Bug#1025050: O: fsmark -- benchmark for simulating synchronous write workloads
Package: wnpp Severity: normal X-Debbugs-Cc: martin.steigerw...@proact.de Control: affects -1 src:fsmark I intend to orphan the fsmark package. The package description is: The fs_mark benchmark tests synchronous write workloads. It can vary the number of files, directory depth, etc. It has detailed timings for reads, writes, unlinks and fsyncs that make it good for simulating mail servers and other setups. Reasons: I do not use fs_mark anymore. Upstream asked me to convert the package to a native package. I'd like to keep the gbp repository layout. I am not aware of major development on fsmark. Hints for someone who wants to take over maintenance: Due to the lack of development and the simplicity of the package except updating to current Debian standards there may not be all that much to do. Last release of package is from 6th of February 2019 and so far it just kept compiling. There was one binary rebuild. Apparently I did some further commits to the package repository at https://salsa.debian.org/debian/fsmark/ that I never released. See tracker page for the package: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/fsmark Also there is one merge request about removing unnecessary constraints open on Salsa. When you take over the package, it is of course up to you whether to keep current gbp / quilt layout of the repo or convert to a native package. Last upstream repository I am aware of is from 2014: git://oss.sgi.com/dgc/fs_mark http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=dgc/fs_mark;a=summary These are gone. There might be an archive of those at archive.org Upstream developers I last had contact to are Dave Chinner and Ric Wheeler. This was also in 2014. In case you like to know their last e-mail addresses contact me by private mail.
Bug#754910: cgmanager_0.20-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Dimitri, Am Freitag, 25. Juli 2014, 16:12:41 schrieb Dimitri John Ledkov: > On 25 July 2014 15:28, Daniel Baumann > > wrote: > > Serge Hallyn > > > >> Anyway, I'll be posting a new 0.28 release later today, based upon > >> which Daniel will post a new package, with himself listed as > >> maintainer. We'll proceed from there. > > > > seems these words are not worth anything. > > > > instead, Serge uploaded a new version (through Steve) yesterday, and > > ftp-master (eventhough being kept in the loop on all mails in #754910) > > just > > happily accepted that right away. > > > > i spend quite some time on this package, all in vain. hope at least you're > > happy with the way you treat people, because i'm not. > > I'm sorry you feel this way, however my original complaint against > your development around it still stands: please file ITPs in the > future, and please use multiarch for any new libraries, and please > talk to upstream about packaging things, and please have vested > intrinsic knowledge of a given software before embarking on trivial > packaging work around it. Debian is way past the point where we > rapidly trivially package things to "get it in first". Instead we > really are after meritocracy, and making sure the best people > available take care of the individual parts of our operating system. > I'm sure your patches to cgmanager or any other software in Debian is > highly welcome and would be applied/reviewed/NMUed as appropriate. I > value your contributions to Debian, especially when it's something > extraordinary and new. Redoing readily available debian compatible > packaging from scratch, is - all in vain, and I still don't see how > that gave Debian or yourself any competitive advantage, apart from > ultimately delaying integration of newer core components in Debian. > > Back when I was not a DD, I was seeking sponsorship through my teams > and debian-mentors mailing-list / irc channel. At the time, it was > clear that sponsors were setting the standards much higher than what's > required and recommended by policy. To the point of refusing to > sponsor things, until everything was perfect. As a sponsor today, I > try to adhere to the same high standards, but it looks like that may > be slipping in the project. Collectively we should be making sure that > Debian is more like a zen garden, than a kitchen sink. If I would be on the receiving end of this – maintaining as many packages as Daniel maintains (or – sadly – maintained) – I would probably feel like crap. Cause I would probably receive it like this: Someone devalues my maintainer work that I am so passionate about. I appreciate Daniel´s work and use a lot of his packages on my Debian systems. In the same way some could devalue my work on fsmark or fio as trivial packaging work. Yet… I always thought that every contribution to the Debian project is valuable and welcome. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2052676.PuhxTCPK48@merkaba
Bug#754910: cgmanager_0.20-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Am Freitag, 25. Juli 2014, 18:23:38 schrieb Serge Hallyn: > Quoting Thomas Goirand (z...@debian.org): > > Then, reading #754910, it looked like Serge was about to work with > > Daniel, but finally, didn't. No sign of this change in #754910, which is > > at least surprising. It's also very surprising to see the package just > > As Daniel said we had an agreement. He was going to push the package. He > failed to do that, causing over a week's delay in straightening out the > non-systemd-upgrade mess. But instead of dropping in on that thread and > apologizing, he's complaining here. My experience is that is usually does not work expecting someone else to apologize, before having apologized oneself for the part of the behavior that contributed to the undesirable outcome. > I have enough to do that when I can delegate something to someone else I'm > happy and thankful to them. Last week I was hoping that would be the > situation here. Alas. Please talk to one another assuming everyone had good intentions. Daniel who maintains a ton of packages started to orphan them (see debian- devel-changes). I bet thats not the intended outcome. To me this conflict does not appear to be unsolvable. Please try to resolve it. A good step would be if one side starts to say "I am sorry" for some of their behavior that could have been rude. Usually both sides have their share in a conflict. Daniel, please reconsider / stop orphaning your packages. I really appreciate your immense packaging effort! I just maintain some little packages and help with bug reports and testing, but I am really worried by whats happening here. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/6253135.B98bYcQPtz@merkaba
