Bug#872635: Info received (util-linux: FTBFS on armel: test failure)
control: severity -1 important Downgrading to important this is not RC I should have done this on previous email. /Andy
Bug#907427: openssl 1.1.1 breaks ssl tests
control: tag -1 unreproducible control: severity -1 important A clean chroot build does not reproduce this bug pulls in: libssl1.1 (= 1.1.1b-1) current build logs suggest this also builds successfully with: openssl_1.1.1a-1 Suspect that this was a transient bug /Andy (with help from jmw)
Bug#917711: grantlee5: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: cd obj-x86_64-linux-gnu && make -j2 test ARGS\+=-j2 returned exit code 2
Bug reproduces on build tests as of 2019-03-07 Possibly a regression in whatever library this calls in, as these tests do not appear to have been touched in some time. Upsteam has sime activity - an a yearly(ish) basis. This will need more experienced C++ / QT / Archaeologist skills than we have available at Cambs BSP... Sorry /Andy
Bug#872635: util-linux: FTBFS on armel: test failure
I have had a look at this as part of the Cambridge BSP 2019-03-09 I am able to reproduce this 'bug', on multiple architectures the following is copy/paste from buster on my AMD64 laptop :-p Simply running the test by hand Assuming you have a working / reliable resolver / untainted cache then the command succeeds: ../util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -d root IPv6 root a.root-servers.n Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 ../util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -w -d root IPv6 root a.root-servers.net Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 ../util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -a -d root IPv6 root Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) a.root-servers.net wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 causing a failure can be done simply by unplugging the machine from the network, thus... ../util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -d root IPv6 root dns-server Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 ../util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -w -d root IPv6 root dns-server Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 /util-linux-2.33.1/tests/ts/utmp$ last -f wtmp-ipv6.LE -a -d root IPv6 root Wed Aug 28 21:30 - 21:40 (00:10) dns-server wtmp-ipv6.LE begins Wed Aug 28 21:30:40 2013 From this I conclude that the test itself is poor - it is assuming that there is a consistently good network / resolver for the duration of the test, something that can not be assumed to always be true. Theoretically glitches can happen anywhere, at any time. Question. What is the purpose of these 3 specific tests? If we are confirming that 'last' is formatting output in the manor specified by the switches then the tests are successful: the reported output may contain EITHER a.root-servers.net XOR dns-server If we are testing that the lookup has happened then it is perfectly acceptable that it will not be possible due to a transitory network failure. this does not mean that last itself is not working correctly only that this test did not PASS (i.e. !PASS is not the same as FAIL) Maybe remove/disable the test, or add retries? Maybe add detection for a timeout failure and simply return a different value to warn about this? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#919826: linux-image-4.19.0-1-arm64: Loading Linux 4.19.0-1-arm64 Loading initial ramdisk error: out of memory system panic
Package: linux-image-4.19.0-1-arm64 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system Dear Maintainer, *** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate *** * What led up to the situation? upgrading kernel in Buster from 4.18.0-3-arm64 via apt-get dist-upgrade * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or ineffective)? root@sally:~# uname -a Linux sally 4.18.0-3-arm64 #1 SMP Debian 4.18.20-2 (2018-11-23) aarch64 GNU/Linux root@sally:~# ## update apt/sources to point to a mirror (was DVD) root@sally:~# apt-get update Hit:1 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster InRelease Hit:2 http://security.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates InRelease Reading package lists... Done root@sally:~# apt-get dist-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Calculating upgrade... Done The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required: libhunspell-1.6-0 liblvm2app2.2 liblvm2cmd2.02 libpython3.6-minimal libpython3.6-stdlib python3.6 python3.6-minimal Use 'apt autoremove' to remove them. The following NEW packages will be installed: apparmor firmware-linux-free irqbalance libaio1 libdns-export1104 libhunspell-1.7-0 libisc-export1100 liblvm2cmd2.03 libnftables0 libnftnl11 libnuma1 libpython3.7-minimal libpython3.7-stdlib libuchardet0 linux-image-4.19.0-1-arm64 nftables python3.7 python3.7-minimal The following packages will be upgraded: adwaita-icon-theme apt apt-utils bash-completion bind9-host bsdutils dash dbus dbus-user-session dconf-gsettings-backend dconf-service dmeventd dmsetup e2fsprogs enchant fdisk file gcc-8-base gir1.2-atk-1.0 gir1.2-freedesktop gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0 gir1.2-glib-2.0 gir1.2-gtk-3.0 gir1.2-pango-1.0 gir1.2-vte-2.91 glib-networking glib-networking-common glib-networking-services gpgv grep groff-base grub-common grub-efi-arm64 grub-efi-arm64-bin grub-efi-arm64-signed grub2-common gtk-update-icon-cache gzip init init-system-helpers iproute2 iptables isc-dhcp-client isc-dhcp-common klibc-utils krb5-locales libapparmor1 libapt-inst2.0 libapt-pkg5.0 libatk1.0-0 libatk1.0-data libbind9-161 libblkid1 libc-bin libc-l10n libc6 libcairo-gobject2 libcairo2 libcap-ng0 libcom-err2 libcroco3 libcryptsetup12 libcups2 libdbus-1-3 libdconf1 libdebconfclient0 libdevmapper-event1.02.1 libdevmapper1.02.1 libdns1104 libedit2 libefiboot1 libefivar1 libelf1 libenchant1c2a libext2fs2 libfdisk1 libfribidi0 libfstrm0 libfuse2 libgcc1 libgcrypt20 libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 libgdk-pixbuf2.0-bin libgdk-pixbuf2.0-common libgirepository-1.0-1 libglib2.0-0 libglib2.0-data libgmp10 libgnutls30 libgpg-error0 libgraphite2-3 libgssapi-krb5-2 libgtk-3-0 libgtk-3-bin libgtk-3-common libharfbuzz0b libhogweed4 libicu63 libip4tc0 libip6tc0 libiptc0 libisc1100 libisccc161 libisccfg163 libjansson4 libjson-glib-1.0-0 libjson-glib-1.0-common libk5crypto3 libklibc libkrb5-3 libkrb5support0 libldap-2.4-2 libldap-common liblwres161 liblz4-1 libmagic-mgc libmagic1 libmount1 libnettle6 libnghttp2-14 libpam-modules libpam-modules-bin libpam-runtime libpam-systemd libpam0g libpango-1.0-0 libpangocairo-1.0-0 libpangoft2-1.0-0 libpangoxft-1.0-0 libperl5.28 libpixman-1-0 libpng16-16 libproxy1v5 libpython3-stdlib libpython3.6-minimal libpython3.6-stdlib librsvg2-2 librsvg2-common libsemanage-common libsemanage1 libsmartcols1 libsoup-gnome2.4-1 libsoup2.4-1 libsqlite3-0 libss2 libstdc++6 libsystemd0 libudev1 libuuid1 libvte-2.91-0 libvte-2.91-common libxcb-render0 libxcb-shm0 libxcb1 libxml2 libxtables12 libzstd1 linux-image-arm64 locales lvm2 man-db mount openssh-client openssh-server openssh-sftp-server os-prober perl perl-base perl-modules-5.28 publicsuffix python3 python3-chardet python3-debianbts python3-gi python3-gi-cairo python3-minimal python3-pkg-resources python3-pycurl python3-pysimplesoap python3-six python3.6 python3.6-minimal rsyslog sed systemd systemd-sysv sysvinit-utils tar task-english task-ssh-server tasksel tasksel-data telnet tzdata ucf udev util-linux util-linux-locales vim-common vim-tiny wget xdg-user-dirs xxd 203 upgraded, 18 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 144 MB of archives. After this operation, 260 MB of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] --- 8< --- Get:207 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main arm64 linux-image-4.19.0-1-arm64 arm64 4.19.12-1 [39.7 MB] Get:208 http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian buster/main arm64 linux-image-arm64 arm64 4.19+101 [7,952 B] --- 8< --- Processing triggers for systemd (240-4) ... Setting up grub-efi-arm64 (2.02+dfsg1-10) ... Installing for arm64-efi platform. Installation finished. No error reported. Generating grub configuration file ... Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-4.19.0-1-arm64 Found initrd
Bug#777511: kernels tested
Ben I have tested against the following kernels on snapshot.d.o Pass 4.2.1-1 4.0.0-1 3.16.36-1 Fails 3.16.7-ckt4-3 /Andy
Bug#777511: update
Hi, it has been a while since there has been any activity against this bug. it is marked as grave, this means that it is Release Critical for Stretch. I have just run Cyril's md-mirror-resync-broken-v2.sh script on a machine running stretch rc1 (Linux debian 4.4.0-2amd64 #1 SMP Debian 4.8.15-2 (2017-01-04) x86_64 GNU/Linux) and this reports Ok, bug not found I guess that means that the regression of this bug is now fixed... Thanks /Andy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#790796: sensord
Hi there, Back in August *2015* there was a short discussion regarding removing sonsord from lm-sensors as a result of this bug. Because it is marked as GRAVE, this bug is release critical for Stretch. Is this really a grave bug, should it be down graded? Can Sensord be removed? Is there another option? It seams to me that if you depend on the structure of a file that changes you could simply re-initialise sensord passing it the new structure. However I suspect that I am trivialising the underlying issue... /Andy
Bug#665334: [Pkg-fonts-devel] Bug#665334: non-DFSG & Type 1 Postscript embedded fonts
On 29/01/17 13:18, Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Andy Simpkins wrote: > >> It is our belief that this is sufficient; that the package FontForge, >> and type 1 fonts generated by this package are now DFSG compliant >> because Apache 2.0 is GPL2+ compatible. > The FSF believes that Apache 2.0 is only compatible with GPLv3+ not GPLv2. > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2 > https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html > Well Paul you are entirely correct. Would you believe that pretty much everyone here missed that one - despite the fact that nearly every person did proof this :-) OK so what does that mean? GPL2 stuff could be problematic but ultimately the suggested action(s) would still appear valid... Karen your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated /Andy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#795055: Any progress or updates?
Hi Anibal, It has been a long time since we last caught up! As part of the Cambridge BSP this weekend [1] I have been looking at lisence violations such as the one in this bug that is marked as RC. It is my understanding that there is no problems with the "All rights reserved" statement included in many of the files without then including the 3-clause BSD licence text as there is no requirement (only a recommendation) for licences to appear inside each file only an overriding external licence text. This is present. HOWEVER Dmitry also points out that there are several files with 4-Clause BSD licences explicit within them, namely: src/crypt_client.c tirpc/rpcsvc/crypt.x As Dmitry points out that this is non-DFSG compliant, so it is these two files that are the cause for concern This bug was raised August 2015, and I have not been able to find any activity since. Do you have a plan of how to deal with this issue prior to the release of Stretch? [1] https://wiki.debian.org/BSP/2017/01/gb/Cambridge signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#840733: Please remove...
Hi Ted, I am currently sat at the Cambridge BSP looking at Debian RC bugs [1]. Looking at this bug report we believe that on balance the best course of action would be to remove lib/et/test_cases/imap_err.et from e2fsprogs. As you have offered to do this in your capacity as "upstream" [2] may we please ask you to do this at your earliest opportunity. Would you mind performing this as an atomic operation as this would make the process of freeze exception straight forwards. Many thanks in advance, /Andy [1] https://wiki.debian.org/BSP/2017/01/gb/Cambridge#Attendees [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840733#10 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#694320: non-DFSG & Type 1 Postscript embedded fonts
Hi Karen, At the Cambridge BSP (Jan 27/28 2017) we have been looking at the following bugs pertaining to non-DFSG compliance with fonts embedded with non-free code: * http://bugs.debian.org/665334 opened 23 Mar 2012, last update 01 Aug 2016 modulo spam * http://bugs.debian.org/694320 opened 25 Nov 2012, last update 30 Aug 2014 blocked by #665334 * http://bugs.debian.org/694323 opened 25 Nov 2012, last update 30 Aug 2014 blocked by #665334 Synopsis: Type 1 fonts that are made using the package FontForge include font hinting code which is marked "copyright Adobe all rights reserved". This issue logically extends to every package that contains fonts that have been made using FontForge. Current State Reading #665334 it appears that FontForge historically contained fragments of code with Adobe asserted rights. We believe that this is now resolved with "autohint code is now all open source". The github repo is top licensed Apache 2.0 [1] It is our belief that this is sufficient; that the package FontForge, and type 1 fonts generated by this package are now DFSG compliant because Apache 2.0 is GPL2+ compatible. * Is our understanding of the above correct? i.e. Does the github repository top-licensing (to Apache) of the Adobe 'hinting' properly apply? * Are the font hinting fragments, that are Adobe copyright, embedded into fonts produced in FontForge, the same code as in the above repository (we *think* that this is the case)? * Thus, are these fonts (generated by the above) now covered by Apache 2.0? * And, consequently: are the fonts in the Debian archive, produced by FontForge, now to be considered under Apache 2.0; and is this sufficient to cover the embedded fragments under Apache 2.0? Assuming the above is all correct then, in order to resolve this issue, we believe that all packages that contain fonts that are generated using FontForge should contain an appropriate licence text for the font. A Mass bug filing could then be made against these packages requesting the appropriate update to the licence file. However we see this a potential minefield, and therefore seek clarification and advice before we continue. /Andy PP Debian BSP Cambridge Jan 2017 [2] [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=665334#168 [2] https://wiki.debian.org/BSP/2017/01/gb/Cambridge signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#799702: ed: ships /usr/share/info/dir.gz on arm64
As part of cambridge bsp we have investigated this bug. The suggested patch does not actuly fix the bug (the -B option still includes /usr/share/info/dir.gz) // info and is not just limited to arm64 Problem was caused by build rules missing build-arch target, and therefore not applying patched during autobuilder builds. JMW has uploaded fix. /Andy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#801781: Possibly fixed.
Hi Salvo, I am looking back though open bugs at the moment and see that the mail traffic for the bug you reported stopped back at the end of October, with people suggesting that this has now gone away. Have you seen this? Have recent updates fixed the problem for you? If so can you please respond and we can close off the bug. If not can you just let us know that you are still seeing the problem and what versions you are currently running. Many thanks /Andy signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#669878: Reproduced 669878 - Could not perform immediate configuration on 'phonon-backend-vlc'
Ran into this problem today at the cambridge BSP when performing a dist-upgrade from squeeze. again the reported problem was: E: Could not perform immediate configuration on 'phonon-backend-vlc'. Please see man 5 apt.conf under APT::Immediate-Configure for details. I performed apt-get upgrade as reccomended then tried dist-upgrade again still failing with the same error I got out of the problem by apt-get install apt initramfs-tools nfs-common where initramfs-tools nfs-common were required to be upgraded because of increased dependancy requirements. I guess this doesn't help resolve the bug, but at least shows that it is reproduceable. BR Andy NOTE: CC'd to debian-release at request of JMW as this will affect dist- upgrades for kde users -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
