Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
On 12/15/2013 06:32 AM, Dave Land wrote: Not sure what's up at debian-ports.org, but I've been trying to debootstrap 2 different HPPA machines for the last couple days and have been getting a variety of errors (size mismatches, files not found when they were there 20 minutes before, etc. etc.) Somebody may want to look into this before it gets out of hand. Thanks! :) I maybe should add some more background here, and maybe someone here on the list might have an idea on how to proceed. Background is, that Dave and myself have binmnu-uploaded the necessary packages for hppa so that debootstrap worked. Then we proceeded with the necessary packages for sbuild and schroot, so that I now have a buildd installed which should be able to start building packages. I haven't turned it on yet though for the reasons which I explain in a few seconds... In the meantime we have of course uploaded a few more packages which now currently break debootstrap. This is fixable manually, but I instead of uploading packages manually now, I would prefer to get the buildd going instead... So, Dave Land, please wait a little bit... Now to the reasons why I didn't turned on the buildd yet: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed for example that reprepro usually doesn't accept packages of the same version which doesn't seem to be the case on debian-ports. So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. A trivial example: On machine buildd.debian-ports.org I run: deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa * hello/hppa | hello: | Package : hello | Version : 2.8-4 | State : Needs-Build | Section : devel | Priority: source | Previous-State : | State-Change: 2013-02-18 00:03:36.782007 | CalculatedPri : 52 | component : main | Distribution: sid | Notes : out-of-date | State-Days : 300 | State-Time : 25958430 So, the package hello would need a rebuild according to the wanna-build database, and that would wb probably tell my buildd who then would start building/uploading it. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. Now, Aurelien mentioned last week to me, that this size-mismatch error might be because of the apt-ftparchive cache might have been corrupted for hppa. I'm not 100% sure about that. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get the size-mismatch errors there is lot of manual work to fix it (unless resetting the apt-ftparchive on debian-ports would solve this). Any other ideas? Helge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ad8a73.6040...@gmx.de
Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
Helge Deller dixit: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT When you binNMU packages you add a +b1, +b2, … suffix to their versions. ITYM porter upload? those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed this problem too, when I accidentally built a package I already had uploaded (and totally forgotten about): basically, the new *.deb files are accepted but the Packages file still contains the checksums etc. from the old *.deb file. Only way to fix this is to reupload the old *.changes file, or to do a binNMU proper. Or to build a newer version, ofc… So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. That’s what you have wanna-build for. Basically, stop doing manual uploads without wanna-build locking at least six hours before turning on the first buildd. After that time, when you want/need to build a package manually, lock it in wanna-build: either “take” it for building, or mark as N-F-U. See here for more info on that: • https://wiki.debian.org/M68k/Porting#binNMU_notes • http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2012/12/msg00124.html • http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2013/10/msg00021.html If you have packages that buildds should never build, for example like we had gcc-4.{6,8} for some time, mark them as Not-For-Us; otherwise, just take them for building. deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa This the same as “wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --info hello”. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 Indeed. This is bad, new, another / a different problem, and we didn’t have this on m68k. (Note that uploads usually take a bit until they show up on w-b, hence the need for locking.) So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. Yes, you will definitely run into that problem when you upload hello_2.8-4_hppa again. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. Either… Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? … that (no idea if it’s possible), or make two lists: a list of what is currently in the archive for hppa, and a list of packages in the Needs-Build or BD-Uninstallable¹ state. Then, for every package in the same versions (except +b* sufficēs) in *both* lists, schedule a binNMU (e.g. to get hello_2.8-4+b1_hppa). Do note whether it already got a binNMU suffix: e.g. aclock.app_0.2.3-3+b4 would need to be scheduled for --binNMU=5 to be larger. You might be able to cheat, e.g. take hello for building, then tell it that you uploaded it. But I don’t know why w-b doesn’t register that it’s there in the first place, so a rescan, if possible, should happen first. Hm, only 12 packages here: tg@leda:~$ wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --list=needs-build | less But this has more (9043): tg@leda:~$ wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --list=bd-uninstallable | less ① You need to include BD-Uninstallable because they will happily convert to Needs-Build once you upload e.g. perl. Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get No, get the w-b list consistent first. According to http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-hppa/Packages.bz2 hello is at version 2.8-4 just fine… hmm. So the apt-ftparchive database seems to be correct. This is all quite complicated, so feel free to ask around when we can help you out again, no need for every arch to go through all of this by themselves, figure out best practices again, etc. HTH HAND, //mirabilos -- If Harry Potter gets a splitting headache in his scar when he’s near Tom Riddle (aka Voldemort), does Tom get pain in the arse when Harry is near him? -- me, wondering why it’s not Jerry Potter……… -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pine.bsm.4.64l.1312151335210.21...@herc.mirbsd.org
Re: Bugs #728936, #730789, #731939 are duplicates: no USB input in debian-installer due to missing ohci-pci
Hello Andreas, Am 15.12.2013 01:10, schrieb Andreas Cadhalpun: To clarify this, Manfred, could you please boot the current testing installer in expert mode and after choosing the language and setting the keyboard layout, switch to the console and report us the output of the following command: # lspci -knn | grep -Ei usb|hci If you still have the installer that failed, please do the same for this installer. Best regards, Andreas I do the test with the actual testing: Debian GNU/Linux testing Jessie - Official Snapshot amd64 NETINST * = * Binary-1 20131210-03:47 Origin: Debian Label: Debian Suite: testing Codename: jessie Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 02:47:14 UTC Valid-Until: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 02:47:14 UTC Architectures: amd64 Components: main contrib Description: Debian x.y Testing distribution - Not Released Result: 00:1a.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #2 [8086:1c2d] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ehci-pci 00:1d.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #1 [8086:1c26] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ehci-pci 00:1f.2 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family SATA AHCI Controller [8086:1c02] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ahci 02:00.0 USB controller [0c03]: NEC Corporation uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host Controller [1033:0194] (rev 03) Kernel driver in use: xhci_hcd * === * Binary-1 20130504-14:43 Origin: Debian Label: Debian Suite: stable Version: 7.0.0 Codename: wheezy Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 12:51:10 UTC Architectures: amd64 Components: main contrib Description: Debian 7.0.0 Released 04 May 2013 Result: 00:1a.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #2 [8086:1c2d] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd 00:1d.0 USB controller [0c03]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family USB Enhanced Host Controller #1 [8086:1c26] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd 00:1f.2 SATA controller [0106]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family SATA AHCI Controller [8086:1c02] (rev 05) Kernel driver in use: ahci 02:00.0 USB controller [0c03]: NEC Corporation uPD720200 USB 3.0 Host Controller [1033:0194] (rev 03) Kernel driver in use: xhci_hcd * === * Binary-1 20130708-05:17 Origin: Debian Label: Debian Suite: testing Codename: jessie Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 02:40:44 UTC Valid-Until: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 02:40:44 UTC Architectures: amd64 Components: main contrib Description: Debian x.y Testing distribution - Not Released This last Version Binary-1 20130708-05:17 does not work. I cannot make the test, because the PC ist completely dead after switching to the first dialog with Choose Language. Hope, this helps. Best regards Manfred -- COMPARAT Software-Entwicklungs-GmbH Prießstraße 16 23558 Lübeck Telefon: 0451/479 56 60 Geschf: Manfred Rebentisch AG Lübeck, HRB 3559 Web: http://www.comparat.de Die Cards: https://cards.athesios.de Der Cards-Film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siZaciL6mdg Businessplattform: https://www.athesios.de Lübeck: http://www.luebeck-info.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/COMPARAT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52adc601.6030...@comparat.de
Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
On 12/15/13 3:54 AM, Helge Deller wrote: On 12/15/2013 06:32 AM, Dave Land wrote: Not sure what's up at debian-ports.org, but I've been trying to debootstrap 2 different HPPA machines for the last couple days and have been getting a variety of errors (size mismatches, files not found when they were there 20 minutes before, etc. etc.) Somebody may want to look into this before it gets out of hand. Thanks! :) I maybe should add some more background here, and maybe someone here on the list might have an idea on how to proceed. Background is, that Dave and myself have binmnu-uploaded the necessary packages for hppa so that debootstrap worked. Then we proceeded with the necessary packages for sbuild and schroot, so that I now have a buildd installed which should be able to start building packages. I haven't turned it on yet though for the reasons which I explain in a few seconds... In the meantime we have of course uploaded a few more packages which now currently break debootstrap. This is fixable manually, but I instead of uploading packages manually now, I would prefer to get the buildd going instead... So, Dave Land, please wait a little bit... Now to the reasons why I didn't turned on the buildd yet: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed for example that reprepro usually doesn't accept packages of the same version which doesn't seem to be the case on debian-ports. So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. A trivial example: On machine buildd.debian-ports.org I run: deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa * hello/hppa | hello: | Package : hello | Version : 2.8-4 | State : Needs-Build | Section : devel | Priority: source | Previous-State : | State-Change: 2013-02-18 00:03:36.782007 | CalculatedPri : 52 | component : main | Distribution: sid | Notes : out-of-date | State-Days : 300 | State-Time : 25958430 So, the package hello would need a rebuild according to the wanna-build database, and that would wb probably tell my buildd who then would start building/uploading it. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. Now, Aurelien mentioned last week to me, that this size-mismatch error might be because of the apt-ftparchive cache might have been corrupted for hppa. I'm not 100% sure about that. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get the size-mismatch errors there is lot of manual work to fix it (unless resetting the apt-ftparchive on debian-ports would solve this). Any other ideas? Helge Thanks Helge, I'll just put the A500 on standby for a while until things stabilize a bit. I saw Thorsten Glaser's comments over in the debian-ports list, and although it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, since I don't fully understand how packages get processed at the repository when the buildd server uploads (or somebody manually uploads). It seems odd that debian-ports would accept a package with the same name/version number... unless it's looking at the md5 signature instead of the filename?? Is that even possible? I would think those would be unique for each file uploaded. Might be a solution to rework things where the server would look at the filename *and* the md5 sig to determine if the filename would need to be auto-incremented to the next iteration/update (e.g. hello-2.1.1-1 to hello-2.1.1-2) Just a thought... I'll check back later. :) Dave L. -- -- Dave Land Land Computer Service xmecha...@landcomp.net ICQ: 676030523 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52adda03.6030...@landcomp.net
Re: Bugs #728936, #730789, #731939 are duplicates: no USB input in debian-installer due to missing ohci-pci
Hi Manfred, thanks for providing this information. I think your problem was similar to the current ohci_hcd driver split, only for ehci_hcd, as in linux 3.8 the ehci-pci was introdced and linux 3.9.6-1 migrated to testing on 2013-06-21, where before that it was still 3.2. Apparently this has been fixed in the meantime, as the current installer correctly loads ehci-pci. Best regards, Andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ade120.4000...@googlemail.com
Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
Hi, On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:54:43AM +0100, Helge Deller wrote: On 12/15/2013 06:32 AM, Dave Land wrote: Not sure what's up at debian-ports.org, but I've been trying to debootstrap 2 different HPPA machines for the last couple days and have been getting a variety of errors (size mismatches, files not found when they were there 20 minutes before, etc. etc.) Somebody may want to look into this before it gets out of hand. Thanks! :) I maybe should add some more background here, and maybe someone here on the list might have an idea on how to proceed. Background is, that Dave and myself have binmnu-uploaded the necessary packages for hppa so that debootstrap worked. Then we proceeded with the necessary packages for sbuild and schroot, so that I now have a buildd installed which should be able to start building packages. I haven't turned it on yet though for the reasons which I explain in a few seconds... In the meantime we have of course uploaded a few more packages which now currently break debootstrap. This is fixable manually, but I instead of uploading packages manually now, I would prefer to get the buildd going instead... So, Dave Land, please wait a little bit... Now to the reasons why I didn't turned on the buildd yet: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed for example that reprepro usually doesn't accept packages of the same version which doesn't seem to be the case on debian-ports. This is indeed the case, apt-fptarchive keep the checksums corresponding to first package. That said it hasn't really caused any problem so far. So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. Well if you leave the build daemons handling the uploads, they will not build and upload the same package again, and the problem won't happen. A trivial example: On machine buildd.debian-ports.org I run: deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa * hello/hppa | hello: | Package : hello | Version : 2.8-4 | State : Needs-Build | Section : devel | Priority: source | Previous-State : | State-Change: 2013-02-18 00:03:36.782007 | CalculatedPri : 52 | component : main | Distribution: sid | Notes : out-of-date | State-Days : 300 | State-Time : 25958430 So, the package hello would need a rebuild according to the wanna-build database, and that would wb probably tell my buildd who then would start building/uploading it. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. The wanna-build database is not up to date on hppa. I have disabled it to save some very precious cpu cycles given there are no buildds on hppa yet. Now, Aurelien mentioned last week to me, that this size-mismatch error might be because of the apt-ftparchive cache might have been corrupted for hppa. I'm not 100% sure about that. Ok I wasn't aware the same package have been uploaded multiple time, so the corruption comes clearly from there. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. I would say stop doing manual upload and start the build daemons. Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? Yes, I can re-enable the hppa wanna-build database if it is actually useful. Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get the size-mismatch errors there is lot of manual work to fix it (unless resetting the apt-ftparchive on debian-ports would solve this). We can rebuild the apt-ftparchive database at some point. Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131215200337.ga2...@hall.aurel32.net
Re: Bugs #728936, #730789, #731939 are duplicates: no USB input in debian-installer due to missing ohci-pci
Hi, thank you very much to all. Software development is sophisticated work, but software for specific hardware is very very hard work. Best regards Manfred Am 15.12.2013 18:04, schrieb Andreas Cadhalpun: Hi Manfred, thanks for providing this information. I think your problem was similar to the current ohci_hcd driver split, only for ehci_hcd, as in linux 3.8 the ehci-pci was introdced and linux 3.9.6-1 migrated to testing on 2013-06-21, where before that it was still 3.2. Apparently this has been fixed in the meantime, as the current installer correctly loads ehci-pci. Best regards, Andreas -- COMPARAT Software-Entwicklungs-GmbH Prießstraße 16 23558 Lübeck Telefon: 0451/479 56 60 Geschf: Manfred Rebentisch AG Lübeck, HRB 3559 Web: http://www.comparat.de Die Cards: https://cards.athesios.de Der Cards-Film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siZaciL6mdg Businessplattform: https://www.athesios.de Lübeck: http://www.luebeck-info.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/COMPARAT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52ae0e5a.3080...@comparat.de
Debian testing installer does not dectect USB keyboard.
This seems closed. http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/kernel?view=revisionrevision=20878 Right, Ben? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387138580.28438.3.camel@homepc
Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
Hello Aurelien, On 12/15/2013 09:03 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 11:54:43AM +0100, Helge Deller wrote: On 12/15/2013 06:32 AM, Dave Land wrote: Not sure what's up at debian-ports.org, but I've been trying to debootstrap 2 different HPPA machines for the last couple days and have been getting a variety of errors (size mismatches, files not found when they were there 20 minutes before, etc. etc.) Somebody may want to look into this before it gets out of hand. Thanks! :) I maybe should add some more background here, and maybe someone here on the list might have an idea on how to proceed. Background is, that Dave and myself have binmnu-uploaded the necessary packages for hppa so that debootstrap worked. Then we proceeded with the necessary packages for sbuild and schroot, so that I now have a buildd installed which should be able to start building packages. I haven't turned it on yet though for the reasons which I explain in a few seconds... In the meantime we have of course uploaded a few more packages which now currently break debootstrap. This is fixable manually, but I instead of uploading packages manually now, I would prefer to get the buildd going instead... So, Dave Land, please wait a little bit... Now to the reasons why I didn't turned on the buildd yet: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed for example that reprepro usually doesn't accept packages of the same version which doesn't seem to be the case on debian-ports. This is indeed the case, apt-fptarchive keep the checksums corresponding to first package. That said it hasn't really caused any problem so far. So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. Well if you leave the build daemons handling the uploads, they will not build and upload the same package again, and the problem won't happen. Ok, so we should enable the buildd as soon as possble. A trivial example: On machine buildd.debian-ports.org I run: deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa * hello/hppa | hello: | Package : hello | Version : 2.8-4 | State : Needs-Build | Section : devel | Priority: source | Previous-State : | State-Change: 2013-02-18 00:03:36.782007 | CalculatedPri : 52 | component : main | Distribution: sid | Notes : out-of-date | State-Days : 300 | State-Time : 25958430 So, the package hello would need a rebuild according to the wanna-build database, and that would wb probably tell my buildd who then would start building/uploading it. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. The wanna-build database is not up to date on hppa. I have disabled it to save some very precious cpu cycles given there are no buildds on hppa yet. Can you the please start it now again? This would help me to see what's missing. Now, Aurelien mentioned last week to me, that this size-mismatch error might be because of the apt-ftparchive cache might have been corrupted for hppa. I'm not 100% sure about that. Ok I wasn't aware the same package have been uploaded multiple time, so the corruption comes clearly from there. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. I would say stop doing manual upload and start the build daemons. Will do. That was even the plan - just upload enough that debootstrap/sbuild/schroot is installable which it is now. Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? Yes, I can re-enable the hppa wanna-build database if it is actually useful. Yes, please, turn it on now. I will send you the hppa buildd gpg/ssh details (as mentioned in your other mail to me) in a few moments. Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get the size-mismatch errors there is lot of manual work to fix it (unless resetting the apt-ftparchive on debian-ports would solve this). We can rebuild the apt-ftparchive database at some point. Thanks, Helge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Re: debian-ports.org getting relatively unstable (hppa)
