Work-needing packages report for Aug 11, 2006
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: 319 (new: 0) Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 84 (new: 3) Total number of packages requested help for: 26 (new: 2) Please refer to http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ for more information. No new packages have been orphaned, but a total of 319 packages are orphaned. See http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/orphaned for a complete list. The following packages have been given up for adoption: owl-dms (#382266), offered yesterday Description: intranet Knowledgebase or DMS Installations reported by Popcon: 9 xbanner (#382267), offered yesterday Description: Beautify your X login screen Installations reported by Popcon: 101 xfe (#382268), offered yesterday Description: lightweight file manager for X11 Installations reported by Popcon: 220 81 older packages have been omitted from this listing, see http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/rfa_bypackage for a complete list. For the following packages help is requested: [NEW] apt-show-versions (#382026), requested 2 days ago Description: lists available package versions with distribution Installations reported by Popcon: 1737 [NEW] mailman (#382128), requested 2 days ago Description: Powerful, web-based mailing list manager Reverse Depends: gforge-lists-mailman Installations reported by Popcon: 550 aboot (#315592), requested 413 days ago Description: Alpha bootloader: Looking for co-maintainers Reverse Depends: aboot aboot-cross dfsbuild ltsp-server Installations reported by Popcon: 52 apt-build (#365427), requested 103 days ago Description: Need new developer(s) Installations reported by Popcon: 433 athcool (#278442), requested 653 days ago Description: Enable powersaving mode for Athlon/Duron processors Installations reported by Popcon: 225 cvs (#354176), requested 168 days ago Description: Concurrent Versions System Reverse Depends: bonsai cvs-autoreleasedeb cvs-buildpackage cvs2cl cvs2html cvschangelogbuilder cvsconnect cvsd cvsdelta cvsps (16 more omitted) Installations reported by Popcon: 7312 docbook (#358522), requested 141 days ago Description: standard SGML representation system for technical documents Reverse Depends: alcovebook-sgml docbook-dsssl docbook-to-man sgmltools-lite Installations reported by Popcon: 3277 docbook-xml (#358520), requested 141 days ago Description: standard XML documentation system, for software and systems Reverse Depends: dblatex docbook-dsssl docbook-ebnf docbook-html-forms docbook-jrefentry docbook-mathml docbook-simple docbook-slides docbook-website docbook-xsl-stylesheets-ko (6 more omitted) Installations reported by Popcon: 8533 dpkg (#282283), requested 628 days ago Description: dselect: a user tool to manage Debian packages Reverse Depends: alien alsa-source apt-build apt-src backuppc build-essential clamsmtp crosshurd cvs-autoreleasedeb cvs-buildpackage (83 more omitted) Installations reported by Popcon: 14259 grub (#248397), requested 822 days ago Description: GRand Unified Bootloader Reverse Depends: dfsbuild grub-splashimages grubconf replicator Installations reported by Popcon: 10943 gtkpod (#319711), requested 382 days ago Description: manage songs and playlists on an Apple iPod Installations reported by Popcon: 375 lirc (#364606), requested 108 days ago Description: Linux Infra-red Remote Control support Reverse Depends: digitaldj fbtv gkrellm-radio gxine irmp3 kradio liblircclient-dev lirc lirc-svga lirc-x (15 more omitted) Installations reported by Popcon: 8032 mc (#380999), requested 9 days ago Description: midnight commander - a powerful file manager Reverse Depends: junior-system Installations reported by Popcon: 4331 mwavem (#313369), requested 423 days ago (non-free) Description: Mwave/ACP modem support software Installations reported by Popcon: 5 nas (#354174), requested 168 days ago Description: The Network Audio System Reverse Depends: abakus acm acm4 alsaplayer-nas apollon ark arson asc audiooss avida-qt-viewer (244 more omitted) Installations reported by Popcon: 9471 ntp (#373824), requested 56 days ago Description: Network Time Protocol: network utilities Installations reported by Popcon: 8542 openssl (#332498), requested 308 days ago Description: Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary and related
Re: Desktop themes for Debian ?
hi, there's related thread on debian-devel mailing list, please look at "Etch artwork" subject. There's also a cross posting message on debian-qt-kde, debian-gtk-gnome and pkg-xfce-devel, look at "Debian sid and etch artwork". An entry on the wiki : http://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktopArtwork We are planning an irc meeting, date and time must be announced soon. cheers, Fathi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]
also sprach Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.0012 +0100]: > 1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-) Why not continue to current versioning scheme until 0.10 is out to avoid the epoch? -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "i like young girls. their stories are shorter." -- tom mcguane signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
* Michael Biebl: > So, what should I do now: > 1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-) > 2.) Use an epoch. > 3.) File a bug report against dpkg. 2) is the typical approach. > If it's not a bug in dpkg, could someone please elaborate on the > reasoning of this behaviour. "." is not special as far as version numbers are concerned. It's not a separator, for instance, and "1." is a valid version number (which is equal to "1.0"). We need a total ordering of version strings, and any approach is arbitrary to some degree because we don't want to use purely lexicographic comparison (otherwise, "9.x" would be greater than "10.x", which is clearly counterintuitive). There are upstream version number schemes for which the Policy algorithm works perfectly well (1.01, 1.02, ..., 1.09, 1.10, ...) and others where it doesn't. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:30:45AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.0012 +0100]: > > 1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-) > > Why not continue to current versioning scheme until 0.10 is out to > avoid the epoch? Yeah -- and the improvement between 0.09+0.1.svn and 0.1~svn isn't big enough to warrant an upload anyway. The former is much nicer than 1:0.1~svn, too. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]: > > > > > Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to > > > the right of the decimal, making the zero significant. > > > > Er, read Policy 5.6.12. > > > I have read it. I was simply speaking from a mathematical perspective. It's still right from a mathematical perspective. The integers within two version numbers are compared in sequence. Leading zeros are insignificant for integers. A '.' character doesn't mean "decimal point" in a version number; Policy 5.6.12 explains what it does mean. -- \"If it ain't bust don't fix it is a very sound principle and | `\ remains so despite the fact that I have slavishly ignored it | _o__) all my life." -- Douglas Adams | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "." is not special as far as version numbers are concerned. It's not > a separator, for instance, and "1." is a valid version number (which > is equal to "1.0"). That doesn't match my reading of Policy 5.6.12: The strings are compared from left to right. First the initial part of each string consisting entirely of non-digit characters is determined. These two parts (one of which may be empty) are compared lexically. If a difference is found it is returned. The lexical comparison is a comparison of ASCII values modified so that all the letters sort earlier than all the non-letters. Then the initial part of the remainder of each string which consists entirely of digit characters is determined. The numerical values of these two parts are compared, and any difference found is returned as the result of the comparison. For these purposes an empty string (which can only occur at the end of one or both version strings being compared) counts as zero. These two steps (comparing and removing initial non-digit strings and initial digit strings) are repeated until a difference is found or both strings are exhausted. So any '.' between digits would be a "part of [the] string consisting entirely of non-digit characters", and is compared lexically by ASCII values; following which is a "part of the remainder of [the] string which consists entirely of digit characters", and is compared numerically; and we repeat these steps until the string is exhausted. That sure sounds like a lone '.' between digit-sequences would be a separator for those digit-sequences. -- \ "Just because nobody complains doesn't mean all parachutes are | `\ perfect." -- Benny Hill | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 07:17:43AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> "." is not special as far as version numbers are concerned. It's not
> a separator, for instance, and "1." is a valid version number (which
> is equal to "1.0").
Uhm, where does the "0" come from? This is grossly unintuitive, and I would
consider this a bug. Both strings parse as follows:
"1." => "", 1, "."
"1.0" => "", 1, ".", 0
Lexicographically, the former is obviously smaller. In every single version
comparison scheme I saw before, non-numeric and numeric parts get compared
alternatively until a mismatch is found. It's just dpkg which instead
parses both strings as:
"1." => ("",1), (".",0)
"1.0" => ("",1), (".",0)
That is, dpkg will make up a 0 at the end.
> We need a total ordering of version strings, and any approach is
> arbitrary to some degree because we don't want to use purely
> lexicographic comparison (otherwise, "9.x" would be greater than
> "10.x", which is clearly counterintuitive). There are upstream
> version number schemes for which the Policy algorithm works perfectly
> well (1.01, 1.02, ..., 1.09, 1.10, ...) and others where it doesn't.
GNU strverscmp() will handle numeric substrings starting with a 0
differently, leading to a switch and possible breakage once "09" turns into
"1" ("09" < "1" < "10", but "19" > "2" < "20". This what I call unnecesary
complication, and it's obvious why this is bad.
I think the same about inventing a "0" from thin air.
And another bug: "2a.0" is _lesser_ than "2.0"! This works as documented,
but is totally against lexicography, expectations and common sense.
