Re: Bug#932957: Please migrate Release Notes to reStructuredText

2023-05-21 Thread Holger Wansing
[[ Replying to two mails in one ]]


Hi,

Holger Wansing  wrote (Sat, 20 May 2023 23:26:47 +0200):
> James Addison  wrote (Fri, 19 May 2023 23:28:55 +0100):
> > > Please note the &oldreleasename; in the URL!
> > > I could not get this working with sphinx (if someone knows better, please
> > > contact me!)
> > 
> > Could the 'extlinks' feature[1] of Sphinx be helpful to migrate those?
> 
> Yes, thanks for the pointer! I used that now to get the manpage links fixed!
> 
> > (it allows defining URL pattern aliases, so for example :oldreleasenotes: 
> > could
> > map to https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/releasenotes and 
> > :releasenotes:
> > could map to https://www.debian.org/releases/bookworm/releasenotes for D12)
> > 
> > Parameters are supported too, and that could be useful for 
> > package-or-filepath
> > refs (re: grep -r '`.*<' source |grep -o '' | sort | uniq -c |sort 
> > -n)
> 
> The drawback is, it is not as flexible as the entities in docbook.
> For example, there is the following URL in this manual in docbook:
> 
> &url-debian-mirror-eg;/debian/dists/&releasename;/main/binary-&architecture;/...
> 
> You see, there are three entites in this URL!
> This seems to be not supported by extlinks :-((

I focused a bit too much on the URL front here.
There is also a problem using entities (or now called substitutions) in 
quoted lines like

deb https://deb.debian.org/debian RELEASENAME main contrib

or

# script -t 2>~/upgrade-RELEASENAMEstep.time -a 
~/upgrade-RELEASENAMEstep.script

These also do not work.
That's the biggest blocker in the upgrading chapter IMHO.


> > > Beside this, I need help to adapt the buildchain, to get the possibility 
> > > of
> > > building the release-notes for the different architectures.
> > > I have no python knowledge, so I will most likely not get this running 
> > > myself.
> > 
> > I'll try to take a look into that soon to see what I can find out.  Do you
> > know how the current docbook-based build varies by architecture?
> 
> There are some chapters, which are only visible for specific architectures, 
> like
> in installing.dbk:
> 
>   
> Cloud installations
> 
>   The cloud team publishes
>   Debian &releasename; for several popular cloud computing services
>   including:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps we can borrow some build scripting from developers-reference and/or
> > debian-policy.. but I suppose those don't have per-architecture output.
> 
> I think so, yes. That will be of no help, I fear...
> 
> > > And the last point is the integration into the debhelper tools: I don't 
> > > know
> > > if it is required, to have the release-notes fit for building as a whole
> > > package with sbuild or debuild or similar. Salsa tries to build it via CI
> > > at every push, but currently fails.
> > 
> > It's possible I've misunderstood, but would be the goals here to be to get
> > the release-notes documentation built by CI, and also for it to be 
> > distributed
> > as a Debian package itself?
> > 
> > (someone who knows more may correct me, but I think it would be great to 
> > have
> > the package available for install using apt in addition to the website)
> 
> That was my first thought as well, yes.





Hi,

Holger Wansing  wrote (Sat, 20 May 2023 23:10:59 +0200):
> Hi,
> 
> Richard Lewis  wrote (Fri, 19 May 2023 
> 00:58:26 +0100):
> > On Thu, 18 May 2023 22:39:11 +0200 Holger Wansing  
> > wrote:
> > Unfortunately, my first impression is that it the output has quite a
> > few issues which make it a lot harder to read than
> > the docbook version - which im sure is because it's still only a
> > prototype, but thought it might helpful to list the things that jumped
> > out at me:
> > - It is a lot more cluttered than the docbook version - it feels
> > off-putting and dense to read
> > - it's all a bit 'blue' - i'd suggest red is more on-brand for debian
> > - the "next"/"prev" links at the bottom-right are white on green  ---
> > I totally missed at first, and found hard to read
> 
> I copied style and font settings from developers-reference, another
> document, which has been migrated recently from docbook to sphinx.
> So I consider this as a quasi-standard at the moment.
> I copied it by intent, to get a consistent look for all manuals generated
> with sphinx.
> We can work on that later on, as Laura already pointed out there is even
> a bugreport for this.
> So will ignore this for now here.
> 
> > - i was a bit confused by the "12.1" version number at the bottom of
> > every page, and having 'sphinx' reminded me of websites with "hosted
> > by geocities"
> 
> The first version I built with sphinx had version displayed
> "release-notes 5.0.1" which confused me even more.
> Therefore I changed that in the sense of "release-notes version 12 for
> Debian release 12". Can still be changed in any way...
> 
> > - are the red hyphens in eg the 'deb...' line near the top of
> > https://people.debian.org/~holgerw/releas

Re: Using i386 by mistake on 64-bit hardware [was Re: i386 in the future 32-bit archs: a proposal)]

2023-05-21 Thread Stephen Kitt
On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:14:52 +0200, Adam Borowski  wrote:
> On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 09:15:00AM +0200, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > How easily could we add 64-bit system detection to the i386 installer,
> > and a message saying something like:
> > 
> > "You're installing the i386 architecture on a 64-bit system. While this
> > will work, this is the last release it'll be supported. We recommend
> > installing the 64-bit amd64 architecture instead.  
> 
> This is not a valid use for i386.  Running the i386 kernel on _modern_
> hardware is insecure, slower (esp. if you have a non-tiny amount of
> memory), etc.  We should put a big fat warnings for _that_.

And future modern hardware is likely to make it impossible:
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/envisioning-future-simplified-architecture.html
which means it will become increasingly difficult to reliably test i386
kernels on sensible hardware; not on a timescale relevant for Trixie, but
still, worth bearing in mind. VMs and/or emulation will end up being the only
possible ways of running legacy software on modern hardware.

Regards,

Stephen


pgpBMXYacDGJr.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature