Should foreign Priority: Required + Multi-Arch: same packages be installed by default with any foreign package?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wine1.4/+bug/938310 is a bug where Wine breaks because it doesn't have the i386 libncurses5, but only on amd64. libncurses5 has never been an explicit depends of Wine, because it's always been on the system anyway - it wasn't until users were installing i386 Wine on an amd64 system that it became possible to not have the library. I imagine there will be similar cases like this in the future, as a lot of packages (correctly) assume that required packages are available. I believe even debhelper won't autogenerate dependencies on them. So, I suggest: - If the user is installing a foreign arch package - and there are uninstalled priority:required packages for that arch - and these packages are also installed on the system - and these packages are marked multi-arch: same Then they should be treated as Recommends and installed automatically. Thoughts? Too late to do this for Precise? Thanks, Scott Ritchie -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Should foreign Priority: Required + Multi-Arch: same packages be installed by default with any foreign package?
On Sunday, March 04, 2012 08:02:48 PM Scott Ritchie wrote: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wine1.4/+bug/938310 is a bug where Wine breaks because it doesn't have the i386 libncurses5, but only on amd64. libncurses5 has never been an explicit depends of Wine, because it's always been on the system anyway - it wasn't until users were installing i386 Wine on an amd64 system that it became possible to not have the library. I imagine there will be similar cases like this in the future, as a lot of packages (correctly) assume that required packages are available. I believe even debhelper won't autogenerate dependencies on them. So, I suggest: - If the user is installing a foreign arch package - and there are uninstalled priority:required packages for that arch - and these packages are also installed on the system - and these packages are marked multi-arch: same Then they should be treated as Recommends and installed automatically. Thoughts? Too late to do this for Precise? libncurses5 is not essential, so it seems like a simple case of missing depends. Making the assumption that transitive dependency resolution will bring in packages your package needs via another package depends is a bug. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Google Summer of Code 2012 announced
Hello everybody, On 06.02.2012 11:11, Daniel Holbach wrote: * February 27 19:00 UTC: Mentoring organizations can begin submitting applications to Google. * March 9 23:00 UTC Mentoring organization application deadline. Please help filling out our application. This is important. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GoogleSoC2012 a number of proposals were added and a few bullet points filled out. We have until the end of the week to complete it and send it off. Has anyone seriously considered to be contact for Ubuntu as a mentoring organisation? (As I said in an earlier mail: I can't make it this time.) Have a great day, Daniel -- Get involved in Ubuntu development! developer.ubuntu.com/packaging And follow @ubuntudev on identi.ca/twitter.com/facebook.com/gplus.to -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Luminance HDR package
Hi All, I want to introduce myself since this is the my first message on this mailing list. I am currently the principal maintainer of Luminance HDR, an open-source project that some of you may already know with its previous name, Qtpfsgui. I took over as leader of the project in September 2010, granted by the previous principal (Giuseppe Rota). Since then, constantly fighting with the lack of time, I have tried to improve Luminance HDR, releasing a new version every 6 months or so. The current version (2.2.) is dated January 2012 (http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/?p=207), but Ubuntu repositories are still stuck on Qtpfsgui 1.9.3 ( http://packages.ubuntu.com/precise/qtpfsgui ). I don't know whether this mail list is the right place, but I wonder whether it is possible to push for an update of this package into the next Ubuntu LTS. Currently Ubuntu's users keep up to date using external PPA. Best regards, Davide Anastasia -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Luminance HDR package
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Davide Anastasia davideanasta...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: Hi All, I want to introduce myself since this is the my first message on this mailing list. I am currently the principal maintainer of Luminance HDR, an open-source project that some of you may already know with its previous name, Qtpfsgui. I took over as leader of the project in September 2010, granted by the previous principal (Giuseppe Rota). Since then, constantly fighting with the lack of time, I have tried to improve Luminance HDR, releasing a new version every 6 months or so. The current version (2.2.) is dated January 2012 (http://qtpfsgui.sourceforge.net/?p=207), but Ubuntu repositories are still stuck on Qtpfsgui 1.9.3 ( http://packages.ubuntu.com/precise/qtpfsgui ). I don't know whether this mail list is the right place, but I wonder whether it is possible to push for an update of this package into the next Ubuntu LTS. Currently Ubuntu's users keep up to date using external PPA. Best regards, Davide Anastasia Hi Davide, Typically Ubuntu gets its packages from Debian, so I would ask there first. From the looks of things [1], the package is effectively unmaintained: there's been no update since 2010, and the 'Problems' section says they're looking for a new maintainer. Since someone is already building debs (I assume) for the PPA, it would probably be easiest if they could take over maintaining the official package in Debian. Then, Ubuntu will sync up with Debian and get the latest package automatically. If whoever is building the debs right now isn't an official Debian maintainer, that's fine: Debian has a mentoring/sponsorship program for just these situations [2]. Cheers, Evan [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/q/qtpfsgui.html [2] http://mentors.debian.net/ -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
unsubscribe
On 4 March 2012 15:16, ubuntu-devel-discuss-boun...@lists.ubuntu.comwrote: Your mail to 'Ubuntu-devel-discuss' with the subject Unsubscribe Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. The reason it is being held: Message may contain administrivia Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel this posting, please visit the following URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/confirm/ubuntu-devel-discuss/61dfa7c1b1634ecb1cfe2227a5b9e357b8d59df0 -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