--
1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor:
// Never attribute to stupidity what can be
// adequately explained by malice.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev vs ldap at startup
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:59:16PM +1000, Brian May wrote: > The second query is trying to find out all the groups root is in (is > it possible to skip this???). Only if you either remove ldap from the groups: line in nsswitch.conf, or you do not use any programs that call initgroups()/getgrent(). A workaround may be to have /etc/nsswitch.conf.files that does not have LDSP entries, bind-mount it over /etc/nsswitch.conf in say /etc/rcS.d/S02blah, and unmount it in /etc/rcS.d/S99blah. This is not a real fix though since udev events can be processed well after rcS is run. The real fix would be to tame libldap2/libnss-ldap. Gabor -- - MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
also sprach Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.0931 +0100]: > Uhm, where does the "0" come from? This is grossly unintuitive, and I would > consider this a bug. Both strings parse as follows: > > "1." => "", 1, "." > "1.0" => "", 1, ".", 0 actually, you forgot the trailing "" > And another bug: "2a.0" is _lesser_ than "2.0"! This works as > documented, but is totally against lexicography, expectations and > common sense. I'll shoot anyone who uses such a version number. :) -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "we all know linux is great... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." -- linus torvalds signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
pe, 2006-08-11 kello 09:47 +0100, martin f krafft kirjoitti: > also sprach Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.0931 +0100]: > > Uhm, where does the "0" come from? This is grossly unintuitive, and I would > > consider this a bug. Both strings parse as follows: > > > > "1." => "", 1, "." > > "1.0" => "", 1, ".", 0 > > actually, you forgot the trailing "" > > > And another bug: "2a.0" is _lesser_ than "2.0"! This works as > > documented, but is totally against lexicography, expectations and > > common sense. > > I'll shoot anyone who uses such a version number. :) Indeed. I think the best lesson from this thread is that as long as version numbers are simple and sensible (number, period, number, period, ..., and no numbers have leading zeroes), everything usually works without surprises. If version numbers become more complicated than that, there will be surprises, and sometimes nasty ones. At least we rarely see, these days, upstream version numbers that are successive negative powers of 10 (0.1, 0.01, 0.001, 0.0001... where 0.1 < 0.01), or successive negative integers (-1, -2, -3, -4...). Or successive phone numbers in a certain year's edition of the Helsinki telephone book (don't ask, I was young and silly). -- Fundamental truth #4: Typing URLs always introduces errors. Always copy +paste. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Status of inetd for etch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Aug 10, Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> installed, all using the same configuration file. Is this a use >> case we really want to support? Are there really setups running >> multiple inetds for a good reason? Having a virtual > A good reason usually is using features not available in a single > package (especially inetd vs. inetd). > It's not hard to manage anyway, my scheme allowed this. We don't allow multiple mail-transport-agents, even though they have different features. Do we have a real, demonstrable, use-case for permitting multiple inetds? To me, it seems rather more manageable to have just one, particularly because they all generally use the same configuration file. If this is something only one or two people with specialised needs do, they can surely sort it out by themselves, as they would if they had a specialised mail setup. >> * netkit-inetd > I agree that it should be removed from the distribution, or at least > replaced by openbsd-inetd as the default inetd. In that case, would it be possible for a netbase upload changing Depends: openbsd-inetd | netkit-inetd to Depends: openbsd-inetd or even Depends: internet-super-server | openbsd-inetd to allow for a future virtual package? openbsd-inetd could implement the virtual package right now, and the other inetds can fix up their dependencies after. >> - The other packages have different init script names or need some >> work on the package dependencies (e.g. inetutils-inetd). xinetd >> is in the same situation, but also needs some work on update-inetd >> before it will be suitable as a replacement. > ITYM "lots of work". Perhaps it simply needs approaching in a different way. Rather than a hugely complex update-inetd, why not have each inetd provide one which works for them (with a common implementation for the traditional format)? On removal, they can (if using a file other than /etc/inetd.conf) dump their configuration there to allow migration between inetd packages and do the opposite on install. >> * IPv6 transition >> - Should individual packages be made to listen on both tcp4 and tcp6 >> sockets, or should this be done by the inetd itself, or even >> update-inetd? > Only individual packages know if they support IPv6. So what are you proposing as the solution here? Should each package call update-inetd twice, for both v4 and v6? (Assuming they support both.) >> - Some inetds automatically listen on v6, whereas others need it > I call them "broken". I believe that administrators do not expect that > services are exposed to IPv6 connections unless they are configured this > way in inetd.conf. Why? All the other major daemons listen on both by default, and I do expect inetd services to do the same where possible. Most of the services are already protected by TCP wrappers, so you would need to explicitly add [::] to /etc/hosts.allow to get an IPv6 connection. >> Users upgrading from woody or sarge to etch will not be switched to >> openbsd-inetd, whereas new installs will use it by default. > Did you actually test this? I checked that new etch installs install openbsd-inetd. Upgrades won't be switched because the netbase dependency is already satisfied by netkit-inetd. In consequence, I think that netkit-inetd needs to be removed from the netbase depends. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `-GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. pgpNtO2ZtFtHF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Status of inetd for etch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: >> It would be good to get rid of inetd from the basic install at all. Those > No, it would not. UNIX systems are supposed to have an inetd installed. I see no reason why *Debian* systems should have an inetd installed unless there is another package installed requiring its services. This can be handled through package dependencies. If the admin wants to add their own services (i.e. not installed by a dependency), they can just install it by hand. If there is nothing using inetd, it's just bloat in the base install. While it's probably best to leave it installed by default for etch, I think fixing up all inetd-using packages to have proper dependencies, and then removing the dependency from netbase would be a worthy goal for etch+1. Regards, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `-GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. pgpihiMtpAfU3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: piuparts unprocessed failed logs page
pe, 2006-08-11 kello 14:42 +1000, Brian May kirjoitti: > Can the argument be made that these aren't packaging bugs but rather > the fact the hostname hasn't been configured correctly? Not only can that argument be made, but I would like to make it myself. I'll fix the chroot piuparts uses so that hostname works within it. -- One does not see anything until one sees its beauty. -- Oscar Wilde -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: piuparts unprocessed failed logs page
ke, 2006-08-09 kello 10:21 +0300, Lars Wirzenius kirjoitti: > While I wait to have time to do something better and more easily usable, > the following page lists the logs of failed piuparts files that have not > yet been processed: > > http://piuparts.cs.helsinki.fi/fail/ I made some more logs available, in the hope that they're useful: http://piuparts.cs.helsinki.fi/bugged/ http://piuparts.cs.helsinki.fi/fixed/ http://piuparts.cs.helsinki.fi/untestable/ The meaning is this: * fail is UNPROCESSED log files for failed piuparts tests. The problems may or may not be in the package, and they may be temporary (e.g., mirror problems). * bugged is failures for which a bug has been reported; the log file is moved there from the fail directory manually. The goal is to have the bug number at the top of the file. Sometimes the bug hasn't been reported and there's some other explanation. Sometimes there's no good reason for the log to be there anymore (or in the first place); my fingers sometimes fumble, and my brain, too. * fixed is where a log moves from bugged after a bug has been fixed. * untestable is where logs for packages are stored that can't be tested with piuparts, for whatever reason (sometimes because piuparts is not smart enough). The only category of log files not visible via http is the "pass" ones, i.e., logs for piuparts runs that failed to find any problems in the package. These are not public because the directory is huge. -- Every time I say /quit I die a little. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Status of inetd for etch
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 12:46:44AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> Now, let's see what depends on *-inetd:
> Depends:
> netbase
Hence, everything that wants an inetd can just Depend: on netbase, rather
than specifying it explicitly, so your list is incomplete:
> lukemftpd
> wipl-client-java
> pawserv
> bitlbee
> micro-httpd
> wipl-client-inetd
> ltsp-server
> noffle
> Recommends:
> atftpd
> Suggests:
> micro-proxy
> education-main-server
The non-broken way to fix this is to have:
Package: net-common
Package: openbsd-inetd
Provides: internet-superserver
Package: foo
Depends: net-common, internet-superserver
Package: netbase
Priority: extra
Depends: net-common, internet-superserver
and rebuild packages that currently depend on netbase, to instead depend
on "net-common" or "net-common, internet-superserver" depending on whether
they use an inetd or not. netbase should also ensure "update-inetd" supports
the current syntax, so packages don't break.
The reason that hasn't happened is because people (including myself)
have been hoping to introduce a new update-inetd with a syntax that
doesn't suck at the same time as introducing the internet-superserver
virtual package so that packages only need to be changed once.
It's not really that hard, but no one's bothered finishing it off. My last
attempt's attached. Consider it GPL v2 or later'ed.
Cheers,
aj
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
package UpdateInetd;
###
# service object:
# service
# type
# protocol
# executable
# arguments
# netgroup
# tcpd
# group
# user
# wait
# disable
sub service2inetd($) {
my %serv = %{$_[0]};
my ($dm, $d, $s, $t, $p, $w, $u, $tcpd, $c, $a) = (
$serv{"disabled_man"} ? "#" : "",
join("", map { "#<$_>" } @{$serv{"disabled"}}),
$serv{"service"},
$serv{"type"},
$serv{"protocol"},
$serv{"wait"},
$serv{"user"} .
