Re: 8.2 and 7.9 planning
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 07:52:49PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > 5/6th - okay for me Fine. > 12/13th - the 12th doesn't work for me until at least mid-afternoon I'm away I'm afraid. > 19th/20th - looks okay > 26th/27th - looks okay > Both work for me. Neil
Processing of partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.changes
partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.changes uploaded successfully to ftp-master.debian.org along with the files: partman-basicfilesystems_120.dsc partman-basicfilesystems_120.tar.xz partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host coccia.debian.org)
Processing of partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.changes
partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: partman-basicfilesystems_120.dsc partman-basicfilesystems_120.tar.xz partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.udeb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:21:31 +0200 Source: partman-basicfilesystems Binary: partman-basicfilesystems Architecture: source i386 Version: 120 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian Install System Team Changed-By: Christian Perrier Description: partman-basicfilesystems - Add to partman support for ext2, linux-swap, fat16, fat32 and ntf (udeb) Changes: partman-basicfilesystems (120) unstable; urgency=medium . [ Updated translations ] * Hebrew (he.po) by Lior Kaplan Checksums-Sha1: ffb3c8543bd900511bdcb385d0aa99444a4dc21f 1784 partman-basicfilesystems_120.dsc fc03336b1fdda3dd13424001abc4fe76e3c85645 188808 partman-basicfilesystems_120.tar.xz 6ef51b5c1780a51a496de99d5edf2fb265ddd7a3 183002 partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.udeb Checksums-Sha256: e81397dad10b69b8c3c28e940400bcefcd0386a7142e76aee11ab684a18d463b 1784 partman-basicfilesystems_120.dsc b2655a29a9505c9183df7e3cce94d2934dc85239cc48e6e5e4bcbe0043adc826 188808 partman-basicfilesystems_120.tar.xz 1d6d65ab17a4010ba166f5471a6e68a03efcbb9ebecab861a5d0fe463b385f79 183002 partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.udeb Files: 77023ae4b58a58455225a67d8830ce78 1784 debian-installer standard partman-basicfilesystems_120.dsc f0777609d0455ed277ae94c9f4403906 188808 debian-installer standard partman-basicfilesystems_120.tar.xz 7933382fbd089f7ed68412945b27ba16 183002 debian-installer standard partman-basicfilesystems_120_i386.udeb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJV1u70AAoJEIcvcCxNbiWo8ogP/iJ0J/MhFXqJAsFPEuN7QtZ8 OVY92cJrNQkc6UEHlecn+jEgfK77iibUOfJBr5uf+Ulqr7uSie7CFxpFqdns3n2y leiEPaTPlpLE7aEuP/MraSaelupzyH+yfK6iFJp8WeGbH0cbOpeRiFybFjaW2Z4j 4AOOWPQEB5vjMgAQTcDQ4FabAXRtDX6Y9/gZ1vcqc8ozU8Uzuy4C2mLgv2Wu25nI KQo8bpbgJKX9Do90wLPmoSrarl1sbFmf9NVtogNa9zXmcVQmCjp8CTDO1O6EdqmN rNmTEp+cKOcAuFt58/X5OKrjgA3MHlo5Z3Z5vTTaLTMdZ16Q01EmJDB6kueIeOme NiQTCFJoWYICN/BliAAhscZBNnnrIuXn7p9JrJ9HopZf8GRgWQblNUtuVqgfEZRC B4G431yWcXgwEL4uZYKrcMqLDtCP8wfYCPbyrU097hc47AMPEE4Hcmy5G3dM7Nnn fIHQmfgXYVNED02+woJfYWiE+g1JRzWhiIlEG1lve+6w+GkNHjX5djCVd0PrPcb0 kx1SXQlStpmmj4ZSyDr8dvlZd+FVvnJs6D0eseJhxUJJ9IUuiEOzPaBb68wAFx/z AuzBNgsqqx1HRotBH05BBOZwhljbRT53WL9O8JcHbHwf4AENpGdmmmviY4aSZdrY +hiuOAkcLrAwnaDVErIr =se+p -END PGP SIGNATURE- Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Plans for di-netboot-assistant (and debian-installer-netboot-***)
We had a discussion during DebConf about di-netboot-assistant.
Here are the ideas we gathered
Verifying netboot image signatures
---
netboot images for Debian are already signed by Release file
1. check SHA256SUM only
2. download the Release file
3. verify the GPG signature for SHA256 only
"gpgv --keyring /usr/share/keyrings/debian-role-keys.gpg"
Daily image ?
TODO! note: the HTTP directory hierarchy for Daily and regular
release aren't the same.
Easier installation of netboot images
-
Idea: Installing a debian-installer-netboot-*** image should invoke
di-netboot-assistant in postinst.
di-netboot-assistant
Suggests: debian-installer-netboot-amd64
Suggests: debian-installer-netboot-i386
debian-installer-netboot-{amd64,i386}
Recommends: di-netboot-assistant
in postinst
=> di-netboot-assistant install --package=debian-installer-netboot-amd64
Note: each time the debian-installer-netboot-amd64 is upgraded on the
system, then debian-installer-netboot-amd64 overwrites that TFTP
directory.
Debian-CD
Put a copy of the netboot image on the DVD.
Which format should be on the DVD? .deb, tarball, extracted ?
Which netboot image arch should be present on which DVD image ?
Validate the di-source file.
implement a feature to make sure that all the netboot images listed in
/etc/di-netboot-assistant/di-source.list exist
Andreas and Franklin
Processed: closing 596889
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 596889 Bug #596889 [flash-kernel] flash-kernel: please add ARM-Versatile Express CA9x4 support Marked Bug as done > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 596889: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596889 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: closing 465122
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 465122 Bug #465122 [flash-kernel] dd uses a lot of memory Marked Bug as done > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 465122: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=465122 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#796470: debian-installer: amd64 and i386 netboot/mini.iso do not boot on qemu
Package: debian-installer
Version: ?
Severity: important
Tags:
Dear Maintainer,
http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/installer-amd64/current/images/netboot/mini.iso
http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/mini.iso
with website date "2015-08-13 10:40" do not boot in qemu
of Deban 8.1.
(As advised by Ian Campbell on debian-cd, i report against
debian-installer. But i do not know its version and reportbug
is unhappy that debian-installer is not installed.
So i have to create this bug mail manually from an older one.)
How to reproduce:
Any senseful combination of
{i386 mini.iso, amd64 mini.iso}
x {qemu-system-i386 , qemu-system-x86_64}
x {-cdrom , -hda}
is broken currently. E.g.:
qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -m 512 -cdrom mini.iso -boot d
qemu-system-i386 -enable-kvm -m 512 -hda mini.iso
El Torito boot record and MBR properly lead to isolinux.bin which
gets stuck after its startup message. Famous last words are
"ETCD" or "EHDD", depending on -cdrom or -hda.
SeaBIOS (version 1.7.5-20140531_083030-gandalf)
...
ISOLINUX 6.03 20150812 ETCD
top shows qemu running at 103% CPU on a 4/8 core Xeon.
(I understand 1.03 cores are busy at 3900 MHz.)
debian-8.1.0-amd64-netinst.iso boots fine and installs.
The minis do not have the EFI boot equipment which netinst.iso
has. But i doubt that this is the reason.
I would normally blame it on the SYSLINUX version. But the
successful netinst.iso has in its isolinux.bin the string
ISOLINUX 6.03 20150107
So no major version jump to see.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 8.1
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
-- no debconf information
Bug#796474: busybox: mishandles non-hash lines in sha512sum and friends
Package: busybox-static Version: 1:1.22.0-15 Severity: normal I have an OpenPGP-signed file that contains lines produced by sha512sum[0]. Running sha512sum -c on it exits 0, noting the improperly-formatted lines: vauxhall ok % LC_ALL=C sha512sum -c SHA512SUMS; echo $? 0223b187.asc: OK README.adoc: OK README.xhtml: OK otr.adoc: OK otr.xhtml: OK ssh-keys.txt: OK sha512sum: WARNING: 20 lines are improperly formatted 0 However, busybox's sha512sum exits 1: vauxhall no % LC_ALL=C busybox sha512sum -c SHA512SUMS; echo $? 0223b187.asc: OK README.adoc: OK README.xhtml: OK otr.adoc: OK otr.xhtml: OK ssh-keys.txt: OK sha512sum: WARNING: 20 of 26 computed checksums did NOT match 1 Furthermore, it claims that there were 20 computed checksums that did not match, which is untrue and misleading. As there were no corresponding files, it did not compute any checksums for those lines, and all the checksums it did compute did, in fact, match. OpenPGP clearsigning hash files is not uncommon; for example, kernel.org does it[1]. busybox's sha512sum (and sha256sum, etc.) should exit 0 on success even in the face of ill-formed lines, and it should accurately reflect that those lines were ill-formed and not lead the user to believe that there was a mismatch when there was not. [0] Available at https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc/keys/ [1] https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/sha256sums.asc -- System Information: Debian Release: stretch/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=es_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=es_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) -- no debconf information -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#787131: debian-installer-launcher: stores the distribution name at build-time ("Debian sid" even in Jessie)
Hi, Stephen Kitt (2015-05-28): > Package: debian-installer-launcher > Version: 19 > Severity: minor > > Dear Maintainer, > > I noticed in the LXDE live CD that the icon label and menu entry for > debian-installer say "Install Debian sid". I suppose that's because > the .desktop file is processed at build time in unstable, but I don't > know what the right fix should be... Since the question was asked on IRC (esp. WRT stable), here's my answer, slightly massaged: It should be fixed in unstable first, possibly migrating to testing; after that (at least the unstable part) a stable update can be considered. At first glance, I fail to see why that should be set at build time in the buildd chroots; should probably be stored in the source package, and bumped when a new debian release is out. This would be done the same way as in src:debian-installer. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
