The canonical way of making a local modification to a package.
Hi Debian User! I write to you, because it's that time again. You know, we've gotten a brand new release, and I have to spend yet a day or two in frustration over why python isn't enabled in the inn2 package. This time, however, I want to ask beforehand, what the proper way of doing such a local modification is. Strictly speaking, I need to add a single line to debian/rules, and for good measure, add to the version string (so I know that it's my own problem), and for good measure, throw in a snide comment in the changelog about deficient distro defaults. The ideal solution would be something that can be scripted to happen automatically, each time the package in Stretch change version. Can anyone give me the ELI5 instructions for the above? -- //Wegge
Determine which file is affected by a harddrive failure
I'm in the rather unlucky circumstances of trying to rebuild a md array, where the good drive is starting to report UNC errors, like this: Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604216] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Unhandled sense c ode Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604243] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Result: hostbyte =DID_OK driverbyte=DRIVER_SENSE Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604271] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Sense Key : Medi um Error [current] [descriptor] Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604300] Descriptor sense data with sense de scriptors (in hex): Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604317] 72 03 11 04 00 00 00 0c 00 0a 80 00 00 00 00 00 Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604343] 46 c0 8a 32 Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604358] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Add. Sense: Unre covered read error - auto reallocate failed Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604388] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] CDB: Read(10): 28 00 46 c0 8a 30 00 00 08 00 Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604413] end_request: I/O error, dev sda, se ctor 1187023410 Apr 7 11:11:18 rollo kernel: [15659.604437] ata1: EH complete Is there a way to determine which file is residing in the affected block, so I can determine if the error can be corrected by forcing a block remap with hdparm, or if this is an essential file, that must be restored from the backup. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150407112238.1435b...@wegge.dk
Re: Why focus on systemd?
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:43:01 +1100 Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: On 22/11/14 22:14, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 21:46:19 +1100 Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: It lost. Developers are not being forced to do what they don't want. The winner was developers will work it out themselves i.e. Debian won. Another reading being The Developpers won, Debian lost... Only reads that way if you have trouble reading - or simple refuse to acknowledge the view of Debian. The Constitution might need to be rewritten, to support your POW. While Debian always have been a meritocracy, the constitution have its load of weasel words, that implies the opposite. A lose-lose situation, in my point of view. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2014114751.7ca54...@wegge.dk
Re: Keep using Debian without GNOME and SystemD
On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:40:49 +0200 Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de wrote: I really don't get why Debian receives so much hate in this discussion. Upstream software depending on systemd is not Debian's choice. Because of the abysmal lack of communication of the reasons behind the descision. I tried to bring this up a few weeks back, but the arrogance from the established debians are so extreme, that even a meta-debate is out of the question. People with good technical skills are often horrible at communication. My conjecture is that the Debian developers have a higher than average level of technical skills. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141022141236.6750c...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:01:44 -0700 Bob Holtzman hol...@cox.net wrote: What I read of your post wasn't dissent. It was character assassination. Please let me know how to point out that an idiotic behaviour is disruptive to the whole process, without actually telling the person in question, that he's an idiot? -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141016085540.313ae...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:38:59 +0100 Lisi Reisz lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday 16 October 2014 07:55:40 Anders Wegge Keller wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:01:44 -0700 Bob Holtzman hol...@cox.net wrote: What I read of your post wasn't dissent. It was character assassination. Please let me know how to point out that an idiotic behaviour is disruptive to the whole process, without actually telling the person in question, that he's an idiot? The person in question most emphatically is NOT an idiot. In this case he is. The condescending way of dismissing a very real issue to be talked over is not an example of outstanding intellect in my book. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141016124646.5048a...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:59:24 +0100 Lisi Reisz lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote: My golly, you are an arrogant self-opinionated individual. As well as misinformed and mistaken. Thank you for those kind words. However, I think you are undermining your attempt at establishing your moral superiority, by using them. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141016135539.38035...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Wed, 15 Oct 2014 04:07:25 +1100 Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: Given that your only contribution to the list is outright and offensive hypocrisy why should you not be rightfully dismissed as an abusive and offensive poster who contributes nothing to the subject. I do know you and your work - and sadly in one post you've changed your name to mud. Go ahead and do that, if that makes you feel better. Just remember that it proves my point. Suppressing dissent will not work. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141015094300.0a7f3...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 22:43:48 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: There's -offtopic (see my .sig), but apparently the anti-systemd crowd wants an audience :( Stop your condescending tone, and make your self useful by reading a book about change mangament. I don't know who you are or what your merits might be. I couldn't care less right now. You just need to stop. Right now! If your only contribution is to tell people off, the whole project would be better off without you. So let me talk to an adult who can tell me where the peons can have a place to vent the frustrations, while the developers try to find a consensus off how to present the news that there is no other way. I'll never hear from you again, as you are clearly getting a kick out of fuelling the flames. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141014181131.3a0a2...@wegge.dk
Re: debian-advocacy?
On Tue, 14 Oct 2014 17:33:55 +0100 Lisi Reisz lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote: This to one of our best and most measured contributors. It's enough to make one weep. He could have been the pope. His attitude is part of the problem, not the solution. If you have read the book about change management, you know what I'm saying. If not, go and read it, before you dig yourself into the same hole. I do not want to hear from someone acting out of a misplaced sense of loyalty. I want someone who actually is capable of seeing why elitism isn't going to save Debian in this case, to come forward, and create a place where the issue can be hashed out. -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141014184001.3edbc...@wegge.dk
debian-advocacy?
It seems that there's a lot of controversy about the SysV-replacement that should not be named. Most, if not all of the arguments for, as well as against seem to be of a philosophical, rather than stringent technichnical nature. As such, they are probably not suited for this list. So my question as a relative newcomer to the Debian ecosystem is if there is an -advocacy list, where the philosophical differences can be beaten into the ground, while keeping this list at a more factual level? If not, where do I propose the creation of such a list? -- //Wegge -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141013194503.6e415...@wegge.dk