Bug#745478: ITP: distkeys -- Distkeys - upload SSH keys to servers and more
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Martin Steigerwald * Package name: distkeys Version : 1.0 Upstream Author : teamix GmbH, Martin Steigerwald * URL : https://github.com/teamix/distkeys * License : GPL-2 Programming Lang: Ruby Description : Distkeys - upload SSH keys to servers and more Distkeys distributes a list of public SSH keys to a list of servers. It reaches servers behind a firewall as well by using SSH port forwarding. Furthermore it can execute a command or a script on a list of hosts or copy a file to them. We use this package to distribute our own public keys to our own and customer machines. I plan to maintain upstream and Debian packaging. In comparison with other solutions I see the following specifics: - It is mainly targetted at distribution of SSH keys. - It can access servers behind a firewall via port forwarding. - It downloads authorized_keys, does all changes and uploads them in one go, and thus is quite fast. - It tries to play it safe by backuping of authorized_keys intelligently. We would like to share distkeys in the hope it is useful to others. Current state of packaging is almost ready to review. TODO: - Review adaptions to make it run with Ruby 1.9. - Get it reviewed by a sponsor (see RFS bug below). The packaging is using git-buildpackage with separate upstream and debian packaging branches. It is already lintian clean, except for a debian/watch file which I consider to be unnecessary in this case. See also: RFS: distkeys/1.0 -- distribute SSH keys https://bugs.debian.org/712787 Which I will update in a moment with some actual information. (Please excuse long signature, it is centrally managed.) -- Martin Steigerwald Consultant / Trainer teamix GmbH Südwestpark 43 90449 Nürnberg fon: +49 911 30999 55 fax: +49 911 30999 99 mail: martin.steigerw...@teamix.de web: http://www.teamix.de blog: http://blog.teamix.de Amtsgericht Nürnberg, HRB 18320 Geschäftsführer: Oliver Kügow, Richard Müller ** Wissenstag Spezial „Datacenter Networking“ – 21.05.2014 ** http://www.teamix.de/spezial -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2076256.KAA0y6IWu6@mango
Bug#655222: filebench: changing back from ITP to RFP
Am Montag, 27. Mai 2013 schrieb Lucas Nussbaum: > retitle 655222 RFP: filebench -- file system and storage benchmark with > flexible workload specification noowner 655222 > tag 655222 - pending > thanks > > Hi, Hi! > This is an automatic email to change the status of filebench back from > ITP (Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug > hasn't seen any activity during the last 12 months. The package is basically done and was stuck with legal issues. Then Wheezy freeze. Right now I have no time for asking for sponsorship and getting it uploaded. I hope to have time for it in about 4 weeks or so. If anyone wants to step in, feel free. Thanks, -- Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201305281005.24949...@teamix.de
Bug#585480: RFP: puae -- Amiga Emulator for *nix Systems
Am Mittwoch, 27. März 2013 schrieb John Paul Adrian Glaubitz: > Just as a short heads-up on this: I am currently packaging "fs-uae", > another, very fancy fork of WinUAE with the focus on gaming [1]. > > The package was already ready and has been uploaded into the NEW queue, > it got rejected however due to several license issues. I have talked > with upstream and he is making the appropriate changes for the next > stable release, 2.2. > > I'm not sure how many people are interested in puae or how swift the > upstream development is, but in any case, fs-uae will be another > alternative as well. > > I have already agreed with Stefan Sürken to remove e-uae and uae from > Debian once fs-uae has been accepted into unstable. There is one thing I like about uae and e-uae: They can run in windowed mode. Can fs-uae also run in windowed mode? > > [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=680899 -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201303292348.32128.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Bug#655222: filebench: bison generated parser + CDDL
Also sent to ITP bug for documentation. Hi! Alex and I almost finished packaging filebench: VCS is at: Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/filebench.git Vcs-Browser: http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/filebench.git;a=summary There is some licensing questions left: 1) Most files use: * CDDL HEADER START * * The contents of this file are subject to the terms of the * Common Development and Distribution License (the "License"). * You may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * * You can obtain a copy of the license at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE * or http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions * and limitations under the License. * * When distributing Covered Code, include this CDDL HEADER in each * file and include the License file at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE. * If