like to have seen discussion take place with debian-bsd@ > copied in; this came as just a bit of a surprise. The feedback I got to my mail to -bsd@ didn't sound like Gnome was actually usable, and that Xfce was a bad choice. And last I checked, not touching things when unsure is what we do at this very late stage of the freeze. > > And, well, doesn't this issue really fit the definition of > > "important"? > > If the severity of this is downgraded, that as an incentive for this to > be missed out of any NMU or refused an unblock. > > I felt certain this was an RC bug and/or policy violation. A package, a > task, a whole desktop environment became uninstallable on two release > architectures. We still have a tasksel option for GNOME (fails with apt > error 100 due to this) and CD's are being built with its packages. If you GNU/kFreeBSD folks want Gnome to be installable again, then fine. But you should have made it clear when I asked. I thought I made it clear I needed feedback, and I wrote “*right now*”. For unrelated reasons, d-i will need a new upload, so I can update tasksel today as well, before rc2 images get built again. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
For all the problems OdyX mentioned from testing, I've found a single cause and filed bug #705435. I've updated this page to demonstrate a functioning GNOME desktop on GNU/kFreeBSD: https://wiki.debian.org/Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD_Desktop#Wheezy_GNOME On 15/04/13 05:53, Christian PERRIER wrote: > I was balanced about working in tasksel to upload with the simple > "move to Recommends" fix but a brief discussion on IRC discouraged me. For something as important as dropping a desktop environment from the release, I'd like to have seen discussion take place with debian-bsd@ copied in; this came as just a bit of a surprise. > I think that nobody is prevented to fix the issue but I would ask > fixing it *and* dealing with things in tasksel's git, not just with an > NMU. Of course, someone else could NMU this and I'll help however I can, but... > And, well, doesn't this issue really fit the definition of > "important"? If the severity of this is downgraded, that as an incentive for this to be missed out of any NMU or refused an unblock. I felt certain this was an RC bug and/or policy violation. A package, a task, a whole desktop environment became uninstallable on two release architectures. We still have a tasksel option for GNOME (fails with apt error 100 due to this) and CD's are being built with its packages. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
Quoting Steven Chamberlain (ste...@pyro.eu.org): > On 14/04/13 11:03, Christian PERRIER wrote: > > As a consequence, having the desktop-gnome task broken on kFreeBSD > > because of the dependency on n-m-gnome can be considered as non > > release critical... > > Just for the record, I'm not happy about this. I'm sorry for this but, given the feedback received by Cyril's mail to -bsd, -boot, that seemed to be the simplest option. I was balanced about working in tasksel to upload with the simple "move to Recommends" fix but a brief discussion on IRC discouraged me. The fix is simple, yesbut the work in tasksel's git to create a wheezy branch starting from 3.14+nmu1, adding the fix to it and upload was something not trivial andat the same time I got an RC bug in one of my packages, one I consider much more important than Gnome in kFreeBSD. So, my priority changed. I think that nobody is prevented to fix the issue but I would ask fixing it *and* dealing with things in tasksel's git, not just with an NMU. Things are probably trivial for someone very comfortable with git. I am not...not enough at least. And, well, doesn't this issue really fit the definition of "important"? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
Am 14.04.2013 20:56, schrieb Steven Chamberlain: > On 14/04/13 11:03, Christian PERRIER wrote: >> As a consequence, having the desktop-gnome task broken on kFreeBSD >> because of the dependency on n-m-gnome can be considered as non >> release critical... > > Just for the record, I'm not happy about this. > > Why could this not have been fixed in any case, it was obviously a > mistake/oversight, creates a regression for kfreebsd-*, and I provided a > patch which is trivial. This patch doesn't help. The Depends was added in the first place to ensure network-manager is on CD1. Demoting that to Recommends is pointless, since we already have a Recommends in gnome-core. > How are users expected to be test GNOME anyway on kfreebsd if they're > prevented from installing it since the rc1 installer. As a 'new' arch, > people typically don't have installed systems to use as a basis to try > things. I don't want to comment on whether we actually have any GNOME users on kbsd. That said, you can of course always use a minimal installation and install GNOME later on. That should make it easy enough to test GNOME on kfreebsd. > Are kfreebsd-*'s GNOME CD-1 etc. going to be able to build if > task-gnome-desktop is uninstallable? Is there any point building them? One possible solution is to make the task- package arch:any, but IIRC that was an option joeyh didn't like. The other option to make sure NM is on CD1 IIRC was to do that via debian-cd. > Furthermore what about tech-ctte decision #688772 that squeeze->wheezy > upgrades (on GNU/Linux) should not pick up network-manager as a > dependency? Is that would what happen if they have task-gnome-desktop > installed and it Depends now on network-manager-gnome? task-gnome-desktop is not a real package on squeeze, so no, the new dependency in task-gnome-desktop does not pull NM on squeeze to wheezy upgrades. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
On 14/04/13 11:03, Christian PERRIER wrote: > As a consequence, having the desktop-gnome task broken on kFreeBSD > because of the dependency on n-m-gnome can be considered as non > release critical... Just for the record, I'm not happy about this. Why could this not have been fixed in any case, it was obviously a mistake/oversight, creates a regression for kfreebsd-*, and I provided a patch which is trivial. How are users expected to be test GNOME anyway on kfreebsd if they're prevented from installing it since the rc1 installer. As a 'new' arch, people typically don't have installed systems to use as a basis to try things. Are kfreebsd-*'s GNOME CD-1 etc. going to be able to build if task-gnome-desktop is uninstallable? Is there any point building them? Furthermore what about tech-ctte decision #688772 that squeeze->wheezy upgrades (on GNU/Linux) should not pick up network-manager as a dependency? Is that would what happen if they have task-gnome-desktop installed and it Depends now on network-manager-gnome? Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
On 14/04/13 11:03, Christian PERRIER wrote: > According to the thread that follows > https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/04/msg4.html, Gnome is > too broken on kFreeBSD to be considered useful. "Oops, an error occurred" is known as the GNOME 'fail whale'. It could happen also on GNU/Linux for such a trivial reasons as CUPS not running. I wouldn't assume *yet* that GNOME is completely useless on kFreeBSD specifically. Otherwise I'm pretty sure we want to fix this, rather than leave it uninstallable. > [...] because nobody apparently is installing Gnome on the > kFreeBSD port..:-) Nobody has a choice currently :P And there would likely be some kFreeBSD GNOME users upgrading from squeeze to wheezy... Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#704748: Not a practical issue (could even be considered a feature...:-))
severity 704748 important thanks According to the thread that follows https://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2013/04/msg4.html, Gnome is too broken on kFreeBSD to be considered useful. As a consequence, having the desktop-gnome task broken on kFreeBSD because of the dependency on n-m-gnome can be considered as non release criticalbecause nobody apparently is installing Gnome on the kFreeBSD port..:-) Therefore, downgrading this bug to severity important which got a verbal ACK on IRC by at least one of the release managers...:-) -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
