Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 09:12:32PM +0200, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: On 2010-08-12 19:33, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: lib/libwin32dll lib/GSM610 regarding the lib/GSM610 folder, on the gmerlin list people don't see why it shouldn't be compatible with GPL: Agreed. I must confess that I blindly stripped without verifying - at the time I thought that my action was to demonstrate _how_ to elegantly strip from source, and then let Hans-Christoph document _why_. ...but I never communicated that :-( The GSM code is the same as already shipped as a shared library in libgsm1, so indeed it is safe to include with source, but we should not use it but instead link against that shared library. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On 2010-08-12 19:33, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the > gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: > > lib/libwin32dll > lib/GSM610 > regarding the lib/GSM610 folder, on the gmerlin list people don't see why it shouldn't be compatible with GPL: On 2010-08-16 16:47, Romain Beauxis wrote: > Le lundi 16 août 2010 07:36:05, IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit : >> the Debian packages currently >> - exclude the libw32dll stuff (see other post) >> - exclude the GSM610stuff (see other post) > > > I fail to see why this piece of code had to be removed. Its licence is: > "Copyright 1992, 1993, 1994 by Jutta Degener and Carsten Bormann, > Technische Universitaet Berlin > > Any use of this software is permitted provided that this notice is not > removed and that neither the authors nor the Technische Universitaet Berlin > are deemed to have made any representations as to the suitability of this > software for any purpose nor are held responsible for any defects of > this software. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY FOR THIS SOFTWARE. > > As a matter of courtesy, the authors request to be informed about uses > this software has found, about bugs in this software, and about any > improvements that may be of general interest." > > It DOES seem to be DFSG-compatible. This code is already present in several > other packages with the same licence. See gnuradio for instance. > fgmasdr IOhannes smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 10:32:44AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote: On 15/08/10 07:13, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:33:51AM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 08/15/2010 09:00 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 21:30:32 (CEST), IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: Well, the point of symbols file is actually to review the list of symbols manually, so automatically updating it really defeats its purpose. If (and only if) you are really sure that no other package actually uses the removed symbols, then it's OK to remove them. well, libgmerlin-avdec1 has never been in Debian, so no other package can possibly depend on symbols in this package. so i guess, we are safe on this side. otoh, libgmerlin-avdec1 has been in marillat's debian-multimedia. packages that used this package and depend on the symbols, will break. how is this normally dealt with? In my opinion Debian is upstream to Marillats archive, Ubuntu, Skolelinux and a lot of others, and if any of those start being "creative" and do things not in Debian, then it is their own headache to untangle themselves again if it clashes with what Debian decides to do later on. In other words, it makes sense to me to have it in mind now that we happen to know about this issue, but if we cannot solve a clash with a downstream distro easily and without carrying odd baggage in the package afterwards, then we should let it clash and leave it to downstream to solve it at their end. Perhaps even be nice and inform them that we are aware of this clash (but without apologizing - it really is their own fault IMO). ...but that's me. I can very well imagine others here having different opinion, if not about Marillat then about Ubuntu. We had a recent discussion about derivative-specific package dependencies with the result that I will keep baggage in the source (but not in binary packages) regarding "firefox" (shipped in Ubuntu but not Debian) using dpkg-vendor. Note that there is a not so slight difference between Marillat's archive and Ubuntu. Namely, that in this team we have people that work on both debian and ubuntu (which is why it makes sense to do stuff for ubuntu too). Marillat does not work with us, and a while ago effectively worked against us. True, we represent multiple distributions here. This affect what kinds of issues we become aware of and is dear to us, and it eases tremendously some coordination for some cases where these distributions differ. I welcome this cross-distro collaboration and would love to see even more distros joining forces with us! The nature and scope of our teamwork should however not affect the packaging style/quality of our efforts, IMO. I, too, am involved in devoping derivatives of Debian (Skolelinux in particular), yet insist - even when it leads to a larger burden on myself as I sometimes then need to some tasks twice - to follow the principle of not burdening or entangling upstream with downstream diversions. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On 15/08/10 07:13, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:33:51AM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: >> On 08/15/2010 09:00 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 21:30:32 (CEST), IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: >>> >>> Well, the point of symbols file is actually to review the list of >>> symbols manually, so automatically updating it really defeats its >>> purpose. >>> >>> If (and only if) you are really sure that no other package actually >>> uses the removed symbols, then it's OK to remove them. >> >> well, libgmerlin-avdec1 has never been in Debian, so no other package >> can possibly depend on symbols in this package. so i guess, we are >> safe on this side. >> >> otoh, libgmerlin-avdec1 has been in marillat's debian-multimedia. >> packages that used this package and depend on the symbols, will break. >> >> how is this normally dealt with? > > In my opinion Debian is upstream to Marillats archive, Ubuntu, > Skolelinux and a lot of others, and if any of those start being > "creative" and do things not in Debian, then it is their own headache to > untangle themselves again if it clashes with what Debian decides to do > later on. > > In other words, it makes sense to me to have it in mind now that we > happen to know about this issue, but if we cannot solve a clash with a > downstream distro easily and without carrying odd baggage in the package > afterwards, then we should let it clash and leave it to downstream to > solve it at their end. Perhaps even be nice and inform them that we are > aware of this clash (but without apologizing - it really is their own > fault IMO). > > ...but that's me. I can very well imagine others here having different > opinion, if not about Marillat then about Ubuntu. We had a recent > discussion about derivative-specific package dependencies with the > result that I will keep baggage in the source (but not in binary > packages) regarding "firefox" (shipped in Ubuntu but not Debian) using > dpkg-vendor. Note that there is a not so slight difference between Marillat's archive and Ubuntu. Namely, that in this team we have people that work on both debian and ubuntu (which is why it makes sense to do stuff for ubuntu too). Marillat does not work with us, and a while ago effectively worked against us. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 01:12:14AM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 21:30 +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: Another little detail, I recall that gmerlin-avdecoder 1.0.3 depends on a certain version on gavl, I believe that's 1.1.1 or 1.1.2. Also, I don't quite understand the cdbs files, but there are a bunch of dependencies with versions in the Fink package that are probably relevant here: http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/fink/dists/10.4/unstable/main/finkinfo/libs/gmerlin-avdecoder1.info?view=markup Ah, thanks for that reference! I would like to examine each and every explicitly stated build-dependency thoroughly at some point, but haven't gotten that far yet. When I do, above alternative set of build-dependencies are useful for a cross-check. :-) I guess what is relevant about CDBS here is 2 things: * debian/control is autogenerated - edit debian/control.in instead * cdbs-inherited build-dependencies are auto-resolved CDBS does not resolve build-dependencies tied to upstream code, only e.g. autotools-related packages when autotools.mk is included. If it was something else about cdbs which puzzled you then please tell, and I will try clarify. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On 2010-08-16 07:12, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: >> >> and of course the debian/copyright has to be updated; hans? > > Wow, its not pretty in the land of copyright statements. There are more > files with the bad BSD license: > > lib/base64.c > lib/os.c > include/bgav_sem.h right. see jonas' and my mails on this topic under the subject "Licensing of gmerlin-avdecoder regression tests" > > Also, I left out copyright statements on these files since I understand > that we are not going to use them: > > lib/GSM610 > lib/libw32dll that's ok, but: are you working on the latest and greatest git? jonas has done a nice job with the repackaging and copyright detection: first of all the lib/GSM610/ and lib/libw32dll/ are no longer there, so you don't even need to ignore them :-) even more nicely, you get copyright information on all files during the buildpackage process, and which files have problematic licenses. > > Another little detail, I recall that gmerlin-avdecoder 1.0.3 depends on > a certain version on gavl, I believe that's 1.1.1 or 1.1.2. Also, I well, the latest released gmerlin-avdecoder is 1.0.3 (2010-02-27), which is what we are trying to package. the latest released gavl was 1.1.2 (2010-02-24), and this is already in squeeze, so all dependencies should be available. but you probably mean to modify the debian/control to reflect the dependency (i only noticed this when i was halfway through the above paragraph and i didn't want to throw it away :-)) i'll have to check to see whether i have a build machine with an older version of libgavl installed to see whether this dependency really is there. otoh, i guess it's just safe to push the /required version. fgmasdr IOhannes smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 21:30 +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 08/13/2010 02:13 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > > > I'll do that now. > > > > thanks a lot. > i have committed that changes necessary to build gmerlin-avdecoer with > the excluded files. > from a technical side, i see one thing that needs to be done now: update > the "debian/libgmerlin-avdec1.symbols" file! > the original has all the gsm symbols in it, which are now missing (since > the files have been stripped). is there a way to automatically update > this file, based on the actual contents of the .so file? > > and of course the debian/copyright has to be updated; hans? Wow, its not pretty in the land of copyright statements. There are more files with the bad BSD license: lib/base64.c lib/os.c include/bgav_sem.h Also, I left out copyright statements on these files since I understand that we are not going to use them: lib/GSM610 lib/libw32dll Another little detail, I recall that gmerlin-avdecoder 1.0.3 depends on a certain version on gavl, I believe that's 1.1.1 or 1.1.2. Also, I don't quite understand the cdbs files, but there are a bunch of dependencies with versions in the Fink package that are probably relevant here: http://fink.cvs.sourceforge.net/fink/dists/10.4/unstable/main/finkinfo/libs/gmerlin-avdecoder1.info?view=markup .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 01:58:51PM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 08/15/2010 01:13 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: ...but that's me. I can very well imagine others here having different opinion, if not about Marillat then about Ubuntu. We had a recent discussion about derivative-specific package dependencies with the result that I will keep baggage in the source (but not in binary packages) regarding "firefox" (shipped in Ubuntu but not Debian) using dpkg-vendor. afaik, the only semi-official repository that has libgmerlin-avdec is marillat. there are some launchpad packages for ubuntu (by roman haefeli), but i guess those are less relevant than marillat's packages. and then there is puredyne (which is an ubuntu clone with a lot of multi-media packages) and they surely have libgmerlin-avdec... those are the only published debian/clones packages i know of that could interfere. Oh, my comment was more general. I did not expect this particular package to already exist at a lot of places... ...but I do expect others on this list disagreeing if I simply responded "we don't need to care about derivatives - just ignore it!". ;-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/15/2010 01:13 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > ...but that's me. I can very well imagine others here having different > opinion, if not about Marillat then about Ubuntu. We had a recent > discussion about derivative-specific package dependencies with the > result that I will keep baggage in the source (but not in binary > packages) regarding "firefox" (shipped in Ubuntu but not Debian) using > dpkg-vendor. afaik, the only semi-official repository that has libgmerlin-avdec is marillat. there are some launchpad packages for ubuntu (by roman haefeli), but i guess those are less relevant than marillat's packages. and then there is puredyne (which is an ubuntu clone with a lot of multi-media packages) and they surely have libgmerlin-avdec... those are the only published debian/clones packages i know of that could interfere. fgmasdr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxn1nsACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvT27ACgikLX6bAD7CelwE4jb1Oz8HgQ mNQAn0VabaPxF96FqmTt+esOLiWUVhIG =BnSP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 11:33:51AM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: On 08/15/2010 09:00 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 21:30:32 (CEST), IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: Well, the point of symbols file is actually to review the list of symbols manually, so automatically updating it really defeats its purpose. If (and only if) you are really sure that no other package actually uses the removed symbols, then it's OK to remove them. well, libgmerlin-avdec1 has never been in Debian, so no other package can possibly depend on symbols in this package. so i guess, we are safe on this side. otoh, libgmerlin-avdec1 has been in marillat's debian-multimedia. packages that used this package and depend on the symbols, will break. how is this normally dealt with? In my opinion Debian is upstream to Marillats archive, Ubuntu, Skolelinux and a lot of others, and if any of those start being "creative" and do things not in Debian, then it is their own headache to untangle themselves again if it clashes with what Debian decides to do later on. In other words, it makes sense to me to have it in mind now that we happen to know about this issue, but if we cannot solve a clash with a downstream distro easily and without carrying odd baggage in the package afterwards, then we should let it clash and leave it to downstream to solve it at their end. Perhaps even be nice and inform them that we are aware of this clash (but without apologizing - it really is their own fault IMO). ...but that's me. I can very well imagine others here having different opinion, if not about Marillat then about Ubuntu. We had a recent discussion about derivative-specific package dependencies with the result that I will keep baggage in the source (but not in binary packages) regarding "firefox" (shipped in Ubuntu but not Debian) using dpkg-vendor. Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/15/2010 09:00 AM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 21:30:32 (CEST), IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > > Well, the point of symbols file is actually to review the list of > symbols manually, so automatically updating it really defeats its > purpose. > > If (and only if) you are really sure that no other package actually uses > the removed symbols, then it's OK to remove them. well, libgmerlin-avdec1 has never been in Debian, so no other package can possibly depend on symbols in this package. so i guess, we are safe on this side. otoh, libgmerlin-avdec1 has been in marillat's debian-multimedia. packages that used this package and depend on the symbols, will break. how is this normally dealt with? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxntH8ACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvQOtQCdHPFa7U70tYuF/VAP/Msa1OJl aEIAoO8LIXtE7/jhLIZHfIaGzti3aFgt =sk0A -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 21:30:32 (CEST), IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > from a technical side, i see one thing that needs to be done now: update > the "debian/libgmerlin-avdec1.symbols" file! > the original has all the gsm symbols in it, which are now missing (since > the files have been stripped). is there a way to automatically update > this file, based on the actual contents of the .so file? Well, the point of symbols file is actually to review the list of symbols manually, so automatically updating it really defeats its purpose. If (and only if) you are really sure that no other package actually uses the removed symbols, then it's OK to remove them. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 10:12:28PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:30:32PM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: and of course the debian/copyright has to be updated; hans? I started on that yesterday, and am about half-way through that... I discovered a licensing problem: lib/base64.c seems licensed as a derivative of 4-clause BSD, which is incompatible with GPL used in most other parts. Can someone confirm - and perhaps have ideas how to solve it? Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 09:30:32PM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: i have committed that changes necessary to build gmerlin-avdecoer with the excluded files. Good. from a technical side, i see one thing that needs to be done now: update the "debian/libgmerlin-avdec1.symbols" file! the original has all the gsm symbols in it, which are now missing (since the files have been stripped). is there a way to automatically update this file, based on the actual contents of the .so file? I know only of a semi-automated way: moving data produced during build and polish manually (makes sense anyway to sanity check). and of course the debian/copyright has to be updated; hans? I started on that yesterday, and am about half-way through that... - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/13/2010 02:13 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > I'll do that now. > thanks a lot. i have committed that changes necessary to build gmerlin-avdecoer with the excluded files. from a technical side, i see one thing that needs to be done now: update the "debian/libgmerlin-avdec1.symbols" file! the original has all the gsm symbols in it, which are now missing (since the files have been stripped). is there a way to automatically update this file, based on the actual contents of the .so file? and of course the debian/copyright has to be updated; hans? fgasr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxm7tcACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvSW2gCgwugR94jo6IxecDV8VVJinB7F 7XcAoMY8h9LceC1NDMUiwR6skxB8ynOO =zs5m -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 01:47:53PM +0200, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: i do see all your latest changes. mine have been pushed 2hours before yours (according to http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-multimedia/gmerlin-avdecoder.git) you should be able to see the upstream/1.0.3 tag. Ohh, yes - silly me. Applying pristine-tar should be as simple as running gbp-import-orig again on top of the already applied (but non-DFSG-tripped) import, now that the gbp-conf has been added. I'll do that now. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/13/2010 01:38 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> i have imported the latest (1.0.3) tarball using git-import-orig >> (without any pristine-tar flags, since i didn't even know about them). >> i'll probably leave it to jonas to get the upstream-tarball business >> right :-) > > I do not see your changes. Did you perhaps forget to push (depending on > configuration you may need "push --all"), or did you deliberately not > share your update? > > If you pull my latest changes (which I mentioned earlier in this thread) > then pristine-tar is automagically used (just make sure you have that > package installed), as I added git-buildpackage config to enable it: No > need to explicitly add it as option to the command. thanks for your long howto. i will try to follow it soon (though probably not today). anyhow, as far as the commits are concerned: i do see all your latest changes. mine have been pushed 2hours before yours (according to http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-multimedia/gmerlin-avdecoder.git) you should be able to see the upstream/1.0.3 tag. mfgasdr IOhannes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkxlMOkACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvTJaQCfToPJ31eyxvSvwiQunxVC8fXj 9gkAnj3u6gzd0WCIE6oypaxrBNJPtI2R =Kf24 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:34:57PM +0200, IOhannes zmölnig wrote: On 08/12/2010 11:08 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: I just saw that IOhannes pushed the new 1.0.3 tarball, perhaps he's working it now. IOhannes? Even if so, it won't hurt to import the intermediary tarball. i have to admit that i'm not very firm at with upstream-tarball.mk (and cdbs in general). upstream-tarball.mk is a make skeleton implementing a get-orig-source rule. Use it the same as if implemented "by hand" in the rules file... The following will fetch the upstream source corresponding to the currently packaged version (resolved by looking at topmost entry in debian/changelog): debian/rules get-orig-source To get a newer version, first bump the version number and (CDBS-specific) comment out the tarball checksum in debian/rules, then execute above command. Here's the routine I use when upgrading a CDBS package to a newer version: 0) Check for new version: uscan --verbose --report 1) Bump version by directly editing topmost debian/changelog entry (dch -v NNN can be used too, but this is only a temporary hack) 2) Temporarily comment out DEB_UPSTREAM_TARBALL_MD5 in debian/rules 3) Fetch new upstream tarball (if hanging at sourceforge: break, remove half-downloaded file and try again): debian/rules get-orig-source 4) Copy the checksum from 3) to cut'n'paste buffer 5) Reset temporary hacks: git reset --hard HEAD 6) Import newly fetched (and perhaps repackaged) upstream tarball: gbp-import-orig ../tarballs/NAME-OF-PERHAPS-REPACKAGED-TARBALL 7) Update DEB_UPSTREAM_TARBALL_MD5 in debian/rules using 4) and commit debian/rules change as isolated commit 8) Auto-generate draft changelog commit: git dch 9) Manually adjust version number to new release, and (if not releasing right away) changing suite from unstable to UNRELEASED, and commit debian/changelog changes as isolated commit i have imported the latest (1.0.3) tarball using git-import-orig (without any pristine-tar flags, since i didn't even know about them). i'll probably leave it to jonas to get the upstream-tarball business right :-) I do not see your changes. Did you perhaps forget to push (depending on configuration you may need "push --all"), or did you deliberately not share your update? If you pull my latest changes (which I mentioned earlier in this thread) then pristine-tar is automagically used (just make sure you have that package installed), as I added git-buildpackage config to enable it: No need to explicitly add it as option to the command. Only when initially bootstrapping a git-buildpackage git is it needed to use --pristine-tar and --signed-tags. As soon as possible thereafter add a debian/gbp.conf file to have it always enabled. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On 08/12/2010 11:08 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> >> I just saw that IOhannes pushed the new 1.0.3 tarball, perhaps he's >> working it now. IOhannes? > > Even if so, it won't hurt to import the intermediary tarball. > i have to admit that i'm not very firm at with upstream-tarball.mk (and cdbs in general). i have imported the latest (1.0.3) tarball using git-import-orig (without any pristine-tar flags, since i didn't even know about them). i'll probably leave it to jonas to get the upstream-tarball business right :-) mfgasdr IOhannes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 04:35:29PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 01:33:27PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: lib/libwin32dll lib/GSM610 I'll take it from there then and get the copyright stuff ironed out. Done! I took the liberty to also add a git-buildpackage config, to ease the following... Do the following yourself (or tell me if you want me to do that too): debian/rules get-orig-source git-import-orig ../tarballs/gmerlin-avdecoder_1.0.1~dfsg.orig.tar.gz git dch dch -r In last step bump the version to 1.0.1~dfsg-1 :-) I just saw that IOhannes pushed the new 1.0.3 tarball, perhaps he's working it now. IOhannes? Even if so, it won't hurt to import the intermediary tarball. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 01:33:27PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: lib/libwin32dll lib/GSM610 I'll take it from there then and get the copyright stuff ironed out. Done! I took the liberty to also add a git-buildpackage config, to ease the following... Do the following yourself (or tell me if you want me to do that too): debian/rules get-orig-source git-import-orig ../tarballs/gmerlin-avdecoder_1.0.1~dfsg.orig.tar.gz git dch dch -r In last step bump the version to 1.0.1~dfsg-1 :-) I just saw that IOhannes pushed the new 1.0.3 tarball, perhaps he's working it now. IOhannes? .hc "A cellphone to me is just an opportunity to be irritated wherever you are." - Linus Torvalds ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 01:33:27PM -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: lib/libwin32dll lib/GSM610 I'll take it from there then and get the copyright stuff ironed out. Done! I took the liberty to also add a git-buildpackage config, to ease the following... Do the following yourself (or tell me if you want me to do that too): debian/rules get-orig-source git-import-orig ../tarballs/gmerlin-avdecoder_1.0.1~dfsg.orig.tar.gz git dch dch -r In last step bump the version to 1.0.1~dfsg-1 :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
> 2010/8/4 Hans-Christoph Steiner : > > I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its > > quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved > > debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change > > and submit it to the ITP? > > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 10:45:20PM +0200, Fabrice Coutadeur wrote: > >It's not only a matter of update the copyright file: you have to repack > >the upstream tarball, to get rid of some content. I'll look after the > >original mail to see what was left (I haven't been able to do that with > >git). > > I notice the package uses CDBS. Nice ;-) > > You then probably want to make use of the upstream-tarball.mk snippet > and simply declare which files or folders needs stripping, et voilá you > get a repackaged tarball with the get-orig-source target. > > > Tell me if you need help doing it, or perhaps would like me to do it. Hey Jonas, Do you think you could do the upstream-tarball.mk thing to the gmerlin-avdecoder package? The folders in question are: lib/libwin32dll lib/GSM610 I'll take it from there then and get the copyright stuff ironed out. .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 17:24 -0400, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > 2010/8/4 Hans-Christoph Steiner : > > I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its > > quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved > > debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change > > and submit it to the ITP? > > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 10:45:20PM +0200, Fabrice Coutadeur wrote: > >It's not only a matter of update the copyright file: you have to repack > >the upstream tarball, to get rid of some content. I'll look after the > >original mail to see what was left (I haven't been able to do that with > >git). > > I notice the package uses CDBS. Nice ;-) > > You then probably want to make use of the upstream-tarball.mk snippet > and simply declare which files or folders needs stripping, et voilá you > get a repackaged tarball with the get-orig-source target. > > > Tell me if you need help doing it, or perhaps would like me to do it. > > > Kind regards, > > - Jonas "CDBS" Smedegaard Sounds good to me, but I'm just jumping in on this. I'm happy to follow up on the upstream-tarball.mk stuff to finish it off, if that makes sense to y'all. .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
2010/8/4 Hans-Christoph Steiner : I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change and submit it to the ITP? On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 10:45:20PM +0200, Fabrice Coutadeur wrote: It's not only a matter of update the copyright file: you have to repack the upstream tarball, to get rid of some content. I'll look after the original mail to see what was left (I haven't been able to do that with git). I notice the package uses CDBS. Nice ;-) You then probably want to make use of the upstream-tarball.mk snippet and simply declare which files or folders needs stripping, et voilá you get a repackaged tarball with the get-orig-source target. Tell me if you need help doing it, or perhaps would like me to do it. Kind regards, - Jonas "CDBS" Smedegaard -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
latest email on gmerlin-avdecoder is there: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2009-December/006780.html By the way, I lost my HD since then, so git/svn is the starting point Cheers, Fabrice 2010/8/4 Fabrice Coutadeur : > Hi Hans-Cristoph, > > It's not only a matter of update the copyright file: you have to > repack the upstream tarball, to get rid of some content. I'll look > after the original mail to see what was left (I haven't been able to > do that with git). > > Fabrice > > 2010/8/4 Hans-Christoph Steiner : >> >> Hey all at DebConf and elsewhere, >> >> I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its >> quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved >> debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change and >> submit it to the ITP? >> >> ITP: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=555852 >> original discussion: >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2009-November/006391.html >> >> .hc >> >> >> ___ >> pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list >> pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org >> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers >> > ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Re: gmerlin-avdecoder redux
Hi Hans-Cristoph, It's not only a matter of update the copyright file: you have to repack the upstream tarball, to get rid of some content. I'll look after the original mail to see what was left (I haven't been able to do that with git). Fabrice 2010/8/4 Hans-Christoph Steiner : > > Hey all at DebConf and elsewhere, > > I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its > quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved > debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change and > submit it to the ITP? > > ITP: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=555852 > original discussion: > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2009-November/006391.html > > .hc > > > ___ > pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list > pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers > ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
gmerlin-avdecoder redux
Hey all at DebConf and elsewhere, I'd like to get gmerlin-avdecoder included in Debian. I see that its quite close, it seems to me that it just needs an improved debian/copyright. Any reason why I shouldn't just make that change and submit it to the ITP? ITP: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=555852 original discussion: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2009-November/006391.html .hc ___ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