Hi Thorsten, thanks for your help! On 12/15/2013 02:59 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: Helge Deller dixit: We noticed, that when we manually binmnu-upload packages, which are already in the *same version* on debian-ports, then debian-ports ACCEPT When you binNMU packages you add a +b1, +b2, … suffix to their versions. ITYM porter upload? Yes, we did correct binNMU uploads for packages which already existed in the same version in the repo. But there were lots of packages which were outdated (the hppa build servers stopped in 2011!) and for those we just rebuilt from current source and uploaded with the current version. those packages, but if we then try to apt-get-update those later on, this leads to a size mismatch error. I do have the feeling, that this is a problem on debian-ports. I noticed this problem too, when I accidentally built a package I already had uploaded (and totally forgotten about): basically, the new *.deb files are accepted but the Packages file still contains the checksums etc. from the old *.deb file. Ok, so it's a generic problem. Only way to fix this is to reupload the old *.changes file, or to do a binNMU proper. Or to build a newer version, ofc… Yes, this is how we solved it too (binNMU) then. So, I'm anxious, that if I start the buildd, it will happily build and upload packages which we already uploaded to debian-ports. If this happens we will get more size-mismatch errors. That’s what you have wanna-build for. Basically, stop doing manual uploads without wanna-build locking at least six hours before turning on the first buildd. After that time, when you want/need to build a package manually, lock it in wanna-build: either “take” it for building, or mark as N-F-U. Ok. See here for more info on that: • https://wiki.debian.org/M68k/Porting#binNMU_notes • http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2012/12/msg00124.html • http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2013/10/msg00021.html Good links. Thanks! If you have packages that buildds should never build, for example like we had gcc-4.{6,8} for some time, mark them as Not-For-Us; otherwise, just take them for building. deller@leda:~$ wb info hello . hppa This the same as “wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --info hello”. But on http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-hppa/main/h/hello/ you can see, that the hello-package is already uploaded at version 2.8-4 Indeed. This is bad, new, another / a different problem, and we didn’t have this on m68k. (Note that uploads usually take a bit until they show up on w-b, hence the need for locking.) It seems the wb-database was turned off because we didn't had buildd servers for quite some time. Aurelien will turn it back on again. So, if my buildd now uploads the newly created hello package, I'm sure we will run again into the size-mismatch problem. Yes, you will definitely run into that problem when you upload hello_2.8-4_hppa again. My question here on the list would be, if you (other arch-porters) do have an idea on how I should proceed. Either… Best solution would probably be, if the wanna-build database rescans what's in the archive already. Is this possible? … that (no idea if it’s possible), or make two lists: a list of what is currently in the archive for hppa, and a list of packages in the Needs-Build or BD-Uninstallable¹ state. Then, for every package in the same versions (except +b* sufficēs) in *both* lists, schedule a binNMU (e.g. to get hello_2.8-4+b1_hppa). Do note whether it already got a binNMU suffix: e.g. aclock.app_0.2.3-3+b4 would need to be scheduled for --binNMU=5 to be larger. You might be able to cheat, e.g. take hello for building, then tell it that you uploaded it. But I don’t know why w-b doesn’t register that it’s there in the first place, so a rescan, if possible, should happen first. Before Aurelien's answer I was thinking if this could work on leda too: touch -d2013-01-01 ~/ref cd /srv/mini-dak/ftp/debian/pool-hppa/main find . -newer ~/ref | grep .changes$ Basically it would just try to find all packages (.changes) which we uploaded after january 2012. Then in the next step maybe use the --pretend-avail option of wb to tell it that this package is already up-to-date. Not sure if this would work though... But I will now first wait until the wb-database will gets activated again and check then. Hm, only 12 packages here: tg@leda:~$ wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --list=needs-build | less But this has more (9043): tg@leda:~$ wanna-build -A hppa -d unstable --list=bd-uninstallable | less ① You need to include BD-Uninstallable because they will happily convert to Needs-Build once you upload e.g. perl. Or, should I just start the buildd and see what's happening? If we then get No, get the w-b list consistent first. Ok. According to http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/binary-hppa/Packages.bz2 hello is at version 2.8-4 just fine…
Re: Debian testing installer does not dectect USB keyboard.
On Sun, 2013-12-15 at 21:16 +0100, aexlfowley wrote: This seems closed. http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/kernel?view=revisionrevision=20878 Right, Ben? It's pending. It won't be closed until the new kernel package is uploaded. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Q. Which is the greater problem in the world today, ignorance or apathy? A. I don't know and I couldn't care less. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part