Re: Salsa pipeline limit

2025-03-11 Thread Peter B
On 10/03/2025 09:57, Simon Josefsson wrote: in a Salsa pipeline, and that seems to be a 5-10GB artifact unless my math is off. Hi Simon, sadly, Salsa pipelines will only handle up to 250MB, a long way short of even 5GB ! https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline/-/issues/389 Che

Re: Salsa CI and large packages

2025-02-14 Thread Peter B
On 14/02/2025 22:10, Iustin Pop wrote: Hi, I have a package that, in the extract source step, generates very large "artifacts" - I guess this is the actual source code. And this fails, of course (https://salsa.debian.org/debian/doc-rfc/-/jobs/7091134): I raised an issue for this here https://

Re: Program request (dosemu).

2024-11-23 Thread Peter B
Hi Mike, dosemu is in the archive and snapshot. Rather long links I'm afraid! http://archive.debian.org/debian-archive/debian/pool/contrib/d/dosemu/dosemu_1.4.0.7+20130105+b028d3f-2+b1_amd64.deb https://snapshot.debian.org/archive/debian-archive/20240331T102506Z/debian/pool/contrib/d/dosemu/dos

Re: Most optimal way to import NMU into existing git-builpackage repository?

2024-10-25 Thread Peter B
On 25/10/2024 11:49, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: If my understanding is correct, then it sounds wrong for DDs to be granted access to all Salsa projects. Hi Jonas, I was not thinking of all Salsa projects, but those that represent official packages. Cheers, Peter

Re: Most optimal way to import NMU into existing git-builpackage repository?

2024-10-25 Thread Peter B
On 24/10/2024 21:36, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: Hi, I occasionally run into the situation that a package has been NMU'd or otherwise updated directly into the Debian repositories, bypassing/ignoring that a packaging git repository existed. Hi Otto, Are any of these packages team maintained? I un

Bug#1083079: ITP: libqt6pas -- Qt6 interface bindings for Pascal

2024-10-01 Thread Peter B
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Peter X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, pe...@pblackman.plus.com, pkg-pascal-de...@alioth-lists.debian.net * Package name    : libqt6pas   Version : 1   Upstream Contact: N/A  (See URL below) * URL : https://www.lazarus-ide

Re: DEP-18 discussion summary (Re: Request for feedback on draft: DEP-18: Enable true open collaboration on all Debian packages)

2024-09-03 Thread Peter B
On 28/08/2024 03:13, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: ## Performance and Reliability Multiple participants, including Salvo Tomaselli, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues, Andrea Pappacoda, and Gioele Barabucci, complained about Salsa/GitLab being slow or unreliable at times, which deterred contribution. Imp

Re: Bug#1069256: debian-policy: clarify requirement for use of Static-Built-Using

2024-07-14 Thread Peter B
On 14/07/2024 16:54, Maytham Alsudany wrote: Hi, Ping for further feedback or seconds for proposed policy change to clarify and document the use of the Static-Built-Using field. Hi Maytham, could also mention that this field would be useful for fpc & lazarus packages. https://bugs.debian.or

Re: Static analyzer / linter for debian/rules?

2024-01-10 Thread Peter B
On 10/01/2024 07:20, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: Hi! Is anybody aware if there is some kind of static analyzer for the `debian/rules` file? Not being aware of such a tool, I usually run 'debuild -S' Much faster than a full build.

Re: Control header sent with done email didn't do what I expected, should it have?

2023-09-25 Thread Peter B
On 25/09/2023 14:25, Jonathan Kamens wrote: So putting a Control: line in the pseudo-header of a message sent to ###-d...@bugs.debian.org doesn't work at all? It should work if the syntax is correct. The + character was missing.

Re: Control header sent with done email didn't do what I expected, should it have?

2023-09-25 Thread Peter B
On 25/09/2023 12:16, Jonathan Kamens wrote: Hi all, I recently tried to close a bug, explain why, and set a "wontfix" tag all at once by sending my explanation to ###-d...@bugs.debian.org with "Control: tags ### wontfix" as the first line of my message body. The bug was closed but the tags co

Re: FTBFS (reprotest) on all recent uploads

2023-06-20 Thread Peter B
On 20/06/2023 05:31, Joachim Zobel wrote: I can see two logs of successful builds and a diff for them. Looks to me like the 2nd build is aborting.     .. I: Building the package I: user script /srv/workspace/pbuilder/1086848/tmp/hooks/A99_set_merged_usr starting Re-configuring usrmerge

Re: my package uploads silently rejected

2022-11-30 Thread Peter B
On 30/11/2022 14:03, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Hi, I am unable to succesfully dput packages. Most likely the cause is my too late updating my PGP key expiry date - but that should be solved by now, and I am unable to figure out how to debug the problem or whom to contact about it. I patiently wa

Bug#1015863: ITP: qt6ct -- Qt6 Configuration Tool

2022-07-22 Thread Peter B
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, pe...@pblackman.plus.com Owner: pe...@pblackman.plus.com * Package name    : qt6ct   Version : 0.5-1   Upstream Author : Ilya Kotov * URL : https://github.com/trialuser02/qt6ct * License : B

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

2014-08-20 Thread Peter B.
On 08/19/2014 12:45 PM, Clément Bœsch wrote: > See: > http://fate.ffmpeg.org/ > http://coverage.ffmpeg.org/ The 2nd link to "coverage" (which should show the LCOV output, I guess) seems to be broken: I get a "404 Not Found" :( Regards, Pb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian

2014-08-10 Thread Peter B.
On 08/08/2014 09:22 PM, Matthias Urlichs wrote: > We'd also benefit from the fact that Upstream tends to use FFmpeg. I'd > hate to report some intractable codec bug which Upstream closes with > an "it works with FFmpeg" comment Oh, btw, just a few days ago, that's exactly what happened on kdenlive