Bug#740105:
In article you wrote: > The package is also at lp:~noskcaj/xsane/packaging if you wish to review it > there What's the address of the upstream current git repository? The website lists a commit list in alioth, but I couldn't find the upstream code. About the package, the copyright file is a bit too simplified, there is a file under the Artistic License, another in LGPL, and some files list the FSF as copyright holder, I've used licensecheck from the devscript package to check this. There are some formatting issues (the build-depends line is 189 chars wide, for instance), lately I've been using wrap-and-sort to deal with this nuisances. The corrupt-filename.patch produces an if else else, as the problem was fixed upstream as well. Could you please check the other patches it they are still needed (or are actually breaking stuff like this one). Happy hacking, -- "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and BSD. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." -- Jeremy S. Anderson Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140225223717.ga6...@gnuservers.com.ar
Re: Ccache size for pbuilder
Mikhail Morfikov wrote: > In pbuilder's config file there's an option: > CCACHEDIR="/var/cache/pbuilder/ccache" > But there's no option as to size of the cache, the one you can see via > ccache -s. What is the cache size of the chroot environment? Is there a > way to set this parameter somehow? The value is persistant, so, you set it once by hand and that's it. You don't even need to be inside the chroot to set it, you can just call: CCACHE_DIR="/var/cache/pbuilder/ccache" ccache -M 16G And that's it. -- Saludos, Maxy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/s91vta-icj@freak.gnuservers.com.ar
Re: review of cinnamon-desktop
Roelof Wobben wrote: > I just finisched my first package of the 10 for Cinnamon. > You can find it here: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cinnamon-desktop > Anyone of the mentors have any remarks on this package. > The source can be found here: > https://github.com/CinnamonDebian/cinnamon-desktop Interesting. As most of my family members use cinnamon, the current debian packages are basically abandoned and the alioth request to join was never replied, I've started to update the packages for personal use. It was all only a test, and, actually, KDE eats a lot of my Debian time, so I won't be able to get a cinnamon in good shape and time alone, so I've just created a collab-maint git repository, here: git://git.debian.org/git/collab-maint/cinnamon/cinnamon-desktop.git I have done some preliminar packaging of muffin and the cinnamon as well. I'll create a repo for them also if you are interested. Happy hacking, -- Saludos, Maxy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ah2vsa-p7p@freak.gnuservers.com.ar
Re: What to do about a bug found after the freeze
Hola Tony Houghton! El 13/08/2010 a las 16:44 escribiste: > A bug was reported upstream in roxterm just after Squeeze's freeze: > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3041926&group_id=124080&atid=698428 All new uploads need to be approved manually by the release team members to enter in squeeze. It's prefered to upload only bugfixes, and not new features, or upstream releases. -- "recursividad 95, 154, 156, 201, 224, 293" -- El Lenguaje de Programacion C, pag. 293 (Kernighan & Ritchie) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100813190154.gi21...@maxy.com.ar
Re: RFS: go
Hola Ivan Wong! El 21/03/2010 a las 16:42 escribiste: > So sounds like more people prefer "google-go". I just renamed it and > re-uploaded it: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/google-go > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian > unstable main contrib non-free > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/google-go/google-go_2010.03.15-1.dsc > I hope someone will be interested in sponsoring this package. Any > help would be greatly appreciated. > > Version : 2010.03.15-1 Here is my quick review: - Version scheme is doomed to be changed in the future - A README.source would be nice to have. - copyright packaging holder says: Ivan Wong >, should be: Ivan Wong - go.substvars non-sense shlibs:Depends=libc6 (>= 2.3.6-6~), libc6 (>= 2.7) Is it really needed? (Please explain this in your README.source) - go.dehelper.log included in your src package isn't really needed. - Why would anyone prefer a static binary compiler in a full blown debian system? (lintian-overrides) (If there is a technical reason to be so please explain it in the README.source otherwise, generate dynamic binaries) - It would be preffered if the environment variables were not needed (that is, to run the compiler), setting a default on compile time would also avoid the need of the wrappers (debian/bin/*) - Please, provide manpages for the programs, even a simple one would help a lot. A quick license review: - ./src/pkg/image/jpeg/idct.go: dubious license, its released under a BSD like license by the Go authors, but claims to be a translation from a non-free implementation -- "recursividad 95, 154, 156, 201, 224, 293" -- El Lenguaje de Programacion C, pag. 293 (Kernighan & Ritchie) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100323162437.gf16...@maxy.com.ar
Re: RFS: lshell (updated)
Hola Ignace Mouzannar! El 01/12/2009 a las 18:25 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.9.8-1 > of my package "lshell". Uploaded. Before uploading I made 2 small changes in debian/changelog (typos), so you'll need to fetch the uploaded changelog to preserve them in your future uploads. Also, you might want to apply as a debian-maintainer. Thanks, -- "UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity." -- Dennis Ritchie Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: csv2latex (updated package)
Hola ben! El 28/10/2009 a las 19:41 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.16-2 > of my package "csv2latex". > It builds these binary packages: > csv2latex - a CSV to LaTeX file converter > The package appears to be lintian clean. > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/csv2latex > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main contrib non-free > - dget > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/csv2latex/csv2latex_0.16-2.dsc > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I have been quite busy latelly. I have you package in my TODO queue. I'll try to review it soonish. -- : You are in a dark room with a compiler, emacs, an internet connection, : and a thermos of coffee. : Your move ? Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: sqlmap (updated package)
Hola Bernardo Damele A. G.! El 25/07/2009 a las 18:21 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.7-1 of my package "sqlmap". > It builds these binary packages: > sqlmap - automatic SQL injection tool The current release of sqlmap is not suitable for Debian, as it includes binary files without their source code. Please note that the binaries contained in a package must be buildable (at the debian/rules build time) and even if the source code cointains a generated binary file it must be ignored when generating the package. Also if it includes binary files, it can't be architecture all. Anyway, if the source is available and buildable with debian tools, it might be feasible to split the package in sqlmap and sqlmap-udf (assuming the udf files are optional), and set the correct architecture to sqlmap-udf. -- "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck, is probably the day Microsoft starts making vacuum cleaners." -- Ernst Jan Plugge Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: csv2latex (updated package)
Hola ben! El 29/07/2009 a las 23:02 escribiste: > Really thanks for your comments. Uploaded. -- "Haskell is faster than C++, more concise than Perl, more regular than Python, more flexible than Ruby, more typeful than C#, more robust than Java, and has absolutely nothing in common with PHP." -- Audrey Tang Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: UNS: Re: RFS: lshell (3rd try)
Hola Ignace Mouzannar! El 29/07/2009 a las 01:20 escribiste: > > - It would be great if you document how to use lshell inside a chroot, > > maybe > > even using makejail. > I am planning to work on this in the upcoming release. Ok, a few other things to add to the TODO list: - Upstream changelog gets installed twice (CHANGES.gz and changelog.gz) - A little document describing some useful setups lshell, as git, bzr, cvs, svn, rsync. > Thank you again for your help. You are welcome, good work so far, keep it up. Uploaded. -- Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree. Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: UNS: Re: RFS: lshell (3rd try)
Hola Ignace Mouzannar! El 27/07/2009 a las 12:19 escribiste: > > - You are creating a group lshellg in postinst using groupadd, without > > checking the group existance, this would fail on reinstall, or upgrade, > > so, > > you to check the existance of the group, you should use addgroup instead > > of > > groupadd, the group should be called lshell, and it must be a system group > > (--system in addgroup). Or you can decide to use adm or nogroup. > This has been corrected. There a few ways to check if a group exists, calling sg group_name true is a creative one, I not against the solution, but using getent group group_name is probably a more traditional approach used in a few other packages, in general, it's good to accept the de facto standard. > The debian/rules file has been modified to use debhelper without cdbs. Great, I appreciate the effort, I didn't mean "do it right away", though. Extra comments: - control claims Build-Dependency of debhelper >= 7, but compat says 5, one or the other is wrong, please fix it. - manpage: - Refers to group lshellg instead of lshell - Doesn't mention the default config file (/etc/lshell.conf) - ¿Why is there a section called TODO? - It would be great if you document how to use lshell inside a chroot, maybe even using makejail. -- "La duración de un minuto depende de que lado del baño estés." -- Ley de la Relatividad (Burke) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: obexpushd (small update)
