Bug#555168: Unclear license situation for (e)glibc locales provided by you

2012-07-05 Thread Denys Dmytriyenko 
Hi,

As it was suggested in the bugreport, most of those locales were copied from 
one common example and nobody could imagine that it would ever be necessary to 
license this data properly in the future... Anyway, I'm fine with re-licensing 
ru_UA under LGPLv2.1+

-- 
Denys


On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> Hello,
> you are listed as contact person/author of the following locale:
> 
> ru_UA
> 
> This locale comes with a statement
> 
> % Distribution and use is free, also
> % for commercial purposes.
> 
> Thus it does not allow modification; it is unclear, however, if this
> statement was meant as a license.
> 
> As discussed in
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=555168 this
> locale could strictly speaking not be part of Debian which would be a
> great loss. (Currently it is allowed pending investigation).
> 
> To properly resolve this, I would like to ask you the following
> question:
> 
> Would you be willing to relicense this locale to a proper license,
> e.g. (L)GPL v2 or higher or another free software license of your choice?
> 
> If you have any questions regarding this issue, do not hesitate to
> contact me (via the reply-to address set).
> 
> Thanks for helping to resolve this!
> 
> Helge
> 
> --
>   Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de
>Dipl.-Phys.   http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
> 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
>Help keep free software libre: http://www.ffii.de/
> 
> 
> -- 
>   Dr. Helge Kreutzmann deb...@helgefjell.de
>Dipl.-Phys.   http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php
> 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred
>Help keep free software "libre": http://www.ffii.de/





-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120706060755.gd3...@denix.org

Processed: unblock 676756 with 678358, forcibly merging 678358 676756

2012-07-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> unblock 676756 with 678358
Bug #676756 [libc0.3] netifaces: FTBFS on hurd-i386
676756 was blocked by: 678358
676756 was blocking: 678375
Removed blocking bug(s) of 676756: 678358
> forcemerge 678358 676756
Bug #678358 {Done: Ghe Rivero } [libc0.3] hurd should not 
define AF_LINK .
Bug #676756 [libc0.3] netifaces: FTBFS on hurd-i386
678376 was blocked by: 678358
678376 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 678376: 676756
Marked Bug as done
Added indication that 676756 affects hurd
Marked as fixed in versions eglibc/2.13-34 and netifaces/0.8-2.
Marked as found in versions eglibc/2.13-33.
Bug #678358 {Done: Ghe Rivero } [libc0.3] hurd should not 
define AF_LINK .
Added tag(s) patch.
Merged 676756 678358
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
676756: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=676756
678358: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678358
678376: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678376
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.134152231923252.transcr...@bugs.debian.org

Processed (with 1 errors): Re: netifaces: FTBFS on hurd-i386

2012-07-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> reassign 676756 libc0.3
Bug #676756 [netifaces] netifaces: FTBFS on hurd-i386
Bug reassigned from package 'netifaces' to 'libc0.3'.
No longer marked as found in versions 0.8-1.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #676756 to the same values 
previously set
> forcemerge 678358 676756
Bug #678358 {Done: Ghe Rivero } [libc0.3] hurd should not 
define AF_LINK .
Bug #676756 [libc0.3] netifaces: FTBFS on hurd-i386
678375 was blocked by: 671115 678358
678375 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 678375: 676756
Failed to forcibly merge 678358: It is nonsensical for a bug to block itself 
(or a merged partner): 676756
Debbugs::Control::set_blocks('bug', 676756, 'block', 676756, 'add', 1, 
'request_msgid', '<201207052301.22932.p...@debian.org>', 'request_replyto', 
...) called at /usr/local/lib/site_perl/Debbugs/Control.pm line 2117
Debbugs::Control::set_merged('transcript', 'GLOB(0x1f68640)', 
'requester', 'Pino Toscano ', 'request_addr', 
'cont...@bugs.debian.org', 'request_msgid', 
'<201207052301.22932.p...@debian.org>', 'request_subject', ...) called at 
/usr/lib/debbugs/service line 887
eval {...} called at /usr/lib/debbugs/service line 886

> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
676756: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=676756
678358: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678358
678375: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=678375
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.134152210220510.transcr...@bugs.debian.org

Re: glibc: disabling armhf ldconfig support

2012-07-05 Thread Steve McIntyre 
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:08:06AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>Hi,
>
>At the end of last year the patch unsubmitted-ldconfig-cache-abi.diff
>has been added, but has not been submitted upstream despite asking a few
>times. This patch provides correct ldconfig support for systems with
>both armel and armhf libraries.
>
>The situation is now that this patch breaks MIPS N64 support due
>to a missing break in a case (easily fixable), but also that upstream
>has reused the same tag value for x32 support:
>
>  Debian 2.13:
>#define FLAG_ARM_HFABI  0x0800
>
>  Upstream HEAD:
>#define FLAG_X8664_LIBX32   0x0800

Sigh.

>As a consequence the armhf value will have to be changed in the future,
>which might have some side effects.

We'd have to make sure that the ldconfig cache is re-generated after
the change, to make sure things don't break.

>For now I guess the best change is simply to disable this patch for
>wheezy, which is already done in the SVN, and will land to send in the
>next upload. I'll ask debian-release to allow migration of the package
>to wheezy. I am also ready to re-enable this patch for wheezy once it
>has been merged upstream, or even when at least the tag value is merged
>upstream.

I'm in the middle of re-working the patch for upstream, but it's slow
going at the moment. I'm trying to get reviews for definitions of the
PT_ARM_ARCH_EXT segment, and that's been held up. :-(

Cheers,
-- 
Steve McIntyresteve.mcint...@linaro.org
 Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120705173641.gb19...@einval.com