Bug#571676: ITP: pianobar -- console based player for Pandora radio

[Luke Faraone]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Luke Faraone 

* Package name: pianobar
  Version : 20100222.git6805c07
  Upstream Author : Lars-Dominik Braun 
* URL : http://6xq.net/0017
* License : MIT/X11 (BSD like)
  Programming Lang: C
  Description : console based player for Pandora radio

pianobar is a cross-platform console client for the personalized web radio 
Pandora,
supporting all important features pandora has:
  
  * Create, delete, rename stations and add more music
  * Rate and temporary ban tracks as well as move them to another station
  * “Shared stations”

and some that pandora does not have (yet):
 
* last.fm scrobbling
* Proxy support for non-americans



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100227032810.3741.36439.report...@opus.home

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

As no opposing arguments were brought up I went ahead and now both
changes are in dpkg's git tree.

On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 00:15:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils,
> the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 172 KiB; xz-utils 504 KiB,
> 160 KiB in share/doc/ and liblzma2 304 KiB, 124 KiB in share/doc/) but
> it supports both “.lzma” and “.xz” formats, in the imminent future
> dpkg-deb will get switched to directly use liblzma-dev so that one will
> disappear, Jonathan Nieder has already sent some patches for that, they
> need some changes first, so probably after next release (after 1.15.6).

  
  

> Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking
> against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb)
> and libselinux (affecting dpkg itself only on Linux). Here's the
> arguments I know of against and in favour, with rebuttals:

  

regards,
guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100227025546.gd27...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 22:51:55 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
> I don't have any objections to this, but I'd strongly suggest that
> this get a run-through experimental with an announcement on
> -devel-announce to request testing so that any really bad problems are
> caught before it gets deployed more widely.

Sure, this can be accommodated, but more so due to the amount of
accumulated changes in the upcoming release, than this specific change,
which I don't expect will cause any problem, but I guess one never
knows. :)

thanks,
guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100227024959.gc27...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: Removing dpkg conffile backgrounding prompt support

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 04:49:06 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I'd like to know if people would strongly miss being able to
> background dpkg on the conffile prompt (‘Z’), instead of starting a
> new subshell. The latter is the default with most modern frontends
> (APT based).
> 
> I personally find the background support annoying and confusing when
> one is used to expect a subshell. It would also allow to properly fix
> bug 60329, which I think would be nice.
> 
> Otherwise I'd like to remove it in the near future.

Ok I've done so now with:

  

and

  

Also once #486222 is fixed (next apt upload it seems), then it will be
possible to always Ctrl-Z on the prompt achieving the same result, so
no functionality lost after all!

regards,
guillem


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100227024623.gb27...@gaara.hadrons.org

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[William Pitcock]

Hi,

- "Michael Tautschnig"  wrote:

> First of all, I'd like to say a big THANKS to all the people
> maintaining Xen
> within (in of course also outside) Debian; you really saved us lots of
> money and
> energy (which is both, electrical and that personal one). 
> 
> [...]
> 
> > 
> > > 4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for
> non-Linux
> > > guests after squeeze?  Still KVM?
> > Yes, virtualized Windows works much better in (modern) KVM than
> Xen.
> > 
> > > 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze
> avoid
> > > Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they
> use?
> > It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features.
> While it
> > works fine for development and casual use I do not recommend using
> it in
> > production for critical tasks.
> > This is where Red Hat really beats us: RHEL shipped Xen years ago
> but
> > recently they released an update which provides a backported and
> > stabilized KVM.
> > 
> > > 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What
> can I do
> > > to help with this point?
> > Remind people that Xen is dying and KVM is the present and the
> future.
> > 
> 
> As I understand the later mails of Bastian and Ian, this is probably
> not an
> issue anyway, but still I'd like to note it: Even though KVM may have
> a
> promising future (on hardware with virtualization support, at least),
> there is a
> serious need for a nice migration path. It seems impossible to
> dist-upgrade to
> squeeze and switch from Xen to KVM at the same time.

Such a migration path already exists: xenner, but it needs to be packaged,
and possibly updated to work with newer Xen hypercalls (such as those introduced
since Xen 3.1).

I am looking into packaging xenner already as a backup plan if I cannot
manage to fix some major reentrancy problems in the Xen dom0 code (Xensource
2.6.18 patches, the pvops stuff has it's own share of problems and needs
more evaluation).

William


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/23104025.2771267222987538.javamail.r...@ifrit.dereferenced.org

Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond Summary

[John Goerzen]

Thank you for the conversation on this.  I would like to summarize what
people have been saying -- it seems there is still a lot of disagreement
about things out there yet, and I'm not entirely certain about things
yet, but this has been helpful.

I'll include my original email with comments from people posting in this
thread mixed in.

According to http://wiki.debian.org/SystemVirtualization :

"Qemu and KVM - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"

"VirtualBox - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"

"Xen - Provides para-virtualization and full-virtualization. Mostly used
on servers. Will be abandoned after squeeze."

 + Andrew M. A. Cater: Xen doesn't keep anywhere current in terms of
kernel - if we release Squeeze this year with kernel 2.6.3*, Debian will
have to maintain all the patches/ "forward port" them to 2.6.32 or
2.6.33 as was done with 2.6.2*.

 + Goswin von Brederlow: I think we can all agree that the old style xen
patches from 2.6.18 and forward ported to newer kernels in lenny are
unmaintainable. But the pv-ops xen kernel is shaping up well and that is
what Bastian Banks is working on. They have a proper upstream and follow
the latest vanilla kernel well enough. According to the wiki the plan is
to have pv-ops merge into vanilla with 2.6.34.

 + Olivier Bonvalet: Linux dom0 kernel from Lenny doesn't work at all on
some hardware with recent pv_ops domu.  In that case you have to change
to a different version...

The Xen page on the wiki makes no mention of this.

So, I am wondering about our direction in this way:


*** 1) Will a squeeze system be able to run the Xen hypervisor?  A Xen dom0?

 + Ben Hutchings: Maybe.  Ian Campbell and Bastian Blank are working on it.

 + Bastian Blank: [re hypervisor] Why not? I see packages laying around.
[re dom0] Most likely yes.  I'm currently ironing out the obvious bugs.


*** 2) Will a squeeze system be able to be installed as a Xen domU with
a lenny dom0?  What about squeeze+1?

 + Ben Hutchings: lenny's xen-flavour kernels (needed for dom0, optional
for domU) are not supportable even now.

 + Bastian Blank: Yes. It should even run on RHEL 5.

 + Olivier Bonvalet: I have a Debian squeeze running on a Lenny Dom0
Xen.  Today it seem to works.


*** 3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option
after squeeze?  Are we confident enough in the stability and performance
of KVM to call it such?  (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
rather iffy stability and performance, but I could be off.)

 + Marco d'Itri: [regarding KVM stability]: Yes. [regarding my
impressions of KVM being wrong]: You are, KVM had huge changes in the
last year.

 + Andrew M.A. Cater: KVM is shaping up well and appears to be very well
supported by Red Hat.

 + Goswin von Brederlow: [to Cater] But still slower and less secure due
to qemu.


*** 3a) What about Linux virtualization on servers that lack hardware
virtualization support, which Xen supports but KVM doesn't?

Marco d'Itri: Tough luck.


*** 4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for
non-Linux guests after squeeze?  Still KVM?

 + Marco d'Itri: Yes, virtualized Windows works much better in (modern)
KVM than Xen.


*** 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze
avoid Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?

 + Ben Hutchings: I would discourage use of the xen-flavour in lenny.

 + Marco d'Itri: It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important
features. While it works fine for development and casual use I do not
recommend using it in production for critical tasks. This is where Red
Hat really beats us: RHEL shipped Xen years ago but recently they
released an update which provides a backported and stabilized KVM.

 + Andrew M. A. Cater: New Squeeze - use KVM? New Lenny - whatever you
want, because at this point you have (days until release of Squeeze + 1
year) to find an alternative.

*** 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What can
I do to help with this point?

 + Marco d'Itri: Remind people that Xen is dying and KVM is the present
and the future.

 + Samuel Thibault: [to Marco] No FUD, thanks.