(defined $serv{"group"} ? "." . $serv{"group"} : ""),
defined($serv{"tcpd"}) ? "/usr/sbin/tcpd" : $serv{"command"},
$serv{"command"},
$serv{"arguments"},
);
$d .= " " if ($d ne "");
if ($tcpd eq $c) {
$c =~ s,^.*/,,;
}
if ($c eq "internal") {
return "$dm$d$s\t$t\t$p\t$w\t$u\t$c";
} else {
return "$dm$d$s\t$t\t$p\t$w\t$u\t$tcpd\t$c $a";
}
}
sub inetd2service($) {
my $line = $_[0];
# a service matches:
# # ^(#?) $1
# ###((#<\S+>)+#?)? $2
# mountd/1 (\S+) \s+ $4
# dgram (dgram|stream) \s+ $5
# rpc/udp (\S+) \s+ $6
# wait (wait|nowait(\.\d+)?)\s+$7
# root (\S+) \s+ $9
# /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd (\S+) $10
# /usr/sbin/rpc.mountd (\s+(\S+))?$12
# (\s+(\S.*))? $14
if ($line =~
m/^(#?)((#<\S+>\s*)+#?\s*)?([^#<\s]\S*)\s+(dgram|stream)\s+(\S+)\s+(wait|nowait(\.\d+)?)\s+(\S+)\s+(\S+)(\s+(\S+))?(\s+(\S.*))?\s*$/)
{
my %results = (
'disabled_man' => $1 eq "#",
'disabled' => $2 || "",
'service' => $4,
'type' => $5,
'protocol' => $6,
'wait' => $7,
'user' => $9,
'command' => $10,
'command2' => $12 || "",
'arguments' => $14 || "",
'tcpd' => undef,
'group' => undef,
);
$results{"disabled"} =
[ map { $1 if (m/<(.*)>/); } (grep /<.*>/, (split /#+/,
$results{"disabled"})) ];
if ($results{"user"} =~ m/^(.*)[:.](.*)$/) {
$results{"user"} = $1;
$results{"group"} = $2;
}
if ($results{"command"} eq "/usr/sbin/tcpd") {
$results{"tcpd"} = 1;
$results{"command"} = $results{"command2"};
}
delete $results{"command2"};
return \%results
}
return undef;
}
sub matchserv($$$;$$) {
my ($serv, $s,$p,$c,$r) = @_;
return 0 unless
($s eq $serv->{"service"})
Re: Silly Packaging Problem
Bruce Sass writes ("Re: Silly Packaging Problem"):
> "files" and "size" accommodate the desire to include generated or
> packageless files and their size (if knowable) in the dpkg DB.
This is a bad idea. dpkg maintains these lists of files not primarily
for the purpose of dpkg -S, but rather for making the package
management operations (install, upgrade, remove, etc.) work properly.
If you start editing these files (even with the relevant lock held and
with regard to the package status), dpkg will behave differently
afterwards: it will think the file in question was shipped in the
currently installed package's .deb.
This is almost certainly not what you want. A good general principle
is to practice ownership: dpkg should remove and update things it has
installed; maintainer scripts and other programs should remove and
update things they created.
If the objective is to make dpkg -S more useful (a worthy goal) then
you need a separate list for each package, of files which should be
reported in -S but which dpkg should otherwise ignore.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Broken dpkg.cfg?
Hi all, (I posted this to debian-user yesterday but got no bites. I'm hoping to have more luck with the debian-devel group.) From the Debian FAQ 8.5: If you'd like to log all your dpkg invokations (even those done using frontends like aptitude), you could add log /var/log/dpkg.log to your /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg. But, like, this doesn't work and stuff: # cat /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg log /var/log/dpkg.log # dpkg -l dpkg: configuration error: unknown option log: Success How is this really supposed to work? (And why does it say "Success" when it exits with an error? Success at generating an error?) Btw, I'm running Sarge. Thanks for your help, Michael Peek -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Broken dpkg.cfg?
also sprach peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.1210 +0100]: > How is this really supposed to work? (And why does it say "Success" > when it exits with an error? Success at generating an error?) > > Btw, I'm running Sarge. log support was added to dpkg post-sarge -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system never trust an operating system for which you do not have the source. -- source unknown signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
md5 sum mismatches and mirror syncs
Failed to fetch http://ftp.ie.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz MD5Sum mismatch I am seeing a lot of this stuff lately, and I've been told it's due to mirror syncs. As our archive grows bigger, the sync takes longer, so this problem will happen more often in the future. I wonder why. To me it seems as if a sync is a blind rsync, which copies the Release index before the individual Packages/Source indices. Shouldn't we switch to using/advocating a smarter algorithm like the one debmirror or anonftpsync use, which is to push new package files to the archive, then synchronise indices, then delete obsolete package files? Or is this already in place? Why then do we see errors like the above? -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "there's someone in my head but it's not me." -- pink floyd, the dark side of the moon, 1972 signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: Broken dpkg.cfg?
martin f krafft wrote: also sprach peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.1210 +0100]: How is this really supposed to work? (And why does it say "Success" when it exits with an error? Success at generating an error?) Btw, I'm running Sarge. log support was added to dpkg post-sarge D'oh! Thanks! Michael Peek -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?
* Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060811 01:13]: > If it's not a bug in dpkg, could someone please elaborate on the > reasoning of this behaviour. I'd be grateful for any comments and replies. That's because dpkg follows the most common versioning scheme: The version after "0.9" is called "0.10". Typically the different parts of a version have some more or less defined meaning. If nothing substantional changes, increasing the first number would only confuse. As there are only natural numbers involved, it is quite easy to compare and the next number is always well-defined. With real numbers one only can do things like switching to 0.91 after 0.9, then fastly arrives at 0.99 and then needs 0.991 and so on, a really mess. To avoid confusing people not knowing how versions are ordered it is often suggested to make versions at least three numbers: "major.minor.patch". Then anybody should see that the . is not the decimal dot but simply a dot. (Other languages often do not have that problem, as for example commas are used for the the decimal point and dots are free. But versions still have a dot there). The other point sometimes confusing people in the way dpkg counts are string parts in versions. Here the problem is that usage shifted a bit. In the past adding some text of a version usally meant something like a branch. Like "3.4rev4" "3.1p2" "2.0.2c" or if Xaver Example made some patches and distributes the whole thing "0.10xe1". Now we have release candidates, alpha and bete prereleases, and they should come earlier and not later, so there is the need for some things sorted earlier while other still later, so they need something to distinguish them, where ~ comes in. One could think about something similar for versions as real numbers, but a leading 0 would be too confusing (0.2 would be larger then 0.09 but smaller than 0.19, or one would have to add the zero everywhere causing versions to look different from upstream) Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: md5 sum mismatches and mirror syncs
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.1222 +0100]: > Shouldn't we switch to using/advocating a smarter algorithm like > the one debmirror or anonftpsync use, which is to push new package > files to the archive, then synchronise indices, then delete obsolete > package files? sorry for the lapse, I am taking this to -mirrors. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system an avocado-tone refrigerator would look good on your resume. signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 09:47:33AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.0931 +0100]: > > And another bug: "2a.0" is _lesser_ than "2.0"! This works as > > documented, but is totally against lexicography, expectations and > > common sense. > > I'll shoot anyone who uses such a version number. :) Then I need to invest in body armour. This is how I mark a release when only a minimal change that doesn't warrant to have its version bumped in the regular manner happens. Fortunately, in all the cases so far the letter was placed after the last numeric part, so even with a Debian revision attached the dpkg misdesign would be mitigated as dpkg special-cases the last hyphen. An example of such a scheme: 1.0.6 1.0.6a (a few hours later, with a brown-paper bug fixed) 1.0.7 In another case, I have an auto-versioning where releases are tagged 0.20060811 (epoch-guard.date). If two checkouts happen on the same date, the makefile target will tag the second one 0.20060811a (or b, c, etc). Or, in file names: a proxy I wrote will wrote incoming connections to files named $date.$time.$format.bz2; if two connections come in the same second (a rare case), the latter will be named "2006-08-11.14-07-58a.bz2", proceeding with b, c, aa, ab, zz, aaa and so on. No one uses dpkg --compare-version to sort file names, but in this case, it would break. So, is there anything wrong in any of the three examples I shown above? I would call that a pretty natural scheme. -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
also sprach Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.1339 +0100]: > 1.0.6 > 1.0.6a (a few hours later, with a brown-paper bug fixed) > 1.0.7 This is totally okay in my book as the letter is at the end. :) -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "you know you're a hopeless geek when you misspell 'date' as 'data'" -- branden robinson signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: Status of inetd for etch
* Marco d'Itri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Aug 11, Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why, for the love of Cthulhu, does netbase depend on inetd in the first > > place? Let's see: > Historical reasons. Not good enough. Not even close. > > It would be good to get rid of inetd from the basic install at all. Those > No, it would not. UNIX systems are supposed to have an inetd installed. meh, if the default install has all of the inetd services disabled then it's idiotic to have an inetd installed (and just fucking insane to actually have an inetd *running*). Things which need inetd *should* be required to Depend on it (or some virtual package which provides it). Packages which can run both with and without inetd could 'Suggest' the virtual inetd package. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]
Michael Biebl writes ("dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now
supports ~ in version numbers]"):
> Reading this announcement I thought, great and wanted to start using
> '~', only to discover that dpkg believes that 0.09+0.1.svn > 0.1~svn.
> 1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-)
So you think that 0.09 < 0.1 ? But you also think that 0.10 > 0.1 ?
And you talk about a 0.10 upstream release, which I assume you know
will come after a 0.9 upstream release.
So in your universe
0.09 < 0.1 < 0.9 < 0.10
? Whatever that is, it's not arithmetic :-).
> 2.) Use an epoch.
There is no need for that; you can have ugly version numbers for a bit
until 0.10 does come out. In the meantime
0.09+really+0.1~svn
or whatever.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Squashing Party: Priority queue?
Dear dd's, I just found an invitation for a debian-edu bug squashing party at central Germany [1]. As this is quite a distance from where I live, I probably won't make it myself - but will try to join the team via IRC (#debian-edu). Now I wonder, if there is more folks around who might be joining, and (most important), if we have a list of topmost relevant bugs to fix? These are the ressources I'd go for in the first place: http://bugs.debian.org http://bugs.skolelinux.no http://wiki.debian.org Thanks Rudi [1] http://wiki.skolelinux.de/BugSquashing2006 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug Squashing Party: Priority queue?
Hello Rudi, On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 15:35 +0200, Rudi Effe wrote: > I just found an invitation for a debian-edu bug squashing party at > central Germany [1]. As this is quite a distance from where I live, I > probably won't make it myself - but will try to join the team via IRC > (#debian-edu). Now I wonder, if there is more folks around who might > be joining, and (most important), if we have a list of topmost > relevant bugs to fix? Thanks for your interest in this. You might look at http://bts.turmzimmer.net , which lists all release critical bugs in the current testing and unstable distributions. These are considered to be "topmost relevant" at this time. Good luck! Thijs signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Hi all! Once again, after I reviewed the "outstanding bugs" list, I intended to package the new upstream version of mantis and to fix some bugs, at least those I was able to ;) The files: http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0.diff.gz http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0.dsc http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0_all.deb http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0_i386.changes http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4.orig.tar.gz Please have a look at the files and let me know, if they are OK. kind regards Daniel -- Daniel Knabl aio4u.com/~daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP/GPG Fingerprint - please send signed mail only A069 671B 39F2 E9B9 FB34 68BB 4BEC 1344 C8A4 3F0B signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Hi On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:37:28 +0200 Daniel Knabl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Once again, after I reviewed the "outstanding bugs" list, I intended > to package the new upstream version of mantis and to fix some bugs, > at least those I was able to ;) 0.19.4 is new upstream version? And what happened to your diff? --- mantis-0.19.4.orig/debian/changelog +++ mantis-0.19.4/debian/changelog @@ -1,7 +1,8 @@ -mantis (1.0.5-1) unstable; urgency=medium +mantis (0.19.4-4.0) unstable; urgency=medium -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Am Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:37:28 +0200 schrieb Daniel Knabl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The files: > > http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0.diff.gz > http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0.dsc > http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0_all.deb > http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4-4.0_i386.changes > http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_0.19.4.orig.tar.gz So, I have mixed up something, sorry for that. If it is the right way (for a NMU) then the version should be changed too? In this case there are new files available here: http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_1.0.5-0.1.dsc http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_1.0.5-0.1.tar.gz http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_1.0.5-0.1_all.deb http://knabl.com/~daniel/mantis/mantis_1.0.5-0.1_i386.changes No matter, if I will ever be on the right level, I WILL continue to try making contibutions. Please keep in mind, that I just want to contribute, and I do NOT intend to become the new maintainer for mantis. If there are people around, that can do this work in a better way, then feel free to do so! If my "work" is welcome - as I hope - then I will try to go on with it. If it is NOT, or if it is of too low quality, then just ignore my tries. kind regards Daniel -- Daniel Knabl www.tirolinux.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP/GPG Fingerprint - please send signed mail only A069 671B 39F2 E9B9 FB34 68BB 4BEC 1344 C8A4 3F0B signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Silly Packaging Problem
Bruce Sass a écrit : > I will be so bold as to suggest... > > Synopsis: update-package [options] > > update-package [options] --add-files= > update-package [options] --remove-files= > update-package [options] --size= > update-package [options] --field=:: > > Commands: [...] > Options: > - the usual useful stuff (help, version, verbosity, logging) > - maybe an admin controlled "off" switch, just in case having a local DB > which differs from the packaged one is a problem (implies a config file > somewhere) > - automatic Installed-Size: updating, not always useful or accurate, > maybe best left as a invocation only option because only the Maintainer > knows for sure --confile: add the file as a conffile. I'm not sure about this however. I think that ucf is better for dynamic configuration files. But ucfr should be enhanced to call update-package --add/--remove in this case. Best regards Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
On 10742 March 1977, Joerg Schilling wrote: Reply-To and M-f-T set to my address, whoever answers please respect this and let this thread die on -devel, its the wrong medium for this discussion, thank you. > I am sorry, but I cannot believe that you like to make serious proposal > with the text you wrote. Do you believe anything thats not written by you is serious? > Let me make a proposal that makes sense for now and the future: > 1)Throw out Eduard Bloch. He has been the biggest problem for Debian > in the past years. Find a new maintainer with the following properties: I know that you cant work with him (and he with you). > 2)Update to a recent cdrtools source, do not hide interesting > new features from Debian users and (this may be even more important to > Linux users) workarounds for recent Linux kernel > self-incompatibilities. You combine CDDL and GPL, and that doesnt work, the two are incompatible. The CDDL is intended to be GPL incompatible. If you dont believe that - even people from Sun, like Simon Phipps and Danese Cooper (now working at Intel, but one of the authors of CDDL) are aware of the incompatibility of the two licenses, and Simon and Danese also said at this years Debian Conference that this is intended. (We had both Simon and Danese there, talking with us about different things including the CDDL). They stated that the GPL incompatibility is *part of the design of the CDDL* If you dont believe that please watch [1] (or [2] if you prefer an mpeg over an ogg). Skip to minute 13 if you dont want to hear all of it, as not everything is interesting for this topic here. Then skip to minute 27 as this is is the more interesting part for the incompatibility, where Danese basically says that they built the CDDL following the Mozilla license *because* it is incompatible with the GPL.. [1] http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/theora-small/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.ogg [2] http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/mpeg1-pal/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.mpeg [3] http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/media/bios/bios-phipps.html And if thats not enough, its not only Debian or Sun stating it, its also FSF, which you can read on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html - the relevant text there is: --88--- Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; it has some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL. It requires that all attribution notices be maintained, while the GPL only requires certain types of notices. Also, it terminates in retaliation for certain aggressive uses of patents. So, a module covered by the GPL and a module covered by the CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We urge you not to use the CDDL for this reason. Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term "intellectual property" --8 8--- There is something else non-free, or at least problematic, in your cdrtools tarball, taken from AN-2.01.01a09: Libscg: - Changed from GPL to CDDL This code may only be used together with other code that is under an approved OpenSource license, see http://www.opensource.org/. That's in my understanding at least *very* problematic. And goes against CDDL3.4 which says "You may not offer or impose any terms on any Covered Software in Source Code form that alters or restricts the applicable version of this License or the recipients rights hereunder." (The rest of it talks about "warranty, support, indemnity or liability", which is irrelevant. The thing is that 3.6 allows me to use the CDDL licensed work with anything else I want to do, as long as I "make sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for the Covered Software." So, your added statement makes it incompatible with the license shown *and* also with DFSG 5/6, as I may want to combine it with something commercial, following the license rules for the libscg part but not using an OSI license for my software. Another thing with CDDL is §3.3, which is similar to invariant sections of GFDL and one of the reasons why the FSF considers it GPL incompatible as cited above - and the GFDL is not allowed in Debian with such a restriction. Also the choice-of-venue is a nice cost bomb. > 3)Remove the unneeded Debian changes as the unmodified original source > does not need any changes in order to work correctly. We wouldnt have them if there wouldnt have been a situation where someone needed it. You know, this is what free software is about - the right to change a software if it doesnt work for you. > 4)If someone at Debian likes to work on enhancements, make sure that > these chan
Re: NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Daniel Knabl wrote: > If my "work" is welcome - as I hope - then I will try to go on with > it. If it is NOT, or if it is of too low quality, then just ignore my > tries. The quality is not really a big issue here, it can be improved with time. What I would like to see is some degree of commitment for maintaining mantis in the future, or helping co-maintain it, if the original maintainer comes back. If this is the case, I'd be happy to sponsor your work, but I would first take some time to look at your package, but my availability atm is low, as I am in holidays. I could look at it, maybe on monday, and then work with you until it is ready for upload. In the meantime you might want to look at my sponsoring checklist, taken from other sponsors, at the bottom of my wiki page: http://wiki.debian.org/AmayaRodrigo and maybe fix some common mistakes this weekend. Specially as this is a new upstream release, a thorough look at the licenses and files in the source, making sure there are no files there under a different license, would be great. Check: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2003/12/msg7.html and http://ganneff.de/blog/2005/10/23#new for great insight on this. On the other hand if you are able to find a quicker sponsor in the meantime, just go ahead. I suggest using the debian-mentors mailing list for this. Thanks for giving mantis some love! -- ·''`. Policy is your friend. Trust the Policy. : :' : Love the Policy. Obey the Policy. -- Lars Wirzenius `. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux `- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: udev vs ldap at startup
Brian May a écrit : > So that probably would explain why I can no longer log in as root when > the NSS LDAP server is down, even with LDAP PAM support disabled and > files is listed before ldap in /etc/nsswitch.conf. I run in a similar problem a few days ago. I misconfigured /etc/nsswitch.conf by putting: passwd: ldap compat group: ldap compat shadow: ldap compat Then, I've been unable to start the userspace. I mean, even with 'init=/bin/bash' on the kernel cmdline, it did not work (ie it hung up). It took me some time to find what happened. As this was during an upgrade (from stable), I hadn't any hints about why the init (or the bash init process) was hang up. I suspected a kernel bug before thinking to ldap. I change the /etc/nsswitch.conf to: passwd: compat group: compat shadow: compat and now, it works fine (ldap is handled by pam) But some kind of warning or timeout with error message on the console when ldap was not answering would have been very helpful. Best regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
On 10743 March 1977, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > [1] > http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/theora-small/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.ogg > [2] > http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/mpeg1-pal/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.mpeg Well, thats meetings-archive.debian.net -- bye Joerg There is no point in trying to fix bugs if I won't have an account. Sorry. pgpaS2Oga8fab.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#382531: ITP: furl -- a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned by Web servers
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Marco Bertorello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: furl Version : 2.1 Upstream Author : Kidney Bingos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.gumbynet.org.uk/software/furl.html * License : GPL v2 (or later) Programming Lang: C Description : a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned by Web servers furl is a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned by Web servers in response to client requests . It can impersonate two different browser: Internet Explorer and Mozilla -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-rc4-k7 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: md5 sum mismatches and mirror syncs
Hi! * martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060811 13:22]: > Shouldn't we switch to using/advocating a smarter algorithm like > the one debmirror or anonftpsync use, which is to push new package > files to the archive, then synchronise indices, then delete obsolete > package files? We used something like that for our university mirror, but droped it, when we ran out of diskspace during the syncs: Sometimes we didn't had the space to store the old packages and the new ones coming during syncing at the same time. Yours sincerely, Alexander -- http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#382531: ITP: furl -- a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned by Web servers
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 06:35:42PM +0200, Marco Bertorello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Marco Bertorello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > * Package name: furl > Version : 2.1 > Upstream Author : Kidney Bingos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > * URL : http://www.gumbynet.org.uk/software/furl.html > * License : GPL v2 (or later) > Programming Lang: C > Description : a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned > by Web servers > > furl is a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers > returned by Web servers in response to client requests > . > It can impersonate two different browser: Internet Explorer > and Mozilla Is there a real benefit over lynx -dump -head and similar things ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Hi again, > No matter, if I will ever be on the right level, I WILL continue to > try making contibutions. Please keep in mind, that I just want to > contribute, and I do NOT intend to become the new maintainer for > mantis. If there are people around, that can do this work in a better > way, then feel free to do so! > > If my "work" is welcome - as I hope - then I will try to go on with > it. If it is NOT, or if it is of too low quality, then just ignore my > tries. Thanks to Amaya, now my work is available through the debian mentors website: http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/maintainer-packages?action=details;package=mantis I also tried to fix the todos on the list mentioned by Amaya, furthermore I duilt it again using pbuilder (upgraded to sid, as mentioned on workaround.org). All without errors or warnings. So for now I would appreciate any comments that lead to a good debian package. thanks and kind regards Daniel -- Daniel Knabl www.tirolinux.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP/GPG Fingerprint - please send signed mail only A069 671B 39F2 E9B9 FB34 68BB 4BEC 1344 C8A4 3F0B signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: cdrtools
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10742 March 1977, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Reply-To and M-f-T set to my address, whoever answers please respect > this and let this thread die on -devel, its the wrong medium for this > discussion, thank you. If we did agree on continuing the mail exchange on a private base, there youle be not problem, but unfortunately, you did send some lies in your mail that need to be corrected first > > I am sorry, but I cannot believe that you like to make serious proposal > > with the text you wrote. > > Do you believe anything thats not written by you is serious? This looks confused. If you do not make a serious proposal you cannot expect that people would take you for serious. > > Let me make a proposal that makes sense for now and the future: > > 1) Throw out Eduard Bloch. He has been the biggest problem for Debian > > in the past years. Find a new maintainer with the following properties: > > I know that you cant work with him (and he with you). I am willing and able to cooperate with any reasonable person. Eduard Bloch has absolutely no clue and on the other side implicitely claims in his arrogant habbit that he knows more about cdrtools than I do. This makes it impussoble to cooperate with him. > > 2) Update to a recent cdrtools source, do not hide interesting > > new features from Debian users and (this may be even more important to > > Linux users) workarounds for recent Linux kernel > > self-incompatibilities. > > You combine CDDL and GPL, and that doesnt work, the two are > incompatible. The CDDL is intended to be GPL incompatible. If you > dont believe that - even people from Sun, like Simon Phipps and Danese > Cooper (now working at Intel, but one of the authors of CDDL) are aware > of the incompatibility of the two licenses, and Simon and Danese also > said at this years Debian Conference that this is intended. (We had both > Simon and Danese there, talking with us about different things including > the CDDL). They stated that the GPL incompatibility is *part of the > design of the CDDL* Claiming that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible with the GPL is a deliberate lie. The rest of your claims from above include several other untrue assertions: - You claim wrong authors: the authors of the CDDL are Claire Giordano (a lawyer) and Andy Tucker (the former chief engineer for OpenSolaris). - You claim that Simon Phipps sayd at this Debian Conference that "an incompatibility was intended". This is definitely not true, I did ask him in a private mail and he replied that he did not say more than that he believes that there are some issues. I am sorry, but it easier to believe him than to believe you. - The general claim that "The CDDL is intended to be GPL incompatible." is definitely not true: I had a long private talk (~ 3 hours) with Andy Tucker (in September 2004 at a joint dinner) and I had a 1.5 hour phone call with Claire Giordano and Andy Tucker in December 2004. Since that time I know that Sun had/has no such intention. Andy did tell me that it makes absolutely no sense, trying to forbid that the OpenSolaris code may be used in other OS. The only rules for creating the CDDL have been to allow Sun Solaris to be build on top of OpenSolaris and that the license has a strong copyleft. Also note: the result of the phone call with Claire Giordano and Andy Tucker was that 3 of 4 changes on the CDDL text made in January 2005 have been done on my requests. If Debian people did have issues with the first CDDL draft, they could have done like me. As they did not, it is obvious that Debian peole have no problems with the CDDL. I am not sure who did start spreading the FUD about "intended incompatibility", but many Sun people who definitely know better are willing to answer questions about the CDDL in order to avoid rumors about the CDDL. > And if thats not enough, its not only Debian or Sun stating it, its also > FSF, which you can read on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > - the relevant text there is: > > --88--- > Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) > > This is a free software license which is not a strong copyleft; it has > some complex restrictions that make it incompatible with the GNU GPL. It > requires that all attribution notices be maintained, while the GPL only > requires certain types of notices. Also, it terminates in retaliation > for certain aggressive uses of patents. So, a module covered by the GPL > and a module covered by the CDDL cannot legally be linked together. We > urge you not to use the CDDL for this reason. > > Also unfortunate in the CDDL is its use of the term "intellectual > property" > --8
Re: NMU for mantis - new upstream and some bugfixes
Hi Daniel, I see you made a great job out of mantis. You are so enthusiastic that I could not make you wait. There are still some issues that I want to discuss with you (ie, the changelog should be improved). But let's take this off-list and talk in private. -- ·''`. Policy is your friend. Trust the Policy. : :' : Love the Policy. Obey the Policy. -- Lars Wirzenius `. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux `- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Status of inetd for etch
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > >>> It would be good to get rid of inetd from the basic install at all. Those >> No, it would not. UNIX systems are supposed to have an inetd installed. > > I see no reason why *Debian* systems should have an inetd installed > unless there is another package installed requiring its services. > This can be handled through package dependencies. If the admin wants > to add their own services (i.e. not installed by a dependency), they > can just install it by hand. > > If there is nothing using inetd, it's just bloat in the base install. > > While it's probably best to leave it installed by default for etch, I > think fixing up all inetd-using packages to have proper dependencies, > and then removing the dependency from netbase would be a worthy goal > for etch+1. Just for the record, this is the list of affected packages: afbackup amanda-client amanda-server apt-proxy asp atftpd bidentd biff binkd bitlbee bootp bozohttpd cfingerd csync2 cupsys-bsd cvs cyrus-imapd cyrus-pop3d dbskkd-cdb dhcp efingerd exim fakepop fam ffingerd fingerd firebird2-classic-server fspd ftpd ftpd-ssl gidentd gnats gtalk gwhois heimdal-kdc heimdal-servers heimdal-servers-x hotway ident2 ifcico ipopd isdnvboxserver kerberos4kth-servers kerberos4kth-servers-x kftgtd krb5-ftpd krb5-kdc krb5-rsh-server krb5-telnetd ktalkd leafnode lukemftpd mailutils-comsatd mailutils-imap4d mailutils-pop3d masqmail midentd mooix ndtpd netkit-inetd nntp node noffle nsca nullidentd oftpd oidentd openbsd-inetd p10cfgd pawserv pidentd popa3d poppassd postfix proftpd proftpd-common pure-ftpd-common qpopper qpopper-drac remctl-server remstats-servers rlinetd rsh-redone-server rsh-server rstatd rusersd rwalld samba sendfile sendmail-base sidentd skksearch slidentd smail smtpd sn solid-pop3d sslwrap statd swat talkd teapop teapop-ldap teapop-mysql teapop-pgsql telnetd telnetd-ssl tftpd tftpd-hpa uucp uw-imapd vsftpd wipl-client-inetd wu-ftpd xfingerd xtel xtell zmailer -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `-GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. pgpGWc6RE2f1M.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: cdrtools
On 10743 March 1977, Joerg Schilling wrote: > If we did agree on continuing the mail exchange on a private base, there > youle be not problem, but unfortunately, you did send some lies in your mail > that need to be corrected first Yeah. > Eduard Bloch has absolutely no clue and on the other side implicitely claims > in his arrogant habbit that he knows more about cdrtools than I do. This > makes > it impussoble to cooperate with him. You know that this is "Rufschädigung übelster Art"? > Claiming that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible with the GPL is a deliberate > lie. You should look at the video I pointed you at. You just accused me of being a liar. If i would have your low level I would now do the same you did with a co-maintainer of the Debian cdrtools package and threat with a lawsuit if you dont take it back. I dont. I just add you to my ignore filter and go on. Which means removal of cdrtools from Debian and later readdition of a free fork. > The rest of your claims from above include several other untrue assertions: > - You claim wrong authors: the authors of the CDDL are Claire Giordano (a > lawyer) and Andy Tucker (the former chief engineer for OpenSolaris). Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danese_Cooper *and* look into the video I pointed you at. I even gave you exact times where to look. > - You claim that Simon Phipps sayd at this Debian Conference that > "an incompatibility was intended". This is definitely not true, I did > ask him in a private mail and he replied that he did not say more than > that he believes that there are some issues. > I am sorry, but it easier to believe him than to believe you. Watch the video, the minutes I pointed you at. Danese, who was one of those drafting the CDDL had some very clear words. > Sorry, but I do not believe people that put things into a GPL FAQ that > are obviously wrong. Yeah, you dont believe those people who have written the GPL... > I am willing to have a private discussion in case it would make sense and > will > not be a waste of time. This means that I will immediately stop the > discussion > in case that you e.g. again claim that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible to > the GPL by intention or that you quote the GPL incorrectly in hope to "prove" > claims about the incompatibility of the CDDL and the GPL. As you obviously stay with your opinion and doesnt even consider stuff people sent to you, including video proof, that would be a waste of time. -- bye Joerg Linus: "Wenn Darl McBride die Macht hätte, würde er wahrscheinlich die Ehe als Verletzung der Verfassung auslegen, weil sie ganz klar die kommerzielle Natur der menschlichen Interaktion entwertet und damit ein großes Hindernis für die kommerzielle Entwicklung der Prostitution darstellt." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remove cdrtools
reassign 377109 ftp.debian.org retitle 377109 RM: cdrtools -- RoM: non-free, license problems thanks Hi guys, ok well, as JS stays with an interpretation of CDDL and GPL that the whole world does not follow (all wrong, of course :) ), lets go and fix this. The sane way is to remove cdrtools from Debian main (unstable) and add a free replacement, most possible a fork from the last free version (which had only the CDDL licensed build scripts, which can easily be replaced by some automake thing). If you want to join that effort - contact me. For Debian etch I dont think its a big problem right now, dependencies will stop it from getting removed before we release. -- bye Joerg Some NM: > 3. How do you manage new upstream releases? yes i manage them. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10743 March 1977, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > [1] > > http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/theora-small/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.ogg > > > [2] > > http://debian-meetings.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/mpeg1-pal/2006-05-14/tower/OpenSolaris_Java_and_Debian-Simon_Phipps__Alvaro_Lopez_Ortega.mpeg > > Well, thats meetings-archive.debian.net Nice to see that this video clip verifies my statements in case you carefully listen to Simon Phipps: - Sun did not make the CDDL incompatible by intention to the GPL - The only thing that prevents Linux to use the DTrace code in Linux is the different threading model - Eben Moglen tells you that what I do in cdrtools is OK: "They" the FSF and Moglen have only be in fear that people could interpret the GPL in a wrong way and for this reason added the OS exception, but the GPL does allow to link a GPLd project against libraries under other licenses. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Eduard Bloch has absolutely no clue and on the other side implicitely > > claims > > in his arrogant habbit that he knows more about cdrtools than I do. This > > makes > > it impussoble to cooperate with him. > > You know that this is "Rufschädigung übelster Art"? I am sorry but this is the truth.. > > Claiming that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible with the GPL is a > > deliberate > > lie. > > You should look at the video I pointed you at. You just accused me of > being a liar. If i would have your low level I would now do the same you I did look at this video: it verifies what I say! If you carefully look at the video, you see that Simon is angry with Danese because she does not tell the truth but he does not like to correct her in the public. > did with a co-maintainer of the Debian cdrtools package and threat with > a lawsuit if you dont take it back. I dont. I just add you to my ignore You are lying here again by quoting the lies of the well known troll Eduard Bloch. You are just going to lose your credability if you spread this kind of lies. As I mentioned already many times, I did not do what Eduard claims! [a lot of nonsense deleted] > > Sorry, but I do not believe people that put things into a GPL FAQ that > > are obviously wrong. > > Yeah, you dont believe those people who have written the GPL... I do not believe the people who did write the FSF GPL FAQ, this is different. > > I am willing to have a private discussion in case it would make sense and > > will > > not be a waste of time. This means that I will immediately stop the > > discussion > > in case that you e.g. again claim that Sun did make the CDDL incompatible > > to > > the GPL by intention or that you quote the GPL incorrectly in hope to > > "prove" > > claims about the incompatibility of the CDDL and the GPL. > > As you obviously stay with your opinion and doesnt even consider stuff > people sent to you, including video proof, that would be a waste of time. As I said: I am willing to have an openminded discussion. In case you verify that you are not willng to do the same, this discussiion ends. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
On Friday 11 August 2006 14:48 pm, Joerg Schilling wrote: > The FSF GPL FAQ e.g. incorrectly claims: > > Linking ABC statically or dynamically with other modules is making a > combined work based on ABC. Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU > General Public License cover the whole combination. > > The GPL does not contain the term "combined work", so this is an invalid > claim. > > The GPL rather talks about a "derived work" and simply linking two modules > together does definitely not make module B a "derived work" of module A > if module A calls code from module B but module B does not call code from > module A. Let's put aside for the moment that the FAQ is not meant to be a legal document as opposed to the GPL itself, and that the FAQ is not saying B would be a derived work of A, but rather that the combination would be... I have a general question about how the GPL is construed to cover the case of dynamic linking. According to the GPL, section 0: The act of running the Program is not restricted... And since dynamic linking is done at the time the program is run, this would appear to me to be what applies. In particular, it appears to me that you could satisfy the GPL and still dynamically link against a non-free library, and distribute both, by invoking the "mere aggregation" clause of section 2. (Of course, you would have to be very careful about any inline functions, etc., from the non-free headers...) As a hypothetical example, let's say that program A uses library B, both licensed under the GPL. Now the author of B decides he doesn't want anybody selling B at all, so he releases a newer version under a non-free license, and Debian decides to package the old version of B as B-free and the new version in non-free. Is Debian allowed to keep distributing A, while distributing B-nonfree at the same time, given that some users might not end up installing B-free? Suppose that later B-free is considered old and buggy enough that we refuse to support it, so B-free is removed from the archive. Now does Debian have to stop distributing A as well? Even if by this point nobody actually had B-free installed any more? (I think my answers would be: distributing A with B-free and B-nonfree is permissible, but once B-free went A would have to go as well. Of course, there would also be the solution we already have with B-free = lesstif and B-nonfree = libmotif, but let's say for the sake of argument B's maintainer doesn't take that course, and instead makes libB1-nonfree: Provides: libB1.) On the other hand, since the FSF is the author of the license, and their own FAQ states that they consider dynamic linking to fall under the terms of the license, distributing GPL programs dynamically linked against GPL-incompatible libraries would clearly be exploiting a loophole under any definition of that term that I know of. And exploiting a loophole in the GPL would hardly be a way to endear oneself to the free software community. Thus, I'm hoping that the above is more of an academic question than anything else. In any case, static linking clearly falls under the definition of a "work based on the Program" in section 0, so you cannot e.g. extend GPL'd program A to use non-free library B, then distribute a resulting binary with B statically linked in. (Which is not the same thing as saying this would make B a derived work of A.) -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ITP: subtitleeditor -- Graphical subtitle editor with sound waves representation
In reply to a RFP, and with the idea of creating subtitles for the talks given in Spanish during Debian Day at Debconf6, found at http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2006/debconf6/theora-small/2006-05-13/tower/ I intend to package subtitleeditor. * Package name: subtitleeditor Version : 0.9 Upstream Author : IDJAAD djamel (aka kitone) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://kitone.free.fr/subtitleeditor/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: C++ Description : Graphical subtitle editor with sound waves representation Subtitle Editor is a GTK+2 tool to edit subtitles. It can be used for new subtitles or as a tool to transform, edit, correct and refine existing subtitles. . This program also shows soundwaves which makes it easier for subtitles synchronisation that most other subtitle editors like ksubtile or gaupol. . Author: IDJAAD djamel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Homepage: http://kitone.free.fr/subtitleeditor/ -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (990, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-1-k7 Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=es_ES.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL set to en_US.UTF-8) -- ·''`. Policy is your friend. Trust the Policy. : :' : Love the Policy. Obey the Policy. -- Lars Wirzenius `. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux `- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remove cdrtools
Alle Friday 11 August 2006 22:51, Joerg Jaspert ha scritto: > reassign 377109 ftp.debian.org > retitle 377109 RM: cdrtools -- RoM: non-free, license problems > thanks > > Hi guys, > > ok well, as JS stays with an interpretation of CDDL and GPL that the > whole world does not follow (all wrong, of course :) ), lets go and > fix this. The sane way is to remove cdrtools from Debian main > (unstable) and add a free replacement, most possible a fork from the > last free version (which had only the CDDL licensed build scripts, > which can easily be replaced by some automake thing). If you want to > join that effort - contact me. The fork-team can look at http://www.arklinux.org/projects/dvdrtools, a 100% free fork of cdrtools. The SVN is inactive from 6 month, but the autotool-ization is already done and it can write on DVDs, and probably is better than starting another fork. One interesting thing on this project is that they want to turn important functionality into a shared library for improve the access from the various frontends. Regards, Francesco -- :wq -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Jorg Schilling wrote: [...] > Sorry, but I do not believe people that put things into a GPL FAQ that > are obviously wrong. Let me give a single example to avoid wasting too > much time: > The FSF GPL FAQ e.g. incorrectly claims: > Linking ABC statically or dynamically with other modules is > making a combined work based on ABC. Thus, the terms and > conditions of the GNU General Public License cover the whole > combination. > The GPL does not contain the term "combined work", so this is an > invalid claim. The GPL does, however, contain the term "work based on [the Program]". Calling it a "combined work based on [the Program]" does not change the fact that it is a "work based on [the Program]". The "combined" is merely a clarification on the term. > The GPL rather talks about a "derived work" and simply linking two > modules together does definitely not make module B a "derived work" of > module A if module A calls code from module B but module B does not > call code from module A. No, but the combined work (A+B) (i.e. a binary produced by linking module A with module B) is a "work based on" A, and hence (A+B) must be distributable under the terms of the GPL. Distributing the sources of A with the sources of B may be fine, but Debian would not be legally allowed to distribute a binary produced by linking A with B, since this would not be "mere aggregation". You brought up the question of Cygwin in a previous message, but that is covered by the exception given in the second-last paragraph of section 3. -- Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Silly Packaging Problem
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1647 +0100]: >> How about allowing conffiles to list files that are generated at >> install time and are not included in the deb? > > You can, but then you run up against policy. You are not allowed to > touch a conffile with a script. Policy and dpkg would obviously have to change to that semantic and specificaly allow/recommend that approach. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Silly Packaging Problem
Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu August 10 2006 10:16, martin f krafft wrote: >> also sprach Goswin von Brederlow > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.10.1647 +0100]: >> > How about allowing conffiles to list files that are generated at >> > install time and are not included in the deb? >> >> You can, but then you run up against policy. You are not allowed to >> touch a conffile with a script. > > Is there anything prohibiting an "update-package.list" command? > > Would updating /var/lib/dpkg/info/*.list files without touching the > appropriate Installed-Size: field be OK? > > Is there any way to get a handle on how much more CPU time and HDD space > would be used if all packages updated their meta-info at install time? > > > - Bruce The problem is that dpkg has the list of files internaly while it unpacks new debs and cleans up after old debs. It would most likely overwrite your changed .list file after your maintainer script is done. And if not then the next upgrade would delete those added entries as they are no longer in the deb. Allowing packages to add files to the file listing has do be done is close cooperation with dpkg and aybe use a seperate meta file. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, but the combined work (A+B) (i.e. a binary produced by linking > module A with module B) is a "work based on" A, and hence (A+B) must be > distributable under the terms of the GPL. > > Distributing the sources of A with the sources of B may be fine, but > Debian would not be legally allowed to distribute a binary produced by > linking A with B, since this would not be "mere aggregation". If you try to again post claims that have already proven to be wrong, I see no reason to continue this "discussion", it only wastes time... The GPL is a source license. The fact that you are thinking about the "license for a binary" verifies that you did not understand the GPL. The GPL only restricts things (and requires the whole work to be put under GPL) in case you try to put other peoples GPLd work _into_ your your work and create a work based on the other code. This is obviously not true for the case I am talking of. Again: if you continue to bend my statements I get the impression that you are not interested in a real discussion but in stealing my time. I did never claim that any possible combination of CDDL & GPL code is permitted. The combination I am using however is OK for me _and_ for binary redistributors. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proposal: searchable d.o/security/
Hi, today I searched for a specific DSA and its really pain if you just know the package but no DSA number (correct me if I missed something). What about a search field on [0] to search the DSA database for past DSAs against a package? The regular search on d.o is not able to find DSAs. Kind regards Nico [0] http://www.debian.org/security/ -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://nion.modprobe.de/blog/ Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons - gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys! pgpHNahRClql2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposal: searchable d.o/security/
also sprach Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.2302 +0100]: > today I searched for a specific DSA and its really pain if > you just know the package but no DSA number (correct me if I missed > something). http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=dsa123+debian&btnG=Search -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "the public is wonderfully tolerant. it forgives everything except genius." -- oscar wilde signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
GPL question [Was: Re: cdrtools]
Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Let's put aside for the moment that the FAQ is not meant to be a legal > document as opposed to the GPL itself, and that the FAQ is not saying B would > be a derived work of A, but rather that the combination would be... > > I have a general question about how the GPL is construed to cover the case of > dynamic linking. According to the GPL, section 0: > > The act of running the Program is not restricted... > > And since dynamic linking is done at the time the program is run, this would > appear to me to be what applies. In particular, it appears to me that you > could satisfy the GPL and still dynamically link against a non-free library, > and distribute both, by invoking the "mere aggregation" clause of section 2. > (Of course, you would have to be very careful about any inline functions, > etc., from the non-free headers...) I believe that the totaly interchangable option of specifying "-static" or not should not change the free-ness of the source or resulting binary. So if you link static and you agree that it is a violation that way then you should not be able to get away with it by linking dynamically. The GPL is viral in nature and specificaly made to work across linking boundaries. People should not be able to add non-free portitons to the source by hiding them in libraries. My 2c, Goswin PS: For proof or disproof ask a lawyer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>> * Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
>>
>> > that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I
>> > think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to
>> > 0.9 will be considered < 0.09+0.1.
>>
>> 0.09 = 0.9 means:
>>
>> 0 == 0
>> and
>> . == .
>> and
>> 09 == 9
>>
>> Which is pretty standard math. ;-)
>>
> Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
> right of the decimal, making the zero significant. I think you will be
> hard pressed to find a mathematician who supports dropping significant
> zeros for no good reason.
>
> -Roberto
Well, lets go math (well, not totaly formal :):
Debian version 0.09 == 0:0.09 == {(0, "", 0), (1, "", 0), (2, ".", 09)}
Debian version 0.1 == 0:0.1 == {(0, "", 0), (1, "", 0), (2, ".", 1)}
Where two triplets of (id, s, n) are comparable for id1 == id2 and then s1
is compared to s2 first and only then n1 to n2.
Sets of those tripplets are compared by order of id comparing triplets
with matching ids and the first non-matching triplet decides the
order.
This confirms that 0.09 >> 0.1.
