Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi, * Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-25 20:53]: built uploaded! Thanks! Please apply for the unblock. Done: #771053 (Note that I s/UNRELEASED/unstable in d/changelog; make sure to do this to in your repository) Done. Cheers Jochen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi, * Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-24 22:12]: Ok, pulled from the git and comparing to the version currently in Jessie: As we are in the freeze, you need to create targeted fixes for RC Bugs only.* So the doxygen one isn't. This seems to be coming from a new Doxygen version and is only needed for debclean , but I can revert it without problems. And be more detailed in freeze time: Will do. I'd write Do not ship but create at install time the files ... Is the register modules change needed for 767653? (I assume yes, but then the changelog should make that clear too) That's actually all part of one change, but ended up in two commits, so git-dch made two lines out of it. Will change the changelog. Why are you moving the util-binaries to the libary package? I would find it better to depend on the utils package instead, (especially as you should consider implement multi-arch for Jessie+1) openni-utils contains sample applications depending on libopenni0. Leaving niReg/niLicense in there would generate a circular dependency, as we need them in the libopenni0 postinst. Is there an other option? Declaring a circular dependency is not a problem here and well handled by dpkg. When postinst is called, both packages are guaranteed to be unpacked, so the library / binaries are in place at this point of time. (See Policy §7.2) Cheers Jochen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi, * Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-24 22:12]: Ok, pulled from the git and comparing to the version currently in Jessie: As we are in the freeze, you need to create targeted fixes for RC Bugs only.* So the doxygen one isn't. This seems to be coming from a new Doxygen version and is only needed for debclean , but I can revert it without problems. And be more detailed in freeze time: Will do. I'd write Do not ship but create at install time the files ... Is the register modules change needed for 767653? (I assume yes, but then the changelog should make that clear too) That's actually all part of one change, but ended up in two commits, so git-dch made two lines out of it. Will change the changelog. Why are you moving the util-binaries to the libary package? I would find it better to depend on the utils package instead, (especially as you should consider implement multi-arch for Jessie+1) openni-utils contains sample applications depending on libopenni0. Leaving niReg/niLicense in there would generate a circular dependency, as we need them in the libopenni0 postinst. Is there an other option? Declaring a circular dependency is not a problem here and well handled by dpkg. When postinst is called, both packages are guaranteed to be unpacked, so the library / binaries are in place at this point of time. (See Policy §7.2) Cheers Jochen I wanted to point you to Policy §8.2 as well, but forgot in the rush. -- it is actually forbidden to have the binaries in the libary package. (-- some simpications applied; the Policy has details.) -- tobi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi, thanks for the clearifications, I've pushed a new version. Can you have a look again? Cheers Jochen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#767653:
Hi Jochen built uploaded! Please apply for the unblock. (Note that I s/UNRELEASED/unstable in d/changelog; make sure to do this to in your repository) -- tobi Am Dienstag, den 25.11.2014, 12:21 +0100 schrieb Jochen Sprickerhof: Hi Tobi, thanks for the clearifications, I've pushed a new version. Can you have a look again? Cheers Jochen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653: marked as done (libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0, libopenni-sensor-primesense0: modifying files from another package: /var/lib/ni/modules.xml)
Your message dated Tue, 25 Nov 2014 21:21:25 +
with message-id e1xtny5-0005es...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#767653: fixed in openni 1.5.4.0-8
has caused the Debian Bug report #767653,
regarding libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0, libopenni-sensor-primesense0:
modifying files from another package: /var/lib/ni/modules.xml
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
767653: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=767653
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
---BeginMessage---
Package: libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0,libopenni-sensor-primesense0
Version: 5.1.0.41.3-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Control: found -1 5.1.0.41-3
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package modifies files from
another package. This is so wrong, I'm not even bothered to look
up the part of policy this violates ;-P
From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
0m23.6s ERROR: FAIL: debsums reports modifications inside the chroot:
/var/lib/ni/modules.xml
The file is owned by libopenni0.
If you run the following command after installing the buggy packages
apt-get install --reinstall libopenni0
/var/lib/ni/modules.xml will be reset to its shipped state. The same
would happen if libopenni0 gets binNMUed for some reason ... so the
current approach is very fragile.