Hola Dominik Bruhn! El 06/06/2009 a las 18:00 escribiste: > I'm looking for someone to sponsor a new version (0.8) for obexpushd. > The changes are small, so it should be reasy to review. It is of course > linitan clean, so no problems here. > It fixes all bugs currently in debian bugs. > Obexpushd is a program for receiving files via Bluetooth or IRDA. Its > maintained by me (since the last maintainer hasn't got any time). My comments: - There is a new upstream release (0.9), you might prefer to prepare that package instead of the version 0.8. - There are a few typos in the changelog, please try to fix them. - Standards-Version is a littly outdated (3.8.1 instead of 3.8.2). - Small typo in debian/copyright (copyight instead of copyright). - It's polite to include NMUs (0.7-1.1) debian/changelogs entrys. -- "recursividad 95, 154, 156, 201, 224, 293" -- El Lenguaje de Programacion C, pag. 293 (Kernighan & Ritchie) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: jigzo (updated package)
Hola Elías A. M.! El 22/07/2009 a las 07:06 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.6.1-3 > of my package "jigzo". > It builds these binary packages: > jigzo - Photo puzzle game for children > jigzo-data - data of Photo puzzle game for children My comments: - Don't use dh_clean -a in install-arch rule, you need to use dh_clean -k -a (deprecated) or dh_prep -a, else the arch indep package would not be uploaded. - You don't need to modify debianized date in debian/copyright - Try to convince upstream to include an icon and a .desktop file in their tarball - Try to push patches, and to make the patches in a pushable manner (for example, debian/patches/01_paths.patch is not applicable by upstream as is) - Try to convince upstream to maintain a changelog file I'd uploaded your package, without realizing of the first comment above, so I had to fix it and reupload it as an NMU. Please consider the issues to improve the software and packaging. -- : You are in a dark room with a compiler, emacs, an internet connection, : and a thermos of coffee. : Your move ? Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: backup-manager (adopted package, RC bug fix)
Hola Sven Joachim! El 22/07/2009 a las 17:39 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.7.8-2 of my package > "backup-manager". > It builds these binary packages: > backup-manager - command-line backup tool > backup-manager-doc - documentation package for Backup Manager Uploaded. -- Se necesitan voluntarios para dominar el mundo. Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: vera (updated package)
Hola Sven Joachim! El 22/07/2009 a las 17:41 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.19-1 > of my package "vera". > It builds these binary packages: > dict-vera - Dictionary of computer related acronyms -- dict format > vera - Dictionary of computer related acronyms -- info format The source package includes a debian/README and a debian/ChangeLog file that seems to belong to upstream, it would be better if upstream included those files, please try to contact them so you don't need to add the upstream ChangeLog from outside the upstream tarball. The debian/README.source should document the concrete commands and not vague ideas. You might want to create a target in the debian/rules files to simplify it. Please check: http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-readmesource and change it accordingly. I could not download upstream tarball as the site was down, so I could not finish my review. -- "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off." Bjarne Stroustrup Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: gtk2-engines-aurora (2nd try)
Hola Chow Loong Jin! El 26/07/2009 a las 04:06 escribiste: > Thanks for your comments. > - Typo: fixed > - debian/watch: left alone, as per Daniel's comment > - The tarball-in-tarball structure is admittedly ugly, but not unheard > of, and even though I'm already rebuilding the orig.tar.gz, I'm not > unpacking the source bzip2 tarball, just bunzipping it and gzipping it. > The symlink hack works rather well, and I don't foresee any trouble that > could come from it. I'm rather curious to hear the opinion of a DD though. Left alone my comments, both issues are upstream annoyances. Could you please try to convince upstream to publish his releases in an uscan friendlier manner? Also without the tar inside tar structure? -- : You are in a dark room with a compiler, emacs, an internet connection, : and a thermos of coffee. : Your move ? Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: csv2latex (updated package)
Hola ben! El 25/07/2009 a las 18:40 escribiste: > Thanks for your comments. > I'll begin by fixing standard version to 3.8.2 and fix the easiest tasks > first. Great. > We switched to cdbs after 0.14-1 though. This seems to do the job > well. What's wrong with it ? cdbs is not documented and its way too difficult to follow/debug, I prefer that first packaging steps are taken using code where you can easily tell what's doing what. I don't mind if you use cdbs for this package (or any other), but I strongly recommend you to learn to package using debhelper as well. -- "UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity." -- Dennis Ritchie Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: gtk2-engines-aurora (2nd try)
Hola Chow Loong Jin! El 23/07/2009 a las 17:18 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gtk2-engines-aurora". > * Package name: gtk2-engines-aurora > Version : 1.5.1-1 > Upstream Author : Eric Matthews > * URL : http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php?content=56438 > * License : GPL-2+ > Section : x11 > It builds these binary packages: > gtk2-engines-aurora - Aurora gtk+-2.0 theme engine > The package appears to be lintian clean. My comments are: - Small typo in debian/control nautral instead of natural - Doesn't make any sense to have an empty (though commented) watch file - To have a tar.gz and a tar.bz2 inside the orig.tar.gz is quite ugly, you are already re building the orig.tar.gz, it might be better to rebuild it fully, decompressing them all, and avoiding the need of the ln -s debian aurora-1.5/debian hack. -- Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree. Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: fslint (updated package)
Hola Raphael Geissert! El 25/07/2009 a las 11:37 escribiste: > >* You closed a few debian bugs in a version that never hit Debian > > repositories, that requires some manual tweaking to process the > > correct part of the changelog, please avoid it. > That's ok, it was me who forgot to include the changelog entries when > uploading it. You mean that the bugs were closed with the 2.28-1 upload? In that case, it might be good to close them through the bts commands? > >* You package version is 2.40-2, which would not include the original > > source in the upload, and requires some manual tweaking to do so, > > please avoid that. > This shouldn't be discouraged either. Just to clarify, I personally find debian/changelog entries of versions that never hit debian repositories (which are the cause for the previous two points) useless, an error prone situation and bothering for the users. -- "La duración de un minuto depende de que lado del baño estés." -- Ley de la Relatividad (Burke) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: csv2latex (updated package)
Hola ben! El 23/07/2009 a las 15:00 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.15-1 > of my package "csv2latex". > It builds these binary packages: > csv2latex - a CSV to LaTeX file converter > The package appears to be lintian clean. A few comments: - The tar.gz provided is not the same file that upstream distributes (you had probably recreated the tar.gz) - The diff.gz includes changes outside debian directory, you should use a patching system for that - Standards-Version are a bit old 3.8.1, while 3.8.2 is the current one, please check that in furter uploads - The debian/dirs in this package is quite useless - I personally don't like using cdbs, I suggest you to also learn to package using debhelper, as well -- "There are only two things wrong with C++: The initial concept and the implementation." -- Bertrand Meyer Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: fslint (updated package)
Hola Pádraig Brady! El 23/07/2009 a las 16:53 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.40-2 > of my package "fslint". > > It builds these binary packages: > fslint - A utility to fix problems with filesystems' data, like duplicate > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fslint > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main > contrib non-free > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fslint/fslint_2.40-2.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. A few comments: - Standards-Version are a bit old 3.8.0, while 3.8.2 is the current one, please check that in furter uploads. - Concerning bugs: * #511805, should have been answered and closed. findutils is an essential package, there is no need to declare essential packages as dependecies, you added the dependency, and the bug will be closed in this upload, there is no harm in this but it's not the best solution. * You closed a few debian bugs in a version that never hit Debian repositories, that requires some manual tweaking to process the correct part of the changelog, please avoid it. * You package version is 2.40-2, which would not include the original source in the upload, and requires some manual tweaking to do so, please avoid that. - You need to keep in contact with your mentors, that will accelerate your uploads, once you gain their trust you might prefer to advocate as a debian maintainer, so you can upload your own packages, it might be educational to have a new mentor in every upload, but it's quite inefficient (you are encouraged to ask for help, though). ""I can't get 2.28 into debian because the mentor process sucks."", that's not it. I'm uploading your package, please consider the previous comments in further changes. -- : You are in a dark room with a compiler, emacs, an internet connection, : and a thermos of coffee. : Your move ? Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: lshell (3rd try)
Hola Ignace Mouzannar! El 24/07/2009 a las 11:18 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lshell". > I have made some modifications in the debian/control as well as > debian/lshell.postinst files, and added a debian/lshell.dirs file. > lshell now uses python-support instead of python-central. > * Package name: lshell > Version : 0.9.4-1 > Upstream Author : Ignace Mouzannar > * URL : http://lshell.ghantoos.org > * License : GPL > Section : shells > It builds these binary packages: > lshell - restricts a user's shell environment to limited sets of commands > lshell is a shell coded in Python that lets you restrict a user's environment > to limited sets of commands, choose to enable/disable any command over SSH > (e.g. SCP, SFTP, rsync, etc.), log user's commands, implement timing > restrictions, and more. A few comments, in decreasing severity order: - You are creating a group lshellg in postinst using groupadd, without checking the group existance, this would fail on reinstall, or upgrade, so, you to check the existance of the group, you should use addgroup instead of groupadd, the group should be called lshell, and it must be a system group (--system in addgroup). Or you can decide to use adm or nogroup. - The tar.gz provided is not the same file that upstream distributes (you had probably recreated the tar.gz) - The license states GPL 2 or any later version, the copyright file refers the user to the GPL-3 license, while this can hardly be a problem, it might be better to point the user to the GPL license - I personally don't like using cdbs, I suggest you to also learn to package using debhelper, as well -- "We must be very careful when we give advice to younger people: sometimes they follow it!" -- Edsger W. Dijkstra Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: fsprotect (try #2)
Excerpts from Neil Williams's message of mar abr 21 14:53:13 -0300 2009: > On what basis? apt and dpkg are definitely native packages, as are most > other packages that use apt and dpkg directly (like emdebian-*). > Packages that use .deb files in explicit manners are often native too - > unless they also work with .rpm etc. I think that a new package shouldn't be native. There are packages that are native projects as the ones you mention, but even if they gain the name by being a development that Debian depends on, there is little gain, if any, in treating them as special cases. Packaging and coding are, after all, different tasks, so using the non-native version numbering that makes explicit the "release version" and "packaging revision" gives a greater degree of flexibility. In cases like giving support to stable, NMUs are easier and cleaner for non-native versioned packages. Or in a derivative distribution, if they need to change a native package, should they build another native or should they make them non-native one? (for example, ubuntu considers apt as native, with version 0.7.20.2ubuntu6) For all these reasons, and many others, even for Debian programs, I think we shouldn't use native packages. > Packages that are explicitly tied to a single distribution are native > to that distribution. What level of tie is deemed to be above a > threshold sufficient to make the package native is a subject of ongoing > case-by-case discussion. > Other packages that are justifiably native include debhelper and the > like. > I'm not particularly interested in fsprotect per-se, but I don't see > that it cannot be deemed native by those who know more about the kinds > of things it needs to do. Neither do I really, but I failed to see what's the gain to use the native versioning packaging. Let's assume fsprotect is a wonderful project, and works perfectly in Debian. I'm sure others would notice and some might choose to use Debian for that reason, but some would prefer to port fsprotect to their systems. Should we then encourage a fork to their particular system, or help them make fsprotect more system independant? Benefiting both systems from mutual improvement is something I would look forward to. While tagging it "too specific for my system, you can't use it" is not. I hope this won't create a huge discussion. -- Saludos, Maxy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: fsprotect (try #2)
Excerpts from Stefanos Harhalakis's message of mar abr 21 12:12:02 -0300 2009: > > > I am looking for guidance and a sponsor for my package "fsprotect". > > 1. why this package is a native package? i think a normal package > > should be better > It was also mentioned on the last thread so I omit that: > fsprotect is 100% tied to a distribution. It cannot be an independent program > that is packaged for debian or other distributions. The core functionality of > fsprotect is provided by one init script and one initramfs script/hook and > those are depending *very* much to the distribution. I.e the init script must > run immediately after the filesystems are mounted and before anything else is > ran. Anyway, it shouldn't be a native package, native packages need a new release to fix anything (packaging, typos, etc), also need a full upload for every change. It can be argued if there is any use for native packages anymore, and probably there isn't. So, please, don't upload a native package. > > 3. can you explain why you override the following lintian warnings > > $ cat debian/fsprotect.lintian-overrides > > fsprotect: non-standard-toplevel-dir fsprotect/ > > fsprotect: virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends > > fsprotect: package-contains-empty-directory fsprotect/system/ > > fsprotect: package-contains-empty-directory fsprotect/tmp/ > fsprotect needs a directory under the root filesystem to preexist. Most > probably it won't be used by normal users, so this won't be common. In IRC it > was mentioned that it could should use /lib/fsprotect, but this directory is > already used to store a helper script: > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1786 2009-03-22 17:32 /lib/fsprotect/fsprotect-protect > and perhaps (in the future) hold other helper scripts too. Why is the script in /lib/fsprotect? Shouldn't it be better if its simply inside /sbin? Why fsprotect needs to break the FHS? > the /fsprotect directory will be used to mount filesystems inside it. 2 > mounts > per protected filesystem will exist in there. > The /fsprotect/system and /fsprotect/tmp directories are required to > pre-exist > at the time initramfs mounts the root filesystem. Then you might prefer to create those directories from a initramfs script. Is it posible to make fsprotect run only as a script of initramfs? -- Saludos, Maxy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: gxemul -- machine emulator for multiple architectures
Hola Jonathan Wiltshire! El 25/08/2008 a las 18:25 escribiste: > I have adopted this package and I am now looking for a sponsor for version > 0.4.6.5-1. > It has been orphaned under bug number 482067 and I believe this upload > will close it. > There are various enhancements including an new upstream release. It > appears to be lintian clean. > I plan to adopt a number of packages with an eventual view to starting > the New Maintainers process, so all your feedback is appreciated even > if you don't wish to sponsor directly. There is a change in the diff file that modifies the source code. Most probably an auto-generated file, anyway, try to avoid such a change. --- gxemul-0.4.6.5.orig/src/devices/.index +++ gxemul-0.4.6.5/src/devices/.index @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ dev_gt.c Galileo Technology GT-64xxx PCI controller dev_hammerhead.c Hammerhead controller, for the secondary CPU on MacPPC machines dev_i80321.c Intel i80321 (ARM) core functionality +device.c Device registry framework dev_igsfb.c Integraphics Systems "igsfb" Framebuffer graphics card dev_iq80321_7seg.c IQ80321 LED device dev_irqc.c Generic IRQ controller for the test machines @@ -97,5 +98,4 @@ dev_wdc.c Standard "wdc" IDE controller dev_z8530.c Zilog Z8530 "zs" serial controller dev_zero.c A simple device which returns zero for reads, discards all writes -device.c Device registry framework lk201.c LK201 keyboard and mouse, used by the dc7085 and scc controllers -- "EIEIO Go home and have a glass of warm, dairy-fresh milk" The GNU C Library Reference Manual, Chapter 2.2, Error Codes Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: samefile
Hola Thorsten Schmale! El 21/08/2008 a las 14:58 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "samefile". > > * Package name: samefile > Version : 2.12-1 > Upstream Author : Jens Schweikhardt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > * URL : http://www.schweikhardt.net/samefile/ > * License : GPL > Section : utils > It builds these binary packages: > samefile - find identical files Is that really needed? Are there any advantages over fdupes or fslint? -- "UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity." -- (Dennis Ritchie) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: ktechlab (updated package)
Hola Georges Khaznadar! El 24/08/2008 a las 22:42 escribiste: > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.3-10 > of my package "ktechlab". > It builds these binary packages: > ktechlab - circuit simulator for microcontrollers and electronics > > The upload would fix these bugs: 474313 The overall package looks fine. I don't like the debian/debiandirs hack, but it's mostly a personal opinion. Some of the patches haven't been commited to the upstream svn yet, please ask upstream (again) to apply them: patches/10-arch-build.dpatch : Not applied yet patches/40_g++-4.3.dpatch : Some of the changes have been applied by upstream, most of them haven't The Standards-Version should be upgraded to 3.8.0, please check if any change is needed. The patch patches/50-i18n.dpatch doesn't have a description, please add a description. Please fix those issues, once fixed I can upload your package. Thanks, -- Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: sshfp - DNS SSHFP records generator
Hola Julien Valroff! El 10/07/2008 a las 18:45 escribiste: > I look forward to receiving your comments on the small updates. Looks nice, I'll upload it as soon as I can. -- "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck, is probably the day Microsoft starts making vacuum cleaners." -- (Ernst Jan Plugge) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: sshfp - DNS SSHFP records generator
Hola Julien Valroff! El 23/06/2008 a las 21:01 escribiste: > > I've made several changes to your package, listed bellow: > > - I used the pristine tar.gz, as I don't see any reason not to. > The pristine tarball already has a debian/ directory. Keeping it makes > the diff.gz harder to read, but I don't know if there is any consensus > on this point. > I remember having read Daniel Baumann's recommendations [0] when taking > the decision to remove the existing debian/ directory. There is no consensus. But if you modify the pristine source it's always a good idea to document the process in the debian/rules get-orig-source. > > - I had removed the previous contents of debian/changelog, as the pre-debian > > packaging history is of little/no use. > In that case, I totally agree. But it might be a good idea to keep > previous entries in case they are useful to understand current > packaging. This particular changelog had nothing interesting. In fact most of the changes were the ones found in the CHANGES files. > > - I changed packaging from cdbs to dh, as cdbs is too dificult to follow. I > > used dh instead of plain debhelper to keep the debian/rules files small > > and > > simple. Even though this increased debian/compat to 7. (not really needed, > > but I really don't like cdbs) > > - I added dpatch support and dependency. (as a replacement of > > simplepatchsys) > It is a matter of taste, I have nothing against using debhelper. I have > never used dh, but it looks quite nice (I still need to study this > deeper when I have more time) cdbs is too difficult to follow. Its fine to do some packaging for oneself, but it's quite troublesome when you are trying fix some weird behaviour in someone elses package. Anyway, if you prefer cdbs, please change it, but I won't review it. :) > > - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the Makefile (should be > > forward > > to upstream). > > - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the manpage (should be > > forward to > > upstream). > great, have you already forwarded these patches? No, being your RFS I believe you should contact upstream and send the patches. > > - I changed the debian/copyright file to include the same text as is > > presented in > > the source code. > Maybe this file could be switched to the machine parsable format, what > do you think? That would be great. > > - I added the Homepage: field. > Wasn't it already added? I have a version with this field, as well as > the Vcs-* fields - I might have forgotten to upload this new version to > mentors. > I think it would be useful to add these Vcs-* fields once they have > reached a definitive location. Ok, do the proposed changes and I'll review it again. > Adding "XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" would also be a good thing for me if > you don't object to this idea. > Would you be interested in co-maintaining this package? Not a lot of > work anyway, but I could then benefit from your experience. I prefer to review the package before its uploaded, until they don't need my intervention. And then we can add the "XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: yes". -- A computer scientist is someone who, when told to "Go to Hell," sees the "go to," rather than the destination, as harmful. Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RFS: sshfp - DNS SSHFP records generator
Hola Julien Valroff! El 09/08/2007 a las 12:50 escribiste: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "sshfp". > > * Package name : sshfp > Version : 1.1.3-1 > Upstream Authors : Paul Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Jake Appelbaum > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * URL : http://www.xelerance.com/software/sshfp/ > * License : GPL > Section : net > > It builds these binary packages: > sshfp - DNS SSHFP records generator > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > The upload would fix these bugs: 413240 > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sshfp > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main > contrib non-free > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/sshfp/sshfp_1.1.3-1.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I had recently being using sshfp, so I believe it would be a useful addition to the archive. I've made several changes to your package, listed bellow: - I used the pristine tar.gz, as I don't see any reason not to. - I had removed the previous contents of debian/changelog, as the pre-debian packaging history is of little/no use. - I removed the patch that replaced © by (c) in the manpage, as manpages now support utf-8 encodings. - I changed packaging from cdbs to dh, as cdbs is too dificult to follow. I used dh instead of plain debhelper to keep the debian/rules files small and simple. Even though this increased debian/compat to 7. (not really needed, but I really don't like cdbs) - I added dpatch support and dependency. (as a replacement of simplepatchsys) - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the Makefile (should be forward to upstream). - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the manpage (should be forward to upstream). - I changed the debian/copyright file to include the same text as is presented in the source code. - I added a debian/watch file (always a good idea to have one). - I added myself as uploader. - I added the Homepage: field. - I upgraded the Standards-Version, no changes needed. The modified package can be fetch from: http://maxy.com.ar/debian/sshfp/sshfp_1.1.3-1.dsc Please review those changes and contact me when you feel that your package is good to be uploaded. Thanks, -- "UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity." -- (Dennis Ritchie) Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
