RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for the version 1.2.8-7 of my package "rdiff-backup".
The upload would fix these bugs: 585508, 587370
The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
* http://mentors.debian.net/package/rdiff-backup
$ dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-7.dsc
This is a Non-maintainer upload, before change it myself, I've waited for an
answer long enough on both bugs (585508 615729) without a reply.
So I just made the changes needed to fix both bugs and ask someone to sponsor
it.
I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
I am attaching also the debdiff.
This new version should be pushed to stable, testing and sid (the package
version is the same on all cases).
Thanks!
--
~~~
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez http://neutrino.es
Igalia - Free Software Engineeringhttp://www.igalia.com
~~~
diff -u rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/changelog rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/changelog
--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/changelog
+++ rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,13 @@
+rdiff-backup (1.2.8-7) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload
+ * Added debian/patches/02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning.dpatch
+- Fixes annoying deprecation warning with python 2.6 (Closes: #587370).
+ * Added debian/patches/03_fix_hardlinks.dpatch
+- Fixes hardlink bug (Closes: #558035).
+
+ -- Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez Tue, 03 Jan 2012 11:51:55 +0100
+
rdiff-backup (1.2.8-6) unstable; urgency=low
* debian/control
diff -u rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/00list rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/00list
--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/00list
+++ rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/00list
@@ -1,0 +2,2 @@
+02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning.dpatch
+03_fix_hardlinks.dpatch
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8.orig/debian/patches/02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning.dpatch
+++ rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning.dpatch
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+#! /bin/sh /usr/share/dpatch/dpatch-run
+## 02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning.dpatch by
+##
+## All lines beginning with `## DP:' are a description of the patch.
+## DP: patch adapted from the one at https://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?26064
+## DP: This fix the following warning: "DeprecationWarning: os.popen2 is
+## DP: deprecated. Use the subprocess module."
+## DP: Also, the *nix version of rdiff-backup requires shell=True instead of
+## DP: shell=False in the subprocess.Popen call
+
+@DPATCH@
+diff -urNad rdiff-backup-1.2.8~/rdiff_backup/SetConnections.py rdiff-backup-1.2.8/rdiff_backup/SetConnections.py
+--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8~/rdiff_backup/SetConnections.py 2009-03-16 15:36:21.0 +0100
rdiff-backup-1.2.8/rdiff_backup/SetConnections.py 2009-10-03 19:27:54.935647306 +0200
+@@ -135,10 +135,10 @@
+ if not remote_cmd: return Globals.local_connection
+
+ Log("Executing " + remote_cmd, 4)
+- if os.name == "nt":
++ if map(int, sys.version.split()[0].split('.')[:2]) >= [2, 6]:
+ import subprocess
+ try:
+- process = subprocess.Popen(remote_cmd, shell=False, bufsize=0,
++ process = subprocess.Popen(remote_cmd, shell=True, bufsize=0,
+ stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
+ stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
+ (stdin, stdout) = (process.stdin, process.stdout)
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8.orig/debian/patches/03_fix_hardlinks.dpatch
+++ rdiff-backup-1.2.8/debian/patches/03_fix_hardlinks.dpatch
@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+#! /bin/sh /usr/share/dpatch/dpatch-run
+## fix_hardlinks.dpatch by
+##
+## All lines beginning with `## DP:' are a description of the patch.
+## DP: Apply hard-links bug fix patch
+## DP: https://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/index.php?26848
+
+@DPATCH@
+diff -urNad '--exclude=CVS' '--exclude=.svn' '--exclude=.git' '--exclude=.arch' '--exclude=.hg' '--exclude=_darcs' '--exclude=.bzr' rdiff-backup-1.2.8~/rdiff_backup/Hardlink.py rdiff-backup-1.2.8/rdiff_backup/Hardlink.py
+--- rdiff-backup-1.2.8~/rdiff_backup/Hardlink.py 2009-03-16 14:36:21.0 +
rdiff-backup-1.2.8/rdiff_backup/Hardlink.py 2012-01-03 11:44:21.708987145 +
+@@ -95,7 +95,13 @@
+ src_rorp.getnumlinks() == dest_rorp.getnumlinks() == 1):
+ return 1 # Hard links don't apply
+
+- if src_rorp.getnumlinks() < dest_rorp.getnumlinks(): return 0
++ """The sha1 of linked files is only stored in the metadata of the first
++ linked file on the dest side. If the first linked file on the src side is
++ deleted, then the sha1 will also be deleted on the dest side, so we test for this
++ & report not equal so that another sha1 will be stored with the next linked
++ file on the dest side"""
++ if (not islinked(src_rorp) and not dest_rorp.has_sha1()): return 0
++ if src_rorp.getnumlinks() != dest_rorp.getnumlinks(): return 0
+ src_key = get_inode_key(src_rorp)
+
Re: RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
* Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez , 2012-01-03, 15:30:
* http://mentors.debian.net/package/rdiff-backup
$ dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-7.dsc
Version number for NMU is wrong, and lintian would tell you that:
W: rdiff-backup source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1.2.8-7
What is the point of 02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning? The default
version is 2.7, which has all deprecation warnings disabled by default.
