Re: buildd stuff

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:04:12AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > You think wrong. Using the public ldap database, you can find the > following details: This access is only usable for people which have login access to ftp-master (or where the info currently is located). Even if I'm included into

Re: source code "forensic" practices

* Yaroslav Halchenko: > The question is: are there any helper tools for doing source code > validation subject to possibly available snippets of code which might be > for illegal activity (ie sending out private information, or serve as > backdoors, etc)? There are several commercial bug finding

Re: buildd stuff

Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : >> Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> One first step would be to keep the current build daemons maintainers >>> (ie the person who signs the upload), and give and access to some >>> porters to the wanna-bui

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> In Ubuntu you have a parallel version. You split of from the main >> trunk but you follow parallel to it at a small distance. For every new >> main version you want a new ubuntu version. Ubuntu versions

Re: Suggesting new method to handle dpkg diversions

Goswin von Brederlow writes ("Suggesting new method to handle dpkg diversions"): > What if each package could list all its current diversions in > DEBIAN/diverions (i.e. in the control.tar.gz)? This is in principle a good idea. It does need thinking about quite carefully to make sure everything h

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:20:23AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> In stable/testing/unstable you have releases with a fixed version that >> can only split of from the main trunk. Any change to stable/testing >> MUST be made special for the old ve

Re: x86 buildd for experimental ?

Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> I think that is a shortcomming of apt though. >> apt-get install foo=1.2-3 >> will fetch foo 1.2-3 from whatever repository that has that >> version. But with >> Package: foo >> Version: 1.2-3 >> Depends

Re: update on binary upload restrictions

Steffen Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Monday 29 January 2007 10:42:25 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote: >> >> If we do go to source-only uploads, could this problem be avoided by >> >> having arm

Re: prospect of non-US?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Jan 29, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> What is the current prospect for the non-US archive? > It has been dead for a long time and apparently there are no plans to > resurrect it. > > -- > ciao, > Marco Wasn't it officialy put to rest ye

Re: Mirror of archive maintenance scripts

* Anthony Towns: > On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 10:57:51AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> Is their a developer-accessible mirror (on a non-restricted host) of >> the archive maintenance which are in production, including (most of) >> the configuration? >> There used to be a mirror on merkel.debian.org

Re: x86 buildd for experimental ?

Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Mon, Jan 29, 2007, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >>> I think that is a shortcomming of apt though. >>> apt-get install foo=1.2-3 >>> will fetch foo 1.2-3 from whatever repository that has that >>> vers

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Release branch: > > ---+-+- sid >|s|e >|a|t >|r|c >|g|h >|e > > Distribution filter: (with patches going both ways) > > +--+--+--+--- Debian > \ \/\ > +--+--+--+- Ubuntu >

Re: source code "forensic" practices

> * Yaroslav Halchenko: > > The question is: are there any helper tools for doing source code > > validation subject to possibly available snippets of code which might be > > for illegal activity (ie sending out private information, or serve as > > backdoors, etc)? > There are several commercial

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

> Hopefully the graphic above makes it clear why a branch isn't the most > helpfull construct for it. Unfortunately I know of no RCS that has > something better for this kind of parallel developement. svk has nice ability to perform 'tag-less' merges. I am yet to discover proper structuring for svn

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

On Tue, 2007-01-30 at 15:23 +, Roger Leigh wrote: > >>> Branches don't work so well for ubuntu as you have to pull over the > >>> changes from the main branch to the ubuntu branch on every > >>> release. Which means (unneccessary) work. > >> > >> It is work, yes, but in many cases it is necess

iFatti.com - mailing list del 30/01/2007

Newsletter del: 30/01/2007 Informazioni Annulla Registrazione Flash news Pubblicità ECCO LE NOTIZIE DE "IFATTI" CHE ASSOLUTAMENTE NON DOVEVATE PERDERE. Vignetta Triangoli di fatto... http://www.ifatti.com Pacs, Barbato:

iFatti.com - mailing list del 30/01/2007

Newsletter del: 30/01/2007 Informazioni Annulla Registrazione Flash news Pubblicità ECCO LE NOTIZIE DE "IFATTI" CHE ASSOLUTAMENTE NON DOVEVATE PERDERE. Vignetta Triangoli di fatto... http://www.ifatti.com Pacs, Barbato:

Re: How to maintain packaging files for multiple distributions in the same tree?

On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 03:07:27PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:20:23AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > >> In Ubuntu you have a parallel version. You split of from the main > >> trunk but you follow parallel t

Re: update on binary upload restrictions

On 25 Jan 2007, at 1:23 am, James Troup wrote: (a) we don't currently have the buildd infrastructure for this - it would require a minimum of 2 (preferably 3) machines dedicated to being i386 buildds. It would also make i386 uploads much more sensitive to delays and really requ

Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature

For some time the idea of having some kind of event queue notification mechanism in dpkg has been floating about. For example, it would be used to avoid running scrollkeeper-update dozens of times during an upgrade and could simplify the emacs addon registration. Wichert and I even had a good des

Re: update on binary upload restrictions

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:42:25AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote: > > > >> If we do go to source-only uploads, could this problem be avoided by > >> having arm and other slow arches wait until at lea

Re: buildd stuff

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:35:04AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > One first step would be to keep the current build daemons maintainers > > (ie the person who signs the upload), and give and access to some > > porters to the wanna-build databa

Re: buildd stuff

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:04:12AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > There is no wb-amd64 nor wb-mipsel. I don't know why. Because for actual w-b access from buildd hosts, those groups are no longer used. Instead, there's a buildd_$arch user for every architecture on buildd.d.o, to which access is re

Re: buildd stuff

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:40:00PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 11:04:12AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Goswin von Brederlow a écrit : > > > Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >> One first step would be to keep the current build daemons maintainers >

Re: Bug #118715 and #246680

> "Lionel" == Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lionel> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:07:28PM +0100, Turbo Lionel> Fredriksson wrote: >> Is there no interest in fixing this even though there's >> patch(es!)? Lionel> A cursory glance suggests that code is not acti

Re: buildd stuff

On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:29:33 +0100, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It's not that it's sacred; it's that w-b uses a Berkeley DB with a >database-level lock for every access (including read-only access); so >giving such access to everyone who asks for it will interfere with >proper build

Re: source code "forensic" practices

Hi Yaroslav, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > I ITPed a package which unfortunately ended up not providing original > sources (sources everybody gets were indentation removed). Unreasonable > denial of providing original source forced me to question good intent of > the author to provide useful and spa

Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature

* Ian Jackson: > To restore a package in state `triggered' to `installed', dpkg will > run the postinst script: >postinst triggered " ..." Is this completely POSIX-conforming if there are many triggers? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble

Re: Mirror of archive maintenance scripts

On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 03:28:19PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > It is now; the katie -> dak rename broke it. > Uhm, it seems that it's still lacking James' recent changes. Are you > sure the mirror is working? They're there and it is. Grep for "Binary-Upload-Restrictions". Cheers, aj signa

Re: Bug#408524: If I play piano while my computer starts up, /dev/dsp disappears !

Marco d'Itri dijo [Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 02:44:19PM +0100]: > > My guess is that it's either the kernel or udev which is doing something > > wrong here. I'm filing this as a bug on udev for the time being; I'm > > sure Marco will properly reassign this bug once you've provided the > > extra informat

Re: update on binary upload restrictions

Goswin von Brederlow dijo [Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 10:42:25AM +0100]: > I would rather do the opposite. Stop building a package when it fails > on other archs. Thing about the (unlikely) situation that arm is > idle. Nothing to build. Now someone uploads foobar. Should we wait or > just try? If it wor