Re: Is there still a point in installing libgcrypt to /lib instead of /usr/lib
* Ansgar: > On Wed, 2020-02-19 at 09:39 +, Simon McVittie wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 09:31:51 +, Simon McVittie wrote: >> > I agree that what Guillem is proposing also does not have the property, >> > which I think is one that is important to you?, that the contents of the >> > root directory are decoupled from /usr (can be set up by an initramfs >> > or a container-runner, perhaps in a tmpfs, without detailed knowledge >> > of the OS installation in /usr). >> >> Or perhaps Guillem is intending that in n years' time, when no package >> in Debian (not even libc6!) ships files in /bin /sbin /lib* in its >> data.tar.*, *then* the maintainer-script-maintained symlink farms in /bin >> /sbin /lib* can be replaced by symlinks bin -> usr/bin, etc., without >> this resulting in anything dpkg-managed being overwritten or aliased? >> >> If that's the case, then we get that desirable property *eventually* under >> this proposal, but not any time soon. > > As far as I know the path `/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2` is part of the > ABI (and similar paths on other architectures). So that will have to > exist unless we break the ABI. Therefore I assume this is unlikely to > happen. It doesn't have to be written to the file system under that name. The only thing that is required is that the kernel can open the dynamic linker under the ABI-mandated pathname.
Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
I'm not receiving messages concerning bugs for most of the packages I maintain. Most of my packages are team-maintained, so my email appears only as the Uploader, not the Maintainer. I am beginning to suspect this is the cause of missing emails. Is it? Is there a global method to inform bts to send me email even when only an uploader? Thanks, -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:15:28AM -0600, Steven Robbins wrote: > Most of my packages are team-maintained, so my email appears only > as the Uploader, not the Maintainer. I am beginning to suspect this is the > cause of missing emails. Is it? Yes, nothing mails Uploaders. > Is there a global method to inform bts to > send me email even when only an uploader? Either you subscribe to the ML that is used as Maintainer, or you subscribed through the PTS. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Saturday, February 22, 2020 10:15:28 A.M. CST Steven Robbins wrote: > I'm not receiving messages concerning bugs for most of the packages I > maintain. Most of my packages are team-maintained, so my email appears only > as the Uploader, not the Maintainer. I am beginning to suspect this is > the cause of missing emails. Is it? Is there a global method to inform > bts to send me email even when only an uploader? Thanks to Mattia for confirming my suspicions. Neither of the two options presented, however, are appealing to me. 1. Subscribe to the Maintainer ML would produce an enormous amount of spam. The maintainer is Debian-Science, which is listed in 790 packages, of which I care about maybe 10. 2. Subscribe through the PTS requires manual work for a few dozen packages and remembering to sub/unsub each time I add/drop a package. I would prefer, instead, to suggest a mechanism to email uploaders. Would that be best suggested to the bts software or the pts software? Thanks, -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 12:35:14PM -0600, Steven Robbins wrote: > 1. Subscribe to the Maintainer ML would produce an enormous amount of spam. > The maintainer is Debian-Science, which is listed in 790 packages, of which I > care about maybe 10. You could do that coupled with some mail filtering locally, checking for X-Debian-Package: foobar X-Debian-PR-Package: foobar but you'd still need to maintain that thing. > I would prefer, instead, to suggest a mechanism to email uploaders. Would > that be best suggested to the bts software or the pts software? the bts is really "dumb" in this regards. For sure it's not saving the content of the Uploader fields anywhere. IMHO, if anything, this would need to be a pts extension of sorts. Or you could script that: the pts also has a mail interface to handle package subscription: you can do something that automatically send the proper control mails whenever you start/stop co-maintaining a package. Honestly though, I don't think going and clicking "subscribe" in a "few dozens" package pages is too much. On that note: remember that you should also remember to subscribe to the salsa repositories to receive MR notifications... (this is a totally unsolved problem still). Fortunately Myon extended the DDPO to show pending MRs... -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 12:35:14PM -0600, Steven Robbins wrote: > On Saturday, February 22, 2020 10:15:28 A.M. CST Steven Robbins wrote: > > I'm not receiving messages concerning bugs for most of the packages I > > maintain. Most of my packages are team-maintained, so my email appears only > > as the Uploader, not the Maintainer. I am beginning to suspect this is > > the cause of missing emails. Is it? Is there a global method to inform > > bts to send me email even when only an uploader? > > Thanks to Mattia for confirming my suspicions. Neither of the two options > presented, however, are appealing to me. > > 1. Subscribe to the Maintainer ML would produce an enormous amount of spam. > The maintainer is Debian-Science, which is listed in 790 packages, of which I > care about maybe 10. And you have a nice way to mark those: you list yourself as an Uploader. Ie, I fully agree with your initial post. > 2. Subscribe through the PTS requires manual work for a few dozen packages > and > remembering to sub/unsub each time I add/drop a package. And we forgot this in almost all cases (speaking from my own experience). > I would prefer, instead, to suggest a mechanism to email uploaders. Would > that be best suggested to the bts software or the pts software? I'd say there's no need to complicate things by providing and opt-in/opt-out. If you don't care about a package's bug mail, keeping yourself as an Uploader serves merely to stack your package list. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Remember, the S in "IoT" stands for Security, while P stands ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ for Privacy. ⠈⠳⣄
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:40:56PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Honestly though, I don't think going and clicking "subscribe" in a "few > dozens" package pages is too much. That'd be acceptable if you could do so all at one time. But most of us don't gain a package more often than once per a few weeks on the average -- so that's another thing to remember to do. > On that note: remember that you should also remember to subscribe to the > salsa repositories to receive MR notifications... For me, that's the main reason to not use Salsa. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ According to recent spams, "all my email accounts are owned ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ by a hacker". So what's the problem? ⠈⠳⣄
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
Quoting Adam Borowski (2020-02-23 01:25:07) > On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 10:40:56PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > Honestly though, I don't think going and clicking "subscribe" in a "few > > dozens" package pages is too much. > > That'd be acceptable if you could do so all at one time. But most of us > don't gain a package more often than once per a few weeks on the average > -- so that's another thing to remember to do. > > > On that note: remember that you should also remember to subscribe to the > > salsa repositories to receive MR notifications... > > For me, that's the main reason to not use Salsa. For me, that's a reason to disable MRs on salsa: I greatly appreciate that Debian offers git hosting, but I dislike how it comes with a slew of new communication channels enabled by default (issue tracker, MRs, code comments). Forthunately those can be disabled. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: Bug email to Maintainer, not Uploader?
On Sat, 2020-02-22 at 22:40 +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Honestly though, I don't think going and clicking "subscribe" in a "few > dozens" package pages is too much. It looks like we have a pts-subscribe command in devscripts these days, so it can also be scripted. (I've never used it, just spotted the reference from bts(1) when I went to check if it supported this sort of thing). Ian.
