Re: Bug#684396: ITP: openrc -- alternative boot mechanism that manages the services, startup and shutdown of a host

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 08:28:27PM +0300, Serge wrote:
> 
> It's often someone says something similar about many ITPs. I believe noone
> should say things like that, unless he wants to scare everybody away and
> have Debian forgotten and dead. Saying that you not only reduce the number
> of bugs in Debian, but you also reduce the number of people working on
> Debian, because when they hear that they just turn around and go away.

I don't see how these people help Debian if they start pushing their
own solution instead of helping to improve what is already there.

> If I was an employee of Debian Inc, and I was paid to spend my 40 hours/week
> to my company, then you could tell me "don't mess around openrc, focus on
> upstart, that's a chief's order" (that may work for RedHat). But Debian
> does not pay me, and noone can tell me what to do.

Well, yes. Debian has it's policy, a social contract and the DFSG. You
are certainly not allowed to do anything you want unless you start
your own blend of Debian by forking it.

> When I come and say "Hey, I want to work on openrc in debian" (replace
> "openrc" with any other package), I mean what I say. Most probably I just
> like this particular software for some reason. And it usually never means
> that I also want to work on upstart/systemd/sysvinit/etc. So when you tell
> me "don't mess around it", I won't drop openrc, I'll just drop debian.

If that was really the case, how come there are so many orphaned
packages in Debian? I'm not saying I wouldn't trust your words, but
you cannot seriously promise you will always be there to take care of
OpenRC if you're the only maintainer.

> You can only politely ask "Please, before continuing to work on openrc,
> look at other init systems, maybe you will find there what you need, or
> maybe it would be easier for you to implement the features you need in
> those systems instead of maintaining a new init system on your own". But
> you can't say me what should I do, because I'll just go to Arch/Gentoo,
> that are not as hostile.

I don't understand your rage. Debian has always been strict about its
policies, this isn't really new. As Josselin already pointed out,
there are rules and you are not allowed to do what you want. If you
don't agree with that, it's fine. But please don't force this onto Debian.

> If we want debian to be a successful and popular distribution, we should
> welcome everybody, does not matter what they want to work on. That should
> bring more people to debian. And we want more people to work on debian,
> don't we? We must help them to work on it, and just hope, that some day
> they will also help us to work on our projects too. That's IMHO, of course.

Debian is already very popular and successful and I don't see how
OpenRC would help Debian gain more popularity.

> > 95% of the users don't ever interact with the init system directly, so
> > there is no point in being able to have a choice
> 
> Bad argument. :) 95% of the users don't even know what Linux is (it's just
> a kernel, you know) and they certainly don't interact with it directly.
> But it does not mean that we can forget about linux and never allow
> people to choose it. :)

I was actually talking about Linux users, I was not referring to all
people using computers in the world.

My point is, 95% of the people who install a Debian or Ubuntu nowadays
simply don't care what init system they are using as long as the code
is mature and reliable.

Your arguments aren't - at least - convincing me why we should have
OpenRC in Debian. If you really want to convince me and others being
sceptical about OpenRC, then you should list a number of arguments why
OpenRC is actually a good alternative to the existing init systems in
Debian.

There should be at least some compelling technical arguments for
OpenRC. Saying that you don't like systemd or its upstream author
doesn't count, because this isn't something which affects end users.

A valid argument in favor of OpenRC and against systemd is certainly
that the former is platform-agnostic. But I think that the non-Linux
ports of Debian aren't (yet) important enough to weigh strong enough
in such decisions.

Cheers,

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/20120831200609.ga16...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#686447: ITP: zfs-linux -- The native Linux kernel port of the ZFS filesystem

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 08:02:21PM +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:

>  This package contains the source code for the native implementation of ZFS
>  for the Linux Kernel, which can be used with DKMS, so that local kernel
>  modules are automatically built and installed every time the kernel packages
>  are upgraded.
>  .
>  This package also contains the user space utilities needed to manage ZFS.

Wow, this is actually very nice. I didn't know the implementation of
ZFS has advanced that much. I would really love to see this in Debian
anytime soon.

Do you know how it compares to the version of zfs available for the
FreeBSD kernels feature-wise?

Cheers,

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/20120901181854.gb24...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#684396: ITP: openrc -- alternative boot mechanism that manages the services, startup and shutdown of a host

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sep 2, 2012, at 2:36 AM, Darren Salt  wrote:

> I demand that Thomas Goirand may or may not have written...
> 
> [snip]
>> Sure, OpenRC doesn't have (yet) all the features of systemd. But because of
>> the above, it might be worth to *at least* give it a chance.
> 
> Should it have all of those features? Should it require support from other
> packages? (Are all of those features appropriate?)

Well, the socket-based activation which allows true parallelization of the boot 
process as well as the replacement of the complicated and error-prone bash 
scripts with unit files are quite compelling in my opinion.

I use systemd on my laptop with an SSD and within a kvm and have boot times 
down to 3 seconds.

Also, systemctl and systemd-analyze are really nice.

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/213434cf-8972-4c0b-a8b6-61e01c600...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Popularity of bzr-builddeb and dh-make

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 02:38:46PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: 
> bzr is the fourth most popular version control system in Debian according to
> .  If you're going to demote
> bzr-builddeb (which doesn't bother me), I think you should also be demoting
> svn-buildpackage, because svn is horrible and should die.

Well, you should also mention the numbers from this site. svn and git
are used about 20 and 40 times respectively more often than bzr for
packaging. Saying that bzr is popular is would be misleading
considering these numbers.

I actually heard of bzr-builddeb for the first time and my impression
always was that most packages using bzr are maintained by Ubuntu
developers.

In any case, the Recommends should be agnostic to the VCS being
used. Recommending dh_make is actually very sensible as it's always a
good start when packaging from scratch. I use it for all my packages
and gives a rough guideline for the packaging work.

Cheers,

Adrian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Poll (was: Popularity of bzr-builddeb and dh-make)

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:06:11PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: 
> Thanks.
> 
> I have setup a poll for it:
> 
> https://dudle.inf.tu-dresden.de/Popularity_of_bzr-builddeb_and_dh-make/

I voted, thanks!

Cheers,

Adrian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Poll (was: Popularity of bzr-builddeb and dh-make)

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Oct 17, 2012, at 1:03 AM, Barry Warsaw  wrote:

> On Oct 12, 2012, at 02:22 PM, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> 
>> How does bzr-builddeb depend on Launchpad? bzr is integrated into
>> Launchpad, but you can use bzr without Launchpad as every other DVCS.
> 
> $ bzr branch debianlp:mypackage
> 
> is one way to use Launchpad with bzr for Debian effectively.  It's certainly
> not *required*, but often works out pretty nicely.

And how do I use bzr *without* Launchpad when I don't want to?

I'm not against LP per se, but I don't like tools limiting my choices in 
development that way.

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/bc4bd80d-1d13-4c4f-bf61-060e5d651...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: major linux problems summary 2012

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 01:56:08AM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 07:30:00PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Don't feed the troll.
> It's not trolling.
> It's a honest list of problems which a lot of developers don't view as
> problems.

It's not. If he was serious, he wouldn't be citing articles from 2007.

Also, it annoys the hell out of me when people talk about Linux not
being successful. Linux is the dominant platform for mobile phones,
embedded devices (such as routers, TiVos, television sets),
servers, high-performance clusters, web servers and so on. Just look
it up.

The desktop PC is just one of many hardware platforms and the fact
that critical *commercial* software like Skype, Spotify and even Steam
is available or is going to be available on Linux speaks a completely
different language than what the author tries to draw in his article.

Plus, the desktop is a platform that Microsoft themselves is about to
abandon with Windows 8 (even though I do not think this is going into
the right direction, but that's a different story).

Linus Torvalds is often cited with "The day Microsoft starts writing
software for Linux, I have won." Well, Microsoft is already doing
with Skype. Plus, they're actually contributing to the Linux kernel.

Linux is everything but unsuccessful.

Cheers,

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/20121103205352.ga16...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: debian mate

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 02:57:35AM +0400, Виталий Короневич wrote:
> debian gnome-edition - ok
> debian kde-edition - ok
> debian lxde-edition - ok
> debian xfce-edition - ok

Those aren't really editions comparable to Ubuntu's editions or
Fedora's spins. You just install a regular Debian and choose the
desktop enviroment you want.

> when will debian mate-edition?

This isn't as easy and straight-forward as you might think. There are
many problems that need to be solved with MATE first before it can
enter Debian. Some of these are discussed here [1].

One of the biggest problems with MATE so far is that it currently
depends on libraries and other things that have been deprecated and
removed in Debian and should not be reintroduced to Debian. Thus, the
MATE developers are working to port MATE to more recent libraries
which are available in Debian.

Furthermore, work has to be done to make sure MATE co-installs
seamlessly with anything from GNOME which isn't that trivial. There
are many binaries and libraries which still exist in GNOME3 and
installing MATE could possibily break these.

I'm actually helping the MATE developers to get MATE ready for Debian,
but don't expect that to happen anytime soon.

I'm also working on getting mdm ready, a fork of gdm 2.20. Currently,
I'm not really happy with the code, however.

Adrian

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=658783


-- 
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/20121104235121.ga25...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#692830: ITP: nemo -- File manager for cinnamon

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 03:59:00PM +0100, Nicolas Bourdaud wrote:
> 
> Nemo is a complete fork of Nautilus 3.4 and its goal is to extend the Cinnamon
> user experience to desktop and file management.

I don't think it is currently a sensible decision to introduce
duplicate GNOME3 packages into Debian. Nautilus 3.4 is currently
available through GNOME3, so this would introduce redundancy.

Also, I am not really convinced of the quality of the packages by
Linux Mint. The mdm display manager in the current Linux Mint release
is a dirty fork of the original gdm 2.20 code with the word "gdm"
regexp-replaced by "mdm" (the readme [1] refers to
"ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/mdm/"; as the download location,
for example). Also, the debian directory contains a control.in
template which is never used (since this was part of the original
Debian package). The package doesn't cleanly co-install with gdm nor
gdm3, contains tons of lintian errors and uses a completely outdated
version of debhelper. I don't think such packages would meet the
quality standards of Debian.

Also, last time I checked, Linux Mint Debian itself mixes packages
from unstable with their own repository and I have seen many package
conflicts with this setup. I think a derivative distribution should
always maintain their own complete repository.

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] https://github.com/linuxmint/mdm/blob/master/README
> [2] https://github.com/linuxmint/mdm/tree/master/debian/control.in


-- 
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/20121109160657.ga28...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#692830: ITP: nemo -- File manager for cinnamon

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 04:23:16PM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 05:06:57PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > I don't think it is currently a sensible decision to introduce
> > duplicate GNOME3 packages into Debian. Nautilus 3.4 is currently
> > available through GNOME3, so this would introduce redundancy.
> 
> wheezy will have 3.4 but 3.6 is already in experimental. So uploads
> targetting experimental only until post-freeze should address your
> concern.

Yes, that's correct. But that's only one of the points of my
criticism. I am in general not very much convinced by the quality of
the packages in Linux Mint.

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/20121109162703.ga29...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#692830: ITP: nemo -- File manager for cinnamon

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 05:39:40PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> You critized their packaging, but this appears to be an upstream fork
> which is not just a sed regexp to replace the name. 

I am just sharing my experiences so far. I tried to help them to fix
issues in mdm and my commits were reverted, even though other people
agreed with me.

I am just worried with the quality of packages in Debian. I choose
Debian over everything else because of its high quality standards.

> If people think it is worth keeping the nautilus codebase around, I
> think it would be ok to  have it packaged,

Hmm, are the GNOME developers eventually dropping nautilus altogether?

> there is worse bloat in Debian

Sure, but that doesn't mean we should introduce more mess. We should
rather clean up what's messed up.

> and the default file manager of a very prominent desktop environment
> can be a personal thing to users.

I don't know, shouldn't these users just not use Linux Mint itself
then? The version in Debian will be quickly outdated then anyway, so
that most users will probably complain.

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/20121109164756.ga29...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:49:07PM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> But anyway, we're getting tired of their ADHD-driven changes just to
> change things

TBH, I'm getting tired of people who are constantly shooting against
them because these people are unwilling to accept changes. We're not
bringing Linux forward if we stick to 30-year-old concepts. systemd is a good
design and most people actually agree otherwise it wouldn't become
standard on so many distributions (except Ubuntu, but that's rather a
political decision IMHO).

One of the Arch developers actually made a couple of good points why
they switched to systemd as default [1].

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=1149530#p1149530


-- 
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/20121114140435.gb28...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:20:05AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> But why is a 30-year-old concept necessarily worse than a new one? Or to put 
> it
> another way, why is it necessary to "bring Linux forward", in cases where what
> is already present is good and works well? (And, taken further: in cases where
> what is already there *isn't* good and/or *doesn't* work well, why is it
> necessary to accept change *in a particular direction*, if that direction has
> problems of its own?)

Because System V Init isn't a good concept. It fails in so many
regards. There is no standardized way for init scripts, it cannot
make sure processes actually run and restart them on demand. It also
lacks mechanisms for ressource control and figuring out dependencies
between service without hardcoding them. It's just a dirty
hack. System V Init was good 20 years ago, but it isn't nowadays.

Automatic dependencies, process watchdogs and ressource control are
something which is incredibly useful to have nowadays, especially on
big machines which are shared among many users (clusters, for
example).

> I've run across a few software projects where it has seemed as if the 
> developers
> were adding new features and removing old ones and changing UIs not because
> there was something wrong with the old, but apparently just because "we're the
> developers, we have to make changes or we're not developing it" - because they
> seemed to think that letting a program sit unchanged is automatically a bad
> thing, no matter how close to perfect-for-its-purpose the program may already
> have been.

True, but as I said, System V Init is not a good concept anymore,
that's why it's being dropped. Apple dropped the old init system with
MacOS X 10.4, why should the Linux world still stick to it in 2012?

