Re: AVR32 port - config.{sub,guess} bug filing
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 01:37:01PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > cur_v=`echo "$timestamp" | sed s/-//g` > > for path in \ > "$HOME/.config/automake" \ > /usr/local/share/automake \ > /usr/local/share/misc \ > /usr/share/automake \ > /usr/share/misc \ > ; do > > if test -x "$path/config.sub" ; then > v=`"$path/config.sub" --time-stamp | sed s/-//g` > if test "$v" -gt "$cur_v" ; then > "$path/config.sub" $* > exit $? > fi > fi > done Hmm, wouldn't it be better to look for the newest version instead of "first one that's newer"? The above would work on a buildd where there is nothing in $HOME or under /usr/local, but could break on user's machines if they have a script in say /usr/local/share/automake that's newer than what the package has, but still older than what would be needed to build correctly. Gabor -- - MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: AVR32 port - config.{sub,guess} bug filing
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Gabor Gombas wrote: > Hmm, wouldn't it be better to look for the newest version instead of > "first one that's newer"? The above would work on a buildd where there is > nothing in $HOME or under /usr/local, but could break on user's machines > if they have a script in say /usr/local/share/automake that's newer than > what the package has, but still older than what would be needed to build > correctly. Good point, how about this? cur_v=`echo "$timestamp" | sed s/-//g` for path in \ "$HOME/.config/automake" \ /usr/local/share/automake \ /usr/share/automake \ /usr/share/misc \ ; do if test -x "$path/config.guess" ; then v=`"$path/config.guess" --time-stamp | sed s/-//g` if test "$v" -gt "$cur_v" ; then cur_v="$v" latest="$path" fi fi done if test "x$latest" != x ; then case $# in 0) "$latest/config.guess";; *) "$latest/config.guess" "$@";; esac exit $? fi -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
[Is there a lawyer in the room?] JPEG-LS license issue
Hi there, I am trying to understand some license issue I am having. Could someone let me know if the following is compatible with a debian package: >From the [For License Of Certain Hewlett-Packard Patents Relating To Lossless and Near-Lossless Image Compression] page (*) The following statement should prevent having an implement of JPEG-LS in debian: ... III. OTHER TERMS 1. Licensee may not assign the license granted hereunder to any party at any time without the prior explicit written consent of HP, except to an acquirer of substantially all of Licensee's assets with written notice to HP. ... Is this correct ? What I do not understand is implementation such as CharLS, which declare: ... Legal The code in this project is available through a BSD style license, allowing use of the code in commercial closed source applications if you wish. All the code in this project is written from scratch, and not based on other JPEG-LS implementations. Be aware that Hewlett Packard claims to own patents that apply to JPEG-LS implementations, but they license it for free for conformant JPEG-LS implementations. Read more at http://www.hpl.hp.com/loco/ before you use this if you use this code for commercial purposes. Ref: http://charls.codeplex.com/ ... As a side note ffmpeg/libavcodec now ships an implementation of JPEG-LS: $ apt-get source -t testing libavcodec-dev $ find ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303 | grep jpegls ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303/libavcodec/jpegls.h ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303/libavcodec/jpeglsenc.c ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303/libavcodec/jpeglsdec.h ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303/libavcodec/jpeglsdec.c ffmpeg-debian-0.svn20090303/libavcodec/jpegls.c I have bcc : 1. The main author of CharLs, 2. The main persons behind the implementation of ffmpeg/jpegls codec, in case they have worked on the subject or would like to add something, thanks ! Regards, -- Mathieu (*) http://www.hpl.hp.com/loco/JPEGLSTerms.htm -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: [Is there a lawyer in the room?] JPEG-LS license issue
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > What I do not understand is implementation such as CharLS, which declare: ... > Ref: http://charls.codeplex.com/ On an unrelated note, please do not package this until upstream fixes the security issues that are mentioned on the website. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#525386: RFP: antico -- Antico is a window manager based on Qt
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org --- Please fill out the fields below. --- Package name: antico Version: 0.1 Upstream Author: [Giuseppe Cigala ] URL: [http://www.antico.netsons.org/] License: [GPL] Description: [Antico is a Qt4/X11 Desktop/Window Manager (i.e. KDE+KWin). The goal is to create a Window/Desktop manager simple and fast. All parameters must be configured from few files, avoiding unnecessary complications, following the K.I.S.S. philosophy. The whole project is based only on Qt4 libraries, without any other external dependencies (e.g. kdelibs ...).] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Linux-libre for Debian Lenny
Ben Finney (24/04/2009): > Think of it as “defense in depth”, ensuring that there is more than > one barrier to undesirable elements. Having to enable contrib/non-free and to pull stuff from there being of course insufficient? Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Is there a lawyer in the room?] JPEG-LS license issue
Mathieu Malaterre (24/04/2009): > I am trying to understand some license issue I am having. Could > someone let me know if the following is compatible with a debian > package: You usually want -legal@ for that. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Linux-libre for Debian Lenny
Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Finney writes: > >> Okay. So I take it then that you would be against separate packaging >> for Linux-Libre for Debian, and prefer instead to apply all its >> changes to Debian's Linux? > > I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I feel the urge to weigh in. > > I think the removal of even the ability to load non-free firmware is > stupid and self-defeating and certainly don't think that should be done > in Debian, in either the main Linux kernel packages or, for that matter, > in a separate package. Shouldn't that be /non-free firmware/external firmware/? If someone starts writing free firmware for some of the affected devices, it will for sure have to live outside the main kernel tree for a while. Later people will still want to give users the option to use the free firmware or the better tested non-free one. Not that I know of any efforts, or even whether that would be realistic. Just a principle thought. Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
file permissions on /etc/apt/trusted.gpg
Hello developers, I am implementing a package manager named 'cupt' for Debian for the aim to provide future APT replacement using the same archive infrasctucture avoiding however some hard-to-fix APT bugs. One of already present cupt features - checking of Release gpg signatures in every run, not only during 'update' action, which has the benefit to reveal possible gpg key expiries or revokes if the system administrator for some reason don't run 'update' action enough frequently. To achieve this, I need world-readable file containing gpg public keys used for verifying. APT maintains this file as /etc/apt/trusted.gpg. However, its permissions are 600, whereas I need 644. Despite placing in /etc (it has probably to lie in /var/lib/apt, as pointed by Enrico Zini), this is not a conffile. The easiest way for me to fix this is to do 'chmod +r /etc/apt/trusted.gpg' in the cupt's postinst. As this file contains only public gpg public keys, this should not harm anything. One can argue that the sane way to fix this is file a bug against apt, wait for fix and then depend on apt >= (x.y.z), where x.y.z is the fixed version. While this is true, the approach has two drawbacks: 1) depending on newer apt version would lead to uninstallability on Lenny, while now cupt can be installed on pure-Lenny system 2) waiting for fix in apt can take significant time Given all this, are there arguments against that chmod command? -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Maintainer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Linux-libre for Debian Lenny
Hi On Freitag, 24. April 2009, Ben Finney wrote: > Adeodato Simó writes: > > > To an hypothetical person that would deeply care about not running > > non-free software, does that provide any real gain/benefit/improvement > > over running a kernel full of request_firmware() calls, and never > > installing a firmware package from non-free in their systems? Honest > > question. > > Jokes about “sin” aside: It's a whole lot easier to *discover* such > non-free pieces if one can be confident that, even if installed by > mistake, they will fail to load. > > Think of it as “defense in depth”, ensuring that there is more than > one barrier to undesirable elements. Just as a side note, there are a number of FOSS firmwares requiring request_firmware() available, voiding this argument. Be it Robert Millan's "a56" [1] package for the Motorola DSP56001 DSPs or OpenFWWF [2] (#513974, as it depends on kernel 2.6.30 (ideally 2.6.31) [3], I haven't pushed for it yet, but it works well) as a GPL2 licensed free firmware for a number of Broadcom 802.11b/g wlan cards. Similar approaches to create free firmware replacements have (had?) also been started for prism54/ p54 wlan cards, although I'm not aware of its status. Regards Stefan Lippers-Hollmann [1] http://packages.debian.org/a56 [2] http://www.ing.unibs.it/openfwwf/ http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/fullstory/b43-asm/trunk/ (#513973) http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/fullstory/openfwwf/trunk/ [3] http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/fullstory/openfwwf/trunk/debian/README.Debian signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#525428: ITP: profit -- structural alignment of multiple proteins
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Steffen Moeller * Package name: profit Version : 3.1 Upstream Author : Andrew Martin , Graig T. Porter * URL : http://www.bioinf.org.uk/software/profit/ * License : non-free, non-redistributable Description : structural alignment of multiple proteins The authors need to change the license, still. The debian folder should appear on http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org in some near future. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Considering the removal of ntpdate
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:30:36 +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote: > - For Squeeze: a package "ntpdate" which depends on rdate and >provides a wrapper script, used to emulate ntpdate's main functionality >(set the system's clock) in terms of rdate and mark it as deprecated Isn't rdate what we tried to get rid of with ntpdate ten years ago? Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Bug#525428: ITP: profit -- structural alignment of multiple proteins
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Steffen Moeller wrote: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Steffen Moeller * Package name: profit Version : 3.1 Upstream Author : Andrew Martin , Graig T. Porter * URL : http://www.bioinf.org.uk/software/profit/ * License : non-free, non-redistributable Description : structural alignment of multiple proteins The authors need to change the license, still. The debian folder should appear on http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org in some near future. Well, that's not really a long description, though. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: file permissions on /etc/apt/trusted.gpg
"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" wrote: > The easiest way for me to fix this is to do 'chmod +r > /etc/apt/trusted.gpg' in the cupt's postinst. As this file contains only > public gpg public keys, this should not harm anything. An alternative would be to instruct the user to do the change, if you cannot get agreement with the apt maintainers soon. Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Considering the removal of ntpdate
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:30:36AM +0200, José Luis Tallón wrote: > - For Squeeze: a package "ntpdate" which depends on rdate and > provides a wrapper script, used to emulate ntpdate's main functionality > (set the system's clock) in terms of rdate and mark it as deprecated > > - For Squeeze+1: just drop it > > > * I do use ntpdate "regularly" --every time I fiddle with my system's > clock or check a customer's older server-- for the same purpose that > weasel gave before. rdate ist not a replacement for ntpdate - it does not use the ntp protocol but the time protocol (builtin inetd) - So making ntpdate depend on rdate is not a solution as it changes the protocol and i dont think all ntp servers also open/support the time protocol. f...@stereo:~$ egrep "^time|^ntp" /etc/services time37/tcp timserver time37/udp timserver ntp 123/tcp ntp 123/udp # Network Time Protocol Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@rfc822.org +49-171-2280134 Those who would give up a little freedom to get a little security shall soon have neither - Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Considering the removal of ntpdate
Florian Lohoff wrote: > rdate ist not a replacement for ntpdate - it does not use the ntp > protocol but the time protocol (builtin inetd) - So making > ntpdate depend on rdate is not a solution as it changes the protocol > and i dont think all ntp servers also open/support the time protocol. rdate also supports the ntp protocol. From the man page: -n Use SNTP (RFC 2030) instead of the RFC 868 time protocol. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Considering the removal of ntpdate
On Friday 24 April 2009, Frans Pop wrote: > Florian Lohoff wrote: > > rdate ist not a replacement for ntpdate - it does not use the ntp > > protocol but the time protocol (builtin inetd) - So making > > ntpdate depend on rdate is not a solution as it changes the protocol > > and i dont think all ntp servers also open/support the time protocol. > > rdate also supports the ntp protocol. From the man page: > -n Use SNTP (RFC 2030) instead of the RFC 868 time protocol. And JFYI, since Lenny Debian Installer uses rdate to update the system time during installs (rdate -o 123 -nvv "$server") and we've not seen any issues with that. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#525490: ITP: fizmo -- console-based Z-Machine interpreter for playing Infocom / Inform games
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: christoph.en...@spellbreaker.org
* Package name: fizmo
Version : 0.6.2
Upstream Author : christoph.en...@spellbreaker.org
* URL : http://spellbreaker.org/~chrender/fizmo/
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C, C++
Description : console-based Z-Machine interpreter for playing Infocom /
Inform games
Fizmo is a Z-Machine interpreter ("Fizmo Interprets Z-Machine Opcodes") which
allows you to run Infocom- and most other Z-Machine based games -- except
version 6 -- on POSIX-like systems which provide a ncursesw (note the "w")
library. It has been successfully compiled on Debian based Linux, Mac OS X
(with MacPorts providing ncursesw) and Windows (using Cygwin and a self-
compiled ncursesw library). This is a "console"-style application, meaning
that it runs in textmode and does not provide any GUI whatsoever. About
Infocom and interactive fiction in general, see the "New to IF" section
at http://www.ifarchive.org.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0.1
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Linux-libre for Debian Lenny
On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 19:19 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ben Finney writes: > > > Okay. So I take it then that you would be against separate packaging > > for Linux-Libre for Debian, and prefer instead to apply all its > > changes to Debian's Linux? No, but I am committed to separating sourceless binaries from the kernel package. > I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I feel the urge to weigh in. > > I think the removal of even the ability to load non-free firmware is > stupid and self-defeating and certainly don't think that should be done > in Debian, in either the main Linux kernel packages or, for that matter, > in a separate package. (I'm sure the security team doesn't want to do > twice as many kernel security builds just to support that particular > exercise.) I don't see either of those happening. > Whatever other work the Linux-Libre folks, or anyone else for that > matter, do to cleanly separate firmware from the Linux kernel (even for > free firmware, as far as I'm concerned) seems like a good thing to > adopt. I was previously unaware of Linux Libre and its removal scripts, and they may be useful to compare against. However, I believe Linux Libre goes rather too far. Aside from the fact that it removes even the option of loading firmware, which does not seem to be in line with the Debian social contract, it disables some drivers with obscure initialisation tables even though these are plausible preferred forms of modification. > As with any other Debian package, the best approach for adoption is to > get the patches adopted upstream so that everyone can benefit and we > don't have to maintain local divergences. Right, we're doing that. > It sounds like Ben Hutchings > and the Debian kernel team have been doing great work in this area, and > I can only stand and applaud their excellent, constructive resolution of > this problem in a way that's consistent with all of our ideals. There are a whole lot of people working on this - David Woodhouse and Jaswinder Singh have probably done the most work upstream. Ben. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
Hi,
In light of the recent outdated config.{sub,guess} discussion I have
decided to generate a list[0] of packages that have these files from before
June 2006, which is when the AVR32 architecture was added. The number
of affected packages comes to 620, and obviously filing 620 bugs seems
like the wrong way to go about this. I shall leave it like this for a
while giving people chance to update things, and later, if nobody objects,
I shall start filing bugs for these.
Obviously this is only a 'wishlist' problem, since AVR32 is not an official
architecture, but I'd very much appreciate it if people could fix these so
as to help push the port forward faster. Thanks.
The list was generated using lintian 2.2.9 with this[1] patch. It is
obviously possible that there are false positives in this list since the
files might be not be actually used in the build, or they are copied from
the host on clean etc. Please let me know if this is the case for one of
your packages so I can avoid filing pointless bugs later on, although it
is probably better to either remove/replace these files or override the
lintian error.
Regards,
Bradley Smith
[0] http://files.brad-smith.co.uk/outdated-autotools-helper-file-by-maint.txt
[1] http://files.brad-smith.co.uk/lintian-2.2.9.diff.txt
--
Bradley Smith b...@brad-smith.co.uk
Debian GNU/Linux Developer bradsm...@debian.org
GPG: 0xC718D347 D201 7274 2FE1 A92A C45C EFAB 8F70 629A C718 D347
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
Bradley Smith writes:
> The list was generated using lintian 2.2.9 with this[1] patch. It is
> obviously possible that there are false positives in this list since the
> files might be not be actually used in the build, or they are copied from
> the host on clean etc. Please let me know if this is the case for one of
> your packages so I can avoid filing pointless bugs later on, although it
> is probably better to either remove/replace these files or override the
> lintian error.
The autoconf2.13 package was flagged, but I am not sure that it
makes sense to update the config.{sub,guess} files in a package
that is provided only for use with software that itself has not
been updated in many years.
(Maybe it's time to get rid of the autoconf2.13 package
altogether, come to think of it.)
--
Ben Pfaff
http://benpfaff.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
Bradley Smith (25/04/2009):
> In light of the recent outdated config.{sub,guess} discussion I have
> decided to generate a list[0] of packages that have these files from
> before June 2006, which is when the AVR32 architecture was added.
Speaking of which, where can one read more about that port? Are there
build logs available (one might want to ease your task and keep an eye
on them for some given packages at least)?
(e.g. I've just fixed one of the package you listed, I was willing to
keep an eye on its build status on this arch.)
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Speaking of which, where can one read more about that port? Are there > build logs available (one might want to ease your task and keep an eye > on them for some given packages at least)? http://avr32.debian.net/ http://ftp-avr32.debian.net/status/architecture.php?a=avr32 Would be nice to move this port to debian-ports.org IMO, since the debian-ports wanna-build is already linked from the PTS. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
On Saturday 25 April 2009 02:51:40 Bradley Smith wrote:
> In light of the recent outdated config.{sub,guess} discussion I have
> decided to generate a list[0] of packages that have these files from before
> June 2006, which is when the AVR32 architecture was added.
> The list was generated using lintian 2.2.9 with this[1] patch. It is
> obviously possible that there are false positives in this list since the
> files might be not be actually used in the build, or they are copied from
> the host on clean etc. Please let me know if this is the case for one of
> your packages so I can avoid filing pointless bugs later on, although it
> is probably better to either remove/replace these files or override the
> lintian error.
Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
which automatically updates config.{sub,guess}.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Outdated config.{sub,guess} package list
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
> which automatically updates config.{sub,guess}.
There doesn't seem to be a bug on lintian about this, please file one.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