Since modules.xml is used as some kind of registry, it should only be
generated, not shipped at all. Ideally dpkg triggers could be used for
this task.
cheers,
Andreas
libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0_5.1.0.41.3-1+b2.log.gz
Description: application/gzip
---End Message---
---BeginMessage---
Source: openni
Source-Version: 1.5.4.0-8
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
openni, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to 767...@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Jochen Sprickerhof deb...@jochen.sprickerhof.de (supplier of updated openni
package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 22:33:38 +0100
Source: openni
Binary: libopenni0 libopenni-java openni-utils libopenni-dev openni-doc
Architecture: source amd64 all
Version: 1.5.4.0-8
Distribution: sid
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Multimedia Maintainers
pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By: Jochen Sprickerhof deb...@jochen.sprickerhof.de
Description:
libopenni-dev - headers for OpenNI 'Natural Interaction' frameworks
libopenni-java - Java framework for sensor-based 'Natural Interaction'
libopenni0 - framework for sensor-based 'Natural Interaction'
openni-doc - developer documentation for OpenNI frameworks
openni-utils - debug and test utilities OpenNI framework
Closes: 767653
Changes:
openni (1.5.4.0-8) unstable; urgency=medium
.
* Do not ship but generate {licenses,modules}.xml at install time
(Closes: #767653)
Checksums-Sha1:
5fe2a2054f0086136ffc82f762abd886e7d2ec65 2357 openni_1.5.4.0-8.dsc
6cd0843161bce49936a94a9b77088ee3f4281bc3 643908 openni_1.5.4.0-8.debian.tar.xz
e8bddeb31309d30aad1176bf282e6f90ee63048d 4176594 openni-doc_1.5.4.0-8_all.deb
Checksums-Sha256:
5c2c6c99d4a006412d98dae7a27c2760b561548c7a0a87d90c0fc7a43412da94 2357
openni_1.5.4.0-8.dsc
622e2d5e0c5100931467c4aa4e89e53d16e8bd2344f337d415e45bbfc5f41734 643908
openni_1.5.4.0-8.debian.tar.xz
574db9724e4196d69b45af4ab5911c4d694c55bd08235b8f0c1f05239b9a401f 4176594
openni-doc_1.5.4.0-8_all.deb
Files:
241e8a05af3e61bbded48dc726ae0570 2357 libs optional openni_1.5.4.0-8.dsc
f596995e4310ad2623ace6ba7a8daffa 643908 libs optional
openni_1.5.4.0-8.debian.tar.xz
e1db2f6a2ebd8a694d3319ea843b34f1 4176594 doc optional
openni-doc_1.5.4.0-8_all.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUdN3eAAoJEJFk+h0XvV02oboP/0R2Ba/ccY52K/AnSKFw5Siz
mF2qX4xanBGzxx+aOegq9m1OUsJeEKDoHhT7TK/zj5T2Pu/XDUJvzTbMlqsPLfyK
sl5bq3Ca5ms1NDoCr/uBvjTkUMkj3YGgmGHteDTwnIoYJ0hJPN6SfVZEk+r97I1B
rc5z/hHnC6HDknR9aIdGLuzB/+V0+T4pXs9ZmUxiD1Haz1u1jp6VSx/dx0F7dvOM
4Vot7dYh+Q5gOy2NiiTpmpV0D9HtVKrDDwoeHZF/+D3h7HuVnIgDu2wRHtZekibT
3nMDMr/RUU
Bug#767653:
Hi Jochen
Hi Tobi,
* Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-23 14:31]:
can you please check if you committed everything?
Especially I'm missing changes to d/changelog...
I've just pushed the changelog as well and tested the build.
Is this a team upload? A NMU? I assume you are on the multimedia team,
I'm part of the Debian Multimedia Maintainers on Alioth and helped
packaging OpenNI but I'm not a DD, so Hans did all the uploads.
have your patch been discussed there?
I've discussed them with fsateler on #debian-multimedia and he proposed
to ask in #debian-devel to have a look (but no one answered). Otherwise
he was ok with them and would do the upload as well. If you could verify
them as well, that would be great.
What is the relation to openni when this bug is reported against
libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0 / libopenni-sensor-primesense0 ?
The files in question (/var/lib/ni/{licenses.xml,modules.xml}) are
deployed by openni, but modified by libopenni-sensor-*. So the fix
needs to be in the openni package.
Cheers Jochen
Thanks for the feedback. However, you should reassign this bug to openni then,
as you should not close bugs not in your pacakge.