applicable, add the following below this CDDL HEADER, with the * fields enclosed by brackets "[]" replaced with your own identifying * information: Portions Copyright [] [name of copyright owner] * * CDDL HEADER END template header. Is it safe to assume that this refers to CDDL-1.0 as in: http://opensource.org/licenses/CDDL-1.0 Well http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/download/Main/licensing/cddllicense.txt refers to that version of the license as well. So that seems to be the case. Except for this notice: NOTICE PURSUANT TO SECTION 9 OF THE COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE (CDDL) The OpenSolaris code released under the CDDL shall be governed by the laws of the State of California (excluding conflict-of-law provisions). Any litigation relating to this License shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts of the Northern District of California and the state courts of the State of California, with venue lying in Santa Clara County, California. 2) It uses a bison generated parser from parser_gram.y and these generated files are: Files: parser_gram.c parser_gram.h Copyright: 1984, 1989, 1990, 2000-2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc. C LALR(1) parser skeleton written by Richard Stallman, by simplifying the original so-called "semantic" parser. License: GPL-3+ with exception This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify […] You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/> . On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License version 3 can be found in "/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3". . As a special exception, you may create a larger work that contains part or all of the Bison parser skeleton and distribute that work under terms of your choice, so long as that work isn't itself a parser generator using the skeleton or a modified version thereof as a parser skeleton. Alternatively, if you modify or redistribute the parser skeleton itself, you may (at your option) remove this special exception, which will cause the skeleton and the resulting Bison output files to be licensed under the GNU General Public License without this special exception. . This special exception was added by the Free Software Foundation in version 2.2 of Bison. Is this compatible with CDDL-1? As far as I understand CDDL-1 and GPL are not compatible, but when I read this special exception correctly, in the case that no new parser generator is done any terms, any license can be used for the resulting work. Would it make sense to include an URL to the license in the copyright file? I did not see an extra field in the machine readable file format description, but I could always include it at the end of the license text if thats wanted. Thanks, -- Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201205071246.42524...@teamix.de
Bug#655224: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant?
Hello! Thankfully, Carl and Larry relicense lib_timing.c as GPL2+ without restrictions. I will put this information into debian/copyright as well and possibly create a patch to change the licensing note in the source file that I send back upstream to Ric Wheeler for inclusion in any possible future version of fs_mark. After a clarification requested by me: -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Betreff: Re: Fwd: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant? Datum: Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2012, 11:59:10 Von: Carl Staelin <… - google.com> An: Martin Steigerwald Kopie: Larry McVoy <… - bitmover - com>, Ric Wheeler <… - redhat - com> For the bits of lmbench that were used by fsmark - namely lib_timing.c -, we are happy to give it a GPL 2 (or later) license without any additional restrictions. Cheers, Carl - Original: -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Betreff: Re: Fwd: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant? Datum: Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2012, 11:35:02 Von: Carl Staelin <… - google - com> An: Martin Steigerwald Kopie: Larry McVoy <… - bitmover - com>, Ric Wheeler <… - redhat - com> Larry and I have nothing to do with fsmark, aside from the fact that apparently bits of lmbench were used to help develop it. For the bits of lmbench that were used by fsmark, we are happy to give it a GPL 2 (or later) license. In particular, it appears that this would be the file lib_timing.c from fsmark. Please forward our release to the appropriate place with our email addresses anonymized/sanitized. Cheers, Carl -- Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#655224: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant?
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2012 schrieb Clark C. Evans: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > 11 * additional restriction that results may published only if > > 12 * (1) the benchmark is unmodified, and > > 13 * (2) the version in the sccsid below is included in the report. > > I think with professional legal assistance the intent of this > restriction could be phrased as a "permissive additional term" > under GPLv3 section 7(e). What the author seems to be doing is […] Thankfully, Carl and Larry agreed to relicense the file unter GPL2+ without additional restrictions. I added their note with sanitized mail addresses to the ITP - should be up there soon, dunno why its taking so long to accept my mail. I now plan to add that information to debian/copyright as well and possibly create a patch for the file to change it to GPLv2 that I offer Ric Wheeler for upstream inclusion. That is unless someone advises me to handle this situation differently. Thanks for help, -- Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120406.34614...@teamix.de
Bug#655224: Fwd: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant?
I contacted Larry, Carl, and Ric and kindly asked Larry and Carl to remove these licensing restrictions. Martin -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Betreff: Fwd: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant? Datum: Dienstag, 10. Januar 2012, 15:50:02 Von: Martin Steigerwald An: Larry McVoy <…>, Carl Staelin <…>, Carl Staelin <…>, Carl Staelin <…> Kopie: "Ric Wheeler" <…>, Carl Staelin <…> Hi Larry, Carl and Ric! I am currently into packaging fs_mark for debian, see: ITP: fsmark -- benchmark for simulating synchronous write workloads http://bugs.debian.org/655224 During filling out the debian/copyright file I found additional license restrictions in lib_timing.c that according to Ben Finney are not compliant with the GPL and also not with the DFSG. Especially being not compliant with the GPL itself according makes it impossible for Debian - or anyone else except the authoers - to distribute fsmark at all according to Ben. Thus I ask you, Carl and Larry, kindly to consider removing these license restriction in order to allow redistribution of fs_mark for Debian or any other recipient of the software source. I kindly also ask you to choose a version of GPL, for example GPL 2 or later for clarity. Cause otherwise I as the packager need to choose one and its not clear whether this holds up if challenged. Ric, Carl and Larry, I kindly also ask you to review the copyright information in the other files and update it as you see fit. Ric and Larry, I was not able to find a recent mail address from Carl so I tried some guess work. In case you have a recent mail address feel free to forward my mail to him. Many thanks, Martin Steigerwald -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Betreff: Re: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant? Datum: Dienstag, 10. Januar 2012, 11:39:11 Von: Ben Finney An: debian-le...@lists.debian.org Martin Steigerwald writes: > On packaging fs_mark I found > > 8 * Copyright (c) 2000 Carl Staelin. > 9 * Copyright (c) 1994-1998 Larry McVoy. > 10 * Distributed under the FSF GPL with > 11 * additional restriction that results may published only if > 12 * (1) the benchmark is unmodified, and > 13 * (2) the version in the sccsid below is included in the report. No version of the GPL is specified. That's often taken to mean “whatever version you, the recipient, choose”. I don't know how well that would hold up if challenged. These additions are not compatible with the GPL which, in GPLv3 §10 says “You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the rights granted or affirmed under this License.” > Is this restriction DFSG compliant? It's not only not compliant with the DFSG; it's not compliant with the GPL itself. So the recipient has no effective grant of license to redistribute. I hope you can contact upstream and notify them that the terms do not grant effective license to any recipient, and encourage them to remove those additional restrictions. -- \ “The cost of education is trivial compared to the cost of | `\ ignorance.” —Thomas Jefferson | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4z79700@benfinney.id.au - -- Martin Steigerwald Trainer / Consultant teamix GmbH Solide IT-Infrastruktur Südwestpark 35 90449 Nürnberg fon: +49 (911) 30999- 0 fax: +49 (911) 30999-99 mail: m...@teamix.de web: http://www.teamix.de vcf: http://www.teamix.de/vcf/ms.vcf gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 Amtsgericht Nürnberg, HRB 18320 Geschäftsführer: Oliver Kügow, Richard Müller - -- Martin Steigerwald Trainer / Consultant teamix GmbH Solide IT-Infrastruktur Südwestpark 35 90449 Nürnberg fon: +49 (911) 30999- 0 fax: +49 (911) 30999-99 mail: m...@teamix.de web: http://www.teamix.de vcf: http://www.teamix.de/vcf/ms.vcf gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 Amtsgericht Nürnberg, HRB 18320 Geschäftsführer: Oliver Kügow, Richard Müller signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#655224: ITP fsmark - bug 655224: License restriction for lib_timing.c DFSG compliant?