Rather than:
if map(int, sys.version.split()[0].split('.')[:2]) >= [2, 6]:
you could write:
if sys.version_info >= (2, 6):
Though I don't understand why do you need a version check at all. The
subprocess module has been available since 2.4, and even oldstable has
2.5 as the default version.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120103144920.ga1...@jwilk.net
Re: RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
heh, I emailed Carl about this package few hours ago [Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez, 2012-01-03] > I am looking for a sponsor for the version 1.2.8-7 of my package > "rdiff-backup". please change version to 1.2.8-6.1 (it's NMU after all), it's weird that lintian didn't warn you about it... anyway, please ping me in few days if Carl will not reply. > This new version should be pushed to stable, testing and sid (the package > version is the same on all cases). did you ask release managers about it? -- Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120103145355.gq27...@piotro.eu
Re: RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
On 03/01/12 15:49, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez , 2012-01-03, 15:30:
>> * http://mentors.debian.net/package/rdiff-backup
>>
>> $ dget
>> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-7.dsc
>>
>
> Version number for NMU is wrong, and lintian would tell you that:
>
> W: rdiff-backup source: source-nmu-has-incorrect-version-number 1.2.8-7
>
Ups, sorry fixed it to be 1.2.8-6.1
$ dget
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-6.1.dsc
> What is the point of 02_python_2.6_deprecationwarning? The default
> version is 2.7, which has all deprecation warnings disabled by default.
The default version of python is 2.6 on stable (squeeze)
> Rather than:
>
> if map(int, sys.version.split()[0].split('.')[:2]) >= [2, 6]:
>
> you could write:
>
> if sys.version_info >= (2, 6):
>
> Though I don't understand why do you need a version check at all. The
> subprocess module has been available since 2.4, and even oldstable has
> 2.5 as the default version.
>
I just picked this patch from the rdiff-backup of ubuntu/lucid [1]
http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/universe/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-5ubuntu2.diff.gz
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rdiff-backup/+bug/436035
Regards!
--
~~~
Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez http://neutrino.es
Igalia - Free Software Engineeringhttp://www.igalia.com
~~~
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
On 03/01/12 15:53, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > heh, I emailed Carl about this package few hours ago > > [Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez, 2012-01-03] >> I am looking for a sponsor for the version 1.2.8-7 of my package >> "rdiff-backup". > > please change version to 1.2.8-6.1 (it's NMU after all), it's weird that > lintian didn't warn you about it... anyway, please ping me in few days > if Carl will not reply. Changed version number. $ dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdiff-backup/rdiff-backup_1.2.8-6.1.dsc Ok, I will ping here in a few days if the current maintainer don't replies. > >> This new version should be pushed to stable, testing and sid (the package >> version is the same on all cases). > > did you ask release managers about it? No... What I need to do for this? Perhaps ask for it on debian-rele...@lists.debian.org ?? Thanks! -- ~~~ Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez http://neutrino.es Igalia - Free Software Engineeringhttp://www.igalia.com ~~~ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: Non-maintainer upload for rdiff-backup
On 03/01/2012 15:30, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for the version 1.2.8-7 of my package > "rdiff-backup". > > The upload would fix these bugs: 585508, 587370 Hi Carlos, Thanks for your work. I upgraded the rdiff-backup package and sent the RFS to my usual sponsor in order to close these bugs (more accurately #558035 and #587370). Bye, Carl Chenet -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f03bbae.5020...@ohmytux.com
