Bug#960710: RFS: adios2/2.6.0-1 [ITP] -- ADIOS2 Adaptable IO system for simulations
Hi Kyle, Is there still something to sponsor? would you mind to upload the package to mentors.debian.net? (I and many other sponsors prefer taking them from there, not from a git instance) (This is also true for your other open RFSs) Cheers, tobi
Bug#971890: RFS: tensorwatch/0.9.0-1 [ITP] -- Debug, monitor and visualize for Python Machine Learning
Control: tags -1 moreinfo as package is broken: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 00:42:06 +0100 Adam Borowski wrote: > autopkgtest [00:34:21]: test autodep8-python3: [--- > Testing with python3.8: > Traceback (most recent call last): (...) > File "", line 1, in > File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/tensorwatch/__init__.py", line 26, in > from .embeddings.tsne_utils import get_tsne_components > File "/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/tensorwatch/embeddings/tsne_utils.py", line 4, in > from sklearn.manifold import TSNE > ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'sklearn' > autopkgtest [00:34:22]: test autodep8-python3: ---] >
Bug#959892: RFS: awf-gtk3/2.0.0-3 [ITP] -- A widget factory is a theme preview application for GTK
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Fabrice, I've took an look at that group of awf-gtk[234] package and notice that they all build from the same source. Therefore it should be the goal to only have one source package and compile the flavours from the same source; debhelper principally support it to compile the source multiple times, however, I dont know whether the differen gtk versions cam be installed simultaneously. (IOW if the build-dependencies libtk-(2|3|4)-dev can be coninstalled and you can select them in your configure.ac accordingly.) This has several advantages: - no source package duplication- - less single debian packaging efforts. - less work for ftp masters and other teams. Please check if that would be generally possible and reply to this bug; then we can decide how to proceed. Cheers, tobi On Wed, 6 May 2020 19:52:15 +0200 Fabrice Creuzot wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "awf-gtk3" > > * Package name : awf-gtk3 > Version : 2.0.0-3 > Upstream Author : Fabrice Creuzot > * URL : https://github.com/luigifab/awf-extended > * License : GPL-3+ > * Vcs : https://github.com/luigifab/awf-extended > Section : x11 > > A widget factory is a theme preview application for GTK. It displays the > various widget types provided by GTK in a single window allowing to see > the visual effect of the applied theme. > > It builds those binary packages: > > awf-gtk3 - A widget factory is a theme preview application for GTK > > To access further information about this package, please visit the > following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/awf-gtk3 > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > dget -x > https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/awf-gtk3/awf-gtk3_2.0.0-3.dsc > > Changes since the last upload: > > * Initial debian package release (Closes: #959436) > > Regards, > Thank you > >
Bug#969446: RFS: vguitar-2.6 [ITP] -- Play Guitar in any term window. Use with a MIDI synthesizer (qsynth)
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Nick
let me follow up. Base of this review is this dsc file:
9a88dec1dfb2f225e8a4d07d205e357aaab926d55b302349c1cda328ddb33fc6 vguitar_2.8-
1.dsc
(Please consider using mentors.debian.net to provide the package, as it has some
nice features that helps in the sponsoring process both the sponsor and the
sponsoree,
eg. by the diagnostic features it has.)
- Lintian has several complaints; I've added some hints. Its possible that the
hardening is a false positive, did not check; refer to the hardening debian
wiki page.
W: vguitar source:
ancient-standards-version 3.9.6 (released 2014-09-17) (current is 4.5.1)
W: vguitar: debian-changelog-has-wrong-day-of-week 2020-09-28 is a Monday
^^^ hint: always use dch(1) to manipulate d/changelogs. It also has a
convienient
"update date" function when ready for release: "dch -r"
W: vguitar source: no-debian-changes
^^ please read the upstream guide. https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide
Likely caused by having the debian/ directory in the upstream tarball, so read
that section carefully.
W: vguitar source: no-nmu-in-changelog
W: vguitar source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 2.8-1
(^^ those two above are false positive)
W: vguitar: syntax-error-in-debian-changelog line 5 "unrecognised line"
I: vguitar: hardening-no-bindnow usr/bin/vguitar
I: vguitar: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/vguitar
I: vguitar source: older-debian-watch-file-standard 3
X: vguitar source: debian-watch-does-not-check-gpg-signature
P: vguitar source: insecure-copyright-format-uri
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
P: vguitar source: silent-on-rules-requiring-root
^^ see debian policy document.
P: vguitar source: trailing-whitespace debian/changelog (line 5)
P: vguitar source: trailing-whitespace debian/changelog (line 6)
P: vguitar source: trailing-whitespace debian/control (line 17)
P: vguitar source: trailing-whitespace debian/control (line 18)
P: vguitar source: trailing-whitespace debian/rules (line 45)
X: vguitar source: upstream-metadata-file-is-missing
- For the whitespace errors, take a look at wrap-and-sort(1)
- There is an (empty) tar in the source tarball. Likely shouldnt be there.
- Possibly the vgituar.1-save is also a stray file.
- d/changelog
- has errors
- see lintian above and
- it still says "UNRELEASED"*
- d/rules
- Lots of comments. please remove them.*
- (As you use help2man), the manpage needs to be generated at build time.
- d/copyright:
- License identifier should be GPL-3+ ("or later") not GPL-3 ("exactly 3")
- d/watch
- lots of boilerplate comments, please remove them as well. *
* already an earlier review finding. Please make sure to consider those,
as it generates uneeded extra work for all parties. TIA.
I'm stopping here and ask you to revisit the previous review comments;
please update the package accordingly and then remove the moreinfo tag.
--
cheers,
tobi
Bug#977380: RFS: fonts-sono/0.93-1 [ITP] -- soft monospace variable font
Control: tags -1 moreinfo FTBFS due to missing gftools (its ITP is #975676): > The following packages have unmet dependencies: > pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: gftools which is a virtual package > and is not provided by any available package > > Unable to resolve dependencies! Giving up... -> not actionable for now, so tagging moreinfo. -- tobi
Bug#979807: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
Hi Gürkan, this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific evaluation board… It seems a bit out-of-scope for Debian to carry such specialized software? I might be really wrong, so maybe elaborate a bit why you think this software should be in Debian? -- Cheers, tobi
Bug#977650: RFS: hpx/1.5.1-1 [ITP] -- C++ Standard library for parallelism and concurrency
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Gürkan, I've saw the rejcect from the FTP masters in #930923#12 However, those changes to d/copyright seem not to be in the package on mentors. (this is a blocker) I'm also seeing some strang dangling symlinks in debian/; I guess you should review the package before this RFS can proceed. The mentors page has also several lintian stuff that needs to be looked at; Do you really want to have the static libraries installed? (I've not checked details, but having shared and static libraries at the same time is strange) (At minimum, stripping of those seems not to have worked, says lintian) -- tobi
Bug#982543: RFS: space-attack-2/20210210-1 -- An Arcade style Space Shooter with mouse and touch screen functionality
Control: tags -1 moreinfo I guess this RFS is waiting for an updated package. Once available, please remove the moreinfo tag. -- tobi
Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
Hi Tobias, this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific evaluation board… Indeed the software is only useful with this hardware: https://www.radec.ch/shop It seems a bit out-of-scope for Debian to carry such specialized software? I would disagree, if people can buy the device, and just install the software with apt, it's a win. I have several users with several computers and such boards. They are glad to use apt. I might be really wrong, so maybe elaborate a bit why you think this software should be in Debian? Debian is the universal OS? But if you think low number of users of hardware specific software should rule out such software, maybe https://packages.debian.org/callisto should be removed as well?
Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
Hi Gürkan, On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > > this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific > > evaluation > > board… > > Indeed the software is only useful with this hardware: > https://www.radec.ch/shop > > > It seems a bit out-of-scope for Debian to carry such specialized > > software? > > I would disagree, if people can buy the device, and just install the > software with apt, it's a win. I have several users with several computers > and > such boards. They are glad to use apt. > > > I might be really wrong, so maybe elaborate a bit why you think this > > software > > should be in Debian? > > Debian is the universal OS? But if you think low number of users of hardware > specific software should rule out such software, maybe > https://packages.debian.org/callisto > should be removed as well? Well, this is not about callisto. So no need to pull this strawman. In Debian we do not (and cannot) package every piece of software, this is not the defintiion of "universal operating system". It should have some relevance though, as every package has some cost to the project (not monetary, but e.g people need to look at thpower) If you say, it has relevance, then this is sufficient for me. The question if something is relevant is not unusual in Debian to ask. -- tobi
Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
On 01.06.2021 13:19, Tobias Frost wrote: Hi Gürkan, On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote: Hi Tobias, > this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific > evaluation > board… Indeed the software is only useful with this hardware: https://www.radec.ch/shop > It seems a bit out-of-scope for Debian to carry such specialized > software? I would disagree, if people can buy the device, and just install the software with apt, it's a win. I have several users with several computers and such boards. They are glad to use apt. > I might be really wrong, so maybe elaborate a bit why you think this > software > should be in Debian? Debian is the universal OS? But if you think low number of users of hardware specific software should rule out such software, maybe https://packages.debian.org/callisto should be removed as well? Well, this is not about callisto. So no need to pull this strawman. Ack. In Debian we do not (and cannot) package every piece of software, this is not the defintiion of "universal operating system". It should have some relevance though, as every package has some cost to the project (not monetary, but e.g people need to look at thpower) The power as in maintaining the software source package? Or the power to run buildds using resources to build the binaries? Or both or something else? That is true, and I'm willing to the software source debian packaging part. If you say, it has relevance, then this is sufficient for me. The question if something is relevant is not unusual in Debian to ask. Then I do. Oh and no problem to question if packaging something is relevant or not. -- tobi
Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 01:36:29PM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote: > > The power as in maintaining the software source package? Or the power to run > buildds using resources to build the binaries? Or both or something else? > That is true, and I'm willing to the software source debian packaging part. You maintaining it is just one part; ftp-masters, sponsors; maybe relase-team, people doing bug triaging, sponsoring… > > If you say, it has relevance, then this is sufficient for me. > > > > The question if something is relevant is not unusual in Debian to ask. > > Then I do. Oh and no problem to question if packaging something is relevant > or not. :)
Re: Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
Heya, you may want to get in touch with https://salsa.debian.org/electronics-team. I had a look and like the device. Conceptionally, it would be very interesting to learn if you can build the firmware for the Spartan-3 also with Debian. It should be possible with Yosys. I do not mean that you need to Open Source your firmware, but just to know that others could come up with their own and use that - would be nice, maybe you could open source some parts of that so that the driver could be reused - you get the idea. Cheers, Steffen Am 01.06.2021 um 13:19 schrieb Tobias Frost: On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote: Hi Tobias, this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific evaluation board… Indeed the software is only useful with this hardware: https://www.radec.ch/shop It seems a bit out-of-scope for Debian to carry such specialized software? I would disagree, if people can buy the device, and just install the software with apt, it's a win. I have several users with several computers and such boards. They are glad to use apt. I might be really wrong, so maybe elaborate a bit why you think this software should be in Debian? Debian is the universal OS? But if you think low number of users of hardware specific software should rule out such software, maybe https://packages.debian.org/callisto should be removed as well? Well, this is not about callisto. So no need to pull this strawman. In Debian we do not (and cannot) package every piece of software, this is not the defintiion of "universal operating system". It should have some relevance though, as every package has some cost to the project (not monetary, but e.g people need to look at thpower) If you say, it has relevance, then this is sufficient for me. The question if something is relevant is not unusual in Debian to ask. -- tobi
Bug#987359: RFS: sfxr-qt/1.3.0+git20210422-1 [ITP] -- sound effect generator, QtQuick port of sfxr
On 16.05.2021 17:30, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 05:25:19PM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote:
On 15.05.2021 21:58, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:58:08AM +0200, Gürkan Myczko wrote:
> > * Package name: sfxr-qt
> It builds, but on trying to start:
during my test, after a small change how it builds, installs and
starts.
> QQmlApplicationEngine failed to load component
> qrc:/main.qml:288:9: Type FileActions unavailable
> qrc:/FileActions.qml:27:9: Type FileDialog unavailable
>
file:///usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/qml/QtQuick/Dialogs/DefaultFileDialog.qml:42:1:
> module "QtQuick.Controls" version 1.2 is not installed
Mind retrying? #3
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sfxr-qt/sfxr-qt_1.3.0+git20210422-1.dsc
QQmlApplicationEngine failed to load component
qrc:/main.qml:288:9: Type FileActions unavailable
qrc:/FileActions.qml:27:9: Type FileDialog unavailable
file:///usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/qt5/qml/QtQuick/Dialogs/DefaultFileDialog.qml:42:1:
module "QtQuick.Controls" version 1.2 is not installed
which is same as the above...
and #4 ?
If it still fails, I guess it's missing another one of these:
apt-cache search ^qml- |awk '{print $1}'
A quick check to figure which one it is would be:
for a in `apt-cache search ^qml- |awk '{print $1}'`; do
sfxr-qt && (echo $a;exit) #mailtome result
apt-get install -uy $a
done
Meow!
Bug#985346: RFS: nspark/1.7.8B2+git+20190713-3 [ITP] -- Decompressor for SparkFS and ArcFS archive files
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Dave, I've reviewed the package on mentors; it needs some work: - the patch "docs and build tweaks": - The Bug-Debian should point to a bug _covering_ the patch, not the ITP. (IOW, remove that line from the dep3 patch header) - Maybe that patch should be sent upstream? - You add -Wpenandic and -g. That shouldnt be neccessary. (and even fragile because of the -Werror) - Readme.Debian - does not contain useful informastion, it should be probably be deleted - If, then this would be in Readme.source (see debian policy), but I suggest: - (if you want to record the git commit id, the better place is to have it in the version string of the pacakge. see uscan(1) pretty-rule - d/changelog, package version - The Debian revision should be "-1" for initial packages and - should only have this entry: "Initial release (Closes: #) - IOW: delete the entries for -2 and -3 and make the one for -1 read that line above, filling in your ITP bug number - d/control: - you only need to Build-Depend on debhelper-compat; the debhelper entry is redundant. - Standard Version can be updated. - is the "!" in !Spark on purpose in the description? - Package sqsh has already a binary called sqsh. So you will need to rename your binary to something else. - Upstream has some new commit. Maybe you could evaluate if those are nice to have. It seems that they have added cmake support, which could be a improvement over a simple Makefile and possibly makes (part of ) your patch obsolete and as cmake supports install targets, it might even be able to remove the overrides in d/rules. - d/snaprk-docs.docs -- I guess this file is not needed. I'm tagging it moreinfo, that means an updated package is required to proceed with this RFS. Once it is ready, remove the tag for a second round of review. -- cheers, tobi
Bug#985826: RFS: bm/1.14.0 [ITP]
Hi Thomas, just a short observation; it seems to apply to at least a few of your new pacakges: - You need have "ITP" bugs for your new packages [1]; - and close them in the d/changelog. - The RFS bug are not closed via d/changelog. (Did not have time for an deeper look at the package) [1] more information on https://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers/ Cheers, tobi
Bug#989365: RFS: recastnavigation
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Hello Debian, I've prepared the packaging of recastnavigation. It is lintian clean and tested with pbuilder. Further information about this package can be accessed from the URL : https://salsa.debian.org/games-team/recastnavigation it's been put into use here, as it is a build dependency for the upcoming OpenMW release. https://launchpad.net/~openmw/+archive/ubuntu/openmw/+packages Please consider it for review and possible upload for 'experimental', at least until Bullseye has been released. :) Cheers, Bret Curtis
Bug#979807: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 10:39 AM Tobias Frost wrote: > this seems to be a quite specific software for some quite specific evaluation > board… The chip seems like something useful for scientists and others dealing with high speed analog signals. Looks like both the board and the chips themselves can be purchased by anyone, I presume that the physics department of ETH Zurich (see the submitter's email) has purchased them and is using them in their own experiments and is also using Debian and wants to use Debian packages of the software. http://phys.ethz.ch/ -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: Bug#979807: Bug#979400: RFS: drs/5.0.5-1 [ITP] -- DRS4 Evaluation Board software
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 11:46 AM Steffen Möller wrote: > I had a look and like the device. Conceptionally, it would be very > interesting to learn if you can build the firmware for the Spartan-3 > also with Debian. It should be possible with Yosys. I do not mean that > you need to Open Source your firmware, but just to know that others > could come up with their own and use that - would be nice, maybe you > could open source some parts of that so that the driver could be reused > - you get the idea. The tarball already includes the firmware source in *.vhd and other files, presumably under the same license as the rest of the package, but I cannot find any indication in the tarball that this package is under the GPL though (except for the embedded code copy of the MIDAS XML Library), but the website does say GPLv3. Looks like Yosys doesn't yet fully support Spartan-3: https://github.com/YosysHQ/yosys/issues/448 SymbiFlow are working on Xilinx Artix 7-Series FPGAs, perhaps they could eventually support Xilinx Spartan-3 too. https://symbiflow.github.io/ -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
