Bug#1033319: Suggestions for ReleaseCheckList

[Paul Gevers]

Hi Adrian,

On 22-03-2023 12:08, Adrian Bunk wrote:

Suggestions for both
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/ReleaseCheckList
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/ReleaseCheckList/BookwormCheckList


They are Wiki's ;). But thanks for discussing it first.


   Before the release

Add "Notify the LTS team of the new debian-archive-keyring"


Do you have an example e-mail? Would everybody in the LTS team know what 
this means for them (I don't).



   After the release
 [ ] Propose a micronews item on the #debian-publicity IRC channel


Again, maybe an example? I'm not sure what you expect here from us.


Should this be a subitem of "Notify the publicity team"
in "While Releasing"?


I guess that makes sense.


   After the release
 [ ] Update the Project History document and upload to stable-p-u

This could be moved to (and uploaded) "Before the release".


Are you sure? That means we'd be predicting the future in a history 
document. I guess you mean once the date is fixed and assuming we 
release on schedule.



   After the release
 [ ] Check with udd maintainers that the hardcoded values are updated (see 
SuitesAndReposExtension#udd)
 [ ] Check with buildd team that buildds know about trixie. (see 
SuitesAndReposExtension#wanna-build)
 [ ] Check with other service/package maintainers that all the other 
hardcoded suite names or codenames are updated

IMHO these should be moved to "Before the release", otherwise there might be
stress for people who realize at short notice that urgent work has to be done.


But these things can't be *done* before the release, right? So maybe 
*add* a "notify" on these topics?



It should link to SuitesAndReposExtension, or be replaced with a list whom to 
notify,


Incomplete sentence?

Paul


OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#1033319: Suggestions for ReleaseCheckList

[Adrian Bunk]

Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal

Suggestions for both
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/ReleaseCheckList
https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/ReleaseCheckList/BookwormCheckList


  Before the release

Add "Notify the LTS team of the new debian-archive-keyring"


  After the release
[ ] Propose a micronews item on the #debian-publicity IRC channel

Should this be a subitem of "Notify the publicity team"
in "While Releasing"?


  After the release
[ ] Update the Project History document and upload to stable-p-u

This could be moved to (and uploaded) "Before the release".


  After the release
[ ] Check with udd maintainers that the hardcoded values are updated (see 
SuitesAndReposExtension#udd)
[ ] Check with buildd team that buildds know about trixie. (see 
SuitesAndReposExtension#wanna-build)

IMHO these should be moved to "Before the release", otherwise there might be
stress for people who realize at short notice that urgent work has to be done.


  After the release
[ ] Check with other service/package maintainers that all the other 
hardcoded suite names or codenames are updated

IMHO this should be moved to "Before the release", otherwise there might be
stress for people who realize at short notice that urgent work has to be done.

It should link to SuitesAndReposExtension, or be replaced with a list whom to 
notify,

Re: Bug#421560: two removal suggestions awl and gem

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:

Andreas Henriksson wrote:

On mån, 2008-09-01 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:

- gem: multiple RC bugs with NMU proposal without comment for more
than
   two months, but also seems in bad shape from looking at the
   non-RC bugs: a segfault unsanswered by the maintainer for
   8 months, a new upstream version (that looks like a bugfix
   release) wishlist without maintainer reaction from June.
   I'm CCing NMUer to be or not to be Andreas if he has any
   insights.


Removal seems best from my point of view as well. Noone apparently cares
enough about the package to even offer to test the fixes.


as the upstream maintainer of gem i would eventually volunteer to do the 
debian packaging;
however, i don't know the timeline for lenny (apart from the freeze), so 
i don't know whether this is a good idea to do right now.


i will try to check out the patches in question asap.



checking andreas's "gem-nmu.diff" from msg#35 in bug#421560 
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=35;filename=gem-nmu.diff;att=1;bug=421560), 
everything seems to be fine.


as upstream author i would therefore say, these patches are fine to include.

the new upstream release of Gem addresses bug-report #454731;

mfg.asdr
IOhannes


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

Re: Bug#421560: two removal suggestions awl and gem

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

Andreas Henriksson wrote:

On mån, 2008-09-01 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:

- gem: multiple RC bugs with NMU proposal without comment for more
than
   two months, but also seems in bad shape from looking at the
   non-RC bugs: a segfault unsanswered by the maintainer for
   8 months, a new upstream version (that looks like a bugfix
   release) wishlist without maintainer reaction from June.
   I'm CCing NMUer to be or not to be Andreas if he has any
   insights.


Removal seems best from my point of view as well. Noone apparently cares
enough about the package to even offer to test the fixes.


as the upstream maintainer of gem i would eventually volunteer to do the 
debian packaging;
however, i don't know the timeline for lenny (apart from the freeze), so 
i don't know whether this is a good idea to do right now.


i will try to check out the patches in question asap.

fgmasdr
IOhannes


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

Re: two removal suggestions awl and gem

[Andreas Henriksson]

On mån, 2008-09-01 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> 
> - gem: multiple RC bugs with NMU proposal without comment for more
> than
>two months, but also seems in bad shape from looking at the
>non-RC bugs: a segfault unsanswered by the maintainer for
>8 months, a new upstream version (that looks like a bugfix
>release) wishlist without maintainer reaction from June.
>I'm CCing NMUer to be or not to be Andreas if he has any
>insights.

Removal seems best from my point of view as well. Noone apparently cares
enough about the package to even offer to test the fixes.


-- 
Regards,
Andreas Henriksson


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

Re: Bug#493687: two removal suggestions awl and gem

[Luk Claes]

Andrew McMillan wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> two removal suggestions for lenny:
>>
>> - awl: initial upload in mid-July, does not properly build from source,
>>is RC-buggy (#493687).
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'll fix the bugs in AWL this week but I'm happy for this, since the
> point of having it in is kind of lost without the other software it
> depends on which didn't make it into testing before the freeze.

Ok, removal hint added.

Cheers

Luk


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

Re: Bug#493687: two removal suggestions awl and gem

[Andrew McMillan]

On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 21:06 +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> two removal suggestions for lenny:
> 
> - awl: initial upload in mid-July, does not properly build from source,
>is RC-buggy (#493687).

Hi,

I'll fix the bugs in AWL this week but I'm happy for this, since the
point of having it in is kind of lost without the other software it
depends on which didn't make it into testing before the freeze.

Cheers,
Andrew.


Andrew @ McMillan .Net .NZ Porirua, New Zealand
http://andrew.mcmillan.net.nz/Phone: +64(272)DEBIAN
   You will live a long, healthy, happy life and make bags of money.




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

two removal suggestions awl and gem

[Thomas Viehmann]

Hi,

two removal suggestions for lenny:

- awl: initial upload in mid-July, does not properly build from source,
   is RC-buggy (#493687).

- gem: multiple RC bugs with NMU proposal without comment for more than
   two months, but also seems in bad shape from looking at the
   non-RC bugs: a segfault unsanswered by the maintainer for
   8 months, a new upstream version (that looks like a bugfix
   release) wishlist without maintainer reaction from June.
   I'm CCing NMUer to be or not to be Andreas if he has any
   insights.

Neither seems have reverse dependencies in testing.

Kind regards

T.
-- 
Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/


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

Suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

I suggest commenting out the KDE/JACK/unixodbc hint for now, since we know
it won't go in for (a) at least two days and (b) until libpng does (barring
gobs of binNMUs), and we further know that it won't give useful information
until then.

Meanwhile, I suggest uncommenting the imlib/libpng hint so we can see what's
still broken.  gnome-print and libglade might have to be added to the hint
but it's not clear yet.

* fvwm just got sucked into the mess by the ARM autobuilder 'grieg',
  which had the previous version of libpng12-dev
* gmoo doesn't build on ia64, apparently due to the
  imlib11-dev/gdk-imlib1-dev conflict, or on sparc, apparently for some
  different gdk-imlib11-dev reason
* There's something funny going on with the gtkhtml build on ia64 --
  jadetex not installable.
* Similarly, terraform failed to build on sparc because of an uninstallable
  tetex-bin and tetex-extra?
* The 'gb' source package is being removed from unstable, and so it wouldn't
  hurt to remove it from testing.

Incidentally, subversion has an unsolved RC bug (335039), and needs an
obsolete binary removed on MIPS (libsvn-javahl), as well as waiting for
perl.  Removal of rapidsvn and pysvn would still allow the wxwindows2.4
cluster to go in, but I suppose there are more rapidsvn and pysvn users than
users of all the wxwindows2.4 packages put together.  And since libgtk-perl
is waiting for perl, it won't help get libpng in until perl goes in (but
perl might be ready well before subversion, and in that case it might be
advisable).

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

A thousand reasons. http://www.thousandreasons.org/
Lies, theft, war, kidnapping, torture, rape, murder...
Get me out of this fascist nightmare!


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

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Martin Schulze]

Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 05:10:05AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
> > > lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
> > >   (Also has a RC bug though.)
>  
> > yeah, that doesn't sound like a win yet (though it's also built on m68k).
> 
> lsh-utils has following, worrying description:
> 
> --snip--
> Description: Secure Shell v2 (SSH2) protocol server
> 
>  WARNING: This is a work in progress, and may be totally insecure.
> --snip--
> 
> If the description is not out of date (It hasn't changed since last
> stable), is this really something that should go to sarge?

Since it's in woody already, yes.

Regards,

Joey

-- 
Life is too short to run proprietary software.  -- Bdale Garbee


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

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Steve Langasek]

On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 01:42:49PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 05:10:05AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
> > > lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
> > >   (Also has a RC bug though.)

> > yeah, that doesn't sound like a win yet (though it's also built on m68k).

> lsh-utils has following, worrying description:

> --snip--
> Description: Secure Shell v2 (SSH2) protocol server
> ...
>  WARNING: This is a work in progress, and may be totally insecure.
> --snip--

> If the description is not out of date (It hasn't changed since last
> stable), is this really something that should go to sarge?

Surely it was even more of a work in progress when it was allowed into woody
three years ago?  If the security team hasn't asked us yet to drop it from
sarge based on that experience, I don't see any reason to drop it based on a
poorly chosen description.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Riku Voipio]

On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 05:10:05AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
> > lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
> > (Also has a RC bug though.)
 
> yeah, that doesn't sound like a win yet (though it's also built on m68k).

lsh-utils has following, worrying description:

--snip--
Description: Secure Shell v2 (SSH2) protocol server
...
 WARNING: This is a work in progress, and may be totally insecure.
--snip--

If the description is not out of date (It hasn't changed since last
stable), is this really something that should go to sarge?


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

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:06:39PM -1000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Packages that have a security fix blocked by arm only:

> ltris 1.0.6-1.1 needed, have 1.0.6-1 for CAN-2005-0825 
> racoon 1:0.5-5 needed, have 0.3.3-7 for CAN-2005-0398 

Force hints (but not force-hint hints) added.  Feel free to do these
yourself, y'know. :)

> Packages that are blocked by arm and m68k:

> epiphany-browser 1.4.8-2 needed, have 1.4.7-3 for CAN-2005-0238 

Also pushed in because m68k has been uploaded; otherwise I would've waited.

> lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
> lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
>   (Also has a RC bug though.)

yeah, that doesn't sound like a win yet (though it's also built on m68k).

> smail 3.2.0.115-7 needed, have 3.2.0.115-5.1 for CAN-2005-0892 
>   (The RC bug 301428 should not block this fix from sarge.)

Also pushed in, now that it's built on m68k and I've had a chance to look at
301428.

> Packages that are frozen:

> netkit-telnet 0.17-28 needed, have 0.17-26 for DSA-697-1
>   0.17-27 consisted of misc other changes, but
>   0.17-28 only fixed the security hole (which is quite a bad one)

0.17-29 is tentatively approved; still needs to age and get built
everywhere.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 09:11:46AM +0200, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:06:39PM -1000, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Packages that are frozen:
> > 
> > netkit-telnet 0.17-28 needed, have 0.17-26 for DSA-697-1
> > 0.17-27 consisted of misc other changes, but
> > 0.17-28 only fixed the security hole (which is quite a bad one)
> > 
> 
> 0.17-27 changes were trivial and mostly package cleaning. They shouldn't
> be a problem. Here's the changelog:
> 
> netkit-telnet (0.17-28) unstable; urgency=high
> 
>   * telnet/telnet.cc: Fixed buffer overflow in the handling of the
> LINEMODE suboptions in telnet clients (CAN-2005-0469).
> Thanks Martin 'Joey' Schulze for the patch.
> 
>  -- Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:10:01 
> +0200
> 
> netkit-telnet (0.17-27) unstable; urgency=low
> 
>   * New maintainer
>   * debian/control. Removed full stops from packages descriptions to shut
> lintian up.
>   * Changed $HOME of telnetd user to /nonexistent. (Closes: #272312)
>   * debian/menu. Set full path to telnet in command field.
> 
>  -- Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:07:06 
> +0100

God damn it! 

I introduced a bug in 0.17-27, when changed the $HOME dir of telnetd to
/nonexistent, since the postinst call to adduser created /nonexistent.

The changes for 0.17-28 in the postinst are:

- adduser --quiet --system --ingroup telnetd --home /nonexistent telnetd
+ adduser --quiet --no-create-home --disabled-password --system --ingroup 
telnetd --home /nonexistent telnetd
- adduser --quiet --system --group --home /nonexistent telnetd
+ adduser --quiet --no-create-home --disabled-password --system --group --home 
/nonexistent telnetd


Dear RMs, please consider *0.17-29* for sarge, as it contains the security fix,
and the Brown Paper Bag fix for this bug. Sorry guys,

Alberto


The changelog entry:

netkit-telnet (0.17-29) unstable; urgency=high
 
  * The 'Brown Paper Bag' release.
  * Don't create /nonexistent when adding telned user. (Closes: #302395)
  * urgency set to high since this has to go into sarge.





--
Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta| Formación, consultoría y soporte técnico
agi@(inittab.org|debian.org)| en GNU/Linux y software libre
Encrypted mail preferred| http://inittab.com

Key fingerprint = 9782 04E7 2B75 405C F5E9  0C81 C514 AF8E 4BA4 01C3


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Rick Younie]

For m68k:

Joey Hess wrote:
> 
> Packages that have a security fix blocked by arm only:
> 
> ltris 1.0.6-1.1 needed, have 1.0.6-1 for CAN-2005-0825 
> racoon 1:0.5-5 needed, have 0.3.3-7 for CAN-2005-0398 
> 
> Packages that are blocked by arm and m68k:
> 
> epiphany-browser 1.4.8-2 needed, have 1.4.7-3 for CAN-2005-0238 

I'm not able to connect with the box that has it.
I'll build on another box if I don't hear from
the admin in a couple hours.

> lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
> lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
>(Also has a RC bug though.)

Building on crest.

> smail 3.2.0.115-7 needed, have 3.2.0.115-5.1 for CAN-2005-0892 
>(The RC bug 301428 should not block this fix from sarge.)

Uploaded.

> 
> Packages that are frozen:
> 
> netkit-telnet 0.17-28 needed, have 0.17-26 for DSA-697-1
>0.17-27 consisted of misc other changes, but
>0.17-28 only fixed the security hole (which is quite a bad one)
> 


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

Re: suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta]

On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:06:39PM -1000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Packages that are frozen:
> 
> netkit-telnet 0.17-28 needed, have 0.17-26 for DSA-697-1
>   0.17-27 consisted of misc other changes, but
>   0.17-28 only fixed the security hole (which is quite a bad one)
> 

0.17-27 changes were trivial and mostly package cleaning. They shouldn't
be a problem. Here's the changelog:

netkit-telnet (0.17-28) unstable; urgency=high

  * telnet/telnet.cc: Fixed buffer overflow in the handling of the
LINEMODE suboptions in telnet clients (CAN-2005-0469).
Thanks Martin 'Joey' Schulze for the patch.

 -- Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:10:01 
+0200

netkit-telnet (0.17-27) unstable; urgency=low

  * New maintainer
  * debian/control. Removed full stops from packages descriptions to shut
lintian up.
  * Changed $HOME of telnetd user to /nonexistent. (Closes: #272312)
  * debian/menu. Set full path to telnet in command field.

 -- Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:07:06 
+0100



-- 
Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta| Formación, consultoría y soporte técnico
agi@(inittab.org|debian.org)| en GNU/Linux y software libre
Encrypted mail preferred| http://inittab.com

Key fingerprint = 9782 04E7 2B75 405C F5E9  0C81 C514 AF8E 4BA4 01C3


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

suggestions for packages to force to testing for security fixes

[Joey Hess]

Packages that have a security fix blocked by arm only:

ltris 1.0.6-1.1 needed, have 1.0.6-1 for CAN-2005-0825 
racoon 1:0.5-5 needed, have 0.3.3-7 for CAN-2005-0398 

Packages that are blocked by arm and m68k:

epiphany-browser 1.4.8-2 needed, have 1.4.7-3 for CAN-2005-0238 
lsh-utils 2.0-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0389
lsh-utils 2.0.1-1 needed, have 1.4.2-8.2 for CAN-2005-0814 
(Also has a RC bug though.)
smail 3.2.0.115-7 needed, have 3.2.0.115-5.1 for CAN-2005-0892 
(The RC bug 301428 should not block this fix from sarge.)

Packages that are frozen:

netkit-telnet 0.17-28 needed, have 0.17-26 for DSA-697-1
0.17-27 consisted of misc other changes, but
0.17-28 only fixed the security hole (which is quite a bad one)

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: removal suggestions

[Moritz Muehlenhoff]

Steve Langasek wrote:
>> # RC since long time, #188448
>> remove abuse-sdl/1:0.7.0-1
>
> Hints added.

Another removal suggestion:
With the removal of doomlegacy, doomlegacy-data become superfluous
for sarge. Probably for sid well as well, if no one wants to reupload
a fixed doomlegacy package without licence violations.

Cheers,
Morit

Re: removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 08:00:49PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> two suggestions of me.

> # ROM, outdated, #274992
> remove python-xml-0.6/0.6.6-3

> # RC since long time, #188448
> remove abuse-sdl/1:0.7.0-1

Hints added.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

two suggestions of me.

# ROM, outdated, #274992
remove python-xml-0.6/0.6.6-3

# RC since long time, #188448
remove abuse-sdl/1:0.7.0-1


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

# 20041011
# changes to 20041010:
# + add dhcping
# + remove mico (conflict bugs have been fixed in other packages)
# + add amavis-stats
# + add bbdate
# + add ccrypt
# changes to 20041009:
# + don't comment thrust out, only rdepends is a meta-package
#   which can easily be fixed
# + don't comment oregano out, same reason
# + add klog
# + add lsh-utils (commented out)
# + add songwrite
# + add sympa
# + add tigr-glimmer
# + add xa+cv
# + add wordpress
# #274950, unclear license situation
# much rdepends: linda, irssi-scripts, tpp, artist
#remove figlet/2.2.1-1 figfonts/2.2.1-1
# #274992(RoM)
remove python-xml-0.6/0.6.6-3
# #274099(FTBFS), no rdepends
remove im-sdk/11.4.1870-5
# #274777(Conflict), outdated, no rdepends
remove ibcs/981105-4
# #274796,#274776(Conflicts), no rdepends
remove libcgi/1.0-4
# #274773(Conflict)
# Included in the thai task
#remove xiterm+thai/1.06 thai-system/2
# #274505(outdated config.*), really old
# rdepends: junior-arcade (meta package)
remove thrust/0.89c-2
# #274507(outdated config.*), really old, no rdepends
remove ultrapoint/0.4-9
# #274500(outdated config.*), really old
# rdepends: education-electronics (meta package)
remove oregano/0.23-2
# #275277(license issues), no rdepends
# still new, though
#remove nickle/2.43-1
# #274791(Conflict), outdated in sarge due to FTBFS in sid
# rdepends: kde-extras (meta package)
remove klog/0.2.5-1
# #274772(Conflict), no rdepends
# bug is in nettle-bin, too, and nettle-bin is newer, but nettle has rdepends 
#remove lsh-utils/1.4.2-7
# #274218(needs newer lilypond), no rdepends
# I know the package itself can't do anything about it, still it needs to be 
fixed
remove songwrite/0.12b-4
# #273862,#274267, no rdepends
remove sympa/4.1.2-1
# #274780(Conflict)
# med-bio (meta package)
remove tigr-glimmer/2.12-1
# #274771(Conflict), old package, NMU unacked for 3 years!!!
# rdepends: xcin2.3 (Only recommends)
remove xa+cv/0.6-1.2
# #275814(Security), security bug, no rdepends
remove wordpress/1.2.0-1.1
# #274504(outdated config.*), no rdepends
remove dhcping/1.2-1
# #273662(missing depends), no rdepends
remove amavis-stats/0.1.12-4
# #269756(missing build-dep), no rdepends
remove bbdate/0.2.4-4
# #274786(Conflict), no rdepends
remove ccrypt/1.7-4
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

Updated my "virtual hint file"

On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 02:58:06PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> I've gathered some removal suggestions (where I was unsure if we should
> break the depending packages I left the remove hint commented out, so
> that one can dump the following list directly into a hint file)

# 20041010
# changes to 20041009:
# + don't comment thrust out, only rdepends is a meta-package
#   which can easily be fixed
# + don't comment oregano out, same reason
# + add klog
# + add lsh-utils (commented out)
# + add songwrite
# + add sympa
# + add tigr-glimmer
# + add xa+cv
# + add wordpress
# #274950, unclear license situation
# much rdepends: linda, irssi-scripts, tpp, artist
#remove figlet/2.2.1-1 figfonts/2.2.1-1
# #274992(RoM)
remove python-xml-0.6/0.6.6-3
# #274099(FTBFS), no rdepends
remove im-sdk/11.4.1870-5
# #274777(Conflict), outdated, no rdepends
remove ibcs/981105-4
# #274796,#274776(Conflicts), no rdepends
remove libcgi/1.0-4
# #274778(Conflict),orphaned,sid version has additional RC bug, no rdepends
remove mico/2.3.7-5
# #274773(Conflict)
# Included in the thai task
#remove xiterm+thai/1.06 thai-system/2
# #274505(outdated config.*), really old
# rdepends: junior-arcade (meta package)
remove thrust/0.89c-2
# #274507(outdated config.*), really old, no rdepends
remove ultrapoint/0.4-9
# #274500(outdated config.*), really old
# rdepends: education-electronics (meta package)
remove oregano/0.23-2
# #275277(license issues), no rdepends
# still new, though
#remove nickle/2.43-1
# #274791(Conflict), outdated in sarge due to FTBFS in sid
# rdepends: kde-extras (meta package)
remove klog/0.2.5-1
# #274772(Conflict), no rdepends
# bug is in nettle-bin, too, and nettle-bin is newer, but nettle has rdepends 
#remove lsh-utils/1.4.2-7
# #274218(needs newer lilypond), no rdepends
# I know the package itself can't do anything about it, still it needs to be 
fixed
remove songwrite/0.12b-4
# #273862,#274267, no rdepends
remove sympa/4.1.2-1
# #274780(Conflict)
# med-bio (meta package)
remove tigr-glimmer/2.12-1
# #274771(Conflict), old package, NMU unacked for 3 years!!!
# rdepends: xcin2.3 (Only recommends)
remove xa+cv/0.6-1.2
# #275814(Security), security bug, no rdepends
remove wordpress/1.2.0-1.1

-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

I've gathered some removal suggestions (where I was unsure if we should
break the depending packages I left the remove hint commented out, so
that one can dump the following list directly into a hint file)

# 20041009
# #274950, unclear license situation
# much rdepends: linda, irssi-scripts, tpp, artist
#remove figlet/2.2.1-1 figfonts/2.2.1-1
# #274992(RoM)
remove python-xml-0.6/0.6.6-3
# #274099(FTBFS), no rdepends
remove im-sdk/11.4.1870-5
# #274777(Conflict), outdated, no rdepends
remove ibcs/981105-4
# #274796,#274776(Conflicts), no rdepends
remove libcgi/1.0-4
# #274778(Conflict),orphaned,sid version has additional RC bug, no rdepends
remove mico/2.3.7-5
# #274773(Conflict)
# Included in the thai task
#remove xiterm+thai/1.06 thai-system/2
# #274505(outdated config.*), really old
# junior-arcade depends on it
#remove thrust/0.89c-2
# #274507(outdated config.*), really old, no rdepends
remove ultrapoint/0.4-9
# #274500(outdated config.*), really old
# education-electronics depends on it
#remove oregano/0.23-2
# #275277(license issues), no rdepends
# still new, though
#remove nickle/2.43-1

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 02:23:03AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> # RoM: 271051
> remove xen/1.2-4.1

> # RoM (me): 270461
> # (current discussions with the maintainers indicate that the BR is
> # valid)
> remove lincvs/1.3.2-3

> # unusable in its current state: 218497
> remove lids-2.4/1.1.1r2-5

Hints added.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

# RoM: 271051
remove xen/1.2-4.1

# RoM (me): 270461
# (current discussions with the maintainers indicate that the BR is
# valid)
remove lincvs/1.3.2-3

# unusable in its current state: 218497
remove lids-2.4/1.1.1r2-5

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Removal suggestions

[Turbo Fredriksson]

Quoting Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:52:55PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > remove ccs/0.cvs20040703-2
> > # see 262925
> 
> > remove libroxen-gdbmuserauth/1.0-7
> > remove libroxen-kiwilogger/1.3-4
> > remove libroxen-roxpoll-doc/1.3-5
> > remove libroxen-templatecreator/0.4-5
> > remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-1/0-6
> > remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-2/0-6
> > # depend all on removed roxen, should be removed or migrated to roxen3
> > # removal is needed to remove pike and roxen from testing
> 
> Hinted for removal.

Just as well I guess. They work only with Roxen 1.3 and that is/should be
removed from the FTP archive(s)...

There is little point in porting them to Roxen3, since that have all that
built in (exept maybe roxpoll but I don't care about that - it's a really
crappy module anyway :).
-- 
kibo counter-intelligence Mossad attack FSF Marxist toluene
supercomputer Kennedy NSA Cuba domestic disruption Noriega president
DES
[See http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/index.html for more about this]

Re: Removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:52:55PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> remove ccs/0.cvs20040703-2
> # see 262925

> remove libroxen-gdbmuserauth/1.0-7
> remove libroxen-kiwilogger/1.3-4
> remove libroxen-roxpoll-doc/1.3-5
> remove libroxen-templatecreator/0.4-5
> remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-1/0-6
> remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-2/0-6
> # depend all on removed roxen, should be removed or migrated to roxen3
> # removal is needed to remove pike and roxen from testing

Hinted for removal.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

remove ccs/0.cvs20040703-2
# see 262925

remove libroxen-gdbmuserauth/1.0-7
remove libroxen-kiwilogger/1.3-4
remove libroxen-roxpoll-doc/1.3-5
remove libroxen-templatecreator/0.4-5
remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-1/0-6
remove roxen-fonts-iso8859-2/0-6
# depend all on removed roxen, should be removed or migrated to roxen3
# removal is needed to remove pike and roxen from testing

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Removal suggestions (ROM)

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 01:58:36PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> The following packages should be removed from testing on RoM:

> rrdcollect (see #267585)
> omlcs (see #269192)
> xsim (see #267291)

> removal requests filed for unstable
> (but perhaps we want to remove them from testing faster)

Hinted for removal.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Removal suggestions (ROM)

[Frank Lichtenheld]

The following packages should be removed from testing on RoM:

rrdcollect (see #267585)
omlcs (see #269192)
xsim (see #267291)

removal requests filed for unstable
(but perhaps we want to remove them from testing faster)

vis5d
talksoup

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 12:36:16AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> remove doomlegacy/1.41release-1 doomlegacy-data/1.41release-1
> # RC bugs, licensing issues

> remove jsboard/2.0.4-1.2
> # RC bug, the patch seems somewhat dubios to me and requires testing
> # we can't provide atm

> remove mindterm/1.2.1-10
> # See #263362

All hinted for removal, along with the jsboard theme packages.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

* Frank Lichtenheld ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040822 00:55]:
> remove jsboard/2.0.4-1.2
> # RC bug, the patch seems somewhat dubios to me and requires testing
> # we can't provide atm

Needs also to remove
jsboard-theme-diary-ko/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-trash-ko/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-aicom-ko/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-wizz-ko/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-trash-en/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-diary-en/0.5-1
jsboard-theme-debian-ko/0.5-1



Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

remove doomlegacy/1.41release-1 doomlegacy-data/1.41release-1
# RC bugs, licensing issues

remove jsboard/2.0.4-1.2
# RC bug, the patch seems somewhat dubios to me and requires testing
# we can't provide atm

remove mindterm/1.2.1-10
# See #263362

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 03:54:52AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> remove roleplaying/2.0-10

> RC bug, ITA, but adopter is slow...

> remove lush/1.0+cvs.2003.07.15

> RC bug, orphaned, upstream issue, long standing.

Both hinted.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

remove roleplaying/2.0-10

RC bug, ITA, but adopter is slow...

remove lush/1.0+cvs.2003.07.15

RC bug, orphaned, upstream issue, long standing.

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: further removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 06:51:27PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> # Package: pbbuttonsd (optional; Jan-Hendrik Palic)remove 
> pbbuttonsd/0.5.3a-2
> # 244361 [ + ] pbbuttonsd: FTBFS: Cannot find depcomp
> # no maintainer reaction
> remove pbbuttonsd/0.5.3a-2
> # kdeutils has an unsatisfied build-dependency: pbbuttonsd-dev
> remove gtkpbbuttons/0.6.2-1 powerprefs/0.3.1-1

I would hate to see that one go and just contacted the maintainer
with an offer to help/to NMU. Either way I will prepare an upload
so please don't remove it right now.

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: further removal suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 12:31:00PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > # Package: gaim (optional; Robert McQueen)remove gaim/1:0.77-1
> > # 248867 [   ] gaim: Gaim 0.77 crashes with SIGSEGV when entering 
> > text when using MSN over HTTP method
> > # no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
> > remove gaim/1:0.77-1
> 
> This bug has no business being grave.  Gaim supports multiple other
> protocols and this isn't even the standard implementation of the MSN
> protocol.  This bug should be priority important, or perhaps even normal,
> and should not be RC.

I agree, and have just downgraded the bug.

Thanks,

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: further removal suggestions

[Russ Allbery]

Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> # Package: gaim (optional; Robert McQueen)remove gaim/1:0.77-1
> # 248867 [   ] gaim: Gaim 0.77 crashes with SIGSEGV when entering 
> text when using MSN over HTTP method
> # no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
> remove gaim/1:0.77-1

This bug has no business being grave.  Gaim supports multiple other
protocols and this isn't even the standard implementation of the MSN
protocol.  This bug should be priority important, or perhaps even normal,
and should not be RC.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 

further removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

a next round of removal suggestions. I'm fairly certain that the
removal suggestion on kdebase will not be taken (and I wouldn't put it
in a file if I could directly enter hints), and also the hint on
libdvdnav is doubtable. Also, please note, that, as always, my removal
suggestions are rather aggressive.

Something about the format: During the time, I became tired of writing
"no dependencies". There is - starting with pbbuttonsd - just a second
line with more removal suggestions (then there are binary
dependencies), or not (in which case there are none). If this is ok, I
tend to keep this in future.


Cheers,
Andi

# suggestions from 2004-06-18

# Package: crash (optional; Josh Huber)remove crash/3.3-1.2
# 249954 [   ] crash: FTBFS [i386] missing ./crash
# maintainer said mid of May to fix it, no further reaction to it.
# no dependencies
remove crash/3.3-1.2

# Package: gaim (optional; Robert McQueen)remove gaim/1:0.77-1
# 248867 [   ] gaim: Gaim 0.77 crashes with SIGSEGV when entering text 
when using MSN over HTTP method
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove gaim/1:0.77-1

# Package: ghc-cvs (optional; Ian Lynagh (wibble))remove ghc-cvs/20031220-3
# 249749 [   ] ghc-cvs: FTBFS: Problems compiling GLUT bindings
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove ghc-cvs/20031220-3

# Package: glcpu (optional; David Martínez Moreno)remove glcpu/1.0.1-4
# 249750 [ + ] glcpu: FTBFS: Missing Build-Depends
# maintainer said on 2004-05-30 that he'll upload "tomorrow or so"; no 
dependencies
remove glcpu/1.0.1-4

# Package: gnome-vfs-extras (optional; Joe Drew)remove 
gnome-vfs-extras/0.2.0-4
# 250441 [   ] gnome-vfs-extras: FTBFS autotools misuse
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove gnome-vfs-extras/0.2.0-4

# Package: gnue-navigator (optional; Jeff Bailey)remove 
gnue-navigator/0.0.6-1
# 250443 [   ] gnue-navigator: FTBFS - TypeError: function takes at 
most 2 arguments (3 given)
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove gnue-navigator/0.0.6-1

# Package: gnunet (optional; RFAed)remove gnunet/0.6.1b-1
# 249894 [   ] gnunet_0.6.2a-2(alpha/amd64/ia64): FTBFS: initializer 
element errors
# RC since 2004-05-22
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove gnunet/0.6.1b-1

# Package: gok (optional; Akira TAGOH et al.)remove gok/0.9.4-2
# 250448 [   ] gok: FTBFS missing various build depends
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove gok/0.9.4-2

# Package: hbf-jfs56 (optional; Anthony Fok)remove hbf-jfs56/1.0-3
# 167544 [   ] hbf-jfs56: postremoval script depends on tetex-bin
# serious since 2004-05-25
# no maintainer reaction; no binary dependencies
remove hbf-jfs56/1.0-3
# apt-howto has an unsatisfied build-dependency: hbf-jfs56
# debian-reference has an unsatisfied build-dependency: hbf-jfs56

# Package: konqueror (optional; Debian Qt/KDE Maintainers et al.)remove 
kdebase/4:3.2.2-1
# 250215 [ S ] CAN-2004-0411: URI handlers do not filter properly
# no maintainer reaction
remove kdebase/4:3.2.2-1
# lots of binary dependencies

# Package: libdvdnav (optional; Philipp Matthias Hahn)remove 
libdvdnav/0.1.9-2
# 249189 [   ] libdvdnav: [FTBFS] needs to use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE or 
not build-depend on automake
# no maintainer reaction
remove libdvdnav/0.1.9-2
# reverse depends: gst-plugins
# if this options is taken, would need an appropriate gst-plugins in tpu

# Package: libmx4j-java (optional; Debian Java Maintainers et al.)remove 
libmx4j-java/2.0.1-1
# 251019 [   ] libmx4j-java: Depends on libbcel-java in contrib
# no maintainer reaction
remove libmx4j-java/2.0.1-1
# revers depends: libcommons-modeler-java
remove libcommons-modeler-java/1.1-1

# Package: libyahoo2 (optional; Gopal Narayanan)remove libyahoo2/0.7.4-1
# 244913 [ + ] libyahoo2_0.7.4-1(ia64/unstable): FTBFS: compiler errors
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove libyahoo2/0.7.4-1

# Package: lilypond (optional; Anthony Fok)remove lilypond/2.1.0-2
# 250622 [   ] lilypond: FTBFS error: `gs' failed (status 139)
# no maintainer reaction
remove lilypond/2.1.0-2
# reverse depends: songwrite, alml
remove songwrite/0.12b-3
remove alml/2004.05.21-1

# Package: ndtpd (optional; Masayuki Hatta (mhatta))remove ndtpd/3.1.5-5
# 249669 [   ] ndtpd: should not ship info dir.gz and dir.old.gz files
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove ndtpd/3.1.5-5

# Package: pbbuttonsd (optional; Jan-Hendrik Palic)remove 
pbbuttonsd/0.5.3a-2
# 244361 [ + ] pbbuttonsd: FTBFS: Cannot find depcomp
# no maintainer reaction
remove pbbuttonsd/0.5.3a-2
# kdeutils has an unsatisfied build-dependency: pbbuttonsd-dev
remove gtkpbbuttons/0.6.2-1 powerprefs/0.3.1-1

# Package: pgplot5 (optional; non-free; Gopal Narayanan)remove 
pgplot5/5.2.2-4
# 248551 [   ] FTBFS: dh_dhelp not found
# no ma

Re: more removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 10:54:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> thanks for adding the hints. I have however one question:

> * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040614 12:25]:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 12:09:41AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:

> > > # segfaults; report from 2004-03-30
> > > # no maintainer reaction
> > > # depends: axkit-language-htmldoc
> > > # build-depends: freeswan, openswan, privoxy
> > > # 241101
> > > remove htmldoc/1.8.23-1.1

> > Hinted.

> > > # axkit-language-htmldoc is ITAed since 2003-09-10.
> > > remove axkit/1.6.2-3

> > Not hinted because it wouldn't stay out on its own.  If you believe this
> > package should be removed from the archive, please file a removal 
> > request against ftp.debian.org through the QA team requesting its
> > removal from sid.

> Hm, I thought that htmldoc will only go out of testing if also
> axkit-language-htmldoc will go out; this was also the reason for the
> removal hint on axkit-language-htmldoc, and AFAICS
> axkit-language-htmldoc will stay out untill htmldoc goes in again.

I'm sorry, I appear to be suffering from a rare form of dyslexia that
affects only my ability to read package relationships.  You are of
course correct; axkit has been added to the hints list.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: more removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

thanks for adding the hints. I have however one question:

* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040614 12:25]:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 12:09:41AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:

> > # segfaults; report from 2004-03-30
> > # no maintainer reaction
> > # depends: axkit-language-htmldoc
> > # build-depends: freeswan, openswan, privoxy
> > # 241101
> > remove htmldoc/1.8.23-1.1
> 
> Hinted.
> 
> > # axkit-language-htmldoc is ITAed since 2003-09-10.
> > remove axkit/1.6.2-3
> 
> Not hinted because it wouldn't stay out on its own.  If you believe this
> package should be removed from the archive, please file a removal 
> request against ftp.debian.org through the QA team requesting its
> removal from sid.

Hm, I thought that htmldoc will only go out of testing if also
axkit-language-htmldoc will go out; this was also the reason for the
removal hint on axkit-language-htmldoc, and AFAICS
axkit-language-htmldoc will stay out untill htmldoc goes in again.



Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: more removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 12:09:41AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:

> # suggestions from 2004-06-09

> # build-dependency disappeared; report from 2004-05-02; no maintainer reaction
> # no dependencies
> # 246963
> remove dchub/0.4.5-2

Hinted.

> # security issue; report from 2004-04-27; no maintainer reaction
> # no dependencies
> # 246093
> remove gnome-cups-manager/0.17-3

Downgraded; and closed anyway by the maintainer.

> # build-dependency disappeared; serious since 2004-03-29
> # no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
> # 229953
> remove hitop/0.36-3

Hinted.

> # segfaults; report from 2004-03-30
> # no maintainer reaction
> # depends: axkit-language-htmldoc
> # build-depends: freeswan, openswan, privoxy
> # 241101
> remove htmldoc/1.8.23-1.1

Hinted.

> # axkit-language-htmldoc is ITAed since 2003-09-10.
> remove axkit/1.6.2-3

Not hinted because it wouldn't stay out on its own.  If you believe this
package should be removed from the archive, please file a removal 
request against ftp.debian.org through the QA team requesting its
removal from sid.

> # build-depends on gcc-3.2/g++-3.2
> # FTBFS: Patches fail to apply
> # 243048, 246797
> # no maintainer reaction
> # depends: xen-domain0-utils
> remove xen/1.2-4

Meh, and just when we started using this at work.  I think I'll have to
go out on a limb to try to save this one, before hinting it out...

> # zinf: Zinf crashes with segmentation fault when searching for MyMusic for 
> the
> # first time; sonce 2004-04-08
> # no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
> remove zinf/2.2.5-3

Hinted.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

* Martin Michlmayr ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040609 18:10]:
> * Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-03 01:07]:
> > # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> > remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> > remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

> Should this maybe be removed from unstable then?  The same question
> basically goes for more or all of the other removal requests.  If a
> package is unmaintained and seems not very important, it might be
> better to remove it from Debian altogether.

Well, it's IMHO just a question of "how long does the maintainer have
time to fix a bug"? As I hope / wish that we release sarge soon, the
threshold for sarge where I start action is significantly lower than
the general threshold.

However, after the deep freeze of sarge, I plan to inspect all
packages that are not in sarge, and propose removal / orphaning on a
case-by-case basis.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-03 01:07]:
> # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

Should this maybe be removed from unstable then?  The same question
basically goes for more or all of the other removal requests.  If a
package is unmaintained and seems not very important, it might be
better to remove it from Debian altogether.
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 10:04:54PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:

> > On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:07:02AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> 
> >> # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
> >> remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1

> > Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.
> > Thoughts?

> Xemacs21 in testing is too old and buggy to support; it's the same version
> which was in woody.

> Myself, I think xemacs21 needs to be removed from testing.  (And the
> maintainer should be asked to orphan it again, as well.)  This situation
> with xemacs21 has gone on far too long.

Quickly done, then.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:07:02AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:

>> # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
>> remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1
> 
> Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.
> Thoughts?

Xemacs21 in testing is too old and buggy to support; it's the same version
which was in woody.

Apparently nobody has been able/willing to clear up the RC bugs in the
version in sid.  These are:

#206667: FTBFS on m68k
  This shouldn't be RC, because xemacs21 has never built on m68k.  I don't
know why the "maintainer" hasn't changed its severity
#233790, #233791, #25, #207412: Installation failures.
#249672: ships info.dir.gz

There have been requests for help to the debian-emacsen mailing list.

The "maintainer" has proved unable to do anything about the bugs.

Myself, I think xemacs21 needs to be removed from testing.  (And the
maintainer should be asked to orphan it again, as well.)  This situation
with xemacs21 has gone on far too long.

-- 
There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 01:35:05PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> > > remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> > > remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

> > At only 22 days, these are currently below my threshold.

> What is your current threshold?

Roughly 30, until we get closer to having all of the RC bugs older than
that being addressed consistently (through fixes or removals).

> > > # ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile
> > > # reason: updates from woody to sarge work.

> > I would prefer that if the package is going to specially handle the
> > config file, the maintainer use a tool such as ucf instead of touching a
> > conffile.  As such, I'm not going to tag this myself, even though the
> > impact appears to be minimal.

> I fully agree with you about the way I'd like a package handles this.
> However, due to the minimal impact of the bug and the de-facto
> importance of postfix, I didn't make a removal suggestion on postfix
> (even as there is a second RC-bug that's definitly not sarge-ignore).

I think it's worth noting that the impact of this bug may also extend
beyond this particular package, since a package as important as postfix
is likely to be imitated (poorly) by others.  C.f. the longstanding
problem with xfree86's lossy config file handling.  Even if it appears
to not cause any directly user-affecting bugs at present, editing
conffiles is just something you Don't Do.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

more removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

some more removal suggestions. I now put my minimum time frame to 21
days. As usual, I consider my suggestions to be a bit agressive.


# suggestions from 2004-06-09

# build-dependency disappeared; report from 2004-05-02; no maintainer reaction
# no dependencies
# 246963
remove dchub/0.4.5-2

# security issue; report from 2004-04-27; no maintainer reaction
# no dependencies
# 246093
remove gnome-cups-manager/0.17-3

# build-dependency disappeared; serious since 2004-03-29
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
# 229953
remove hitop/0.36-3

# segfaults; report from 2004-03-30
# no maintainer reaction
# depends: axkit-language-htmldoc
# build-depends: freeswan, openswan, privoxy
# 241101
remove htmldoc/1.8.23-1.1
# axkit-language-htmldoc is ITAed since 2003-09-10.
remove axkit/1.6.2-3

# build-depends on gcc-3.2/g++-3.2
# FTBFS: Patches fail to apply
# 243048, 246797
# no maintainer reaction
# depends: xen-domain0-utils
remove xen/1.2-4

# zinf: Zinf crashes with segmentation fault when searching for MyMusic for the
# first time; sonce 2004-04-08
# no maintainer reaction; no dependencies
remove zinf/2.2.5-3


I hope my removal suggestions are helpful. If there are any issues
with it, please don't hesitate to tell me.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Andreas Metzler]

On 2004-06-06 Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:07:02AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
[...]
> > # wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
> > remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

> Given that I find 210 usages of test test1 -a test2 in 175 postinsts on
> my local system, and only four of those postinst scripts declare
> /bin/bash as an interpreter, I would like to see a POSIX citation for
> this bug

That is easy.[1]
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/test.html
-a is an XSI extension

> before we endure the joy of that particular mass-bugfiling.

> Comment sent to the bug submitter.  I'm inclined to tag this as
> sarge-ignore regardless of the outcome, given the number of affected
> packages and the minimal concrete impact.
[...]

I fully agree. "Any POSIX compatible shell" is not very helpful,
without naming which version of POSIX, and up until some moths ago we
interpreted it as "runs on dash". ;-) Now we have posh available...
 cu andreas

[1] http://www.google.com/search?q=susv3+posix
third hit.
-- 
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt]

Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040606 03:55]:
>> Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
>>> remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1
>> Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.
>> Thoughts?
> Strange.
> grep-dctrl -Fdepends,recommends xemacs21-packages < 
> /org/ftp.root/debian/dists/sarge/main/binary-i386/Packages
> gives me no output at all. Do I make some silly mistake?

Yes. xemacs21-packages is the source package, creating
xemacs21-basesupport, xemacs21-mulesupport-el, xemacs21-basesupport-el
and xemacs21-mulesupport.

Marc
-- 
$_=')(hBCdzVnS})3..0}_$;//::niam/s~=)]3[))_$(rellac(=_$({pam(esrever })e$.)4/3*
)e$(htgnel+23(rhc,"u"(kcapnu ,""nioj ;|_- |/+9-0z-aZ-A|rt~=e$;_$=e${pam tnirp{y
V2ajFGabus} yV2ajFGa&{gwmclBHIbus}gwmclBHI&{yVGa09mbbus}yVGa09mb&{hBCdzVnSbus';
s/\n//g;s/bus/\nbus/g;eval scalar reverse   # 


pgpqTs0VFr5Fj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040606 03:55]:
> Digging into these now.  BTW, it would be helpful if you would include
> bug numbers with your requests, as this is ultimately what I base my
> decision on (since at a minimum I have to check that the bugs still
> apply), and what I've been using as the comment on the hints.

Ok, will do this in future.

> > # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> > remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> > remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

> At only 22 days, these are currently below my threshold.

What is your current threshold?


> > # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
> > remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1

> Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.
> Thoughts?

Strange.
grep-dctrl -Fdepends,recommends xemacs21-packages < 
/org/ftp.root/debian/dists/sarge/main/binary-i386/Packages
gives me no output at all. Do I make some silly mistake?


> > # ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile
> > # reason: updates from woody to sarge work.
> 
> I would prefer that if the package is going to specially handle the
> config file, the maintainer use a tool such as ucf instead of touching a
> conffile.  As such, I'm not going to tag this myself, even though the
> impact appears to be minimal.

I fully agree with you about the way I'd like a package handles this.
However, due to the minimal impact of the bug and the de-facto
importance of postfix, I didn't make a removal suggestion on postfix
(even as there is a second RC-bug that's definitly not sarge-ignore).


> > # wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
> > remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

> Given that I find 210 usages of test test1 -a test2 in 175 postinsts on
> my local system, and only four of those postinst scripts declare
> /bin/bash as an interpreter, I would like to see a POSIX citation for
> this bug before we endure the joy of that particular mass-bugfiling.
> 
> Comment sent to the bug submitter.  I'm inclined to tag this as
> sarge-ignore regardless of the outcome, given the number of affected
> packages and the minimal concrete impact.

Ah, also ok.



Thanks for using these suggestions.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:07:02AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> I updated my aggressive removal suggestions. Please tell me if there
> are any issues with it, so that I can update them. As I said, these
> suggestions are quite aggressive IMHO, and I also picked some packages
> up with the intention: It's just long enough, remove it.

> New are also ignore-suggestions. At the end are the left over removal
> suggestions from my last mail.

Digging into these now.  BTW, it would be helpful if you would include
bug numbers with your requests, as this is ultimately what I base my
decision on (since at a minimum I have to check that the bugs still
apply), and what I've been using as the comment on the hints.

> # suggestions from 2004-06-02

> # icukrell: Too buggy for Testing (bug report from maintainer)
> remove icukrell/2.0.0pre0.1-2
> # don't ship 0.3.1-5.1 with sarge (bug report from maintainer)
> remove vegastrike/0.3.1-5.1

Hints added.

> # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

At only 22 days, these are currently below my threshold.

> # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
> remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1

Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.
Thoughts?

> # can't fulfill the Recommends since two months, no maintainer reaction
> remove python-osd/0.2.6-1

> # FTBFS since 2004-04-29; plptools: FTBFS: kdb2html is no more
> remove plptools/0.12-4

Hinted.

> # sarge-ignore suggestions

> # ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile
> # reason: updates from woody to sarge work.

I would prefer that if the package is going to specially handle the
config file, the maintainer use a tool such as ucf instead of touching a
conffile.  As such, I'm not going to tag this myself, even though the
impact appears to be minimal.

> # ignore 246047
> # ignore 246048
> # ignore 246049
> # reason: bug is that the Star data catalogue may not be distributed in
> # modified form

Shelved pending resolution of the current release policy crisis.

> # left-overs from last mail

> # fixing was promised at start of April
> remove gnats/4.0-3

According to the maintainer, only the version in unstable has this bug;
tagged accordingly.

> # gnatsweb depend on gnats
> # remove gnatsweb/4.00-1

Actually, it only suggests gnats, AFAICT.  Bizarre, that.

> # bug report at start of April, no reaction to it
> remove htdig/3.2.0b5-5

Hinted.

> # FTBFS / build-depends-conflict, maintainer doesn't want NMUs
> remove libapache-mod-auth-useragent/1.0-7
> remove libapache-mod-cgi-debug/0.7-9
> remove libapache-mod-filter/1.4-8
> remove libapache-mod-index-rss/0.10-9
> remove libapache-mod-ldap/1.4-7
> remove libapache-mod-mp3/0.39-3
> remove libapache-mod-random/1.4-8
> remove libapache-mod-relocate/1.0-9
> remove libapache-mod-repository/0.3-8
> remove libapache-mod-text2html/1.0-7
> remove libapache-mod-trigger/1.1-4

All hinted.

> # wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
> remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

Given that I find 210 usages of test test1 -a test2 in 175 postinsts on
my local system, and only four of those postinst scripts declare
/bin/bash as an interpreter, I would like to see a POSIX citation for
this bug before we endure the joy of that particular mass-bugfiling.

Comment sent to the bug submitter.  I'm inclined to tag this as
sarge-ignore regardless of the outcome, given the number of affected
packages and the minimal concrete impact.

> # unbuildable since some time; also not part of woody
> remove pixieplus/0.5.4-2

> # license requires non-commercial use; bug since 20 Mar w/o
> # maintainers reaction
> remove smssend/3.2-0.2

Both hinted.  Note that in the latter bug, the maintainer did react, but
his reaction is hidden in a control message.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

removal / ignore suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

I updated my aggressive removal suggestions. Please tell me if there
are any issues with it, so that I can update them. As I said, these
suggestions are quite aggressive IMHO, and I also picked some packages
up with the intention: It's just long enough, remove it.

New are also ignore-suggestions. At the end are the left over removal
suggestions from my last mail.


Cheers,
Andi

# suggestions from 2004-06-02

# icukrell: Too buggy for Testing (bug report from maintainer)
remove icukrell/2.0.0pre0.1-2
# don't ship 0.3.1-5.1 with sarge (bug report from maintainer)
remove vegastrike/0.3.1-5.1

# undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
remove 3270/3.2.17-2
remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

# FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1

# can't fulfill the Recommends since two months, no maintainer reaction
remove python-osd/0.2.6-1

# FTBFS since 2004-04-29; plptools: FTBFS: kdb2html is no more
remove plptools/0.12-4

# sarge-ignore suggestions

# ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile
# reason: updates from woody to sarge work.

# ignore 246047
# ignore 246048
# ignore 246049
# reason: bug is that the Star data catalogue may not be distributed in
# modified form



# left-overs from last mail

# fixing was promised at start of April
remove gnats/4.0-3
# gnatsweb depend on gnats
# remove gnatsweb/4.00-1

# bug report at start of April, no reaction to it
remove htdig/3.2.0b5-5

# FTBFS / build-depends-conflict, maintainer doesn't want NMUs
remove libapache-mod-auth-useragent/1.0-7
remove libapache-mod-cgi-debug/0.7-9
remove libapache-mod-filter/1.4-8
remove libapache-mod-index-rss/0.10-9
remove libapache-mod-ldap/1.4-7
remove libapache-mod-mp3/0.39-3
remove libapache-mod-random/1.4-8
remove libapache-mod-relocate/1.0-9
remove libapache-mod-repository/0.3-8
remove libapache-mod-text2html/1.0-7
remove libapache-mod-trigger/1.1-4

# wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

# unbuildable since some time; also not part of woody
remove pixieplus/0.5.4-2

# license requires non-commercial use; bug since 20 Mar w/o
# maintainers reaction
remove smssend/3.2-0.2

-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

aggressive removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

Hi,

as just promised on IRC, here are some aggressive removal suggestions.
They probably need some re-viewing.

# kernels that have already a newer version in testing:

# ignore d-i kernel-image-2.4.25-s390/2.4.25-2
remove kernel-image-2.4.21-s390/2.4.21-2
# ignore version kernel-patch-2.4.25-mips/2.4.25-0.040415.1 (2.4.25-0.040415.1)
remove kernel-patch-2.4.19-mips/2.4.19-0.020911.8
# ignore version kernel-patch-2.4.25-apus/2.4.25-2 (2.4.25-2)
remove kernel-patch-2.4.20-apus/2.4.20-1
# ignore version kernel-patch-2.4.25-powerpc/2.4.25-8 (2.4.25-8)
remove kernel-patch-2.4.22-powerpc/2.4.22-13
# ignore version kernel-image-2.6.5-alpha/2.6.5-4 (2.6.5-4)
remove kernel-image-2.6.3-alpha/2.6.3-2
# ignore version kernel-image-2.6.5-i386/2.6.5-4 (2.6.5-4)
remove kernel-image-2.6.3-i386/2.6.3-2
# ignore version kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.6/2.6.6-2 (2.6.6-2)
remove kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.5/2.6.5-2


# the rest are all RC-bugs and not really in being fixed for at least 14 days:

# 2.2-kernel-patches with FTBFS; maintainer did not agree to removing
# from sid till now
remove kernel-patch-2.2-lids/0.11.0-3
remove kernel-patch-2.2.17-vm-global/3
remove kernel-patch-2.2.17-vm-global/2
remove kernel-patch-2.2.20-p3/2
remove kernel-patch-2.2.20-raid/4

# fixing was promised at start of April
remove gnats/4.0-3
# gnatsweb depend on gnats
# remove gnatsweb/4.00-1

# bug report at start of April, no reaction to it
remove htdig/3.2.0b5-5

# FTBFS / build-depends-conflict, maintainer doesn't want NMUs
remove libapache-mod-auth-useragent/1.0-7
remove libapache-mod-cgi-debug/0.7-9
remove libapache-mod-filter/1.4-8
remove libapache-mod-index-rss/0.10-9
remove libapache-mod-ldap/1.4-7
remove libapache-mod-mp3/0.39-3
remove libapache-mod-random/1.4-8
remove libapache-mod-relocate/1.0-9
remove libapache-mod-repository/0.3-8
remove libapache-mod-text2html/1.0-7
remove libapache-mod-trigger/1.1-4

# wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

# unbuildable since some time; also not part of woody
remove pixieplus/0.5.4-2

# license requires non-commercial use; bug since 20 Mar w/o
# maintainers reaction
remove smssend/3.2-0.2



Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: removal suggestions

[Andreas Barth]

* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040426 04:40]:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 03:41:22PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > I was going through the RC bug list while preparing the BSP. The
> > following packages are IMHO candidates for removal from testing.

> > kernel-headers-2.2.20-sparc
> > kernel-image-2.2.20-sun4dm-smp
> > kernel-image-2.4.17-s390
> > kernel-patch-2.2-lids
> > kernel-patch-2.2.17-vm-global
> > kernel-patch-2.2.18-vm-global
> > kernel-patch-2.2.20-arm
> > kernel-patch-2.2.20-p3
> > kernel-patch-2.2.20-raid
> 
> > Some of them should probably removed from unstable, too.
> > I'm not familiar enough with kernel issues too make final
> > suggestions here (but all of them sound reasonable to me).
> 
> I would expect that all of these should be removed from unstable, and
> suggest that filing a bug against ftp.debian.org for each requesting its
> removal would be better than having then hand-processed for both testing
> *and* unstable.

For the patches (except the -arm-one), I reassigned the RC-bug from
the package to ftp.d.o and the package some days ago with asking for
removal.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Re: removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 03:41:22PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> I was going through the RC bug list while preparing the BSP. The
> following packages are IMHO candidates for removal from testing.

> remove ddt/0.5.9.1

> old RC bug (cannot fulfill build-deps), from the comments in the BR
> I read that it is nontrivial to fix and a upstream issue.

Hmm, I don't see anything in that report that would imply it's
particularly hard to fix.  Hinted, regardless.

> remove lgc-pg/0.32-1
> remove lgeneral/1.1.1-3

> "move to contrib" issue, no response from maintainer ("only" three weeks
> old, though).

Four weeks.  Hinted.

> And there are many kernel removal suggestions (as RC bugs) for

> kernel-headers-2.2.20-sparc
> kernel-image-2.2.20-sun4dm-smp
> kernel-image-2.4.17-s390
> kernel-patch-2.2-lids
> kernel-patch-2.2.17-vm-global
> kernel-patch-2.2.18-vm-global
> kernel-patch-2.2.20-arm
> kernel-patch-2.2.20-p3
> kernel-patch-2.2.20-raid

> Some of them should probably removed from unstable, too.
> I'm not familiar enough with kernel issues too make final
> suggestions here (but all of them sound reasonable to me).

I would expect that all of these should be removed from unstable, and
suggest that filing a bug against ftp.debian.org for each requesting its
removal would be better than having then hand-processed for both testing
*and* unstable.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

Hi.

I was going through the RC bug list while preparing the BSP. The
following packages are IMHO candidates for removal from testing.

remove ddt/0.5.9.1

old RC bug (cannot fulfill build-deps), from the comments in the BR
I read that it is nontrivial to fix and a upstream issue.

remove gnome-jabber/0.3+cvs.20031208-1

RC bug, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225763&msg=5
Orphaned

remove lgc-pg/0.32-1
remove lgeneral/1.1.1-3

"move to contrib" issue, no response from maintainer ("only" three weeks
old, though).

remove pysol/4.82-1

See 
http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/debian-release-200403/msg00121.html
for a reasoning.

And there are many kernel removal suggestions (as RC bugs) for

kernel-headers-2.2.20-sparc
kernel-image-2.2.20-sun4dm-smp
kernel-image-2.4.17-s390
kernel-patch-2.2-lids
kernel-patch-2.2.17-vm-global
kernel-patch-2.2.18-vm-global
kernel-patch-2.2.20-arm
kernel-patch-2.2.20-p3
kernel-patch-2.2.20-raid

Some of them should probably removed from unstable, too.
I'm not familiar enough with kernel issues too make final
suggestions here (but all of them sound reasonable to me).

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

On Friday 26 March 2004 17.59, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:

> In the mean time I see Adrian has tagged this bug unreproducible.

Just to make sure nobody misunderstands: I propose downgrading as well, but I 
haven't done that as (i) IANADD and (ii) I'm no regular bug-triage/qa 
contributor either.

greets
-- vbi
-- 
Today is Sweetmorn, the 13rd day of Discord in the YOLD 3170


pgp91v5ZI94lS.pgp
Description: signature

Re: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Steve Langasek]

On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 01:14:02PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >> => easy lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7
> >> python-scientific/2.4.5-2 hdf5/1.6.1-4 netpipe/3.6-1 xmpi/2.2.3b8-3
> >> Lets that whole list in.

> Well, this isn't working, apparently, from the big "FAILED" in
> update_output.txt, and I can't tell why from update-output.txt.  :-P  Try
> changing it to a 'hint' perhaps?
> => hint lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7

Changed with an s/easy/hint/.  That should at least give us better
insight into the hold-up, if nothing else.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Nathanael Nerode]

Steve Langasek wrote:

>> => easy lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7
>> python-scientific/2.4.5-2 hdf5/1.6.1-4 netpipe/3.6-1 xmpi/2.2.3b8-3
>> Lets that whole list in.

Well, this isn't working, apparently, from the big "FAILED" in
update_output.txt, and I can't tell why from update-output.txt.  :-P  Try
changing it to a 'hint' perhaps?
=> hint lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:

> Er, if upstream agrees that there may be a data-lossage bug here, how
> many users do you think have to notice it before it should be considered
> RC?

Timo is just being really cautious.

>  How sure are you that this bug doesn't affect other folders, and
> users just haven't noticed their mail is disappearing yet?
>

Well, they haven't mentioned it to me. I use dovecot with mbox heavily and
I know many other people who do fwiw.

> I thought upstream was supposedly working on fixing this, anyways?
>

Yes but he's kind of dropped out of sight lately.  I'll see if I can give
him a nudge.

In the mean time I see Adrian has tagged this bug unreproducible.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

tags 225048 +unreproducible
thanks

On Thursday 25 March 2004 12.28, Pascal Hakim wrote:

[dovecot]

>   Doesn't this bug only happen in mbox files? You could simply drop mbox
> support, it appears to be working fine with maildir (which is how I
> suspect how must people are using it (I certainly am (woah! 3 levels of
> nested brackets))).

I'd be most annoyed if my mailserver suddenly decided not to work anymore 
after an upgrade.

So, better drop dovecot from testing *now*. People who have dovecot will not 
really notice, and perhaps this will be motivation for someone (upstream?) to 
fix that bug.

Or drop dovecot from testing, and add a new package dovecot-nombox which then 
doesn't have that bug. A debconf notice 'dovecot now doesn't support mbox 
folders anymore' does *not* suffice, imho, as a quick apt-get upgrade 
suddenly escalates to a convert-the-mailserver (and users' .procmailrc, too, 
and maybe the POP server doesn't even support maildir, and ...) 


As a dovecot user, I can say that I never, ever had any data loss with dovecot 
(yes, I'm using mbox). I have a few folders which frequently get one or a few 
new mail and then are emptied again, and all the messages that should be 
there, were there.

So I'd say downgrade at least until somehone can reproduce this with a 
different installation than the submitter's. Note also that the submitter 
runs a self-made woody backport, so it could just be bad dovecot / libc / 
compiler / whatever interaction.

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
Every bug you find is the last one.


pgproSBfBjQTO.pgp
Description: signature

Re: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 11:04:39PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> severity 227464 important
> reassign 232664 uucp

> I'm reassigning this bug back to uucp.  The fact that
> mail-transport-agent did correlate with the rmail command in the past
> does not seem to impose an obligation on MTA maintainers to ensure this
> going forward.  Without a policy mandate, the responsibility seems to
> lie with the uucp package to depend on a list of acceptable packages (in
> the absence of a virtual package with the requisite meaning).

Irregardless of anything else it's an incompatible change in the
sendmail package that's got the potential to break mail setups on
upgrade (especially partial upgrades).

-- 
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Pascal Hakim]

On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 16:54, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:
> 
> > > => remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-3
> > > #225048 (data loss).  I know this has been argued, but I still think it's
> > > not right to ship a package with a dataloss bug like this; your mileage 
> > > may
> > > vary.
> >
> > My mileage doesn't vary.  Package also was not shipped with woody; I
> > don't see any reason to be lenient about letting another buggy imap
> > server into stable, we have some of those there already.
> >
> 
> Note there is only one user who thinks this package loses data.  I have
> kept the severity as grave because upstream agrees that this might be the
> case.  But I've heard nothing else on this from anyone.  Perhaps a
> severity downgrade is in order?

Doesn't this bug only happen in mbox files? You could simply drop mbox
support, it appears to be working fine with maildir (which is how I
suspect how must people are using it (I certainly am (woah! 3 levels of
nested brackets))).

It'd be a shame to not have dovecot in sarge...

Cheers,

Pasc
-- 
Pascal Hakim
Do Not Bend


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

On Thursday 25 March 2004 06.04, Steve Langasek wrote:

> > => remove sendmail/8.13.11.Beta0-1
> > #227464.  Also #232664
>
> #232664 -- wow, sendmail and uucp, two of my favorite technologies, let
> me think about this one. ;p  While I see in policy that it states rmail
> should be /usr/sbin/rmail, I don't see anything to support the claim
> that a package providing mail-transport-agent is required to contain
> /usr/sbin/rmail.  In fact, the only mention of rmail at all is a
> "should".

I don't know if you saw it: Peter Palfrader is right now discussing this on 
-devel (Subject: rmail, m-t-a, and uucp).

cheers
-- vbi

-- 
Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?


pgpCLgCN6pfmc.pgp
Description: signature

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 12:54:08AM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:

> > > => remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-3
> > > #225048 (data loss).  I know this has been argued, but I still think it's
> > > not right to ship a package with a dataloss bug like this; your mileage 
> > > may
> > > vary.
> >
> > My mileage doesn't vary.  Package also was not shipped with woody; I
> > don't see any reason to be lenient about letting another buggy imap
> > server into stable, we have some of those there already.

> Note there is only one user who thinks this package loses data.  I have
> kept the severity as grave because upstream agrees that this might be the
> case.  But I've heard nothing else on this from anyone.  Perhaps a
> severity downgrade is in order?

Er, if upstream agrees that there may be a data-lossage bug here, how
many users do you think have to notice it before it should be considered
RC?  How sure are you that this bug doesn't affect other folders, and
users just haven't noticed their mail is disappearing yet?

I thought upstream was supposedly working on fixing this, anyways?

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#225048: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Steve Langasek wrote:

> > => remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-3
> > #225048 (data loss).  I know this has been argued, but I still think it's
> > not right to ship a package with a dataloss bug like this; your mileage may
> > vary.
>
> My mileage doesn't vary.  Package also was not shipped with woody; I
> don't see any reason to be lenient about letting another buggy imap
> server into stable, we have some of those there already.
>

Note there is only one user who thinks this package loses data.  I have
kept the severity as grave because upstream agrees that this might be the
case.  But I've heard nothing else on this from anyone.  Perhaps a
severity downgrade is in order?


-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Re: All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Steve Langasek]

severity 227464 important
reassign 232664 uucp
thanks

On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 09:04:52PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> => easy xfree86/4.3.0-7 sppc/1.0.1-7 tulip/1.2.5-4
> Lets XFree86 in.

Added as "hint xfree86/4.3.0-7", in case there are other packages
lurking that haven't been built for alpha.

> => easy lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7 
> python-scientific/2.4.5-2 hdf5/1.6.1-4 netpipe/3.6-1 xmpi/2.2.3b8-3
> Lets that whole list in.

> => easy lm-sensors/2.8.5-3 mrtgutils/0.5 wmsensors/1.0.4-3.3 
> hardware-monitor/1.0-2 wmgtemp/0.6-3 xsensors/0.40-2
> Lets lm-sensors and all dependencies in, though only once hardware-monitor
> has built on powerpc and waited a few more days.

Hints added for both of these, with a comment on the last one to remind
me to pay attention to it.

> And the old removals:

> => remove atmelwlandriver/2.1.1-3.3
> #229159 (and other bugs)

Hinted.

> => remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-3
> #225048 (data loss).  I know this has been argued, but I still think it's
> not right to ship a package with a dataloss bug like this; your mileage may
> vary.

My mileage doesn't vary.  Package also was not shipped with woody; I
don't see any reason to be lenient about letting another buggy imap
server into stable, we have some of those there already.

> => remove drivel/0.9.1-4
> #226492

Looks like the fixed package is just pending sponsorship, which is
forthcoming.  Hinted anyway for now.

> => remove kronolith/1.1-1
> #227461

Hinted, though hoping someone will package the necessary PEAR glue
soon.

> => remove sendmail/8.13.11.Beta0-1
> #227464.  Also #232664

227464 is now downgraded.  Nowhere in policy does it say that debconf
use is a must, for precisely the reason that not everyone has
transitioned to it yet.

#232664 -- wow, sendmail and uucp, two of my favorite technologies, let
me think about this one. ;p  While I see in policy that it states rmail
should be /usr/sbin/rmail, I don't see anything to support the claim
that a package providing mail-transport-agent is required to contain
/usr/sbin/rmail.  In fact, the only mention of rmail at all is a
"should".

I'm reassigning this bug back to uucp.  The fact that
mail-transport-agent did correlate with the rmail command in the past
does not seem to impose an obligation on MTA maintainers to ensure this
going forward.  Without a policy mandate, the responsibility seems to
lie with the uucp package to depend on a list of acceptable packages (in
the absence of a virtual package with the requisite meaning).

Also, the claim that sendmail is the only mta not providing rmail is
false.  The ssmtp package provides: mail-transport-agent without
providing an rmail binary, and I suspect nullmailer is the same way.

So sendmail is spared.

> => remove zope/2.6.4-1
> #222443

Hinted with dismay.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

All my current hinting suggestions (includes XFree86)

[Nathanael Nerode]

The HINTS!

=> easy xfree86/4.3.0-7 sppc/1.0.1-7 tulip/1.2.5-4
Lets XFree86 in.

=> easy lam/7.0.4-2 blacs-mpi/1.1-21 scalapack/1.7-7 python-scientific/2.4.5-2 
hdf5/1.6.1-4 netpipe/3.6-1 xmpi/2.2.3b8-3
Lets that whole list in.

=> easy lm-sensors/2.8.5-3 mrtgutils/0.5 wmsensors/1.0.4-3.3 
hardware-monitor/1.0-2 wmgtemp/0.6-3 xsensors/0.40-2
Lets lm-sensors and all dependencies in, though only once hardware-monitor
has built on powerpc and waited a few more days.

And the old removals:

=> remove atmelwlandriver/2.1.1-3.3
#229159 (and other bugs)

=> remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-3
#225048 (data loss).  I know this has been argued, but I still think it's
not right to ship a package with a dataloss bug like this; your mileage may
vary.

=> remove drivel/0.9.1-4
#226492

=> remove kronolith/1.1-1
#227461

=> remove sendmail/8.13.11.Beta0-1
#227464.  Also #232664

=> remove zope/2.6.4-1
#222443

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Re: More removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 08:20:55PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Riku Voipio wrote:

> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:37:15PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >> Igor Genibel wrote:
> >> > Could you explain your motivation about dovecot ?
> >> > The upstream seems to be active and aware
> >> > ( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225048 )
> >> > and the maintainer too ...
> >> > The package is up to date (same as the upstream).

> >> I don't think it's reasonable to release the current version, and the bug
> >> has sat at 'grave' since February 11 (a full month) with no visible
> >> progress.

> >> If you think it's just fine to release sarge containing dovecot in this
> >> data-lossy condition, well, then it shouldn't be removed from sarge.
> >> However, it sounds like a bad idea to me.

> > I had few beers with dovecots author las night, and He said that
> > he doesn't consider that a RC bug ("mboxes are inheritedly unsafe").

> If the bug is really considered non-RC, then the bug should be downgraded. 
> Perhaps if you're uncomfortable doing that, someone could ask on
> debian-devel whether they agree that 'mboxes are inherently unsafe'?  If
> nobody agrees, then the package should presumably be removed from sarge. 
> One or the other, you know?

There are more complicated locking requirements that make mbox
inherently more difficult to code for.  To my knowledge, this does not
mean mbox is inherently unsafe.  And even if it did, I would personally
consider it RC for *any* package to provide mbox support, rather than
thinking it ok to provide inherently broken mailbox handling.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: More removal suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

Riku Voipio wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:37:15PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> Igor Genibel wrote:
>> > Could you explain your motivation about dovecot ?
>> > The upstream seems to be active and aware
>> > ( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225048 )
>> > and the maintainer too ...
>> > The package is up to date (same as the upstream).
>  
>> I don't think it's reasonable to release the current version, and the bug
>> has sat at 'grave' since February 11 (a full month) with no visible
>> progress.
>  
>> If you think it's just fine to release sarge containing dovecot in this
>> data-lossy condition, well, then it shouldn't be removed from sarge.
>> However, it sounds like a bad idea to me.
> 
> I had few beers with dovecots author las night, and He said that
> he doesn't consider that a RC bug ("mboxes are inheritedly unsafe").

If the bug is really considered non-RC, then the bug should be downgraded. 
Perhaps if you're uncomfortable doing that, someone could ask on
debian-devel whether they agree that 'mboxes are inherently unsafe'?  If
nobody agrees, then the package should presumably be removed from sarge. 
One or the other, you know?

> Dovecot is going under a major rewrite, so while the next version will
> probably fix this, it will be overall more untested.

Thanks for your time & all.

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Re: More removal suggestions

[Riku Voipio]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:37:15PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Igor Genibel wrote:
> > Could you explain your motivation about dovecot ?
> > The upstream seems to be active and aware
> > ( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225048 )
> > and the maintainer too ...
> > The package is up to date (same as the upstream).
 
> I don't think it's reasonable to release the current version, and the bug
> has sat at 'grave' since February 11 (a full month) with no visible
> progress.
 
> If you think it's just fine to release sarge containing dovecot in this
> data-lossy condition, well, then it shouldn't be removed from sarge. 
> However, it sounds like a bad idea to me.

I had few beers with dovecots author las night, and He said that
he doesn't consider that a RC bug ("mboxes are inheritedly unsafe"). 
Dovecot is going under a major rewrite, so while the next version will 
probably fix this, it will be overall more untested.

-- 
Riku Voipio|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974  --+--
02140 Espoo|   |
dark> A bad analogy is like leaky screwdriver  |

Re: Removal suggestions due to uninstallability

[Adrian Bunk]

On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 09:44:35PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>...
> | All I can see is that they will become installable in testing ass soon
> | as netsaint-plugins enters testing, and netsaint-plugins is waiting for
> | PostgreSQL.
> 
> You mean nagios-plugins, right?

Yes, my fault.

> | What other problems do I miss?
> |
> | cu
> | Adrian
> 
> None.  I guess they can sit and wait for postgresql.  I stand corrected.

cu
Adrian

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Re: Removal suggestions due to uninstallability

[Nathanael Nerode]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Adrian Bunk wrote:
| On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 06:46:28PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
|
|>So, the nagios mess does not look close to being fixed.
|>The following packages have no installable binaries in 'testing' (except
|>nagios-nrpe-doc, which seems kind of silly when none of the other packages
|>are installable.)
|
|
| Why do you claim nagios-statd-server wasn't installable in testing?
Oops, my mistake.

|
|
|>remove nagios-nrpe/2.0-2
|>remove nagios-statd/3.09-3
|>remove nagios/2:1.1-11
|>...
|
|
| What's the problem with these packages?
Nothing much, except for #235139 -- I guess all the other nagios bugs
don't apply to the version in testing.

| All I can see is that they will become installable in testing ass soon
| as netsaint-plugins enters testing, and netsaint-plugins is waiting for
| PostgreSQL.

You mean nagios-plugins, right?

| What other problems do I miss?
|
| cu
| Adrian

None.  I guess they can sit and wait for postgresql.  I stand corrected.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAXQGTRGZ0aC4lkIIRAiB8AJwJuvq3HqMYJuHJkARY3hppBAx9hQCfasON
30Rr3GA8tj3RkHIF3QiRvP4=
=kCxf
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Removal suggestions due to uninstallability

[Adrian Bunk]

On Sat, Mar 20, 2004 at 06:46:28PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> So, the nagios mess does not look close to being fixed.
> The following packages have no installable binaries in 'testing' (except
> nagios-nrpe-doc, which seems kind of silly when none of the other packages
> are installable.)

Why do you claim nagios-statd-server wasn't installable in testing?

> remove nagios-nrpe/2.0-2
> remove nagios-statd/3.09-3
> remove nagios/2:1.1-11
>...

What's the problem with these packages?

All I can see is that they will become installable in testing ass soon 
as netsaint-plugins enters testing, and netsaint-plugins is waiting for 
PostgreSQL.

What other problems do I miss?

cu
Adrian

-- 

   "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
   "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
   Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Removal suggestions due to uninstallability

[Nathanael Nerode]

So, the nagios mess does not look close to being fixed.
The following packages have no installable binaries in 'testing' (except
nagios-nrpe-doc, which seems kind of silly when none of the other packages
are installable.)

remove nagios-nrpe/2.0-2
remove nagios-statd/3.09-3
remove nagios/2:1.1-11

Hopefully the nagios RC bugs (235129, 235013,, and 236477+ the four bugs
merged with it) will get fixed some time; the whole mess should go in
once they do.

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Re: removal suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 01:15:55AM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> remove pointless/0.4-3
> latex2html transition required, no reaction from maintainer
> (#221342)
> 
> remove sear-media/0.4.6-1
> RoM (#238492)
> 
> remove sear/0.4.6-3
> RoM (#238493)

All done, thanks.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

removal suggestions

[Frank Lichtenheld]

remove pointless/0.4-3
latex2html transition required, no reaction from maintainer
(#221342)

remove sear-media/0.4.6-1
RoM (#238492)

remove sear/0.4.6-3
RoM (#238493)

Gruesse,
-- 
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
www: http://www.djpig.de/

Re: More removal suggestions

[Steve Langasek]

On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 06:22:40PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> I see that all my earlier suggestions have been dealt with.  Cool!

> ==> remove kmusicdb/0.8.2-4
> KDE2 dependency, uninstallable.

> ==> remove ksensors/0.7-6
> KDE2 dependency, uninstallable.

Hints added for both of the above.

Cheers,
-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: More removal suggestions

[Igor Genibel]

Le Saturday 13 March 2004 03:37, Nathanael Nerode a écrit :

> I don't think it's reasonable to release the current version, and the bug
> has sat at 'grave' since February 11 (a full month) with no visible
> progress.

Yes, I agree. I have seen that no cvs commit was done by the upstream since 
january. You are probably true. Let's go.

-- 
Igor Genibel 
http://www.answare.fr/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.tuxfamily.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.debian.org/~igenibel/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG: 1024D/1648F6C8


pgpgBJUZwCFNM.pgp
Description: signature

Re: More removal suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

Igor Genibel wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Le Friday 12 March 2004 02:27, Nathanael Nerode a écrit :
> 
>> remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-2
>> #225048 (data loss) and #232832
> 
> Could you explain your motivation about dovecot ?
> The upstream seems to be active and aware
> ( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225048 )
> and the maintainer too ...
> The package is up to date (same as the upstream).

I don't think it's reasonable to release the current version, and the bug
has sat at 'grave' since February 11 (a full month) with no visible
progress.

There has to come some point at which one decides that a package with grave
bugs shouldn't be included in the release, doesn't there?

If you think it's just fine to release sarge containing dovecot in this
data-lossy condition, well, then it shouldn't be removed from sarge. 
However, it sounds like a bad idea to me.

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

Re: More removal suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:27:48PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> remove boot-icons/0.2
> Request of the maintainer, a.k.a. bug 235862

Done.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: More removal suggestions

[Igor Genibel]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Le Friday 12 March 2004 02:27, Nathanael Nerode a écrit :

> remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-2
> #225048 (data loss) and #232832

Could you explain your motivation about dovecot ?
The upstream seems to be active and aware  
( http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=225048 )
and the maintainer too ...
The package is up to date (same as the upstream).

Regards
- -- 
Igor Genibel 
http://www.answare.fr/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.tuxfamily.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.debian.org/~igenibel/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG: 1024D/1648F6C8
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAUWKZ+xgdMBZI9sgRAqauAJ0XyDXDFuHwVIPxtaXszvbuwTnnwgCdEyc7
sDNm93VaGjyhkxq26aO4rPQ=
=9wtx
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

More removal suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

remove boot-icons/0.2
Request of the maintainer, a.k.a. bug 235862

remove dovecot/0.99.10.4-2
#225048 (data loss) and #232832

-- 
Make sure your vote will count.
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

More removal suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

I see that all my earlier suggestions have been dealt with.  Cool!

==> remove kmusicdb/0.8.2-4
KDE2 dependency, uninstallable.

==> remove ksensors/0.7-6
KDE2 dependency, uninstallable.

A new version can eventually go in when the lm-sensors mess is
sorted out (which see below), but it's not clear whether that will happen
before or after sarge releases.

Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is dealing with the lm-sensors mess.
* He adopted the related packages and uploaded new packages which are now
waiting in NEW.
* He filed a removal request for the obsolete i2c packages (#235490).
* http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/debian-devel-200402/msg02038.html
includes an outline of the remaining steps, which need to wait for the NEW
packages to be accepted.

---
The other uninstallable packages on i386 are mostly dependent on postgresql
via nagios and should hopefully clear up when new postgresql goes in.

The exception is vlc-arts.  For a new version of vlc to go in, new arts,
xfree86, and libggi have to get in, all of which have their own problems.
Hopefully those will clear up too, though...

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  
US citizens: if you're considering voting for Bush, look at these first:
http://www.misleader.org/  http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/

Re: Stronger hint suggestions

[Riku Voipio]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 08:57:18AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 08:30:35PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Thanks to Riku Voipio for the basis of these suggestions
> > (http://lists.debian.org/debian-qt-kde/2004/debian-qt-kde-200402/msg00222.html)

> > These should not really be done immediately; as noted below, there
> > are two days left to wait even if all these hints are used, including
> > the impossible 'urgent' hint, and who knows, maybe lots of other stuff
> > will be fixed by then (though I doubt it).
 
> If the 'urgent' hint were available, I'd consider this lot, but since it
> isn't it's better just to wait and see what the state is when delays
> have expired.

How does the xfree86 4.3 upload affect the remaining builds? atleast
they are unbuildable until xfree compiles on arm and mipsel, and that
seemingly wont happen before gcc-3.3 ( #233633 )is fixed... I thought
that the binaries compiled against xf4.3 would be unistallable on xf4.2,
but there is nothing on the libx*shlibs that seems to imply so.

-- 
Riku Voipio|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |
kirkkonummentie 33 |+358 40 8476974  --+--
02140 Espoo|   |
dark> A bad analogy is like leaky screwdriver  |

Re: Stronger hint suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 08:30:35PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Thanks to Riku Voipio for the basis of these suggestions
> (http://lists.debian.org/debian-qt-kde/2004/debian-qt-kde-200402/msg00222.html)
> 
> These should not really be done immediately; as noted below, there
> are two days left to wait even if all these hints are used, including
> the impossible 'urgent' hint, and who knows, maybe lots of other stuff
> will be fixed by then (though I doubt it).

If the 'urgent' hint were available, I'd consider this lot, but since it
isn't it's better just to wait and see what the state is when delays
have expired.

> If I sound over-eager to get this done, it's because of this:
> once the jack-audio-connection-kit mess goes in, kdebase and kdegames
> 3.1.5 will go in, and then kdeaddons 3.1.5 will go in -- and kdeaddons
> is still at version 2.2.2 in sarge.  In other words, this will allow
> there to be a version of KDE 3 entirely present in sarge for the first
> time, accomplishing an important release goal and allowing everyone
> to relax.  :-)

I think we're thoroughly aware of the importance of this. :) I've been
pushing the same on -qt-kde, as you've probably seen.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Stronger hint suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

Thanks to Riku Voipio for the basis of these suggestions
(http://lists.debian.org/debian-qt-kde/2004/debian-qt-kde-200402/msg00222.html)

These should not really be done immediately; as noted below, there
are two days left to wait even if all these hints are used, including
the impossible 'urgent' hint, and who knows, maybe lots of other stuff
will be fixed by then (though I doubt it).

==> remove redland/0.9.14-5
Having the jack-audio-connection-kit transition linked to the perl
problems is just not a good idea.  This breaks that otherwise-unnecessary
piece of linkage.  After jack goes in, redland will just wait for perl.

==> remove libjackasyn/0.9-2
The new version has to wait ten days and be rebuilt on all architectures; 
and we have to hope that no new bugs show up in that time.
In contrast, if it's removed from testing, the new version will probably
go in just as quickly *after* jack, but it will not hold up anything else.

==> urgent gst-plugins/0.6.4-4
This would let it go in sooner than 7 days from now, if such a hint
was available.  ;-)

Ardour and gst-plugins have their missing builds happening right now,
which should therefore be done fairly soon, hopefully within the week.
That would leave the 2-day wait on spiralsynthmodular, which will probably
be done by the time the ardour and gst-plugins builds are uploaded.

If I sound over-eager to get this done, it's because of this:
once the jack-audio-connection-kit mess goes in, kdebase and kdegames
3.1.5 will go in, and then kdeaddons 3.1.5 will go in -- and kdeaddons
is still at version 2.2.2 in sarge.  In other words, this will allow
there to be a version of KDE 3 entirely present in sarge for the first
time, accomplishing an important release goal and allowing everyone
to relax.  :-)

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  
US citizens: if you're considering voting for Bush, look at these first:
http://www.misleader.org/  http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/

Re: New hint suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 01:38:54PM +0100, guenter geiger wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Colin Watson wrote:
> > I think I misunderstood, actually: libhydrogen can be marked to remove
> > even if hydrogen isn't ready yet, and it'll go with the rest of the
> > hint.
> >
> > But surely libhydrogen simply ought to be removed from unstable if this
> > is the case? Guenter?
> 
> Yes, from unstable for sure.
> 
> Then, when the new hydrogen enters testing, libhydrogen has to be
> removed completely.

This will Just Happen in the process of hinting
jack-audio-connection-kit, if libhydrogen is removed from unstable.

> To further explain the situation:
> 
> the hydrogen application used to be split into libhydrogen and the
> program using the library. (its the only program that uses the library)
> 
> This has changed with the new release. everything that is needed
> for hydrogen is in the hydrogen package itself and it doesn't depend
> on libhydrogen anymore.

Thanks for the explanation.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: New hint suggestions

[guenter geiger]

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:07:40AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > As I understand it, the maintainer said "remove when new hydrogen is
> > > ready", not "remove now" ...
> > >
> > > hydrogen (0.8.0-1 to 0.8.1-2)
> > > Maintainer: Guenter Geiger (Debian/GNU)
> > > 23 days old (needed 10 days)
> > > out of date on mips: hydrogen (from 0.8.0-1)
> > > out of date on mipsel: hydrogen (from 0.8.1-1)
> > > Not considered
> > > Depends: hydrogen jack-audio-connection-kit
> > > Depends: hydrogen qt-x11-free
> >
> > It's never going to be ready before jack enters testing, no?
> >
> > I have an impression that he was referring to hydrogen
> > entering unstable (it was in the NEW queue at the time) ?
>
> I think I misunderstood, actually: libhydrogen can be marked to remove
> even if hydrogen isn't ready yet, and it'll go with the rest of the
> hint.
>
> But surely libhydrogen simply ought to be removed from unstable if this
> is the case? Guenter?

Yes, from unstable for sure.

Then, when the new hydrogen enters testing, libhydrogen has to be
removed completely.

To further explain the situation:

the hydrogen application used to be split into libhydrogen and the
program using the library. (its the only program that uses the library)

This has changed with the new release. everything that is needed
for hydrogen is in the hydrogen package itself and it doesn't depend
on libhydrogen anymore.

Guenter

Re: New hint suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 08:07:40AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > As I understand it, the maintainer said "remove when new hydrogen is
> > ready", not "remove now" ...
> > 
> > hydrogen (0.8.0-1 to 0.8.1-2)
> > Maintainer: Guenter Geiger (Debian/GNU)
> > 23 days old (needed 10 days)
> > out of date on mips: hydrogen (from 0.8.0-1)
> > out of date on mipsel: hydrogen (from 0.8.1-1)
> > Not considered
> > Depends: hydrogen jack-audio-connection-kit
> > Depends: hydrogen qt-x11-free
> 
> It's never going to be ready before jack enters testing, no?
> 
> I have an impression that he was referring to hydrogen 
> entering unstable (it was in the NEW queue at the time) ?

I think I misunderstood, actually: libhydrogen can be marked to remove
even if hydrogen isn't ready yet, and it'll go with the rest of the
hint.

But surely libhydrogen simply ought to be removed from unstable if this
is the case? Guenter?

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: New hint suggestions

[Junichi Uekawa]

Hi,

> As I understand it, the maintainer said "remove when new hydrogen is
> ready", not "remove now" ...
> 
> hydrogen (0.8.0-1 to 0.8.1-2)
> Maintainer: Guenter Geiger (Debian/GNU)
> 23 days old (needed 10 days)
> out of date on mips: hydrogen (from 0.8.0-1)
> out of date on mipsel: hydrogen (from 0.8.1-1)
> Not considered
> Depends: hydrogen jack-audio-connection-kit
> Depends: hydrogen qt-x11-free

It's never going to be ready before jack enters testing, no?

I have an impression that he was referring to hydrogen 
entering unstable (it was in the NEW queue at the time) ?


regards,
junichi

Re: New hint suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 07:50:34AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> ==> easy python-qt3/3.8-3 sip-qt3/3.8-2 qscintillia/1.2-4
> Should work immediately, now that qt-x11-free is in.

Good call. Done.

> ==> remove libhydrogen/0.8.0-4
> Needed for jack-audio-connection-kit transition, which holds up a lot
> of stuff.

As I understand it, the maintainer said "remove when new hydrogen is
ready", not "remove now" ...

hydrogen (0.8.0-1 to 0.8.1-2)
Maintainer: Guenter Geiger (Debian/GNU)
23 days old (needed 10 days)
out of date on mips: hydrogen (from 0.8.0-1)
out of date on mipsel: hydrogen (from 0.8.1-1)
Not considered
Depends: hydrogen jack-audio-connection-kit
Depends: hydrogen qt-x11-free

> ==> remove logtrend-visuapache/0.82.2-1
> Necessary to remove libgd-perl.  (Although, come to think of it, why was
> libgd-perl being removed again?)

I don't understand that. Anthony?

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

New hint suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

==> easy python-qt3/3.8-3 sip-qt3/3.8-2 qscintillia/1.2-4
Should work immediately, now that qt-x11-free is in.

==> remove libhydrogen/0.8.0-4
Needed for jack-audio-connection-kit transition, which holds up a lot of stuff.

I have suggested those before.  ;-)  Thanks to Steve Langasek, my
other previous suggestions have all gone in and been successful.  :-)

==> remove logtrend-visuapache/0.82.2-1
Necessary to remove libgd-perl.  (Although, come to think of it, why was
libgd-perl being removed again?)

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  
US citizens: if you're considering voting for Bush, look at these first:
http://www.misleader.org/  http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/politicsandscience/

Re: Hinting suggestions, latest edition

[Colin Watson]

On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 11:07:12AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> ==> easy petsc/2.1.6-2 illuminator/0.6.9-2
> The maintainer is really frustrated that these aren't in yet, after all
> his hard work.  And they do need to go in together, not one at a time.
> 
> According to bjorn.haxx.se, illuminator is out of date on mipsel.  But
> it's already built there (on Monday), and is apparently just waiting for
> some buildd person to upload the file.  :-P

Hint added, now that the mipsel build is available.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Hinting suggestions, latest edition

[Steve Langasek]

On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 11:07:12AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Renders all previous editions obsolete.  ;-)

> ==> remove ida/0.12
> ==> easy libpcd/1.0.1 fbi/1.28
> ==> easy openmotif/2.2.2-6 motv/3.88-1
> ida is the linchpin which makes this such a mess.  It's also a contrib extra
> package, and version 0.12 is two years out of date.

> The other four have been held up for wy too long by a complex
> web of dependencies, and if you wait, they'll probably get enmeshed in more
> dependencies. :-P

> Once they're cleared up, new ida (0.20) can go in as soon as new curl does
> (which needs 10 days and builds).

> ==> remove encompass/0.4.99.30-5
> Allows neon & subversion in.  There's a new encompass already, but
> it has to wait for gtkhtml3.0 -- breaking the link is worthwhile.

I've added hints for the above.

> ==> easy petsc/2.1.6-2 illuminator/0.6.9-2
> The maintainer is really frustrated that these aren't in yet, after all
> his hard work.  And they do need to go in together, not one at a time.

> According to bjorn.haxx.se, illuminator is out of date on mipsel.  But
> it's already built there (on Monday), and is apparently just waiting for
> some buildd person to upload the file.  :-P

I've added this to my queue so it can be revisited once the mipsel build
is uploaded.

I'll try to look through the rest of the below today.

> ==> remove iraf/2.11.3-2
> See previous messages -- you might already have done this.

> ==> remove libhydrogen/0.8.0-4
> Junichi Uekawa wrote "this package is going to be removed".  I don't know
> if he meant from testing or from testing & unstable, but it certainly wouldn't
> hurt the process to remove it from testing.
> 
> ==> easy sip-qt3/3.8-2 python-qt3/3.8-3 qscinitilla/1.2-4
> These need to go in together.
> 
> (This presumably won't work until qt-x11-free/3:3.2.3-2 goes in
> -- see below)
> 
> ==> wait for qt-x11-free/3:2.3-2 to go in
> It currently needs
> * two days
> * a build on mipsel (it's second in the needs-build queue)
> * an upload on arm (it's built but not uploaded, it seems?...)
> 
> ==> somehow, complete jack-audio-connection kit 0.94 transition
> Ow.
> This requires:
> * the removal of libhydrogen
> * builds of a *lot* of packages
> * waiting for new curl to go in (10 days & builds)
> * some complex hint which isn't worth worrying about until the above happens

> KDE depends on this mess (via alsa-lib), sadly.  :-(

> Hopefully thanks to Junichi's freeze there will be no new uploads of
> anything in this mess (except to fix build failures or RC bugs)
> until kdemultimedia gets in. :-)

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Hinting suggestions, latest edition

[Nathanael Nerode]

Renders all previous editions obsolete.  ;-)

==> remove ida/0.12
==> easy libpcd/1.0.1 fbi/1.28
==> easy openmotif/2.2.2-6 motv/3.88-1
ida is the linchpin which makes this such a mess.  It's also a contrib extra
package, and version 0.12 is two years out of date.

The other four have been held up for wy too long by a complex
web of dependencies, and if you wait, they'll probably get enmeshed in more
dependencies. :-P

Once they're cleared up, new ida (0.20) can go in as soon as new curl does
(which needs 10 days and builds).

==> remove encompass/0.4.99.30-5
Allows neon & subversion in.  There's a new encompass already, but
it has to wait for gtkhtml3.0 -- breaking the link is worthwhile.

==> remove iraf/2.11.3-2
See previous messages -- you might already have done this.

==> easy petsc/2.1.6-2 illuminator/0.6.9-2
The maintainer is really frustrated that these aren't in yet, after all
his hard work.  And they do need to go in together, not one at a time.

According to bjorn.haxx.se, illuminator is out of date on mipsel.  But
it's already built there (on Monday), and is apparently just waiting for
some buildd person to upload the file.  :-P

==> remove libhydrogen/0.8.0-4
Junichi Uekawa wrote "this package is going to be removed".  I don't know
if he meant from testing or from testing & unstable, but it certainly wouldn't
hurt the process to remove it from testing.

==> easy sip-qt3/3.8-2 python-qt3/3.8-3 qscinitilla/1.2-4
These need to go in together.

(This presumably won't work until qt-x11-free/3:3.2.3-2 goes in
-- see below)

==> wait for qt-x11-free/3:2.3-2 to go in
It currently needs
* two days
* a build on mipsel (it's second in the needs-build queue)
* an upload on arm (it's built but not uploaded, it seems?...)

==> somehow, complete jack-audio-connection kit 0.94 transition
Ow.
This requires:
* the removal of libhydrogen
* builds of a *lot* of packages
* waiting for new curl to go in (10 days & builds)
* some complex hint which isn't worth worrying about until the above happens

KDE depends on this mess (via alsa-lib), sadly.  :-(

Hopefully thanks to Junichi's freeze there will be no new uploads of
anything in this mess (except to fix build failures or RC bugs)
until kdemultimedia gets in. :-)

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  
http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html

Re: Revised hinting suggestions

[Colin Watson]

On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 08:52:53PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> These hints really should go in ASAP; I'm waiting to see how things
> work out on some of the other groups, which still have RC bug issues.
> 
> ==> easy libdumbnet/1.7-3 libevent/0.7c-1 farpd/0.2-4 fragroute/1.2-7
>  honeyd/0.6a-4.1 labrea/2.5-stable-1 trickle/1.06-4 stegdetect/0.5-5

This one's already done ...? Perhaps you're looking at a stale cache of
update_output.txt.

-- 
Colin Watson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Revised hinting suggestions

[Nathanael Nerode]

These hints really should go in ASAP; I'm waiting to see how things work out
on some of the other groups, which still have RC bug issues.

==> easy libdumbnet/1.7-3 libevent/0.7c-1 farpd/0.2-4 fragroute/1.2-7
 honeyd/0.6a-4.1 labrea/2.5-stable-1 trickle/1.06-4 stegdetect/0.5-5

This should work *now*.  And all of these except honeyd have been waiting
quite a while.
(If it doesn't work, try "hint libdumbnet/1.7-3 libevent/0.7c-1")

==> remove ida/0.12
This package ties up libpcd, openmotif, fbi, motv.  I had suggested some easy
hints for getting them all in, but since then a new ida has been uploaded,
and a new curl (on which ida depends) has been uploaded with RC bugs.  Dammit.

If ida is removed, at least libpcd, openmotif, fbi, and motv, which have all
been ready to go for MONTHS, can get in.  :-P

==> easy petsc/2.1.6-2 illuminator/0.6.9-2
The maintainer is really eager to get these in and has fixed oodles of
other packages in order to get it working (his packages themselves have
been in good shape for a long, long time).  Currently it needs a build
on mips and six days; by the time you get to this I expect that will have
happened.

==> force nvidia-graphics-drivers/1.0.5328-4
The problem is that this is non-free with unsatisfiable depends and
will *never* go in manually.  5328 is needed for out-of-the-box 2.6 kernel
support, which is worth having for sarge.

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  
http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html

Re: Clearer hinting suggestions.

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 02:01:34AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:

Some comments:

> ==? Ignore RC bugs for kdebase/4:3.1.4-1
> Neither of the RC bugs are present in sid (only in woody); it seems to 
> be a failing of the current 'testing' scripts that they don't recognize 
> this, given that both bugs are tagged 'woody'.

Huh? The ones that matter are the kdm ones, which are tagged pending, not
woody. It's also not built everywhere, etc.

> ==> force chasen
> Chasen has two alternative dependencies: one is the non-free and 
> not-compiled-everywhere ipdadic -- but the other is the perfectly free, 
> compiled-everywhere, and present in 'testing', chasen-cannadic.  So why 
> isn't chasen being allowed in?  

I give up, why isn't it?

> (Hmm.  The non-free dependency should 
> come second rather than first, I guess -- perhaps a bug report worth 
> filing?)

The dependency order has no relevance to the testing scripts, and I
can't think of a case when it would be an RC bug.

> ==> remove libgtkada/1.2.12-8
> This is libgtkada1, which is orphaned and dead upstream; now there is
> libgtkada2.  If it is to be kept it would need to be recompiled with new
> gnat (bug 225060), but nobody seems to care enough to even do that, and
> even the bug reporter suggested removing it.

If it's not useful at all anymore, it should be dropped from unstable,
rather than just testing. If it's orphaned, any member of debian-qa (ie,
more or less any developer) can request its removal in the usual manner
(bug against ftp.d.o).

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

   Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can.
   http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004


pgpRQblhNWMdQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature