Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Mi, 10 iul 19, 23:47:28, The Wanderer wrote: > > The release notes might be a valid place to document this for people > upgrading from oldstable-buster to stable-bullseye after the release of > bullseye, or even (if this would be applicable) switching from stable to > testing-bullseye midway th

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On 2019-07-10 at 15:03, Neil McGovern wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 07:51:18PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: >> But I realised later that this is going to bite all users when they >> come to upgrade from buster. Perhaps some aptitude and apt-get >> patches can go into a stable (buster) point re

Re: wanted: recommendation for webhook queueing library/thing

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 05:05:53PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > I also use systemd.path units for this. > Since it was Ian asking I didn't really feel that was worth suggesting > though. yes, I also though about that but decided to cite prior art anyway. one can always use inotify to achieve the sa

Re: wanted: recommendation for webhook queueing library/thing

I also use systemd.path units for this. Since it was Ian asking I didn't really feel that was worth suggesting though.

Re: wanted: recommendation for webhook queueing library/thing

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 04:09:11PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Sean Whitton writes ("git & Debian packaging sprint report"): > > Main achievement > > > > > > We designed and implemented a system to make it possible for DDs to > > upload new versions of packages by simply pushing a

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 07:51:18PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > Thanks to everyone for suggestions; I discovered "apt update" through > a Google search. > I've submitted a patch against the release notes to explicitly mention this: https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/release-notes/merge_requests/5

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 02:30:24PM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! > > Indeed! ☺ > > > E: Repository 'http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian testing InRelease' changed > > its 'Co

Re: The noudeb build profile and dh-only rules files

Theodore Ts'o wrote: [...] > Thanks, that's really helpful. One of the really frustrating things > I've found about trying to use dh is that there is a real lack of > examples which are more complicated than: > #!/usr/bin/make -f > # > # See? dh is easy-peasy! > %: > dh $@ > Sure, th

Bug#883393: ITP: jool -- Open Source SIIT and NAT64 Translator for Linux

Package: wnpp Followup-For: Bug #883393 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hey! Any progress on this? Do you need help packaging? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQJGBAEBCAAwFiEErvI0h2bzccaJpzYAlaQv6DU1JfkFAl0mDQYSHGJlcm5hdEBk ZWJpYW4ub3JnAAoJEJWkL+g1NSX5SVQP/2rf1gCpD3aw71BxPFf7xAzw

Re: The noudeb build profile and dh-only rules files

Theodore Ts'o writes ("Re: The noudeb build profile and dh-only rules files"): > Thanks, that's really helpful. One of the really frustrating things > I've found about trying to use dh is that there is a real lack of > examples which are more complicated than: ... > # See? dh is easy-peasy! ...

wanted: recommendation for webhook queueing library/thing

Sean Whitton writes ("git & Debian packaging sprint report"): > Main achievement > > > We designed and implemented a system to make it possible for DDs to > upload new versions of packages by simply pushing a specially formatted > git tag to salsa. > > Please see this blog post t

Bug#931796: ITP: live-clone -- GUI to clone and manage Live-Build USB sticks

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Georges Khaznadar * Package name: live-clone Version : 1.0-1 Upstream Author : Georges Khaznadar * URL : https://usb.freeduc.org/jbart-en.html * License : GPL-3 Programming Lang: Python3 Description : GUI to clon

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

Julian Gilbey writes: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: >> Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! >> >> So I tried upgrading my machine to bullseye today, and >> aptitude/apt-get update don't like this, giving me errors such as: >> >> E: Repository 'http://ft

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! > > So I tried upgrading my machine to bullseye today, and > aptitude/apt-get update don't like this, giving me errors such as: > > E: Repository 'http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian testing

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

Hello, Am 10.07.19 um 14:30 schrieb Julian Gilbey: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: >> Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! >> >> So I tried upgrading my machine to bullseye today, and >> aptitude/apt-get update don't like this, giving me errors such as: >>

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

Hi, On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! Indeed! ☺ > E: Repository 'http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian testing InRelease' changed its > 'Codename' value from 'buster' to 'bullseye' > N: This must be accepted explicitly before

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 7:59 PM Julian Gilbey wrote: > So I read apt-secure(8), which gives no indication of how to "accept > this explicitly", and neither do any of the linked wiki pages. > > Any suggestions? There are two options: # apt update # apt-get --allow-releaseinfo-change update --

Re: Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:31:51PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! > > So I tried upgrading my machine to bullseye today, and > aptitude/apt-get update don't like this, giving me errors such as: > > E: Repository 'http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian testing

Apt-secure and upgrading to bullseye

Hooray, buster's released! Congrats to all! So I tried upgrading my machine to bullseye today, and aptitude/apt-get update don't like this, giving me errors such as: E: Repository 'http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian testing InRelease' changed its 'Codename' value from 'buster' to 'bullseye' N: Thi

Re: buster backports question/status

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:42:40AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > buster-backports exists. AIUI this is an apt bug when dealing with > empty repos. (Although why are you setting default-release to > buster-backports?) JFTR: Yes it is an apt "bug" in that empty repositories do not create the stru

Re: buster backports question/status

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:29:01 +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > Le mer. 10 juil. 2019 à 11:08, Andrey Rahmatullin a > écrit : > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:54:21AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > > > So, am I doing something wrong? > > You tried to install a package (what package? they don't e

Re: buster backports question/status

Le mer. 10 juil. 2019 à 11:35, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit : > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:29:01AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > > I tried a package that is not in backports, it was just for test (for an > > automation tool I use) > > It should fail with a *package not found* , but should not fail

Re: buster backports question/status

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 11:29:01AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > I tried a package that is not in backports, it was just for test (for an > automation tool I use) > It should fail with a *package not found* , but should not fail about > buster-backports being non available. I don't think the faili

Re: Using dh causes configure to be run twice?

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 01:16:03AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > I tried to see how other packages work around this misfeature, and I > see that openssh just hacks things to make the second > dh_auto_configure a no-op: > > override_dh_auto_configure-arch: > dh_auto_configure -Bdebian/build-d

Re: buster backports question/status

On 2019/07/10 11:29, olivier sallou wrote: > > > Le mer. 10 juil. 2019 à 11:08, Andrey Rahmatullin > a écrit : > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:54:21AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > > So, am I doing something wrong? > You tried to install a package (what pac

Re: buster backports question/status

Le mer. 10 juil. 2019 à 11:08, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit : > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:54:21AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > > So, am I doing something wrong? > You tried to install a package (what package? they don't exist) from a > repo that doesn't exist. > I tried a package that is not in

Re: buster backports question/status

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:54:21AM +0200, olivier sallou wrote: > So, am I doing something wrong? You tried to install a package (what package? they don't exist) from a repo that doesn't exist. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

buster backports question/status

Hi, it may be a silly question, but doing some tests on a Debian buster, I got errors trying to install a package from buster-backports. I added to sources.list.d info to set buster-backports but i get this error: E: The value 'buster-backports' is invalid for APT::Default-Release as such a relea

Re: Using dh causes configure to be run twice?

On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 at 01:16:03 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > In my attempt to convert e2fsprfogs's debian/rules to use dh, I'm > running into yet another frustration with dh, which is that it insists > on running the configure script twice. This has not been my experience with other Autotools pac

Re: Dropping Release and Release.gpg support from APT

Quoting Julian Andres Klode (2019-07-10 10:17:51) > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:10:41AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > > Given the timeline, shouldn't we also get oldstable to ship an InRelease > > file? > What's the use case for having oldstable in your sources.list on > unstable/testing machines? I

Re: Dropping Release and Release.gpg support from APT

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 4:18 PM Julian Andres Klode wrote: > What's the use case for having oldstable in your sources.list on > unstable/testing machines? I have it in a chdist so that I can look up package versions in old releases. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: Dropping Release and Release.gpg support from APT

On 2019-07-10 10:04, Julian Andres Klode wrote: On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:35:25AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 2:53 AM Julian Andres Klode wrote: > Timeline suggestion > --- > now add a warning to apt 1.9.x for repositories w/o InRelease, but Release

Re: Dropping Release and Release.gpg support from APT

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:10:41AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2019-07-10 10:04, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:35:25AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 2:53 AM Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > > > > > > Timeline suggestion > > > >

git & Debian packaging sprint report

Hello, Over the weekend, Ian Jackson and I met in Cambridge, U.K. to work on the design and implementation of tools and processes relating to git & Debian packaging. Main achievement We designed and implemented a system to make it possible for DDs to upload new versions of packa

Re: Dropping Release and Release.gpg support from APT

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 10:35:25AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 2:53 AM Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > > Timeline suggestion > > --- > > now add a warning to apt 1.9.x for repositories w/o InRelease, but > > Release{,.gpg} > > Aug/Sep turn the wa

Re: Error when running dh_dwz (actually an error when running dwz(1))

On 09.07.19 21:54, Boyuan Yang wrote: > Dear -devel list, > > Looks like dh_dwz was recently added into debhelper and it is causing some > FTBFS on one of my packages. It could be a bug of dwz itself but I'm looking > for some help inside Debian first. > > Please try to build package marisa from