extundelete is marked for autoremoval from testing
extundelete 0.2.4-1 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2018-05-16 It is affected by these RC bugs: 894645: extundelete: extundelete FTBFS with e2fsprogs 1.44.1-1 ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Bug#894645: extundelete FTBFS with e2fsprogs 1.44.1-1
Source: extundelete Version: 0.2.4-1 Severity: serious Tags: buster sid https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/extundelete.html ... insertionops.cc: In function 'std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream&, const ext2_inode&)': insertionops.cc:36:36: error: 'const struct ext2_inode' has no member named 'i_dir_acl'; did you mean 'i_file_acl'? os << "Directory ACL: " << inode.i_dir_acl << std::endl; ^ The "#define i_dir_acl i_size_high" was removed. ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Bug#765984: extundelete: 0.2.4 upstream available
* Matt Taggart [Sun Oct 19, 2014 at 01:58:36PM -0700]: There is a much newer upstream release available, 0.2.4. Unfortunately upstream doesn't appear to have a nice changelog available, but looking at the git repo I see a bunch of interesting commits. It would be good to update. But... The new upstream release was laying in the Git repository since quite some time, I just took care of some further adjustments and uploaded a new package version, I hope neither Elías nor Christophe (both being the actual maintainers, though I'm also part of the Debian-Forensics team) don't mind. Any testing and feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for triggering this, Matt! regards, -mika- signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Bug#765984: marked as done (extundelete: 0.2.4 upstream available)
Your message dated Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:21:13 + with message-id e1xggrh-000605...@franck.debian.org and subject line Bug#765984: fixed in extundelete 0.2.4-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #765984, regarding extundelete: 0.2.4 upstream available to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 765984: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765984 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: extundelete Version: 0.2.0-2.1 Severity: wishlist There is a much newer upstream release available, 0.2.4. Unfortunately upstream doesn't appear to have a nice changelog available, but looking at the git repo I see a bunch of interesting commits. It would be good to update. But... How does extundelete compare to similar tools such as ext4magic? Are the reasons to have both in the archive? Thanks, -- Matt Taggart tagg...@debian.org ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Source: extundelete Source-Version: 0.2.4-1 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of extundelete, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive. A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 765...@bugs.debian.org, and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Michael Prokop m...@debian.org (supplier of updated extundelete package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:54:46 +0200 Source: extundelete Binary: extundelete Architecture: source amd64 Version: 0.2.4-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Forensics forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: Michael Prokop m...@debian.org Description: extundelete - utility to recover deleted files from ext3/ext4 partition Closes: 670815 765984 Changes: extundelete (0.2.4-1) unstable; urgency=low . [ Christophe Monniez ] * Imported Upstream version 0.2.3 * [2b2b330] Removing patch as linux2.l_i_reserved2 seems not to be used anymore. * [950d490] Removing now obsolete patch. * [4a903ff] Removing another absolete patch. * [b741130] Updating output dir patch. * [09cf0c7] Removing broken output_dir patch. * [1dd3169] Adding nm patch from Antonio Terceiro to fix a segfault (Closes: #670815). . [ Elías Alejandro ] * [0f8143f] Imported Upstream version 0.2.4 (Closes: #765984) * [be6cc0b] Bump debhelper compat to 9 * [3edb0f6] Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.4 * [4f90ee2] debian/copyright updated to format 1.0 * [7c3b7fb] debian/extundelete.1 update manpage . [ Michael Prokop ] * [393e244] Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.6 * [b47622f] Update VCS headers * [339f9ac] Update debian/copyright (file compile no longer exists) Checksums-Sha1: 4e6bad78199840a155cb485c3413f41692773cf6 1383 extundelete_0.2.4-1.dsc 186fa01b576ee3e21783a65c2d6b77a798202471 108565 extundelete_0.2.4.orig.tar.bz2 61b02fc8f7bee07aa7bd1841ea885912ae8d47ef 4976 extundelete_0.2.4-1.debian.tar.xz 0b21a7df06b532a7bd230ee9c897c9f872320421 49982 extundelete_0.2.4-1_amd64.deb Checksums-Sha256: 3779ba0f31d962b231e78e059065477887f9c45a0d53df71187f2aab37101ce2 1383 extundelete_0.2.4-1.dsc 444c4f9b1e7c7752beca60bd4874fd24b07ffa0cd0e2466366416c2010e25c95 108565 extundelete_0.2.4.orig.tar.bz2 e6476730b63f83aba251af6092e2716f0ffe0f77942492f700cd7881f3880f88 4976 extundelete_0.2.4-1.debian.tar.xz 9c325066b99ffc94d2b5c456185fb87bb5f1cf7da5a05106cf2a963fff48dc85 49982 extundelete_0.2.4-1_amd64.deb Files: 24681f0c8195c0ab672b69ce5d7daf7b 1383 utils optional extundelete_0.2.4-1.dsc 7483689905541049f4ea975381cc2226 108565 utils optional extundelete_0.2.4.orig.tar.bz2 d80753365a3df0dd2d6b459642b88dfb 4976 utils optional extundelete_0.2.4-1.debian.tar.xz 2ef4c50580ff982ca3c44c6a05307049 49982 utils optional extundelete_0.2.4-1_amd64.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlRGvHMACgkQ2N9T+zficuiFkgCgguyewsKUsJcnH1x59DxFIuXo tZUAn1Fi38lDUFIg4LzQEYOqu+5PudG2 =cfYO -END PGP SIGNATUREEnd Message--- ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Please update extundelete to latest upstream version in Debian unstable
Dear maintainers, Please update extundelete http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/extundelete.html to the latest upstream version in Debian unstable. Thanks a lot, Amr ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete 0.2.4
Le samedi 27 avril 2013 à 22:48 +0200, Elías Alejandro a écrit : Hi all, I was checking extundelete and I saw Christophe's work for 0.2.3 version (btw, thanks!!). I've imported the last upstream version 0.2.4 and made some updates. But after to create debian/changelog with something like: git-dch --debian-branch debian --id-length=7 I get all the work about 0.2.3 version. Should I remove all of them from debian/changelog file or keep them, because represents collaborative work? Also, Anybody can check this new version and then upload? :) Thanks for you help. -- Elías Alejandro From my point of view, it's up to you to decide. -- Christophe Monniez christophe.monn...@fccu.be ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete 0.2.4
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 09:45:15AM +0200, Michael Prokop wrote: * Christophe Monniez [Mon Apr 29, 2013 at 08:41:23AM +0200]: Le samedi 27 avril 2013 à 22:48 +0200, Elías Alejandro a écrit : I was checking extundelete and I saw Christophe's work for 0.2.3 version (btw, thanks!!). I've imported the last upstream version 0.2.4 and made some updates. But after to create debian/changelog with something like: git-dch --debian-branch debian --id-length=7 I get all the work about 0.2.3 version. Should I remove all of them from debian/changelog file or keep them, because represents collaborative work? Also, Anybody can check this new version and then upload? :) From my point of view, it's up to you to decide. ACK. *I* would just keep it as it is. ok. If the package is ready for upload from your PoV I'm happy to upload it then. I think only run git-dch is pending and then upload, unless someone can check it out and help us too. I realized that lintian will be blame us because debian/changelog line 6 is a little bit long. :) and about nmu, but that last, I could fix doing Debian Forensic Team as the last writer for debian/changelog. -- Debian Forensics forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
extundelete 0.2.0-2.1 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the extundelete source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 0.2.0-2 Current version: 0.2.0-2.1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Bug#670815: marked as done (extundelete: Extundelete segfaults when trying to recover files)
Your message dated Tue, 04 Dec 2012 18:32:39 + with message-id e1tfxin-0004pu...@franck.debian.org and subject line Bug#670815: fixed in extundelete 0.2.0-2.1 has caused the Debian Bug report #670815, regarding extundelete: Extundelete segfaults when trying to recover files to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 670815: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=670815 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: extundelete Version: 0.2.0-2 Severity: important Tags: patch When attempting to use extundelete to recover files from a partition (/dev/sda11, a 553GB ext4 partition previously mounted as /home, and fsck'd before running 'extundelete /dev/sda11 --restore-all'), I got a general protection fault. It turns out that e2fsprogs and extundelete have different declarations of the ext2_extent_handle structure. Changing extundelete's struct to the version in e2fsprogs appears to fix it - at least, I was able to recover a bunch of files without further crashes. The enclosed patch fixes the problem for now, though I suspect that in the long run the struct really should live in a shared header file instead. === Patch follows === diff -rc extundelete-0.2.0/src/block.c extundelete-0.2.0+deekoohacks/src/block.c *** extundelete-0.2.0/src/block.c 2010-04-15 17:59:33.0 -0700 --- extundelete-0.2.0+deekoohacks/src/block.c 2012-04-29 00:16:12.102682323 -0700 *** *** 69,74 --- 69,75 ext2_filsys fs; ext2_ino_t ino; struct ext2_inode *inode; + struct ext2_inode inodebuf; int type; int level; int max_depth; === End patch === -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU core) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages extundelete depends on: ii e2fslibs 1.42.2-2 ext2/ext3/ext4 file system librari ii libc6 2.13-27Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libcomerr21.42.2-2 common error description library ii libgcc1 1:4.6.3-1 GCC support library ii libstdc++64.6.3-1GNU Standard C++ Library v3 extundelete recommends no packages. extundelete suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- Source: extundelete Source-Version: 0.2.0-2.1 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of extundelete, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive. A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 670...@bugs.debian.org, and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Antonio Terceiro terce...@debian.org (supplier of updated extundelete package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@debian.org) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2012 13:55:42 -0300 Source: extundelete Binary: extundelete Architecture: source amd64 Version: 0.2.0-2.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Forensics forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org Changed-By: Antonio Terceiro terce...@debian.org Description: extundelete - utility to recover deleted files from ext3/ext4 partition Closes: 670815 Changes: extundelete (0.2.0-2.1) unstable; urgency=low . * Non-maintainer upload. * 05_fix_segmentation_fault.patch by Deekoo L. to fix segmentation fault when trying to recover files (Closes: #670815) Checksums-Sha1: dd2aeba01dd1ad445b561cb54769f0ad689ebce8 1389 extundelete_0.2.0-2.1.dsc 91abbf58e28bc2637c3ac88e17c1adbd830c04a8 6862 extundelete_0.2.0-2.1.debian.tar.gz d0e8d58d58fad74ce94c58e103bd375b7e5ea71f 55042 extundelete_0.2.0-2.1_amd64.deb Checksums-Sha256: f31da4aba60b9844467ac45b99e83e0b5660cd58054133f052bfe7b9421a1f50 1389 extundelete_0.2.0-2.1.dsc 3e37f24ac60bd60a0d162184b2834b85bac0cd4cd2d055e1f687ed6a88f70f97 6862 extundelete_0.2.0-2.1.debian.tar.gz
Bug#670815: extundelete: Extundelete segfaults when trying to recover files
Package: extundelete Version: 0.2.0-2 Severity: important Tags: patch When attempting to use extundelete to recover files from a partition (/dev/sda11, a 553GB ext4 partition previously mounted as /home, and fsck'd before running 'extundelete /dev/sda11 --restore-all'), I got a general protection fault. It turns out that e2fsprogs and extundelete have different declarations of the ext2_extent_handle structure. Changing extundelete's struct to the version in e2fsprogs appears to fix it - at least, I was able to recover a bunch of files without further crashes. The enclosed patch fixes the problem for now, though I suspect that in the long run the struct really should live in a shared header file instead. === Patch follows === diff -rc extundelete-0.2.0/src/block.c extundelete-0.2.0+deekoohacks/src/block.c *** extundelete-0.2.0/src/block.c 2010-04-15 17:59:33.0 -0700 --- extundelete-0.2.0+deekoohacks/src/block.c 2012-04-29 00:16:12.102682323 -0700 *** *** 69,74 --- 69,75 ext2_filsys fs; ext2_ino_t ino; struct ext2_inode *inode; + struct ext2_inode inodebuf; int type; int level; int max_depth; === End patch === -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU core) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages extundelete depends on: ii e2fslibs 1.42.2-2 ext2/ext3/ext4 file system librari ii libc6 2.13-27Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libcomerr21.42.2-2 common error description library ii libgcc1 1:4.6.3-1 GCC support library ii libstdc++64.6.3-1GNU Standard C++ Library v3 extundelete recommends no packages. extundelete suggests no packages. -- no debconf information ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: Bug#634401: extundelete: FTBFS: extundelete.cc:963:47: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'struct opaque_ext2_group_desc'
* Eric Sandeen [Tue Jan 03, 2012 at 11:54:46AM -0600]: On 12/31/11 6:23 AM, Michael Prokop wrote: [...] The responsible change in e2fslibs-dev is this one (libext2fs: make fs-group_desc opaque): http://git.kernel.org/?p=fs/ext2/e2fsprogs.git;a=commit;h=efe0b401465a3ee836180614b5b435acbb84fc27 [...] The code of extundelete that's failing to compile is: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=forensics/extundelete.git;a=blob;f=src/extundelete.cc;h=d51d45e15081b01e32e781334ba6d431e7adf88f;hb=HEAD#l944 //FIXME: may need to change to be compatible with newer file systems :) Yeah :) The point of the change was to prevent this kind of use of -group_desc: group_descriptor_table[n] = fs-group_desc[n]; because the size of group_desc may change. Instead, we need something like: group_descriptor_table[n] = *ext2fs_group_desc(fs, fs-group_desc, n); I think my pointer-fu is ok ;) Maybe a memcpy would be clearer. Seems to work - thanks a lot for your help, Eric! There are other problems though, I think, in parse_inode_block() for example, things in there have changed as well... this tool seems to be getting a little to grubby in the ext internals. I think maybe it should be making use of ext2fs_swap_inode() instead. Ok. regards, -mika- signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: Bug#634401: extundelete: FTBFS: extundelete.cc:963:47: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'struct opaque_ext2_group_desc'
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 11:54:46AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: I just investigated on this FTBFS issue. The problem is that extundelete doesn't compile against e2fslibs-dev versions =1.42. Therefore extundelete was just removed from Debian/testing, so if this bug can't be resolved then extundelete sadly can't be shipped with the upcoming Debian stable release. The extundelete program also needs to be changed to support 64-bit file systems. The responsible change in e2fslibs-dev is this one (libext2fs: make fs-group_desc opaque): http://git.kernel.org/?p=fs/ext2/e2fsprogs.git;a=commit;h=efe0b401465a3ee836180614b5b435acbb84fc27 The commit message talks about EXT2FS_OLD_32_COMPAT which should provide compiling of Old-style applications who don't want to change their source code. Sadly EXT2FS_OLD_32_COMPAT wasn't implemented in this commit nor in a following one. Hm, none of that was in my original commit or message, I think Ted added that text on commit, but didn't modify the patch at all. Yeah, somehow that change got lost. I'm not sure what happened. There are other problems though, I think, in parse_inode_block() for example, things in there have changed as well... this tool seems to be getting a little to grubby in the ext internals. I think maybe it should be making use of ext2fs_swap_inode() instead. The issue was brought up on the mailinglist of extundelete a few weeks ago, but there wasn't a reaction from upstream since then. Eric and Theodore - any ideas what's the best way to resolve this issue in the meanwhile? I'll look at trying to add the backwards compatibility support back into a future version of e2fsprogs, but really, extundelete should be updated to use the accessor functions and updated to support 64-bit file systems. - Ted ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Bug#634401: extundelete: FTBFS: extundelete.cc:963:47: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'struct opaque_ext2_group_desc'
Source: extundelete Version: 0.2.0-1 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy sid User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: qa-ftbfs-20110718 qa-ftbfs Justification: FTBFS on amd64 Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part: make[3]: Entering directory `/build/extundelete-m9SM_D/extundelete-0.2.0/src' extundelete.cc: In function 'int load_super_block(ext2_filsys)': extundelete.cc:963:47: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'struct opaque_ext2_group_desc' /usr/include/ext2fs/ext2fs.h:211:8: error: forward declaration of 'struct opaque_ext2_group_desc' extundelete.cc:963:47: error: no match for 'operator=' in '*(group_descriptor_table + ((long unsigned int)(((long unsigned int)n) * 32ul))) = * fs-struct_ext2_filsys::group_desc' extundelete.cc:963:47: note: candidate is: /usr/include/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h:136:8: note: ext2_group_desc ext2_group_desc::operator=(const ext2_group_desc) /usr/include/ext2fs/ext2_fs.h:136:8: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from 'opaque_ext2_group_desc' to 'const ext2_group_desc' make[3]: *** [extundelete-extundelete.o] Error 1 The full build log is available from: http://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2011/07/18/extundelete_0.2.0-1_lsid64.buildlog A list of current common problems and possible solutions is available at http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/FTBFS . You're welcome to contribute! About the archive rebuild: The rebuild was done on about 50 AMD64 nodes of the Grid'5000 platform, using a clean chroot. Internet was not accessible from the build systems. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
extundelete 0.2.0-1 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the extundelete source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: (not in testing) Current version: 0.2.0-1 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: updating extundelete
Le lundi 13 juin 2011 à 01:07:49 (+0200 CEST), Elías Alejandro a écrit : [...] Also, I have noticed the comments in src/extundelete.cc state the program is distributed under GPL-2 and not GPL-2+. I've Added this copyright/license. You have forgotten to change the License field for 'Files: *' accordingly. The rest seems now OK. Cheers, Julien -- .''`. Julien Valroff ~ jul...@kirya.net ~ jul...@debian.org : :' : Debian Developer Free software contributor `. `'` http://www.kirya.net/ `- 4096R/ E1D8 5796 8214 4687 E416 948C 859F EF67 258E 26B1 ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: updating extundelete
Hi Elías, Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 à 00:46:24 (+0200 CEST), Elías Alejandro a écrit : Hi Julien, First all, thanks for your help and advices. Here some answers Thanks for *your* work on this package. On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:55:37PM +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: [...] * debhelper compatibility should be bumped to 8 given you build-depend on = 8.0.0 Done. Actually, not yet fixed: `echo 8 debian/compat' will fix this (or reduce debhelper version to 7 in the build-dependencies if you prefer). Also, I have noticed the comments in src/extundelete.cc state the program is distributed under GPL-2 and not GPL-2+. Cheers, Julien -- .''`. Julien Valroff ~ jul...@kirya.net ~ jul...@debian.org : :' : Debian Developer Free software contributor `. `'` http://www.kirya.net/ `- 4096R/ E1D8 5796 8214 4687 E416 948C 859F EF67 258E 26B1 ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: updating extundelete
Hi Julien, On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 03:33:08PM +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: Thanks for *your* work on this package. No problem at all ;) Actually, not yet fixed: `echo 8 debian/compat' will fix this (or reduce debhelper version to 7 in the build-dependencies if you prefer). Now it seems ok. Also, I have noticed the comments in src/extundelete.cc state the program is distributed under GPL-2 and not GPL-2+. I've Added this copyright/license. Also I've tested with pbuilder and piuparts and it seems works fine. Best regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: updating extundelete
Hi Julien, First all, thanks for your help and advices. Here some answers On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:55:37PM +0200, Julien Valroff wrote: * Remove useless comments from debian/rules Done. * You don't need to refer to your patch in the changelog, it's a new package. The README.Debian also seems useless. Both things can easily be replaced by using DEP-3 formatted headers in the patch file itself. Done. * Again about this patch: have you forwarded it to upstream developers? If so, have they accepted it? I think it is a good idea to try and keep the Debian package as close as possible to the upstream tarball, and hence avoid unnecessary patches. I've forwarded since last year and recently last week, but no upstream answers so far. This patch allow flexibility to recover files in anywhere place and not just in the current directory as default behaviour. * Have you also forwarded the manpage you have written? I guess this can * be useful for upstream to include it in their tarball. Yes, but the same patch's story no answers so far. * You should use a standalone license paragraph for (at least) GPL-2+ (see DEP-5 for details) I think now is a little bit more improved. * debhelper compatibility should be bumped to 8 given you build-depend on = 8.0.0 Done. Please let me know any news and I will work in about it. Best regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: updating extundelete
Hi Elías, Le dimanche 05 juin 2011 à 22:50:02 (+0200 CEST), Elías Alejandro a écrit : Hi I've just updated extundelete[1]. Any member willing to review it?. Thanks for your good work. I think todo is: - Add Christophe Monniez copyright. - Sync date under debian/changelog to be agree with Debian Policy 3.9.2 (if not lintian warning). I had a quick look at the package, and it looks mainly ok, though here are some tiny improvement suggestions beside the above points: * Remove useless comments from debian/rules * You don't need to refer to your patch in the changelog, it's a new package. The README.Debian also seems useless. Both things can easily be replaced by using DEP-3 formatted headers in the patch file itself. * Again about this patch: have you forwarded it to upstream developers? If so, have they accepted it? I think it is a good idea to try and keep the Debian package as close as possible to the upstream tarball, and hence avoid unnecessary patches. * Have you also forwarded the manpage you have written? I guess this can * be useful for upstream to include it in their tarball. * You should use a standalone license paragraph for (at least) GPL-2+ (see DEP-5 for details) * debhelper compatibility should be bumped to 8 given you build-depend on = 8.0.0 - Someone willing DD under uploader field, to finally upload it. I'd be happy to upload this package for you once these points are fixed. Cheers, Julien -- .''`. Julien Valroff ~ jul...@kirya.net ~ jul...@debian.org : :' : Debian Developer Free software contributor `. `'` http://www.kirya.net/ `- 4096R/ E1D8 5796 8214 4687 E416 948C 859F EF67 258E 26B1 ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
updating extundelete
Hi I've just updated extundelete[1]. Any member willing to review it?. I think todo is: - Add Christophe Monniez copyright. - Sync date under debian/changelog to be agree with Debian Policy 3.9.2 (if not lintian warning). - Someone willing DD under uploader field, to finally upload it. [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=forensics/extundelete.git;a=summary Best regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
about extundelete
Hi Forensic team, I'd like to know what can I do to view extundelete[1] released under Debian? Maybe I'm delayed but I'd appreciate any suggestions or advices. [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=forensics/extundelete.git Best regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
extundelete
Hi, I've just updated the git repository. [1] Please could anyone review it? [1] http://git.debian.org/?p=forensics/extundelete.git;a=summary Best regards, -- Elías ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 02:45:08PM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: I prefer to have an option that would permit the user to choose the directory name where to drop the undelete files. But I think that the better way is to ask the upstream author or to give him a patch. Ok, I've applied a patch. it will be like this: extundelete --restore-file 'path' --output-dir 'path' /dev/mydevice the new option is: --output-dir Please review it for then update debian directory. Also, I've sent a email to upstream author about it if he's interested to include an option to dump the recovered files, some like this patch. I still no recieve his reply. Regards, -- Elías ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
Le dimanche 24 octobre 2010 à 06:44 +0200, Elías Alejandro a écrit : Hi, On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 09:57:54AM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: - We should ask the upstream author to add an option to specify the directory where we want the files to be restored. I apologize for the delay. I had a lot work :( About it, I was trying it, and RECOVERED_FILES is created in the same place where you run extundelete (So, where ever). I think it could be skip or what do you think? Regards, -- Elías I prefer to have an option that would permit the user to choose the directory name where to drop the undelete files. But I think that the better way is to ask the upstream author or to give him a patch. -- Christophe Monniez christophe.monn...@fccu.be ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
Hi, On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 09:57:54AM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: - We should ask the upstream author to add an option to specify the directory where we want the files to be restored. I apologize for the delay. I had a lot work :( About it, I was trying it, and RECOVERED_FILES is created in the same place where you run extundelete (So, where ever). I think it could be skip or what do you think? Regards, -- Elías ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
Hi all, On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:28:17PM +0200, Michael Prokop wrote: I'll upload extundelete as soon as you've finished packaging inside git and give me your final ACK. I've just applied a couple of commits. I think it's ready. Basically refers to dpkg-source 3.0 according [1] and closing bug #569085 furthermore appears to be lintian clean Please, could you review it. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/DebSrc3.0 Regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
* Elías Alejandro eal...@gmail.com [Sat Oct 16, 2010 at 11:01:54AM -0500]: On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 07:36:53AM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: Here is the new extundelete git repository, if you agree with that: http://git.debian.org/?p=forensics/extundelete.git;a=summary I imported your work as one commit. I don't know if it is the common way to do that kind of stuff. Ok, I wanted update debian/changelog to close #569085 basically adding 1 line: * Initial release (Closes: #569085) but I have no permissions. Maybe other members can revise it and make the change. (seems the email list has low traffic) or Could you check it and upload it? Make sure you've an alioth account and join the forensics group so we can add you to the group to get the according permissions: https://alioth.debian.org/projects/forensics/ I'll upload extundelete as soon as you've finished packaging inside git and give me your final ACK. regards, -mika- signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
Le jeudi 14 octobre 2010 à 16:24 +0200, Elías Alejandro a écrit : On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 07:53:11AM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: We have repositories for debian forensics packages on alioth: Ok, I've recently created a git repository to my package [1] I think is similar. My id under collab-maint is: ealmdz-guest [1] http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/gpick.git;a=summary Kind regards, -- Elías Alejandro Here is the new extundelete git repository, if you agree with that: http://git.debian.org/?p=forensics/extundelete.git;a=summary I imported your work as one commit. I don't know if it is the common way to do that kind of stuff. -- Christophe Monniez christophe.monn...@fccu.be ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
extundelete
Hi Elías, I saw your work on extundelete (http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/extundelete/) and, as a member of the Debian Forensics team (http://alioth.debian.org/projects/forensics/), I'm interested to help in packaging this software. Are you interested in joining our team so that we can do team work on this package ? -- Christophe Monniez christophe.monn...@fccu.be ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
Re: extundelete
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:33:28AM +0200, Christophe Monniez wrote: Hi Elías, I saw your work on extundelete (http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/e/extundelete/) and, as a member of the Debian Forensics team (http://alioth.debian.org/projects/forensics/), I'm interested to help in packaging this software. Are you interested in joining our team so that we can do team work on this package ? Ok, I think extundelete will be better under forensics team. Should I create a new repository on alioth? or Do I wait to join in the team? I'm sorry I'm newbie. Kind regards, -- Elías Alejandro ___ forensics-devel mailing list forensics-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/forensics-devel