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/20121114143721.ge28...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
 
> I'm tired of these changes that don't solve any problems. Half-baked
> stuff that is deployed before it is even feature-complete with the
> boring old stuff it is supposed to replace. How would you feel about a
> forced upgrade of apt to yum? After all newer is better ...

Comparing apples and oranges here. You cannot "upgrade" apt to yum
because yum is feature-wise very much comparable to apt. systemd,
OTOH, brings many new useful features you simply can't have with any
other init system. Period.

> 
> > systemd is a good
> > design and most people actually agree otherwise it wouldn't become
> > standard on so many distributions (except Ubuntu, but that's rather a
> > political decision IMHO).
> It does have some good ideas, and it is better than the random bits of
> unmaintained shell it replaces - but it's mediocre at best. No real
> design, just things nailed together with screws and secured with tape.

Which just shows that you probably never seriously dug into
systemd. systemd has a very sensible and mature concept as opposed to
the very hacky System V Init where every distribution has to provide
their *own* init scripts (which clearly shows there is no concept) and
lots of modern functionatity is simply missing.

> > One of the Arch developers actually made a couple of good points why
> > they switched to systemd as default [1].
> > 
> Their users really appreciate it, especially those that are now
> migrating to other distros because they preferred their OS when it was
> booting as intended.

Stating from the thread in the Arch forums which I have posted, I
would say that this is simply untrue. People aren't going away from
Arch because of systemd. There are some who are unhappy with it, sure,
but most Arch users support the systemd switch or simply don't care
because they only want their init system to be fast and reliable which
truly is what systemd provides.

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/20121114144509.gf28...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 14, 2012, at 5:05 PM, Roger Leigh  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 03:04:35PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:49:07PM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> But anyway, we're getting tired of their ADHD-driven changes just to
>>> change things
>> 
>> TBH, I'm getting tired of people who are constantly shooting against
>> them because these people are unwilling to accept changes. We're not
>> bringing Linux forward if we stick to 30-year-old concepts. systemd is a good
>> design and most people actually agree otherwise it wouldn't become
>> standard on so many distributions (except Ubuntu, but that's rather a
>> political decision IMHO).
> 
> systemd does have some good design features.  It also has some bad
> ones.  It's not as black and white as some people have claimed.
> 
> If you want a reliable system, you need a reliable PID 1.  Putting
> additional complexity into PID1 increases the likelihood that a
> bug will bring down your *entire system*.  PID 1 is a single point
> of failure.  It *must* be absolutely dependable and reliable.
> Upstart is also AFAIK at fault here.

Sticking to the same logic, we should pull out all functionality out of the 
Linux kernel and use a micro kernel.

Modern computer systems are much more versatile and complex than they were at 
the time when System V Init was conceived.

You need a certain complexity if you want a certain functionality. I don't want 
to reboot my computer when changing my network connection, add or remove new 
hardware like disks or input devices. And I don't want to mess around with 
configuration files when I want to redirect the audio output of VLC from the 
internal laptop speakers to an bluetooth or AirPlay.

The reason why Linux has become so successful is because users don't have to 
mess with tools like isaconf and pnpdump anymore to configure their 
Soundblaster sound card or edit the interfaces or hosts file to change their IP 
address.

I honestly think that people who are fighting modern software like systemd, 
pulse-audio or udev are simply fearing that their expertise in hacking 
configuration files in order to get things working are no longer needed 
anymore. They fear that the average joe can install and set up a Linux box 
without their help.

When I started using Linux in 1998, I would have never thought that I'd be 
installing it onto my mother's laptop almost 15 years later as the sole 
operating system and she'd be happily using it with nearly zero support from my 
side. This would have never been possible without all these little modern 
helpers that we have nowadays.

If some advanced users want to stick to the traditional Unix way, they're free 
to use distributions like Gentoo or use any of the BSDs. But I honestly ask 
them to stop spreading FUD about how software like systemd or Pulse-Audio is 
hurting Linux and free software, because Linux wouldn't be there where it is 
nowadays without these developments.

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/0277b04f-40fa-4ae1-b3d0-fe08b0e0e...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 14, 2012, at 7:06 PM, Thomas Goirand  wrote:

> On 11/14/2012 10:37 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> True, but as I said, System V Init is not a good concept anymore,
>> that's why it's being dropped. Apple dropped the old init system with
>> MacOS X 10.4, why should the Linux world still stick to it in 2012?
> Could we try not to mix the init system debate with
> the udev brokenness one?

udev isn't broken. The only reason why you think udev is broken is because you 
don't want to use the way it is intended to be used and now you're looking for 
people to jump the band wagon.

I could start the same discussion regarding other software packages not being 
compatible with certain platforms: "I want to use $DAEMON on $KERNEL, so please 
do something, upstream!"

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/50ffb4fe-0a85-43f5-a933-a5bb091e0...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 14, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Steve Langasek  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:47:11PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 03:04:35PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:49:07PM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>>> But anyway, we're getting tired of their ADHD-driven changes just to
>>>> change things
> 
>>> TBH, I'm getting tired of people who are constantly shooting against
>>> them because these people are unwilling to accept changes. We're not
>>> bringing Linux forward if we stick to 30-year-old concepts. systemd is a
>>> good design and most people actually agree otherwise it wouldn't become
>>> standard on so many distributions (except Ubuntu, but that's rather a
>>> political decision IMHO).
> 
>> Pretty sure you have this backwards.  The decision to implement upstart and
>> use it in Ubuntu was a political one.
> 
> Haha, I mean technical. ;)

Haha, gotcha! :)

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/39499ac6-5c31-4541-bec4-e58e28a13...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 03:41:55PM -0300, gustavo panizzo  wrote:
> >udev isn't broken.
> 
> really?
> 
> https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=134012&p=1

I actually remember having seen this issue on Fedora Rawhide as well,
but it vanished after an update a few weeks ago, so it rather seems
like a "normal" bug to me. That's not really what "broken" means in
this context.

> but don't trust me
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/2/505

Well, yes, it's the same issue. Linus is well known for going on a
rant very quickly, but that doesn't mean that udev is completely
broken.

Yes, they obviously made a recent change that broke module loading on
some machines, but that doesn't mean the whole concept is
broken. That's just an unfair statement. Also, Kay is admitting that
there is/was a problem with udev that needs to be addressed and it
seems that they did because I cannot reproduce it anymore with udev
195 anymore.

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/20121114223427.ga23...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 15, 2012, at 12:23 AM, Steve Langasek  wrote:

> Upstart provides a PID 1 that is absolutely rock solid.  It's true that it's
> more complex than sysvinit, because it's more featureful;

The same is valid for the comparision of upstart vs systemd.

> And of all the concerns raised when Ubuntu (and Fedora and OpenSuSE)
> switched to upstart, "PID 1 is buggy and crashes" was not one of them.

With only Ubuntu being the remaining distribution sticking to upstart, while 
nearly everyone else has switched to systemd.

> This is not theoretical.  upstart has been PID 1 in Ubuntu since 2006.  It
> *is* absolutely dependable and reliable.

Upstart has had its problems, too [1]. And, honestly, the way this bug was 
handled left me with little confidence in upstart.

Adrian

> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/557177

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 14, 2012, at 6:43 PM, lego12...@yandex.ru wrote:

>> Modern computer systems are much more versatile and complex than they were 
>> at the time when System V Init was conceived.
> 
>  Some things must be as simple as possible even today.

Care to elaborate why? To save memory on an 8 GB workstation? Even the 25 US$ 
Raspberry Pi has enough power for systemd.

Are you also choosing FAT32 over ext4 because it is simpler?

Why are we having Fibre Channel support in the kernel? Why does the kernel 
include a virtual machine hypervisor? Why do we support IPv6?

We could just go back and stick with our good old SunOS 4 boxes.


> 
>> I honestly think that people who are fighting modern software like systemd, 
>> pulse-audio or udev are simply fearing that their expertise in hacking 
>> configuration files in order to get things working are no longer needed 
>> anymore. They fear that the average joe can install and set up a Linux box 
>> without their help.
> 
>  May be init today should has some new features, but systemd is not such new
> init. systemd is a wrong way. See plan9 for a good design examples.

What makes you think that systemd does it the wrong way? They are using a very 
similar concept that Apple uses very successfully on MacOS X since 10.4 while 
no one in this universe has ever touched Plan 9 again.

People are constantly insisting that systemd is too bloated or unreliable, but 
yet no one has really come up with real examples to prove that.

Yes, the core binary of System V Init is smaller than systemd's. However, 
System V Init needs a lot of bloat in form of hacky bash scripts using even 
more external tools like sed and awk to be actually useful in any regard.

And I think it makes way more sense to have all the functionality of the init 
system integrated into it's core binary rather than depending on external 
scripts which will hopefully do what init expects from them.

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/290b451f-cc15-4793-a0aa-2516d1eff...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 15, 2012, at 1:19 AM, Steve Langasek  wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:45:48AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>> This is not theoretical.  upstart has been PID 1 in Ubuntu since 2006.  It
>>> *is* absolutely dependable and reliable.
> 
>> Upstart has had its problems, too [1].
> 
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/557177
> 
> A bug in an upstart job, and your dissatisfaction with how the upstart
> maintainer responded to the bug report, is entirely orthogonal to Roger's
> point about complexity in PID 1.

I don't think so. It shows what can happen if you delagate fundamental tasks 
out of the core init binary into external bash scripts.

Upstart has to rely entirely rely on the external script to do the right thing 
instead of doing it itself. You are constantly argueing that this makes the 
whole system more reliable, yet it took one apparently harmless command to kill 
the entire filesystem.

I don't want to imagine this situation on our backup or home directory server.

This would not have happened with systemd's design.

> 
>> And, honestly, the way this bug was handled left me with little confidence
>> in upstart.
> 
> I'm very sad for you.

So, you think marking such a major flaw as a wishlist is an appropriate 
reaction?

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/1a08d899-27f3-474f-8619-2ca57032c...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 15, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Ben Hutchings  wrote:

>>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/upstart/+bug/557177
> 
> I suppose you should comment on it too, just to add your indignation
> at a bug that never affected you and wasn't fixed for a whole 2 days.

Yes, it was fixed, after a very heated discussion with the maintainer who was 
blaiming users first for using the script incorrectly.

Again, that's what can happen if you rely on hacky bash scripts for core 
functionality.

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/77ee56aa-6c1c-4cda-875f-59340ffbc...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 11:45:45PM +0100, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> On Thursday 15 November 2012 00.57.50 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > People are constantly insisting that systemd is too bloated or unreliable,
> > but yet no one has really come up with real examples to prove that.
> 
> Hum, actually when i tried it, i couldn't halt or reboot my machine without 
> an 
> hard reset. I suppose that is a real example of bloated?
> 
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=661239

Hmm, that doesn't look like a valid bug report to me. Especially I
don't see why dhclient would be able to disrupt systemd in such a way
that you'd need to do a hard reboot.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121116230900.ga22...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

 checks can take
forever. If you reboot such a server and it needs to do an fs check,
it will be unavailable until the check has finished. With systemd, you
can just declare the filesystem as an automount [1] and the system
still boots while the filesystem checks are performed.

> We use the mathematics of relativity and trigonometry to make GPS work, btw.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagorean_theorem#History

Sticking to your chain of arguments: If physicists had been happy with
the theory aether [2], Einstein had never come up with special
relativity and GPS actually would never be able to work. The math
behind special relativity is just a little older than 100 years (annus
mirabilis is dated back to 1905), so it's actually something NEW.

The fact that GPS works is a result of PROGRESS.

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd#Automount
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121119102344.ga7...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:42:24PM +0100, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> Also, the people who write udev and systemd really know what they are
> doing, and especially systemd is documented perfectly well - everyone
> who does not feel comfortable with systemd should read at least the
> basic docs. (and then think again, and then probably dislike it on a
> basis of facts)

This is what I am constantly saying all the time. I always have the
feeling that everyone who is dismissing systemd simply didn't read the
documentation first.

> Also, systemd hasn't anything to do with udev, there is no systemd
> dependency in udev.

Correct. You can build udev completely without systemd [1].

> If you have some time for entertainment, you might want to read this
> thread on G+:
> https://plus.google.com/111049168280159033135/posts/R387kQb1zxc
> (GKH, Lennart, Kay and several others falsify every reason for a full
> udev fork (vs. just maintaining a small patch))

It should be mentioned in this context that GKH is actually one of the
original authors of udev [2] *and* he is actually a Gentoo developer
himself [3]. Yet he is dismissing the idea of a fork.

Even the claims of the Gentoo people about the separate /usr partition
are unjustified [4].

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/MinimalBuilds
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Udev
> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman
> [4] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121119114824.gb7...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Packaging MATE for Debian

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi,

after following up with the discussion on MATE on this list, I think
we have a consens that there are many people who'd be in favor to
getting MATE into Debian.

As Debian Wheezy is already in the freeze, MATE won't undeniably be a
part of it. Even if we still weren't in the freeze, I still don't
think MATE is yet quite ready to be uploaded to Debian. The MATE
developers are currently working on porting MATE to newer libraries so
they won't reintroduce old, unsupported stuff back into the
distributions (like Bonobo, for example).

Anyway, I have had contact with the MATE development team over the
last weeks and I already have write access to their Debian packaging
repository.

I'd therefore like to ask if anyone here would be willing to help me
to get MATE into Debian for Jessie.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121121102251.ga4...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: debian mate

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

the people who
are actually using the software. Changes are ok, but not if these
changes mean taking features away or making software more
uncomfortable to use.

Just look at Microsoft and their disaster with Windows 8 and you will
realize what will happen when you don't listen your users: The sales
figures for Windows 8 are so low that Microsoft is too embarrassed to
disclose them.

People who were defending Microsoft's decision always came up with the
same argument that users are too lazy to accept changes which is an
unfair accusation. Changes and improvements are always good (I love
stuff like systemd or Pulse-Audio, for example). But most changes from
GNOME2 to GNOME3 are not an improvement, they made things worse.

> > and some of those shortcomings can be 
> > tweaked away, which means effort and grief in varying degree. In short, 
> > gnome3-fallback just looks at the upper surface almost like gnome2 did, 
> > but is, behaves, works completely different. 
> 
> Indeed, it works much better. It is a fallback for GNOME3, not just
> GNOME2 with sed s/gnome/mate/ so it was a bit more work, but certainly
> worth it.

Could you elaborate on this, please? Because I do not think at all
that GNOME fallback is a viable alternative to GNOME2/MATE and it was
never intended to. There is a reason why it is called "fallback mode"
and not just GNOME3 2D. The fallback mode was always just a temporary
solution until software rendering was ready and that's the reason why
it is now being dropped by upstream for the next release.

> > I kind of insist it being in jessie ;) And yes, that makes another good 
> > point why the gnome3-fallback just can't feel like the real thing. It is 
> > supposed to be for those users that 1.) can't use the shell as no 3D 
> > acceleration available 2.) absolutely can't or don't want to work with a 
> > new and different desktop-paradigm, with accepted pain and grief in 
> > varying detail...
> 
> So what you suggest for jessie is, after users having gone through the
> “pain” of moving from GNOME2 to GNOME 3 classic, to go back to GNOME2
> with GTK2, GConf (sorry, MateConf) and almost everything looking like a
> squeeze desktop?

Most Debian users haven't gone through the pain of change yet, they're
still running GNOME2 with Squeeze. And please, don't call it "GNOME3
classic", there is no such thing. It's a fallback mode, an ugly one.

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=679386
> [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683662 

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121121142138.gb4...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Bug#693998: ITP: linux-minidisc -- Free software for accessing NetMD and HiMD MiniDisc devices

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 

* Package name: linux-minidisc
  Version : 0.9.0
  Upstream Author : linux-minidisc project 
* URL : https://wiki.physik.fu-berlin.de/linux-minidisc
* License : GPLv2, LGPLv2.1
  Programming Lang: C, C++, XML
  Description : Free software for accessing NetMD and HiMD MiniDisc devices

The linux-minidisc project develops libraries and backends which allow to
access MiniDisc devices fitted with a USB connector adhering to the NetMD [1]
or HiMD [2] specification.

Both NetMD and HiMD allow to transfer music digitally over a USB connection to
a supported device. HiMD devices additionally provide upload capabilities, thus
transferring recordings made with a HiMD device back to the PC. NetMD device -
with the exception of the Sony MZ-RH1 (also known as MZ-M200) Walkman - do not
allow digital uploads through USB. It is however possible to capture the audio
through the analogue inputs of a sound card while controlling the NetMD device
from the PC using the NetMD protocol and retrieving track information. This
allows uploads with the same ease and comfort as digital USB uploads albeit not
providing the same audio quality. The project homepage provides a capability
matrix for that matter [3].

This ITP overlaps with the previous ITPs I filed before [4-6]. I consolidate
these ITPs into one since all of these packages are built from the same
source package called 'linux-minidisc'.

> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NetMD#NetMD
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-MD
> [3] https://wiki.physik.fu-berlin.de/linux-minidisc/doku.php#status
> [4] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=533112
> [5] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=571647
> [6] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638968


-- 
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/20121122191655.24075.55783.reportbug@localhost.localdomain

Re: debian mate

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 23, 2012, at 12:41 AM, Svante Signell  wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-11-22 at 23:51 +0100, Stefano Karapetsas wrote:
>>> GNOME Classic is just as featureful and usable as GNOME Shell,
>>> which makes it very suitable for a default desktop on non-3D machines.
>> 
>> But GNOME Fallback is going to be dropped soon. And the next GNOME 
>> release, also if it will support a classic session with extensions, is 
>> not suitable in old or low level machines, for example.
> 
> FYI: Some kind of classic support also for 3.8+
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/22/1411201/gnome-3-to-support-a-classic-mode-of-sorts
> http://lwn.net/Articles/526082/.363.138.ca...@hp.my.own.domain

Yes, that's what Stefano was talking about when he said GNOME Classic through 
extensions.

In any case, that's not really going to help. GNOME3 is still way to different 
from GNOME2 for the average joe. People just want to get work done and not play 
around with their desktop. It has to be at least unobstrusive as possible.

Cheers,

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/f685e703-2223-494e-9b26-b98a1feb7...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#693998: ITP: linux-minidisc -- Free software for accessing NetMD and HiMD MiniDisc devices

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 09:02:18AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:16 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> 
> > * Package name: linux-minidisc
> 
> Thats a strange name considering it builds and runs on MacOS, Windows,
> Linux, FreeBSD and Haiku.

Yes, the name is indeed somewhat confusing in that regard. But when we
first came up with the project, we were initially only concerned about
Linux, so the name was obvious. Finding a good name for such a project
is complicated because of possible trademark violations.

If you have a better idea, I'd be happy to hear it ;).

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121123132632.ga2...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems (was: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev)

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 04:58:04PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote:
> > This thread was originally about udev, yet everyone is starting again the
> > systemd / upstart / sysv-rc war. I think we can agree that we don't about
> 
> I, for one, wholeheartedly welcome the fork, as I hope that this will
> help getting back some of the modularity in Linux that was there, once
> upon a time, and which contributed to making Linux a robust platform -
> sometime in the past.

Well, while I'm usually not against forks - I like MATE for example
very much - I don't think this fork is going anywhere soon. I have
followed their development a bit and read the discussion involving
Greg Kroah-Hartman and others and their comments on the fork and I
don't think the eudev people know what they're doing.

They're constantly claiming, for example, that udev and systemd break
a separate /usr partition which is simply not true. systemd just warns
you about it. Furthermore, they're randomly removing code from udev
which they don't seem to understand which means they will probably
break something some time.

I don't think these guys have the expertise to work on a udev fork (I
wouldn't claim that for myself either). Just look at their discussion
about creating a free BIOS replacement [1], it's ridiculous.

Coming back to your original complaint. The discussion about init
systems naturally came about because this is actually the reason udev
was forked by Gentoo in the first place. They want to stick to their
init solution OpenRC - no matter what - like Ubuntu wants to stick to
upstart.

If both Ubuntu and Gentoo would just go with the rest of the community
and accept systemd, we wouldn't have to bother whether udev runs
without systemd or not. I don't see anyway why something as low-level
as udev should be highly portable in the first place.

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/linux.gentoo.dev/yWQGqxsfjI0

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121124161524.ga5...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems (was: Gentoo guys starting a fork of udev)

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 06:03:02PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: 
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 05:15:25PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > If both Ubuntu and Gentoo would just go with the rest of the community
> > and accept systemd, we wouldn't have to bother whether udev runs
> > without systemd or not.
> 
> I would highly prefer a system where I can take small bites if I want
> to, and where components are as portable as possible

Why? Why would you want to rip such low-level stuff apart? It
seriously doesn't make any sense unless you need a highly-customized
setup, for embedded applications, for example.

> and as it stands,
> I am very uncomfortable with systemd, too. It's certainly
> interesting, but having a hard dependency on it is imho a no-no.

Again. What's so bad with systemd? I don't get it. I really don't get
it. You're not seeing your init daemon 99% of the time you're using
your computer, so why even bother with it? When you have something
such low-level, you're best off with taking the best solution which
is clearly systemd and which is why most distributions are adopting
it.

> Please take a step back, look at the bigger picture, and tell me
> whether you think that we, as Debianites, or as Free Software
> Advocates, are still heading in the right direction:
> 
> 1. What does it mean if more and more software is required to run a
>Linux system, in the various scenarios, and losing the ability to
>swap components w/o major kernel hackery?

Because it's a LOW-LEVEL component and you don't profit at all by
choosing any different solution. It's not like your browser or desktop
which you can choose on your personal preferences. Argueing which init
daemon is the best is like argueing over which oil pump in your car to
choose based on preferences. You choose the one that does the job
best, it doesn't have to be customizable, that's just non-sense.

>So far, being highly
>modular was a way to contain the complexity, and finish off bugs.

So, you think code is more maintainable when it's spread across dozens
of projects instead of doing the work in one repository? Why should we
have separate repositories for atd, crond, anacron, xinetd, init, rc,
watchdogd, autofs and so on when these projects are more or less
something that should be performed by ONE daemon, because what these
daemons do overlaps quite a lot?

>It's not only "more eyeballs" to catch them

systemd has over 118 contributors, that makes 236 eyeballs. I guess
that's much more than any eyeballs in any of the traditional daemons
combined.

>it's also the complexity
>that makes it increasingly hard for people to understand what's going
>on in the first place, so the problem of having the required
>knowledge, that you highlighted in your message, will only get worse
>and worse with tighter integration.

systemd is not complex, sysvinit is. Just compare the average init
script with a systemd unit file and you will understand.

> 2. What does it mean if more and more software only runs on Linux?

It's a very good thing. It makes Linux stronger as a free platform
which is what we need in order to be able to compete against the
proprietary platforms. We need to combine power.

You probably want to hear now that's unfair to the other free
operating systems, but seriously, I don't care. You want to dictate
developers of free software not to take advantage of Linux-specific
features. You want to force them to consider stuff like FreeBSD as
well.

> 3. What does it mean that - my claim/experience - more and more Linux
>software is simply broken (see Gnome for a popular example, but I
>have more)?

It's broken because it doesn't run on your favourite non-Linux
operating system? I don't think so.

> > I don't see anyway why something as low-level
> > as udev should be highly portable in the first place.
> 
> Maybe, but I do see why systemd must not be a hard dependency of the
> Linux kernel, and if systemd is basically the user-space part of udev,
> and both can't live without each other, then something is fundamentally
> wrong in the design. IMHO.

systemd has a hard dependency on the Linux kernel because it takes
advantage of many Linux-specific features and it would be stupid not
to do that. Linux has these features, so we should be free to use
them when we can.

Do the FreeBSD people develop all their stuff in a fashion that it
would run on Linux as well?

I'm sorry for the harsh tone, but it's really something that annoys
me, people constantly complaining about systemd but never really
coming up with good arguments why something as low-level as
systemd/udev should be replacable in the first place. 95% of the us

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 07:20:02PM +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Specs/RaringUpstartUserSessions

This is actually going to be very interesting to see if they are able
to extend upstart in such a way that they can use it for session
management similar to systemd-loginctl.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121124191735.ga6...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 08:17:35PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 07:20:02PM +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FoundationsTeam/Specs/RaringUpstartUserSessions
> 
> This is actually going to be very interesting to see if they are able
> to extend upstart in such a way that they can use it for session
> management similar to systemd-loginctl.

While reading a bit on it, I found this passage:

> By making use of a Linux-specific prctl(2) call, we effectively tie
> Upstart to systems running with a Linux kernel. This is a major
> restriction, but porting to other systems is already complicated by
> the fact that even the BSDs do not provide a full POSIX environment
> (missing "waitid(2)" for example).

So it's not just systemd which runs into the situation that at some
point they have to drop support for non-Linux kernels because they
need a Linux-specific feature, in this case prctl.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121124192951.ga6...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:28:46PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> 
> waitid is supported on FreeBSD.

Are you sure? According to their status page [1] it's not yet fully
implemented. The page is dated to last October.

Adrian

> [1] http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/index.html

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121124214629.ga7...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 12:52:47PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/25/2012 12:15 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > They're constantly claiming, for example, that udev and systemd break
> > a separate /usr partition which is simply not true.
> I believe you've been reading too much L. Poettring.

And again the same idiotic and childish style of argumentation. It has
nothing to do with Poettering. Please come up with real arguments
instead of just saying systemd is broken and the author is an idiot.

> Yes, lots of
> udev stuff are moving to /usr, and this is a fact. Yes, lots of
> things are annoying in the merge for someone who wishes to use
> udev alone, and not systemd. That is a fact as well.

There is tons of stuff that you would need to fix, not just udev
stuff. See [1].

> It would help the discussion if there was nobody always claiming
> the opposite.

What? I'm not claiming the opposite, I am claiming facts. Is it false
that all these binaries mentioned in [1] are required for early boot
up and are located in /usr? Just check it yourself.

> On 11/25/2012 12:15 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > If both Ubuntu and Gentoo would just go with the rest of the community
> > and accept systemd
> Yeah, right! Along the line with "why are these idiots so vocal". That is
> in fact one of the main concern about udev/systemd people: they don't
> care about others, refuse patches, and always claim others are stupid.
> You shouldn't go through this dangerous path as well, IMO.

Sorry, but I wouldn't touch code with a ten-feet pole who from someone
is so naive claiming that he knows more about writing an open source
BIOS than the people at Coreboot who have been doing that since
1999. I started right out laughing when he claiming Coreboot is a
Linux distribution and starting a x86 computer just involves setting
up a few interrupt vectors.

I know several people in the Coreboot project personal and the
claims that Richard makes in [2] are just ridiculous and show the same
attitude he has towards working on udev.

Even Greg is ridiculing their work [3]. And he should know, he came up
with udev in the first place and he is even a Gentoo developer. Don't
you think he understands you a little more than anyone else, so he can
assess when people do the right things with the code or not?

Adrian

> [1] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
> [2] 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en&fromgroups=#!topic/linux.gentoo.dev/yWQGqxsfjI0
> [3] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2226/focus=81216

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125073521.ga10...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 08:35:22AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Sorry, but I wouldn't touch code with a ten-feet pole who from someone
> is so naive claiming that he knows more about writing an open source
> BIOS than the people at Coreboot who have been doing that since
> 1999. I started right out laughing when he claiming Coreboot is a
> Linux distribution and starting a x86 computer just involves setting
> up a few interrupt vectors.
> 
> I know several people in the Coreboot project personal and the
> claims that Richard makes in [2] are just ridiculous and show the same
> attitude he has towards working on udev.
> 
> Even Greg is ridiculing their work [3]. And he should know, he came up
> with udev in the first place and he is even a Gentoo developer. Don't
> you think he understands you a little more than anyone else, so he can
> assess when people do the right things with the code or not?

And if that's not already enough, they even started removing copyright
information from the udev files headers [1] which I find rude and
disrespectful. They claim that they can do that because it's free
software, after all. Again, it just shows they have no idea what
they're talking about.

Going with this philosophy, their code wouldn't probably even meet the
Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG). Removing copyright information
of other people's work is a no no.

Adrian

> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2226/focus=81216 

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125075028.ga10...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:48:27PM +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:

> https://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailarchive/lau/2012/11/21/194431
> 
> There is a rather bad smell regarding all this. 

None of the systemd advocates ever mentioned for example the real
reason why it uses such an ugly configuration syntax and Windoze
format files.^^^
I stopped reading
there

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125100359.ga11...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:16:27PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
 > >> Yes, lots of
> >> udev stuff are moving to /usr, and this is a fact. Yes, lots of
> >> things are annoying in the merge for someone who wishes to use
> >> udev alone, and not systemd. That is a fact as well.
> > 
> > There is tons of stuff that you would need to fix, not just udev
> > stuff. See [1].
> 
> The point is, systemd and udev have recently been patched by upstream so
> that things are going *even more* on the direction of having stuff
> stored in /usr.

Which is still not really a problem when tons of other daemons have
done the same already. We're not "fixing" this by patching systemd and
udev when many other daemons behave the same way. So, it's pointless
anyway.

Besides, can you elaborate what is so important in having /usr
separate? I see that it made sense back on the old Unix workstations
where you could split partitions across different disks, but I don't
see the point nowadays where a cheap harddisk has 1TB of space.

> That is exactly this kind of things (and others, like merging systemd
> and udev), going to the wrong direction, which pushed Gentoo people
> to fork.

Which I don't agree. Just look at FreeBSD, they have the whole
operating system core merged with their kernel source. I don't see
anyone complaining there either.

> >> On 11/25/2012 12:15 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> >>> If both Ubuntu and Gentoo would just go with the rest of the community
> >>> and accept systemd
> >> Yeah, right! Along the line with "why are these idiots so vocal". That is
> >> in fact one of the main concern about udev/systemd people: they don't
> >> care about others, refuse patches, and always claim others are stupid.
> >> You shouldn't go through this dangerous path as well, IMO.
> > 
> > Sorry, but I wouldn't touch code with a ten-feet pole who from someone
> > is so naive claiming that he knows more about writing an open source
> > BIOS than the people at Coreboot who have been doing that since
> > 1999. I started right out laughing when he claiming Coreboot is a
> > Linux distribution and starting a x86 computer just involves setting
> > up a few interrupt vectors.
> > 
> > I know several people in the Coreboot project personal and the
> > claims that Richard makes in [2] are just ridiculous and show the same
> > attitude he has towards working on udev.
> > 
> > Even Greg is ridiculing their work [3]. And he should know, he came up
> > with udev in the first place and he is even a Gentoo developer. Don't
> > you think he understands you a little more than anyone else, so he can
> > assess when people do the right things with the code or not?
> 
> This is the kind of aggressive attitude which happened with systemd
> upstream, claiming that everyone are idiots, while in fact they've been
> pointing rightly at problems. You just made a new occurrence of it. :(

And you are dodging my questions. Don't you think that people like
Richard who make such bold claims that writing a free BIOS replacement
is a matter of a few hundred lines of assembly, ridiculing the almost
15 years of development of Coreboot, cannot be taken seriously?

Do you think that Greg - being a Gentoo developer himself - would make
such statements if he didn't knew what he was talking about?

Sorry, but no. I have seen such claims in the past very often where
people ridiculed existing software stacks and claiming they could do
something better in no time [1]. This guy would even remain on his
bold point of view after one of the Ardour and Jack developers
explained him why he was wrong [2].

I didn't mean to be aggressive in any way, I'm just annoyed. Please
don't get me wrong about forks, they are just fine. As I said before,
I like MATE very much, for example, because these people do great work
and they even collaborate with the original authors from GNOME.

But I don't support forks which are created based on false assumptions
of the original software. Another bad example where people forked and
obviously don't know what they're doing is Trinity [3].

Adrian

> [1] http://klang.eudyptula.org/
> [2] http://ardour.org/pd_on_klang
> [3] 
> http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2012/10/maintaining-history-done-wrong/

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125144219.ga13...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:52:58PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/25/2012 01:30 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Why? Why would you want to rip such low-level stuff apart?
> 
> Well, isn't it the opposite thing that is happening? "Such low-level
> stuff" are being merged (with systemd+udev merge), they were
> separated projects before.
> 
> So, I'd rather ask you: why would you want "such low-level stuff"
> to merge, since some others like it separated (like for example,
> to be able to have the choice of replacing one or another)?

Well, systemd and udev are developed by the same developers. Both
daemons interact very closely and integration of the sources was the
natural consequence.

Yes, it makes it more difficult to use udev with a different init
system, but again most people don't care as long as the init system
they have works reliable. And since udev is Linux-only anyway, I don't
see a problem merging it with a Linux-only init system.

If it's so important to be able to choose such a low-level component
as the init system, why aren't people demanding that you can choose
different kernel stacks of choice? For example OSS4 instead of ALSA or
the old Firewire stack instead of the new one?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125150321.ga13...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 04:48:04PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , 2012-11-25, 13:06:
> >The:
> >
> >[crap]
> >foo = bar
> >
> >format for config files is widely despised.  And this is not a
> >systemd issue, even git uses that crap instead of something better
> >like xml, or simpler, like the hierarchical format used by apt
> >that resembles C++ classes.
> 
> I guess you're not being serious here, but it's not that obvious.
> This problem is known as Poe's Law: "Without a winking smiley or
> other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody
> of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing."

YMMD :D.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125173246.ga14...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 01:08:31AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> 
> So please just keep in mind that this is annoying
> some others, and if you don't feel annoyed, just
> live with the fact you aren't alone in this world, and
> that some of us prefer a separated /usr partition.

Based on which technical merits?

"I want to have a separate /usr, because I can" is not a reason to
make things more complex and difficult in the development.

I would agree if there was a technical reason, but I don't see
any. And, as you see, enabling a separate /usr means extra work.

> Now, I may add, I have no will to discuss it with you
> anyway, after reading you impose on my your
> partitioning scheme, and would like me to use my
> computer the way *YOU* think is best. That is, by
> the way, the same attitude systemd upstream has.

Yes, you can do with *YOUR* computer whatever you want. You can paint
it pink and attach nice flower stickers onto it. But that doesn't mean
upstream or distribution developers always have to keep their software
in the most flexible way so it would fit everybody. It's simply not
feasible and wastes time and efforts sometimes.

It's pointless to put so much effort to support every single use
case. As I said before, 95% of the users don't care what init system
they have. The same argumentation is valid when it comes to supporting
certain architectures. Debian dropped support for m68k and Alpha and
deprived users of their freedom to run Debian on these platforms with
the latest supported software. But these architectures weren't dropped
because they wanted to take away people's freedoms but because it was
no longer reasonable to support them on the long term. You can still
run and install Debian on these architectures, but since they really
aren't that popular anymore, they shouldn't have a strong influence on
the main development.
 
> > And you are dodging my questions. Don't you think that people like
> > Richard who make such bold claims that writing a free BIOS replacement
> > is a matter of a few hundred lines of assembly, ridiculing the almost
> > 15 years of development of Coreboot, cannot be taken seriously?
> >
> > Do you think that Greg - being a Gentoo developer himself - would make
> > such statements if he didn't knew what he was talking about?
> 
> I don't know these guys, I can't judge...
> 
> > But I don't support forks which are created based on false assumptions
> > of the original software. Another bad example where people forked and
> > obviously don't know what they're doing is Trinity [3].
> 
> ...but I know that Gentoo guys aren't working
> on their fork because of false assumptions only.

According to Greg - the original author of the software - they do!
I don't understand why you wouldn't trust the person more who designed
the original software than the ones who are forking it.

Adrian 

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125174945.ga14...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 02:12:23AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> P.S: By the way, there's still an ongoing m68k porting effort. Please
> respect
> this work as well.

I've been a vivid Amiga user since 1991* and I still love these
machines and I am supporting the efforts to get Debian back onto
m68k. Yet, I do not think this should happen at all costs. There
haven't been no new 68k processors for years, have there?

Adrian

* I recently spent lots of money to get my A1200 upgraded to have an
  68030, 64 MB of Fast RAM and a flickerfixer with DVI output.

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121125190220.ga15...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#693998: ITP: linux-minidisc -- Free software for accessing NetMD and HiMD MiniDisc devices

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 06:55:25AM +1100, Karl Goetz wrote:
> > > > * Package name       : linux-minidisc
> > > 
> > > Thats a strange name considering it builds and runs on MacOS, Windows,
> > > Linux, FreeBSD and Haiku.
> > 
> > Yes, the name is indeed somewhat confusing in that regard.
> 
> > If you have a better idea, I'd be happy to hear it ;).
> 
> Not necessary better, but perhaps libre-minidisk? 3 letters different and 
> only contains one trademark :)

libre-minidisc sounds actually nice (note, it's minidis_c_, not
minidis_k_ as compared to hard dis_k_), but renaming the project would
involve too much of a hassle. The name is already everywhere, on the
project wiki, the mailing list, the git repository and so on. So, I
think we will refrain from doing that for now.

In the end, it affects the name of the source package only anyway, so
it's not a big deal. Most Windows and MacOS users just search and
download the UI application, QHiMDTransfer and don't care it mentions
Linux on the project homepage.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121126091914.ga20...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:04 PM, Thomas Goirand  wrote:

>> However, it's the opinion of the systemd
>> primary upstream authors that having /usr on a separate fs is a bad idea
>> since there are tools that (primarily) some udev rules use, which live
>> on /usr.
> Yeah, we all so his marvelous examples of software that
> would break. His first example is pulseaudio, which is one
> of the software he authors. Brilliant way of thinking, if you
> ask me. Like: one of my software is broken, therefor, I will
> do more breakage...

Please do not just cut out the information which is relevant to get your point 
across. Picking only Pulse-Audio out of the many things he mentioned - most of 
them not written by him - to prove that he takes also the full blame for that 
situation is also a form of lying.

If did a proper and fair argumentation, you'd have to admit that he is right 
and it's not just about the things he wrote.

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/d0742e8d-66f5-4454-ab35-f3e9ec388...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

es sense to got into that direction when the adoption rate of a
certain software is high?

I mean, just look at the popcon numbers for systemd vs upstart:

> http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=systemd
> http://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=upstart

> udev took quite some time to be accepted by the community too, but now
> it's probably fair to say that it has been. To try to couple that to
> systemd sounds like a bad form of systemd advocacy to me.

Yes, I agree it leaves a bad taste for sure. But again, I am not so
sure if we really need to be able to choose our init system. I mean,
do we have this discussion over mdev vs udev? Or even devfs?

> Oh well, we'll see what the future brings, I suppose.

This is actually the one and only thing where we all can agree on :).

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129144041.ga18...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems |Subject: Re: Really, about udev

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Harald,

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:58:35PM +0100, Harald Jenny wrote:
> I have tried systemd but as it does not support the Debian extensions to
> cryptsetup (namely the crypttab keyscript parameter) it is not a
> valuable alternative for me - sysvinit and upstart btw do support them,
> I did not yet get the chance to try openrc (and yes this is a Debian
> specific feature nontheless present since long time so I argue that
> people are using it and will also continue to do so). I guess this means
> that either the Debian systemd maintainer may need to handle this in
> some way (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=618862) or
> the Debian users will have to decide how to deal with this matter.

Thank you!

This is actually a true valid point which I personally would accept as
an argument against systemd. Without looking into the details, this
seems to be something that can be fixed by a new upload, doesn't it?

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129171214.ga20...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:28:40PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/homepage.jsp?code=PC68KCF
> 
> the most recent processor you can find there was released in January
> 2012.

Yeah, someone else posted this information already.

How much are these instruction set compatible with the classical m68k
processors? Would we be able to have an m68k port of Debian which runs
both on the original m68k CPUs and the ColdFire series?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129195147.ga21...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 03:40:47AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> We can ignore what happens to other downstreams of udev,
> however I don't think that's a good idea to do so.

Why bother other downstreams if they don't complain? I find it rather
intrusive to post on the lists of other downstreams, trying to
convince them that a particular choice of upstream was bad.

I think the proper way should be to wait until the topic actually
comes up itself among the other downstreams.

As I said before, even the best upstream cannot always cover every
single use case and you can turn it any way you want, Gentoo is
definitely a very special and uncommon use case, so I can somehow
understand that upstream cannot cover that. But again, you're free to
fork the code and do whatever you want. You shouldn't just run around
everywhere and try to convince the other downstreams that your
particular use case is the one that has to be honored.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129195723.gb21...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:22:41PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> I think noone claims that systemd would not be the superior design
> in a world where there is bug-free, perfect software prepared to handle
> every possible situation it will be thrown into.

Yes, but this is valid for any other software design. But I think
systemd *does* a very good job in trying to cover every possible
usecase because it was actually designed with modern hard- and
software environments in mind, like embedded or big servers which
weren't simply existant back when the original System V Init design
was conceived.

> As our world has not
> yet seen bug-free software handling every single situation the authors
> did not think about properly, the expectation of what happens if one
> runs into a not-yet fixed bug is an important issue for many people.

Absolutely. But again, this is true for any software and this is
*especially* true for old designs which couldn't cover certain setups
which simply didn't exist back then.

You know the famous quote: "640 kB ought to be enough!"

> Free software has always been a way to avoid being helplessly at the
> mercy of some software. So handing over the basics of your computer
> to a much more complex system can be quite frightening for many
> people around here.

Yes, I see your point. But again, what I said before, how many people
are actually digging into such low-level code? Someone who is jumping
into kernel or plumberland development always has to have a certain
background knowledge. It requires more skills and experience as
opposed to writing desktop applications or smart phone apps.

But do you really think that we should keep every part of the system
brain-dead simple that everyone understands at the cost of reliablity
and performance? I mean, how many people do actually really understand
how the FireWire stack in the kernel works and is designed, how many
people understand the underlyings of gcc and so on?

I see your argument about keeping stuff simple, but again, if you want
to be able to solve more complex tasks with your computer, the
software on it itself has to become more complex. It's almost as if we
should never add features to the kernel because it becomes too complex
for newbies. I'm very sure Linus would flip everyone off who comes
with this certain mindset.

> Claiming that it will work for everyone and that
> anyone not being able to name a problem existing now has no arguments
> does not help.

Do System V Init or Upstart work in EVERY single use case? Do you know
that systemd actually works much better with systems which have high
load or are shared among many users (because it allows ressource
control by using cgroups).

You're putting the arguments the wrong way around. It is the old
System V Init which actually covers only a very limited use case while
systemd offers a much more flexible design, ranging from embedded
stuff up to very big machines.

> It only makes sure people are reassured that systemd is
> not for them. Combine that with vocal demands that it should be the
> only allowed init process in a short time frame makes sure that there
> is a big opposition (which will look for you like it has no arguments,
> as no real arguments against systemd are accepted.)

Yes, I do accept vocals against systemd, but only if these are
actually valid arguments. Because I want software development to
be driven on technical merits and not on sympathies against or for
certain people neither the stance to reject any modern developments.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129201402.gc21...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Canonical pushes upstart into user session - systemd developer complains

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote:
> Vincent Lefevre  writes:
> 
> > It is more verbose, but I find it as readable (if you have characters
> > that normally need to be escaped, you can still use CDATA sections,
> > which is a way to keep the readability).
> 
> So to keep everyone equally happy, we need:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Structure _and_ readability.

I wonder what the effect is of setting key3 to ♬♫♩♩♫ :D :D.

Hilse fra Berlin!

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129203902.gd21...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:34:08PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> No one is expecting you to help, so your statement that you don't think
> this activity is useful is just noise.  One of the features of free
> software is that there is no need to concern onself with the (presumably
> billions) of people who *don't* want to work on something.  Only the
> people who *do* want to work on something matter, provided that they
> include the resources to do the minimum amount of work required to
> coordinate this sort of flexibility.

Correct. But if it means when a minority of people have a vastly
different opinion on a certain matter and this opinion means extra
work and redundancies, I think this is something that should not be
persued.

> If we were asking everyone maintaining Debian packages to do something
> proactive to provide this flexibility, that would be another matter, but
> so far that's not been necessary.  The work is largely isolated to those
> people who want to work on it, which makes the opinions of people who
> don't want to work on it uninteresting.

Well, the choice of init system can have a huge impact on lots of
packages. If we decide to use either systemd or upstart by default,
we should ship all daemons with the appropriate unit/upstart files to
make the most of these sysvinit replacements.
 
> Even if we all decided that systemd was the one and only one way to go, we
> would *still* have to develop init system flexibility in the archive in
> order to handle the transition.  So we are *far* from any lost resources
> in the effort we're putting into this, and it's completely premature to
> pick a winner.

As far as I know, at least ArchLinux and Fedora already made the full
transition. According to a befriended Arch user I talked to today,
their old rc system is completely defunct now.

> > I think there's already enough evidence to show that systemd is clearly
> > the best choice. How much more would you expect to have before it would
> > not be "premature" any more?
> 
> I don't see any need to have a firm answer to that question at this time.
> The point is less about the amount of evidence required and much more
> about the fact that there's no reason to make this decision unless and
> until we actually need to as a project.  We're not at that point.

Well, on the other hand, it's not a good thing to postpone this
decision forever. Mandriva, openSuSE, Fedora, Arch, Frugalware and
Mageia already made the full transition while we're still arguing over
it.

systemd also has by far more contributors than any other init system,
so I think it's a sane decision to adopt the system which has the
highest popularity and momentum. This will guarantee that *most* of
our users will be happy (we can't satisfy everyone anyway) and the
upstream code will always be maintained.

> At this point, the single most annoying thing about systemd is the people
> who are advocating it on debian-devel at every opportunity and seem
> incapable of shutting up about it for more than a week, even though the
> repeated conversations are both useless to the project as a whole and
> don't vary with repetition.

And for me, the most annoying thing is the neverending circlejerk of
systemd bashing on a non-technical basis. If anyone of these people
would really take the time to read into the design rationales of the
available init systems (upstart, systemd, sysvinit, openrc), look at
the popularity and the amount of contributors, the decision would be
far easier to make.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121129234932.ga29...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:43:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: 
> The people who repeatedly advocate systemd on debian-devel are not
> representative of the whole development community.  I suspect most of them
> aren't even *part* of the systemd development community.

No. But I am using systemd both at home and work now and it solved
many headaches I had before. I don't have to worry about messing with
/etc/default anymore to enable/disable daemons, I don't even have to
worry how to do that when using a different distribution. It works the
same on Fedora, Arch, Debian, openSuSE, every distribution that uses
systemd.

I also don't have to worry about daemons dying unsupervised daemons,
not noticing it until someone knocks at the door of the IT department
to complain. Gone are the headaches we had with autofs only working
70% of the time or the /home NFS simply not being mounted on some
machines after startup.

I can quickly figure out why my system takes longer than usual too
boot and I will immediately see when and why daemon xyz was restarted.

Seriously, this is not based on religion, this is based purely on
technical merits and good experiences with systemd.

> Rather, this is
> all further sign of a particular social problem in free software, namely
> the tendency to attach oneself to projects (whether that be vim vs. Emacs,
> GNOME vs. KDE, or systemd vs. upstart) as if they were sports teams, and
> then start behaving with all the public composure and mutual understanding
> of drunk football fans.

Yes, there are these wars on actual software applications and these
will definetely never stop, simply because the choice of a preferred
editor or desktop is highly subjective.

As for stuff in the plumberland, you don't see it most of the time,
you just want it to be there and work reliably.

And the concept and design of systemd has been already proven to be
very reliable. Apple switched to the design (launchd) in 2004 in MacOS
X and successfully uses it on any iOS device (iPhone, iPad, iPod
touch) they're shipping. I never heard of any problems with regard to
launchd.

> Let's try to avoid that on *all* sides.  It's just software.  And software
> changes over time, and sometimes becomes much better (or much worse) than
> it is right now.  It also forks and remerges, and the development
> community often changes radically.  See, for example, glibc.

Absolutely true. And this is actually why I don't understand so many
people get so emotional when it comes to software like systemd or
Pulse-Audio.

> This is, btw, *exactly* why I personally tend to switch desktop
> environments every couple of years.  It's a lot easier to not villify a
> whole project when one has used it for a bit and can see that it has
> pluses and minuses, just like everything else.

I rather do that because I get bored from time to time, want to help
find bugs in other desktops or I simply want to explore new stuff, to
make sure I still have the best experience I can get.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/2012113433.gb29...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:04:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> John Paul Adrian Glaubitz  writes:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:34:08PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> 
> >> At this point, the single most annoying thing about systemd is the
> >> people who are advocating it on debian-devel at every opportunity and
> >> seem incapable of shutting up about it for more than a week, even
> >> though the repeated conversations are both useless to the project as a
> >> whole and don't vary with repetition.
> 
> > And for me, the most annoying thing is the neverending circlejerk of
> > systemd bashing on a non-technical basis.
> 
> This is something that you're all (collectively) enabling via your
> behavior of constantly repeating the same arguments.  Someone has to stop.
> Preferrably everyone at once.

Why should my chain of arguments change? If it constantly changed all
the time, it would mean I'm not really having any arguments but I just
want to win the discussion. This is not my point, I'm just trying to
explain the sceptics that most of their fears are simply unjustified.

> > If anyone of these people would really take the time to read into the
> > design rationales of the available init systems (upstart, systemd,
> > sysvinit, openrc), look at the popularity and the amount of
> > contributors, the decision would be far easier to make.
> 
> This is the key point: WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE A DECISION RIGHT NOW.  We
> simply are not.  It doesn't matter how many messages you write to
> debian-devel, what arguments you muster, and what evidence you have: this
> decision will not be made right at this moment, in the middle of a release
> freeze, prior to completing the Policy work for even testing a migration
> to systemd.

Hey, you don't need to be yelling at me, I didn't kick off the
discussion. I am perfectly fine with the current situation. And you
don't need to enlighten me on the release policy, I am very much
aware that we're in freeze. At no point did I say we have to decide
something now. I merely said that we certainly shouldn't wait forever.

Again, I didn't bring up the discussion, so please don't focus on me.

> It's absolutely impossible that any firm decision will be made at any time
> before the wheezy release is complete.  I think it's rather unlikely until
> we have a clear policy for how people should add systemd support in their
> packages and those package maintainers who chose to do so have started to
> enable it.  (I think we're actually fairly close to such a policy, but
> it's not formalized yet.)

Yes, I am aware of the situation.

> Therefore, every time you continue to argue about this on debian-devel,
> the *only* thing that you are accomplishing is to feed what you accurately
> describe as a never-ending circlejerk, by providing it with more material,
> more ammunition, more fodder for the discussion to continue and continue
> and continue.
>
> This is all equally true of the people who hate systemd.

Phew, I already feared I would have to take all the blame :).
 
> It would also be true of the people who advocate upstart or OpenRC, except
> you'll notice that they've largely stopped discussing the topic except
> when they can't stop themselves from rebutting some specific technical
> point.  That's wise.  It's worthy of emulation.

I don't think there are particular people to blame. The unwillingness
to stop discussing the topic comes from both sides. But as long as we
treat each other respectfully, I still think it's ok to be discussed.

It's not that I am not willing to learn. I'm always willing to give in
with my argumentation if someone actually comes up with valid
counterarguments (with what Harald Jenny said, for example).

> Please, let's *stop talking about this*, apart from the much more
> specific, straightforward, and *useful* discussion of what further work is
> required to enable those who wish to do so to run systemd as their init
> process in Debian.

Sure, I would love to switch the topic :).

Adrian 

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121130002017.ga23...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, about udev, not init sytsems

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:19:22PM +0100, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=693522
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694048

I can't say anything about the fetchmail problem, but I just tried to
reproduce the problem you explained in #693522 and it works on my
installation.

So we will probably need more input to debug this.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/2012113012.gb2...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:51:24PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 11/30/2012 07:49 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > And for me, the most annoying thing is the neverending circlejerk of
> > systemd bashing on a non-technical basis. If anyone of these people
> > would really take the time to read into the design rationales
> 
> So, basically, anyone who do not agree with you is either trolling,
> or don't know about anything. Why do you waste your time writing
> to  -devel then?

Sorry, but if I remember correctly, it was you who came here to
discuss Gentoo-related problems on a Debian development list and who
admitted that he enjoyed starting flame wars because you were bored.

Honestly, you should remember that before pointing with your fingers
at others.

I never meant to start any redundant discussion about which init system
is best. And, as Russ already pointed out, we're not going to make
that decision this time. So please, just leave it for now, so will I.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121130155724.ga3...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 09:31:37AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:00:01AM +0200, Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > Systemd does much better than its competitors as a social activity.
> 
> ROTFL.
> 
> I don't have much to say about the quality of Lennert's code, but his
> social skills are sorely lacking.

systemd is not Lennart, he is one of the many contributors. I am
pretty sure that Uoti was referring to the community around these
projects and you can simply figure this out by checking out the
appropriate IRC channels:

As of Dec 1, 10:30 AM CET:

#upstart (FreeNode) - 23 nicks
#systemd (FreeNode) - 211 nicks
#openrc (FreeNode) - 40 nicks

So, from these numbers, systemd has a larger community than four times
the people of upstart and OpenRC combined.

But, anyway, didn't we want to stop discussing this?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121201093419.ga8...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 10:12:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 12/01/2012 05:34 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > systemd is not Lennart, he is one of the many contributors.
> 
> This statement is simply false.
> 
> I just checked with "git blame". Out of 381 473 lines of code in
> the Git, git blame reports 152 787 lines with "Poettering" in it.
> That's more than 40% of the project.
> 
> I wouldn't call this "one of the many contributors", and unless
> someone else authors more than 40% of the code (which I didn't
> check), he is clearly the main author of systemd.

*sigh*

You seriously fight for every inch and single line to get your point
across, don't you?

Haven't we agreed to stop this for now?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121201141557.ga10...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Really, ...

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 03:17:03PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> Please stop fueling these threads already (especially when the subject
> is not meaningful at all).

Hey, didn't I say several times already that I would like to leave it?
Please don't address me, I have been tired of this for several days
now and I don't want to discuss it any further.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121201141949.ga10...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Packaging MATE for Debian

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hey,

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:22:52AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I'd therefore like to ask if anyone here would be willing to help me
> to get MATE into Debian for Jessie.

I'd like to ping back and see if there's anyone here who'd be
interested in joining me to package MATE for Debian.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121202122650.ga17...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Packaging MATE for Debian

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 10:21:43PM +, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 01:26:50PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Hey,
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:22:52AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > > I'd therefore like to ask if anyone here would be willing to help me
> > > to get MATE into Debian for Jessie.
> > 
> > I'd like to ping back and see if there's anyone here who'd be
> > interested in joining me to package MATE for Debian.
> 
> If there was a git repo to check out I'd be happy to test packages and do
> some mild work, but not as a main commitment.

There is: https://github.com/mate-desktop/debian-packages

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121202230337.ga21...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#696006: ITP: tinyos -- operating system for sensor motes and embedded devices

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 06:03:27PM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> The package will generate a tinyos-source binary
> package.

What exactly does the package do? Does it download the current
upstream source and builds it for deployment?

What's the advantage of having this as a package in Debian? Can it be
used for something on a running Debian system?

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121215180601.ga2...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Packaging upstream tarballs with mixed C and Python sources

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi,

I am currently trying to figure out how to get the new UAE fork
"fs-uae" [1] ready for Debian and I haven't yet found a satisfiable
way to build the package.

fs-uae itself is written in C, but it ships together with a launcher
GUI and a server for multi-player games, both written in Python. While
the C source code for the emulator itself is located at the top
directory of the source tarball, both the launcher and the server are
located in sub-directories.

If I just create the usual debhelper 9 rules file, the package will be
built from the C sources only, ignoring the Python code for launcher
and server.

Does anyone have an idea how to create the three binary packages for
the emulator, launcher and server from one source package. I am asking
since I am not such an expert on Python packaging yet and hope that
someone here knows better :).

I am CC'ing upstream since I have been discussing the issue with him
as well. Also, there might be the possibility to just split the
upstream tarball into emulator, launcher and server to simplify
packaging.

The upstream tarball can be found here [2], if anyone wants to have a
look.

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://fengestad.no/fs-uae/
> [2] http://fengestad.no/fs-uae/stable/2.0.1/fs-uae-2.0.1.tar.gz

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121222152322.ga32...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Packaging upstream tarballs with mixed C and Python sources

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 09:11:11AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Игорь Пашев wrote:
> 
> > I think override_dh_auto_{build,install,clean} in debian/rules could help.
> > For example:
> >
> > override_dh_auto_build:
> > cd server && ... # build server
> > $(MAKE) ... # build in top dir
> 
> Best talk upstream into providing a better build system, but until
> they do that, this workaround would be better I think:
> 
> override_dh_auto_build:
>  dh_auto_build --sourcedirectory=server
>  dh_auto_build

Exactly what I was looking for, thanks a lot!

Adrian 

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121223113808.ga25...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: how to add my project?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hello Eduard,

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:23:42AM +0100, Eduard wrote:
> Hello!
> How can i add my project into debian-devel repository? For example,
> my program is the based on httrack library tool, the GUI for it,
> it's the clone from WinHTTrack tool, classical for windows systems.

I assume that you are talking about getting your software into the
official Debian repositories, so I'll describe this procedure.

First, in order for a particular to become part of Debian, it has to
be packaged. This means, someone needs to write a number of scripts
which go into a directory called "debian". These scripts will compile
your package and build a Debian package (.deb). Furthermore, the
debian directory contains a changelog describing the changes of the
package, a so-called control file which tells the package manager
about the dependencies (i.e. other Debian packages which have to be
installed as well for your package to work) and many more files
(depending on the particular type of package).

After the package has been built and it meets the quality standards
for packages in Debian, it can be uploaded by a Debian Developer (DD)
into the Debian archives where it will become available for
installation in Debian unstable (and Debian testing and eventually
Debian stable).

If you are not a Debian Developer, you can still have your packages
uploaded into Debian through the means of Debian mentors [1]. Debian
mentors is a repository where newbies can upload their packages and
ask Debian Developers to sponsor these, which means reviewing and
eventually uploading these packages. Once you have gained enough
experience and self-confidence - after uploading more packages to
Debian through sponsored uploads through Debian mentors - you can
eventually apply to become a Debian Developer yourself.

Anyway, in your case I would suggest you get into contact with the
Debian Developer who maintains the package "webhttrack" [2] (you find
his email address on this website). Since your application is a GUI
for the webhttrack package, it might make sense that he maintains the
GUI for it as well.

Hope that helps!

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://mentors.debian.net/
> [2] http://packages.debian.org/stable/web/webhttrack

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121223120357.gb25...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#696593: ITP: sun -- sun calculates the sun's rise/set times

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Steffen,

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 03:54:06PM +0100, Steffen Vogel wrote:
> PS: Please excuse my mistakes i've propably made. Thats my first ITP and 
> Debian package overall...

Sounds like an interesting project. Have you already uploaded your
package to Debian mentors [1] to ask for sponsorship?

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://mentors.debian.net/

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121223152552.gb27...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: openmotif is now LGPL, retirement of lesstif in jessie?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 07:56:06PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Of course, we still have to release wheezy, but may I (also with my
> lesstif co-maintainer hat on) already suggest to get rid of lesstif for
> jessie.
> 
> What do you think?

Sounds reasonable to me, especially since lesstif seems to be
abandonend (last release 2007) while OpenMotif just had a release in
October 2012 (according to Wikipedia).

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121223192535.ga28...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: openmotif is now LGPL, retirement of lesstif in jessie?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 12:01:37PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: 
> If he agrees, we could start with packaging the next version already in
> experimental. Although of course, we should be focusing on releasing
> Wheezy right now.

I would suggest then that you guys work togther and even might have a
look at this very related RFP [1] :).

Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=689098

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121224232053.ga23...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#696623: ITP: seekwatcher -- utility to visualize block I/O patterns

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 06:55:29PM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> 
>Package name: seekwatcher
> Version: 0.12+hg20091016-1
  

Without checking myself, is this actually the most recent upstream
version? Does it make sense to package such an old version?

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20121224232715.gc23...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Bug#697821: ITP: ppsspp -- ppsspp: A portable PSP emulator.

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 

* Package name: ppsspp
  Version : 0.5
  Upstream Author : Henrik Rydgård 
* URL : http://www.ppsspp.org/
* License : GPL2+
PSPSDK BSD-compatible license
  Programming Lang: C, C++, Objective-C and 
  Description : ppsspp: A portable PSP emulator.

>From the homepage:

PPSSPP is a PSP emulator written in C++, and translates PSP CPU
instructions directly into optimized x86, x64 and (soon) ARM
machine code, using an efficient JIT compiler.

PPSSPP can thus run on quite low-spec hardware, including
stronger Android phones and tablets, as long as there's
support for OpenGL ES 2.0.

PPSSPP is still in early development, some features like audio
playback for ATRAC3+-encoded content is not implemented. Many
games, however, are already playable:

http://www.ppsspp.org/compatibility.html


-- 
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/2013011206.25169.98305.reportbug@localhost.localdomain

Re: tool to create debian/copyright files paragraphs?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 01/28/2013 12:58 PM, Thomas Koch wrote:

I have a package (closure-compiler[1]) with files copyrighted by six different
parties unsystematically distributed over a large source tree.

Has anybody already written a tool to automatically create the files section
of the debian/copyright file? The tool should try to keep the files list short
by using wildcards.

If not I might hack something in python.


Awesome idea! Please tell me where to send the crate of beer once you're 
finished ;).


Cheers,

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51066972.6090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: needing sponsor for blt: am I at that stage?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/02/2013 04:42 AM, Paul Wise wrote:

Looks like you did everything correctly, except one thing:


I'd like to disagree here. After having a quick glance at the package on 
mentors [1], there is lots of work to be done until the package is 
lintian-clean which is what I always prefer when sponsoring.


Cheers,

Adrian

> [1] http://mentors.debian.net/package/blt

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51317597.2090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

> The maintainer seems MIA since June 2012, not responding to bug
> reports nor direct mails.
> The two most recent upstream releases not packaged.

Why would this be a reason to *remove* a package? Especially after
such a short time. The package hasn't even been orphaened.

I have seen packages in Debian which haven't received updates from the
maintainer after much longer periods. This doesn't necessarrialy mean
the maintainer is MIA. Debian is run by volunteers and sometimes,
people are busy with more important things in life. This doesn't mean
that anyone has the right to immediately remove their packages from
Debian.

I suppose Khalid will be happy to continue to work on the package
again once he finds the time. I don't see any need (and I think it's
impolite) to pressure him in such a way.

Regards,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/20130303120604.ga18...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi,

On 03/03/2013 08:33 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote:

Would you consider adding one of the active contributors to Subsurface
as a co-maintainer? This is currently a really fast moving project
(3.0.2 will come out tonight or tomorrow, 3.1 is planned for next month)
and it might be easier to have someone who is part of the developer team
helping out with the packaging (this is what we are doing on several of
the other distributions).


If someone from the Subsurface project is actually willing to step up 
and help, it would be a great idea. I highly encourage 
co-maintainership, especially since help will be coming from upstream.


I'd also be happy to review and sponsor any uploads.


PS: would it be useful for me to include the Debian packaging files in
the git tree? we have an ancient version under packaging/debian but I'll
be happy to update those if you are interested.


Well, no, I actually would not advise doing that. Debian usually prefers 
doing the packaging on its own, especially since when there are 
sometimes (license) issues which make the software not comply with the 
DFSG (which I am not assuming in this case).


A great place for maintaining the packaging for Debian is github, for 
example.


In any case, I'd be happy to help with sponsoring.

Cheers,

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/5133a663.2090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/03/2013 08:51 PM, Dirk Hohndel wrote:

I'd also be happy to review and sponsor any uploads.


We have several people who offered to step up, a couple of them are
copied on this email...


Great. Just in case ;).


PS: would it be useful for me to include the Debian packaging files in
the git tree? we have an ancient version under packaging/debian but I'll
be happy to update those if you are interested.


Well, no, I actually would not advise doing that. Debian usually prefers
doing the packaging on its own, especially since when there are
sometimes (license) issues which make the software not comply with the
DFSG (which I am not assuming in this case).


We are 100% GPLv2 so I don't think this would pose a problem, but I'm
fine with that and will instead remove the outdated files from the
sources to avoid confusion.


The license issue was just an example (hence the braces). The reasoning 
is that the Debian packaging is supposed to be independent of upstream, 
especially since we cannot always follow upstream, during a freeze, for 
example.


Assume we have version 3.0 in Debian and upstream has 3.5 and we're 
frozen. During the freeze, someone discovers a nasty bug in subsurface 
which is considered RC (release critical) in Debian, but gets fixed in 
3.5.1 upstream.


Now, since we'd be in freeze, uploading the new version 3.5.1 into 
unstable to fix the problem in testing would not be possible. Instead, 
the fix would have to be backported to 3.0 and fixed in the Debian 
packaging. If the Debian packaging would be part of upstream, 
backporting the bug would be a bit difficult since the fix would be 
realized as a patch in the debian/patches directory which wouldn't apply 
if upstream was already at 3.5.1 (which includes the fix naturally) and 
the official Debian packaging (which is at 3.0) would be part of the 
upstream repository.


I am aware that you could probably avoid this problem with branches, but 
I think it would just make things difficult. Debian cannot simply be 
up-to-date with upstream and thus upstream shouldn't maintain the 
Debian-specific part.



A great place for maintaining the packaging for Debian is github, for
example.


Well - I run my own git server at git.hohndel.org but we can use
whatever works for the packaging.


Sure, that was just a suggestion. I'd just keep it independent from 
upstream.


Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/5133abaa.4000...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#701536: RM: subsurface -- RoQA; unmaintained package, maintainer MIA

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/03/2013 10:35 PM, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:


The license issue was just an example (hence the braces). The reasoning is
that the Debian packaging is supposed to be independent of upstream,
especially since we cannot always follow upstream, during a freeze, for
example.
Assume we have version 3.0 in Debian and upstream has 3.5 and we're frozen.
During the freeze, someone discovers a nasty bug in subsurface which is
considered RC (release critical) in Debian, but gets fixed in 3.5.1 upstream.


What about upstream keeping stuff on release branches (3.0, 3.0.2, 3.5,
and so on)?  And doing that sort of backporting patches themselfs?  How
much would that help with packaging?


Yes, but that would always mean Debian somehow depends on upstream which 
is not really a desired situation. As I said, we cannot always keep up 
with upstream for various reasons. Debian-specific changes through 
patches are not uncommon and it doesn't always make sense to adopt the 
changes upstream.


Debian packaging should only be part of the upstream repository if the 
package is Debian-native, e.g. it has its origin in Debian. Like dpkg or 
apt, for example. You can recognize these packages from the missing -n 
(n being a natural numner) in the version number.



I am aware that you could probably avoid this problem with branches, but I
think it would just make things difficult. Debian cannot simply be up-to-date
with upstream and thus upstream shouldn't maintain the Debian-specific part.


Alright.  Package maintenence stuff separated from upstream source stuff.
Did I get that right?


I'd recommend that, yes.

As for the current situation, I'd recommend getting the current upstream 
version of subsurface ready for Debian and have it uploaded into 
experimental.


Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/5133c38d.3040...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: is Kai Wasserbäch still active?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Ben,

I'd be happy to sponsor your package once I'm sober again (just came back from 
a pub :)).

Cheers,

Adrian

On Mar 24, 2013, at 6:26 AM, Ben Scott  wrote:

> I have a package (kvpm) that Kai Wasserbäch sponsored for upload 
> into the repository. I need to upload an important bug fix but email
> to 'curan AT debian.org' isn't being answered. Is he still active?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> bensc...@nwlink.com
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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/utednT4LoeIWE9PMnZ2dnUVZ_oSdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition
> 


--
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/9b76a110-7062-4b5a-837a-1df30854f...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: is Kai Wasserbäch still active?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/25/2013 05:15 AM, Ben wrote:

Thank you! I uploaded the revised version of "kvpm" to mentors.


I already had a look at it.


You should
look to make sure I got the package correct.


Well, there are some lintian problems, but that's ok for the moment. The 
only important task is to fix the bug now.


Since this is a critical bug, it should be fixed in Wheezy as well which 
means the package needs to be unblocked by the release team.


To make sure this goes as smooth as possible, I suggest the following:

- file a critical bug report against the kvpm package in Debian for this 
specific bug


- update the changelog entry for 0.8.6-3 to reflect the aforementioned 
bug with a Closes: #nn statement and upload the package to Mentors


- let me review and upload the package into unstable

- file an unblock request (reportbug release.debian.org), attaching the 
debdiff for the changes between kvpm 0.8.6-2 and 0.8.6-3


- hope that the release team accepts your change and have the fix 
propagate into Wheezy (chances that this happens are higher when you 
file a proper bug report)


After that has happened, I'd be happy to sponsor further kvpm uploads 
for you to get the package into better shape for Debian Jessie.


Cheers,

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/515017ed.7040...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Bug#704100: ITP: jubatus -- jubatus: Distributed Online Machine Learning Framework

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 

* Package name: jubatus
  Version : 0.4.2
  Upstream Author : The Jubatus Team 
* URL : http://jubat.us
* License : LGPL v2.1
  Programming Lang: C++, Python
  Description : jubatus: Distributed Online Machine Learning Framework

Jubatus is a distributed online machine learning framework developed by
Japan's Nippon Telegraph & Telephone (NTT) and Preferred Infrastructure
Corporation (PFI).

It can be used to analyse data in real time allowing to assist making forecasts
for markets, detecting frauds, predicting natural disasters, estimating parts
and material procurement for manufacturing, making assesments about health
risks and providing predictive techniques in life and natural sciences.

Jubatus is provided as a library and provides client libraries with bindings
for C++, Python, Ruby and Java. An online tutorial and extensive documentation
are provided both in English and Japanese on the Jubatus homepage. Support
can be obtained through Google Groups, news updates are posted on Twitter
(@JubatusOfficial) as well as the Jubatus blog.

Note:

I have already been in touch with upstream and notified them that I would like
to package Jubatus for Debian. Since Jubatus is still a rather young project
and thus subject to frequent API changes and code clean ups, the Jubatus team
asked me to allow them to get the code a bit more into shape before they
consider it ready for offical packaging. I have filed this ITP already to
express my interest to become the maintainer of Jubatus in Debian nevertheless.

People who want to try out Jubatus in the mean time can resort to the Debian
and RPM packages provided by the Jubatus team themselves.


-- 
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/20130327220127.6867.16735.reportbug@localhost.localdomain

Re: Bug#704124: codename 'rc-buggy' not handled correctly

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/28/2013 11:21 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:

rc-buggy is not a codename, it's a bad joke.  Don't use it?


I actually never noticed the pun but very much like the idea as it would 
be equivalent to the pun used for unstable (=sid), the pun fits perfect.


Why not make "rc-buggy" the official code name for experimental?

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51541d12.6040...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#455769: same problem on wheezy + Thinkpad X220T

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/28/2013 11:47 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:

Would you provide a guarantee to all users of wheezy that you will pay
for their laptop repair if this issue causes damage?


> Debian GNU/Linux comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, to the extent
> permitted by applicable law.


This problem happens regularly enough that Debian should not be promoted
for laptops if it is not taken seriously as an RC issue.  Users will get
a very bad impression if basic things like this aren't working in a
stable release.


I have heard of that problem for the very first time now and I have been 
using Debian on a laptop since around 2004, on various machines like the 
Thinkpad 240X, X40, T42, T60, T23.


Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/5154247f.4070...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#455769: same problem on wheezy + Thinkpad X220T

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 03/28/2013 12:33 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:

Think about it another way - if you put Debian on a friend's laptop and
they suffer with this issue, would you be quoting that clause in the
license for them?


I would. Software is made by humans, it's never perfect after all and 
you should always expect things to break and have a backup. If you are 
so delusional that you think you can trust your computer your data 100%, 
then you haven't had used computers long enough.


I have worked in IT support when I was a student, we always told people 
to never trust their important data their laptops but use the SAN instead.



This problem happens regularly enough that Debian should not be promoted
for laptops if it is not taken seriously as an RC issue.  Users will get
a very bad impression if basic things like this aren't working in a
stable release.

I have heard of that problem for the very first time now and I have
been using Debian on a laptop since around 2004, on various machines
like the Thinkpad 240X, X40, T42, T60, T23.

There are a long list of issues, many just under the RC threshold,
against the gnome-power-manager package:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=gnome-power-manager


Again, haven't seen such issues for ages.


I have experienced suspend problems on X61s, X201 and X220 with squeeze
and wheezy regularily. Most of the times it was hald that needed to be
restarted which is now done regularily upon wakeup on my notebooks.


Can you make any suggestion how we can make this more stable for
non-technical users of wheezy?


Well, it would be interesting to know what hardware models are affected. 
Power management issues often arise due to shitty hardware or faulty 
ACPI tables or bad drivers.


But I also think that these issues should rather be addressed upstream.

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51542c58.3070...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: missing libgl1-mesa-dri in upgrades

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 04/01/2013 11:59 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:


I've found that some default packages in Gnome are broken if
libgl1-mesa-dri is not installed

(...)

While I've filed a bug against empathy (that is where I observed the
problem), I suspect other packages are impacted and the issue may need
to be fixed at some other level.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704257


Empathy itself does not required GL libraries to be installed:

glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$ objdump -p `which empathy` |grep NEEDED
  NEEDED   libenchant.so.1
  NEEDED   libcheese-gtk.so.21
  NEEDED   libebook-1.2.so.13
  NEEDED   libgeoclue.so.0
  NEEDED   libgeocode-glib.so.0
  NEEDED   libnm-glib.so.4
  NEEDED   libgudev-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libm.so.6
  NEEDED   libdbus-glib-1.so.2
  NEEDED   libfolks-telepathy.so.25
  NEEDED   libfolks.so.25
  NEEDED   libgee.so.2
  NEEDED   libgnome-keyring.so.0
  NEEDED   libgnutls.so.26
  NEEDED   libgstreamer-0.10.so.0
  NEEDED   libgthread-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libtelepathy-logger.so.2
  NEEDED   libtelepathy-glib.so.0
  NEEDED   libxml2.so.2
  NEEDED   libcanberra-gtk3.so.0
  NEEDED   libcanberra.so.0
  NEEDED   libnotify.so.4
  NEEDED   libwebkitgtk-3.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libchamplain-gtk-0.12.so.0
  NEEDED   libclutter-gtk-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgtk-3.so.0
  NEEDED   libchamplain-0.12.so.0
  NEEDED   libclutter-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgdk-3.so.0
  NEEDED   libX11.so.6
  NEEDED   libgio-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libpango-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgobject-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libglib-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libpthread.so.0
  NEEDED   libc.so.6
glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$

However, Empathy depends on Clutter which itself requires an OpenGL 
implementation:


glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$ objdump -p 
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libclutter-1.0.so.0 |grep NEEDED

  NEEDED   libm.so.6
  NEEDED   libatk-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libcogl-pango.so.0
  NEEDED   libcogl.so.9
  NEEDED   libjson-glib-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgio-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgdk-3.so.0
  NEEDED   libpangocairo-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libcairo-gobject.so.2
  NEEDED   libcairo.so.2
  NEEDED   libX11.so.6
  NEEDED   libXext.so.6
  NEEDED   libXdamage.so.1
  NEEDED   libXfixes.so.3
  NEEDED   libXcomposite.so.1
  NEEDED   libXi.so.6
  NEEDED   libpangoft2-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libpango-1.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libfreetype.so.6
  NEEDED   libfontconfig.so.1
  NEEDED   libgobject-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgthread-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libgmodule-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   librt.so.1
  NEEDED   libglib-2.0.so.0
  NEEDED   libpthread.so.0
  NEEDED   libc.so.6
glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$

Checking the depends of libclutter-1.0-0:

glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$ apt-cache depends libclutter-1.0-0 |head
libclutter-1.0-0
  Depends: libatk1.0-0
  Depends: libc6
  Depends: libcairo-gobject2
  Depends: libcairo2
  Depends: libcogl-pango0
  Depends: libcogl9
  Depends: libfontconfig1
  Depends: libfreetype6
  Depends: libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0
glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$

where you see a dependency on libcogl9 which in turn depends on MESA:

glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$ apt-cache depends libcogl9 |head
libcogl9
  Depends: libc6
  Depends: libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0
  Depends: libglib2.0-0
  Depends: libx11-6
  Depends: libxcomposite1
  Depends: libxdamage1
  Depends: libxext6
  Depends: libxfixes3
  Depends: libgl1-mesa-glx
glaubitz@znote-t60o:~$

So, whatever you do, don't mess around with Empathy. The bug, if any, is 
not in Empathy but any of its dependencies. I'd have a look at Clutter.


Also, have you tried running Empathy on a non-compositing window manager 
when libgl1-mesa-dri is not installed?


Cheers,

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51597f74.6000...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: missing libgl1-mesa-dri in upgrades

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 04/01/2013 09:59 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:

Agreed, but that doesn't complete the picture, as libgl1-mesa-glx
doesn't depend on libgl1-mesa-dri:

$ apt-cache depends libgl1-mesa-glx
   ...
 Recommends: libgl1-mesa-dri



Well, "Recommends" are installed by default, aren't they? However, I'm 
not sure why it shouldn't be depending on either "libgl1-mesa-dri" or 
"libgl1-mesa-swx11" here. I mean, MESA doesn't work without either of 
these, does it?



Either empathy or libclutter probably need to generate a popup error
window in this situation, if the error only appears in a console then it
will leave users with a bad impression of any impacted binary.
Generating such an error is independent of making sure the dependency is
present.


No, I don't think there should be a popup. Someone should just fix the 
dependencies.



Also, have you tried running Empathy on a non-compositing window manager
when libgl1-mesa-dri is not installed?



I'm happy to try that, can you propose which window manager I should
try?  I know fvwm quite well and don't mind installing that.


Yeah, fvwm doesn't really do any compositing :).

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/5159e845.9070...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Bug#704997: ITP: cw-driver -- Driver and utilities for the Catweasel versatile floppy disk controller

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz 

* Package name: cw-driver
  Version : 0.14
  Upstream Author : Karsten Scheibler 
* URL : http://unusedino.de/cw/
* License : GPL-2
  Programming Lang: C
  Description : Driver and utilities for the Catweasel versatile floppy 
disk controller

cw is a package containing the driver and utilities for accessing floppy disks 
attached
to the Catweasel series of floppy disk controllers by Individual Computers. 
These controllers
are fully programmable and therefore allow reading and writing of a variety of 
floppy disk
formats. These currently include:
  .
  * Amiga 3.5" (880k, 1760k)
  * Apple Macintosh 3.5" (400k, 800k, 720k, 1440k)
  * MS-DOS 3.5" (720k, 1440k)
  * MS-DOS 5.25" (360k, 720k, 800k, 1200k)
  * ATARI ST 3.5" (360k, 720k, 800k, 1440k)
  * ATARI 800 XL 5.25" (130k, 180k)
  * Apple II 5.25" (140k)
  * Commodore 1541 5.25" (170k)
  * Commodore 1571 5.25" (170k, 341k)
  * Commodore 1581 3.5" (800k)
  * Catweasel Extra (1160k, 2380k)
  * Nintendo Backup Station 3.5" (1600k)
  .
The disks can be read and written using conventional DD/HD 3.5" and 5.25" 
floppy disk
drives using the cwtool disk utility provided in the cw package. The driver 
supports
the following Catweasel models:
  .
  * Catweasel Mk-II (IDE-type, connected to an IDE host)
  * Catweasel Mk-III Flipper (PCI)
  * Catweasel Mk-IV (PCI)
  * Catweasel Mk-IVplus (PCI)
  .
The driver supplied in the cw package supports the built-in floppy disk 
controller
only. Support for the on-board C64 sound chip (SID), the joystick ports and the
Amiga keyboard port, is provided by other driver packages, these include:
  .
  * catweasel: supports SID, joystick and Amiga keyboard ports - 
http://llg.cubic.org/cw/
  * cwfloppy: Catweasel floppy disk controller block device driver - 
http://www.soundtracker.org/raw/cwfloppy/
  * hardsid: supports HardSID cards and the SID chips on the Mk-III and IV 
Catweasels - http://hardsid.sourceforge.net/
  * hardsid-catweasel: reworked hardsid driver which supports the Catweasel 
Mk-IV only - https://bel.fi/alankila/hardsid-catweasel/
  * cw2dmk: utility to use the Catweasel floppy disk controller without a 
kernel driver - http://www.tim-mann.org/catweasel.html
  * hardsec_cw: fork of cw2dmk with additional supprt for hard-sectored disks - 
http://webpages.charter.net/thecomputercollection/hardsec_cw.tar.gz
  .
More information can be found in the README included in the tarball of the cw 
package.


-- 
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/20130408152225.32465.72297.reportbug@localhost.localdomain

Re: Bug#705015: ITP: ie7-js -- help Internet Explorer behave like a standards-compliant browser

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 04/08/2013 09:23 PM, David Prévot wrote:

The purpose would be to provide it, via a libjs-ie7, in order to be used
as a third party in other packages like spip. As such, I intend to
maintain it under the Debian Javascript umbrella.


And how would I use it on Debian when there is no Internet Explorer 7 
available for non-Windows platforms? Wine?


Cheers,

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51631a91.8090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#705015: ITP: ie7-js -- help Internet Explorer behave like a standards-compliant browser

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 04/08/2013 09:43 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote:

It's a shim. You provide the support for the missing features right on
your website. When a user loads a page in IE7, this JavaScript detects
this and enables replacement implementations of those things. Same as
jQuery gives you a $ function, but here it's about redefining or
overlaying existing features.


Makes sense and sounds pretty cool! Thanks for clearing that up!

Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


--
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/51631e5e.1090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch status

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 11/29/2013 09:48 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> s390 and Hurd will not be release architectures for Jessie.
> 
> Two words: THANK. YOU.

However, m68k will be.

*preparing to run as fast as I can*

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/529855e3.5040...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bits from ARM porters

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/03/2013 01:40 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> I’d really like to get everyone who’s got root on the m68k buildds,
> or physical access to it¹, to be a member of the project, though…

I second that!

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/529e194c.8090...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#732159: Should this package be removed?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/14/2013 11:07 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Moritz Muehlenhoff  wrote:
>> Package: mplayer
>> Severity: serious
>>
>> Should this package be removed? If so, please reassign to ftp.debian.org
>>
>> - Last upload nearly two years ago
>> - FTBFS for a long time
>> - Incompatible with current libav
>> - Alternatives exist (mplayer2, mpv)

Well, to be honest, I think the problem is actually libav, not mplayer.
Most users prefer the original ffmpeg over libav from my own experience.

And there are new upstream releases of mplayer which are actually more
frequent and active than mplayer2:

- mplayer: current stable release 1.1.1, released May 6th, 2013
- mplayer2: current stable release 2.0, released: March 24th, 2011

Even the latest git commit for mplayer2 is older than the current
stable release of mplayer. The latter seems much more active to me.

So, what I'd rather like to see is that we get a proper ffmpeg
back in Debian again which would also allow to update mplayer
to the current upstream version. There is even an RFP for
that [1]. But I guess this is not going to happen.

I'm still a bit sad that the split among the ffmpeg people
happened.

Adrian

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=729203

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Bug#732159: Should this package be removed?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/15/2013 10:11 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
> Bálint Réczey  schrieb:
>> How about introducing the ffmpeg shared libraries with libffmpeg
>> prefix instead of libav prefix?
> 
> No way. Keeping up with security fixes for libav is tedious enough,
> we cannot reasonably have both. 

So, the alternatives then are either removing xbmc, mplayer and all
packages with dependencies on these or switching back to ffmpeg?

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52ae2172.5030...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: ITA: microcom

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Uwe!

On 12/20/2013 08:29 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> my colleagues and I are using microcom much at my work place and the
> last upstream releases were done by a colleague. So I'm willing to take
> maintainership of the package.

Thank you very much for doing this. I always highly appreciate that
when people step up and are willing to adopt a package :).

> The only thing I need help for is: I'm
> "only" a DM, so I'd need someone to do
> 
>   dcut dm --uid "Uwe Kleine-König" --allow microcom

You haven't done any uploads for this package before, so I suggest
you have at least your first version sponsored if you don't mind.

I would be very happy to review the package for you and sponsor it
if you like. And if there aren't any problems with your packaging,
I am very glad to give you upload permissions for "microcom".

Thanks!

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52b4a186.4030...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#732159: Should this package be removed?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/21/2013 11:47 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Mike Gabriel
>  wrote:
>> @Reinhard: please note that we in X2Go currently work on a multimedia
>> implementation that requires mplayer on the client side. It would be a shame
>> (disclaimer: /me has not fully read all postings in this thread) if
>> mplayer(1) would disappear out of Debian.
> 
> What's the problem with using mplayer2 or mpv?

mplayer2 is badly maintained as compared to mplayer, don't know
anything about mpv though. Just learned about it as of today,
in fact.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52b57bed.20...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#732159: Should this package be removed?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Jonas!

On 12/21/2013 01:15 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> A week ago Reinhard started this thread, explicitly referencing mpv.  
> You quoted that, sidestepping to your own pet issue:
> 
> Quoting John Paul Adrian Glaubitz (2013-12-14 23:53:05)
>> On 12/14/2013 11:07 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>>> - Alternatives exist (mplayer2, mpv)
>>
>> Well, to be honest, I think the problem is actually libav, not 
>> mplayer.
>> Most users prefer the original ffmpeg over libav from my own 
>> experience.
> 
> 
> ...and now you admit that you didn't even read the original post:

I did, "mpv" just slipped through my eyes since I haven't heard of
it before.

And my impression with ffmpeg and libav is, in fact, that most
users prefer ffmpeg over libav, sorry. I never understood why
ffmpeg was replaced in the first place without asking what people
actually wanted.

There is even an RFP for ffmpeg at the moment [1]. I'm aware of
the amount of flames I am going to get for my opinion, but I think
we should package what people actually use and not what the result
of some upstream infightings were.

> Quoting John Paul Adrian Glaubitz (2013-12-21 12:30:53)
>> On 12/21/2013 11:47 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>> What's the problem with using mplayer2 or mpv?
>>
>> mplayer2 is badly maintained as compared to mplayer, don't know
>> anything about mpv though. Just learned about it as of today,
>> in fact.
> 
> 
> Shame on you!!

Because I slipped one word? :(

PS: Remember me from last LinuxTag? We keysigned each other ;).

Adrian

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=729203

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Bug#732159: Should this package be removed?

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/21/2013 02:11 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Because you sidestepped (read: hijacked) the original post.

I did not. I was simply elaborating what the actual problem is. mplayer
is broken and unmaintained and so is xbmc and the actual reason is not
that those projects are unmaintained upstream but because Debian has
decided to take sides with libav because one of the libav developers
also happens to be a DD and these upstream projects still prefer
ffmpeg over libav and so do other like the PPSSPP emulator, for
example, which is extremely popular.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: gdm3: still buggy!

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/22/2013 11:22 PM, Svante Signell wrote:
> This is really becoming an issue: I still cannot run the latest gdm3
> together with gnome, meaning that gdm3 is still borked.

Could you be more specific, please?

I'm using gdm3 without any issues all the time on two different
machines running unstable. It's a bit slow sometimes when starting
up, but it's working as advertised.

I am running systemd 204 on both machines.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52b76804.6020...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: [Prepare mass bug filling][RFC] New lintian tags: privacy-breach

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Bastien!

On 12/23/2013 04:23 PM, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> I have just implemented lintian-privacy-breach tags [1,2]
> 
> These tags check for webpage fetching external documents and thus
> allowing to track our user.
> 
> Lintian is beeing to run over the archive but nevertheless we get some
> partial result (expect full archive coverage in a week or two).

I already love lintian for what it's doing and it's one of the most
helpful developer tools I have ever used. It's especially helpful
when sponsoring packages for Debian Maintainers and those who
want to become one and I run it every time when I am about to
upload a package.

This additional check makes it even more awesome, thanks a lot for
implementing that feature :).

Happy Holidays and Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52b85b6f.20...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 12/25/2013 08:46 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> And overriding the *entire* service file seems excessive if you wish to
>> override just one line of the package's service file.
> 
> And also, systemd would be the only package behaving this way, which is
> counter-intuitive for our users. I'd even go up to say this isn't policy
> compliant (as configuration files must be in /etc).

Thomas, we have agreed to no longer discuss this topic anymore until the
technical committee has made a decision, haven't we?

And, as for your statement, it's incorrect. systemd (and udevd) have
always shipped their "factory" unit files in /usr or /lib and everything
that you customize is read from /etc/systemd and /etc/udevd,
respectively and has precedence over the shipped unit or rules
files. This is a common practice used by many packages,

So there is nothing violating the policy and the information you had
was simply incorrect.

In any case, please let's stop here and let the committee do their
work. We've had enough discussion already.

Cheers and Happy Holidays!

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52baaa79.20...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: several SIGSEGV bugs in debian 7/AMD64

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hello Rene!

On 12/28/2013 08:40 AM, René Kuligowski wrote:
> concerning: older AMD64 computers + 3.x kernel,
> X11 + native NVidia drivers + FVWM or WMII,
> and some other SIGSEGV'ing apps

This is too unspecific, unfortunately. You should file a bug report for
each machine and each problem you encounter.

For example, when you see crashes of the nVidia driver with one of your
machine, file a bug against the "nvidia-glx" package providing the exact
hardware configuration you have. The tool "reportbug" will allow you to
create a template to write a bug report and you can find more
information here [1].

> I am using an older AMD64 AthlonXP Core 2 3800+, accompanied by 8GB DDR2
> RAM, on an Asus M2NPV-VM mainboard, which features a nForce4 430 chipset
> with integrated NV6150 GPU, and use an additional PCIe NV9500GS GPU.

Before looking closer at the software, have you checked the hardware
itself? The capacitors on hardware of that age are very prone to
failure, see [2].

> ––  I have disabled PowerNow in the mainboard's BIOS, and the 3.2 kernel
> complains about missing ACPI ("try with newer BIOS").  The kernel
> doesn't even recognize the power-off button.  In debian 6, ACPI works
> absolutely perfectly.

Well, did you actually try a newer BIOS? ACPI tables which are part of
the mainboard BIOS are very often broken or incorrect. There are tools
which are table to verify the ACPI implementation of your BIOS [3].

Newer BIOS version often fix or at least improve the ACPI tables.

> When I use the Novula kernel module, things are extremely slow, even
> in 2D mode;

Speed is very subjective in this regard, but nouveau is certainly slower
than the binary driver by nVidia. This is known and lies in the nature
of the way this driver has been developed.

> when I use the native NVidia modules (driver packages 304 or
> 295 which support both GPUS, or the recent 331, which only supports the
> 9500), KDM, FVWM, WMII and a good host of other programs just SIGSEGV or
> put the CPU in an endless loop and blank the screen by using illegal
> video modes.

Then you should actually file bug reports against "nvidia-glx" providing
all necessary information like the output of "lspci", "dmesg" and so
on. You can, for example, write an installation report [4] which
will do most of that work for you. You just need to fill in the
missing information about the hardware and what worked and what not.

> Note: this does *not* happen in the i386 port of debian 7, which runs
> smoothly on my Acer AspireOne netbook with native Intel GPU drivers…

How is this related to any of the problems above? This is a completely
different hardware. Please file separate bug reports for each problem
and machine.

>   Since there seems to be no 2.6 kernel available anymore, I'll stick
> with debian 6.0.7 for now (by the way, the 6.0.7 security update and the
> 6.0.8 have similar issues…).  Please look into this issues and let me
> know if you can fix it somehow.

Before we can do that, you need to file proper bug reports so that
maintainers and developers don't have to search the necessary
information to pin down the origin of your problems. With the current
information, it's rather like finding a needle in a hay stack.

Adrian

> [1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor_plague
> [3] https://wiki.linaro.org/LEG/Engineering/test-acpi
> [4] http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/apas04.html.en

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913


-- 
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/52be9230.50...@physik.fu-berlin.de

Re: Fwd: Re: several SIGSEGV bugs in debian 7/AMD64

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Rene!

On 12/28/2013 09:52 PM, René Kuligowski wrote:
> Thanks for your quick answer,… but (sounds like a pouting little boy, I
> know):
> Sorry, but I cannot file a bug report against, say, nvidia-glx, because
> it is most likely not the cause.  The problem is far more likely kernel
> 3.x- and/or gcc-related, and I need somebody who knows more intimate
> workings of debian 7 before I can file a bug report to the correct
> topic/person:

You can still file the bug report against a particular package. If it
turns out to be assigned to the wrong package, we can still change
that afterwards at any time.

Also, you still need to be more specific. A bug report in the sense
of "Debian 7 crashes on my old computer, Debian 6 didn't", isn't helpful
at all. Debian comes with over 15.000 source packages and there are
billions of hardware combinations out there.

Unless someone at Debian can get hold of a crystal ball, it's simply
impossible to debug your problem with the information that you
provided.

> –– newer BIOS for my machine does not exist.  Current/last is from
> 2009.  And, like I wrote, it works perfectly with debian 6 (kernel 2.6)
> or winXP/win7.  *without* *any* problems. And I don't exactly care if
> APM/ACPI standards have changed in the meantime.  Debian used to be
> backward-compatible to even twenty-years-old hardware and their specs.

You got me wrong. ACPI standards didn't change, I never said that. What
I said is that lots of BIOS firmware has incorrect implementations of
the ACPI specification and you probably need to patch your ACPI tables
(there are tools for that out there).

In any case, it's still your job to write a detailed bug report and
trying to pin point your problem to a certain package, e.g. "Updating
nvidia-glx from version 123.45 to 155.99 brought my graphics with
my nVidia GeForce 123 graphics adapter". Again, without this
information, any attempt to help you will be futile.

> –– no capacitor or other hardware related issues.  Cannot be, also,
> because things would shred under debian 6 and winXP/win7, too, which
> they don't.  Things are a bit older, but tended well to.

Bad capacitors tend to cause all kinds of problems, including those
that don't make any sense at first sight. I have often seen people
overlooking bad capacitors, especially since not all bad capacitors
tend to bulge.

> –– with NVidia modules tailor-made and compiled for the running kernel
> by the installer, the current X screen (the tty "behind" it) shows
> SIGSEGV and dump notes with/from/by several system librares.  I'll see
> if I can find a way to send you a screendump/log-extract.

Well, if it turns out to be a bug in the proprietary nVidia driver,
there is nothing Debian can actually do to fix this. This driver
is closed-source, thus only nVidia can make changes to it to fix
bugs.

Debian can fix bugs in the nouveau driver only which is recommended
for older nVidia cards anyway unless you want to do some serious
gaming. My Debian workstation sports a GeForce 210 which isn't that
old but also not a gaming board and I have been using nouveau ever
since without any problems. It's surely not fast enough for 3D
gaming, but 2D stuff is fine.

> Hence, my indirect question if there is an
> official 2.6 kernel for debian 7. 

No, there isn't and it's certainly not sensible to use older kernels.
There might be important daemons like udevd which might need a more
recent kernel.

I don't want to experiment with the
> 2.6 sources on an "unknown" and differently behaving operating system
> myself, and I don't know if it even would run without compiling the
> whole 7 distro from scratch again.

What? Building your own kernel is one of the easiest things to do. Fetch
the source, unpack it, copy your current config from /boot-`uname -r`
into the root directory of the sources as ".config" and run "make
oldconfig".

> Please do not tell me "heck, just buy a more modern gfx card or a whole
> new machine, will you", because that wouldn't accomplish anything.  I
> need the old ones.  And debian once was a distribution that ran on
> everything from oldest to newest.

No, but you should do a little more research yourself. Firstly, this
is not the "debian-user" mailing list but "debian-devel", we don't
provide support here. And, secondly, you can't expect people here
fixing your computer for free. Nothing indicates so far that your
problems are related to any bugs, you are just making assumptions.

Again, file a proper and detailed bug report against a particular
package and people will gladly be helping you.

Cheers,

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universita