dh_suidregister bugs
# netkit-base severity 83022 wishlist severity 84827 wishlist tag 84827 - wontfix merge 83022 84827 # xcdroast severity 83755 wishlist severity 84497 wishlist # (84497 seems a weird bug to have been reassigned) # cgiwrap severity 83834 wishlist # innfeed severity 83859 wishlist # inn severity 84271 wishlist # (also bug 84383, merged) # masqmail severity 84506 wishlist # poppassd severity 84551 wishlist # mailman severity 84554 wishlist # netselect severity 84565 wishlist # ircd severity 84567 wishlist # hanterm severity 84580 wishlist # jfbterm severity 84585 wishlist # opie severity 84590 wishlist # typespeed severity 84672 wishlist # mutt severity 84826 wishlist # osh severity 84870 wishlist # rawrec severity 85195 wishlist thanks These bugs are all "package with suid binaries use dh_suidregister, which is now obsolete". This stopped packages from building with debhelper versions >= 2.2.12 and << 3.0.0. Since the debhelper in testing is << 2.2.12, and the debhelper in unstable is 3.0.0, this should mean all these packages should be buildable again, which means none of the above bugs need to be "serious" anymore (though not all of them were). Using statoverride instead of suidmanager is still a Good Thing, though, so they ought to stay open as wishlist requests. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
libssl 0.9.4
Hi guys, Could someone from each of these arches (arm, m68k and powerpc) please compile openssl094 and/or rebuild any packages currently linked against libssl09 so they're linked against libssl0.9.6 instead? TIA. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net) pgpr2LAQojwhu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: libssl 0.9.4
On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 01:36:23PM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote: > On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Anthony Towns wrote: > > Could someone from each of these arches (arm, m68k and powerpc) please > > compile openssl094 and/or rebuild any packages currently linked against > > libssl09 so they're linked against libssl0.9.6 instead? Ryan Murray is doing a powerpc build/upload of 094 atm, and arm's had a version for a little while now, thanks. :) > I'll start a rebuild for m68k (the autobuild system's currently down due > to problems on kullervo). Any luck with this? There doesn't seem to have been an upload yet... Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
packages need to be recompiled against libgd1
Hi guys, mrtg on arm needs to be rebuilt against libgd1 instead of libgd1g, and gdtclft on powerpc needs the same thing, from what I can tell. These'll need to be bumped to versions 2.9.10-1.0.1 and 2.2.5-5.0.1 presumably. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net) pgpH3A0UEf7I5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Base Installation (aph 2.3.5 6/7)
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 11:57:40PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > > Sorry you must mount your root and /usr filesystems on /target and > > /target/usr before running yabootconfig > > > this is because you installed woody and not sid. yaboot 1.2.1-1.2.1-1 > is not in woody yet. this step will fail until it is. (This should happen in 30 hours or a little more, depending on your mirror site, btw) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
glibc 2.2.3-9 on alpha/ppc
So, wassup? The ppc build says: 2.2.3-8 should not autobuild this... 2.2.3-7 won't autobuild - depended on kernel-headers-2.4.5-sparc??? 2.2.3-1 build conflicts fail And the build logs at cyberhqz don't list any logs for glibc at all. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Re: glibc 2.2.3-9 on alpha/ppc
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 12:57:28PM -0700, David Schleef wrote: > On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 07:48:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > So, wassup? > > The ppc build says: > > 2.2.3-7 > > won't autobuild - depended on kernel-headers-2.4.5-sparc??? > Because of this: > Build-Depends: ... kernel-headers-2.4 [!hurd-i386], ... > And this: > $ apt-cache search 'Provides.*kernel-headers-2.4' > The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed. > There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for > providing too many) but I can't find the numbers because brainfood > is down. This needs to be raised to RC (serious, does not autobuild), and fixed ASAP, then. If it could be worked around by hand sooner, that would be good too. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net) pgp9xA5tzjc1v.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6_1.24_powerpc.changes REJECTED
