Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 14:58 +0100, Jon Dowland a écrit :
> > So it's best if you consider unstable always in production-mode by default.
>
> I disagree with this. We expect *our* users of sid to use things like
> apt-listbugs and to be wary of blindly upgrading. I think we should hold
> dow
Le jeudi 05 mai 2011 à 08:23 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > Could you please give a concrete example of where this would be needed?
> > I think all existing cases should be covered by uploading directly to
> > either t-p-u or unstable.
>
> Use case:
> During freeze, there's a library transit
Hi,
On Wed, 04 May 2011, sean finney wrote:
> It's an excellent idea. Some of the initial feedback that I've gotten
> about DEP-10 (in particular some brainstorming on IRC with Carsten Hey)
> is pointing at ideas along these lines, and I hope to flush them out
> in a bit more detail RSN. But I t
On 04/05/11 at 22:19 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
> > possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
> > rolling-proposed-updates). It will be useful i
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jon Dowland writes:
> > On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 11:48:33AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> >> While I can sympathize with this (it's what I want as a developer),
> >> it's certainly not a good idea in Debian in general: we have many
> >> derivatives ta
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:05:22AM +0300, Cristian Henzel wrote:
> > What to do during freezes
> > -
> > I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
> > freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the freeze time and
> > making it more predic
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:48:46PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> * Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-04 22:23 +0200]:
> > On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > > While I like the idea in general, I think th
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:34:15PM +0200, sean finney wrote:
> And furthermore, even if Debian chooses to "fix" this, upstreams will
> be forced to eventually cater to the default glibc behavior for every
> other libc distro out there that does not have their own "fix" (and
> non-libc OS's where t
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:29:50PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> "Steve M. Robbins" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I'm with Linus on this: let's just revert to the old behaviour. A
> > tiny amount of clock cycles saved isn't worth the instability.
>
> Tiny amount?! The optimized memcpy() variants that b
I've been trying to build a tomcat7 package based on the existing
tomcat6 package. After fiddling with it for a while, I've managed to
"build" what looks like a working binary, but I get a backtrace when the
services starts.
The relevant part of the backtrace is
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: or
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:40 PM, sean finney wrote:
[...]
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> > What to do during freezes
>> > -
>> > If we want to do something diff
Hiya,
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:25:35PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > What to do during freezes
> > -
> > If we want to do something different though, there is a simple recipe:
> > allow package
On 02/05/11 22:22, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 02/05/2011 20:54, phantomjinx wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Someone with the handle 'mfv' came into the gtkpod irc channel wondering
>> about gtkpod dependencies as he was packaging it for debian.
>
> It was me :-) Sorry if I didn't wait long enough
> What to do during freezes
> -
> I’m not sure we really need to do something different in times of
> freeze. Our time would be better spent by reducing the freeze time and
> making it more predictable; squeeze has been an awesome step in this
> direction.
>
> If we want
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 04:25:35 PM Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > What to do during freezes
> > -
> >
> > If we want to do something different though, there is a simple recipe:
> > allow packages to
* Pierre Habouzit [2011-05-04 22:23 +0200]:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > > While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
> > > possible to upload packages directly to ro
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jakub Wilk
* Package name: morfeusz
Version : 20110416
Upstream Author : Zygmunt Saloni, Włodzimierz Gruszczyński,
Marcin Woliński, Robert Wołosz
* URL : http://sgjp.pl/morfeusz/
* License : BSD-2-cla
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> PPAs as a developer tool are one thing, PPAs as a tool for random uploads, I
> think are quite another. I'd hate to see Debian make the same mistake that
> Canonical did in this regard.
PPA on Debian infrastructure should be lim
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:17:03PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> If you want to go ahead with patching britney, by all means go ahead, as
> it might provide patches useful for the main brintey as well. But if you
> want to try some alternatives, we can probably help.
I don't think you need to
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:19:45PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> > While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
> > possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
> > rolling-proposed-updates). It wi
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 22:12 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit :
> While I like the idea in general, I think that it should also be
> possible to upload packages directly to rolling (through
> rolling-proposed-updates). It will be useful in cases where neither the
> package in testing, not the pack
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 03:30:40PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
> > works correctly, you usually have to add APT lines for unstable, while
> > pinning them to only install specif
On 04/05/11 at 14:24 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in a
> blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people I’ve
> talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so it’s time for it to be
> discussed at larg
Jon Dowland writes:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 11:48:33AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> While I can sympathize with this (it's what I want as a developer),
>> it's certainly not a good idea in Debian in general: we have many
>> derivatives taking unstable/testing at various points in time, and
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ralf Treinen
* Package name: mccs
Version : 1.0
Upstream Author : Claude Michel
* URL : http://users.polytech.unice.fr/~cpjm/misc/mccs.html
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C
Description : multi-critera CUDF sol
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt dijo [Mon, May 02, 2011 at 09:15:38AM +0200]:
> > I understand members of the release team feel particularly responsible to
> > do various release-critical tasks that should have been done by the
> > maintainers but haven't (for various reasons). And I guess that's the
> > re
Hi,
Josselin Mouette writes:
> The new “rolling” suite
> ---
> This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
> experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
> maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
> semi-aut
On Wednesday, May 04, 2011 12:34:45 PM Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:16:54AM -0400]:
> > > AFAIU, only DD and DM could create PPA and upload to them. If this is
> > > not the case, then I share your fears.
> >
> > Usage of the PPA system on LP requires that yo
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 10:42:31AM +0200]:
> (...)
> If anyone would have actually read the PPA proposal, they would know
> that uploads were and are intended to be restricted to DDs and DMs
> (which can break buildds anyway, if they want) and building should
> happen in t
Paul Tagliamonte dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:16:54AM -0400]:
> > AFAIU, only DD and DM could create PPA and upload to them. If this is not
> > the case, then I share your fears.
>
> Usage of the PPA system on LP requires that you agree to the usage
> terms (not unlike machine usage policies for
Stefano Zacchiroli dijo [Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:56:15PM +0200]:
> > I think it would make quite sense to get something like e.g. ppa done for
> > Debian. But thats something else than it's proposed here.
>
> Yes, absolutely. I'd even dare to say that having something like PPA for
> Debian is a pr
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 02:24:12PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> The new “rolling” suite
> ---
> This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
> experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
> maintainers, rolling would be built on t
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 16:20 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> A full suite can have 2 versions of the same source package and
> can contain both libgnomekbd4 and libgnomekbd7. It's not a problem.
OK, so I officially do not care a shit™.
> > What the britney-like thing could do is bring auto
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 04:49:42PM +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 01:31:24PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:41:35AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > It is clear from the discussion that there would be consequences. Some
> > > would be negative
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 08:28:00AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 01:23:12AM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > I believe Debian is quite correct to be
> > concerned about the potential for user confusion and damage to Debian's
> > reputation for high quality work.
> >
Hi,
(you already know, but let's state that on dd@ too)
Josselin Mouette (04/05/2011):
> during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in
> a blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people
> I’ve talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so it’s time for
Piotr Ożarowski dijo [Wed, May 04, 2011 at 03:22:07PM +0200]:
> [Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
> > This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
> > experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
> > maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and fil
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote:
>> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > kdelibs3 was removed recently from the archive and the last tiny bit
>> > of KDE 3 remaining, aRts, will be removed quite soon.
>> >
>> > This means the KDE team is n
Josselin Mouette writes:
> This way, when something is broken in testing and cannot be unbroken
> quickly, a maintainer who notices it could add (or make the people in
> charge add) the necessary packages to the override file. If, for a
> reason or another, an important bug fix or a security upda
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > It doesn't need to be a pseudo-suite. It's a collection of packages taken
> > in testing or unstable, it's not more complicated to make it a full suite.
>
> It cannot be “just” a full suite. When you add a package coming from
> unstable, you must al
Le 04/05/2011 16:02, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
>
>> Le 04/05/2011 14:06, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
>>> a nice behaviour, it would be way better to print
>>> a warning and fallback to a correct behaviour. Users can then report the
>>> problems without experiencing a
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> Le 04/05/2011 14:06, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
>> a nice behaviour, it would be way better to print
>> a warning and fallback to a correct behaviour. Users can then report the
>> problems without experiencing a non working-application.
>
> Printing a warning on a thing t
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 11:48:33AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> While I can sympathize with this (it's what I want as a developer), it's
> certainly not a good idea in Debian in general: we have many derivatives
> taking unstable/testing at various points in time, and we also want to make
> test
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 à 15:30 +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
> > works correctly, you usually have to add APT lines for unstable, while
> > pinning them to only install speci
Message [o91db421774654d4eaeccd1845b56aa3d.pro] triggered rule [Anti-Virus
Malware Scanning (1)] at 4:04:20 PM 5/4/2011
Sender: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Recipient(s): mhan...@shb.com.sa
Subject: Returned mail: Data format error
[Didier Raboud, 2011-05-04]
> While I agree with the demotivation stance, why can't those packages be
> uploaded to experimental, fwiw ?
because that's not what experimental is for and it's harder to use it
(did you notice that python3.2 is in experimental or did someone gave
you proper apt-pinni
Hi,
I came to the same conclusion than you after the discussion we had in
the comments of your article. I think it's the right approach. I still
have a few comments though.
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing system that
> works
Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
>> This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
>> experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
>> maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
>> semi-automatically. A rolling syst
[Josselin Mouette, 2011-05-04]
> This would be a pseudo-suite, like experimental. Except that while
> experimental is built on top of unstable and filled manually by
> maintainers, rolling would be built on top of testing and filled
> semi-automatically. A rolling system would have typically 2 APT
[Abou Al Montacir, 2011-05-04]
> On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 20:00 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>
> > On 2011-04-24, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > > Dear Release Team ... good luck in proposing a freeze month now :-)
> >
> > I would propose mid september or mid-march. That's just after 2nd patch
> > re
Le mercredi 04 mai 2011 14:23:19, Aurelien Jarno a écrit :
> Le 04/05/2011 14:06, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > a nice behaviour, it would be way better to print
> > a warning and fallback to a correct behaviour. Users can then report the
> > problems without experiencing a non working-application.
Le 04/05/2011 07:42, Steve M. Robbins a écrit :
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:10:48AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>> Sounds like http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12518
>> which is fixed (sort of) by commit 0354e355 (2011-04-01).
>
> Oh my word. So glibc 2.13 breaks random binari
Hi,
during the recent discussions about rolling, a proposal was made in a
blog comment, and after giving it some quick thoughts, most people I’ve
talked with seem to think it is a good idea, so it’s time for it to be
discussed at large.
It starts from the following fact: if you want a testing sys
Le 04/05/2011 14:06, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> a nice behaviour, it would be way better to print
> a warning and fallback to a correct behaviour. Users can then report the
> problems without experiencing a non working-application.
Printing a warning on a thing that is potentially used everywhere
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Le 04/05/2011 11:48, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> > So it's best if you consider unstable always in production-mode by
> > default.
>
> So how do you plan to detect bugs if you never enable a feature?
Really abort()ing is not a nice behaviour, it would
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > kdelibs3 was removed recently from the archive and the last tiny bit
> > of KDE 3 remaining, aRts, will be removed quite soon.
> >
> > This means the KDE team is not longer interested in Qt3 and we are looking
> > for new ma
You miss qucs for instance.
I suppose qt3 is near bug free ?
Could help to maintain but in team
Bastien
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> kdelibs3 was removed recently from the archive and the last tiny bit
> of KDE 3 remaining, aRts, will be removed quite soon.
>
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:29:50PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> "Steve M. Robbins" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I'm with Linus on this: let's just revert to the old behaviour. A
> > tiny amount of clock cycles saved isn't worth the instability.
>
> Tiny amount?! The optimized memcpy() variants that b
On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 05:32:41PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 03 May 2011, Alessandro Ghedini wrote:
> > > Or am I missing some substantial design issue which is still lacking
> > > from http://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Guidelines
> > Sounds like the "Debian Pure Blends" [0] [1],
Adam Borowski writes:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:42:16AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> I'm with Linus on this: let's just revert to the old behaviour. A
>> tiny amount of clock cycles saved isn't worth the instability.
>
> I'd instead propose to sacrifice a tiny amount of cycles to check f
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le lundi 02 mai 2011 à 19:31 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> To those users that want newer software my next question would be "What
>> software?". My feeling there is that it is only some software, allways
>> the same software and used for the same use case
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 06:09:17PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Also the libc6-msp430-dev:all and libc6-dev:msp430 packages will both be
>> using /usr/inlcude// and already trigger the problem you
>> fear.
>
> No, libc6-msp430-dev would use /usr//include as it do
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 20:00 +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2011-04-24, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > Dear Release Team ... good luck in proposing a freeze month now :-)
>
> I would propose mid september or mid-march. That's just after 2nd patch
> release of new set of releases by KDE.
And wh
"Steve M. Robbins" wrote:
Hi,
> I'm with Linus on this: let's just revert to the old behaviour. A
> tiny amount of clock cycles saved isn't worth the instability.
Tiny amount?! The optimized memcpy() variants that break shitty code
bring a 4 to 5x speedup on the processors they've been written
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 625538 gnome-power-manager
Bug #625538 [general] general: Monitor turns off even if in gnome-screensaver
and gnome-power i disalbe automatic turning off.
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'gnome-power-manager'.
> merge 370692 6255
Le 04/05/2011 11:48, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Wed, 04 May 2011, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> I'd instead propose to sacrifice a tiny amount of cycles to check for
>> overlapping and abort()ing so buggy code can be fixed. Random instability
>> is the worst kind of error, a clean crash is easy to f
Dear all,
I just uploaded into experimental a new version 0.42exp of debdelta (
you may find some binaries also in [3] ).
This version adds an experimental feature : if you call
'debdelta-upgrade' with the option '--format=unzipped' , then in the
recreated deb the data.tar part will not be compr
On Wed, 04 May 2011, Adam Borowski wrote:
> I'd instead propose to sacrifice a tiny amount of cycles to check for
> overlapping and abort()ing so buggy code can be fixed. Random instability
> is the worst kind of error, a clean crash is easy to fix. Heck, we can even
> make a change just before w
reassign 625538 gnome-power-manager
merge 370692 625538
thanks
This is a known bug in gnome-power-manager.
Regards,
Roger
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 11:16:25AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> reassign 625538 gnome
> thanks
>
> On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2011, Alessandro Sardone wrote:
> > Package: genera
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt, 2011-05-04 10:42:31 +0200 :
> Heya,
>
> Roland Mas writes:
>> Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200:
>>> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
>>> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
>> My initial idea ab
reassign 625538 gnome
thanks
On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2011, Alessandro Sardone wrote:
> Package: general
> Severity: normal
>
> Even if through gnome-screensaver-preferences and gnome-power-preference I
> disable the screensaver and the automatic turning off of the monitor, when
> I'm away the monitor
Package: general
Severity: normal
Even if through gnome-screensaver-preferences and gnome-power-preference I
disable the screensaver and the automatic turning off of the monitor, when I'm
away the monitor became blank and black.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0.1
APT prefers stable-
schrieb Josselin Mouette am 2011-05-03 17:22:
> Le mardi 03 mai 2011 à 15:56 +0200, Patrick Strasser a écrit :
> Congratulations, you have added yet another bug on the pile that no one
> ever reads, since there are no real maintainers for poppler.
Now that's really bad. Alternatives? Reporting u
[ Cc: debian-devel-ga...@lists.debian.org FYI ]
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 04:14:11PM -0300, gustavo panizzo wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: gustavo panizzo
>
>
> * Package name: vavoom
> Version : 1.32-1
> Upstream Author : Janis Legzdinsh
> * URL
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:42:16AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 12:10:48AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > Sounds like http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12518
> > which is fixed (sort of) by commit 0354e355 (2011-04-01).
>
> Oh my word. So glibc 2.13
On 4 May 2011 15:23, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> That depends on what you mean by 'issue'. I think exactly the issues that
> concern some people in Debian about packages of 'poor quality' being
> generated
> in an uncontrolled PPA system are happening with regularity in Ubuntu.
> Although it doesn'
Heya,
Roland Mas writes:
> Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200:
>> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
>> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
> My initial idea about how one would go about implementing them
> involved very s
Le mardi 03 mai 2011 à 18:19 +0100, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> Where is your RFH bug?
I’m not the maintainer. I’m just one of the guys who happen to upload it
when it gets too outdated.
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone,
Mike Hommey, 2011-05-04 07:57:47 +0200 :
[...]
> Add to that that allowing random people to upload packages to be built
> on Debian build daemons is a recipe to have the buildds compromised.
My initial idea about how one would go about implementing them
involved very strict isolation of the bu
79 matches
Mail list logo
