Re: Fwd: FC6 downloads and installs
Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 07:06:33AM +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote: >> Hi, >> Could we have something like this after release: > [...tracking unique IP addresses that connect to Fedora mirrors...] > > Doing it that way (checking for people running 'apt-get update' or > similar) isn't going to be possible for Debian, since we don't have > access to the logs on all our mirrors (and getting that access would be > /very/ hard to do, since it would require our mirrors to give out that > data). > > However, etch will install popcon by default, which also tracks unique > submitters. While this will be voluntary (people can decline to install > popcon fairly easily), it will give us a fair approximation of the > number of our users (at the very least, it will give the lower margin). > Redhat suffered badly with bandwidth with FC. And they coudnt track bittorent numbers like that either. In any case, the popcon package should produce some very interesting results (as well as flame wars, i.e. gnome cs kde etc) Anton -- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]home: 02380 557 995 mobile: 07900 951 627 work: 01962 816 557 blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly
2009/9/19 Sven Joachim :
> On 2009-09-19 21:18 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
>
>> Note that transitional packages are seamless for users. When users has
>> foo in $stable, and foo gets renamed into bar in $stable +1, then there
>> is that:
>>
>> $stable: package foo
>> $stable + 1: foo Depends bar, bar {replaces foo, provides foo, conflicts foo}
>> $stable + 2: foo is dropped, replaces/provides/conflicts foo in bar can be
>> dropped.
>>
>> After user has upgraded from $stable to $stable + 1, he doesn't have
>> 'foo' anymore.
>>
>> There is one point in having the transitional package: it ensures that
>> no package does try to take "foo" as a package name in $stable + 1 which
>> would then in turn confuse apt.
>>
>> That is the state of the art. Could you please elaborate where and why
>> this field would help ?
>
> It would help frontends to transition the "Automatically installed"
> status from bar to foo. Currently in this situation bar is marked as
> automatic as it's a dependency of foo, and you need to do e.g.
> "aptitude unmarkauto bar; aptitude markauto foo" so that
>
> - removing foo does not accidentally remove bar as well;
> - foo gets away as soon as it's no longer needed.
>
> This should really be done by the package management, not by the user.
It sounds like you are describing the following:
>> $stable: package foo
manually installed
>> $stable + 1: foo Depends bar, bar {replaces foo, provides foo, conflicts foo}
foo should now be marked as removeable, bar should be marked as
manually installed (i.e. take the state associated with foo)
Can any of that be achieved with postinst scripts?
Anton
--
Anton Piatek
email: an...@piatek.co.uk
blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com
pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://www.strangeparty.com/anton.asc)
fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a
significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Transitional (dummy) packages considered silly
2009/9/19 Eugene V. Lyubimkin :
> Anton Piatek wrote:
>>> This should really be done by the package management, not by the user.
>>
>> It sounds like you are describing the following:
>>>> $stable: package foo
>> manually installed
>>>> $stable + 1: foo Depends bar, bar {replaces foo, provides foo, conflicts
>>>> foo}
>> foo should now be marked as removeable, bar should be marked as
>> manually installed (i.e. take the state associated with foo)
>>
>> Can any of that be achieved with postinst scripts?
> That's a very bad idea IMO.
Care to elaborate?
Anton
--
Anton Piatek
email: an...@piatek.co.uk
blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com
pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://www.strangeparty.com/anton.asc)
fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a
significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
dh_installman problems
Hi, I am trying to teach myself to package up a program for debian, but can't get the manpage I have written to work properly. It has the line '.TH CAJUN 1 "June 10, 2007"' near the top of the file and is named cajun.1 in the debian dir inside the src package dir. dh_installman seems to ignore the file and not install it in the build. What am I missing? does dh_installman need an argument? I thought it searched the debian dir for files that have the .TH line and installs them. Anton -- Anton Piatek email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF pgpKk26xgCYp2.pgp Description: PGP signature
hot to build i386 on amd64 using pbuilder?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I am trying to get this working... I have created my chroot image as an i386 image dpkg-architecture returns DEB_BUILD_ARCH=i386 DEB_BUILD_ARCH_OS=linux DEB_BUILD_ARCH_CPU=i386 DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU=i486 DEB_BUILD_GNU_SYSTEM=linux-gnu DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE=i486-linux-gnu DEB_HOST_ARCH=i386 DEB_HOST_ARCH_OS=linux DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU=i386 DEB_HOST_GNU_CPU=i486 DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM=linux-gnu DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE=i486-linux-gnu So that looks ok. If I call pbuilder with linux32, the uname -m returns i686 Yet when building my packages, pbuilder dies with dh_installdirs: dpkg-architecture failed Am I missing something? Anton - -- Anton Piatek email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://firegpg.tuxfamily.org iD8DBQFHjxs4WG/uFE1FAgwRArc8AJwKsp6ZMgfkRcrN8xgydCxTbh8dwgCeI0Qp 2bfLXU+E1uYJIBm0RmMKdKs= =PFto -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hot to build i386 on amd64 using pbuilder?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thanks, Works on one machine, but not on another I have noticed another error in the logs, there are permission errors on /dev/null Logging into the chroot reveals /dev/null is 644, not 666 as I would expect. How can I fix the permissions of /dev/null under the chroot? Are my problems likely to be cause by the fact that my machine is running as a vserver? Anton On 17/01/2008, Fathi Boudra wrote: > see attached helper scripts base on scripts provided with pbuilder. > > cheers, > > Fathi > > > - -- Anton Piatek email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: http://firegpg.tuxfamily.org iD8DBQFHj1eXWG/uFE1FAgwRAgHdAKCMHpj5YtOecS9lI+OWTJnbtbEjlQCfQvLK +VqLRACgNPnqCtfuquO9bXc= =6UuO -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hot to build i386 on amd64 using pbuilder?
On 17/01/2008, Anton Piatek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have noticed another error in the logs, there are permission errors > on /dev/null > Logging into the chroot reveals /dev/null is 644, not 666 as I would expect. > > How can I fix the permissions of /dev/null under the chroot? > > Are my problems likely to be cause by the fact that my machine is > running as a vserver? Actually /dev/null is not even a character device inside the chroot: # ls -l /dev/null -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Jan 17 14:00 /dev/null Outside the chroot it is fine - I sounds like I have a problem with a chroot/pbuilder image inside a vserver image (it works fine outside the vserver image) Any ideas? Anton -- Anton Piatek email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hot to build i386 on amd64 using pbuilder?
Where is that set? inside the tgz? Theres no fstab inside, and I cant see any options in the pbuilder config. Anton On 17/01/2008, Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anton Piatek wrote: > > Thanks, > > Works on one machine, but not on another > > > > I have noticed another error in the logs, there are permission errors > > on /dev/null > > Logging into the chroot reveals /dev/null is 644, not 666 as I would expect. > > You might want to mount devpts in the chroot. > > Cheers > > Luk > -- Anton Piatek email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog/photos:http://www.strangeparty.com pgp: [0xB307BAEF] (http://tastycake.net/~anton/anton.asc) fingerprint: 116A 5F01 1E5F 1ADE 78C6 EDB3 B9B6 E622 B307 BAEF No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
