[Bug 539035] Re: Please backport daemontools source package
We really need to backport 1:0.76-3ubuntu1 as this caters for the older upstart version in hardy. Failing that, the attached debdiff does the trick on 3ubuntu2. ** Attachment added: "Revert 3ubuntu2 changes" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/40999570/hardy-patch.debdiff.gz -- Please backport daemontools source package https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/539035 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backports Testing Team, which is subscribed to Hardy Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 539035] Re: Please backport daemontools source package
Test package built in ppa:neil-aldur/experimental. Builds from source OK. -- Please backport daemontools source package https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/539035 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backports Testing Team, which is subscribed to Hardy Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 539035] [NEW] Please backport daemontools source package
Public bug reported: Backport 1:0.76-3ubuntu2 of daemontools from karmic/lucid. Daemontools doesn't exist in the Hardy repos at all. ** Affects: hardy-backports Importance: Undecided Status: New -- Please backport daemontools source package https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/539035 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backports Testing Team, which is subscribed to Hardy Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 225466] Re: Please backport libgems-ruby from Intrepid
'Triaged' means tested in this process. It won't get done any faster if you don't follow the process https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports#head- 5523e47badd3e3ea3f7aebebb0ebf23bfc76129f We are now in the hands of the backporting team, who are volunteers and busy guys. I find patience and the right level of lobbying on IRC tends to do the trick. ** Changed in: hardy-backports Status: Confirmed => Triaged -- Please backport libgems-ruby from Intrepid https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/225466 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backports Testing Team, which is subscribed to Hardy Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 225466] Re: Please backport libgems-ruby from Intrepid
Good to go I feel. ** Changed in: hardy-backports Status: Confirmed => Triaged -- Please backport libgems-ruby from Intrepid https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/225466 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backports Testing Team, which is subscribed to Hardy Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 129922] Re: backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper
** Changed in: dapper-backports Status: Incomplete => Invalid -- backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129922 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 129926] Re: backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper
** Changed in: dapper-backports Status: Incomplete => Invalid -- backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129926 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
It's good to know that a new LTS is around the corner. It seems to me that you have a 'complete replacement' policy. If that policy won't flex then this bug is a WONTFIX. The difference with apache is that 2.0 *is* supportable and entirely usable, unless you need the new features. So if something breaks you back out. Apache2.2 has been tested extensively on dapper by dozens of Rails users across the world, in the limited context of a load-balancing webserver and with a limited set of backported packages. It is a useful addition to dapper and would probably only be used by that set of people - although it would give others the opportunity to build on the work. On 8/3/07, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The next LTS is supposed to be Gutsy + 1. -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
Thinking about this a little more, I have a feeling that we are coming at this from different directions. If it is the case that a backport has to be a drop in replacement for what is currently in the distribution, then backporting Apache2.2 would be totally impractical. It conflicts with a lot of modules which don't have Feisty replacements - libapache2-mod-python24 and libapache2-mod-php4 for starters. If 'complete backward compatible replacement' is the policy for backports then that precludes movement from anything much more than the +1 release because as time moves on too much needs to be recompiled and it becomes a waste of effort. It also means that backports to LTS releases become less and less likely, so the LTS wastes away. The obvious solution to that is to make sure that LTS releases happen at intervals much less than the actual support period so that LTS upgrades can be planned in. Perhaps somebody would be good enough to ask the question as to when the next LTS can be expected. The alternative is to see backports as 'augmentation' - particularly as with Dapper there is a perfectly good and commercially supported version of apache2 in the distribution. Unlike Feisty, Dapper has Apache 2.0 at its disposal. You would only go to 2.2 if you needed its facilities (the case in point being the mod-proxy-balancer widely used in Rails houses) and the mods you need have been backported. If not then you get the job of doing the backport on the bit you require! If you take the 'augmentation' position then you only require a small number of modules in the backport. Existing modules will conflict correctly, and yes it may break Bugzilla - but I would suggest that it is the job of the people who want to run Bugzilla with 2.2 to do the backport work required to make that combination work on Dapper, not me. (It may work flawless out of the box. I don't know.). There is a set of backported Dapper apache2.2 packages on kodefoo (http://packages.kodefoo.com/dists/dapper/main/binary-i386/Packages) that has worked fine all year on commercial services supporting Rails, php5 and perl. That's a lot of real world testing backing up the port. The only reason for getting these into dapper-backports is to refocus the community on a single set of auto-built backport packages, get any bugs tracked in the right place and generally save a lot of messing around with apt-keys or compilations. But if it is going to be a lot of trouble requiring extensive testing of package combinations no sensible sysadmin is going to use then we're not going to save any community time going down this route. kodefoo works after all and PPAs are just around the corner. So if policy dictates complete backward compatibility then we need to move to WONTFIX straight away. However if there is room for an augmentation approach, I would suggest a subset similar to the kodefoo archive would be the pragmatic way forward - and would limit the work required on all sides. I doubt that implementing such a small subset would cause much in the way of bug reports (except possibly by those who haven't pinned their backports properly), but it would be of great value to the Rails community. I would ask that the possibility is given some consideration. -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 129926] Re: backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper
It'll only run apache2.2-common. It isn't used by anything else. On 8/3/07, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does it work? Before backporting we need to know that it will run, not > just build. > > ** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream) >Status: Confirmed => Incomplete > > -- > backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129926 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > -- backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129926 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 129922] Re: backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper
Since it is only used by apache2.2-common, it has no impact whatsoever on anything in Dapper. Nothing there uses it - they use libapr0 instead. On 8/3/07, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How does it run? Does it work with the current version of Apache in > Dapper or just the new one? > > ** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream) >Status: Confirmed => Incomplete > > -- > backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129922 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > -- backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129922 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
I didn't think Universe was on in Dapper. On 8/2/07, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Main and Universe. Multiverse too if relevant, but I care less about > that. -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
Would that be rdepends within dapper/main? On 8/2/07, Scott Kitterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As long as all the rdepends are tested it ought to be feasible. -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 129926] backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper
Public bug reported: Required to support backport of apache2.2 to Dapper. Builds OK on dapper once 'apr' package is built and installed. ** Affects: dapper-backports (upstream) Importance: Undecided Status: Confirmed ** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream) Status: New => Confirmed -- backport 'apr-util' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129926 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 129922] backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper
Public bug reported: libapr1 required to support port of apache2.2 to Dapper. Packages here http://sharkattack.media.mit.edu:8080/dapper-debs/apr/ Build log here: http://sharkattack.media.mit.edu/inventory/check_builds/55 ** Affects: dapper-backports (upstream) Importance: Undecided Status: Confirmed ** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream) Status: New => Confirmed -- backport 'apr' from Feisty to Dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/129922 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
Re: [Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
I appreciate the concern. However this is required in live operation, and is being done manually by Ruby on Rails houses the world over. So it can't be that much of a problem otherwise people wouldn't be building businesses on the back of it. Certainly I don't hear a lot of complaints of shared library failures, (but that may be because that bit of the package isn't running.) Perhaps the dependencies within apache2 are too tight, or perhaps the package could do with splitting. Running a backport could help bring that to light. Real businesses like to use 6.06 LTS for all the usual good reasons of stability and security. It seems a bit of a failure of free software that they have to look to unofficial archives, and manual compliation to get the job done. What do you need to see to get this through? On 8/2/07, Lionel Porcheron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This request has already been rejected in the past. > > Considering the number of modules you have to backport (43 at first > approximation) and the time needed for apache2.2 transition during > feisty dev cycle (we spent something like one moth tracking unmet dep) > backporting this backport too risky for me. > > Let's see what other think... Scott ? :) > > -- > Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 > You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber > of the bug. > -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
Sharkattack obviously doesn't like multiple package builds! 'apr', 'aprutil' and 'apache2' confirmed as building on Dapper from the Feisty packages via prevu. Add the following to /etc/apt/sources.list to pick up the test packages. deb http://accounts4free.rubyforge.org/ubuntu dapper main Please test installation. ** Changed in: dapper-backports (upstream) Status: New => Confirmed -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
[Bug 80609] Re: Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper
Yep. Need to build 'apr' and 'apr-util' first. Pity that sharkattack doesn't try that for you automatically. I've switched to manual 'prevu'. It seems easier. -- Port apache2 2.2.3 from feisty back to dapper https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/80609 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Backporters, which is the bug contact for Dapper Backports. -- ubuntu-backports mailing list ubuntu-backports@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-backports