I was not sure whether to Cc debian-devel. I didn't do it, cause everyone can lookup the current state at the ITP. Please add it to Cc for your answer when you find it approbiate. Hi! On packaging fs_mark I found 8 * Copyright (c) 2000 Carl Staelin. 9 * Copyright (c) 1994-1998 Larry McVoy. 10 * Distributed under the FSF GPL with 11 * additional restriction that results may published only if 12 * (1) the benchmark is unmodified, and 13 * (2) the version in the sccsid below is included in the report. 14 * Support for this development by Sun Microsystems is gratefully acknowledged. in lib_timing.c. Is this restriction DFSG compliant? What are the alternatives when it isn't? I will hold back further packaging efforts until further notice. The current state is at: Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/fsmark.git Vcs-Browser: http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/fsmark.git;a=summary It already builds a package, but packaging is not finished for review yet. Thanks, -- Martin Steigerwald - teamix GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120110.49010...@teamix.de
Bug#655224: ITP: fsmark -- ITP: fs_mark - benchmark for simulating synchronous write workloads
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Martin Steigerwald * Package name: fsmark Version : 3.3 Upstream Author : Ric Wheeler * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/fsmark/ * License : GPL v2 or later Programming Lang: C Description : ITP: fs_mark - benchmark for simulating synchronous write workloads The fs_mark benchmark tests synchronous write workloads. It can vary the number of files, directory depth, etc. It has detailed timings for reads, writes, unlinks and fsyncs that make it good for simulating mail servers and other setups. (taken from upstream webpage.) I intend to maintain it as project of collabmaint on Alioth via Git. I intend to have my co-worker Sebastian 'tokkee' Harl as sponsor for reviewing and uploading the package. The fs_mark benchmark is popular among kernel developers for measuring metadata performance, see for example: Dave Chinner [3.2-rc7] slowdown, warning + oops creating lots of files http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/15130 I like to maintain the package to have the tool at hand for my Linux Performance analysis & tuning trainings. Thanks, Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120109135553.10663.20574.report...@mango.of.teamix.net
Bug#655222: ITP: filebench -- ITP: filebench - file system and storage benchmark with flexible workload specification
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Martin Steigerwald * Package name: filebench Version : 1.4.9.1 Upstream Author : Vasily Tarasov (v...@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu) and others * URL : http://sourceforge.net/projects/filebench/ * License : CDDL 1.0 Programming Lang: C, Perl Description : ITP: filebench - file system and storage benchmark with flexible workload specification Filebench is a file system and storage benchmark that allows to generate a high variety of workloads. It employs extensive Workload Model Language (WML) for detailed workload specification. Features: - Extensive Workload Model Language (WML) for workload specification - Includes popular pre-defined workloads: webserver, fileserver, varmail, etc. - Reports throughput and latency histograms - Works on Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris (taken from upstream webpage) I intend to maintain it as project of collabmaint on Alioth via Git. I intend to have Sebastian 'tokkee' Harl as my sponsor for uploading the package. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120109134217.4596.20961.report...@mango.of.teamix.net
Bug#585480: [uae] Does anybody run PUAE on Debian Lenny?
Am Sonntag, 31. Juli 2011 schrieb Philippe Coval: > hi there Hi Philippe, > yes i played a bit on it lately check > http://rzr.online.fr/q/emulate > > let me update : > http://bugs.debian.org/585480 > > Currently it does not build on amd64 , so I put it on hold > but if any one is interested for co-maintainance, I can try building on amd64 when I manage to take time for it. Might take some time tough. > I'll push my git repo to alioth which team can take it ? > collab-maintain ? Would be nice. I have a collab-maintain packages as well (fio) and thus it should be easy to get access to. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201108011042.33073.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Bug#591817: ITP: rubinius -- Rubinius is an implementation of the Ruby programming language.
Hi Steven! > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist Do you have anything to test yet? Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#541691: How could I help?
Hi Ana! I do not like to promise anything and I probably do not manage to take time for it quite often, but if you can identify some well defined tasks I might be able to help. I have an alioth guest account. I maintain debian packages fio which Michael Prokop is uploading for me. And I backported some packages [1]. I estimate my packaging skills as beginner to medium maybe, so well defined tasks might help me to get started. [1] http://people.teamix.net/~ms/ Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Debian packaging now on Alioth/CollabMaint
Hi! Debian packaging repository is now at: Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/git/collab-maint/fio.git Vcs-Browser: http://git.debian.org/git/collab-maint/fio.git Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Updated debian package for fio
Am Donnerstag 13 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Martin Steigerwald [20090813 10:42]: > > Am Donnerstag 13 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > > > Package is lintian clean and the fio_1.32-1.diff.gz looks fine. > > > If you send me a 'ACK' I'll upload the package. > > > > ACK. ;) > > Thanks. Uploaded. > > You should (have) receive(d) mails about the state of the upload. > Should appear on http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html soon. Nothing yet. Bug tracker still listed Hendrik as package maintainer in last mails, so possibly I won't get these? > > BTW the package was lintian clean here even before I fixed the > > copyright sign. And I did install lintian from unstable here. > > > > shambhala:~> apt-show-versions | grep lintian > > lintian/sid uptodate 2.2.13 > > Interesting. Same lintian version with git tree before last fix: > | W: fio: debian-copyright-file-uses-obsolete-national-encoding at line > | 11 > > Are you using a UTF-8 console environment? Yes. Possibly I tricked myself. Latest git-buildpackage possibly was still with the older lintian. And then I possibly ran the newest linitian on the dsc file without rebuilding the package before. But I thought I ran a git- buildpackage after updating lintian... well I can try to reproduce this and do a bug report regarding lintian if desired. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Updated debian package for fio
Am Donnerstag 13 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Martin Steigerwald [20090813 08:31]: > > Am Mittwoch 12 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > > > Just one minor problem: the copyright sign in your git commit isn't > > > UTF-8, which should be used nowadays in debian maintainer scripts. > > > Fix it via running: > > > > > > iconv -f ISO-8859-1 -t UTF-8 debian/copyright > > > > debian/copyright.new mv debian/copyright.new debian/copyright > > > > > > I've attached a patch (which also changes another '(C)' to '©') > > > that addresses the issue so you can verify the result. Then the > > > package should be lintian clean. > > > > I used recode which replaces the original file automatically. ;) I > > left the copyright notes unchanged as they are copied from the source > > files. You didn't change them either. I can change them if you wish. > > > > KMail got the encoding wrong as I saved the attachment with your > > patch. Strange. I am using UTF-8 here and the attachment is quoted > > printable. > > Heh. :) > > Package is lintian clean and the fio_1.32-1.diff.gz looks fine. > If you send me a 'ACK' I'll upload the package. ACK. ;) BTW the package was lintian clean here even before I fixed the copyright sign. And I did install lintian from unstable here. shambhala:~> apt-show-versions | grep lintian lintian/sid uptodate 2.2.13 -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Updated debian package for fio
Am Mittwoch 12 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Martin Steigerwald [20090812 21:13]: > > Am Mittwoch 12 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > > > * Martin Steigerwald [20090812 17:18]: > > > > Hi Michael! > > > > [...] > > > > > > Michael, please review. I am at the office again beginning next > > > > week, so I subscribed to this bug report via my private address. > > > > > > Initial reviewing done. Find fixes against git tree attached as git > > > patches. (Tip: use lintian from unstable to verify your package.) > > > Please review on your own and apply what you acknowledge, ping me > > > if you think the package is ready for upload to Debian then. [...] > > Please pull and review. > > Just one minor problem: the copyright sign in your git commit isn't > UTF-8, which should be used nowadays in debian maintainer scripts. > Fix it via running: > > iconv -f ISO-8859-1 -t UTF-8 debian/copyright > debian/copyright.new > mv debian/copyright.new debian/copyright > > I've attached a patch (which also changes another '(C)' to '©') that > addresses the issue so you can verify the result. Then the package > should be lintian clean. I used recode which replaces the original file automatically. ;) I left the copyright notes unchanged as they are copied from the source files. You didn't change them either. I can change them if you wish. KMail got the encoding wrong as I saved the attachment with your patch. Strange. I am using UTF-8 here and the attachment is quoted printable. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Updated debian package for fio
Am Mittwoch 12 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Martin Steigerwald [20090812 17:18]: > > Hi Michael! [...] > > Michael, please review. I am at the office again beginning next week, > > so I subscribed to this bug report via my private address. > > Initial reviewing done. Find fixes against git tree attached as git > patches. (Tip: use lintian from unstable to verify your package.) > Please review on your own and apply what you acknowledge, ping me if > you think the package is ready for upload to Debian then. All applied. Added a changelog entry for each one. Pushed my changes. Please pull and review. > @Jens: the first patch > (0001-fio.1-fix-hyphen-used-as-minus-sign.patch) addresses a minor > issue in the manpage. Please feel free to apply it in your upstream > source. Since it is only one patch for upstream - except a minor patch for the Makefile to build in /usr - and Jens already applied it anyway I decided not to use quilt this time. You replaced dh_clean by dh_prep in 0003-debian-rules-drop-unnecessary-configure-target-repla.patch What is the reason? Is dh_clean deprecated? I forgot to add a ~/.gitconfig with my name and mail address at work. Is there any way to rewrite the mail address in the initial git log entries? If not, well its just an email address in there that won't work from outside of our intranet. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Updated debian package for fio
Hendrik, I will drop you from CC next time, unless you write me you still want to follow this. Hi Michael! I updated my Debian package to fio-1.32. I switched it to git-buildpackage. You can get and build it like follows: m...@mango:~/Zeit/fio> history | tail -8 1197 git clone git://github.com/martin21/fio.git 1198 cd fio 1199 git branch -a 1200 git checkout -b upstream origin/upstream 1201 git checkout -b pristine-tar origin/pristine-tar 1202 git checkout master 1203 git-buildpackage 1204 history | tail I also put it for download at: http://people.teamix.net/~ms/debian/lenny/fio/ Aside from the differing copyright file - Hendrik's is in the new format - and the fact that Hendriks package is done via cdbs I think my package has all and more than Hendriks. I developed the package on Lenny, but I used pbuilder to verify that it builts okay under unstable and that the build dependencies are sufficient. Michael, please review. I am at the office again beginning next week, so I subscribed to this bug report via my private address. I am happy to put it onto alioth or somewhere - need to get started on how to approach that tough. I'd prefer git over subversion for maintaining the package. Ciao, -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Built a package for fio
Hi Jens, Hendrik and Michael! I am forwarding this to the bug report as it is my review of the differences of my package and the one built by you, Hendrik. I already updated my package to fio-1.32. I will send a mail about this after this one. After updating my package today, I found that Hendrik send me a subversion URL for fetching his package in a mail to me and Jens Axboe only - as the above review it didn't went to this bug report: "Martin, feel free to fetch the package source from http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/fio or svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/collab-maint/ext-maint You are very welcome to get/check/fix things there" The HTTP URL seems to be (note the slash at the end): http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/fio/ But I still did not get it checked out: m...@mango:~/lokal/Debian> LANG=C svn checkout http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/fio/ svn: XML data was not well-formed Maybe the WebDAV/SVN HTTP URL is different? I included the examples as documentation in my package already, but I like to compare Copyright files as well. Any hint on how to checkout the package from Hendrik? Information of my current package will follow shortly. Ciao, Martin -- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -- Betreff: Re: Fwd: Built a package for fio Date: Mittwoch, 20. Mai 2009 Von: Martin Steigerwald An: Hendrik Frenzel Kopie: Am Dienstag, 19. Mai 2009 schrieb Hendrik Frenzel: > Martin Steigerwald schrieb: > > The manpage needs a little fix in order to pass lintian > > This is already fixed in my packages. > > They are nearly ready for upload. > I just have to remove the .git/ from the source to get it clean for Debian. > > Martin, feel free to fetch the package source from > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/fio or > svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/collab-maint/ext-maint > You are very welcome to get/check/fix things there :) I had a look at the web url as I don't have SSH access to debian hosts. I have a couple of comments / suggestions: 1) Could you add my manpage for fio_generate_plots? It helps making the package lintian clean and I think it adds some value for the end user as well. That might be something for you, Jens, as well, to integrate upstream. 2) Your doc file is missing out the HOWTO and REPORTING-BUGS files. I attached my version. I am not completely sure about REPORTING-BUGS, but the HOWTO seems to be quite interesting. 3) Does a docbase entry for the HOWTO makes sense? I attached mine. 4) I used priority optional, since I think this package wouldn't conflict with any other package. 5) I added a Suggests: gnuplot since the bash script fio_generate_plots would like to have it. I missed out the examples and your copyright file is better done as well - that seems to be the new machine readable format I read about somewhere. Also the rules file look interestingly short. cdbs appears to be really nice stuff. ;) I can't do any of above changes myself as I have no write access to that SVN repository. I would do any changes that you agree with, Hendrik, otherwise. Ciao, -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 --- -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 fio_generate_plots.1 Description: Troff document fio.1 debian/fio_generate_plots.1 README HOWTO REPORTING-BUGS Document: fio Title: Flexible I/O tester HOWTO Author: Jens Axboe Abstract: This document describes how to run the Flexible I/O tester fio and how it works. Section: Help/HOWTO Format: text Files: /usr/share/doc/fio/HOWTO.gz signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: current state?
Am Mittwoch 05 August 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Michael Prokop [20090805 15:55]: > > * Martin Steigerwald [20090710 19:05]: > > > Am Freitag 10 Juli 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: [...] > > > Sounds like a plan. Until then you could just use my package for > > > testing and whatnot. It works and AFAIR should be lintian clean. > > > > I'm using it already and works fine for me. > > Just ping me if you're back from your holidays - enjoy it! > > Back from holidays? Please contact me if you're back so we can take > care of fio. Yes. I started looking at fio-1.32 and like to update my package. I also want to maintain it via git-buildpackage. But I didn't find the time. Next two days I will be writing articles for Linux User magazine. I hope to get to it next week. Feel free to review my existing package if you have the time. Then I could correct anything that you find in my updated one. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: current state?
Am Freitag 10 Juli 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > > Maybe it could be hosted on alioth somewhere in a git or bazaar > > repo. > > ACK (I strongly prefer git over bazaar ;)) I am just not (yet) used to git, but used Bazaar all over the place. For /etc and in just about several dozen, maybe hundred or more Bazaar branches spread all over my home directory. I want to learn git tough I have no problems with using git. Unless it sucks heavily compared to Bazaar, but I don't think it will. ;) > > I am in holidays for three weeks, so please include my private > > address in further replies (see CC of this mail). If you want things > > to go really quickly it might be best when you just look at my or > > Hendriks package, make changes as you see fit and upload it ;). But I > > think Hendrik should have a chance to have a word on it. I am > > reachable at least during the next week, but please understand that > > in holidays I have lots of other interests too, so it might take a > > day or two longer for me to respond. On the other side it may also be > > quicker, cause I have more time for doing things like debian > > packaging. ;) > > The original ITP is nearly three months old without any > information/updates. It's ~two weeks since I asked about it - > without any reply. > > So - let's give Hendrik three more weeks to take any actions, > otherwise I'd suggest you take over maintenance after your holidays > and I sponsor your package. Sounds like a plan. Until then you could just use my package for testing and whatnot. It works and AFAIR should be lintian clean. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: current state?
Hi Michael! Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Martin Steigerwald [20090710 13:17]: > > Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 12:01:35 schrieb Michael Prokop: > > > * Michael Prokop [20090710 10:00]: > > > > what's the current state of your fio package? > > > > > > Re-Ping. I'd really like to see fio in Debian. > > > Please let me know if you're still interested in maintaining > > > the package, otherwise I'd take care of it. > > > > Well I'd just built one cause I needed it for preparing a Linux > > Performance training course. I am not a Debian DD. I think the package I > > did was pretty much ready, but it doesn't use cdbs. Take whatever you'd > > like with it. I think Hendriks package is also almost ready, but had one > > or two suggestions regarding it. See above. > > Not using cdbs is just fine for me. :) > Where is Hendrik's package? Sorry, I can't find any reference in > #524790. I have no idea. > I'd just like to know *whether* someone of you wants to really > maintain the package and if so *who*. I'd sponsor your package but > if you don't plan to maintain the package I'd take over maintaining > it on my own (and would base my package on your - Martin - work). Well I'd like to maintain it. But I don't want to take it out of Hendriks hands, so I would like to hear Hendrik about it. Maybe it could be hosted on alioth somewhere in a git or bazaar repo. I am in holidays for three weeks, so please include my private address in further replies (see CC of this mail). If you want things to go really quickly it might be best when you just look at my or Hendriks package, make changes as you see fit and upload it ;). But I think Hendrik should have a chance to have a word on it. I am reachable at least during the next week, but please understand that in holidays I have lots of other interests too, so it might take a day or two longer for me to respond. On the other side it may also be quicker, cause I have more time for doing things like debian packaging. ;) Ciao, -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: current state?
Am Freitag, 10. Juli 2009 12:01:35 schrieb Michael Prokop: > * Michael Prokop [20090710 10:00]: > > what's the current state of your fio package? > > Re-Ping. I'd really like to see fio in Debian. > Please let me know if you're still interested in maintaining > the package, otherwise I'd take care of it. Well I'd just built one cause I needed it for preparing a Linux Performance training course. I am not a Debian DD. I think the package I did was pretty much ready, but it doesn't use cdbs. Take whatever you'd like with it. I think Hendriks package is also almost ready, but had one or two suggestions regarding it. See above. -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#524790: Built a package for fio
Hi! I needed something to try out building a completely new package as Debian New Maintainer Guide describes. I looked at packages which are about to be packaged and took fio since I am interested in performance tuning as well. My result is at: http://people.teamix.org/~ms/debian/lenny/fio/ Hendrik feel free to use or disregard as much of my efforts as you like ;-). I know I didn't ask before, but I would have done it anyway for gaining some experience and now that I have done it I can as well share my results. Thus I wouldn't upload it even if I were a DD. Ciao, -- Martin Steigerwald - team(ix) GmbH - http://www.teamix.de gpg: 19E3 8D42 896F D004 08AC A0CA 1E10 C593 0399 AE90 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#468379: can't get kmymoney2-plugin-aqbanking_0.9.6beta-3 to work
Hi! I have shambala> COLUMNS=140 dpkg -l | grep kmymoney2 | cut -c1-64 ii kmymoney2 0.8.9-1 ii kmymoney2-plugin-aqbanking0.9.6beta-4 and shambala> COLUMNS=140 dpkg -l | grep hbci | cut -c1-60 ii libaqhbci10 2.3.2-2 ii libaqhbci12 3.1.0-1 ii libaqhbci13 3.3.0+dfsg-1 and shambala> COLUMNS=170 dpkg -l | grep libaqbanking | cut -c1-60 ii libaqbanking-data3.3.0+dfsg-1 ii libaqbanking-plugins-libgwenhywfar38 2.3.2-2 ii libaqbanking-plugins-libgwenhywfar47 3.3.0+dfsg-1 ii libaqbanking16 2.3.2-2 ii libaqbanking20 3.3.0+dfsg-1 ii libaqbanking20-dev 3.3.0+dfsg-1 ii libaqbanking20-plugins 3.3.0+dfsg-1 ii libaqbanking20-plugins-qt3.3.0+dfsg-1 In KMyMoney2's AqBanking configuration it shows the following modules: aqhbci 3.3.0 aqnone 3.3.0 aqofxconnect 3.3.0 My accounts are configured to use AQHBCI. Still in the context menu of my bank account "Online update via OFX..." is ghosted. And I see no entry for HBCI. Do I need to change some other setting to make it work? Am I missing a package? Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
