Re: Bug#605009: serious performance regression with ext4

Hi! On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 16:09:10 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > How about dpkg doesn't care, like it used to, *except* for really > important packages (say, essential ones, or priority important, or > whatever). Since apparently the whole avoid empty files thing is much > more important for libc th

Re: Bug#605009: serious performance regression with ext4

Hi Ted! On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 23:11:52 -0500, Ted Ts'o wrote: > I did some experimenting, and I figured out what was going on. You're > right, (c) doesn't quite work, because delayed allocation meant that > the writeout didn't take place until the fsync() for each file > happened. I didn't see t

Re: apt-diff: a tool to diff filesystem content against APT

Hi! On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 01:41:38 -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [brian m. carlson] > > IIRC, the reason md5sums of conffiles are shipped is to determine > > whether they have been changed by the administrator so that dpkg > > knows whether to automatically replace them with newer versions or >

Re: Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

Hi! On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 11:33:10 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Since there is no support for auto-building arch-independent binaries > > I would hope that throwing away developer built debs would also apply > to arch-independent packages, I

Re: Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

Hi! On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 13:15:47 +, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-02-11, Hideki Yamane wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100 > > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> I have not seen any word about XZ support. > >> When you deployed support for new source package formats, you forbid > >> lzma

Re: Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

Hi! On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 08:39:21 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Using Build-Architecture would be a workaround, it should not be > > needed once multiarch is in place and those packages are built for > > their respective arch

Re: Bug#615090: ITP: quakespasm -- an engine for iD software's Quake

Hi! On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 16:59:58 +, David Banks wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: David Banks > > * Package name: quakespasm > Version : 0.85.3 > Upstream Author : David Banks > * URL : http://quakespasm.sourceforge.net/ > * License :

Re: Help identify packages that multiarch support will break

Hi! On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 14:45:51 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2011, Carsten Hey wrote: > > * Raphael Hertzog [2011-03-02 15:06 +0100]: > > >In general parsing the status file should not be done, instead you > > >should use dpkg-query. > > > > Is there any reason for th

Re: Help identify packages that multiarch support will break

Hi! On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 15:06:11 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > Here's what might create troubles: > 3/ Any program that assumes the current layout of control files >(/var/lib/dpkg/info/.) will be broken (at least for >some packages) since the layout will change to support Multi-Arch:

Re: Help identify packages that multiarch support will break

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 17:30:42 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 02:45:51PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > And the status file is not a public interface. It's a file used by dpkg. > > If tomorrow dpkg supports an optional SQLite internal database through a > > plugin, dp

Re: Help identify packages that multiarch support will break

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 18:20:01 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 17:30:42 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > Is there a way to ask dpkg-query to dump all the information contained > > in /var/lib/dpkg/status without either having to: (1) list all fields > &

Re: Speeding up dpkg, a proposal

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 18:49:44 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2011, Phillip Susi wrote: > > It would be much better to use aio to queue up all of the syncs at once, > > so that the elevator can coalesce and reorder them for optimal writing. > > I'm not convinced it would help. You'

Re: Moving bash from essential/required to important?

Package: login Version: 1:4.1.4.2+svn3283-3 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 10:16:35 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:04:20PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > > What do others think of moving bash to important (required and important > > are part of the

Re: Moving bash from essential/required to important?

On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 01:08:19 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > This appears to open up any accounts that have been deliberately > disabled by setting their shell to a nonexistent path. I know that's a > dumb way to disable an account, but that doesn't make this any less of a > security hole. > > Ho

Re: glibc: causes segfault in Xorg

On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 14:06:41 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 04 May 2011, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > So how do you plan to detect bugs if you never enable a feature? > > Really abort()ing is not a nice behaviour, it would be way better to print > a warning and fallback to a correct behavi

Re: Bug#568598: ITP: librt-java -- runtime routines for projects of intarsys

Hi! On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 02:27:44 +0100, Steffen Möller wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: "Steffen Möller" > > * Package name: librt-java > Version : 4.7 > * URL : > http://opensource.intarsys.de/home/en/index.php?n=JPodRenderer.DevelopersGuide > *

Removing dpkg conffile backgrounding prompt support

Hi! I'd like to know if people would strongly miss being able to background dpkg on the conffile prompt (‘Z’), instead of starting a new subshell. The latter is the default with most modern frontends (APT based). I personally find the background support annoying and confusing when one is used to

Re: why are the watchdog drivers blacklisted?

