Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Yadd
Le 2 décembre 2021 00:34:27 GMT+01:00, Paul Wise a écrit : >On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote: > >> Personally I dislike redirectors. > >A redirector service is superior to including the redirector code >within uscan itself or within a debian/watch file, since when the >upstream web

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Yadd
On 02/12/2021 10:16, Yadd wrote: On 02/12/2021 00:34, Paul Wise wrote: On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote: Personally I dislike redirectors. A redirector service is superior to including the redirector code within uscan itself or within a debian/watch file, since when the upstrea

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Geert Stappers
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Yadd wrote: > On 02/12/2021 10:16, Yadd wrote: > > On 02/12/2021 00:34, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Wed, 2021-12-01 at 12:53 +0100, Yadd wrote: > > > > > > > Personally I dislike redirectors. > > > > > > A redirector service is superior to including the re

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Gard Spreemann
Paul Wise writes: > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian source > packages, since upstream download locations generally change > independently of the Debian package and so information about upstream > download locations probably should be maintained independently. I v

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30) > > Paul Wise writes: > > > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian > > source packages, since upstream download locations generally change > > independently of the Debian package and so information about > > upstream downlo

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Gard Spreemann
Jonas Smedegaard writes: > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30) >> >> Paul Wise writes: >> >> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian >> > source packages, since upstream download locations generally change >> > independently of the Debian package and so in

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 13:09:17) > > Jonas Smedegaard writes: > > > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30) > >> > >> Paul Wise writes: > >> > >> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian > >> > source packages, since upstream download locations gener

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Julien Puydt
Hi Le jeu. 2 déc. 2021 à 11:36, Yadd a écrit : > > Another idea to have a compromise: > * uscan is released with versioned schemes (GitHub.json, sf.json,...) > * when launched, it tries to download new version from a new Debian API > (static json files) > * if no response or no new v

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Gard Spreemann
Jonas Smedegaard writes: > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 13:09:17) >> >> Jonas Smedegaard writes: >> >> > Quoting Gard Spreemann (2021-12-02 12:31:30) >> >> >> >> Paul Wise writes: >> >> >> >> > I also wonder if it is time to split debian/watch out of Debian >> >> > source packages,

Using release-monitoring.org [was: uscan roadmap]

2021-12-02 Thread Stephan Lachnit
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 12:51 AM Paul Wise wrote: > > It might be a idea to look at how other distributions do checking for > new upstream releases and adopt some of their improvements. > > I note Fedora uses a service (that isn't Fedora specific) for this: > > https://release-monitoring.org > http

/usr/bin/ld.so as a symbolic link for the dynamic loader

2021-12-02 Thread Florian Weimer
I'd like to provide an ld.so command as part of glibc. Today, ld.so can be used to activate preloading, for example. Compared to LD_PRELOAD, the difference is that it's specific to one process, and won't be inherited by subprocesses—something is that exactly what is needed. There is also some use

Re: Using release-monitoring.org [was: uscan roadmap]

2021-12-02 Thread Paul Wise
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 15:57 +0100, Stephan Lachnit wrote: > I think this would be the best path forward - it would probably be not > easy given that it changes entirely how the current system works, but > it might be well worth the effort. Working together with another > distribution would share t

Re: uscan roadmap

2021-12-02 Thread Paul Wise
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 10:16 +0100, Yadd wrote: > Yes but the redirector often responded with 500 codes 500 codes probably just mean bugs in the redirector, which should be easy to fix for anyone with access to the redirector source code. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signatur

Re: Using release-monitoring.org [was: uscan roadmap]

2021-12-02 Thread Scott Talbert
On Fri, 3 Dec 2021, Paul Wise wrote: I think this would be the best path forward - it would probably be not easy given that it changes entirely how the current system works, but it might be well worth the effort. Working together with another distribution would share the work for the distro. I'm

Re: Using release-monitoring.org [was: uscan roadmap]

2021-12-02 Thread Stephan Lachnit
On Thu, 2 Dec 2021, 23:17 Paul Wise, wrote: > At minimum we would need a way to map from release-monitoring.org > package names to Debian source package names. Assuming they use Fedora > source package names, then the Repology service provides such a mapping > and we could presumably could get a

Re: Using release-monitoring.org [was: uscan roadmap]

2021-12-02 Thread Paul Wise
On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 23:36 +0100, Stephan Lachnit wrote: > If I understand correctly, release-monitoring already offers such a > mapping [1]. It seems like the Ayanita distro mapping needs to be done manually once per package, while using the Repology data would automatically get us the mapping

Re: /usr/bin/ld.so as a symbolic link for the dynamic loader

2021-12-02 Thread Paul Wise
Florian Weimer wrote: > I'd like to provide an ld.so command as part of glibc. Will this happen in glibc upstream or just in Debian? > Today, ld.so can be used to activate preloading, for example. > Compared to LD_PRELOAD, the difference is that it's specific to one > process, and won't be inhe

Work-needing packages report for Dec 3, 2021

2021-12-02 Thread wnpp
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the last week. Total number of orphaned packages: 1247 (new: 6) Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 184 (new: 0) Total number of packages reques