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 05:48:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:03:41AM +0100, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > > Hi fellow debian-powerpc users, > > > Once more, some influent folk in the debian-boot team, who didn't even > > > want to > > > be named, is trying to stop me from working on powerpc d-i. > > > Frans requested uploads of 2.6.18-3 .udeb packages, and so i did it, but > > > the > > > package was rejected. > > I would be very interested to learn why the upload was rejected. AFAIK, a > > reason must be given. > The only reason was : > reject as requested by debian-boot As I said to you the day before you sent that mail, the reason for the reject was that it was an NMU that didn't follow the NMU procedure of posting a patch to the BTS before uploading. The NMU procedure is not onerous, and claiming that you're "really" the maintainer doesn't excuse you from it. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
openssh/powerpc out of date and buggy
Hi guys, Could someone please recompile openssh for powerpc, please? There's an outstanding RC bug that should be fixed by a simple recompile (64424) and powerpc's ssh is already out of date anyway. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.'' -- Dave Clark pgpk0GcSp9VF5.pgp Description: PGP signature
potato
Hi guys, Since both dark and I have been absent for the last week or so the number of RC bugs has ballooned outrageously, and some of your uploads and such have been left sitting in incoming, and as such the release hasn't gotten significantly closer. Sorry about that. :( In any event, we'll hopefully get incoming cleared out shortly, and have i386 done in a day or two. Hopefully. How does this leave everyone else? A few days ago sparc needed to do a whole bunch of recompiles. Have these been done? Are there any similar things that other archs have only just discovered they need to do and are just doing now? At this point, as far as i386 is concerned I expect most problems will be ignored, save for maybe a couple of removals, a couple of upgrades, and a handful of security fixes which will probably still be being added at a fairly late stage. On an only marginally related matter, I'd appreciate it if y'all could get woody autobuilders happening fairly promptly and effectively by the time potato releases. If there are hardware or bandwidth problems, it'd be nice to resolve these ASAP, rather than JIT... Please note the excessive cross-posting, and edit your followups to suit. I'm not on most of these lists, so if there's something I need to know that's not appropriate for -release, please cc me. Thanks. Cheers, aj (acting release manager) -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.'' -- Dave Clark pgpjhARRJGY80.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: PowerPC CDs on hold, awaiting new floppies
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 10:36:00AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Sparc is still appearing as I type, and I'll need to do powerpc after > > that, but otherwise the images are available via rsync here: > I've been told that the current powerpc floppies are broken, so am not > bothering with TC3 images until someone tells me that they're fixed. > So, powerpc folks, when you've fixed them, tell me. These should be fixed and installed already. Not sure whether they've been mirrored yet. You're looking for a directory like: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls potato/main/disks-powerpc/ 2.2.16-2000-07-26 current Actually, they seem to have made it to ftp.d.o, so you should have a decent chance. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.'' -- Dave Clark pgphFoendOcW5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Package pools, testing, 2.2r2
Hello world, debian-cd folk: 2.2r1 is final, even if that'll make some of the powerpc and security folk (justifiably) unhappy. If you'd like to update the potato CD images, that'd probably be a good thing. All who're interested: katie (ie, the new dinstall, ie package pools) will be rolled out when James has enough time to cope with any unforseen problems. Hopefully in the next week or two. "testing" will be rolled out shortly afterwards, in all probability. debian-cd folk: when katie is rolled out, the debian-cd scripts will probably break [0], it'd be very helpful if this can be fixed ASAP, otherwise we won't be able to provide official CDs for 2.2r2... Porters, X folks, etc: 2.2r2 is likely to come out relatively quickly. Please consider this as your notification, and upload any ports or security fixes or new versions that should make it into r2 sooner rather than later. For those who're interested: we'll see about handling 2.2r2 in a more transparent manner. I'll try to keep auric:~ajt/which-updates as an up to date list of which will get accepted and why others will get rejected, and have it posted automatically to -release once a week. Comments etc should go to -release. Cheers, aj [0] Since the Packages files will start referencing packages and sources in the pool, rather than under dists/potato/... This is actually unavoidable, but we'll try to make sure there are at least symlinks from dists/potato to the pool for anything missing, FWIW. The Packages/Sources files may or may not end up pointing at the symlinks rather than the pool. This will probably first happen sometime after the changeover, but will definitely happen during 2.2r2. -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.'' -- Dave Clark pgpfE6FlpXi7X.pgp Description: PGP signature
Potato revision 2
Hello world, In the next day or so, Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> will be creating a list of show stoppers for potato revision two. This list will hopefully be maintained for future revisions, and be treated more or less as the release critical bug list has been during the freeze [0]. If there's anything that needs to be done, or that's in the process of being done, that we should be waiting for for r2 rather than leaving until r3 or later, please make sure Ben knows about it. r2 will happen ASAP after that list is emptied. The more detailed the information you can send the better: "we need new boot-floppies" is better than "no! we can't release yet", and "I'm preparing new boot-floppies for i386 to fix bugs 32343 55643 and 76432, which will be ready in a day; updates for powerpc are also needed (bug 65653) and Daniel Jacobowitz is taking care of that, but I don't know how long it will take; updates for other architectures aren't urgent" is better still. Who's doing it, how long it will take, why it's needed, and why it won't cause new problems would be ideal. For reference, you can consider the list to currently be: Show stoppers for potato r2 ~~~ * Show stopper list needs to be created (Ben Collins) (will be done by around (2000/11/21 12:00 UTC) * 2.2.18 boot-floppies for i386 (Adam di Carlo) (will be done by around (2000/11/22 12:00 UTC) Note further that r2 is expected to happen fairly soon now (days, not weeks) [1]. Cheers, aj [0] ie, we'll try to make sure there aren't any left; but if there are some that don't appear to have any hope of ever being fixed, they'll eventually just get ingored. [1] cf http://lists.debian.org/debian-announce-00/msg00011.html -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.'' -- Dave Clark pgpHVi8liOwsU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Autobuilder log pages
Hello world, Please Cc me, I'm not on most of these lists. I guess most (all?) of the ports have autobuilders now days, and I guess most (all?) of them have build logs on the web somewhere. I'd like to add links to build logs from http://auric.debian.org/~ajt/update_excuses.html so that, eg, + out of date on m68k: slocate(2.2-0.0) is a link to the m68k build logs for version 2.4-1 of the slocate source package (or, ideally, a "The autobuilder hasn't tried building this package yet because..." page when appropriate) to explain why this hasn't built and maybe make it obvious what needs to be fixed. So is there any chance of people telling me urls I can use for this? Something like: http://m68k.debian.org/buildd/logs/slocate_2.4-1_20001201-0800 almost works, except for the _20001201-0800... Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Thanks to all avid pokers out there'' -- linux.conf.au, 17-20 January 2001 pgpQVWzygj8FL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Issues regarding powerpc and Sven
Frans and Colin dropped from Cc's, -boot and -powerpc Bcc'ed only; please avoid crossposting. On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:14:39AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 04:38:31PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > As I suspect you're all already aware, on 27th April, Sven Luther asked > > me to review the situation with d-i and powerpc as a result of finding > > his commit access to the d-i repository had been removed. Having spent > > some time since then seeing what's been going on, I've concluded that > > removing Sven's commit access was a reasonable course of action, and > > won't be asking that you accept Sven's request to have it reinstated. > Anthony, d-i team. > I would very much like to get the detail of the reasoning behind how you > concluded that it was a reasonable course of action, The d-i team were acting under the belief that you no longer wished to work on d-i after a number of conflicts in the past [0]; they then sought to find someone else to work on powerpc issues for d-i on the -powerpc list [1], indicating they need people at all levels to work on it (from testing builds to arch-specific development), and you not only saw that call for help, but participated in the thread [2]. About a month after that got around to removing your commit access. That you now indicate that your intention had been to resign as *lead* powerpc porter for d-i doesn't really change matters; you weren't clear that that was your intention originally, you didn't clarify your intention when Frans stated the d-i team's understanding, and for various reasons your involvement in d-i over the month between the mails above and your noticing your commit access was also removed. I don't think there's anything at all unreasonable in removing commit access for someone who voluntarily resigns from a project, especially when they go on to make it difficult to recruit new members to replace them. That means it becomes a question of whether you joining the d-i team at this point actually makes sense on its own merits, rather than merely as a reversion of a previous bad decision. Since both you and Frans have made it very clear you're uncomfortable working closely with each other at this point, forcing you together seems entirely inappropriate, and against explicilty expressed desires from both of you. [0] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "I hereby officially announce that i won't continue to do the ungratefull job of powerpc d-i porting, i hear the d-i team has plenty of folk to take my place, so they should fix this." [1] Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Sven Luther has recently announced [1] that he will no longer work on PowerPC support in Debian Installer." [2] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Well, that is what i see right now, some of these issues are open since a couple of weeks now, if not more, and i saw nobody jump in to fix then, even after i was scheduled for expulsion, so i hope that frans calls will give more results, altough seeing as it is a tedious process with little respect from the d-i team ..." > Further, i want to point out that i am the original author of both the > nobootloader and prep-installler .udeb packages, and was also early involved > in partman-prep (which is currently broken) package from Cajus Pollmeyer. Note that your technical abilities are not in any question. > These tree packages are in the debian-installer svn repo, and removing my > commit access means additional hurdle to me working on them, It means that if you wish to continue maintaining them, you need to do so independently of the Debian Install System Team, which is listed as the current maintainer, and of which you are no longer a member. If you wish to consult with your co-maintainers for those packages (Matt Kraai and Stephen R Marenka for nobootloader, and Cajus Pollmeier for partman-prep) and setup a new source control repository, that's entirely appropriate. > and i think it > would be more logical if this confirms itself, that those packages be removed > from the d-i svn repo and hosted somewhere else more neutral. You're no longer a member of the d-i team; if they wish to keep those packages' source in their subversion repository, it doesn't matter to you at all. If they wish to maintain a fork compared to your packages, that's fine too. If other members of the d-i team wish to maintain it in your stead, they probably will be expected to justify that change as a package hijack, depending on what your co-maintainers think of the situation. > [...] and in any case, i have seen > no evidence that this removal of my svn commit access was expected to have any > technical effect, only a social one, to get ride of me and
pcmcia-cs
Hi all, Please get the current pcmcia-cs built on your respective architectures (alpha, powerpc and arm). Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Debian: giving you the power to shoot yourself in each toe individually.'' -- with kudos to Greg Lehey
Re: Unidentified subject!
On Thu, Jun 11, 1998 at 12:53:55PM +0200, Swen wrote: > Hello, Salut, Swen! [which is about the extent of my high school French, I'm afraid :)] > since i was not able to find a binary version of the glibc packages, > i tried to cross compile it, but egcs needs the target headers in order > to compile an cross compiler, and since i cannot just get the glibc > includes (gnu/stubd.h is a result of the glibc I've only just started trying to get Debian/PPC working locally, so take this with a grain of salt, but from what I gather the lack of binaries for glibc, and the lack of the approriate source to compile it are an oversight rather than a deliberate action. I've been pointed to ftp://powerpc.debian.org/pub/Linux/linux-ppc/debian/ which contains .deb's for glibc and sundry other stuff. I haven't had a chance to install it yet [I don't have "ar" on my system at the moment, even :(] > what is the status of debian-powerpc anyway ? are there still people > working on it ? how many people, is it no more useful to post to it > because nobody will reply ? As far as I understand it, the current version of glibc doesn't work on powerpc (or sparc?), and that's making things a touch difficult. :) HTH, etc. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred. ``It's not a vision, or a fear. It's just a thought.'' pgpXG4npNGpcj.pgp Description: PGP signature