Hi! On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 20:15:30 +0100, Michael Meskes wrote: > Please keep in mind the OOM killer will only influence watchdog if it happens > to kill it. If you happen to run out of memory though, you can tell watchdog > to > test if enough free mem is available. The OOM killer can be disabl

Re: Bug#569079: ITP: python-xdgapp -- Python XDG application library

Hi! On Tue, 2010-02-09 at 17:32:01 -0500, Luke Faraone wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Luke Faraone > > * Package name: python-xdgapp > Version : 1.1 > Upstream Author : Martin Owens > * URL : http://launchpad.net/python-xdgapp > * License

Re: Bug#569079: ITP: python-xdgapp -- Python XDG application library

Hi! On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 14:36:03 -0500, Luke Faraone wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:52, Guillem Jover wrote > >What does this provide that python-xdg does not? > > It's depended on by https://launchpad.net/groundcontrol, and > provides a wrapper around some xdg f

Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

Hi! As I'd like to change some Pre-Depends in dpkg, I'm bringing this up here for discussion, as per policy §3.5 and given dpkg “Essential: yes” nature. First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils, the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 172 KiB; xz-utils 504 KiB, 160 K

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 10:07:45 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 12:15:10AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Second, I'd like to switch from statically to dynamically linking > > against zlib and libbz2, eventually liblzma too (affecting dpkg-deb

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 00:15:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils, > the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 172 KiB; xz-utils 504 KiB, > 160 KiB in share/doc/ and liblzma2 304 KiB, 124 KiB in share/doc/) Regarding xz-

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

Hi! On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 17:14:00 +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > On Tue, 2010-02-23 at 05:20 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I don't think this would be worth it, as Marco has also said, if the > > system is hosed but you can still get to the point of obtaining a > > pa

Re: Removing dpkg conffile backgrounding prompt support

Hi! On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 04:49:06 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > I'd like to know if people would strongly miss being able to > background dpkg on the conffile prompt (‘Z’), instead of starting a > new subshell. The latter is the default with most modern frontends > (APT based).

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

Hi! On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 22:51:55 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > I don't have any objections to this, but I'd strongly suggest that > this get a run-through experimental with an announcement on > -devel-announce to request testing so that any really bad problems are > caught before it gets deploye

Re: Changes in dpkg Pre-Depends

Hi! As no opposing arguments were brought up I went ahead and now both changes are in dpkg's git tree. On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 00:15:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > First, I'd like to change the dpkg Pre-Depends from lzma to xz-utils, > the latter is a bit bigger in size (lzma 1

Proposal: Automatic selection of hardware specific packages

Hi! I've had this idea in my head for long, but as never found the time to work on it, didn't feel appropriate to throw it to the wall and expect someone else to implement it. Anyway, it seems to me it might be a nice GSoC project, and not necessarily too complex. As I've my plate already full, I'

Re: About new source formats for packages without patches

Hi! On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 09:25:38 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Neil Williams wrote: > > Now all I need is for dpkg to accept that the absence of > > debian/source/format is declarative of source format 1.0. > > That's the case _for now_. > > > packages don't need to be

Re: Bug#582831: ITP: png2ico -- png2ico converts PNG files to Windows icon resource files.

Hi! On Sun, 2010-05-23 at 18:38:26 -0500, Chris Silva wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Chris Silva > > > * Package name: png2ico > Version : 12.08.02-1 > Upstream Author : Matthias S. Benkmann > * URL : http://www.winterdrache.de/freeware/png2ico

Re: Parallellizing the boot in Debian Squeeze - ready for wider testing

On Sun, 2010-05-16 at 14:18:57 +, Clint Adams wrote: > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:57:56PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > > Was this request ever actually made to the kfreebsd porters? I'm not sure > > > that it was, in which case it's rather unfair to say that they've had > > > enough

Re: finally: packages to optionally create default collaboration dirs

Hi! On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 13:00:23 +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: > On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 10:27:35AM +0200, C. Gatzemeier wrote: > [skipped] > > BTW, mutt seems to incorrectly fill the References: header when I > reply to your mail. > > Just a second test. Please ignore... That's because C

Re: Removal of not+kfreebsd and linux-gnu dependency, bugs already filled

Hi! On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 10:48:44 -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [Sebastian Andrzej Siewior] > > Since Debian-Policy 3.9.0 architecture wild cards are allowed so this > > dependency would become > > libudev-dev (>= 0.139) [linux-any] > > and the type-handling aliases (which are hack according t

Switch from xz-utils to liblzma in dpkg Pre-Depends

Hi! As I'd like to change a Pre-Depends in dpkg, I'm bringing this up here for discussion, as per policy §3.5 and given dpkg “Essential: yes” nature. As mentioned in [0] some time ago, I'd like to switch the Pre-Depends from the current xz-utils commands to use the liblzma shared library, (with

Re: Alioth status update, take 3

Hi! On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 22:35:00 +0200, Roland Mas wrote: > We should now be in the phase where we pretend it's done, wait for the > complaints, and fix the problems as they are reported. The project web sites do not seem to work anymore, for example:

Re: Bug#627983: ITP: bmake -- Portable version of NetBSD's make

Hi! On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 09:29:44 +0200, Jeroen Schot wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Jeroen Schot > > * Package name: bmake > Version : 20110505 > Upstream Author : Simon J. Gerraty > * URL : http://www.crufty.net/help/sjg/bmake.html > * Licen

Portability improvements with libbsd 0.3.0

Hi! One of the main motivations when creating the libbsd library was to ease porting source code with strong BSD origins by needing to patch them less, and to reduce code duplication in other projects. So if there are functions, macros or declarations commonly found on the BSDs that your packages

Re: Anonymous read-only access and Vcs-* [Re: Alioth status update, take 3]

On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 20:56:25 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 21:15 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > vasks has the copy of the repositories. > > > > wagner NFS mounts the repositories read-only. > > > > vasks is {git,svn,…}.debian.org (so ssh://git.d.o/ continues working), >

Re: throw away debs and source only uploads

Hi! On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 11:20:07 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > The main decision which needs to be made is whether, as a project, we > > > want source only uploads or to throw away DD built non-all debs. > > > There's

Re: throw away debs and source only uploads

On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 09:03:00 +, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-06-06, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I think this was mentioned in some previous incarnation of this > > discussion, but throwing away debs unconditionally, or at least w/o > > having a way to specify they must

Re: Portability improvements with libbsd 0.3.0

On Sat, 2011-06-04 at 14:24:52 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Guillem Jover dixit: > > pkg-config --cflags libbsd-overlay > > pkg-config is a GNU abomination and not used by BSD projects. I disagree with the abomination part, but in any case do you have a better alternative

Re: throw away debs and source only uploads

On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 19:38:03 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > Are you saying they cannot be bootstrapped with older versions (which > are already in the archive)??! By definition if they need to be manually bootstrapped it's because their build dependencies are not available. The usual cases for that a

Re: Bug#636164: RFP: apt-clone -- ZFS integrated APT package handling utility

Hi! On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 00:38:13 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name: apt-clone > Version : 0.7.9nexenta28 > * URL : see below > * License : CDDL > Programming Lang: Perl > Description : ZFS integrated APT

Re: Introducing Build-Recommends / Build-Core-Depends?

Hi! On Sat, 2011-08-13 at 13:28:36 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > During bootstraping a new architecture, there are sometimes ugly > build-dependency-loops (usually involving generating documentation > for the core build utilities means you need to have the architecture > already available; same wi

Re: RFC: dpatch - past, present and future

Hi! On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 22:33:55 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > As for the future: I still believe dpatch is a temporary solution, and > > that better tools exist now. Therefore, it is my long-term plan to > > slowly deprecate dpatch, and eventually

Re: /usr/share/doc/ files and gzip/xz/no compression

On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 19:55:12 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:33:48 +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > >On the other hand, many computers now have an SSD drive, for speed, > >which is relatively small. Further, most users will likely need files in > >/usr/share/doc rarely, if ever,

Re: dpkg predependency against tar >= 1.23, objections?

On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 20:02:16 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > Couldn't dpkg figure out from tar --version whether it can add the > option? Well it could, but then I'd rather remove the warning suppression (or the equivalent of postponing adding the option until after wheezy) than doing something l

Re: ITP: susv4 -- Fetch and install SUSv4 (POSIX.1:2008) documentation

On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 22:28:00 +0200, David Weinehall wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: David Weinehall > > * Package name: susv4 > Version : 7 > Upstream Author : N/A > * URL : N/A > * License : Public Domain > Programming Lang: POSIX sh >

Re: Bug#639535: ITP: libdebian-copyright-perl -- perl module to parse, merge and write Debian copyright files

Hi! On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 22:08:55 +0100, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > Package: wnpp > Owner: Nicholas Bamber > Severity: wishlist > X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org > > * Package name: libdebian-copyright-perl > Version : 0.1 > Upstream Author

Re: dpkg predependency against tar >= 1.23, objections?

On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 18:50:35 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sun, 25 Sep 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > $ sudo apt-get install dpkg-dev > [...] > > > tar: unrecognized option `--warning=no-timestamp' > > > Try `tar --help' or `tar --usage&#

Re: Bug#645014: ITP: libfile-fcntllock-perl -- Perl module for file locking with flock(2)

Hi! First of all, thanks for packaging this so fast. :) On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 14:32:25 -0500, Julián Moreno Patiño wrote: > Package: wnpp > Owner: Julián Moreno Patiño > Severity: wishlist > X-Debbugs-CC: > debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org,642...@bugs.debian.org > > *

Re: Increasing minimum 'i386' processor

Hi! On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 22:42:11 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have > long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors > and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor. > > I think it is time to increas

Re: Red Hat is moving from / to /usr/

On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 11:34:34 +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > I am not really looking forward to keep reverting these changes in my > package, and since Red Hat controls most Linux infrastructure now other > packages will face the same problem. I might be missing something but given the link your po

Re: Bug#652011: general: Repeated pattern of FHS violation: Dependencies of /sbin and /bin, belong in /lib

Hi! On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 13:43:19 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Roger Leigh wrote: > > I think an important point to consider is that /usr would not > > disappear. It could be replaced by a symlink for new installs. > > This would permit older installs to continue to use /usr, but > > the files woul

Re: Source package without a binary

Hi! On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 18:26:13 +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Theoretically, there is no interesting binary package produced from this > source package and it seems that the policy does not explicitly require > that a source package produces binary packages... but I am certain that > this is

Re: Bug#655187: ITP: nacl -- High-speed software library for network communication

On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 04:49:02 +, Sergiusz Pawlowicz wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Sergiusz Pawlowicz > > * Package name: nacl > Version : 20110221 > Upstream Author : Daniel J. Bernstein > * URL : http://nacl.cace-project.eu/ > * License

Re: Providing a dummy web server package in Debian (Removing web server dependencies from web apps)

On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 10:38:04 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > I agree we should advertise equivs more as it is the most flexible > solution. But until it is discoverable from (not to mention integrated > with) package managers, I doubt we can make a dent in the number of > people who will get s

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

Hi! On Wed, 2018-11-21 at 10:23:46 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > with less confidence: > • making usrmerge Essential (large amount of effort, known issues) Oh dear, no, please! First off, as I've said in the past, I have no problem whatsoever with the concept, I think it brings both advantages

Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

Hi! On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 07:52:08 +0500, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > Well, the buildd configuration change has been reverted. What worries me now > is that there is a risk not yet mitigated, coming from personal systems of > Debian developers, and we should also check porter boxes. > > As lon

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 22:13:41 +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 02:48:32PM -0200, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > (ischroot(1) is from debianutils which is Essential). > "On GNU/Linux, chroot detection is not possible when not root." I think this was just missed as part of t

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 05:51:35 +0900, Mike Hommey wrote: > "Only Essential: yes and direct build dependencies installed"? Why not > extend .buildinfo with the list of all packages installed that aren't > Essential:yes or build dependencies? Because that'd have the potential to leak privacy and sec

Re: CTTE decision on vendor-specific patch series (bug #904302)

On Tue, 2018-11-13 at 19:22:09 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > Resolution […] > The Committee therefore resolves that: > > 1. Any use of dpkg's vendor-specific patch series feature is a bug for >packages in the Debian archive (including contrib and non-free). > >This should be i

Re: wicd-daemon-run_1.0_amd64.changes REJECTED

On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 13:56:40 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Preferably in a package maintained by someone who actually uses that > daemon with sysvinit, rather than one maintained by someone who doesn't. > (And bugs in the use of that package with sysvinit then belong to that > separate package, w

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 14:48:32 -0200, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 02:57:52PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > This is actually a great idea! I went ahead and implemented this, see > > attached tentative patch which I'm planning on including in dpkg 1.19.

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 16:45:15 -0500, Michael Stone wrote: > On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 04:28:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > Guillem Jover writes: > > > Whether a package is being built within a chroot or not, has nothing > > > to do with how that installation is be

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

On Sun, 2018-12-02 at 13:40:05 +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 04:32:17PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Please, if we decide we want to do merged /usr, let's do it properly. > > I'm toying with the idea of creating a merged-usr package indicating >

Re: Removing conflicts of init system

Hi! On Fri, 2018-12-21 at 23:57:38 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > On Fri, 21 Dec 2018, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > > I propose to replace current approach with update-alternatives(1) > […] > > Opinions? > No. update-alternatives is too fragile to handle things like > /bin/sh and init(8). While t

Re: call for epoch (was Re: Bug#915553: ITP: pd-csound -- Csound external for Pure Data)

On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 23:22:19 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > There already is an epoch, you can't remove it. On the other hand, with the > damage already done, there's little reason not to bump it. I think this is a misconception. It is true that any possibly ugliness will not go away, and increa

Re: Policy and procedures issue: init package hijacked via hostile NMU (declined by maintainers)

Hi! On Sat, 2018-12-22 at 10:11:53 -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Please note in the following mail that I'm raising this *exclusively* as a > policy and procedures issue, *not* a technical issue.> > See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=838480 . Rough > summary of events: I thin

Re: Removing conflicts of init system

On Sat, 2018-12-22 at 20:11:13 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 05:54:26PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-12-21 at 23:57:38 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > > > No. update-alternatives is too fragile to handle things like > > > /bin/sh

Re: Policy and procedures issue: init package hijacked via hostile NMU (declined by maintainers)

On Sat, 2018-12-22 at 21:03:18 +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > (Not sure debian-devel is the right place for this discussion, but > oh well...) Yeah, this should probably have been brought up on debian-project, if at all… > On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 08:32:07PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrot

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

Hi! On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:22:03 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > The current merged-/usr deployment (via usrmerge or the bootstrapping > > symlink generation before unpack) is a major hack, and bypasses the dpkg > > understanding of the filesystem,

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

On Sun, 2018-12-23 at 04:06:14 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > […] They also imply to permanently suffer the aliasing problems. To expand and clarify a bit on this. We have aliasing in general with symlinks and hardlinks, but those tend to not be as problematic when aliasing the last component,

Re: Policy and procedures issue: init package hijacked via hostile NMU (declined by maintainers)

On Sat, 2018-12-22 at 22:51:37 +, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 at 22:25:48 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Procedurally? I guess it was > > OKish, but I guess that's a consequence we get when people involved > > the ctte to muddle the social and proced

Re: usrmerge -- plan B?

On Sun, 2018-12-23 at 16:45:28 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sun, 2018-12-23 at 04:06:14 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > […] They also imply to permanently suffer the aliasing problems. > > To expand and clarify a bit on this. We have aliasing in general with > symlinks

Re: Potentially insecure Perl scripts

Hi! On Wed, 2019-01-23 at 14:05:54 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > I've just reported > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=920269 > > against gropdf (also reported upstream to bug-groff), about the use of > the insecure null filehandle "<>" in Perl, which can lead to arbitrary

Re: Potentially insecure Perl scripts

On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 21:08:00 +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Ian Jackson: > > I asked codesearch about > >while.*\<\> > > and got 10780 results. > > I had a similar thought but tried a slightly more complex pattern: > > (while\s*|for(each)?\s*(my)?\s*\$.*)\(.*<>\s*\) > > The pattern also

Re: Namespace for system users

Hi! On Sat, 2019-02-09 at 13:10:27 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > at work we have a large fleet of Debian machines, but also more than 200k > user accounts with no reuse and somewhat painful rename experiences. > Obviously an increasing number of accounts leads to a much increased risk of > collisio

Re: Bug#922353: ITP: socket-activate -- Run a socket-activated daemon with minimal dependencies

Hi! On Thu, 2019-02-14 at 17:36:31 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Daniel Kahn Gillmor > > * Package name: socket-activate > Version : 0.1 > Upstream Author : Daniel Kahn Gillmor > * URL : https://gitlab.com/dkg/socket-a

Re: Recreating history of a package

Hi! On Sat, 2019-02-16 at 12:22:04 +, peter green wrote: > 2. Snapshot.debian.org is only offered over plain insecure http. For >recent versions the packages can be verified against the >Packages/Sources files which can in turn be verified with gpg but >older versions are more prob

Re: Bug#922353: ITP: socket-activate -- Run a socket-activated daemon with minimal dependencies

On Fri 2019-02-15 04:34:47 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Another option would be to implement this in start-stop-daemon, like > > the similar support for the systemd readiness protocol was recently > > implemented there too. > > Thanks for the suggestion! How widely-dis

Re: Bug#922353: ITP: socket-activate -- Run a socket-activated daemon with minimal dependencies

Hi! On Fri, 2019-02-15 at 17:24:24 +0100, Andrej Shadura wrote: > Speaking of which, maybe it would also make sense to merge my changes > in? > > https://bitbucket.org/andrew_shadura/start-stop-daemon-isolate/commits/8646be59e3fde0b22f84a842ef5729a5de08fd3b This being

Re: Tainted builds (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

Hi! On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 18:20:44 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > … and then I'm not entirely sure a non-minimal environment should be > > qualified as tainted? For example contrast using a minimal but outdated > > installation to a non-minimal

merged-/usr-via-symlinks damage control (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

Hi! On Tue, 2018-11-20 at 22:16:17 +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > Thus, it seems to me that the plan A for usrmerge has serious downsides for > dubious benefits. What about the plan B I described above? So, people still seem to be conflating merged-/usr (the filesystem layout) with the different

Re: Unifying logging by default

On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 14:19:02 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Josh Triplett writes: > > While there are *absolutely* configurations in which system > > administrators want to log to arbitrary locations and files, I would > > like to propose that for consistency we should configure software to > > un

Re: Bug#922643: ITP: build-alternative -- helper to build Debian package with diet libc

Hi! On Mon, 2019-02-18 at 19:37:38 +, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Dmitry Bogatov > > * Package name : build-alternative > Version : 0.0.1 > Upstream Author : Dmitry Bogatov > * Url : https://salsa.debian.org/kaction/buil

Re: merged-/usr-via-symlinks vs a-different-layout

On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:54:12 +0100, Ansgar wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > 3) Switching packages to the merged-/usr layout could have been > >accomplished automatically via debhelper for a coverage of around > >99% (?) of the archive. With somethi

Re: merged-/usr-via-symlinks damage control (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

Hi! On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 05:49:24 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > So, as part of damage control I'm going to: > > - include the Build-Tainted-By patches into dpkg 1.19.5. Done. > - include a bug-script in dpkg for reportbug to report whether the > system has been

Re: merged-/usr-via-symlinks damage control (was Re: usrmerge -- plan B?)

On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 03:23:09 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 05:49:24 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > So, as part of damage control I'm going to: > > > > - include the Build-Tainted-By patches into dpkg 1.19.5. > > Done. > >

Re: merged-/usr-via-symlinks vs a-different-layout

On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 08:27:20 +0100, Ansgar wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > You are still conflating the concept with the deployment. The > > underlaying properties of merging /usr is that the contents for > > directories that are present in both / and /usr get merged i

Re: merged-/usr-via-symlinks vs a-different-layout

On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 09:23:14 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > >>>>> "Guillem" == Guillem Jover writes: > Guillem> On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 08:27:20 +0100, Ansgar wrote: > >> Guillem Jover writes: > You are still conflating the concept with >

Re: ITP: fossology -- FOSSology is an open source license compliance software system and toolkit.

Hi! On Fri, 2019-03-15 at 20:27:57 +0530, Gaurav Mishra wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Gaurav Mishra > Package name : fossology > Version : 3.4.0 > Upstream Author : Michael Jaeger > URL : https://www.fossology.org/ > License : GPL-2.0-only, LGPL-2.1-only > Pro

Re: first epoch for acme-tiny

Hi! On Sat, 2019-04-06 at 14:11:57 +0100, Samuel Henrique wrote: > In order for that to happen I need to introduce an epoch as we were using > calver and now we have semver, I'm assuming this is a non-controversial > epoch but I need to send this email on d-devel anyway. > > Previous version:

Re: is Wayland/Weston mature enough to be the default desktop choice in Buster?

Hi! On Fri, 2019-04-05 at 16:12:22 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > I was surprised to learn — by way of synaptic being autoremoved — that > the default desktop in Buster will be GNOME/Wayland. I personally do not > think that Wayland is a sensible choice for the default *yet*; and if > the conseq

Re: SIMDebian: Debian Partial Fork with Radical ISA Baseline

Hi! On Fri, 2019-02-08 at 16:25:41 +, Mo Zhou wrote: > For most programs the "-march=native" option is not expected to bring any > significant performance improvement. However for some scientific applications > this proposition doesn't hold. When I was creating the tensorflow debian > package,

Re: is Wayland/Weston mature enough to be the default desktop choice in Buster?

On Sat, 2019-04-06 at 21:48:57 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 08:47:51PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I don't use GNOME at all, but I tried to switch to Wayland last month > > (from i3 to sway), and sadly the experience lasted only a couple of da

Re: SIMDebian: Debian Partial Fork with Radical ISA Baseline

On Tue, 2019-04-09 at 06:48:59 +, Mo Zhou wrote: > On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 10:55:35PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > If what you are interested in though is just a small subset of the > > archive, another option that would benefit everyone and is perhaps > > less cumb

Re: Bug#927725: Please build with --enable-mmdblookup

On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 04:39:50 -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > On 4/23/19 5:12 AM, Michael Biebl wrote: > > My main concern is to keep the rsyslog core package reasonably small > > (dependency wise). I think either a new package for this plugin or a conglomerate package with extra stuff sound g

Re: Bug#927725: Please build with --enable-mmdblookup

On Tue, 2019-04-23 at 19:35:50 -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23 2019, Michael Biebl wrote: > > Am 23.04.19 um 11:12 schrieb Michael Biebl: > >> But splitting each tiny module into a separate package adds significant > >> overhead packaging-wise. > > > > (not to forget NEW round trips) >

Bogus upstream source tarball signature files in the archive

Hi! Some days ago I noticed that uscan is generating bogus upstream tarball signature files when converting them from the ones fetched from upstream. There are several problems, but the main ones are that it will rearmor some of the ASCII armored signatures based on the extension, and that it will

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >