Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi,
I talked to Davide and he is saying he still supports xmail. Let's
update it. Can you NMU this version since you worked so hard?
-R.
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Radu,
Radu Spineanu radu.spine...@gmail.com writes:
Sent a ping to Davide, no answer yet. Let's wait for an answer for a
couple more days.
any update on this yet?.. is it worth to have the package still in
Debian? actually this nmu is blocking one of NM process task so :)
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi Radu,
Radu Spineanu radu.spine...@gmail.com writes:
Sent a ping to Davide, no answer yet. Let's wait for an answer for a
couple more days.
any update on this yet?.. is it worth to have the package still in
Debian? actually this nmu is blocking one of NM process task so :)
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Sent a ping to Davide, no answer yet. Let's wait for an answer for a couple more days. -R. On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:35 AM, intrigeri intrig...@debian.org wrote: Hi Radu, Radu Spineanu wrote (16 Oct 2013 17:17:54 GMT) : That is a good question. There hasn't been a new version of xmail since around my last upload. At the time Davide planned IMAP support but I don't believe that's going to happen anymore. I'll send an email to the creator of XMail to see what his plans are. If he doesn't want to continue working on it we should stop supporting it. If he does, I'll push a fix. Any news on this side? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi Vasudev, Vasudev Kamath wrote (01 Nov 2013 16:24:11 GMT) : Yeah I actually read it in a wrong way, here is fixed patch It now looks good to me. Regards, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi Radu, Radu Spineanu wrote (16 Oct 2013 17:17:54 GMT) : That is a good question. There hasn't been a new version of xmail since around my last upload. At the time Davide planned IMAP support but I don't believe that's going to happen anymore. I'll send an email to the creator of XMail to see what his plans are. If he doesn't want to continue working on it we should stop supporting it. If he does, I'll push a fix. Any news on this side? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
On 11:21 Sat 19 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
Hi,
Vasudev Kamath wrote (19 Oct 2013 05:59:12 GMT) :
It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks
/usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it
should do the contrary, right?) and does not move
/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample.
Regarding the symbolic linking excerpt from � 12.3
Packages must not require the existence of any files in /usr/share/doc/
in order to function 7 . Any files that are refer- enced by programs but
are also useful as stand alone documentation should be installed under
/usr/share/package/ with symbolic links from /usr/share/doc/package.
So did I do something wrong in understanding above?
I believe you did it the wrong way.
Yeah I actually read it in a wrong way, here is fixed patch
Best Regards
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
diff -Nru xmail-1.27/debian/changelog xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
--- xmail-1.27/debian/changelog 2013-11-01 20:52:44.0 +0530
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/changelog 2013-10-26 20:11:32.0 +0530
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+xmail (1.27-1.2) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Symlink contents of /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/
+in rules file and use the file from /usr/share/xmail/ in maintainer
+script.
+Closes: bug#710311. Thanks to Andreas Beckmann.
+
+ -- Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com Sat, 21 Sep 2013 14:01:46 +0530
+
xmail (1.27-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
* Non-maintainer upload.
diff -Nru xmail-1.27/debian/dirs xmail-1.27/debian/dirs
--- xmail-1.27/debian/dirs 2013-11-01 20:52:44.0 +0530
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/dirs 2013-10-31 22:53:55.0 +0530
@@ -19,6 +19,6 @@
var/spool/xmail/spool/temp
var/spool/xmail/pop3linklocks
var/spool/xmail/pop3locks
-usr/share/doc/xmail
-usr/share/doc/xmail/sample
+usr/share/xmail
+usr/share/xmail/sample
usr/share/lintian/overrides
diff -Nru xmail-1.27/debian/postinst xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
--- xmail-1.27/debian/postinst 2013-11-01 20:52:44.0 +0530
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/postinst 2013-10-26 20:14:30.0 +0530
@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
if [ -z $2 ]; then
#we are installing for the first time
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
+ cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
+ cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
#make links to xmail config files
ln -s /etc/xmail/*.tab /var/lib/xmail/
ln -s /etc/xmail/dnsroots /var/lib/xmail
diff -Nru xmail-1.27/debian/rules xmail-1.27/debian/rules
--- xmail-1.27/debian/rules 2013-11-01 20:52:44.0 +0530
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/rules 2013-11-01 09:44:01.0 +0530
@@ -82,8 +82,11 @@
chmod +x $(DESTDIR)/var/lib/xmail/sendmail/xsendmail
#install sample cfgs
- cp MailRoot/*.tab $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
- cp MailRoot/dnsroots $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
+ cp MailRoot/*.tab $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/xmail/sample/
+ cp MailRoot/dnsroots $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/xmail/sample/
+
+ # symlink the sample cfgs to /usr/share/xmail
+ dh_link /usr/share/xmail/sample /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample
touch $(DESTDIR)/etc/xmail/cmd_line
#Enable Logging
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Vasudev Kamath wrote (26 Oct 2013 15:08:39 GMT) : On 11:21 Sat 19 Oct , intrigeri wrote: So did I do something wrong in understanding above? I believe you did it the wrong way. FTR, we've just clarified this on IRC, Vasudev understood his mistake, and will refresh the patch :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
On 11:21 Sat 19 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
Hi,
Vasudev Kamath wrote (19 Oct 2013 05:59:12 GMT) :
It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks
/usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it
should do the contrary, right?) and does not move
/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample.
Regarding the symbolic linking excerpt from � 12.3
Packages must not require the existence of any files in /usr/share/doc/
in order to function 7 . Any files that are refer- enced by programs but
are also useful as stand alone documentation should be installed under
/usr/share/package/ with symbolic links from /usr/share/doc/package.
So did I do something wrong in understanding above?
I believe you did it the wrong way.
Vasudev, did you actually test it with 'dpkg --path-exclude=...'?
Regarding dpkg --path-exclude=... actually I don't know how to execute
this with piuparts as stated in bug report. I also encountered some
other error with piuparts which I mentioned in the bug report reply.
I think you should install the patched package without piuparts,
I see I tested this and it works fine.
but with dpkg --path-exclude=, see if it installs and configures fine,
look at the resulting symlinks, and see if it makes sense to you :)
(Or I am totally misunderstanding your path, which is possible too.)
Symbolic link looks sane
root@rudra:/usr/share/xmail# ls -l
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 Oct 19 05:44 sample - ../doc/xmail/sample
root@rudra:/usr/share/xmail#
So I guess patch is fine then?
Also, although a minor issue, unrelated whitespace changes are
generally not well suited for a NMU.
Are you referring to new lines introduced by me or is there any
whitespace in patch? I just did a white space cleanup on patch let me
know if its fine.
The attached patch removes an empty line somewhere unrelated to
its purpose. That's what I call unrelated changes.
Ah okay here comes the fixed patch
Best Regards
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/changelog xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
--- xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+xmail (1.27-1.2) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Symlink contents of /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/
+in rules file and use the file from /usr/share/xmail/ in maintainer
+script.
+Closes: bug#710311. Thanks to Andreas Beckmann.
+
+ -- Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com Sat, 21 Sep 2013 14:01:46 +0530
+
xmail (1.27-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
* Non-maintainer upload.
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/rules xmail-1.27/debian/rules
--- xmail-1.27/debian/rules
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/rules
@@ -85,6 +85,9 @@
cp MailRoot/*.tab $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
cp MailRoot/dnsroots $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
+ # symlink the sample cfgs to /usr/share/xmail
+ dh_link /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample /usr/share/xmail/sample
+
touch $(DESTDIR)/etc/xmail/cmd_line
#Enable Logging
echo Md -Pl -Sl -Fl -Cl -Ll $(DESTDIR)/etc/xmail/cmd_line
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/postinst xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
--- xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
if [ -z $2 ]; then
#we are installing for the first time
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
+ cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
+ cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
#make links to xmail config files
ln -s /etc/xmail/*.tab /var/lib/xmail/
ln -s /etc/xmail/dnsroots /var/lib/xmail
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
On 10:33 Wed 16 Oct , intrigeri wrote:
Hi,
Vasudev Kamath wrote (22 Sep 2013 07:52:26 GMT) :
I went through the log and prepared an NMU for fixing the policy issue,
as mentioned in Debian policy document I symlinked the sample folder
under /usr/share/doc/xmail to /usr/share/xmail and in the maint script
replaced the path to use /usr/share/xmail instead. I wanted to test
this scenario on piuparts but failed to do so.
It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks
/usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it
should do the contrary, right?) and does not move
/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample.
Vasudev, did you actually test it with 'dpkg --path-exclude=...'?
Regarding the symbolic linking excerpt from � 12.3
Packages must not require the existence of any files in /usr/share/doc/
in order to function 7 . Any files that are refer- enced by programs but
are also useful as stand alone documentation should be installed under
/usr/share/package/ with symbolic links from /usr/share/doc/package.
So did I do something wrong in understanding above?
Regarding dpkg --path-exclude=... actually I don't know how to execute
this with piuparts as stated in bug report. I also encountered some
other error with piuparts which I mentioned in the bug report reply.
Also, although a minor issue, unrelated whitespace changes are
generally not well suited for a NMU.
Are you referring to new lines introduced by me or is there any
whitespace in patch? I just did a white space cleanup on patch let me
know if its fine.
To end with, I see that xmail is a leaf package, its popcon has been
rapidly decreasing since 2011, there are a number of bugs with no
reply from the maintainer for years, and the last maintainer upload
was in June, 2010. So perhaps this package would be a candidate for
removal from Debian? Radu, are you still interested in maintaining
xmail in Debian?
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
--
Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4 C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/changelog xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
--- xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+xmail (1.27-1.2) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Symlink contents of /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/
+in rules file and use the file from /usr/share/xmail/ in maintainer
+script.
+Closes: bug#710311. Thanks to Andreas Beckmann.
+
+ -- Vasudev Kamath kamathvasu...@gmail.com Sat, 21 Sep 2013 14:01:46 +0530
+
xmail (1.27-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
* Non-maintainer upload.
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/rules xmail-1.27/debian/rules
--- xmail-1.27/debian/rules
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/rules
@@ -63,7 +63,6 @@
install-doc: build
# installing docs in $(docdir)
install -m 0444 docs/* $(docdir)
-
DESTDIR=$(CURDIR)/debian/xmail
@@ -85,6 +84,9 @@
cp MailRoot/*.tab $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
cp MailRoot/dnsroots $(DESTDIR)/usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/
+ # symlink the sample cfgs to /usr/share/xmail
+ dh_link /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample /usr/share/xmail/sample
+
touch $(DESTDIR)/etc/xmail/cmd_line
#Enable Logging
echo Md -Pl -Sl -Fl -Cl -Ll $(DESTDIR)/etc/xmail/cmd_line
diff -u xmail-1.27/debian/postinst xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
--- xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
+++ xmail-1.27/debian/postinst
@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
if [ -z $2 ]; then
#we are installing for the first time
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
-cp /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
+cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/*.tab /etc/xmail
+cp /usr/share/xmail/sample/dnsroots /etc/xmail
#make links to xmail config files
ln -s /etc/xmail/*.tab /var/lib/xmail/
ln -s /etc/xmail/dnsroots /var/lib/xmail
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi, Vasudev Kamath wrote (19 Oct 2013 05:59:12 GMT) : It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks /usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it should do the contrary, right?) and does not move /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample. Regarding the symbolic linking excerpt from � 12.3 Packages must not require the existence of any files in /usr/share/doc/ in order to function 7 . Any files that are refer- enced by programs but are also useful as stand alone documentation should be installed under /usr/share/package/ with symbolic links from /usr/share/doc/package. So did I do something wrong in understanding above? I believe you did it the wrong way. Vasudev, did you actually test it with 'dpkg --path-exclude=...'? Regarding dpkg --path-exclude=... actually I don't know how to execute this with piuparts as stated in bug report. I also encountered some other error with piuparts which I mentioned in the bug report reply. I think you should install the patched package without piuparts, but with dpkg --path-exclude=, see if it installs and configures fine, look at the resulting symlinks, and see if it makes sense to you :) (Or I am totally misunderstanding your path, which is possible too.) Also, although a minor issue, unrelated whitespace changes are generally not well suited for a NMU. Are you referring to new lines introduced by me or is there any whitespace in patch? I just did a white space cleanup on patch let me know if its fine. The attached patch removes an empty line somewhere unrelated to its purpose. That's what I call unrelated changes. Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
Hi, Vasudev Kamath wrote (22 Sep 2013 07:52:26 GMT) : I went through the log and prepared an NMU for fixing the policy issue, as mentioned in Debian policy document I symlinked the sample folder under /usr/share/doc/xmail to /usr/share/xmail and in the maint script replaced the path to use /usr/share/xmail instead. I wanted to test this scenario on piuparts but failed to do so. It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks /usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it should do the contrary, right?) and does not move /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample. Vasudev, did you actually test it with 'dpkg --path-exclude=...'? Also, although a minor issue, unrelated whitespace changes are generally not well suited for a NMU. To end with, I see that xmail is a leaf package, its popcon has been rapidly decreasing since 2011, there are a number of bugs with no reply from the maintainer for years, and the last maintainer upload was in June, 2010. So perhaps this package would be a candidate for removal from Debian? Radu, are you still interested in maintaining xmail in Debian? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#710311: Unable to reproduce exact scenario mentioned and nmu diff
That is a good question. There hasn't been a new version of xmail since around my last upload. At the time Davide planned IMAP support but I don't believe that's going to happen anymore. I'll send an email to the creator of XMail to see what his plans are. If he doesn't want to continue working on it we should stop supporting it. If he does, I'll push a fix. -Radu On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:33 AM, intrigeri intrig...@debian.org wrote: Hi, Vasudev Kamath wrote (22 Sep 2013 07:52:26 GMT) : I went through the log and prepared an NMU for fixing the policy issue, as mentioned in Debian policy document I symlinked the sample folder under /usr/share/doc/xmail to /usr/share/xmail and in the maint script replaced the path to use /usr/share/xmail instead. I wanted to test this scenario on piuparts but failed to do so. It seems to me that the attached patch symlinks /usr/share/xmail/sample to /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample (while it should do the contrary, right?) and does not move /usr/share/doc/xmail/sample to /usr/share/xmail/sample. Vasudev, did you actually test it with 'dpkg --path-exclude=...'? Also, although a minor issue, unrelated whitespace changes are generally not well suited for a NMU. To end with, I see that xmail is a leaf package, its popcon has been rapidly decreasing since 2011, there are a number of bugs with no reply from the maintainer for years, and the last maintainer upload was in June, 2010. So perhaps this package would be a candidate for removal from Debian? Radu, are you still interested in maintaining xmail in Debian? Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
