Bug#734677: more info
Looking at this a bit closely, I see that Debian already does MOST of
this. Most qt5 packages do have multi-arch tags. This includes both
qtbase-opensource-src and qtchooser. The -dev packages do not have these
tags, however.
I'm attaching a patch that adds those tags. I looked at the contents of
the already-built packges debian ships, and it looks like the file names
are already separate, thus adding the tags is all that is necessary.
I tried to build new packages, but there's some sort of build issue
that's tripping it up:
$ DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=7 dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b -j
lots of output
make[6]: Entering directory
`/home/dima/qtbase-opensource-src-5.2.0+dfsg/src/plugins/platforms/xcb'
/home/dima/qt5/qtbase-opensource-src-5.2.0+dfsg/bin/qmake -o
Makefile.xcb-plugin xcb-plugin.pro
make[6]: /home/dima/qt5/qtbase-opensource-src-5.2.0+dfsg/bin/qmake: Command
not found
I hit this building an unreleased git HEAD off experimental, so not
reporting this as a separate bug.
From 51a0810700aef7ae8cb02cf08c4d70a73f81cba0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dima Kogan d...@oblong.com
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:27:39 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] QT5 -dev packages are now Multi-Arch:same
This is just a change in the debian/control tag, since the package contents
already used the arch-specific paths and thus didn't conflict
---
debian/control |8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control
index b1401f8..940d66f 100644
--- a/debian/control
+++ b/debian/control
@@ -263,6 +263,8 @@ Description: Qt 5 print support module
Package: qtbase5-dev
Architecture: any
+Multi-Arch: same
+Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
Section: libdevel
Depends: libgl1-mesa-dev [!armel !armhf] | libgl-dev [!armel !armhf],
libgles2-mesa-dev [armel armhf] | libgles2-dev [armel armhf],
@@ -296,6 +298,8 @@ Description: Qt 5 base development files
Package: qtbase5-private-dev
Architecture: any
+Multi-Arch: same
+Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
Section: libdevel
Depends: qtbase5-dev (= ${binary:Version}), ${misc:Depends}
Breaks: qtbase5-dev ( 5.0.2+dfsg1-3~)
@@ -311,6 +315,8 @@ Description: Qt 5 base private development files
Package: libqt5opengl5-dev
Architecture: any
+Multi-Arch: same
+Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
Section: libdevel
Depends: libqt5opengl5 (= ${binary:Version}),
qtbase5-dev (= ${binary:Version}),
@@ -406,6 +412,8 @@ Description: Qt 5 base examples debugging symbols
Package: qt5-default
Architecture: any
+Multi-Arch: same
+Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
Depends: qtbase5-dev, qtchooser, ${misc:Depends}
Conflicts: qt4-default
Suggests: qt5-qmake, qtbase5-dev-tools
--
1.7.10.4
Bug#734677: yet more info
The previous message included a patch that added multi-arch:same tags to 4 packages. I had trouble building these packages, so I added those tags to the pre-built packages already in Debian/experimental. I then tried to co-install these to make sure that adding those tags was safe. 3 of the 4 packages are fine. However in qtbase5-dev there's a conflicting file: /usr/include/qt5/QtCore/qconfig.h This is an issue in Ubuntu also, but I don't think they know it yet (I'll comment on their bug shortly). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/877ga9h36l@secretsauce.net
Bug#734677: marked as done (src:qtbase-opensource-src: qt5 packages aren't multi-arch ready)
Your message dated Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:25:41 -0300 with message-id 21712503.sU1gvB5H62@luna and subject line Re: Bug#734677: yet more info has caused the Debian Bug report #734677, regarding src:qtbase-opensource-src: qt5 packages aren't multi-arch ready 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 734677: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734677 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: src:qtbase-opensource-src Severity: normal In Debian, QT5 packages have no multi-arch tags. Ubuntu has supposedly resolved this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtbase-opensource-src/+bug/1209239 ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Thursday 09 January 2014 02:14:58 Dima Kogan wrote: The previous message included a patch that added multi-arch:same tags to 4 packages. I had trouble building these packages, so I added those tags to the pre-built packages already in Debian/experimental. I then tried to co-install these to make sure that adding those tags was safe. 3 of the 4 packages are fine. However in qtbase5-dev there's a conflicting file: /usr/include/qt5/QtCore/qconfig.h This is an issue in Ubuntu also, but I don't think they know it yet (I'll comment on their bug shortly). Hi Dima! As you have just found, there are reasons why this packages aren't marked as m-a: same: they are not. They vary between archs, so you can't make them m-a: same. You can take a look at, for example, usr/include/qt5/QtCore/qconfig.h from different archs (I took armhf, amd64 and s390x, for example). Making the dev packages m-a: same would be a bug, so I'm closing this report. Kinds regards, Lisandro. -- Theory and practice sometimes clash. And when that happens, theory loses. Every single time. Linus Benedict Torvalds. Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ---End Message---
Bug#734750: virtuoso-minimal: segfaults all the time, constant high CPU load
Package: virtuoso-minimal Version: 6.1.6+dfsg-4 Severity: normal From log on to KDE, virtuoso (and akonadi) constantly causes very high CPU load. I notice in syslog that it keeps on segfaulting all the time: Jan 9 15:57:40 Erwin laptop-mode: enabled, not active Jan 9 15:57:50 Erwin kernel: [10327.063254] virtuoso-t[23809]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7fa4c0715fc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 15:57:56 Erwin kernel: [10333.170102] virtuoso-t[23853]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f5453781fc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 15:58:06 Erwin kernel: [10342.758358] virtuoso-t[23870]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f971c81ffc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 15:58:12 Erwin kernel: [10348.894821] virtuoso-t[23886]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f6193d2ffc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 15:58:43 Erwin kernel: [10379.637821] virtuoso-t[23955]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f5c7bf4efc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 15:58:50 Erwin kernel: [10386.560659] virtuoso-t[24034]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7fb1c9b08fc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 16:00:05 Erwin kernel: [10462.077828] virtuoso-t[24109]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7fd979fdefc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 16:00:12 Erwin kernel: [10468.814755] virtuoso-t[24234]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f1747d30fc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 16:00:50 Erwin kernel: [10506.472417] virtuoso-t[24270]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7fc379efdfc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 16:00:56 Erwin kernel: [10513.166859] virtuoso-t[24285]: segfault at ip 007b2c1e sp 7f9fdf8b8fc0 error 7 in virtuoso-t[40+974000] Jan 9 16:03:36 Erwin kernel: [10672.596203] LogServer[3666]: segfault at 20 ip 0020 sp 7f5f4b250738 error 14 in mythlogserver[40+3000] -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (450, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages virtuoso-minimal depends on: ii libvirtodbc0 6.1.6+dfsg-4 ii virtuoso-opensource-6.1-bin 6.1.6+dfsg-4 virtuoso-minimal recommends no packages. virtuoso-minimal suggests no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140109150634.24181.54890.reportbug@Erwin.babel
Processing of qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6_amd64.changes
qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.dsc qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.debian.tar.gz libqt5clucene5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb libqt5designer5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb libqt5designercomponents5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qdbus-qt5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb libqt5help5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-private-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-dev-tools_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-examples_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-examples-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb qttools5-doc_5.2.0-6_all.deb qttools5-doc-html_5.2.0-6_all.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1w1h3c-0008ra...@franck.debian.org
qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into experimental
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:56:04 +0400 Source: qttools-opensource-src Binary: libqt5clucene5 libqt5designer5 libqt5designercomponents5 qdbus-qt5 libqt5help5 qttools5-dev qttools5-private-dev qttools5-dev-tools qttools5-examples qttools5-dbg qttools5-examples-dbg qttools5-doc qttools5-doc-html Architecture: source amd64 all Version: 5.2.0-6 Distribution: experimental Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers debian-qt-kde@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Dmitry Shachnev mity...@gmail.com Description: libqt5clucene5 - Qt 5 CLucene module libqt5designer5 - Qt 5 designer module libqt5designercomponents5 - Qt 5 Designer components module libqt5help5 - Qt 5 help module qdbus-qt5 - Qt 5 D-Bus tool qttools5-dbg - Qt 5 tools debugging symbols qttools5-dev - Qt 5 tools development files qttools5-dev-tools - Qt 5 development tools qttools5-doc - Qt 5 tools documentation qttools5-doc-html - Qt 5 tools HTML documentation qttools5-examples - Qt 5 tools examples qttools5-examples-dbg - Qt 5 tools examples debugging symbols qttools5-private-dev - Qt 5 tools private development files Changes: qttools-opensource-src (5.2.0-6) experimental; urgency=medium . * Update symbols files to fix build failure on armel, armhf and s390x. Checksums-Sha1: 9b0779832254d69609e891bce15ecd81ceefa5e8 2998 qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.dsc e1d043f2967e4de38d454692b0454411d366da1f 57402 qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.debian.tar.gz 3110402c5fbfaefd694e286c63f0dabfa959a826 277134 libqt5clucene5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 380ad955b14a33f602310320180788626df3e023 2725414 libqt5designer5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 29745ae96a90a2eadfab945ce353f4f2b483a9f6 677310 libqt5designercomponents5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 9c7a03cb6076430981209948489b2af6db8173f5 26510 qdbus-qt5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 5fcc5caa9fcf7df24e4e608d77dcf82da37e68d0 183724 libqt5help5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb b301658c23e7685293a109a82e8f2f80674e430a 189758 qttools5-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 6427c3507ab06f822b56f4aeafca0d8684e7bff2 82142 qttools5-private-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb f162797849cd35407d7b66ca0e5440aeb10aab1c 1582416 qttools5-dev-tools_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 41695db68e871fef0fd98959860d5887dbccdbf5 473914 qttools5-examples_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 83e27d4e170805d2c5539f2dacece3908c6c31f6 91513544 qttools5-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 765bbbaf144e715b58359e82a79cbdb1dbba63ea 12353732 qttools5-examples-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb ffe28c4c663f40113629b17b85455b6657b2593e 3607220 qttools5-doc_5.2.0-6_all.deb ce216efbeeaf4006cbcc7d1315cece6ceb00b0fc 3356196 qttools5-doc-html_5.2.0-6_all.deb Checksums-Sha256: 2b2f5e1ab6aa49f1ff3bff9117960c9039634412e468bba09c8b12f6dedf9e45 2998 qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.dsc f12fd252f7bd84dc565e03db75b8bfab1c04f21dfaa49e705b0330aadb90e6bc 57402 qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.debian.tar.gz ec196b10c7115fc05f4368af1ecb32bbb328481ec0980a809924d4f9edbb8203 277134 libqt5clucene5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb a877594ed961120ec36bc86609014b238db6d10fd811dd2302d5497b90115dbf 2725414 libqt5designer5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb e1f8e65ad3b25fab1cb5a794ea717f1f88ac8d240e2a426fd56a4be09b0fde36 677310 libqt5designercomponents5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 5501146e3471c8bf6df149aae19e0eea09cd6141b20a04673dffead056a76d73 26510 qdbus-qt5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb ee9bad54e51ffa4f76dcd3f4985a5084992e00833f7768ee1fad653ccc3c8adb 183724 libqt5help5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 5c921d5649474f23ad2eaa555727f187e271e71c5d81cdd154d9268539af9b04 189758 qttools5-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 0fa0f34d3a27754385bfbc1211f63ebe6743673a1007b56201d0643049af5689 82142 qttools5-private-dev_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb f0062cd06240d5fac377bb48e0610121677beae61c0c8d5debfc8a1aea85d1af 1582416 qttools5-dev-tools_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 07c76a904349dbf9e569e3b6b48930fa3cccbb88a174d546dbafdb5b47bf9111 473914 qttools5-examples_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 229b3a834a6883723dee8f0279f7350852a5c72682b92bb597e34671373d0426 91513544 qttools5-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 5a00644784452f0e24bed94d1c7b8bb5819d7ce9802d1ac47795948851e72175 12353732 qttools5-examples-dbg_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb c0e8ebfeba0c25bf9968a8e28b92b667e786dd90a0cd9fc0270fe4e0dcc49fa5 3607220 qttools5-doc_5.2.0-6_all.deb 6efe59076a8e0d8f0ed059033ad6c26ce530604e4c811310b8aefbddabf90c17 3356196 qttools5-doc-html_5.2.0-6_all.deb Files: d1942d1412abaf45d5630b773c43de27 2998 libs optional qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.dsc 1945d127d7f71db70b63d3978e2759ff 57402 libs optional qttools-opensource-src_5.2.0-6.debian.tar.gz bc2723994689331bc79f9c47d3dd99b6 277134 libs optional libqt5clucene5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 936f6c3f654a1e3ee48751621a95ec73 2725414 libs optional libqt5designer5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb a967b6c1a4b12a6795c6b029105daf40 677310 libs optional libqt5designercomponents5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 87e6fe8e89b6e7533fd39abd041012ec 26510 utils optional qdbus-qt5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 693a2ea0cf677a98c030e0559987a2ee 183724 libs optional libqt5help5_5.2.0-6_amd64.deb 9c88e2aa77d49f2699175fe0412ac665 189758 libdevel optional
Bug#734677: yet more info
perezme...@gmail.com writes: On Thursday 09 January 2014 02:14:58 Dima Kogan wrote: The previous message included a patch that added multi-arch:same tags to 4 packages. I had trouble building these packages, so I added those tags to the pre-built packages already in Debian/experimental. I then tried to co-install these to make sure that adding those tags was safe. 3 of the 4 packages are fine. However in qtbase5-dev there's a conflicting file: /usr/include/qt5/QtCore/qconfig.h This is an issue in Ubuntu also, but I don't think they know it yet (I'll comment on their bug shortly). Hi Dima! As you have just found, there are reasons why this packages aren't marked as m-a: same: they are not. They vary between archs, so you can't make them m-a: same. You can take a look at, for example, usr/include/qt5/QtCore/qconfig.h from different archs (I took armhf, amd64 and s390x, for example). Making the dev packages m-a: same would be a bug, so I'm closing this report. Hi Lisandro. Thank you for replying. The bug isn't simply that there are missing tags, but rather that you can't co-install qt5 -dev packages, thus making cross-builds impossible. Does it not make sense to keep this open to keep track of this feature as it is developed? In the spirit of keeping track, are there other roadblocks to multi-arching this? I tried to co-install the 4 packages my patch touched, and this was the only conflicting file. Thanks dima -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8761ptgijh@secretsauce.net
Re: Soften the the wording recommending menu files: let's do it in Jessie.
Charles Plessy wrote: On the other hand, it is the spirit of Debian to accept low-maintenance patches (in that case, menu entries) when it can help other projects even if one does not care for it. In that sense, if the Debian Menu has an active user base, it would be counter-productive to kill it with a top-down decision. I don't think no longer documenting the old Debian menu system (or moving the documentation to an appendix) would kill it or be a top-down decision. After all, if policy does not say that I *should* add a menu entry, that does not stop me from adding one if I want to. Currently Debian has two menu systems. The old Debian menu system is nice because there is clear documentation about how to add your program to it and as a result for a while it was a pretty complete menu. Alas, now that completeness is eroding and I don't see much reason to recommend in policy to continue to add entries, unless we have clear advice about when packagers should include an entry in it and when they should add to the fdo menu instead. As far as I can tell, the de facto policy is just to add to the fdo menu when appropriate. The documented policy is failing to describe that actual practice. Is there some subtlety I'm missing? Thanks, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140109211516.ga10...@google.com
Re: Bug#707851: Soften the the wording recommending menu files: let's do it in Jessie.
Le Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 01:15:16PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : Alas, now that completeness is eroding and I don't see much reason to recommend in policy to continue to add entries, unless we have clear advice about when packagers should include an entry in it and when they should add to the fdo menu instead. As far as I can tell, the de facto policy is just to add to the fdo menu when appropriate. The documented policy is failing to describe that actual practice. Is there some subtlety I'm missing? Hi Jonathan and everybody, please, I would like to decouple two issues. - Issue 1: the Debian menu is superseded in major destkotop environments, and the Policy should recognise that the Debian menu is not the lead mechanism for managing menus in Debian anymore. Unfortutately we have two parallel systems at the moment. - Issue 2: deciding whether the Debian menu is actually obsolete and should be removed from the Policy. I have not yet read complains from users of the Debian menu system that it not comprehensive enough anymore. And while I am not using it, I see in “/usr/share/menu” computer the entries for evince, rythmbox, gedit, and even nautilus, showing that programs that are not strictly specific to GNOME are still there. What I have read is complains from non-users that they would prefer that somebody else does the work of keeping the Debian menu viable, which I think is a totally reasonable request (and to be clear, is also my position as a maintainer of packages having menu entries). If we tie Issue 1 to Issue 2, my gut feeling (not my wish) is that there is currently no way to conclude without going in front of the TC or having a GR, and prehaps demotivate some DDs in the meantime. Please let's not do that, and work so that the the Debian menu is not on the way of the major desktop systems on one hand, and (importantly) vice-versa. Let's avoid that activities in Debian become mutually destructive. So, in order to move forward, I would appreciate if people having stakes in the issue, or having expressed objections earlier, would say whether the patch I proposed is acceptable in principle after correction, and if not, what they are asking for exactly regarding: - Softening the recommendation to use the Debian menu, - documenting the FreeDesktop entry system (menu plus media types), - and since it seems to be a popular request, removing the documentation of the Debian menu from the Policy. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140109232104.ga4...@falafel.plessy.net
Processed: Re: Bug#734671: enable pam_keyinit by default
Processing control commands: clone -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 Bug #734671 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug 734671 cloned as bugs 734816-734819 reassign -1 login Bug #734671 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug reassigned from package 'libpam-runtime' to 'login'. No longer marked as found in versions pam/1.1.3-10. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #734671 to the same values previously set reassign -2 openssh-server Bug #734816 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug reassigned from package 'libpam-runtime' to 'openssh-server'. No longer marked as found in versions pam/1.1.3-10. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #734816 to the same values previously set reassign -3 lightdm Bug #734817 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug reassigned from package 'libpam-runtime' to 'lightdm'. No longer marked as found in versions pam/1.1.3-10. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #734817 to the same values previously set reassign -4 gdm3 Bug #734818 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug reassigned from package 'libpam-runtime' to 'gdm3'. No longer marked as found in versions pam/1.1.3-10. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #734818 to the same values previously set reassign -5 kdm Bug #734819 [libpam-runtime] enable pam_keyinit by default Bug reassigned from package 'libpam-runtime' to 'kdm'. No longer marked as found in versions pam/1.1.3-10. Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #734819 to the same values previously set -- 734671: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734671 734816: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734816 734817: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734817 734818: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734818 734819: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734819 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.b734671.138932012426474.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Re: Soften the the wording recommending menu files: let's do it in Jessie.
Hi, Charles Plessy wrote: please, I would like to decouple two issues. - Issue 1: the Debian menu is superseded in major destkotop environments, and the Policy should recognise that the Debian menu is not the lead mechanism for managing menus in Debian anymore. Unfortutately we have two parallel systems at the moment. - Issue 2: deciding whether the Debian menu is actually obsolete and should be removed from the Policy. I don't understand the distinction. If policy doesn't say I should have debian-menu entries, then what is all this text in policy about debian-menu for? I'm not saying that the old Debian menu system should be removed from the archive. I'm saying that either (A) the recommendation to use it should be removed from where it currently is in policy, perhaps to be moved to an appendix, or (B) there should be clear advice about when a package should provide a Debian menu entry and when it should provide an fdo menu entry Otherwise I, a packager, have no idea what policy is telling me about how to correctly package software. [...] If we tie Issue 1 to Issue 2, my gut feeling (not my wish) is that there is currently no way to conclude without going in front of the TC or having a GR, I don't suspect that at all. I like to think the policy process can work, especially when I don't even see any major disagreement. If there is some disagreement, hearing where I have gone wrong above would help me a lot, since then it becomes possible to see where the policy can be clarified. Hope that helps, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140110023608.ga8...@google.com
Bug#734677: yet more info
On Thursday 09 January 2014 09:40:50 Dima Kogan wrote: [snip] Hi Lisandro. Thank you for replying. The bug isn't simply that there are missing tags, but rather that you can't co-install qt5 -dev packages, thus making cross-builds impossible. Does it not make sense to keep this open to keep track of this feature as it is developed? In the spirit of keeping track, are there other roadblocks to multi-arching this? I tried to co-install the 4 packages my patch touched, and this was the only conflicting file. Multiarch does not has support for arch-qualified headers yet, and upstream won't do all the necessary effort to change that file just because a distro or two want it. So there is no need to track anything. If at some point we get support for arch-qualified headers feel free to reopen the bug or fill a new one. In other words: - No, it does not makes any sense to keep this bug open. - Yes, it does means that cross-builds are not doable. You can workaround this by using a chroot. Kinds regards, Lisandro. -- Yo quiero conocer el pensamiento de Dios, el resto son detalles. Albert Einstein Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Bug#707851: Soften the the wording recommending menu files: let's do it in Jessie.
On Wednesday 08 January 2014 11:31:07 Charles Plessy wrote: [snip] Hi Lisandro, thanks for your answer. Input from all the parties is critical. in my point of view, the Policy has been used to bully the maintainers of FreeDesktop-compliant applications and desktop environments, and the patch that I propose, which calls the Debian Menu superseded in these situations, should stop that problem. On the other hand, it is the spirit of Debian to accept low-maintenance patches (in that case, menu entries) when it can help other projects even if one does not care for it. In that sense, if the Debian Menu has an active user base, it would be counter-productive to kill it with a top-down decision. Note that if generalised, top-down termination of people's projects can make Debian very, very small. Regardless of what you think of the Debian Menu, what do you think about my patch ? I was hopping to get more time to review all the bug, but saddly this is not happening, so let me point you want I don't think it's OK (which is debatable, but at least what I think). I think most of the stuff has been pointed out by someone else already. Packages shipping applications that belong to one or both menu systems should provide the necessary entry files to integrate with them. * I don't really think an application belongs to one or the other system. * If I where new to this I wouldn't understand which one should I pick. WRT the current FDO wording, I like it. All packages that provide applications that need not be passed any special command line arguments for normal operation should register a menu entry for those applications So even if you already provide a desktop file you must provide a menu one? If we are trying to say that the FDO is superseding the Debian menu then this needs to be rephrased. Kinds regards, Lisandro. -- Without us [Free Software developers], people would study computer science and programming without ever having seen a real program in its entirety. That's like becoming writers without ever having read a complete book. Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project. http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/25412/news.htm Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#734831: nepomuk-core-runtime: I get popup window with Folder Watch Limit after each reboot
Package: nepomuk-core-runtime Version: 4:4.11.3-2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, after each reboot I get popup window with question about Folder Watch Limit, this is very annoying. I disable nepomuk indexer but popup is still present. This popup window have label Folder Watch Limit with org.kde.nepomuk.filewatch.raiselimit and two PIDs point to this: 8379 ?SNl0:00 /usr/bin/nepomukfilewatch 8397 ?Sl 0:00 /usr/lib/kde4/libexec/kde_nepomuk_filewatch_raiselimit -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (800, 'testing'), (800, 'stable'), (200, 'unstable'), (65, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=ru_RU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ru_RU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages nepomuk-core-runtime depends on: ii libavformat54 6:9.10-1 ii libavutil52 8:1.2.1-dmo3 ii libc6 2.17-97 ii libepub0 0.2.2-1 ii libexiv2-12 0.23-1 ii libgcc1 1:4.8.2-10 ii libkdecore5 4:4.11.3-2 ii libkdeui5 4:4.11.3-2 ii libkidletime4 4:4.11.3-2 ii libkio5 4:4.11.3-2 ii libnepomukcore4 4:4.11.3-2 ii libpoppler-qt4-3 0.18.4-10 ii libqt4-dbus 4:4.8.5+git192-g085f851+dfsg-2 ii libqt4-xml4:4.8.5+git192-g085f851+dfsg-2 ii libqtcore44:4.8.5+git192-g085f851+dfsg-2 ii libqtgui4 4:4.8.5+git192-g085f851+dfsg-2 ii libsolid4 4:4.11.3-2 ii libsoprano4 2.9.4+dfsg-1 ii libstdc++64.8.2-10 ii libtag1c2a1.9.1-2 nepomuk-core-runtime recommends no packages. nepomuk-core-runtime suggests no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20140110043356.8528.89085.report...@home.progtech.ru
