Bug#895847: marked as done (RFS: pqiv/2.10.4-1 [ITA] -- Powerful image viewer with minimal UI)
Your message dated Fri, 27 Apr 2018 04:20:11 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: pqiv/2.10.4-1 [ITA] -- Powerful image viewer with minimal UI has caused the Debian Bug report #895847, regarding RFS: pqiv/2.10.4-1 [ITA] -- Powerful image viewer with minimal UI to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 895847: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=895847 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my new revision of the pqiv package. I am the upstream author. * Package name: pqiv Version : 2.10.3-0.1 Upstream Author : Phillip Berndt * URL : https://github.com/phillipberndt/pqiv * License : GPL3 Section : optional The latest version in the Debian archives is 2.6, a bug report [1] with a request to update to the intermediate versions has been open for 14 months now, I have not been able to reach the maintainer since. QA request regarding that is pending. I thought that a NMU might be my best chance of getting a more recent release into the archives. I did my best to update the package to accord to the latest packaging standards while at it. To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/pqiv Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pqiv/pqiv_2.10.3-0.1.dsc Regards, Phillip Berndt [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=856166 --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package pqiv version 2.10.4-1 is in unstable now. https://packages.qa.debian.org/pqiv--- End Message ---
Bug#883611: marked as done (RFS: auter/0.11-1 (ITP: Bug#880600))
Your message dated Thu, 26 Apr 2018 22:20:29 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: auter/0.11-1 (ITP: Bug#880600) has caused the Debian Bug report #883611, regarding RFS: auter/0.11-1 (ITP: Bug#880600) to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 883611: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883611 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "auter" * Package name: auter Version : 0.11 Upstream Author : Paolo Gigante * URL : https://github.com/rackerlabs/auter * License : Apache-2 Section : misc It builds those binary packages: auter - Automatic updates for Redhat and Debian based Linux servers To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/auter Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/auter/auter_0.11.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from https://www.example.com. Changes since the last upload: Initial Upload Any assistance with sponsorship and packaging guidance would be greatly appreciated. In addition, we are very eager and willing to have any suggestions, requests and/or bugs raised against the auter github page. Thank you. Regards, Paolo Gigante --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Package auter has been removed from mentors.--- End Message ---
Bug#896995: RFS: ddccontrol/0.4.4-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ddccontrol" * Package name: ddccontrol Version : 0.4.4-1 Upstream Author : Miroslav Kravec * URL : https://github.com/ddccontrol/ddccontrol * License : GPL-2.0 Section : utils It builds those binary packages: ddccontrol - program to control monitor parameters gddccontrol - program to control monitor parameters (graphical interface) libddccontrol-dev - development files for ddccontrol libddccontrol0 - shared library for ddccontrol To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/ddccontrol Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/ddccontrol/ddccontrol_0.4.4-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release (Closes: #888015) * debian/ddccontrol.install, debian/libddccontrol0.install: update location of ddcpci binary (fixes binary-without-manpage), install with library (ddcpci is used by the library) * debian/gddccontrol.lintian-overrides: add override for desktop-command-not-in-package * debian/changelog, debian/control: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace * debian/control: bump standards version to 4.1.4 * debian/rules: enable bindnow hardening, fixes lintian hardening-no-bindnow Kind regards, Miroslav Kravec
Bug#896115: marked as done (RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP])
Your message dated Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:57:41 -0400 with message-id <87efj1zw8a@sergiodj.net> and subject line Re: Bug#896115: RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP] has caused the Debian Bug report #896115, regarding RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 896115: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=896115 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-cerberus" * Package name: python-cerberus Version : 1.2-1 Upstream Author : Nicola Iarocci * URL : http://github.com/pyeve/cerberus * License : ISC Section : python It builds those binary packages: python-cerberus-doc - Documentation for python3-cerberus python3-cerberus - Lightweight, extensible data validation library for Python To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/python-cerberus Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python- cerberus/python-cerberus_1.2-1.dsc More information about Cerberus can be obtained from http://python- cerberus.org/. Regards, Joel Cross -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.15.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Thursday, April 26 2018, Joel Cross wrote: >> Hm, from what I've seen the package is pretty much the same as it was >> when you submitted it. I'm using the following repository: >> >> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-cerberus >> >> And I don't see the fixes I asked you to do. Maybe I'm looking at the >> wrong place? > > Oops, I `dput` the package but I didn't push the repo back to Salsa. I have > done that now. Aha :-). BTW, pedantically speaking, Vcs-Browser should be "https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-cerberus";, but gitlab has a redirection rule in place so it's no big deal to use the same URL as Vcs-Git. Just FYI. >> >> 2) On d/rules, there's no need to override dh_compress. It >> > automatically excludes HTML files when compressing things. >> > >> > I read in the docs that HTML files are supposed to be excluded, but >> > for some reason the one HTML file changelog.html was being gzipped. I >> > couldn't figure out why, but adding the exclude line fixed the >> > problem. >> >> Ah, thanks for explaining. I didn't know that. I guess it has >> something to do with the name "changelog"; it's probably installed by >> dh_installchangelogs... >> >> Can you please add a comment on top of the override_dh_compress rule >> explaining this, then? > Done Thanks. I've uploaded it now. I'll try to take a look at your other Python packages later today. Cheers, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature --- End Message ---
