Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
Package: ark Severity: serious Justification: DFSG #4 This package has a Suggests: rar tag. If it has the functionality to create rar archives via rar, this is a serious problem, because it is encouraging users to create trap archives that can't be extracted with free software. I believe this is a violation of DFSG #4 (Our priorities are our users and free software) since we put: - A minority of our users (those who use rar to publish data). before: - The majority of our users (who can't extract the data in a pure Debian system). - The free software community, for which trap archive formats are seriously detrimental. OTOH, if this package is only using rar to extract these archives, then it'd be better to use the unrar package instead (in that case severity of this bug should be lowered). -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-1-k7 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) (ignored: LC_ALL set to C) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
severity 340704 important severity 340705 important severity 340706 important severity 340707 important thanks Hi Robert, Sorry, I have to disagree with these bug severities; Suggests: are just not important enough in our packaging system to treat them as release-critical, regardless of what's being suggested, and it is generally considered acceptable to Suggest: non-free packages from main anyway. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: rar support violates DFSG #4
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 340704 important Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4 Severity set to `important'. severity 340705 important Bug#340705: rar support violates DFSG #4 Severity set to `important'. severity 340706 important Bug#340706: rar support violates DFSG #4 Severity set to `important'. severity 340707 important Bug#340707: rar support violates DFSG #4 Severity set to `important'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340704: marked as done (rar support violates DFSG #4)
Your message dated Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:56:21 +0100 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 25 Nov 2005 10:16:00 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 02:16:00 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 216.red-62-57-140.user.auna.net ([62.57.140.216] helo=khazad.dyndns.org) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Efaca-00054M-H9 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:16:00 -0800 Received: from rmh by khazad.dyndns.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EfacU-0002Md-W8; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:15:55 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: rar support violates DFSG #4 X-Mailer: reportbug 3.17 Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:15:54 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 Package: ark Severity: serious Justification: DFSG #4 This package has a Suggests: rar tag. If it has the functionality to create rar archives via rar, this is a serious problem, because it is encouraging users to create trap archives that can't be extracted with free software. I believe this is a violation of DFSG #4 (Our priorities are our users and free software) since we put: - A minority of our users (those who use rar to publish data). before: - The majority of our users (who can't extract the data in a pure Debian system). - The free software community, for which trap archive formats are seriously detrimental. OTOH, if this package is only using rar to extract these archives, then it'd be better to use the unrar package instead (in that case severity of this bug should be lowered). -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-1-k7 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) (ignored: LC_ALL set to C) --- Received: (at 340704-done) by bugs.debian.org; 25 Nov 2005 10:58:04 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 02:58:04 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from outmx011.isp.belgacom.be ([195.238.3.3]) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EfbHI-0007Qd-JB for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:58:04 -0800 Received: from outmx011.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by outmx011.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id jAPAvwMj029224 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:57:58 +0100 (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from [192.168.2.3] (78.15-200-80.adsl.skynet.be [80.200.15.78]) by outmx011.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id jAPAvpht029144 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:57:51 +0100 (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 11:56:21 +0100 From: Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4 References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER, RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robert Millan wrote: Package: ark Severity: serious Justification: DFSG #4 This package has a Suggests: rar tag. If it has the functionality to create rar archives via rar, this is a serious problem, because it is encouraging users to create trap archives that can't be extracted with free software. I believe this is a violation of DFSG
Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 02:41:49AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: Sorry, I have to disagree with these bug severities; Suggests: are just not important enough in our packaging system to treat them as release-critical, regardless of what's being suggested, Hi Steve, My concern is about the rar writing support itself, not about Suggests. The Suggests tag is just an indication that either the application supports generating rar archives (or that there's a mistake, and the maintainer just mean to suggest unrar instead). and it is generally considered acceptable to Suggest: non-free packages from main anyway. Well, that's not the problem. If the application needs unrar to extract rar archives, then suggesting unrar is ok [1]. It's the fact that the application supports creating rar archives that I believe violates the DFSG. Does this explanation satisfy you? If it does, I'd like to rise the severity back to serious (I don't think it's an issue for the release, being only 4 bugs). OTOH, if you think my interpretation of DFSG is inadequate, I could try to expose it better, and we could also move this to -legal (perhaps I should have started there in first place). Thanks! [1] In fact, unrar is one of the two non-free packages whose distribution by Debian I would personaly endorse. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
