059 kB]
>
> I've cherry-picked this locally, and it works with git 2.47 (trixie) and
> 2.49 (sid)/
>
> Phil, I've prepared an NMU at
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/os-autoinst/-/merge_requests/6
Great, thanks.
I should have time to deal with that tomorrow.
Cheers
to assume that it would be release quality.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
more recent upstream version of openqa, but that's
taken longer than I'd hoped.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
/openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=testing&build=20241124_1010-testing-amd64&groupid=10
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ps64el or s390x, and even then
it wouldn't be even slightly important.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
to break someone's system, and if
you want to do that you really ought to at least check, and preferably
try to work out a way of warning them about it, or fixing the breakage
first.
I note that neither the Changelog nor the NEWS file mentioned this as a
breaking change or issued anything like a warning about it.
https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/iproute2/-/commit/c4bb148dd4ed0601ca32ee8a458007d0c348d6c3
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
agine that there's more to be done if we want this to work nicely
for downstreams however.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
Package: debootstrap-udeb
Version: 1.0.135
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: openqa
While testing daily netinst debian-installer images with openQA, we see that
debootstrap fails:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/272866#step/install_base/1
"The debootstrap program e
Package: xfsprogs-udeb
Version: 6.7.0-2
Severity: grave
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: openqa
Hi,
Recent openQA tests show that it is not currently possible to create an XFS
filesystem using the latest debian-installer:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/259699#step/install_base/13
L
Hi,
Just in case it helps, I've applied Michael's patch, and opened an MR on salsa:
https://salsa.debian.org/virtualsquare-team/vde2/-/merge_requests/6
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
makes things
better.
On the other hand, if I'd been paying attention at the time, the fact
that this change dropped the number of shellcheck reports for setupcon
from 189 to 1 should have rung some alarm bells, but it seems that I've
learnt to ignore the little '!' in my emacs status bar -- I'll have to
keep an eye on that in future.
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
Anthony Iliopoulos writes:
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 09:02:01PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
...
>> error: invalid XFS directory entry.
...
> This issue exists independently of the large extent counter, and it is
> related to grub commit ef7850c75 ("fs/xfs: Fix issues found
Philip Hands writes:
> Anthony Iliopoulos writes:
> ...
>> Yeap it is due to nrext64, I've submitted a patch to grub (should have
>> cc'ed linux-xfs..)
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/grub-devel/20231026095339.31802-1-ail...@suse.com/
>
> That certai
atch to grub, and then getting that
version of grub installed into the target just after the initial attempt
to run grub had failed, which then allows a retry of the grub install
step to succeed.
Also, with the patched version: `grub-probe -d /dev/vda1` produces 'xfs'
Cheers, Phil.
--
P
8911/logfile?filename=complete_install-DI-installed-pkgs.txt
which lists the installed components (udebs) of the installer that's running:
xfsprogs-udeb 6.5.0-1
Cheers, Phil.
--
Philip Hands -- https://hands.com/~phil
Philip Hands writes:
...
> Could this be related to #1051543?
>
> I'll try testing D-I while using the patch from that bug, to see if that
> helps.
It seems (to me at least) that the patch there does not apply usefully
to the version we're talking about, so I'll l
Package: xfsprogs-udeb
Version: 6.5.0-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: openqa
While doing openQA testing of Debian-Installer, I notice that XFS installs
started failing a few days ago, and comparing the versions of udebs that changed
between success and failure, the o
https://salsa.debian.org/philh/busybox/-/commit/328fdfbe43cd8d9e4425c3ee1c68aadfa44ee434
but if that did work, it does no longer. Either I was mistaken about it
having worked earlier (I'm at least 80% sure that's not the case) or
something non-deterministic is going on ... which makes me
Control: reopen -1
It seems that the initial attempt to fix this bug was a failure, so I'm
reopening the bug and will attempt to do a proper job shortly.
Cheers, Phil.
to create the volume group, seen in the initial
screenshot above.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY
Package: openqa
Severity: serious
Recently upstream, openQA switched to using shepherd.js for its guided tour,
which is not yet packaged.
I'd prefer to avoid the current version getting into testing, to avoid it
somehow sneaking into stable if getting shepherd.js through NEW takes longer
than exp
Source: mailavenger
Followup-For: Bug #957514
Control: tags -1 patch
Hi Dererk,
The reason for this FTBFS is that gcc 10 now defaults to -fno-common, which then
throws errors because there are some tentative definitions in .h files, and some
definitions of an int `garbage` in several .c files.
H
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #987441 in cdebconf reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/cdebconf/-/commit/40481682a6fa46c901f8a48d
Package: debian-installer
Followup-For: Bug #987449
Dear Maintainer,
Having tested this with both the alpha2 and alpha3 netinst ISOs, I find that the
bug does not exist in alpha2 and does exist in alpha3, which is the same as
#987377.
Also, the lock-up points are visually similar, and in both ca
Package: kcov
Version: 38+dfsg-1
Followup-For: Bug #964654
Dear Maintainer,
Just in case merge notifications don't get to you from salsa, I thought I'd add
a note here too (I hope that's OK -- I missed a couple of such notifications
myself, hence the concern).
I just created this:
https://sal
of that, thank you very much for setting out what your view
of the situation is.
I hope that this will enable a constructive discussion to continue,
hopefully leading to a solution that all find acceptable.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-
both directory schemes are allowed, but packages should only
> be built on hosts with "merged `/usr`" directory schemes (or in
> such chroots)
>
> * FD: Further Discussion
>
> === End Resolution ===
I vote:
H > M > FD > W
Cheers, Ph
make policy forbid all the foolish ways in which
one might try to assemble a package, in order to ensure that there is
nowhere for people to hide in policy? I think not.
It would seem much more straightforward to remove the upload rights from
people who insist on repeating this sort of behaviour i
this other set of packages?
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
to survive this, just
use a CD image that includes the matching modules.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
t sources.debian.net didn't
show that up -- I might have missed it, or the thing doing it might not
contain the full path, say.
BTW Is this reproducible?
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org
ff, there
would be a session to look at via serial if it never gets to the
network.
Perhaps this is not a real scenario though (I've not played with SSH
connections to d-i, so I don't know what happens when you log in and
debconf is already active on the console)
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)
Philip Hands writes:
...
> (but I still need to test it...)
Now that I've built d-i (having used the HEAD that includes the new
kernel version) it works:
https://jenkins.debian.net/job/lvc_debian-miniiso/318/
That's a preseeded test. I've also installed jessie with
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> Control: tag -1 - d-i
>
> Philip Hands (2016-11-16):
>> Package: bootstrap-base
>> Version: 1.166
>> Severity: important
>> Tags: d-i patch
>>
>> While testing the daily images, I get th
Philip Hands writes:
> Tianon Gravi writes:
>
>> On 15 November 2016 at 15:36, Philip Hands wrote:
>>> This seems to have resulted from the recent change to bootstrap-base to
>>> allow the script to be specified only as the codename, but which is not
>>>
depressingly slow when compared to the more svelt
alternatives we have available.
BTW I just upgraded back to the standard mesa packages, and can confirm
that lightdm is able to launch Gnome on this machine with the normal
packages.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HAND
e to run any extra tests, feel free to ask.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Package: libgl1-mesa-dri
Version: 10.3.2-1~hands.1
Followup-For: Bug #775235
Just installed jessie on a Dell Latitude D505 and got the symptoms
described here (getting the "Oops" screen from attempting to log in via
gdm3, and seeing the underrun errors in the logs)
Tried rebuilding mesa with llvm
ly encrypted sources, and even this action contains some risk of
> receiving compromised data.
This last sentence seems unclear to me. Are you saying that the act of
reading the data increases the chance of it being compromised? If so,
perhaps it should read:
... previously encrypte
Daniel Baumann writes:
> On 12/30/2012 12:09 PM, Philip Hands wrote:
>> you should contribute it to the bug before you continue with this
>> childishness
>
> right, i don't contribute.. *sigh*
I did NOT say you don't contribute.
I was using the word "contri
uot;serious".
If you have evidence to suggest that it is more severe than it seems so
far, you should contribute it to the bug before you continue with this
childishness -- otherwise I suggest you just set the severity to
"important" as it deserves, and spend your time more
out "... have .php, .php[345] or .phtml at the end"?
(or 'right-hand end' if you think there's any possibility of confusion)
'extension' only really makes sense on FAT and similar file systems, and
the extension on those file systems does not include the full-stop (.)
ser, and will ask them to contribute
details here if possible. Hopefully we'll be able to identify something
that will allow the daemon to abort if the config is likely to end up
with this behaviour.
Cheers, Phil.
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/
|-| HANDS.CO
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 07:31:52PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 06:21:50PM +0000, Philip Hands wrote:
> > I note that this bug is tagged as serious, which it isn't -- it might
> > be serious in Ubuntu, but in Debian it's not even a bug.
>
On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 11:09:23AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> tags 561524 + pending
> thanks
>
> Dear maintainer,
>
> I've prepared an NMU for pyjamas (versioned as 0.7~+pre2-2.1) and
> uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I
> should delay it longer.
Ah, I see -- I ta
ly inflicts extra work
on them.
Feel free to try to persuade me otherwise, of course.
Cheers, Phil.
--
|)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/
|-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/
|(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLA
Justin Pryzby wrote:
> package ssh-askpass
> tag 347065 patch
> thanks
>
> I intend to NMU a fix for this bug sponsored by some member of the QA
> group; patch attached. My pbuild result of this patch was clean, and
> produced a binary package with expected debdiff output from the most
> recent v
47 matches
Mail list logo
