Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's really only one little difference between debian/control in n.v.m and the one in my snapshot branch: Build-Depends: cdbs (= 0.4.28), debhelper (= 4.0.0), autotools-dev, - libboost-filesystem-dev, libboost-regex-dev, libboost-dev, libz-dev + libboost-filesystem-dev, libboost-regex-dev, libboost-dev, libz-dev, + po-debconf Is po-debconf something we actually need? I've never really checked, but it was there in the n.v.m.debian branch once upon a time... That is a very interesting question. I've looked into it, and I believe we do need that dependency, or else the translated debconf templates for the monotone-server package don't get installed right. So far so simple; what makes the question interesting is that the po-debconf documentation says one should also run the 'debconf-updatepo' command from one's debian/rules clean target. CDBS does not do this, and I'm skeptical that it should be done; the effect is (essentially) to run msgmerge on all the template .po files, which is exactly what the translators for the main .po files have told us not to do. Perhaps things are different for debconf translations? I don't know, nor do I know who to ask. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The bugs said FTBFS but 0.33-2 built just fine on all architectures, so the bugs are gone. That's why I closed them. I think that's an accident of sbuild, though. I could reproduce both bugs with pbuilder. ... however, I have just installed the 0.33-2 package from unstable, and it sure *looks* like it's built against boost 1.33; are you sure? It is a coincidence that you use the same architecture as Shaun (i386). I'm on amd64, and I would use the version just built against boost 1.34 on the buildds. Oh, duh, of course. I understand now. I'm not proposing to push it in ahead of the 10-day window, but I'd like to see it go in as soon as possible after that. Me too, but as soon as possible really depends on boost. I suggest you contact the boost maintainers, chip in on monotone using the single-threaded version of boost (see the last comment in #429533), and ask what the boost maintainers' plans are regarding the two RC bugs. Well, my personal inclination is to push forward on eliminating the dependencies on libboost-regex and libboost-filesystem, so that we are no longer tied to boost at all (we'll still build-depend on boost-dev, but that won't translate to a runtime dependency, so it won't affect testing propagation). This can happen for 0.36 if (a) I succeed in finishing the b-fs removal tomorrow, and (b) we are okay with merging nvm.experiment.deregexp plus nvm.experiment.pcre as a stopgap. I should bug njs about reviewing .deregexp. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A team of maintainers is great. In fact, it's done quite regularly. Just search google for 'debian maintainer team'. If the team's well coordinated, it can work much better than a single maintainer. So thinking about it a bit more, I don't want to put monotone-devel@nongnu.org as the Maintainer: list, since most people on that list don't care about Debian packaging issues. Can we get a [EMAIL PROTECTED] list? I *think* this just requires one of the people with project admin rights on Savannah to fill out a form ... (cc:ing njs, as I know graydon is not available right now) My feeling on how to move forward is that once we have that list, we should do ASAP an 0.35-1 which is basically the same as the 0.35-0.2 I did last week, plus corrections as discussed in this thread - I have 1) add po-debconf to the dependencies 2) pull in the Dutch debconf translation from #415496 3) new Maintainer: and Uploaders: control lines -- did I miss anything? That will get us working packages in unstable. We can then worry about testing transition problems and uncoupling from boost at our leisure. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 11:27:33AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: So thinking about it a bit more, I don't want to put monotone-devel@nongnu.org as the Maintainer: list, since most people on that list don't care about Debian packaging issues. Can we get a [EMAIL PROTECTED] list? I *think* this just requires one of the people with project admin rights on Savannah to fill out a form ... (cc:ing njs, as I know graydon is not available right now) Just created it, it's listed at https://savannah.nongnu.org/mail/?group=monotone now, though the links don't seem to work (hopefully they will start magically working once a cron job runs or something). -- Nathaniel -- The problem...is that sets have a very limited range of activities -- they can't carry pianos, for example, nor drink beer. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sun, 8 Jul 2007 16:49:37 -0700, Nathaniel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: njs On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 11:27:33AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: njs So thinking about it a bit more, I don't want to put njs monotone-devel@nongnu.org as the Maintainer: list, since most people njs on that list don't care about Debian packaging issues. Can we get a njs [EMAIL PROTECTED] list? I *think* this just requires one of njs the people with project admin rights on Savannah to fill out a form njs ... (cc:ing njs, as I know graydon is not available right now) njs njs Just created it, it's listed at njs https://savannah.nongnu.org/mail/?group=monotone njs now, though the links don't seem to work (hopefully they will start njs magically working once a cron job runs or something). Looks like the list itself works like a charm, I just subscribed. OK, time to change debian/control... Cheers, Richard ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Hi, Zack Weinberg wrote: some time to figure it out. [ I am not certain 0.33-2 will actually go into testing after ten days - grep-excuses seems to think bug 425907 is relevant even though it affects 0.31-8 too, and *may* be confused about which boost libraries it needs... but we don't have to worry about that right now, anyway. ] I'm not sure exactly how the excuses script works, but http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/version.cgi?width=;info=1;height=;found=monotone%2F0.31-8;package=monotone;format=png;collapse=0;ignore_boring=0 seems to indicate that it thinks 0.33-2 isn't a direct descendent of 0.31-8 - maybe this is why it thinks that's a problem? -- Jon ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:17:18 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw On 7/6/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw Second, I would indeed encourage you, Richard and Zack, to zackw co-maintain the package. That means, as a prerequisite, that zackw I'd like you to agree on merging your scripts, and on a zackw long-term maintenance strategy. zackw zackw As far as scripts, I don't have any; Me neither. I was wondering what scripts you were talking about, Ludovic. The snapshots I make are a different story, and the script I use there isn't really that interesting for regular releases, as most of it is about propagating from three different monotone branches to a private one. For regular releases, I simply use dpkg-buildpackage (or debuild the last two or three days). zackw I was just taking the official 0.35 release tarball and zackw manually applying relevant bits of the 0.31-8 Debian diff, plus zackw one post-0.35 change. I'd be inclined to track official zackw releases as closely as possible. Richard, what are your zackw thoughts? In complete agreement. Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Zack Weinberg said: zackw On 7/6/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw Second, I would indeed encourage you, Richard and Zack, to zackw co-maintain the package. That means, as a prerequisite, that zackw I'd like you to agree on merging your scripts, and on a zackw long-term maintenance strategy. zackw zackw As far as scripts, I don't have any; Me neither. I was wondering what scripts you were talking about, Ludovic. The snapshots I make are a different story, and the script I use there isn't really that interesting for regular releases, as most of it is about propagating from three different monotone branches to a private one. For regular releases, I simply use dpkg-buildpackage (or debuild the last two or three days). By scripts I simply mean the contents of the debian/ subdirectory. zackw I was just taking the official 0.35 release tarball and zackw manually applying relevant bits of the 0.31-8 Debian diff, plus zackw one post-0.35 change. I'd be inclined to track official zackw releases as closely as possible. Richard, what are your zackw thoughts? In complete agreement. Me too. -- Ludovic Brenta. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Jon Bright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi, Zack Weinberg wrote: some time to figure it out. [ I am not certain 0.33-2 will actually go into testing after ten days - grep-excuses seems to think bug 425907 is relevant even though it affects 0.31-8 too, and *may* be confused about which boost libraries it needs... but we don't have to worry about that right now, anyway. ] I'm not sure exactly how the excuses script works, but http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/version.cgi?width=;info=1;height=;found=monotone%2F0.31-8;package=monotone;format=png;collapse=0;ignore_boring=0 seems to indicate that it thinks 0.33-2 isn't a direct descendent of 0.31-8 - maybe this is why it thinks that's a problem? I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. So I closed the two bugs; they will not block monotone from going into testing. However, boost has been blocked for 53 days by 2 RC bugs; one of them is fixed in experimental but the other one (#429533) seems problematic. The 0.33-2 in unstable is built against boost 1.34.0-1, which has both bugs. Also, it was built with g++-4.2 (the new default C++ compiler as of two weeks ago), so watch out for any bugs. I think it is appropriate to allow the package to mature a little more in unstable. Personally I run testing and I am content with 0.31-6 for now. (I do have an unstable chroot for building packages). -- Ludovic Brenta. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:31:40 +0200, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: ludovic Sure. I'd add myself before uploading in any case :) Now, ludovic you and Richard should decide who will be in the Maintainer: ludovic field :) Zack, how much do you desire being an official maintainer. Or shall we do a virtual rock, scissors, bag? Don't misunderstand me, I have zero problems being a maintainer for monotone, considering I'm already involved to a large enough degree that I think the difference won't be that big. Another thought is, does the maintainer have to be a person, or can it be a group of maintainers? Technically, all we would need is a mailing list (possibly monotone-devel@nongnu.org, but that depends on what the rest of the list thinks of that idea), and it wouldn't look different from a debian/control point of view. Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By scripts I simply mean the contents of the debian/ subdirectory. Ah, well, I'd be using the stuff currently in debian/ on net.venge.monotone. The way I see it working under ideal conditions is that the -1 release for any given upstream release has an empty (but present) Debian diff, and subsequent Debian releases accumulate changes in the diff. We can also bring forward Debian-specific changes in the diff if necessary (e.g. the current removal of -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS). I am not inclined to use a patch system, as I don't expect divergence from upstream sufficient to warrant it. We are currently using cdbs; I wouldn't object to switching to a pure debhelper arrangement. I don't mind it myself but I know there are lots of people who don't like cdbs. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. Argh. So I closed the two bugs; they will not block monotone from going into testing. Was that really the right thing to do? Those bugs are real and present in 0.33-2; it's just that they're in 0.31-8 as well... However, boost has been blocked for 53 days by 2 RC bugs; one of them is fixed in experimental but the other one (#429533) seems problematic. The 0.33-2 in unstable is built against boost 1.34.0-1, which has both bugs. Double argh, and IMO entirely destroys the point of doing 0.33-2 at all; it was supposed to be built against 1.33.1, to avoid those problems and the known bugs in monotone =0.35 when boost 1.34 is in use! ... however, I have just installed the 0.33-2 package from unstable, and it sure *looks* like it's built against boost 1.33; are you sure? Also, it was built with g++-4.2 (the new default C++ compiler as of two weeks ago), so watch out for any bugs. ... according to mtn --full-version, this is not true either. I think it is appropriate to allow the package to mature a little more in unstable. I'm not proposing to push it in ahead of the 10-day window, but I'd like to see it go in as soon as possible after that. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:31:40 +0200, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: ludovic Sure. I'd add myself before uploading in any case :) Now, ludovic you and Richard should decide who will be in the Maintainer: ludovic field :) Zack, how much do you desire being an official maintainer. Or shall we do a virtual rock, scissors, bag? Don't misunderstand me, I have zero problems being a maintainer for monotone, considering I'm already involved to a large enough degree that I think the difference won't be that big. I am indifferent, truly. I kinda like the mailing list idea. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. Argh. Okay. So maybe it's not as simple as uploading the version from experimental to unstable. I forgot to include the translations added in -7 and -8. Double argh, and IMO entirely destroys the point of doing 0.33-2 at all; it was supposed to be built against 1.33.1, to avoid those problems and the known bugs in monotone =0.35 when boost 1.34 is in use! ... however, I have just installed the 0.33-2 package from unstable, and it sure *looks* like it's built against boost 1.33; are you sure? My Deb-fu was lacking. I built the i386 binary to use boost 1.33.1 from testing. However, all the buildd architecture binaries will be built from unstable using boost 1.34. If monotone 0.33 is buggy with boost 1.34, this is an RC bug and 0.33 will not migrate to testing. If that's the case, you may as well upload 0.35. In the mean time, i386 users can use the 0.33 binary in unstable. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 7 Jul 2007 09:46:25 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw I kinda like the mailing list idea. Seems like a good option, doesn't it? It would allow for maintainers to help each other easily, or to switch with minimal hassle. What does the Debian community think of such a setup, incidently? Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 7 Jul 2007 09:46:25 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw I kinda like the mailing list idea. Seems like a good option, doesn't it? It would allow for maintainers to help each other easily, or to switch with minimal hassle. What does the Debian community think of such a setup, incidently? A team of maintainers is great. In fact, it's done quite regularly. Just search google for 'debian maintainer team'. If the team's well coordinated, it can work much better than a single maintainer. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/7/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/7/07, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. Argh. Okay. So maybe it's not as simple as uploading the version from experimental to unstable. I forgot to include the translations added in -7 and -8. I've uploaded 0.33-3 which includes the forgotten -7 and -8 changes. Cheers, Shaun monotone (0.33-3) unstable; urgency=low * Include the Japanese and Portuguese translations from 0.31-7 and 0.31-8, which were accidentally omitted in 0.33-2. -- Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat, 7 Jul 2007 11:09:04 -0600 ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sat, 7 Jul 2007 09:39:25 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw By scripts I simply mean the contents of the debian/ subdirectory. zackw zackw Ah, well, I'd be using the stuff currently in debian/ on zackw net.venge.monotone. Yup, that's what I would expect to use as well. There's really only one little difference between debian/control in n.v.m and the one in my snapshot branch: Build-Depends: cdbs (= 0.4.28), debhelper (= 4.0.0), autotools-dev, - libboost-filesystem-dev, libboost-regex-dev, libboost-dev, libz-dev + libboost-filesystem-dev, libboost-regex-dev, libboost-dev, libz-dev, + po-debconf Is po-debconf something we actually need? I've never really checked, but it was there in the n.v.m.debian branch once upon a time... zackw The way I see it working under ideal conditions is that the -1 zackw release for any given upstream release has an empty (but zackw present) Debian diff, and subsequent Debian releases accumulate zackw changes in the diff. We can also bring forward Debian-specific zackw changes in the diff if necessary (e.g. the current removal of zackw -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS). I agree with that. zackw I am not inclined to use a patch system, as I don't expect zackw divergence from upstream sufficient to warrant it. Completely agree. zackw We are currently using cdbs; I wouldn't object to switching to zackw a pure debhelper arrangement. I don't mind it myself but I zackw know there are lots of people who don't like cdbs. I don't have enough knowledge for that part, so I'll happily leave that entirely in your hands and will just be a willing tester ;-). Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Zack Weinberg writes: On 7/7/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I looked at the changelog, and indeed it has branches. For example the current changelog (0.33-2) does not list 0.31-8 (or -7) at all. Argh. So I closed the two bugs; they will not block monotone from going into testing. Was that really the right thing to do? Those bugs are real and present in 0.33-2; it's just that they're in 0.31-8 as well... The bugs said FTBFS but 0.33-2 built just fine on all architectures, so the bugs are gone. That's why I closed them. However, boost has been blocked for 53 days by 2 RC bugs; one of them is fixed in experimental but the other one (#429533) seems problematic. The 0.33-2 in unstable is built against boost 1.34.0-1, which has both bugs. Double argh, and IMO entirely destroys the point of doing 0.33-2 at all; it was supposed to be built against 1.33.1, to avoid those problems and the known bugs in monotone =0.35 when boost 1.34 is in use! Yes. If you want a recent version of monotone on an older version of libraries, the only solution right now is www.backports.org, i.e. the latest version of monotone running on Etch, i.e. using g++-4.1 and boost 1.33.1-10. ... however, I have just installed the 0.33-2 package from unstable, and it sure *looks* like it's built against boost 1.33; are you sure? It is a coincidence that you use the same architecture as Shaun (i386). I'm on amd64, and I would use the version just built against boost 1.34 on the buildds. Also, it was built with g++-4.2 (the new default C++ compiler as of two weeks ago), so watch out for any bugs. ... according to mtn --full-version, this is not true either. Ditto. I think it is appropriate to allow the package to mature a little more in unstable. I'm not proposing to push it in ahead of the 10-day window, but I'd like to see it go in as soon as possible after that. Me too, but as soon as possible really depends on boost. I suggest you contact the boost maintainers, chip in on monotone using the single-threaded version of boost (see the last comment in #429533), and ask what the boost maintainers' plans are regarding the two RC bugs. -- Ludovic Brenta. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 5 Jul 2007 17:21:56 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw Ludovic Brenta is willing to sponsor someone else to maintain zackw the package, but not to maintain the package himself. It zackw sounds like he's hoping you'll adopt the package, and he'll zackw sponsor the upload for you. If you'd like to adopt montone, zackw you have to prepare a package and send it to Ludovic for zackw proofreading and sponsorship. zackw zackw I suppose I'm willing to do that, but I'd prefer team zackw maintenance with at least one other person; I am often zackw unavailable. How about you, Richard? Depends. I have the resources to build i386 packages, and in the last few releases, I have built the packages for sid that are in the monotone.ca download area. Building specifically for Debian and doing what else is necessary (I assume it will involve handling bug reports, or?) doesn't sound too consuming, and I do take time for monotone either way, so... Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 5 Jul 2007 17:19:39 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw net.venge.monotone.levitte.select-heads-off zackw- additional H: selector zackw zackw -- Any reason not to merge this to mainline? Yes. The implementation is ugly and needs to be generalised. See the magic selector page on the wiki. I just haven't taken the time to think about it... Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/4/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zack Weinberg writes: On 7/4/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shaun, your last upload of monotone to Debian is from March 2007, and testing and unstable still carry 0.31 (0.33 is in experimental). Are you planning to continue maintaining the packages in Debian? If not, I can sponsor Richard, as I am a Debian Developer and an everyday user of Monotone. Shaun's ability to work on Debian is very limited at the moment. Richard's snapshots are not currently suitable for direct inclusion in Debian (there's been no effort to mark Debian bugs closed, and there are a small number of places where an official package needs to diverge from the snapshots. I've actually prepared an 0.35 package suitable for Debian just yesterday - you can get it from http://mrtock.ucsd.edu/~zack/debian/. It'd be great if you could check that and upload it. I suggest you and Richard merge your packaging scripts. They are in Monotone itself, so that should be easy :) Longer term, I understand that Shaun is interested in having someone take over the package - He should file a bug against wnpp stating he's looking for a co-maintainer, or orphaning the package. I did look for such a bug and didn't find one. So, I'll await his reply. Done. It's bug #431797. perhaps that could be you, in collaboration with me and Richard. I'm not interested in running the NM gauntlet myself, but I'd be happy to take on some of the work in maintaining this one package. OK. I'm willing to sponsor the package but not to do the actual packaging work, so, if Shaun is willing to hand the package over, it soulds like we've got a deal :) Great! Glad to hear it. Thanks. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/4/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw Between your 0.35-0.1 and the -0.2 I'm suggesting for Debian there are zackw three changes: zackw zackw * No -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREAD; this is a workaround for problems zackw reported on powerpc, IIRC. (From 0.31-8.) zackw * Backport Tim's post-0.35 fixes for boost 1.34. zackw * List all the fixed Debian bugs in debian/changelog ;-) I forgot to mention the corrections to the build-depends (texlive-* instead of tetex, and no longer pulling in libboost-test-dev). Yes? That's what's included in the changes you committed/pushed, right? Yes and no. I committed the build-dep fixes and the changelog sync -- to n.v.m. The boost 1.34 fixes are already there, and it doesn't make sense to have the -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREAD hack on mainline. Is there a branch corresponding to your snapshots? If so, it would make sense to put all the changes there. How do we move forward on getting the version actually in Debian updated? zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 5 Jul 2007 13:17:29 -0700, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: zackw On 7/4/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw Yes? That's what's included in the changes you committed/pushed, zackw right? zackw zackw Yes and no. I committed the build-dep fixes and the changelog zackw sync -- to n.v.m. The boost 1.34 fixes are already there, and zackw it doesn't make sense to have the -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREAD zackw hack on mainline. I'm wondering about that one. I've noticed that the Debian release (I download the source for 0.31-8 just to see what was changed) removes that macro. zackw Is there a branch corresponding to your snapshots? If so, it zackw would make sense to put all the changes there. There is such a branch, it's called richard.levitte.org:compilations.monotone and is only found (as far as I know) on guardian.lp.se (a.k.a. monotone.ca, among others). And no, it doesn't make sense to put such changes in that branch, it's much better to put that in n.v.m, as that's the basis for the Debian releases, among others. My snapshots are a bit special, as mentioned in the description: This package is built from a combination of the following monotone branches: . net.venge.monotone - the main development branch net.venge.monotone.debian - additional debian control files net.venge.monotone.levitte.select-heads-off - additional H: selector Actually, the .debian branch isn't needed any more, so I'll probably remove that next time I remember ;-). zackw How do we move forward on getting the version actually in zackw Debian updated? I'd like to know as well. Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: zackw How do we move forward on getting the version actually in zackw Debian updated? I'd like to know as well. As a first step, I can upload the version that's in experimental (0.33-1) to the normal unstable distribution. The next step is for someone to adopt the package and upload it. If the new maintainer is not a Debian developer, a sponsor needs to upload the package to Debian. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a first step, I can upload the version that's in experimental (0.33-1) to the normal unstable distribution. I'm pretty sure that won't work correctly with boost 1.34. I'd much rather see the 0.35-0.2 NMU uploaded as a first step. The next step is for someone to adopt the package and upload it. If the new maintainer is not a Debian developer, a sponsor needs to upload the package to Debian. Ludovic Brenta seems to be the obvious choice for a new maintainer...? zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/4/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... OK. I'm willing to sponsor the package but not to do the actual packaging work, so, if Shaun is willing to hand the package over, it soulds like we've got a deal :) On 7/5/07, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ludovic Brenta seems to be the obvious choice for a new maintainer...? Ludovic Brenta is willing to sponsor someone else to maintain the package, but not to maintain the package himself. It sounds like he's hoping you'll adopt the package, and he'll sponsor the upload for you. If you'd like to adopt montone, you have to prepare a package and send it to Ludovic for proofreading and sponsorship. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: boost 1.33.1-10 is still in testing. I can build against that. My inclination is to upload 0.33 as is, since it takes hardly any effort. An upload of 0.35-0.2 can still follow. At present, 0.33 also has a better chance of migrating to testing in short order, since boost 1.33.1-10 is in testing. Ah, okay. zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/4/07, Ludovic Brenta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... OK. I'm willing to sponsor the package but not to do the actual packaging work, so, if Shaun is willing to hand the package over, it soulds like we've got a deal :) On 7/5/07, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ludovic Brenta seems to be the obvious choice for a new maintainer...? Ludovic Brenta is willing to sponsor someone else to maintain the package, but not to maintain the package himself. It sounds like he's hoping you'll adopt the package, and he'll sponsor the upload for you. If you'd like to adopt montone, you have to prepare a package and send it to Ludovic for proofreading and sponsorship. I suppose I'm willing to do that, but I'd prefer team maintenance with at least one other person; I am often unavailable. How about you, Richard? zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm wondering about that one. I've noticed that the Debian release (I download the source for 0.31-8 just to see what was changed) removes that macro. What's going on there is kind of complicated. Level one of the problem is that -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS disables thread support in shared_ptr. However, we are linking against external Boost libraries that were compiled *without* -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS, and some of them use shared_ptr themselves. This causes ODR violations. On x86 those appear to be harmless, but on some of Debian's architectures they break the mtn binary. [I thought there was a Debian bug about this but I can't find it.] The simplest workaround is to remove the -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS. Now, level two of the problem is that we *could* link against the -st- versions of the external Boost libraries, which are built with thread support off (and in particular with -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS) but that might not cure the problem altogether, because even the -st- version of libboost_regex.so drags in libpthread.so. [It doesn't do this itself; however, it links against libicu.so, and libicu.so is unconditionally linked with libpthread. There is no good reason for that, but the libicu developers are convinced that it is necessary; I tried and failed to change their minds.] Enough stuff changes its behavior when libpthread is present that I am not confident the -st- version of libboost_regex actually works. This is a major reason why I am trying to get rid of our dependency on the external Boost libraries. Once that is done, we should be able to reactivate -DBOOST_SP_DISABLE_THREADS in the official Debian packages. zackw Is there a branch corresponding to your snapshots? There is such a branch, it's called richard.levitte.org:compilations.monotone and is only found (as far as I know) on guardian.lp.se (a.k.a. monotone.ca, among others). Hmm. Longer term, I'm thinking it makes sense to maintain the official Debian packages out of our repository - so we would have a small branch off each release tag that contains the contents of the Debian diff (which hopefully would be minimal). Clearly that's not the same as your snapshot branch. net.venge.monotone.levitte.select-heads-off - additional H: selector -- Any reason not to merge this to mainline? zw ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
On 7/5/07, Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/5/07, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a first step, I can upload the version that's in experimental (0.33-1) to the normal unstable distribution. I'm pretty sure that won't work correctly with boost 1.34. I'd much rather see the 0.35-0.2 NMU uploaded as a first step. boost 1.33.1-10 is still in testing. I can build against that. My inclination is to upload 0.33 as is, since it takes hardly any effort. An upload of 0.35-0.2 can still follow. At present, 0.33 also has a better chance of migrating to testing in short order, since boost 1.33.1-10 is in testing. Cheers, Shaun ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
[Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Hello, previously, my builds of the following snapshot packages for Debian unstable worked well with Debian testing as well. Not so any more since the release of Debian 4.0, so I've finally written the little script to backport my snapshots to testing. The relevant packages are: monotone-server monotone-doc monotone monotone-viz So, from now on, you should be able to install on Debian testing with the following lines in /etc/apt/sources.list: deb http://guardian.lp.se/debian testing/ deb-src http://guardian.lp.se/debian testing/ Those using Debian unstable should of course stay with the following: deb http://guardian.lp.se/debian unstable/ deb-src http://guardian.lp.se/debian unstable/ Cheers, Richard - Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
Re: [Monotone-devel] Packages for Debian testing
Richard Levitte writes: So, from now on, you should be able to install on Debian testing with the following lines in /etc/apt/sources.list: deb http://guardian.lp.se/debian testing/ deb-src http://guardian.lp.se/debian testing/ Those using Debian unstable should of course stay with the following: deb http://guardian.lp.se/debian unstable/ deb-src http://guardian.lp.se/debian unstable/ Shaun, your last upload of monotone to Debian is from March 2007, and testing and unstable still carry 0.31 (0.33 is in experimental). Are you planning to continue maintaining the packages in Debian? If not, I can sponsor Richard, as I am a Debian Developer and an everyday user of Monotone. -- Ludovic Brenta. ___ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