-- John


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b883f38.7040...@complete.org

Bug#571656: ITP: billiard -- Multiprocessing Pool Extensions for Python

[Fladischer Michael]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Fladischer Michael 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


* Package name: billiard
  Version : 0.2.3
  Upstream Author : Ask Solem 
* URL : http://pypi.python.org/pypi/billiard/
* License : BSD
  Programming Lang: Python
  Description : Multiprocessing Pool Extensions for Python


-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkuIKW4ACgkQeJ3z1zFMUGZMHQCbBsNwlaNy2Ss93+9B+OOY+4al
mS0An0gyeaaawjD23yvJgvDr/l+04Wwc
=cRMd
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100226200502.18965.78828.report...@corellia.home.fladi.at

Re: Debian Packaging Meego Working Group

[Fathi Boudra]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Raphael Hertzog  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> following the recent "Debian Mobile" thread on
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org, and the numerous discussions about
> packaging on meego-...@meego.com, it looks like that it would be a good
> idea to have an official Meego Working Group dedicated to Debian Packaging
> of Meego software. So I went ahead and drafted the proposal on the wiki:
> http://wiki.meego.com/Proposal_for_a_Debian_Packaging_working_group

it isn't clear on the wiki page: the working group will use Meego
infrastructure based on OBS
to do a deb/apt based Meego instance, right ?

Cheers,

Fathi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/6a2e33621002261153y5c535f1ct9e68a4c035ee0...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Michael Tautschnig]

First of all, I'd like to say a big THANKS to all the people maintaining Xen
within (in of course also outside) Debian; you really saved us lots of money and
energy (which is both, electrical and that personal one). 

[...]

> 
> > 4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for non-Linux
> > guests after squeeze?  Still KVM?
> Yes, virtualized Windows works much better in (modern) KVM than Xen.
> 
> > 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
> > Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?
> It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features. While it
> works fine for development and casual use I do not recommend using it in
> production for critical tasks.
> This is where Red Hat really beats us: RHEL shipped Xen years ago but
> recently they released an update which provides a backported and
> stabilized KVM.
> 
> > 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What can I do
> > to help with this point?
> Remind people that Xen is dying and KVM is the present and the future.
> 

As I understand the later mails of Bastian and Ian, this is probably not an
issue anyway, but still I'd like to note it: Even though KVM may have a
promising future (on hardware with virtualization support, at least), there is a
serious need for a nice migration path. It seems impossible to dist-upgrade to
squeeze and switch from Xen to KVM at the same time.

Thanks everyone,
Michael



pgph22ptMIHTL.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Bug#571651: ITP: blogilo -- Blogging client for KDE

[Al Nikolov]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Al Nikolov 


* Package name: blogilo
  Version : 1.0
  Upstream Author : Mehrdad Momeny 
* URL : http://blogilo.gnufolks.org/
* License : GPL3
  Programming Lang: C++
  Description : Blogging client for KDE

Blogilo is a Blogging client, focused on simplicity and usability. Blogilo 
means "Blog Tool" in Esperanto.
It was formerly known as Bilbo, And at 18-Sep-2009, renamed to Blogilo due to a 
trademark issue.
It based on a modified version of KDE KBlog library, and uses Qt4 and KDE 4 
libraries.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226191439.6694.83417.report...@home-br0

Bug#571647: ITP: qhimdtransfer -- Transfer software for HiMD Walkman

[Adrian Glaubitz]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Adrian Glaubitz 

Hi,

I would like to package qhimdtransfer for Debian which is the graphical frontend
to a library called libhimd which we also develop. libhimd is also intended for
packaging in another ITP (#533112) in Debian. Up to now, we are linking 
qhimdtranfer
statically against libhimd since we expect still a lot of changes to the code in
the library.

* Package name: qhimdtransfer
  Version : 0.0.1
  Upstream Author : Adrian Glaubitz 
* URL : https://wiki.physik.fu-berlin.de/linux-minidisc
* License : GPL
  Programming Lang: C, C++
  Description : Transfer software for HiMD Walkman

qhimdtransfer is a transfer software for HiMD Walkman. These
MiniDisc devices provide a USB interface to transfer music tracks
to and from the device. Since HiMD uses a special, proprietary
container format, a special software is required for transfer.



Adrian



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100226182227.10007.31971.report...@z6.physik.fu-berlin.de

Debian Packaging Meego Working Group

[Raphael Hertzog]

Hello,

following the recent "Debian Mobile" thread on
debian-devel@lists.debian.org, and the numerous discussions about
packaging on meego-...@meego.com, it looks like that it would be a good
idea to have an official Meego Working Group dedicated to Debian Packaging
of Meego software. So I went ahead and drafted the proposal on the wiki:
http://wiki.meego.com/Proposal_for_a_Debian_Packaging_working_group

Interested people can register themselves in the contributors section
and can also join #meego-debian on Freenode.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog

Like what I do? Sponsor me: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/05/5-years-of-freexian/
My Debian goals: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/09/debian-related-goals-for-2010/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226173042.gd31...@rivendell

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 26, Luca Capello  wrote:

> >> 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
> >> Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?
> > It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features. While it
> > works fine for development and casual use I do not recommend using it in
> > production for critical tasks.
> Is the qemu-kvm backport the "correct" solution, then?
You also need a recent kvm driver in the host, so probably you should
just use a newer kernel at least in the host.
I have tens of lenny guests (with their standard kernels) on RHEL 5.4
hosts and so far I had no issues, but so far most guests are not heavily
loaded.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Luca Capello]

Hi there!

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:38:33 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 25, John Goerzen  wrote:
>> 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
>> Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?
> It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features. While it
> works fine for development and casual use I do not recommend using it in
> production for critical tasks.

Is the qemu-kvm backport the "correct" solution, then?

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca


pgpvDnWon7rrd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Ian Campbell]

On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 11:58 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Feb 26, Petter Reinholdtsen  wrote:
> 
> > I understand the pain of maintaining Xen, but believe it is bad idea
> > to defend replacing it with kvm by claiming those needing
> > virtualization and not having servers with hardware support are few
> > and should just get new servers.
> Obviously these people can start maintaining Xen themselves...

Um, they are?

There are people (myself included) who are committed to maintaining Xen
stuff in squeeze, so what is the problem?

Ian.
-- 
Ian Campbell

Work smarter, not harder, and be careful of your speling.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/1267194360.11737.12463.ca...@zakaz.uk.xensource.com

Re: [RFC] Collecting changelog entries in projectb

[Jon Dowland]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:25:37PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum
wrote:
> > UDD is the wrong approach. And also, ever looked at its
> > "db layout"?
> 
> Could you elaborate?

UDD sprung to mind for me too.  I'd like to know why it
doesn't fit for this use-case.  I'd also be curious in an
armchair-sense to know what's wrong with it's db layout
(I've never looked)


-- 
Jon Dowland


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[John Goerzen]

Bastian Blank wrote:
> 
> Did we ever had something "preferred"? 

Not officially, but there were clearly better solutions for different
situations.

-- John

> 
> Bastian
> 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b87d8c8.4020...@complete.org

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[John Goerzen]

Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> I understand the pain of maintaining Xen, but believe it is bad idea
> to defend replacing it with kvm by claiming those needing
> virtualization and not having servers with hardware support are few
> and should just get new servers.

Agreed.  At work, we made a major purchase of Opteron servers in 2006.
Many of them don't have HW virtualization support, and yet are still
perfectly fine servers, happily running Xen to this day.

-- John


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b87d572.4020...@complete.org

Re: Where to report bug for lintian HTML pages ?

[Patrick Schoenfeld]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 02:13:48PM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> http://lintian.debian.org/tags/doc-base-unknown-section.html
>
> Where should I fill a bug for that ?

See the bottom of the page:

" Please send all comments about these web pages to the Lintian
maintainers."

Regards,
Patrick


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226135236.ga5...@lisa

Where to report bug for lintian HTML pages ?

[Mathieu Malaterre]

Hi there,

  I am looking at the page:

http://lintian.debian.org/tags/doc-base-unknown-section.html

Clearly the line (and the href) is bogus:

"Refer to Debian doc-base Manual section 2.3.3 (The section field) for
details. "

Where should I fill a bug for that ?

Thanks,
-- 
Mathieu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/bf0c3b3f1002260513m45961b86s845eb7819e186...@mail.gmail.com

Re: [RFC] Collecting changelog entries in projectb

[Simon McVittie]

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 at 11:21:08 +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Post-upload corrections?

I assume Charles refers to this practice: imagine I maintained hello, and
uploaded upstream release 6.6 without initially realising that it contained
a security fix:

hello (6.6-1) unstable; urgency=low

 * New upstream release.

 -- Simon McVittie   Tue, April 1, 2038 09:00:00 +

Then in a later upload, I'd want to correct that:

hello (6.6-2) unstable; urgency=medium

 * Add patch from upstream to fix build on knetbsd-mipsel and
   knetbsd-toaster (Closes: #66)
 * Retroactively note CVE number for 6.6-1

 -- Simon McVittie   Wed, April 2, 2038 09:00:00 +

hello (6.6-1) unstable; urgency=low

 * New upstream release.
   - Fixes a buffer overflow in excessively long greetings (CVE-2038-001)

 -- Simon McVittie   Tue, April 1, 2038 09:00:00 +

(I conjecture that by 2038, Debian will run on toasters, GNU hello will
be security-sensitive, and we'll still be fixing buffer overflows...)

S


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100226125818.ga7...@reptile.pseudorandom.co.uk

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 26, Philipp Kern  wrote:

> Wow, logic.  Because they don't have monetary resources to buy new
> servers they have a vast amount of time instead?
Why should they expect other people to solve their problems for them?
Free software is not about other people working in your place.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [RFC] Collecting changelog entries in projectb

[Philipp Kern]

On 2010-02-26, Charles Plessy  wrote:
> If the developments on changelog parsing introduce new requirements, in
> particular limitations on post-upload corrections, I strongly recommend to
> document this in our Policy.

Post-upload corrections?

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnhofbl4.9b7.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Philipp Kern]

On 2010-02-26, Marco d'Itri  wrote:
> On Feb 26, Petter Reinholdtsen  wrote:
>> I understand the pain of maintaining Xen, but believe it is bad idea
>> to defend replacing it with kvm by claiming those needing
>> virtualization and not having servers with hardware support are few
>> and should just get new servers.
> Obviously these people can start maintaining Xen themselves...

Wow, logic.  Because they don't have monetary resources to buy new
servers they have a vast amount of time instead?

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnhofbjd.9b7.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 26, Petter Reinholdtsen  wrote:

> I understand the pain of maintaining Xen, but believe it is bad idea
> to defend replacing it with kvm by claiming those needing
> virtualization and not having servers with hardware support are few
> and should just get new servers.
Obviously these people can start maintaining Xen themselves...

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:18:41AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:

> But the pv-ops xen kernel is shaping up well and that is what Bastian
> Banks is working on. They have a proper upstream and follow the latest
> vanilla kernel well enough. According to the wiki the plan is to have
> pv-ops merge into vanilla with 2.6.34.

I just took a quick look at linux-next (which *should* have everything
for 2.6.34 in it) doesn't show anything that looks obviously like this,
though I only looked briefly.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226103536.gb31...@sirena.org.uk

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Olivier Bonvalet]

Hi,

1) in Lenny I use the Xen hypervisor 3.4 from Squeeze, so it works.
The main problem is that the linux dom0 patch is not (yet) upstream, and 
Debian can't really maintain it.

But we hope, it will be accepted upstream, a lot of works have be done.
As you can see on the Xen wiki 
http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenDom0Kernels , "Xen 4.0 switched to 
using Linux pv_ops based dom0 kernel as a default. This is the kernel 
all users should be using and testing, and all the development should be 
made against this kernel tree."
So we already use that version for testing (and I use it for production 
too... with some limitations).


But xen-tools have be removed from Squeeze, so I suppose it will be more 
difficult to create new installations (require much more work to replace 
the xen-create-image script).


2) Well, I have a Debian squeeze running on a Lenny Dom0 Xen. Today it 
seem to works.


3) LXC, Xen, KVM, or others. You choose what you want no ? I dislike 
KVM, except on desktops.


5) Linux dom0 kernel from Lenny doesn't work at all on some hardware 
with recent pv_ops domu. In that case you have to change to a different 
version...



But I'm not a debian developper.

Olivier

On 25/02/2010 23:53, John Goerzen wrote:

Hi folks,

There was a thread here a little while back about the status of Xen in
future Debian releases.  It left me rather confused, and I'm hoping to
find some answers (which I will then happily document in the wiki).

According to http://wiki.debian.org/SystemVirtualization :

"Qemu and KVM - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"

"VirtualBox - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"

"Xen - Provides para-virtualization and full-virtualization. Mostly used
on servers. Will be abandoned after squeeze."

The Xen page on the wiki makes no mention of this.

So, I am wondering about our direction in this way:

1) Will a squeeze system be able to run the Xen hypervisor?  A Xen dom0?

2) Will a squeeze system be able to be installed as a Xen domU with a
lenny dom0?  What about squeeze+1?

3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option after
squeeze?  Are we confident enough in the stability and performance of
KVM to call it such?  (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
rather iffy stability and performance, but I could be off.)

3a) What about Linux virtualization on servers that lack hardware
virtualization support, which Xen supports but KVM doesn't?

4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for non-Linux
guests after squeeze?  Still KVM?

5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?

6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What can I do
to help with this point?

Thanks,

-- John


   



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b87a27c.6010...@daevel.fr

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Goswin von Brederlow]

"Andrew M.A. Cater"  writes:

> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:53:56PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> There was a thread here a little while back about the status of Xen in
>> future Debian releases.  It left me rather confused, and I'm hoping to
>> find some answers (which I will then happily document in the wiki).
>> 
>> According to http://wiki.debian.org/SystemVirtualization :
>> 
>> "Qemu and KVM - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"
>> 
> Yes - but also the only game in town for cross platform emulation.
>
> KVM is shaping up well and appears to be very well supported by Red Hat.

But still slower and less secure due to qemu.

>> "VirtualBox - Mostly used on Desktops/Laptops"
>
> Who knows what will happen to this now that Oracle own it? It's possible 
> it will be merged in one of their other products like Virtual Iron.
>
>> 
>> "Xen - Provides para-virtualization and full-virtualization. Mostly used
>> on servers. Will be abandoned after squeeze."
>> 
>
> I think that the problem here is that Xen isn't mainstream in the 
> kernel. It takes a long time for a Xen-ified kernel to come out and any 
> distribution supporting it has to carry a heavy patch burden. Xen 
> doesn't keep anywhere current in terms of kernel - if we release Squeeze 
> this year with kernel 2.6.3*, Debian will have to maintain all the patches
> / "forward port" them to 2.6.32 or 2.6.33 as was done with 2.6.2*. 

I think we can all agree that the old style xen patches from 2.6.18 and
forward ported to newer kernels in lenny are unmaintainable.

But the pv-ops xen kernel is shaping up well and that is what Bastian
Banks is working on. They have a proper upstream and follow the latest
vanilla kernel well enough. According to the wiki the plan is to have
pv-ops merge into vanilla with 2.6.34.

>> The Xen page on the wiki makes no mention of this.
>> 
>> So, I am wondering about our direction in this way:
>> 
>> 1) Will a squeeze system be able to run the Xen hypervisor?  A Xen dom0?
>> 
>> 2) Will a squeeze system be able to be installed as a Xen domU with a
>> lenny dom0?  What about squeeze+1?
>> 
>> 3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option after
>> squeeze?  Are we confident enough in the stability and performance of
>> KVM to call it such?  (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
>> rather iffy stability and performance, but I could be off.)
>> 
>> 3a) What about Linux virtualization on servers that lack hardware
>> virtualization support, which Xen supports but KVM doesn't?
>> 
>
> Which servers that lack hardware virtualisation support - 
> pretty much everything made in the last two or three years has it. For 
> servers,
> specifically, the likelihood is that - Lenny has a 2 year life + 1 year, 
> Squeeze has ? year life + 1 year - by the time you get to Squeeze + 1 
> anything that doesn't will be almost ten years old. QEMU will work. 
> Non-Intel - ARM, PPC ... may be another matter.

Just end of last year I bought myself a nice POV/ION330 board (Atom 330
cpu) with 4GB ram. Makes no noise, eats little power and can decode
movies in hardware. The ideal desktop for a non-gamer. But no kvm
support.

There are still a lot of cpus being made that don't have hvm. And
systems are being used longer than 10 years too. My Amiga is coming up
on 20 years. :) Hey, even last years I saw someone asking about actual
i386 support.

And what about ia64? Does kvm support that?

>> 4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for non-Linux
>> guests after squeeze?  Still KVM?
>> 
>> 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid
>> Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1?  If so, what should they use?
>> 
>
> New Squeeze - use KVM? New Lenny - whatever you want, because at this 
> point you have (days until release of Squeeze + 1 year) to find an 
> alternative.
>
>> 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What can I do
>> to help with this point?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> -- John
>> 
>>
>
> Just my 0.02c
>
> AndyC

MfG
Goswin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874ol4e1vi@frosties.localdomain

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Samuel Thibault]

Marco d'Itri, le Fri 26 Feb 2010 02:38:33 +0100, a écrit :
> On Feb 25, John Goerzen  wrote:
> > 3a) What about Linux virtualization on servers that lack hardware
> > virtualization support, which Xen supports but KVM doesn't?
> Tough luck.
> 
> > 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way?  What can I do
> > to help with this point?
> Remind people that Xen is dying and KVM is the present and the future.

No FUD, thanks.

Samuel


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100226100657.ga3...@const.homenet.telecomitalia.it

Re: Xen, Squeeze, and Beyond

[Bastian Blank]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:53:56PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> "Xen - Provides para-virtualization and full-virtualization. Mostly used
> on servers. Will be abandoned after squeeze."
> The Xen page on the wiki makes no mention of this.

Well, I don't know where this conclusion comes from. But usually the
maintainers are responsible for such decisions.

> 1) Will a squeeze system be able to run the Xen hypervisor?

Why not? I see packages laying around.

> 1)   A Xen dom0?

Most likely yes. I'm currently ironing out the obvious bugs.

> 2) Will a squeeze system be able to be installed as a Xen domU with a
> lenny dom0?  What about squeeze+1?

Yes. It should even run on RHEL 5.

> 3) What will be our preferred Linux server virtualization option after
> squeeze?  Are we confident enough in the stability and performance of
> KVM to call it such?  (Last I checked, its paravirt support was of
> rather iffy stability and performance, but I could be off.)

Did we ever had something "preferred"? 

Bastian

-- 
Humans do claim a great deal for that particular emotion (love).
-- Spock, "The Lights of Zetar", stardate 5725.6


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100226095726.ga12...@wavehammer.waldi.eu.org

Bug#571580: ITP: python-netio230a -- software to control the Koukaam NETIO-230A, a cheap but advanced multiple socket

[Philipp Huebner]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Philipp Huebner 

* Package name: python-netio230a
  Upstream Author : Philipp Klaus 
* URL : http://github.com/pklaus/netio230a
* License : GPL 3+
  Programming Lang: Python
  Description : software to control the Koukaam NETIO-230A, a cheap but 
advanced multiple socket


Taken from the URL above:


this software’s core
The core of this software is the Python netio230a:
* netio230a.py – The class netio230a with the functionality to query and 
command the Koukaam NETIO-230A

command line user interface
There is a command line tool (to switch on/off ports) included in the package:
* netio230a_ctrl.py

graphical user interface
And a graphical user interface is also included. PyGTK gui for the NETIO-230A 
(query status / switch on/off ports):
* netio230a_gui.py

You can find screenshots on the screenshots site of the project website.

examples to show how to use the netio230a module/class in your Python projects
To show you how you can take advantage of that class in your own scripts, there 
are also several example files included.
Take a look:
* example.querySystemStatus.py Query all information of the NETIO-230A
* example.switchPower.py switch on/off a port of the device
* example.setTime.py manually set the time of the box
* example.interrupt.py interrupt an output for a predefined time
* example.querySystemStatus.py about 8 hours ago mostly changed examples 
[pklaus]
* example.reboot.py reboot the NETIO-230A (without loosing the power status 
on the ports)

discovery tool
There is also a discovery tool implemented in Python trying to give the same 
functionality as the Windows Tool NetioDiscover.exe by Koukaam.
It is however just a command line tool yet. It is able to detect all Koukaam 
NETIO-230A devices on your network.
It cannot set the IP etc. of any of the devices yet.
* discoverNETIOsOnLAN.py



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20100226080055.20321.80633.report...@emmagan.debalance.de