(You mark libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0, libopenni-sensor-primesense0 as
affected)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653:
Hi Jochen Ok, pulled from the git and comparing to the version currently in Jessie: As we are in the freeze, you need to create targeted fixes for RC Bugs only.* So the doxygen one isn't. And be more detailed in freeze time: I'd write Do not ship but create at install time the files ... Is the register modules change needed for 767653? (I assume yes, but then the changelog should make that clear too) Why are you moving the util-binaries to the libary package? I would find it better to depend on the utils package instead, (especially as you should consider implement multi-arch for Jessie+1) Let me know your thoughts; (as I might have missed some details) -- tobi * the release team is stricter this year. If you can convince them that they will approve it, you can keep this; but I'd prefer a pre-approval in this case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi, * Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-24 22:12]: Ok, pulled from the git and comparing to the version currently in Jessie: As we are in the freeze, you need to create targeted fixes for RC Bugs only.* So the doxygen one isn't. This seems to be coming from a new Doxygen version and is only needed for debclean , but I can revert it without problems. And be more detailed in freeze time: Will do. I'd write Do not ship but create at install time the files ... Is the register modules change needed for 767653? (I assume yes, but then the changelog should make that clear too) That's actually all part of one change, but ended up in two commits, so git-dch made two lines out of it. Will change the changelog. Why are you moving the util-binaries to the libary package? I would find it better to depend on the utils package instead, (especially as you should consider implement multi-arch for Jessie+1) openni-utils contains sample applications depending on libopenni0. Leaving niReg/niLicense in there would generate a circular dependency, as we need them in the libopenni0 postinst. Is there an other option? Cheers Jochen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#767653:
Hi Jochen, can you please check if you committed everything? Especially I'm missing changes to d/changelog... Is this a team upload? A NMU? I assume you are on the multimedia team, have your patch been discussed there? What is the relation to openni when this bug is reported against libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0 / libopenni-sensor-primesense0 ? Can you please clarify? Thanks -- tobi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653:
Hi Tobi,
* Tobias Frost t...@debian.org [2014-11-23 14:31]:
can you please check if you committed everything?
Especially I'm missing changes to d/changelog...
I've just pushed the changelog as well and tested the build.
Is this a team upload? A NMU? I assume you are on the multimedia team,
I'm part of the Debian Multimedia Maintainers on Alioth and helped
packaging OpenNI but I'm not a DD, so Hans did all the uploads.
have your patch been discussed there?
I've discussed them with fsateler on #debian-multimedia and he proposed
to ask in #debian-devel to have a look (but no one answered). Otherwise
he was ok with them and would do the upload as well. If you could verify
them as well, that would be great.
What is the relation to openni when this bug is reported against
libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0 / libopenni-sensor-primesense0 ?
The files in question (/var/lib/ni/{licenses.xml,modules.xml}) are
deployed by openni, but modified by libopenni-sensor-*. So the fix
needs to be in the openni package.
Cheers Jochen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#767653: libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0, libopenni-sensor-primesense0: modifying files from another package: /var/lib/ni/modules.xml
Package: libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0,libopenni-sensor-primesense0 Followup-For: Bug #767653 Hi, I've pushed a patch to [1] to fix this. Would be great if a DD could upload it. [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/openni.git -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#767653: libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0, libopenni-sensor-primesense0: modifying files from another package: /var/lib/ni/modules.xml
Package: libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0,libopenni-sensor-primesense0 Version: 5.1.0.41.3-1 Severity: serious User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: piuparts Control: found -1 5.1.0.41-3 Hi, during a test with piuparts I noticed your package modifies files from another package. This is so wrong, I'm not even bothered to look up the part of policy this violates ;-P From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...): 0m23.6s ERROR: FAIL: debsums reports modifications inside the chroot: /var/lib/ni/modules.xml The file is owned by libopenni0. If you run the following command after installing the buggy packages apt-get install --reinstall libopenni0 /var/lib/ni/modules.xml will be reset to its shipped state. The same would happen if libopenni0 gets binNMUed for some reason ... so the current approach is very fragile. Since modules.xml is used as some kind of registry, it should only be generated, not shipped at all. Ideally dpkg triggers could be used for this task. cheers, Andreas libopenni-sensor-pointclouds0_5.1.0.41.3-1+b2.log.gz Description: application/gzip