* Robert Millan [Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:34:23 +0100]: Well, that's not the problem. If the application needs unrar to extract rar archives, then suggesting unrar is ok [1]. It's the fact that the application supports creating rar archives that I believe violates the DFSG. Does this explanation satisfy you? If it does, I'd like to rise the severity back to serious (I don't think it's an issue for the release, being only 4 bugs). OTOH, if you think my interpretation of DFSG is inadequate, I could try to expose it better, and we could also move this to -legal (perhaps I should have started there in first place). Oh dear. Are you going to suggest that we move OpenOffice.org out of main 'cause it can be used to create Microsoft Word files? No em fotis. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org We learned that the Linux load average rolls over at 1024. And we actually found this out empirically. -- H. Peter Anvin from kernel.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:57:17PM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote: * Robert Millan [Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:34:23 +0100]: Well, that's not the problem. If the application needs unrar to extract rar archives, then suggesting unrar is ok [1]. It's the fact that the application supports creating rar archives that I believe violates the DFSG. Does this explanation satisfy you? If it does, I'd like to rise the severity back to serious (I don't think it's an issue for the release, being only 4 bugs). OTOH, if you think my interpretation of DFSG is inadequate, I could try to expose it better, and we could also move this to -legal (perhaps I should have started there in first place). Oh dear. Are you going to suggest that we move OpenOffice.org out of main 'cause it can be used to create Microsoft Word files? No. Any of the files created by OOo can be opened with free software (notably, with OOo itself), so they're not a trap. A valid analogy would be like: - In the future, we have a package of MS-Office in non-free (MS allowed us to re-distribute it, etc) - Users can create some new trap format with it (not unlikely, e.g. [1]) - Such format can't be opened with free software. Thus: - We'd be doing a bad service to most of our users, who use OOo/etc - We'd be harming the free software community as a whole. (both of these are infractions of DFSG #4 IMHO) [1] There are also reports that Microsoft is planning to use patented extensions to XML as the basis for a future Word format; anyone who implements free software to read those files could be sued for patent infringement by Microsoft. from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#337764: libqt4-debug: Building apps in debug mode breaks image loading
On 18.11.05 13:44:29, Brian Nelson wrote:
Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 18.11.05 10:20:54, Brian Nelson wrote:
Andreas Pakulat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Building QT4 apps using
CONFIG += debug
breaks the loading of any icons in the application. Remove debug and
everythings fine. This not only happens to the icons created for that
app, but also for the icons in standard dialog, like the QFileDialog.
Hmm, I can't reproduce this. Can you test some of the examples from Qt
and see if you can reproduce it with any of those. The stuff under
mainwindows/ seem like good candidates.
Sure, just take the application example, add
CONFIG += debug
and run qmake-qt4 make. The program won't display any icon, except the
one for paste. This is with an up to date sid and I'm having Qt3 as
default Qt (i.e. qmake == qmake-qt3).
QTDIR is set to point to /usr/share/qt3, but changing to /usr/share/qt4
doesn't help either.
OK, I see it now. Strange I couldn't reproduce it the first time I
tried.
I wonder if this is a consequence of this bug:
http://www.trolltech.com/developer/tasktracker.html?method=entryid=86441
Hi,
I thought you might be interested in my findings with the current rc1 of
Qt 4.1.0...
This bug (33776) seems to be gone, using the application example all
icons are shown when building it in debug-only mode (i.e. CONFIG+=debug
CONFIG-=release).
The problems with the custom widget's plugins are resolved kind of
a strange way I think. The release-mode-designer still can't load
debug-built-plugins, but qmake now has a debug_and_release config
option which creates a Makefile, a Makefile.debug and a Makefile.release
probably the same as when building Qt4 itself. Then you also need the
following
CONFIG(debug, debug|release) {
unix: TARGET = $$join(TARGET,,,_debug)
else: TARGET = $$join(TARGET,,d)
}
To make the debug-plugin have a _debug in it. Then both lib* can
reside in the same plugins-dir and designer loads the right one.
So the summary is: You can probably close all three bugs when you
package the next release, however I'd suggest to add a note to
README.Debian that tells the user that debian's packages are built with
-debug-and-release config switch and that therefore everybody who needs
a debug version of his plugins should add debug_and_release and the
above mention CONFIG-lines to the .pro-file.
As this is a summary for all three bug reports I CC the other two.
Andreas
--
Beauty and harmony are as necessary to you as the very breath of life.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340704: rar support violates DFSG #4
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:34:23PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 02:41:49AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: Sorry, I have to disagree with these bug severities; Suggests: are just not important enough in our packaging system to treat them as release-critical, regardless of what's being suggested, My concern is about the rar writing support itself, not about Suggests. The Suggests tag is just an indication that either the application supports generating rar archives (or that there's a mistake, and the maintainer just mean to suggest unrar instead). and it is generally considered acceptable to Suggest: non-free packages from main anyway. Well, that's not the problem. If the application needs unrar to extract rar archives, then suggesting unrar is ok [1]. It's the fact that the application supports creating rar archives that I believe violates the DFSG. Does this explanation satisfy you? If it does, I'd like to rise the severity back to serious (I don't think it's an issue for the release, being only 4 bugs). OTOH, if you think my interpretation of DFSG is inadequate, I could try to expose it better, and we could also move this to -legal (perhaps I should have started there in first place). Yes, I still disagree with this reasoning. People of conscience may disagree on whether *preventing* the creation of files that can't be read with free software is serving the goals of the DFSG. In the absence of agreement on this point, I don't think it's right to treat this as a release-critical bug unless the *maintainer* agrees with you. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
