Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 07:25:32AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > James Clarke wrote in https://bugs.debian.org/853886#10: > > > > "For source-only builds, I don't understand why you would want to > > perform the build in a chroot. > > Since Build-Depends are requested on my local machine anyway -nc is usually enough. And are you saying it was possible to build a source package in a chroot without already having a source package? -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#858089: RFS: ubertooth/2017.03.R2-1~exp1 and libbtbb/2017.03.R2-1~exp1
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, These two packages both have backwards-incompatible ABI changes. This leads to 2 new binary packages: libbtbb1 and libubertooth1 As a DM I cannot upload new binary packages. Can anyone help me out? You will find the packages here: https://mentors.debian.net/package/libbtbb https://mentors.debian.net/package/ubertooth Thank you very much in advance! Cheers Ruben
Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
Hi, Quoting Andrey Rahmatullin (2017-03-18 07:58:56) > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 07:25:32AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > James Clarke wrote in https://bugs.debian.org/853886#10: > > > > > > "For source-only builds, I don't understand why you would want to > > > perform the build in a chroot. > > > > Since Build-Depends are requested on my local machine anyway > -nc is usually enough. And are you saying it was possible to build a source > package in a chroot without already having a source package? I am also highly confused by this thread. Maybe I'm misunderstanding pbuilder (I'm just the sbuild maintainer) but isn't the source package the *input* to pbuilder just as it is for sbuild? What sbuild does when you execute it on an unpacked source directory, is to first build the source package which it then hands to the chroot. I think pbuilder does the same, judging from this line: http://sources.debian.net/src/pbuilder/0.228.6/pdebuild/?hl=91#L91 And I don't think what this has to do with build dependencies. You don't need the build dependencies installed to build a source package. In your local unpacked source tree, just run: dpkg-source -b . So just as with sbuild I don't see why anybody would want to *only* build the source package inside a chroot. Since the source package is the *input* to the whole operation, you would just get back what you already put in. If you want to make a source-only upload, you should build everything in a chroot and instruct pbuilder or sbuild to create a .changes file that only includes the relevant source package bits and not the binary packages. This is what you do with the --source-only-changes option for both sbuild and pbuilder. Thanks! cheers, josch signature.asc Description: signature
Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:22:36AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > So just as with sbuild I don't see why anybody would want to *only* build the > source package inside a chroot. Since the source package is the *input* to the > whole operation, you would just get back what you already put in. The only gain would be in a situation where you can't run the clean target outside of the chroot, due to missing dependencies, so `dpkg-source -b .` will produce an "unclean" source. After moving it inside a throw-away chroot with the build-deps installed you can call the clean rules, and produce the source again, which will be "cleaner" than the one produced outside. Personally I'd call this case quite borderline and unusual, especially in this world of git where the working directory is easily cleaned by a `git clean -fdx` et al. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
Quoting Mattia Rizzolo (2017-03-18 08:53:21) > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:22:36AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > So just as with sbuild I don't see why anybody would want to *only* build > > the > > source package inside a chroot. Since the source package is the *input* to > > the > > whole operation, you would just get back what you already put in. > The only gain would be in a situation where you can't run the clean target > outside of the chroot, due to missing dependencies, so `dpkg-source -b .` > will produce an "unclean" source. After moving it inside a throw-away chroot > with the build-deps installed you can call the clean rules, and produce the > source again, which will be "cleaner" than the one produced outside. > Personally I'd call this case quite borderline and unusual, especially in > this world of git where the working directory is easily cleaned by a `git > clean -fdx` et al. how would the unpacked source directory become unclean if I'm using pbuilder or sbuild to build my packages? If I'm not mistaken that would only happen if I ever call some targets from debian/rules outside the chroot and that again requires the build dependencies to be installed at which point you can also run the clean target. cheers, josch signature.asc Description: signature
Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 03:45:30PM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > how would the unpacked source directory become unclean if I'm using pbuilder > or > sbuild to build my packages? The developer might drop in debian/ (or in ./ in the case of a native package) any kind of file and that would be packed up by dpkg-source -b. Very simply those files could be .orig and .reject from patch(1). Or debian/files :P (I think that would be generated by `dpkg-buildpackage -S -nc -d` (and -d is implied by the combination of -nc and -d)). You can find a very simple example in pbuilder itself, look at the source package before I start maintaining it, you'll find very weird test files left there by dancer that were not part of the git repository and didn't really had any role within the package. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: What option should I now use to do source only builds
Hello Andreas, On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:32:25PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > I have understood from NEWS.debian of pbuilder 0.228 that the '-S' > option does not work any more. Unfortunately I did not understood what > I need to do now to do a source only build (nor what the problem of this > simple way was). There is also `dgit -wgf build-source` which means "build a source package exactly matching git HEAD", which is quite reassuring, even if you don't use dgit for the upload. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#856827: RFS: xfce4-equake-plugin/1.3.8.1-2 [RC]
> Dear Jeroen, > > Please be sure to CC the RFS bug! Forgot the "reply all". I did send it to the RFS bug separately. > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:49:27PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote: > You still haven't noted that you updated the copyright years. And you > haven't documented updating the Homepage: field. > > Also, there is a typo "Buil-Depends". I fixed the typo and added an entry to document the change in copyright years as well as the change in the Homepage: control field. I have uploaded it to mentors. >> I assume I don't need to create a debdiff for this small change? > > I suggest that when you remove the moreinfo tag from the unblock bug, > you say "some changelog tweaks with no functional change (feedback in > RFS)". I'll do that, thank you. Best regards, Jeroen
Bug#858155: RFS: stenc/1.0.7-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "stenc" * Package name: stenc Version : 1.0.7-1 Upstream Author : John Coleman * URL : https://sourceforge.net/projects/stenc/ * License : GPLv2 Section : admin It builds those binary packages: stenc - SCSI Tape Encryption Manager To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/stenc Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/stenc/stenc_1.0.7-1.dsc More information about stenc can be obtained from https://sourceforge.net/projects/stenc/ At the moment Debian is missing a tool which would alow users to utilise hardware encryption in their tape drives. Stenc manages encryption on capable LTO tape drives with hardware-based encryption. Program should work on any other SSP capable tape drives. Built specifically for Linux and AIX. Now supports key change auditing and key descriptors (uKAD). I have been using this tool with LTO-6 drive for some time and I think Debian would benefit from having it packaged. Regards, Denys Berkovskyy
Bug#856827: marked as done (RFS: xfce4-equake-plugin/1.3.8.1-2 [RC])
Your message dated Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:39:28 -0700 with message-id <20170319023928.g225qfqwao22u...@iris.silentflame.com> and subject line Re: Bug#856827: RFS: xfce4-equake-plugin/1.3.8.1-2 [RC] has caused the Debian Bug report #856827, regarding RFS: xfce4-equake-plugin/1.3.8.1-2 [RC] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 856827: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=856827 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xfce4-equake-plugin" * Package name: xfce4-equake-plugin Version : 1.3.8.1-1 Upstream Author : Jeroen van Aart * URL : https://www.e-quake.org * License : GPL Section : xfce It builds those binary packages: xfce4-equake-plugin - Xfce panel plugin which monitors earthquakes To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/xfce4-equake-plugin Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xfce4-equake-plugin/xfce4-equake-plugin_1.3.8.1-1.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from: https://www.e-quake.org Changes since the last upload: New upstream release: Closes: 856774 Migrated to use https to download earthquake data because USGS will phase out or has phased out http access, see also: https://https.cio.gov older versions of equake will stop working as a result Best regards, Jeroen van Aart --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Thank you for preparing this fix! Uploaded. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature --- End Message ---