Bug#896115: RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP]
> Hm, from what I've seen the package is pretty much the same as it was > when you submitted it. I'm using the following repository: > > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-cerberus > > And I don't see the fixes I asked you to do. Maybe I'm looking at the > wrong place? Oops, I `dput` the package but I didn't push the repo back to Salsa. I have done that now. > >> 2) On d/rules, there's no need to override dh_compress. It > > automatically excludes HTML files when compressing things. > > > > I read in the docs that HTML files are supposed to be excluded, but > > for some reason the one HTML file changelog.html was being gzipped. I > > couldn't figure out why, but adding the exclude line fixed the > > problem. > > Ah, thanks for explaining. I didn't know that. I guess it has > something to do with the name "changelog"; it's probably installed by > dh_installchangelogs... > > Can you please add a comment on top of the override_dh_compress rule > explaining this, then? Done
Bug#896115: RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP]
On Thursday, April 26 2018, Joel Cross wrote: > Hi Sergio, Hey, Joel, > Thanks for all the comments. I've addressed most of them and re-uploaded the > package. As for this one: Hm, from what I've seen the package is pretty much the same as it was when you submitted it. I'm using the following repository: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/modules/python-cerberus And I don't see the fixes I asked you to do. Maybe I'm looking at the wrong place? >> 2) On d/rules, there's no need to override dh_compress. It > automatically excludes HTML files when compressing things. > > I read in the docs that HTML files are supposed to be excluded, but > for some reason the one HTML file changelog.html was being gzipped. I > couldn't figure out why, but adding the exclude line fixed the > problem. Ah, thanks for explaining. I didn't know that. I guess it has something to do with the name "changelog"; it's probably installed by dh_installchangelogs... Can you please add a comment on top of the override_dh_compress rule explaining this, then? Thanks, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Salsa repository request (link-grammar)
On Thursday, April 26 2018, Fabian Wolff wrote: > Dear mentors, Hey, Fabian, > I am currently preparing a QA upload for the link-grammar Debian > package. The link-grammar packaging Git repository is currently still > hosted on Alioth: > > https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/link-grammar.git > > I would like to migrate the repository to Salsa, but since I am not a > Debian Developer, I do not have access to the Debian group on Salsa. > Therefore, I would like to ask for someone to create a "link-grammar" > packaging repository in the Debian group on Salsa and grant me > (wolff-guest) write access to it. An empty repository will suffice; > I'll take care of the rest (including a Merge Request for > AliothRewriter). There you go: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/link-grammar > Once the new repository is in place, it would be a good idea to lock > the old Alioth repository, which can be achieved by creating the file > /git/collab-maint/link-grammar.git/hooks/pre-receive with the > following content, which I would also like to ask you to do, since I > do not have write access in that location: > > """ > #!/bin/sh > > cat < > This repository has been moved to salsa.debian.org: > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/link-grammar > > EOF > > exit 1 > """ Done as well. Cheers, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#896115: RFS: python-cerberus/1.2-1 [ITP]
Hi Sergio, Thanks for all the comments. I've addressed most of them and re-uploaded the package. As for this one: > 2) On d/rules, there's no need to override dh_compress. It automatically excludes HTML files when compressing things. I read in the docs that HTML files are supposed to be excluded, but for some reason the one HTML file changelog.html was being gzipped. I couldn't figure out why, but adding the exclude line fixed the problem. Please can you take a look at the updated package and let me know if you think it's ready for upload now? -- Joel Cross
Salsa repository request (link-grammar)
Dear mentors, I am currently preparing a QA upload for the link-grammar Debian package. The link-grammar packaging Git repository is currently still hosted on Alioth: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/link-grammar.git I would like to migrate the repository to Salsa, but since I am not a Debian Developer, I do not have access to the Debian group on Salsa. Therefore, I would like to ask for someone to create a "link-grammar" packaging repository in the Debian group on Salsa and grant me (wolff-guest) write access to it. An empty repository will suffice; I'll take care of the rest (including a Merge Request for AliothRewriter). Once the new repository is in place, it would be a good idea to lock the old Alioth repository, which can be achieved by creating the file /git/collab-maint/link-grammar.git/hooks/pre-receive with the following content, which I would also like to ask you to do, since I do not have write access in that location: """ #!/bin/sh cat
Re: Building a prospective 32 bit package on 64 bits.
Please don't start a new thread by replying to some existing email. On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 05:05:02PM +0200, Albert van der Horst wrote: > A package for a Debian system must be buildable on the Debian it is intended > for. It depends. > So a new candidate DEC alpha packets must properly build on Buster DEC Actually, we don't usually build on testing systems, only on sid. > alpha , or on a fake-root system. Note that fakeroot(1) is something different from what you wanted to say here. You probably wanted to say "emulator". > Running a AMD architecture Debian I run programs built for i386 without > giving it much thought. > > Is it sufficient if an i386 package builds and tests properly on an AMD > buster, or is it mandatory to > install a i386 buster for testing? Most our packages work on all architectures. That's the nature of well-written and supported open source software. Even when making a package for the official Debian distribution you are not required to test it on all architectures. But note that when testing *building* you shouldn't do that on the host system in any case. And, again, you need to test that the package builds and works on sid, not on testing. > An i386 package will run without problems on an AMD. Now if this has been > confirmed, can AMD > be added to the architecture: line in the file ``control'' ? You shouldn't restrict architecture lists unless you have reasons for that. Not having a package tested there is not a good reason. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#896988: RFS: nautilus-hide/0.2.3-3
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "nautilus-hide" * Package name: nautilus-hide Version : 0.2.3-3 Upstream Author : Bruno Nova * URL : https://github.com/brunonova/nautilus-hide * License : GPL-3+ Section : gnome It builds this binary package: nautilus-hide - Extension for Nautilus to hide files without renaming them To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/nautilus-hide Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nautilus-hide/nautilus-hide_0.2.3-3.dsc Changes since the last upload: * Add machine-readable upstream metadata. * Indicate compliance with Debian Policy 4.1.4. Regards, Carlos Maddela
Building a prospective 32 bit package on 64 bits.
I understand this much: A package for a Debian system must be buildable on the Debian it is intended for. Let's restrict our attention to a single architecture package. So a new candidate DEC alpha packets must properly build on Buster DEC alpha , or on a fake-root system. So far so good. Running a AMD architecture Debian I run programs built for i386 without giving it much thought. Is it sufficient if an i386 package builds and tests properly on an AMD buster, or is it mandatory to install a i386 buster for testing? An i386 package will run without problems on an AMD. Now if this has been confirmed, can AMD be added to the architecture: line in the file ``control'' ? Groetjes Albert -- Suffering is the prerogative of the strong, the weak -- perish. Albert van der Horst
Bug#896985: RFS: nautilus-admin/1.1.6-1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "nautilus-admin" * Package name: nautilus-admin Version : 1.1.6-1 Upstream Author : Bruno Nova * URL : https://github.com/brunonova/nautilus-admin * License : GPL-3+ Section : gnome It builds this binary package: nautilus-admin - Extension for Nautilus to do administrative operations To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/nautilus-admin Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nautilus-admin/nautilus-admin_1.1.6-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release [1.1.6]. * Add machine-readable upstream metadata. * Indicate compliance with Debian Policy 4.1.4. Regards, Carlos Maddela
Bug#896970: RFS: odp/1.19.0.0-1 [ITP]
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
control: owner -1 !
Hi Dmitry,
Thank you for this package. Here are some problems found in your package:
1. This package misses dependency libconfig-dev
2. Please fix the lintian warnings. e.g.
W: odp-doc: privacy-breach-generic
3. debhelper compat level and the standards-version is a bit old.
The latest compat is 11, and standards-version is 4.1.4.
See debhelper(7) section COMPATIBILITY LEVELS for compat checklist.
See https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ for the standards upgrading
checklist.
4. Please break the lines whose length exceeds 80 characters in
debian/control and rules.
5. Could you explain why these lines exist? Package libodp-linux-dev
seems not exist.
43 Conflicts: libodp-linux-dev
44 Provides: libodp-linux-dev
also, package libodphelper-dev depends on the non-existing package.
53 Package: libodphelper-dev
54 Architecture: any
55 Section: libdevel
56 Depends: libodphelper119 (= ${binary:Version}),
57 libodp-linux-dev,
6. Must we provide a example package with pre-built binaries shipped?
77 Package: odp-linux-examples
Why can't we put the source of these examples into the doc package?
Or why don't we choose a name such as libodp-tools / libodp-utils
to avoid ambiguity?
7. your patch directory is empty, could you please remove it?
8. Changelog: This is the first-time upload. Could you change the file
so that it looks like this:
PACKAGE (VERSION) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
* Initial release. (Closes: #XX)
-- maintainer Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:06:09 +
9. debian/docs This file looks useless ?
10. Why is the package containing
./usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libodp-linux.so.119.0.0
named libodp-generic119?
11. Why is dh_auto_test overrode to empty?
Please feel free to ask if you have any question about
the above points. And have a good day :-)
--
Best,
Bug#896970: RFS: odp/1.19.0.0-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist I am looking for a sponsor for my package "odp" * Package name: odp Version : 1.19.0.0-1 Upstream Author : Linaro / ODP community * URL : https://www.opendataplane.org/ * License : [fill in] Section : libs It builds those binary packages: libodp-common-dev - OpenDataPlane library (common development files) libodp-generic-dev - OpenDataPlane reference implementation library (development) libodp-generic119 - OpenDataPlane reference implementation library (runtime) libodphelper-dev - OpenDataPlane helper library (development) libodphelper119 - OpenDataPlane helper library (runtime) odp-doc- OpenDataPlane library (documentation) odp-linux-examples - OpenDataPlane examples To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/odp Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/odp/odp_1.19.0.0-1.dsc More information about odp can be obtained from https://www.opendataplane.org. -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.15.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled
