Version to use in package for a program with non standard versioning

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

As of November 2005, I've picked up maintainance of qd, the [EMAIL PROTECTED]
queue dumper, after it's author passed away in August 2005.

I'm trying to create native Debian packages for qd, it's data file
(qdinfo.dat) and another program to print the content of the data file
(qdiprint).

qd and qdiprint, are both a single .c file, without a configure or
anything else, qdinfo.dat is a text file with credits per project tables.
Up to now, only the .c files and precompiled binaries were available on
the authors website. Since then I've been writing some documentation,
besides a few bugfixes, which are now also available.

qd is already packaged for Debian by Claudio Moratti, and I've spoken with
him about my intent to package the more up to date version qd. He doesn't
mind and will switch his kfolding package over to depend on my qd package
when/if it's hits the archive.

Now for the problem I'm dealing with. qd doesn't use traditional
versioning, it uses two values for it's version.

The first value is the date on which it's internal pointtable was created,
this point table has the same data as the qdinfo.dat file has. The
qdinfo.dat files was created so that it wasn't needed to download and/or
compile a new binary if only its credits per project table was updated.
The qd binary uses this date to check if its internal pointtable is more
recent than the pointtable provided by the qdinfo.dat data file.

Secondly it has a "functional revision", this is a 3 decimal number,
currently at 033, which is the actual version of the code. Whenever there
was a bugfix, a new feature or change in the programs behaviour the
functional revision was incremented. The most recent "functional revision"
is also noted in the qdinfo.dat file, so that when only the qdinfo.dat is
updated, the user will be notified that a new release of qd is available.

If I look at Section 2.3 of the New Maintainers Guide, it says I should
use whatever non-standard versioning is used prefixed with "0.0.".
Thinking in the Debian way of keeping your packages up to date, I'm not
sure which version I should use here, and if I should change the way
update notification is currently handled.

I was thinking that the functional revision would be best to use in the
package version, because this effects the programs functioning. New
functional revisions would mean a new upload of an updated debian package.
In the meantime updates to the point table, which can be daily changes,
other times there are no changes for more than a month, will be done
through qdinfo.dat as usual. I was thinking of either a volatile package
for qdinfo.dat, or a separate script to download an updated version.

How does the version string effect a Debian package? Would this work?
Would it be wise for me to also include the date of the point table inside
the qd binary in the version string for the qd package?

Currently I have qd-0.0.033, qdinfo-0.0.20051226 and qdiprint-0.0.3.
qdiprint doesn't have any versioning whatsoever, therefor I now keep my
own in the traditional x.y.z format.

Regards,

Bas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Version to use in package for a program with non standard versioning

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> You have sorted out the licence problems with qd? It's currently in
contrib.

What license problem whould that be?

Dick Howell, the original author, explicitly says on his website:
"This is free software; you can distribute it and/or modify it under the
terms of the GNU Public License.  There is no warranty.  If it breaks, as
they say, you get to keep the pieces."
http://linuxminded.xs4all.nl/mirror/www.boston.quik.com/rph/fah.html

I think that the problem could be that in the kfolding source there was no
mention of the qd license, but Dick Howell released all his tools under
the GPL, so I don't think that would be a problem. Or am I not aware of
something?

>
>> Now for the problem I'm dealing with. qd doesn't use traditional
versioning, it uses two values for it's version.
>
> But that's internal versioning really - you could absorb that into your
Debian
> versioning if you don't mind incrementing the Debian version each time
the internal versions change. Just increment the minor version number
each time
> the qdinfo version changes. How often does that happen?

As I said, one time there are a few updates in one week, sometimes even
multiple updates on one day, although those are rare. Usually there are
one or two updates in one month, other times there are no update for a
whole month or more.

I don't mind incrementing the Debian version, I would prefer that
actually. To keep the Debian version in sync with the "legacy" version of
qd, which all its users are used to.

>> If I look at Section 2.3 of the New Maintainers Guide, it says I should
use whatever non-standard versioning is used prefixed with "0.0.".
>
> That's for a completely new package, this has some history in Debian so I'd
> say it's best to start at the previous version and increment that.

OK. I'll use the existing qd as a startpoint than, thanks.

>> Currently I have qd-0.0.033, qdinfo-0.0.20051226 and qdiprint-0.0.3.
qdiprint doesn't have any versioning whatsoever, therefor I now keep my
own in the traditional x.y.z format.
>
> I may be wrong but I'd suggest a debian changelog entry of 2.0.0-1,
creating
> qd_2.0.0-1_i386.deb etc.

This would mean that the Debian version of qd is completely separate from
the internal and the one its users are used to.

Currently the Debian package for qd uses the version of kfolding as the
Debian package version. I think this is wrong, and would prefer to do this
differently. But if the 1.0.0 version in the .deb is significant, I'll
continue from there.

> Depends how much qd has changed since it was last uploaded as part of
kfolding. 1.1.0-1 may be suitable.

Not much has changed, there have been 3 updates to qd by Dick Howell since
the version which is in Debian. Mostly tiny bugfixes, but a few features
have been added since then too. The Operating System in the queue.dat can
now be decoded, and a different output format is now also available. I've
also fixed a 3 bugs since Dick Howells last release.

Regards,

Bas




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Version to use in package for a program with non standard versioning

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Neil Williams wrote:
> I'm not claiming to have an authoritative answer for all this, I'm not a DD 
> yet.

Don't worry, I appreciate all feedback. But I would like to know what a
DD has to say about this.

> Why is it in contrib then? Just curious really.

If I look at what the Policy has to say about contrib:

"Examples of packages which would be included in contrib are:
 * free packages which require contrib, non-free packages or packages
   which are not in our archive at all for compilation or execution, and
 * wrapper packages or other sorts of free accessories for non-free
   programs."

I think the first is the case, since kfolding "is an applet for the KDE
panel. It provides a convenient and unobtrusive way to monitor,
visualise, and control the [EMAIL PROTECTED] client software on Unix systems
running KDE."

Stanfords [EMAIL PROTECTED] client is not DFSG-free. Stanford won't release
the source, and you need permission if you wish to write for a 3th party
installer and no one is allowed to distribute the software. AFAIK, thats
the reason why there's no [EMAIL PROTECTED] client in Debian.

There is a Debian package by Nick Lewycky which installs the [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
client
on Debian though.
http://wagon.dhs.org/folding/

>>As I said, one time there are a few updates in one week, sometimes even
>>multiple updates on one day, although those are rare. Usually there are
>>one or two updates in one month, other times there are no update for a
>>whole month or more.
> 
> Is there really any point in incrementing the version that often? Are the 
> upgrades incompatible in any way? I don't know any Debian packages that need 
> to change this often. It can take several days for a release to propagate 
> through the various uploading systems, especially new binaries. Personally, 
> I'd expect a monthly release at most and if users need updates in between, 
> they'll have to be downloaded separately. Don't know how easy that would be 
> to configure though.
> :-(

I don't think the way qd works with qdinfo.dat differs much from an AV
for instance.

Take this scenario for example:
I've released qd-1.1.0 and qdinfo-20061226 not so long ago.

Now Stanford updates their project info, and qdinfo is updated.

I release the new qdinfo package qdinfo-20061230, since there is no new
release required for qd, this is al there is.

A few days from now while working on qd I find a bug, I fix it and
prepare a new qd package. I release qd-1.1.1 and qdinfo-20061230-1. The
only thing changed in the qdinfo package is the latest functional
revision of qd.

The only thing which needs to be updated frequently is the qdinfo
package, just like the clamav-data package with the ClamAV virus
definitions in volatile.

Another option besides using volatile for the qdinfo package, a cronjob
could also be setup to simply download the qdinfo.dat each night.

The only thing which could happen is that the user gets a notice when he
runs qd that the version of qd he is using is older than the latest
release available, because the qdinfo.dat has a higher functional
revision in it. The notice is a bit annoying but it doesn't affect qd in
any way, unlike the clamav-freshclam situation where you can have
changes in the database format.

> 1.1.0 may be more suitable then.
> 
> The 1.0.0 version on the existing Debian package is important because unless 
> you increment from that point, apt may not replace the old package with the 
> new.

I already thought apt/dpkg would not like it if I used my own
versioning. Thanks for the confirmation.

Another thing I was thinking for the qd version, would be qd-1.1.033.
This would use the 1.1.0 version increase which is a good enough
distinction between the previous version, but also uses the functional
revision in the Debian package version.
This makes it easier for myself and the users of qd to match de Debian
version of qd against the normal release.

Regards,

Bas

- --
GnuPG: 0x77A975AD

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDtZklRWRRA3epda0RAtRCAJwKaXuJItCTyUB1PoY9cPd4+fQZZACfXexx
IexVmFcBD0y/0neCX+9hE6U=
=1keV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#723175: [SoB] Vcs is not up to date

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

Thanks for looking into osgEarth so shortly before you VAC.

On 09/18/2013 01:25 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> on SoB Wiki page[1] you asked for sponsering your package.  I checked
> out VCS via
> 
>   gbp-clone ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/osgearth.git
> 
> and found an old version there which is lagging behind mentors[2] please
> commit everything to VCS to make sure it is in sync with what you intend
> to upload.  I'll generally rebuild a package from VCS via
> git-buildpackage.

The changes for the package on mentors are in git, but in the jessie
branch not in master. This should work for the moment:

  gbp-clone --debian-branch=jessie
ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/osgearth.git

I'll merge the changes for jessie into master and push it to git.debian.org.

> Kind regards
> 
> Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianPureBlends/SoB
> [2] https://mentors.debian.net/package/osgearth
> 

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/5239923c.4050...@xs4all.nl

Bug#723175: [SoB osgearth] Vcs is not up to date

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/18/2013 03:11 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Bas,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:45:00PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> Thanks for looking into osgEarth so shortly before you VAC.
> 
> Well, forcing people to wait is demotivating ... and I want to push a
> bit on the motivation side, right. ;-)

It is certainly motivating, I appreciate it a lot.

>  
>> On 09/18/2013 01:25 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>> on SoB Wiki page[1] you asked for sponsering your package.  I checked
>>> out VCS via
>>>
>>>   gbp-clone ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/osgearth.git
>>>
>>> and found an old version there which is lagging behind mentors[2] please
>>> commit everything to VCS to make sure it is in sync with what you intend
>>> to upload.  I'll generally rebuild a package from VCS via
>>> git-buildpackage.
>>
>> The changes for the package on mentors are in git, but in the jessie
>> branch not in master. This should work for the moment:
>>
>>   gbp-clone --debian-branch=jessie
>> ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/osgearth.git
> 
> Ahhh, that was a bit hidden from the workflow I'm usually following
> 
>> I'll merge the changes for jessie into master and push it to git.debian.org.
> 
> Found it.
> 
> .../osgearth (master) $ git-buildpackage
> gbp:info: Orig tarball 'osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg.orig.tar.gz' not found at 
> '../tarballs/'
> gbp:warning: Pristine-tar branch "pristine-tar" not found
> pristine-tar: no pristine-tar branch found, use "pristine-tar commit" first
> gbp:error: Couldn't checkout "osgearth_2.4.0+dfsg.orig.tar.gz": 
> /usr/bin/pristine-tar returned 1
> 
> .../osgearth (master) $ git branch
> * master
>   upstream
> 
> 
> Hmmm, it seems pristine-tar branch is missing.  I'm used to import upstream
> tarball via
> 
> git import-orig --pristine-tar
> 
> which enables the byte-identical recreation of the upstream tarball.  While
> I could download the tarball for sure would you consider also injecting this
> (or am I missing something again?)

I don't use pristine-tar, I just commit the uscan downloaded upstream
tarball to the upstream branch and merge that into the release specific
branch and/or master to work on the debian packaging for the new
upstream release.

I build the packages with git-buildpackage specifying the upstream tree
and debian branch. For example:

  git-buildpackage --git-upstream-tree="upstream"
--git-debian-branch="jessie" --git-pbuilder --git-dist=sid -sa >
/var/tmp/osgearth-2.4.pbuilder 2>&1 &

Using pristine-tar instead of commiting the whole upstream tarballs is
probably better.

It's probably a good idea to adopt the Debian Perl Group Git Guide and
modify it for Debian GIS. That workflow looks much better than what I've
come up with, and more like what you were expecting.

So far we only document how to setup a Git repo for Debian GIS on the
wiki. We can use the git guide to document the next steps.

> 
> Kind regards
> 
>Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/5239b1ba.1060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#723175: [SoB osgearth] Vcs is not up to date

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 09/18/2013 03:32 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi again,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:45:00PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> I'll merge the changes for jessie into master and push it to git.debian.org.
> 
> Only cosmetic hints:
> 
> debian/rules:
> -
> 
> override_dh_clean:
> dh_testdir
> 
> -$(RM) -rf build/
> 
> -$(RM) debian/.#* .#*
> 
> dh_prep
> 
> -$(RM) -rf $(CURDIR)/debian/files
> -$(RM) -f $(CURDIR)/debian/*.debhelper.log
> -$(RM) -f $(CURDIR)/debian/man/*.1
> 
> 
> It would be way shorter to do:
> 
> override_dh_clean:
>   dh_clean
>   -$(RM) -f $(CURDIR)/debian/man/*.1
>   -$(RM) -rf build/
> 
> May be I forgot something - but calling the original dh_clean does
> several things you are doing manually.  dh_testdir should not be
> needed in override_* statements neither should dh_prep.  So you can
> drop the dh_testdir from any of your override_* targets.
>

You didn't forget anything. I've incorporated your suggestions in the
packaging. Thanks for the tips!

> Regarding the get-orig-source target please read what I wrote in my
> mail this morning:
>https://lists.debian.org/debian-gis/2013/09/msg00017.html
> The enhanced uscan just does what you want it to do.  So I would
> recommend for the next upstream version (no reason to fumble around
> with this onw) to use the enhanced uscan.

I spent quite sometime researching this issue, and with the knowledge I
gained I agree that your uscan version using d/copyright and the
get-orig-source script to handle the old way is quite nice. This is also
incorporated in the packaging.

> 
> Moreover I think you can drop
>export DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS=hardening=+all
> It should be default for debhelper compat=9 .
> 

Indeed. There is no need to use -pie like is required to build MapServer
successfully.

> 
> debian/control:
> ---
> 
> Do you know
> 
>  cme fix dpkg-control
> 
> Please just try it (I think you should call it twice in the row to fix
> all issues).  You get a better readable debian/control file and it also
> drops unneeded versioned Depends.  Calling cme to fix d/control quickly
> became part of my packaging workflow right after I realised this nice
> tool.

I'm aware of Config::Model, but had not thought of using it to tidy the
control file. I have mixed feelings about cme dropping the versioned
dependencies when the minimum required is available in all releases, I
like documenting the versions upstream requires.

> You can also run it on dpkg-copyright to ensure DEP5
> compatibility but in your case it is OK (even if I consider things like
> this
> 
> Copyright: 2008-2010, Pelican Mapping
>   2008-2011, Pelican Mapping
>   2008-2012, Pelican Mapping
>   2008-2013, Pelican Mapping
> 
> a bit strange ...)
> 

It's a bit abiguous about which copyright statements apply to which of
the files. This was how licensecheck2dep5 groups them by default. I
grouped the files per years and holders for MapServer in the past, so
I've now done this for osgEarth too.

> 
> So you can see for the moment only nitpicking comments.  Feel free to
> ask me to upload anyway once you told me whether you would include
> pristine-tar or whether I should use the original tarball in
> ../tarballs.
> 

Seeing the merits of pristine-tar, I've added the branch and push all my
changes for the above to git.debian.org.

My local build doesn't show any regressions, so if you could have
another look at the recent changes I'd be very grateful.

> 
> Kind regards
> 
>Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/523a0927.1010...@xs4all.nl

Re: Bug#724670: RFS: pgrouting/2.0.0-1 [ITP] -- basic routing functionality support for PostgreSQL

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Michael,

Would it be an idea to maintain pgRouting under the DebianGis [1]
umbrella instead of collab-maint?

We already maintain the closely related PostGIS and QGIS packages, so
I think pgRouting would fit right in. We're always looking people like
you helping to package GIS software for Debian.

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianGis

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/524438d9.4080...@xs4all.nl

Bug#725831: RFS: libkml/1.3.0~r864-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/09/2013 10:19 AM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> Bas did you verify if the new version is still back-compatible against the old
> one? In the opposite case, a SONAME bump is mandatory.

Yes, the only change from upstream is "Allow colors to have leading
whitespace, with or without '#'." That shouldn't cause problems for
backward compatibility.

The Multi-Arch change could cause problems for its rdeps, but doesn't
seem to be. The only reverse dependency of libkml is gdal at the moment,
and that it rebuilds fine with the new libkml.

Also without a rebuild, upgrading libkml on an unstable system doesn't
seem to cause problems. I've loaded a subset of the kml-testcases with
QGIS and marble, once with the libkml/1.3.0~r863-4.1 and once with
libkml/1.3.0~r864-1 installed. Both use GDAL to parse the KML files.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/525554e3.7080...@xs4all.nl

Re: Gitorious and debian/watch file

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Creating a watch file for Gitorious will most likely require a redirect
service to translate the refs JSON to download URLs.

Take for example your osm-c-tools package, it has JSON data with the
repo branches and tags available at:

https://gitorious.org/osm-c-tools/osmctools/refs

The tags can be translated to the tarball URL using the hash:

https://gitorious.org/osm-c-tools/osmctools/archive/9cb724682b14840e1fd020eee7a380926424d603.tar.gz

It's an ugly filename, but you can mangle that in the watch to become
osmctools-0.1.tar.gz

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/525d6220.6020...@xs4all.nl

Re: Gitorious and debian/watch file

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/15/2013 05:58 PM, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> Same link works for tags: 
> https://gitorious.org/osm-c-tools/osmctools/0.1.tar.gz

That's nice to know, but it only works when you add 'archive/' before
the 0.1.tar.gz.

> So the only real problem is to find the right tag.

Those are listed in the refs JSON.

I've wipped up a Q&D Gitorious watch service, you can see it working for
osm-c-tools at:

http://linuxminded.nl/tmp/gitorious-watch/?project=osm-c-tools&repo=osmctools

The code in question comes down to the gitorious-watch.pl as attached,
that's a CLI tool and just a proof-of-concept. The online code just
formats the output as HTML.

I could make this into a CGI to run on Alioth where previous watch file
redirect services were also hosted IIRC.

Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)
#!/usr/bin/perl -w

use strict;
use File::Basename;
use Getopt::Long qw(:config bundling no_ignore_case);
use HTTP::Request::Common;
use LWP::UserAgent;
use URI::Escape;
use JSON;

my %cfg = (
	project => '',
	repo=> '',
	verbose => 0,
	help=> 0,
  );

my $result = GetOptions(
			 'p|project=s' => \$cfg{project},
			 'r|repo=s'=> \$cfg{repo},
			 'v|verbose'   => \$cfg{verbose},
			 'h|help'  => \$cfg{help},
		   );

if(!$result || $cfg{help}) {
	print STDERR "\n" if(!$result);

	print "Usage: ". basename($0) ." -p  -r  [OPTIONS]\n\n";
	print "Options:\n";
	print "-p, --projectProject name on Gitorious\n";
	print "-r, --repo   Repository name on Gitorious\n";
	print "-v, --verbose  Enable verbose output\n";
	print "-h, --help Display this usage information\n";
	
	exit 1;
}

my $ua = LWP::UserAgent->new(agent => 'gitorious-redirect');

if($cfg{project} && $cfg{repo}) {
	my $base_url  = 'https://gitorious.org/';
	   $base_url .= URI::Escape::uri_escape($cfg{project}).'/';
	   $base_url .= URI::Escape::uri_escape($cfg{repo});

	my $url = $base_url.'/refs';

	print "Retrieving URL: $url ... " if($cfg{verbose});

my $req = HTTP::Request->new(GET => $url);
my $res = $ua->request($req);

	if($res->is_success) {
		print "Success\n" if($cfg{verbose});

my $json = $res->content;
		my $data = JSON::decode_json($json);

		if($data->{tags} && @{$data->{tags}}) {
			print "Tag | URL\n";
			foreach my $tag (@{$data->{tags}}) {
my ($name, $hash) = @{$tag};

my $url  = $base_url.'/archive/';
   $url .= URI::Escape::uri_escape($hash).'.tar.gz';

print "$name | $url\n";
			}
		}
		else {
			print "Error: No tags found in Gitorious repo!\n";

			exit 1;
		}
}
else {
		print "Failed!\n" if($cfg{verbose});
print "Error: Failed to retrieve URL! ($url)\n";
print "HTTP Status: ".$res->code." ".$res->message."\n";

		exit 1;
}
}
else {
	print "No project and/or repo specified, cannot query Gitorious without them.\n";

	exit 1;
}

Bug#736885: RFS: gdal/1.10.1+dfsg-4

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 01/28/2014 12:01 AM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2014-01-27 23:34:25, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal
>> 
>> Dear mentors,
>> 
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gdal"
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> Changes since the last upload:
>> 
>> * Rebuild for libepsilon1.
> 
> gdal is currently involved in the ongoing poppler transition. To
> not entangle the poppler and libepsilon transition, please talk to
> the Release Team and wait for their OK. (I don't know how many
> packages are involved in the libepsilon transition, but you might
> want to read [1] on how to coordinate transitions with the Release
> Team.)

GDAL is already marked 'good' in the poppler transition, that doesn't
seem to be a problem. The openjpeg transition in which it's include
via poppler may be.

Since only gdal and librasterlite need to be rebuild for the new
libepsilon skipping the release team was not protested. See:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-gis/2014/01/msg00054.html

> But anyway, this upload is not required. Once the new libepsilon
> got built and installed everywhere, it is enough to request
> binNMUs. reportbug release.debian.org has a template for that.

Andreas, should we go this route instead?

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=HbSZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/52e6e9c7.4010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#736884: Bug#736885: RFS: gdal/1.10.1+dfsg-4

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2014 08:03 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:20:39AM +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> gdal is currently involved in the ongoing poppler transition. To
>>> not entangle the poppler and libepsilon transition, please talk to
>>> the Release Team and wait for their OK. (I don't know how many
>>> packages are involved in the libepsilon transition, but you might
>>> want to read [1] on how to coordinate transitions with the Release
>>> Team.)
>>
>> GDAL is already marked 'good' in the poppler transition, that doesn't
>> seem to be a problem. The openjpeg transition in which it's include
>> via poppler may be.
>>
>> Since only gdal and librasterlite need to be rebuild for the new
>> libepsilon skipping the release team was not protested. See:
>>
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-gis/2014/01/msg00054.html
>>
>>> But anyway, this upload is not required. Once the new libepsilon
>>> got built and installed everywhere,
> 
> libepsilon is just uploaded

Thanks.

>>> it is enough to request
>>> binNMUs. reportbug release.debian.org has a template for that.
>>
>> Andreas, should we go this route instead?
> 
> Requesting binNMUs would do less stress test to my poor connection. :-)
> 
> I'd also like to say that you are asking for sponsoring 1.1~svn11-3 in
> #736884 but Git has only 1.1g-3 which is just in experimental.

Because master already has 1.1g, the changes for 1.1~svn-3 live in the
1.1_svn11 branch. But this won't be required anymore.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/52e757d6.6020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#736885: RFS: gdal/1.10.1+dfsg-4

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/28/2014 03:51 PM, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 11:34:25PM +0100, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> Package: sponsorship-requests
>> Severity: normal
>>
>> Changes since the last upload:
>>
>>  * Rebuild for libepsilon1.
>>
> 
> Please, don't. You should ask for a bNMU in this case, via reportbug.

Don't worry, I'm not. I've already closed the RFS because I'll file the
BinNMU requests once libepsilon gets out of NEW.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
GnuPG: 0xE88D4AF1 (new) / 0x77A975AD (old)


-- 
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/52e7e55d.2020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#739029: RFS: qgis/2.0.1-2

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi Paul,

On 02/15/2014 08:24 AM, Paul Gevers wrote:
> [ Sorry, no intent to sponsor this right now, but ... ]

No problem, the Sponsoring Of Blends initiative is working very nicely.

> On 15-02-14 03:12, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "qgis"
> 
> This package is part of a proposed transition (by you). You would
> do well to at least mention this fact in your RFS.

This upload of qgis is not related to the spatialite transition, it is
related to the FTBFS on ARM and the piuparts issues recently reported.

The spatialite transition is only planned for now, the updated
packages are only available in experimental until we get the go ahead
from the Release Team.

Kind Regards,

Bas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=kKWw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/52ff674d.4060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#739029: RFS: qgis/2.0.1-2

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/15/2014 05:42 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Some minor nitpicking:
> 
> On Saturday, 15. February 2014 03:12:36 Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>>  qgis-plugin-globe- OSG globe plugin for QGIS
>>  qgis-plugin-globe-common - OSG GLOBE plugin for QGIS -
> 
> inconsistent capitalization
> 
> There are a lot of unused substvars, maybe they should be "used" somehow. The 
> unknown ones are probably OK.
> 
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: package qgis: unused
> substitution variable ${sip:Depends}

The inconsistent capitalization and unused substitution variable
${sip:Depends} warnings are fixed in git.

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-grass/qgis.git

The remaining unused substitution variable warning is for
${python:Versions}:

dpkg-gencontrol: warning: package python-qgis: unused substitution
variable ${python:Versions}

It was previously used for the XB-Python field, but this field is
deprecated in the current Python packaging policy:

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-specifying_versions

This warning can be ignored.

The other fixes will be included in the next qgis upload.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/52ffe01c.4030...@xs4all.nl

Re: Bug#742173: Please commit your changes to VCS

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

> I guess you forgot to `git push` ...

I did, sorry for my oversight. The branch on git.d.o is update to date now.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/0883a303ea00f9d07ce133bcaa934943.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#747000: Can not find commit in Git

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 05/04/2014 09:21 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I can not find a commit for gdal/1.11.0+dfsg-1~exp1 in Git.
> 
> Am I missing something?

It's in the experimental branch for the time being.

> Kind regards
> 
> Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/53669528.5090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#747000: Can not find commit in Git

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/04/2014 10:08 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 09:29:44PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 05/04/2014 09:21 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>> I can not find a commit for gdal/1.11.0+dfsg-1~exp1 in Git.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something?
>>
>> It's in the experimental branch for the time being.
> 
> This branch is not pulled by gbp-pull.  It would help if this would work
> "as usual".  WHat exactly do I need to do to pull and to build?

Sorry for breaking the usual work flow. Hopefully the experimental
branch won't be needed long.

The following should do to build the package:

 git fetch origin
 git checkout experimental
 git-buildpackage --git-debian-branch=experimental -sa

> Kind regards
> 
>  Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5366a15b.1030...@xs4all.nl

Re: Older release and git-buildpackage

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/10/2014 03:56 PM, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
> I need some help with a scenario with gbp. Say I have imported a new
> upstream version but would like to release a -2 to an older release. 
> 
> Is there a simple way to do this ? 

You can create a branch for your older version, and have
git-buildpackage use it with --git-debian-branch.

This is similar to the workflow described for experimental, see:

https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit#Merging_a_debian-experimental_branch_into_master_for_sid

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/536e32d...@xs4all.nl

Re: Bug#748784: RFS: proj/4.8.0-5

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/20/2014 08:42 PM, Wookey wrote:
> +++ Bas Couwenberg [2014-05-20 20:24 +0200]:
>> Package: sponsorship-requests
> 
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "proj"
> 
> I think you have a regular sponsor now, so assume this will be taken
> care of. But if not I have an interest in proj and could be persuaded
> to sponsor (in a bit - quite busy right now!).

Yes, I usually have a sponsor. Andreas Tilles Sponsoring of Blends
initiative is working very well.

> Wookey

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/537ba493.5000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#754227: RFS: gdal/1.10.1+dfsg-6

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 07/08/2014 11:26 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 22:40:17 +0200, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> 
>> Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal
>> 
>> Dear mentors,
>> 
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gdal"
> 
> You found one since this contains only my patch, and building the 
> package once more today doesn't hurt :)

Thanks for sponsoring the upload as well.

I've marked the package as uploaded by you on the Sponsoring of Blends
wiki page and put Andreas in the CC just in case he misses the wiki edit.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=xi6k
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/53bc63f6.3030...@xs4all.nl

Bug#754227: RFS: gdal/1.10.1+dfsg-6

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 07/08/2014 11:34 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 23:26:47 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> 
>>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gdal"
>> You found one since this contains only my patch, and building
>> the package once more today doesn't hurt :)
> 
> And uploaded.
> 
> Thanks again for picking up the patch so quickly.

No problem. It was high on my TODO list, and your patch gave me very
little left to do. :)

I'm now preparing a new revision of gdal 1.11.0 to include your patch
as well.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=rkVV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/53bc649d.2080...@xs4all.nl

Re: Bug#755049: RFS: libharu/2.3.0-1 (update)

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> * Package name: libharu
>   Version : 2.3.0-1
>   [...]
> libharu is already packaged in debian, this is just an update to the last
> upstream version. It will require a rebuild of the depending packages:
> saga
> udav
> mathgl
> emboss
> falconpl

It may be wise to change the package to 2.3.0-1~exp1 and upload it to
experimental. The uploaded package in experimental can then be used to
test the rebuilds of the reverse dependencies.

If you have verified that rebuilding the reverse dependencies doesn't
cause any issues, uploading to unstable may be an option, but must be
followed by requesting binNMUs from the Release Team (using the binnmu
reportbug template for release.debian.org). See also:
https://release.debian.org/wanna-build.txt

A normal transition may be more appropriate, with the new package in
experimental until the Release Team gives the go ahead to upload it to
unstable.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/abcc09860cbdf3dbe6768a9e03b8b56a.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#754253: Bug#755553: Can not build osm2pgsql

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/27/2014 06:59 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I intended to sponsor the latest status of osm2pgsql in Git but it does
> not build for me.  I attached the build log.
> 
> Any idea what might went wrong?

Based on your log I suspect your chroot is outdated.

It's using the protobuf 1.0.0~rc2-1 from experimental instead of the
1.0.0-1 release in unstable:

Setting up libprotobuf-c1 (1.0.0~rc2-1) ...
Setting up libprotobuf-c-dev (1.0.0~rc2-1) ...

My build:

Setting up libprotobuf-c1 (1.0.0-1) ...
Setting up libprotobuf-c-dev (1.0.0-1) ...

My chroot doesn't have the experimental repository in its APT
sources.list only unstable.

Can you try a rebuild in an unstable only chroot?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/53d53402.60...@xs4all.nl

Bug#757243: RFS: qmapshack/0.2.0+ds1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/17/2014 06:35 PM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
> I just uploaded new upstream version of qmapshack 0.3.0 to debian mentors.
> This package fixing all previous issues, I would be grateful for reviewing.

Regarding the copyright file I suggest to use the SPDX license
shortnames as much as possible.

http://spdx.org/licenses/

So instead of "BSD (3 clause)" as used by licensecheck, use BSD-3-Clause
instead. And use the minor numbers for the GPL licenses, so GPL-3.0+
instead of GPL-3+.

The copyright-format 1.0 specifies that license names cannot contain
spaces (unless they define exceptions), using the SPDX license names
prevents that.

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-syntax

There is also an additional space after the Source field that should be
removed.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/53f0e5ef.7090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#757243: RFS: qmapshack/0.2.0+ds1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/17/2014 07:46 PM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
> Can you please advice what to do with "LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception
> 1.1" license?

The relevant documention in the copyright-format 1.0 states:

"
An exception or clarification to a license is signalled in plain text,
by appending /with keywords exception/ to the short name. This document
provides a list of keywords that must be used when referring to the most
frequent exceptions. When exceptions other than these are in effect that
modify a common license by granting additional permissions, you may use
an arbitrary keyword not taken from the below list of keywords. When a
license differs from a common license because of added restrictions
rather than because of added permissions, a distinct short name should
be used instead of with keywords exception.

Only one exception may be specified for each license within a given
license specification. If more than one exception applies to a single
license, an arbitrary short name indicating that combination of multiple
exceptions must be used instead.
"

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification

The current short name doesn't conform to the "with keyword exception"
syntax, but seems in common use for QT software.

I wouldn't worry too much about the short name syntax in this case, and
use the same license section as qtmultimedia-opensource-src for example:

http://sources.debian.net/src/qtmultimedia-opensource-src/5.3.1-4/debian/copyright/#L72

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/53f0f409.6020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#757243: RFS: qmapshack/0.2.0+ds1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Thanks for incorporating the feedback.

I think the WTFPL short name should keep the version number, WTFPL-2 was
better IMHO.

The text of the QT license exception is still missing the LGPL exception
text. I suggest at least the changes included in the attached patch.

Since the license text of the QT commercial license is not known, and
appears to be specific to each commercial licensee (because you need to
contact them first, it's likely part of the contract negotiation), I
would drop the QT_COMMERICAL license option too and just use:

License: GPL-3.0+ or LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception 1.1

This is what qtmultimedia-opensource-src uses too, except in reverse order.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

diff --git a/debian/copyright b/debian/copyright
index 38a75bb..4b9dbcf 100644
--- a/debian/copyright
+++ b/debian/copyright
@@ -57,12 +57,12 @@ Files:
  src/animation/*
 Copyright:
  *No copyright*
-License: WTFPL
+License: WTFPL-2
 
 Files: src/helpers/CTextEditWidget.cpp
  src/helpers/CTextEditWidget.h
 Copyright: 2012, Digia Plc and/or its subsidiary(-ies)
-License: QT_COMMERICIAL or GPL-3 or LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception 1.1
+License: QT_COMMERICIAL or GPL-3.0+ or LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception 1.1
 
 License: GPL-3.0+
  This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ Comment: You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
  On Debian systems, the full text of the e Apache License, Version 2.0
  can be found in the file `/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0'.
 
-License: WTFPL
+License: WTFPL-2
  DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT TO PUBLIC LICENSE
  .
  Version 2, December 2004
@@ -158,34 +158,41 @@ License: WTFPL
  .
  see .
 
-License: QT_COMMERICIAL or GPL-3 or LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception 1.1
- $QT_BEGIN_LICENSE:LGPL$
- Commercial License Usage
- Licensees holding valid commercial Qt licenses may use this file in
- accordance with the commercial license agreement provided with the
- Software or, alternatively, in accordance with the terms contained in
- a written agreement between you and Digia.  For licensing terms and
- conditions see http://qt.digia.com/licensing.  For further information
- use the contact form at http://qt.digia.com/contact-us.
- .
- GNU Lesser General Public License Usage
- Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU Lesser
- General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software
- Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the
- packaging of this file.  Please review the following information to
- ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 requirements
- will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html.
+License: LGPL-2.1 with Digia Qt LGPL Exception 1.1
+ GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1:
+ This file may be used under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
+ License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software Foundation and
+ appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the packaging of this
+ file. Please review the following information to ensure the GNU Lesser
+ General Public License version 2.1 requirements will be met:
+ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html.
  .
  In addition, as a special exception, Digia gives you certain additional
- rights.  These rights are described in the Digia Qt LGPL Exception
+ rights. These rights are described in the Digia Qt LGPL Exception
  version 1.1, included in the file LGPL_EXCEPTION.txt in this package.
  .
- GNU General Public License Usage
- Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU
- General Public License version 3.0 as published by the Free Software
- Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.GPL included in the
- packaging of this file.  Please review the following information to
- ensure the GNU General Public License version 3.0 requirements will be
- met: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html.
- .
- $QT_END_LICENSE$
+ On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU Lesser General Public License
+ can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2.1`.
+ .
+ Digia Qt LGPL Exception version 1.1:
+ As an additional permission to the GNU Lesser General Public License version
+ 2.1, the object code form of a "work that uses the Library" may incorporate
+ material from a header file that is part of the Library.  You may distribute
+ such object code under terms of your choice, provided that:
+ (i)   the header files of the Library have not been modified; and
+ (ii)  the incorporated material is limited to numerical parameters, data
+   structure layouts, accessors, macros, inline functions and
+   templates; and
+ (iii) you comply with the terms of Section 6 of the GNU Lesser General
+   Public License version 2.1.
+ .
+ Moreover, you may apply this exception to a

Bug#757243: RFS: qmapshack/0.2.0+ds1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/17/2014 10:55 PM, Tobias Frost wrote:
> Regarding the patch: I'm not near a PC right now, so can't check: Are you 
> sure the license of those files with the exception had a "or later" on their 
> GPL option?

I'm pretty sure about that. The QT project licensing page links to the
licenses as published by the FSF which contain the "or later" part.
Furthermore the LICENSE.LGPL and LICENSE.GPL files contained in QT
projects contain "or (at your option) any later version".

> Regarding the commercial option: I wouldn't leave it out, as IMHO d/copyright 
> should be a exact representation on the license, even if a option is not 
> really applicable. 

I agree in general, but we're not able to document the text of the
commercial license. The other QT software I looked at also don't specify
the commercial license, have you found any that do and if so how do they
handle this issue?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/53f12537.2060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#757243: RFS: qmapshack/0.2.0+ds1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 08/18/2014 08:52 AM, Tobias Frost wrote:
> Hi Sebastiaan, 
> 
> On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 23:57 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 08/17/2014 10:55 PM, Tobias Frost wrote:
>>> Regarding the patch: I'm not near a PC right now, so can't check: Are you 
>>> sure the license of those files with the exception had a "or later" on 
>>> their GPL option?
>>
>> I'm pretty sure about that. The QT project licensing page links to the
>> licenses as published by the FSF which contain the "or later" part.
>> Furthermore the LICENSE.LGPL and LICENSE.GPL files contained in QT
>> projects contain "or (at your option) any later version".
> 
> No I disagee. You cannot refer to the published complete license text
> here;
> LICENSE.GPL begins with 
> "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
>  of this license document, but changing it is not allowed."
> so one can be sure that it is not modified for the purpose to have the
> "or later" option. As there is no no-later veision of the license file,
> we have to read on.
> 
> Later in the license the or-later-option is introduced:
> "Each version is given a distinguishing version number.  If the Program
> specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any
> later version", you have the option of following the terms and
> conditions either of that version or of any later version published by
> the Free Software Foundation."
> 
> The files in question do *NOT* have the "any later version" specified,
> so the AND evaluated to false and it does not apply. That means you have
> only GPL-3 as option. 
> 
> As licenses are bound to the specific artifact, it is very dangerous to
> say "other packages using QT do it this way".  
> 
> Looking at
> http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/qtwidgets-richtext-textedit-textedit-cpp.html
> (looks like the source of the file), and on 
> http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/licensing.html I don't see any "or later
> option" too. (However, this would be only an addtional, non-authoritive
> datapoint anyway, as the only thing that counts is the text in the
> artifact)

The license header in the artifact doesn't state the "or later", but
refers to the license as published by the FSF which does include it:


 ** GNU Lesser General Public License Usage
 ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU Lesser
 ** General Public License version 2.1 as published by the Free Software
 ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.LGPL included in the
 ** packaging of this file.  Please review the following information to
 ** ensure the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 requirements
 ** will be met: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html.
 **
 ** In addition, as a special exception, Digia gives you certain additional
 ** rights.  These rights are described in the Digia Qt LGPL Exception
 ** version 1.1, included in the file LGPL_EXCEPTION.txt in this package.
 **
 ** GNU General Public License Usage
 ** Alternatively, this file may be used under the terms of the GNU
 ** General Public License version 3.0 as published by the Free Software
 ** Foundation and appearing in the file LICENSE.GPL included in the
 ** packaging of this file.  Please review the following information to
 ** ensure the GNU General Public License version 3.0 requirements will be
 ** met: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html.


The full license text is not included in the header, but is deferred to
the license as published by the FSF. Since the licenses as published by
the FSF include "or (at your option) any later version" GPL-3+ applies.

QT projects include the LICENSE.GPL and LICENSE.LGPL files as referred
to in the header, but these are not included in qmapshack as they are in
QT projects. The LICENSE.GPL and LICENSE.LGPL files included in QT
projects are verbatim copies of the licenses as published by the FSF
which includes "or (at your option) any later version".

The QT code included in qmapshack is taken from the QT examples, and the
license applied to that include "or (at your option) any later version":

https://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.7/demos-textedit-textedit-cpp.html
https://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.7/licensing.html
https://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.7/gpl.html
https://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.7/lgpl.html

>>> Regarding  the commercial option: I wouldn't leave it out, as IMHO 
>>> d/copyright should be a exact representation on the license, even if a 
>>> option is not really applicable. 
>>
>> I agree in general, but we're not able to document the text of the
>> commercial license.
> 
> Thats not the point. 

Bug#760725: lintian: "File without copyright info" in gdal-grass

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 09/07/2014 06:12 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> it seems lintian found a new target and gdal-grass is affected:

It looks like a recent change in lintian.

> Since I think this is easy to fix this should be done.

Keep an eye out for updated copyright files in git.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/540c885f.8050...@xs4all.nl

Re: Infrastructure Inquiry -- please advise

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Brian,

This question is not very suitable for the mentors list, this list is
intended for help with packaging and other developer-related issues.

On 04/14/2016 09:17 PM, Brian M Hamlin wrote:
> I am writing this email, not as a Debian Developer in-training, but instead 
> asking advice from 
> the Debian Project, on behalf of OSGeo.org -- a software foundation modeled 
> on the Apache Foundation, 
> for free and open geospatial software development. 
> 
> OSGeo.org Systems Administration (SAC) is building a new infrastructure for 
> ** git repositories **.. 
> the Debian Project core is clearly experienced here, so I am writing to ask 
> for advice and.or feedback 
> on our own efforts. As with Apache Foundation and others, infrastructure is 
> security-related, 
> so experienced advice is very welcome.

I suspect the recent 'What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?'
[0] thread is the trigger for your question.

The experiences of the Alioth administrators [1] is probably what you're
looking for.

The Alioth administrators are very busy, so you may not get a reply from
them in the short term. Prodding an admin on #alioth may get you
feedback sooner.

The git infrastructure on Alioth uses pretty standard git components
like cgit, nothing fancy like gogs. The major benefit is its integration
with Fusion Forge, the software running on Alioth [2]. This takes care
of user/group and SSH key management. This is not very relevant for the
proposed git service for OSGeo.

Do you have specific questions for the Alioth admins?

[0] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-April/015890.html
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Alioth
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Trying to disable error=format-security for clapack

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/16/2016 11:07 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> When reading the code it seems to me that actually a test whether this
> code works or not is intended and thus fixing the format is not in the
> intention of the authors.  So I tried 
> 
> export DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_FORMAT:=0
> DPKG_EXPORT_BUILDFLAGS = 1
> 
> but the build keeps on failing.  Any idea?

If you want to disable the format-security option, you can try this in
debian/rules:

 CFLAGS += -Wno-error=format-security

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: change of username

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/20/2016 03:34 PM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> When I signed up some years ago, I got a user name with -guest appended. I
> guess that was the policy at the time. In any case, how can I change that?

You can get rid of the -guest suffix by becoming a DD or DM.

See also:

Alioth FAQ: 1.1. Why do I have a "-guest" suffix on my account ?

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#Why_do_I_have_a_.22-guest.22_suffix_on_my_account_.3F

> I wouldn't mind an entirely new account either, even if I have to sign up
> for all my groups again.

After getting your DD or DM account, you'll need to join the groups
again with that account and request the project admins to remove your
-guest account.

See: Alioth FAQ 1.4 & 1.5:

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#How_can_I_migrate_my_-guest_account_to_my_new_official_Debian_account_.3F

https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/FAQ#How_can_I_remove_my_old_-guest_account_.3F_an_unused_project_.3F

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Missing latest version of libgtk-3-common in unstable?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05/22/2016 02:39 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Any hint?

The arch:all package cannot be built on the buildds:

https://bugs.debian.org/824999

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#832985: RFS: svgsalamander/1.0.0+dfsg1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Felix,

I've had a look at your package and some comments follow. In general the
package looks good, but there is room for improvement.

Please consider bumping the debhelper compatibility to 9.

Also change the LGPL-2.0 shortname to LGPL-2+ to better reflects the "or
(at your option) any later version" clause.

The Forwarded header in
0004-Use-system-awt-gradient-instead-of-the-embedded-batik.patch &
0006-modify-broken-upstream-pom.patch can also be improved. For the
former "not-needed" is more appropriate than "no" with note, not-needed
is probably also appropriate for the latter.

The README.source should be updated to reflect the change to GitHub
tarballs.

Consider adding the --parallel option to dh in debian/rules to enable
the use of parallel builds with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=".

The watch file can also be improved to handle common issues [0], like
the attached version for example.

Also consider adding upstream metadata [1].

[0] https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
version=3
opts=\
dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/,\
filenamemangle=s/(?:.*?)?(?:rel|v|svgSalamander)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))/svgSalamander-$1.$2/
 \
https://github.com/blackears/svgSalamander/releases \
(?:.*?/)?(?:rel|v|svgSalamander)?[\-\_]?(\d\S+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))

Bug#832985: RFS: svgsalamander/1.0.0+dfsg1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Felix,

Thanks for your changes.

On 08/06/2016 04:35 PM, Felix Natter wrote:
> Sebastiaan Couwenberg writes:
>> Consider adding the --parallel option to dh in debian/rules to enable
>> the use of parallel builds with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=".
> 
> done. (although compilation takes less than a few seconds).

The benefit of parallel builds for small packages is limited, adding the
--parallel option is mostly a best practice because without it debhelper
won't enable parallel support even when it's beneficial. I maintain a
couple of big packages for which you don't won't non-parallel builds as
those take several hours, instead of under an hour with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="parallel=3".

debhelper compat level 10 defaults to --parallel for all buildsystems
that support parallel building, which is a nice improvement. But compat
level 10 is not well supported in stable yet.

>> The watch file can also be improved to handle common issues [0], like
>> the attached version for example.
> 
> I added your watch file, thank you.
> So that I understand this:
> - version=3 is preferred
> - make archive type variable
> - make dversionmangle more general (backports etc.)
> - make uversionmangle more general:
> +uversionmangle=s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha)\d*)$/$1~$2/;s/RC/rc/,\
> --> is this best practice for github tarballs? Otherwise I think this is
> difficult because every upstream project has different terminology.
> 
> --> Maybe the uscan man page should be extended regarding this?
> (it contains a github example hard-coded for tar.gz)

Because uscan in jessie doesn't support version=4 yet, I prefer
version=3 watch files until stretch is stable. The downgrade for
svgSalamander is appreciated.

The uversionmangle is a best practice in general, and is documented on
the wiki [0]. Because the gbp import-orig complains about uppercase RC
that is additionally translated to lowercase.

Because the version captured in debian/watch included non-digets
(\d+\S+) you need to handle pre-releases with the uversionmangle rule,
otherwise version 1.0.0-rc1 will not precede version 1.0.0.

[0] https://wiki.debian.org/debian/watch#Common_mistakes

>> Also consider adding upstream metadata [1].
> 
> I added this.

I've committed a few improvements to the upstream metadata before
sponsoring the upload. Most importantly fixing the Repository URL to
include the .git suffix required for `git clone`. I've also added the
Repository-Browse field (without the .git suffix).

I've also added a gbp.conf file to use pristine-tar by default, to not
require the --(git-)pristine-tar options for the git-buildpackage commands.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#836373: marked as done (RFS: ismrmrd/1.3.2-4 [RC])

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> (can you please check for other hdf breakages in the archive?)

The archive rebuilds resulted in some similar bugreports, the
outstanding one is mathgl (#835680), I've submitted a patch to the
bugreport last Sunday.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: .desktop file handling

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/15/2016 10:02 AM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote:
> On 15/09/16 08:53, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>>> I know this approach
>>> works, but is it the "right" way? Does it matter?
>>
>> your way is the best  one if you also add a patch to automatically
>> install the file
>> inside the upstream build system.
>>
>> Otherwise you can avoid a patch and add the desktop file inside the
>> debian directory,
>> and ask upstream to integrate it.
> 
> In my personal experience, upstream usually prefers to be asked about
> where to put the .desktop file. So writing a patch that blindly places
> it in the root of the source tree may be rejected as is.
> 
> Instead you should rather first embed it in the debian/ folder and
> discuss with upstream where to put it in a subsequent PR.

A desktop file without application icons doesn't make a lot of sense,
placing the desktop relative to icons is common.

Related policy:

 https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-menus

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: Any reason why sphinx does not migrate to testing?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/16/2016 10:01 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> So what might be the problem here?

The strict dependencies on sphinx in cdist-doc apparently.

>From the britney output:

 Trying easy from autohinter: clustalo/1.2.3-1 sphinx/1.4.6-1
 start: 57+556: a-3:i-18:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 orig: 57+556: a-3:i-18:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 easy: 59+556: a-4:i-19:a-0:a-0:a-0:m-0:m-0:p-35:p-0:s-1:m-556
 * amd64: cdist-doc
 * i386: cdist-doc

 FAILED

https://release.debian.org/britney/update_output.txt

The new cdist has not aged sufficiently to migrate:

 Excuse for cdist

 * Too young, only 4 of 5 days old
 * Depends: cdist sphinx
 * Not considered

https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=cdist

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 18:15:08 +0200 Klaus Zimmermann wrote:
> Mattia already declined sponsoring on grounds of not sponsoring Debian 
> virgins like myself.

Ross Gammon's initial ITP intended to maintain this package in the
Debian GIS team alongside the netcdf packages where I'm available for
sponsoring as is Andreas Tille's Sponsoring of Blends initiative.

Since the package has been moved to the Python Modules team, finding a
sponsor within the team is your best option. Please contact
debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org as documented in the Python Modules Team
policy:

 http://python-modules.alioth.debian.org/policy.html#joining-the-team

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 09/30/2016 02:46 PM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
> "the netcdf package. There was an ITP for the netcdf-libcf package, but
> development of this source upstream is stalled.
> 
> cf-python depends on netcdf-python being packaged first, and will be 
> maintained
> within the Debian GIS team."
> 
> this is what Ross said, where is netcdf-python package?

That's the python-netcdf4 package in the Build-Depends:

 https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/netcdf4-python

It provides the modern Python bindings for libnetcdf, unlike the old
python-netcdf package from python-scientific which does not support
numpy >= 1.9. For some discussion about these see #778417 & #821221.

> I also fail to see where Ross gave you permission to work and ask for 
> sponsorhip on this package
> (this isn't an issue, but it wouldn't be the first time that somebody steals 
> a package
> to another person, so I prefer a written sentence where permission to do it 
> is granted).

The annoying bot that changes ITPs into RFPs after a certain time
without progress is most likely at fault. See the history of #777315.
Anyone is free to take over an RFP, so I don't think explicit consent
from Ross is required for cf-python.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#837650: RFS: cf-python/1.3.1+dfsg.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/01/2016 07:39 PM, Klaus Zimmermann wrote:
> Am 30.09.2016 um 14:46 schrieb Gianfranco Costamagna:
>> So, if you can answer the above points and ping back, I'll be happy to do a 
>> review and maybe an upload.
>
> Thanks, that would be great!

Regarding package review, please also build the module for Python 3 per
the Python Policy:

 https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/

Since the package uses pybuild, supporting Python 3 in addition is trivial.

>> BTW you should be member of the Team, and create a repo there if you want to 
>> maintain it
>> under that umbrella [1].
>
> I am already a member and the repository is available under the team
> facilities, i.e. the MR thing with ./checkout cf-python should work.
> In fact I already received a number of comments, particularly from
> bignose and mapreri, that improved the quality of the package (I hope),
> and of the software itself, since some of the necessary patches have
> already moved upstream.
> 
> If it's preferable to keep the package in the GIS team, I will also be
> happy to do that. I am inexperienced in Debian politics and submit to
> your better judgment.

As long as cf-python is properly maintained within the Python Modules
team I'm happy to see it there. The Debian GIS team is low on manpower,
so all packages taken care of by someone other than me is very welcome.
Many of the netcdf reverse dependencies are maintained outside of the
Debian GIS team, so having cf-python maintained elsewhere is in line
with that.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#764831: RFS: geolinks/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/11/2014 04:41 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>  * Package name: geolinks
>Version : 0.0.1-1

The package doesn't have Vcs-* URLs in debian/control, and the git
repository doesn't seem to exist yet under pkg-grass on Alioth.

Can you create the repository on Alioth and push your changes?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54394b8b.5070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764831: RFS: geolinks/0.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/11/2014 05:23 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10/11/2014 04:41 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>>  * Package name: geolinks
>>Version : 0.0.1-1
> 
> The package doesn't have Vcs-* URLs in debian/control, and the git
> repository doesn't seem to exist yet under pkg-grass on Alioth.
> 
> Can you create the repository on Alioth and push your changes?

The git repo was there, so I've push a change to add the Vcs-* URLs.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54394d63.7060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766508: Libjpeg trouble in jmapviewer

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/23/2014 08:20 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> unfortunately there is some conflict in the Build-Depends:
> 
> 
> 0 packages upgraded, 132 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 62.8 MB/92.4 MB of archives. After unpacking 210 MB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is to be installed.
>  libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-10 is to be 
> installed.
> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
> The following NEW packages will be installed:

This is caused by the build-dependency on default-jdk which needed an
update for the jpeg-turbo transition. It was earlier today reported on
debian-release in the "gettext is BD-Uninstallable" thread:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2014/10/msg00445.html

It should be fixed with the latest openjdk-7 upload, but it hasn't hit
the mirrors yet.

> Kind regards
> 
>  Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54494dc5.3090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/23/2014 09:26 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Bas,
> 
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 09:10:43PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> [no love for enigmail today]
> 
> try mutt ;-)

Should be fixed with manual configuration now.

> switched to public discussion anyway.
>  
> For very strange reasons I get
> 
> 0 packages upgraded, 228 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 37.7 MB/115 MB of archives. After unpacking 491 MB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: libgdal-dev (>= 1.11.0-1~) but 
> 1.10.1+dfsg-8+b3 is to be installed.
> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> 
> 
> and yes, I have experimental sources.list enabled in my pbuilder
> environment and updated cowbuilder.  I vaguely remember that we had such
> a case before but I forgot how we solved this.

It looks like your experimental branch is outdated, gdal-grass 1.11.1
build depends on libgdal-dev (>= 1.11.1-1~).

Pulling the experimental branch should suffice to fix this specific issue:

 git fetch origin
 git checkout experimental
 git pull

Unfortunately this packages also suffers from the libjpeg62-turbo unmet
build dependency, so it cannot be built at the moment.

> Thanks for the preparation
> 
>  Andreas.

Thanks for your all your sponsorship efforts.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5449610f.7040...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/23/2014 10:22 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:11:59PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>
>> It looks like your experimental branch is outdated, gdal-grass 1.11.1
>> build depends on libgdal-dev (>= 1.11.1-1~).
>>
>> Pulling the experimental branch should suffice to fix this specific issue:
>>
>>  git fetch origin
>>  git checkout experimental
>>  git pull
> 
> I did so:
> 
> $ git log
> commit 4b4b0f7a63c8d35f86489e9ed515372dc35ef650
> Author: Bas Couwenberg 
> Date:   Sun Oct 12 16:17:07 2014 +0200
> 
> Set distribution to experimental.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> Unfortunately this packages also suffers from the libjpeg62-turbo unmet
>> build dependency, so it cannot be built at the moment.
> 
> ... so we can keep on sorting out since the problem seems to remain.
> 
> 0 packages upgraded, 228 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 36.9 MB/115 MB of archives. After unpacking 491 MB will be used.
> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: libgdal-dev (>= 1.11.1-1~) but 
> 1.10.1+dfsg-8+b3 is to be installed.
> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> 
> 
> I even fetched a fresh clone via gbp-clone and did the steps you
> suggested above. :-(

The git repo looks good, and the version in the unmet Depends too.

I cannot reproduce this problem with my sid+experimental chroot which is
setup like yours as described in:

http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-September/021973.html

Interestingly here apt reports 229 newly installed, yours one less. I've
attached my build log for comparison.

>> Thanks for your all your sponsorship efforts.
> 
> I admit I'm waiting for the time when three or four of you new activists
> in Debian GIS will become DM.  I also tried to encourage Ross and Johan
> to apply.  You all do pretty good work and it is time to gain the
> official status.

I just pinged my AM again to see if we can get moving again.

> Kind regards
> 
>Andreas.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



libgdal-grass_1.11.1-1~exp1_amd64.build.gz
Description: application/gzip

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/23/2014 11:36 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 10/23/2014 10:22 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:11:59PM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> Unfortunately this packages also suffers from the libjpeg62-turbo unmet
>>> build dependency, so it cannot be built at the moment.
>>
>> ... so we can keep on sorting out since the problem seems to remain.
>>
>> 0 packages upgraded, 228 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 36.9 MB/115 MB of archives. After unpacking 491 MB will be used.
>> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>>  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy : Depends: libgdal-dev (>= 1.11.1-1~) but 
>> 1.10.1+dfsg-8+b3 is to be installed.
>> Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...
>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>>
>>
>> I even fetched a fresh clone via gbp-clone and did the steps you
>> suggested above. :-(
> 
> The git repo looks good, and the version in the unmet Depends too.
> 
> I cannot reproduce this problem with my sid+experimental chroot which is
> setup like yours as described in:
> 
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-September/021973.html
> 
> Interestingly here apt reports 229 newly installed, yours one less. I've
> attached my build log for comparison.

Did you find out what the missing package on your build was?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/544a18bf.8090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766662: RFS: josm-plugins/0.0.svn30763+ds1-1 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/24/2014 06:54 PM, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>   * Bump JOSM dependency to 7643.
> (closes: #764176)

JOSM 7643 has hit the mirrors, so josm-plugins can be built now.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/544acf70.9020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/24/2014 11:03 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> -Need to get 35.1 MB/116 MB of archives. After unpacking 494 MB will be used.
> -The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> - libjpeg62-turbo : Conflicts: libjpeg62 but 1:1.3.1-8 is to be installed.
> - libjpeg62 : Depends: libjpeg62-turbo (= 1:1.3.1-8) but 1:1.3.1-10 is to be 
> installed.
> -Unable to resolve dependencies!  Giving up...

This seems to be caused by gdal 1.11.1 in experimental not having been
rebuilt for the jpeg-turbo transition.

I've just filed a binnmu bug to have it rebuilt (#766694).

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/544ad1d1.1030...@xs4all.nl

Bug#766662: RFS: josm-plugins/0.0.svn30763+ds1-1 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 10/25/2014 12:38 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Bas,
> 
> thanks for the hint.
> 
> Do you know any method to get pinged about such updates?

Unfortunately I don't, I just periodically check the version in latest
the Packages file on the mirror.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/544adaa9.3020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#767763: RFS: ossim/1.8.16-3 [RC]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi Tobias,

On 11/02/2014 08:26 PM, Tobias Frost wrote:
> I will upload this once build is complete, thanks for providing the
> fix.

Thanks for sponsoring the upload, I've removed the entry from the
Sponsoring of Blends wiki.

> For the long evenings during freeze: (Sorry for the long list, but
> the package takes ages to build and therefore I looked closer to
> kill time)
> 
> maybe you* want to update the package a little, for example
> d/copyright to dep5 format, or the patch could have a dep3-header
> and (if applicable) forwared to upstream, d/rules could have use of
> a get-orig-source as there is no watchfile and according to
> README.source its taken from svn. IMHO the upstream version should
> also reflect that, like ossis-+svn, what do
> you think?) There are also tons of trailing whitespaces in
> d/control, libossim-dev.install has a duplicate line, and the
> library itself is not made with multiarch-support (which is a
> release goal since long)
> 
> But during the freeze, thats only something for to be prepared for 
> experimental...
> 
> Thanks for fixing this RC-bug!
> 
> *or your team

Because this revision only contains the targeted fix for the RC bug, I
didn't fix the copyright, patches, and other issues you reported.

Post release I'll update the package more thoroughly unless someone
beats me to it.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=C3bf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/545686ff.1010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#764951: RFS: libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 10/25/2014 09:58 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 12:25:21AM +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> I've just filed a binnmu bug to have it rebuilt (#766694).
> 
> As usual ping me once I should retry the build (even if stuff in
> experimental should not be that urgent). 

While the binnmu by the Release Team was sufficient to build
libgdal-grass, the recent upload of gdal/1.11.1+dfsg-1~exp2 is even
better due to the updated symbols.

Can you try libgdal-grass/1.11.1-1~exp1 once more now that the buildds
are done with gdal?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/545e5018.3010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#769604: RFS: pktools/2.5.4-1~exp1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Francesco,

Can you sponsor the upload of pktools? Andreas is unavailable until
December 5th.

Kind Regards,

Bas

On 11/14/2014 11:44 PM, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear mentors,
> 
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pktools"
> 
>  Package name: pktools
>  Version : 2.5.4-1~exp1
>  Upstream Author : Pieter Kempeneers 
>  URL : http://pktools.nongnu.org/
>  License : GPL-3.0+
>  Section : science
> 
> It builds those binary packages:
> 
>  pktools  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing
>  pktools-dev  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> development files
>  libalgorithms1   - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> libalgorithms
>  libbase1 - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> libbase
>  libfileclasses1  - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> libfileClasses
>  libimageclasses1 - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> libimageClasses
>  liblasclasses1   - GDAL add-on tools to perform useful raster processing - 
> liblasClasses
> 
> To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
> URL:
> 
> http://mentors.debian.net/package/pktools
> 
> 
> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
> 
>   dget -x 
> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pktools/pktools_2.5.4-1~exp1.dsc
> 
> More information about pktools can be obtained from 
> http://pktools.nongnu.org/.
> 
> Changes since the last upload:
> 
>   * New upstream release.
>   * Add myself to Uploaders.
>   * Drop fann-va_list.patch, applied upstream.
>   * Update copyright file, add autotools files.
>   * Split binaries and libraries into separate packages.
>   * Override dh_install to list missing files.
>   * Update symbols for amd64.
>   * Add upstream metadata.
>   * Include config.h & pktools.pc in pktools-dev.
>   * Remove .la files before install.
>   * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.6, changes: symbols.
> 
> 
> Regards,
>  Bas Couwenberg
> 
> ___
> Pkg-grass-devel mailing list
> pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
> 


-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5466987d.6020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#770521: RFS: rasterio/0.15.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 11/22/2014 12:40 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> Feel free to review and/or sponsor.
> In case you wonder, I have disabled the python3 package because there
> are a lot of problems when using LANG=C . I may add support later if
> python3-click has a solution.

Your package looks good in general, I have only two minor improvements
to suggest.


You may want to specify the supported Python version in the control file
in the X-Python-Version field.

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-specifying_versions


Because uscan uses the tags on Github, it's recommended to mangle the
filename to not download 'v.tar.gz' like it does now:

-- Successfully downloaded updated package 0.15.1.tar.gz
-- Successfully symlinked ../0.15.1.tar.gz to
../rasterio_0.15.1.orig.tar.gz.

I suggest to use the attached watch file, which results in:

-- Successfully downloaded updated package rasterio-0.15.1.tar.gz
-- Successfully symlinked ../rasterio-0.15.1.tar.gz to
../rasterio_0.15.1.orig.tar.gz.


Other than the above it looks like a pretty straight forward Python
package. I suggest you email Francesco directly to ask for sponsorship
because Andreas is currently unavailable.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
version=3
opts="dversionmangle=s/\+(debian|dfsg|ds|deb)\d*$//,\
uversionmangle=s/_/./g;s/(\d)[_\.\-\+]?((RC|rc|pre|dev|beta|alpha|b|a)[\-\.]?\d*)$/$1~$2/,\
filenamemangle=s/(?:.*?)?v?(\d[\d\.]*)\.tar\.gz/rasterio-$1.tar.gz/" \
https://github.com/mapbox/rasterio/releases \
(?:.*/)*(?:rel|v|rasterio|)[\-\_]?(\d[\d\-\.]+)\.(?:tgz|tbz|txz|(?:tar\.(?:gz|bz2|xz)))

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 12/09/2014 09:03 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> qgis(master) $ git branch
> * master

This is correct. For qgis, the packaging targeting experimental lives on
the master branch.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5486b015.6000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

Are you able to build the package using the master branch?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54889d3e.6070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#772614: Fail to see experimental branch

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Andreas,

On 12/10/2014 10:19 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I had some real life things to do and bad bandwidth.

That's perfectly understandable, I was worried there might be another
problem with the build.

> I'll do the build over night and try to upload tomorrow morning.

Take your time, there is no hurry. It will take a while to pass through
NEW anyway.

Thanks for your continued effort sponsoring Debian GIS (and other
Blends) packages!

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5488b9ea.2080...@xs4all.nl

Bug#773505: RFS: python-descartes/1.0.1-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Do you intent to add this RFS to SoB wiki page?

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianPureBlends/SoB

Both python-descartes and python-geopandas were added to the Debian GIS
Blend.

http://blends.debian.org/gis/tasks/workstation#python-descartes
http://blends.debian.org/gis/tasks/workstation#python-geopandas

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54940fa7.5020...@xs4all.nl

Bug#774512: RFS: python-osmapi/0.5.0-1~exp1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/04/2015 03:55 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> Is there a specific reason you are targeting experimental and not unstable?

Mostly because it's not targeted for migration to jessie.

> Can this package be used by Osgeo live or is there a reason not to do
> so (Angelos recently packaged version 0.4.1)?

This package can be used by OSGeo Live (and UbuntuGIS, or even Ubuntu
itself). Although I was not aware of Angelos' work a package for osmapi,
so I've not merged any changes. I'll have have a look at that.

@Angelos, would you like to co-maintain this package in Debian too?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54a95644.8050...@xs4all.nl

Bug#774512: RFS: python-osmapi/0.5.0-1~exp1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/05/2015 09:57 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> On 01/04/2015 05:03 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 01/04/2015 03:55 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>>> Can this package be used by Osgeo live or is there a reason not to do
>>> so (Angelos recently packaged version 0.4.1)?
>> This package can be used by OSGeo Live (and UbuntuGIS, or even Ubuntu
>> itself). Although I was not aware of Angelos' work a package for osmapi,
>> so I've not merged any changes. I'll have have a look at that.
>>
>> @Angelos, would you like to co-maintain this package in Debian too?
> I have recently created a 0.4.1 package to avoid pip usage during the
> OSGeoLive build process :)
> Sorry I missed your 0.5 package, I would be happy to help.

Cool, I'll add you to the Uploaders then so the package will show up on
your Packages overview too.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54aafc5e.2090...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Nico,

First of all thanks for your work on NetCDF!

> The package I'm looking at is netCDF [1] which – apart from the
> library and headers – installs the file
> ```
> $ cat /usr/share/doc-base/netCDF

Interestingly there is no doc-base file in the souce package. Do you have
local changes not yet available in the git repository?

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git

> Document: netCDF
> Title: NetCDF Manual
> Author: Russ Rew, Glenn Davis, Steve Emmerson, Harvey Davies, Ed
> Hartnett, Dennis Heimbigner, Ward Fisher
> Abstract: This manual describes what netCDF is, and how it can be used.
> Section: File Management
>
> Format: HTML
> Index: /usr/share/doc/netCDF/index.html
> Files: /usr/share/doc/netCDF/*.html
> ```
> and of course a bunch of files in
> ```
> $ ls /usr/share/doc/netCDF/*
> [...]
> ```
> Up until now, I've always put all files of `/usr/share/doc/netCDF/*`
> into libnetcdf-doc, and the file `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF` into the
> libnetcdf-dev package. With this, however, I'm getting

The doc-base file should be in the same package as the documention it
references, moving the doc-base file to libnetcdf-doc should be the right
way forward.

> ```
> $ install-docs --verbose --check /usr/share/doc-base/netCDF
> Warning in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 1: invalid value of
> `Document' field.
> Warning in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 9: file
> `/usr/share/doc/netCDF/index.html' does not exist.
> Error in `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF', line 9: all `Format' sections
> are invalid.
> ```
> The second warning I understand, but I'm not sure how to best fix it.
> Move `/usr/share/doc-base/netCDF` into the doc package?
> The first warning and the error I don't understand.
>
> Ideas, anyone?

I wanted to reproduce your problem, but was unable because the source
package in git is different from the source you're working with.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/dc1865af115c87de23ff214a21d330eb.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> I see the file
> ```
> libnetcdf-dev.doc-base
> ```
> in the debian/ folder [1]. I suppose renaming that to
> ```
> netcdf-doc.doc-base
> ```
> will do the trick. Is that your intention, too?

Yes. Although the warnings may need to be fixed with additional changes to
the file.

The Document field produces a warning because it doesn't conform to the
specification (see /usr/share/doc/doc-base/doc-base.txt.gz):

"
 Legal characters for the document ID are lower case letters (a-z),
 digits (0-9), plus (+) or minus (-) signs, and dots (.) (the same
 characters allowed in package names).1
"

Using the (source) package name instead should fix the warning for the
Document field.

The paths in to the documentation files also need to be corrected to use
/usr/share/doc/netcdf-doc/ instead of /usr/share/doc/netCDF/.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/19806aa4c1748e9139818b2f86d1154f.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Nico,

On 01/15/2015 09:52 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
> I'd be great if you could have a look at the branch `split-c-f-cxx` on
> alioth to see if there are any obvious shortcomings. If we can fix
> those, we should be finally able to upgrade from the several years old
> 4.1.3.

I only find netCDF 4.3.3-rc3 in the upstream branch, but no branch into
which it's merged.

The split-c-f-cxx branch still lists 4.3.2 in the changelog. 4.3.3-rc3
is also missing from the pristine-tar branch, which makes me suspect
that you still have local changes not pushed to Alioth?

`git push --all && git push --tags` should push all local branches and
tags back to Alioth.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54b8051e.6030...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/15/2015 07:57 PM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
>> that you still have local changes not pushed to Alioth?
> 
> Right; fixed now.

Thanks for the push!

Can you also update the pristine-tar branch with your upstream tarballs
as imported into the upstream branch?

I've push some changes on the split-c-f-cxx branch. First I updated the
changelog for 4.3.3-rc3, I also updated the watch file to use GitHub
releases, and added a gbp.conf to have git-buildpackage use pristine-tar
by default. Once the split-c-f-cxx branch is merged back into master the
debian-branch in gbp.conf needs to be updated to reflect this.

My build of the package produced a lot of lintian issues that need to be
addressed. You can see the full list with:
`lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E `.

You should also add yourself to Uploaders field in the control file. The
control can also do with a restructuring by cme. See:

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/policy.html#cme

I'm willing to help you with some of these issues, but I'm currently
also working on updating the grass package for the 7.0 pre-releases. So
I'd need to divide my attention a bit more to include netcdf too.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54b81c0d.6090...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/16/2015 10:20 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
>> I've push some changes on the split-c-f-cxx branch.
> 
> I've created upstream pull requests for the patches you added. Let's
> see if they make it in for the 4.3.3 release.

I'm still working on the changes to support Policy 3.9.4 and up, and
have just pushed last nights work. It includes some more patches that
should be forwarded upstream.

>> http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/policy.html#cme
> 
> Great tip! I hadn't known about this one. This'll help me out on a
> number of other projects, too. Thanks!
> 
> I fixed all errors and warnings in debian/control, except
> ```
> Warning in 'source Vcs-Browser' value
> 'http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git': URL to debian
> system is not the recommended one
> ```
> No idea what is recommended instead. Can you enlighten me?

The current values are correct (although could use HTTPS), but lintian
on Ubuntu uses a different vendor profile.

When running lintian on Ubuntu on a package for Debian, also use the
option `--profile debian`.

>> `lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E `.
> 
> Will look at those later.

The initial list has shrunk significantly with my changes from last
night. There isn't much left anymore.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54b8f9d5.1030...@xs4all.nl

Re: doc-base errors, documentation installation

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 01/16/2015 10:49 AM, Nico Schlömer wrote:
>>> `lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E `.
> 
> This doesn't show anything serious for me:
> ```
> $ lintian -I --show-overrides --pedantic -E
> netcdf_4.3.3~20150116-utopic2_source.changes
> E: netcdf changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file utopic
> P: netcdf source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
> ```
> What do you get?

I got a whole lot more initially, see the attached list.

With last nights changes most of the issues are fixed now, but I'm not
done yet.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

I: netcdf source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field "section" in 
package netcdf-bin
I: netcdf source: vcs-field-not-canonical 
git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-grass/netcdf.git 
git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-grass/netcdf.git
I: netcdf source: vcs-field-not-canonical 
http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-grass/netcdf.git 
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/netcdf.git
W: netcdf source: changelog-should-mention-nmu
W: netcdf source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1:4.3.3~rc3-1
I: netcdf source: quilt-patch-missing-description link-private.patch
P: netcdf source: no-dep5-copyright
W: netcdf source: ancient-standards-version 3.9.4 (current is 3.9.6)
P: netcdf source: debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/nccopy
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/nccopy
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncdump
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncdump
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncgen
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncgen
W: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-relro usr/bin/ncgen3
I: netcdf-bin: hardening-no-fortify-functions usr/bin/ncgen3
P: netcdf-bin: no-upstream-changelog
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:19
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:20
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:21
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz:22
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/nccopy.1.gz 12 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:17
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:42
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz:124
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncdump.1.gz 10 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:9
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:16
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:17
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:56
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz:63
I: netcdf-bin: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz absense 
absence
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen.1.gz 33 more 
occurrences not shown
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:10
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:11
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:12
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:13
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:14
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:15
I: netcdf-bin: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man1/ncgen3.1.gz:

Bug#775693: RFS: python-cligj/0.1.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Sorry for not doing this sooner, but I have reviewed the package now.
Some comments follow.

The copyright file only documents the upstream copyright, documenting
the copyright & license for debian/* is a good idea unless you want to
assign the copyright to MapBox.

There seems to be an issue with the setup.py and Python 3.2, the package
fails to build because the clean target fails before even starting the
build:

running clean
removing
'/home/bas/git/pkg-grass/python-cligj/.pybuild/pythonX.Y_2.6/build' (and
everything under it)
'build/bdist.linux-x86_64' does not exist -- can't clean it
'build/scripts-2.6' does not exist -- can't clean it
I: pybuild base:170: python3.2 setup.py clean
  File "setup.py", line 12
description=u"Click params for GeoJSON CLI",
  ^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
E: pybuild pybuild:256: clean: plugin distutils failed with: exit
code=1: python3.2 setup.py clean
dh_auto_clean: pybuild --clean -i python{version} -p 3.2 --dir .
returned exit code 13
make: *** [clean] Error 13
debuild: fatal error at line 1358:
couldn't exec fakeroot debian/rules:
gbp:error: Couldn't run 'debuild -d clean': debuild -d clean returned 2

This is on one of my wheezy systems, the package builds fine with Python
3.4 on sid.

lintian reports a duplicate short description. Because the short
description is already 60 characters long this doesn't leave much room
to add something like "Python 3 module for ...". Appending "for Python
V" would fall within 80 characters, although the line length including
field name exceeds it.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54beb41b.5060...@xs4all.nl

Bug#777146: RFS: fiona/1.5.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on fiona and related packages!

Some comments regarding the package based on my review.

lintian reported two issues with the copyright file, both having the
same cause:

I: fiona source: wildcard-matches-nothing-in-dep5-copyright
docs/data/tests/data/* (paragraph at line 13)
I: fiona source: unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright paragraph at
line 13

Upstream moved the data in 1.5.0, which requires changing
Files: docs/data/tests/data/* to Files: tests/data/*

Have you configured the lintian hook in pbuilder, and have you enabled
the lower severity tags as documented in the Debian GIS Policy?

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-pbuilder-hooks

This should catch similar issues in the future.


You've used the git format-patch format for the patches, which is not a
problem because DEP3 explicitly supports its field names as an
alternative, but I found it a bit confusing. I initially thought they
were patches cherry-picked from the upstream git repo, but they were
authored by you for Debian specific customizations. I tend to use git
format-patch for patches cherry-picked from upstream, and plain quilt
patches for Debian specific changes, because I like the distinction.
This not something you have to adopt, but you may want to consider it.

http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/

We should investigate the git patch helpers to standardize a recommended
practice for patches in the Debian GIS team, so we can benefit from the
git workflow while still having plain quilt patches in the resulting
source package. This is a little off topic for your RFS, but it's where
my train of thought lead me, so I'll leave it at this.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54d3aaea.8020...@debian.org

Bug#777146: RFS: fiona/1.5.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 06:39 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> [...] I'll leave it at this.

Famous last words. There is just one more thing.

The doc-base control file has an unusual suffix:
.docbase instead of .doc-base.

It also uses an unusual Document ID: fiona.docbase, using the (source)
package name is more common for Document IDs.

The doc-base control file references the HTML documentation included in
the fiona-doc package, but the control file is used for the fiona package.

For references see:

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#doc-base
http://manpages.debian.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=dh_installdocs

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54d3b608.2060...@debian.org

Bug#777146: Fiona does not build

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 10:22 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I: pybuild base:170: python3.4 setup.py clean 
> WARNING:root:Failed to get options via gdal-config: [Errno 2] No such file or 
> directory: 'gdal-config'
> CRITICAL:root:Cython.Build.cythonize not found. Cython is required to build 
> from a repo.
> E: pybuild pybuild:256: clean: plugin distutils failed with: exit code=1: 
> python3.4 setup.py clean 

Looks like you don't have all build dependencies installed locally
(libgdal-dev includes gdal-config).

My builds on sid succeeded without issues.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54d3e408.9000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#777146: Fiona does not build

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/05/2015 10:33 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> It works for me in unstable. You will need a recent update of unstable
> as fiona relies on python-cligj which was only added yesterday.

You don't need to have python-cligj installed locally to build the
package with pbuilder, you do need cython and libgdal-dev.

> Also fiona requires a recent version of Cython, so building under
> jessie is not possible without further tweaking.

jessie & sid have the same cython version, so it should work. The wheezy
version is not sufficient though.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/E88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54d3e5d6.6010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#778488: RFS: python-geojson/1.0.9-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for fixing the issues with the initial upload.

On 02/15/2015 08:26 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>  Package name: python-geojson
>  Version : 1.0.9-1

> Changes since the last upload:
> 
>   * Initial upload (closes: #690833)
> 
> [Note] that this package was previously uploaded but rejected in new
> because it contained some cruft (leftovers of a wrong build) in
> debian.
> This should  now be fixed. I also improved testing and corrected the homepage.

Please increment the Debian revision and add the changes made after the
REJECT to the changelog.

Documenting the changes is important.

See also: https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/07/msg00686.html

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54e10806.9000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#778488: RFS: python-geojson/1.0.9-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 02/15/2015 08:26 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-geojson"

I'm partially done with the review, but I have to leave for work now.
I'll continue tonight after I get back.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54e1a9c8.60...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on the bluebird packaging!

On 03/03/2015 09:01 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
>   * Fix duplicate package descriptions

You may want to tweak these a bit to be more in line with other node-*
and libjs-* packages.

See for example node-q:

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-q.git/tree/debian/control

And also what npm2deb generates.

I pushed a change with my suggested improvement.

>   * Remove async.js and use packaged version instead

This looks a lintian false positive, the async.js in bluebird is quite
different from the node-async one.

Compare:

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-async.git/tree/lib/async.js

http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-bluebird.git/tree/src/async.js

I think reverting this change and adding a lintian override instead is a
better idea.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/54f61a85.9070...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 03/04/2015 07:53 AM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> On 03/03/2015 09:33 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> * Remove async.js and use packaged version instead
>> 
>> This looks a lintian false positive, the async.js in bluebird is
>> quite different from the node-async one.
>> 
>> Compare:
>> 
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-async.git/tree/lib/async.js
>>
>>
>> 
http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-bluebird.git/tree/src/async.js
>> 
>> I think reverting this change and adding a lintian override
>> instead is a better idea.
> 
> Whoops - I should of checked that. I was in a hurry to finish -
> that is never a good thing. I have a few family commitments
> tonight, but after that I will fix.

There is no hurry getting the the openlayers dependency tree packaged,
there is a lot of work to do which will take quite some time and
that's not a problem. Remember: Good things come to those who wait. :-)

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=adMa
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/54f6b015.9000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#779667: RFS: node-bluebird/2.9.13+dfsg-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 03/04/2015 09:58 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> On 03/04/2015 08:11 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>>>>> I think reverting this change and adding a lintian
>>>>>> override instead is a better idea.
> 
> Fixed

Thanks for the fixes. I've pushed some more changes for various things
I encountered.

Did you notice that the upstream build process requires itself?

The tools/build.js script also does some modifications to the source
when it generates the js/main/ code from the source.

If installing the unmodified source is not sufficient, we may need to
find a different solution to replace build.js to bootstrap this package.

I haven't tested this yet.

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=56rf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/54f78b93.6090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781701: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#781701: RFS: node-convert-source-map/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 04/01/2015 08:53 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-convert-source-map"

There are some minor issues that needs to be addressed before the upload
to the archive.


debian/control:

Testsuite: autopkgtest

AFAIK this is not an official header yet, it should be XS-Testsuite.


debian/copyright:

It contains an incorrect copyright year, npm2deb tends to get this
wrong. The LICENSE file specifies 2013.


The upstream sources contain an example, you should consider including
it in the package.


Since inline-source-map is not packaged yet, you can't run the tests. If
it get packaged in the future you should consider running the tests
during the build process.


Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/551d80c7.5000...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781763: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#781763: RFS: node-coffeeify/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Also thanks for your work on this package.

This package a few minor issues just like node-convert-source-map (#781701).

The Testsuite header in the control file should be XS-Testsuite.

The copyright year by npm2deb is not reflected in the upstream source,
it doesn't list any so I suggest to drop the year and keep the author.

The upstream sources contain several examples, you should consider
including them in the package.

You may want to consider extending Use_through2.patch to cover all files
that use the through module, there are some tests that require it too.
Since the test dependencies cannot be satisfied in Debian strictly required.

Patching the readme.markdown to replace node executable with nodejs as
it's called in Debian is also something you may want to consider. But
the commands in question also require some of the missing test
dependencies, so it's also not strictly required.

The project name in the upstream metadata uses the node- prefix, but
upstream doesn't. Dropping the prefix is better.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/551d8392.7080...@xs4all.nl

Bug#781763: RFS: node-coffeeify/1.0.0-1 [ITP]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 04/03/2015 05:56 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> Thanks again for another review Bas.
> 
> On 02/04/15 19:59, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> You may want to consider extending Use_through2.patch to cover all files
>> that use the through module, there are some tests that require it too.
>> Since the test dependencies cannot be satisfied in Debian strictly
>> required.
> I have fixed (I hope) all the other issues, but have one question before
> I finish. The package.json file also "requires" through. Should we leave
> this pristine so users know what upstream intended to be used (through),
> or also patch it to show what we used (through2)?

I think the package.json installed by the Debian package should reflect
the dependencies used by the package not npm.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/551eca5e.9010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#784132: RFS: pyshp/1.2.1-2

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

On 05/03/2015 01:21 PM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> * Package name: pyshp
>   Version : 1.2.1-2

Because version 1.2.1+ds-1 was the actual version to be uploaded to the
archive, the packages for version 1.2.1-2 was not automatically removed
from mentors.

Can you remove it to get rid of the TODO list item on the DMD page?

https://udd.debian.org/dmd/?email1=pkg-grass-devel%40lists.alioth.debian.org#todo

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/554e89fe.3000...@xs4all.nl

Re: http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/ not accessible any more

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> It seems it is forbidden to read the web dir directly.  Any reason for
> this and if it is intentional what would be the alternative to fetch
> data about packages in new?

If indexes are forbidden intentionally now, extracting the links from
new.html may be reasonable alternative.

https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
https://ftp-master.debian.org/backports-new.html

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/078240a66aa7b2afe99f3ffa6909dc61.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#786571: RFS: osm-gps-map/1.0.2-3 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Ross,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 05/23/2015 12:21 AM, Ross Gammon wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "osm-gps-map"

I've sponsored the uploaded, but there are a couple of unused
substitution variables in the control file you may want to have a look at.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/555fd18e.7040...@xs4all.nl

Re: Upload new version of a package waiting in NEW

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

>  c) upload immediately.
> i)   use a new version?

Because NEW processing takes such a long time now, I don't wait for FTP
master to review my packages in NEW before working on them again.

When I have a new revision of the package ready I just upload it so that
the latest revision will get into the archive when FTP master finally gets
around to accept the package.

It's not uncommon to have multiple revisions of the same package in NEW,
as you can see in the current state of the NEW queue:

https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/38a802dd06333cb51117568f165a417a.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#788385: RFS: fiona/1.5.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package too.

On 06/10/2015 10:22 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>  Package name: fiona
>  Version : 1.5.1-1

The package cannot be built from git because the upstream & pristine-tar
branches have not been pushed.

Please run `git push --all && git push --tags` to get it all to Alioth.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5578a41c.40...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788385: RFS: fiona/1.5.1-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 06/10/2015 10:54 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 06/10/2015 10:22 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>>  Package name: fiona
>>  Version : 1.5.1-1
> 
> The package cannot be built from git because the upstream & pristine-tar
> branches have not been pushed.
> 
> Please run `git push --all && git push --tags` to get it all to Alioth.

Thanks for the push, I've just sponsored the upload.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/5578a919.6050...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788850: RFS: python-cligj/0.2.0-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 06/15/2015 05:20 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "python-cligj"

I've sponsored the upload, and since it was a straightforward new
upstream release I have not further comments.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/557f178a.3010...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788984: RFS: owslib/0.9.0-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 06/16/2015 09:10 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "owslib"

The copyright for several authors is missing from the debian/copyright
file, among them Luís de Sousa for the newly added wcs111.py for example.

Please add the missing copyright holders. Other than that the package
looks good.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/558093aa.1090...@xs4all.nl

Bug#788986: RFS: geolinks/0.1.0-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package too.

On 06/16/2015 09:18 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "geolinks"

This package also as small copyright issue. Please add a Files section
for debian/* with your copyright unless you want to assign this to upstream.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/55809b23.5000...@xs4all.nl

Re: Pbuilder requests Build-Depends on local machine - why this?

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

> since I'm back from vacation and upgraded my testing system I realised
> that when using pbuilder the Build-Depends of some package seem to be
> required also on the machine that is creating the pbuilder chroot
> (=where you start pdebuild).  I regard this a bug but may be I'm missing
> something so before creating noise I would like to make sure whether its
> just me ...

This is usually because those build dependencies are required to run the
clean target that is execute first outside the chroot.

Kind Regards,

Bas


-- 
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/4d2e562e87d562d740e50ea359e135e7.squir...@webmail.xs4all.nl

Bug#792701: RFS: saga/2.2.0+dfsg-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Johan,

Thanks for your work on this package.

I noticed some updates to the copyright file were required to include
the changes in the new upstream release, I took the liberty to commit
those changes.

Unfortunately I cannot build the package because the pristine-tar branch
hasn't been updated for saga_2.2.0+dfsg.orig.tar.xz. Maybe you forgot to
push the branch?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/55aa8936.40...@xs4all.nl

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/18/2015 10:46 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 07/18/2015 10:35 PM, Christopher Baines wrote:
>> The package is maintained in a git repository that can be found 
>> here:
>> 
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/osrm.git/
> 
> You still need to finalize the package by setting the
> distribution:
> 
> dch -r -D unstable git commit -m "Set distribution to unstable."
> -a
> 
> See also:
> 
> http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-release-upload

PS,
> 
be sure to also read the relevant section from the Policy:

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgchangelog

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 07/18/2015 10:35 PM, Christopher Baines wrote:
> The package is maintained in a git repository that can be found
> here:
> 
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/osrm.git/

You still need to finalize the package by setting the distribution:

 dch -r -D unstable
 git commit -m "Set distribution to unstable." -a

See also:

http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/policy/packaging.html#git-release-upload

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#792822: RFS: osrm/4.6.1-1 [uploaded]

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 07/19/2015 12:01 AM, Christopher Baines wrote:
> On 18/07/15 22:42, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> Try to not use an annotated tag next time to keep all the changes
>> on the branch.
> 
> Regarding the debian tag, I just used gbp buildpackage --git-tag
> to generate it. Is your suggestion just to make a lightweight tag?

Because you cannot upload the package yourself, it's better to only
set the distribution in the changelog (using `dch -r`) and leave the
tagging (with `debcommit -ar`) for after the upload. There may be more
changes need before the upload, so this prevent the need to modify the
tag (which is especially problematic for signed tags).

Kind Regards,

Bas

- -- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=y1E7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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/55aad15a.10...@xs4all.nl

Bug#794019: RFS: sfcgal/1.1.0

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

Hi Sven,

Thanks for your work on this package.

On 29-07-15 22:48, Sven Geggus wrote:
> * Package name: sfcgal
>   Version : 1.1.0-2~exp1

It looks like someone may have sponsored the upload already, I got a
bunch of "553 Could not create file" messages from dput:

Good signature on ../sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc.
Uploading to ftp-master (via ftp to ftp.upload.debian.org):
  Uploading sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc: 553 Could not create file.
Leaving existing sfcgal_1.1.0-2~exp1.dsc on the server and continuing
NOTE: This existing file may have been previously uploaded partially.
   For official Debian upload queues, the dcut(1) utility can be
   used to remove this file, and after an acknowledgement mail is
   received in response to dcut, the upload can be re-initiated.

Did you perhaps upload to ftp-master instead of mentors?

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/55b9452a.3030...@xs4all.nl

Bug#794019: RFS: sfcgal/1.1.0

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 29-07-15 23:33, Sven Geggus wrote:
> Sebastiaan Couwenberg schrieb am Mittwoch, den 29. Juli um 23:27 Uhr:
> 
>> Did you perhaps upload to ftp-master instead of mentors?
> 
> Unfortunately I already closed the terminal where I did the upload, but I do 
> definitely have mentors.debian.net in my .dput.cf

Unless you've made mentors the default dput target, you need to specify
it explicitly:

 dput mentors 

> Would I be even able to upload to ftp-master? My gpg key should be available 
> on
> mentors.debian.net only.

The actual file transfer should work, but because your signature is not
in the keyring the upload will be rejected.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/55b94bd4.90...@xs4all.nl

Re: Pbuilder broken due to aptitude: symbol lookup error

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 05-08-15 21:32, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Setting up pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (0.invalid.0) ...
> aptitude: symbol lookup error: aptitude: undefined symbol: 
> _ZN7cwidget7widgets5pager8set_textERKSsPKc
> [...]
> This is for a package that only Build-Depends debhelper.  Other packages
> with more Build-Dependencies are failing to install any of them.
> 
> Any hint?

aptitude needs a rebuild for the cwidget transition:

https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-cwidget.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2015/08/msg00120.html

In the mean time you can use the classic resolver by setting it in
.pbuilderrc:

PBUILDERSATISFYDEPENDSCMD="/usr/lib/pbuilder/pbuilder-satisfydepends-classic"

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1


-- 
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/55c267d9.7090...@xs4all.nl

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 19-08-15 13:38, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> Hello Forum:
> 
> I recently got the right to access to some Debian porter machines.
> Now I want to connect to them via SSH. I guess that some SSH key
> must be deposited somewhere: any idea ?

You can change your SSH key via the LDAP mail gateway:

"
 Part of the replicated dataset is a virtual .ssh/authorized_keys file
 for each user. The change address is the simplest way to set the RSA
 key(s) you intend to use. Simply place a key on a line by itself, the
 full SSH key format specification is supported, see sshd(8). Probably
 the most common way to use this function will be

  cat .ssh/id_rsa.pub | gpg --clearsign | mail chan...@db.debian.org

 which will set the authentication key to the identity you are using.
 Multiple keys per user are supported, but they must all be sent at
 once. Keys can be exported to a subset of machines by prepending
 allowed_hosts=$fqdn,$fqdn2 to the specific key. The allowed machines
 must only be separated by a comma. Example:

  allowed_hosts=ravel.debian.org,gluck.debian.org ssh-rsa
B3Nz..mOX/JQ== user@machine
 ssh-rsa B3Nz..uD0khQ== user@machine
"

https://db.debian.org/doc-mail.html

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 19-08-15 23:30, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> On 19/08/15 14:02, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 19-08-15 13:38, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
>>> I recently got the right to access to some Debian porter machines.
>>> Now I want to connect to them via SSH. I guess that some SSH key
>>> must be deposited somewhere: any idea ?
>>
>> You can change your SSH key via the LDAP mail gateway:
>>
>> [...]
>> https://db.debian.org/doc-mail.html
> 
> So I went there and I done: my feed backs from the mail gateway are errors:
> is this service also meant for non-DD contributors ?

It should be, I added my SSH key via a mail to changes@ back when I
first got a guest account and I wasn't a DM nor DD yet.

Make sure the message to changes@ is signed with the key you used to
request the guest account and signed the DMUP with.

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

Re: porter machine: ssh connection: SSH pub keys

[Sebastiaan Couwenberg]

On 20-08-15 00:51, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> I keep getting the error message:
> 
> Error: Unable to check the signature or the signature was invalid:
> ==> : UDFormatError: Signing key 
> (80BFC3820C4B26E3, Jerome) has expired
> 
> But my key has not expireed. On the other hand, it was renewed a few month 
> ago.
> 
> https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x80BFC3820C4B26E3

I suspect you didn't push your updated key to the Debian keyserver.

Make sure to send it to keyring.debian.org:

 gpg --keyserver keyring.debian.org --send-keys 

See also: https://www.debian.org/events/keysigning

Kind Regards,

Bas

-- 
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1