MfG
Goswin
PS: ~ was ignored for simplicity.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: md5 sum mismatches and mirror syncs
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Failed to fetch > http://ftp.ie.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz > MD5Sum mismatch > > I am seeing a lot of this stuff lately, and I've been told it's due > to mirror syncs. As our archive grows bigger, the sync takes longer, > so this problem will happen more often in the future. > > I wonder why. To me it seems as if a sync is a blind rsync, which > copies the Release index before the individual Packages/Source > indices. > > Shouldn't we switch to using/advocating a smarter algorithm like > the one debmirror or anonftpsync use, which is to push new package > files to the archive, then synchronise indices, then delete obsolete > package files? > > Or is this already in place? Why then do we see errors like the > above? The algorithm used is 2pass. First pass only mirrors pool while the second pass mirrors the Release and Packages files. The time a mirror is out of sync should always be limited to the time it takes to download the Packages file after the Release file. All the index files are done in one chunk file to file. A matter of minutes at most. For details please read the recommended mirror scripts provided by debian. I think the problems seen way too often come from rsync failing every now and then leaving a partialy updated mirror. I've seen that happen several times but never reproducible. MfG Goswin PS: All mirror admins and Debians default scripts should add the "--delay-updates" option from rsync to cut down the out-of-sync time to near nothing. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remove cdrtools
Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > reassign 377109 ftp.debian.org > retitle 377109 RM: cdrtools -- RoM: non-free, license problems > thanks > > Hi guys, > > ok well, as JS stays with an interpretation of CDDL and GPL that the > whole world does not follow (all wrong, of course :) ), lets go and fix > this. The sane way is to remove cdrtools from Debian main (unstable) and > add a free replacement, most possible a fork from the last free version > (which had only the CDDL licensed build scripts, which can easily be > replaced by some automake thing). If you want to join that effort - > contact me. > > For Debian etch I dont think its a big problem right now, dependencies > will stop it from getting removed before we release. For those that didn't see it on irc there is also a replacement for cdrecord called cdrskin based on the JS free libburn. The BIG problem with it is that it can only burn data CDs in disk-at-once mode. No TAO or audio capabilities. For anyone intrested Eduart Block and some others have packaged it in the last 24h: svn.debian.org/svn/collab-maint/deb-maint/cdrskin/trunk I know it is far from being a full replacement but good enough to e.g. burn Debian CDs. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITP: subtitleeditor -- Graphical subtitle editor with sound waves representation
Amaya Rodrigo Sastre wrote: > This program also shows soundwaves which makes it easier for > subtitles synchronisation that most other subtitle editors like > ksubtile or gaupol. So, now that I read this aloud, is it "that" or "than" here? Nah, the description should definitely be improved. Preliminary work can be found at http://www.amayita.com/debian/subtitleeditor but don't expect an upload until next week. BTW, Co-maintainers are most welcome! -- ·''`. Policy is your friend. Trust the Policy. : :' : Love the Policy. Obey the Policy. -- Lars Wirzenius `. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux `- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
You did write: ... >I have a general question about how the GPL is construed to cover the case of >dynamic linking. According to the GPL, section 0: ... I am sory to see that you did remove me from the Cc: list you are the first person at Debian who starts to think the right way... If you read the GPL again, you will find out that the GPL doeas not contein the term "linking". It is obvious that there is no difference between static and dynamic linking in terms of the GPL. So everything that is possible with dynamic linking is also possible with static linking. Linking a GPLd program against a non-GPLd library does not make the library a derived work of the GPLd program. You may either call this "mere aggregation" or in the worst case call the GPLd program a derived work of the library but not vice versa. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 23:55 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Linking a GPLd program against a non-GPLd library does not make the library a > derived work of the GPLd program. but it does mean you may distribute the resulting binary only if you make the library source available under the GPL, and if the library's license does not allow this then you may not distribute the binary -- Edward Allcutt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: md5 sum mismatches and mirror syncs
also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.2326 +0100]: > The algorithm used is 2pass. First pass only mirrors pool while the > second pass mirrors the Release and Packages files. The time a mirror > is out of sync should always be limited to the time it takes to > download the Packages file after the Release file. All the index files > are done in one chunk file to file. A matter of minutes at most. Or almost 10 hours as was the case today. So if rsync dies, maybe this is the problem to fix? Is it? -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" -- isaac asimov signature.asc Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
Re: Proposal: searchable d.o/security/
Hi, * martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-08-12 00:50]: > also sprach Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.08.11.2302 +0100]: > > today I searched for a specific DSA and its really pain if > > you just know the package but no DSA number (correct me if I missed > > something). > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=dsa123+debian&btnG=Search Yeah you got links to external sites, anything bad to have them usable on debian.org itself? Regards Nico -- Nico Golde - JAB: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GPG: 0x73647CFF http://www.ngolde.de | http://nion.modprobe.de/blog/ Forget about that mouse with 3/4/5 buttons - gimme a keyboard with 103/104/105 keys! pgpuQ1SOCH5V1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the > right of the decimal, making the zero significant. A '.' character in a version string isn't a decimal point. The prevalence of versions strings containing more than one '.' character should make this abundantly clear. -- \"The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must | `\ not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true." | _o__) -- Albert Einstein | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Hi, On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 07:04:51PM -0400, Edward Allcutt wrote: > On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 23:55 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: Your discussion is off-topic for debian-devel, please kindly take it elsewhere. Thanks, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 23:25:52 +0200, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> No, but the combined work (A+B) (i.e. a binary produced by linking
>> module A with module B) is a "work based on" A, and hence (A+B) must
>> be distributable under the terms of the GPL.
>>
>> Distributing the sources of A with the sources of B may be fine, but
>> Debian would not be legally allowed to distribute a binary produced
>> by linking A with B, since this would not be "mere aggregation".
> If you try to again post claims that have already proven to be wrong,
> I see no reason to continue this "discussion", it only wastes time...
> The GPL is a source license. The fact that you are thinking about the
> "license for a binary" verifies that you did not understand the GPL.
The GPL (section 3) does restrict distributions of binaries ("object
code or executable form", to use the words of the GPL, to be more
accurate, since the GPL only uses the term "binary" once, and only to
refer to a completely different issue) and states that such binaries
must be distributed under the terms of sections 1 and 2 (which seem to
be the important parts of the GPL as far as Debian is concerned).
Section 2b also then states that anything "... derived from the Program
..." must be licensed under the terms of the GPL, and I can't see how a
binary is not "derived from the Program".
The only place in the GPL that restricts its terms to applying to
sources is section 1, which refers to "verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it".
The GPL is a source license in the sense that it does not make sense to
apply it only to a binary, due to section 3. But that does not mean
that its terms do not apply to binaries as well.
[...]
> I did never claim that any possible combination of CDDL & GPL code is
> permitted. ...
Understood. I think that we all agree that, say, taking code licensed
under the CDDL and linking it to a GPLed library is not allowed. (And
we all agree that that is not the situation that we're talking about.)
--
Hubert Chan - email & Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA (Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GPL question [Was: Re: cdrtools]
On Friday 11 August 2006 18:10 pm, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > I believe that the totaly interchangable option of specifying > "-static" or not should not change the free-ness of the source or > resulting binary. So if you link static and you agree that it is a > violation that way then you should not be able to get away with it by > linking dynamically. > > The GPL is viral in nature and specificaly made to work across linking > boundaries. People should not be able to add non-free portitons to the > source by hiding them in libraries. I agree, but then "should" and "is" sometimes disagree. But after thinking about it some more, I believe a dynamically linked binary together with the corresponding shared libraries should be considered as a distribution method for the complete program that gets assembled in a common address space. Consider for example the case of EvilCo, back before dynamic linking was widespread, trying to use a GPL'd library in their non-free program. They try to get around the GPL by distributing their compiled program code in a single .o file in a "mere aggregate" along with the GPL library .a file, and ask users to link the program themselves. This is obviously bogus; they've just created an alternate means of distribution of the resulting binary, and so the binary itself must be distributable under the terms of the GPL, which it isn't. And the case of a dynamically linked executable with shared libraries is almost exactly the same as this scenario, only it's the system dynamic linker doing the work instead of the user doing it manually. Anyway, as somebody else pointed out, this is off-topic for debian-devel, and I apologize. Please direct any replies to debian-legal (too bad kmail doesn't let me set Followup-To afaik). -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Use of generic init script names
> "Roberto" == Roberto C Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Roberto> However, the cyrus init script is called Roberto> /etc/init.d/cyrus21, the courier init script is Roberto> /etc/init.d/courier-imap and the dovecot init script is Roberto> /etc/init.d/dovecot. It would seem to me that if these Roberto> packages are going to claim to provide some sort of Roberto> common server (imap-server in this case), that the Roberto> ability and method to start and stop the service should Roberto> be part of the commonality. All of those packages should Roberto> really provide an init script by the same name (as they Roberto> all conflict with each other anyways). I disagree - we should be moving to avoid conflicts where ever possible. There are numerous reasons why you might want several different imap servers installed simultaneously: * you have different services listening on different IP addresses and/or ports. * you are upgrading from one service to the other, and want both installed in case one fails and you have to revert. * you want to experiment with several servers at the same time and find out which one best fits your needs. etc. The reason we have them conflicting is because so far we have no management system to prevent contention of shared resources, such as TCP ports, etc. Also, last I heard, things get very messy if two or more packages install the same conffile or configuration file, even if the packages conflict (consider the purge operation - the maintainer scripts - will delete the file even if another packing is using it). -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: centralized bzr (Re: Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools)
> "Robert" == Robert Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Robert> On Sun, 2006-08-06 at 12:01 +1000, Brian May wrote: >> Curiously though, the problems continue even after the archive >> appears to be converted successfully - if I do a diff >> operation, it reports all files as deleted, but if I try to >> revert it, it slows to a grinding halt. Robert> Could you please run 'bzr upgrade' while using bzr Robert> 0.9rc1. If my guess at your situation is right this will Robert> take a while to run, but correct your performance issues. Are there any Debian packages of 0.9rc1 available? -- Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: centralized bzr (Re: Successful and unsuccessful Debian development tools)
la, 2006-08-12 kello 15:59 +1000, Brian May kirjoitti: > Are there any Debian packages of 0.9rc1 available? http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/bzr says 0.9~rc1-1. (Lookup time: about ten seconds. :) -- On a clear disk, you seek forever. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrtools
Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > According to the GPL, section 0: > > The act of running the Program is not restricted... > > And since dynamic linking is done at the time the program is run, this would > appear to me to be what applies. In particular, it appears to me that you > could satisfy the GPL and still dynamically link against a non-free library, > and distribute both, by invoking the "mere aggregation" clause of section 2. This does not mean that anything that happens when you run the program is not restricted. For example, the act of running GNU cp and sed is not restricted, but that cann't possibly mean that the GPL gives you carte blanche to go ahead and violate the GPL through use of cp and sed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
