On 22/09/23 09:41, Christoph Biedl wrote:
I doubt simple rules will really work out, rules like that
one I had in mind "Packages are removed from testing once they have been
orphaned/last maintainer-uploaded more than five years ago".
Maybe something more nuanced may work.
For example: package
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 23:07 +0900, Simon Richter wrote:
> One thing I'd think might help would be a tag in the package database
> that is derived from WNPP status, which would allow the summary output
> at the end of installs also list packages that are installed that are
> currently in RFA or O
On Fri, 2023-09-22 at 09:27 +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote:
> Host lintian.debian.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
> is this expected ?
Yes, it is replaced by the UDD interface:
https://wiki.debian.org/Services/lintian.debian.org
https://udd.debian.org/lintian/
There is no web based location for the desc
On 9/22/23 4:26 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
Am 22.09.23 um 21:40 schrieb Khalid Aziz:
I want to change the behavior to:
- No package config option to do automatic kexec reboot.
- "reboot" command causes a cold reboot
- Use "kexec-reboot" command to do a kexec reboot. "kexec-reboot" is a
script i
Am 23.09.23 um 00:26 schrieb Michael Biebl:
Am 22.09.23 um 21:40 schrieb Khalid Aziz:
I want to change the behavior to:
- No package config option to do automatic kexec reboot.
- "reboot" command causes a cold reboot
- Use "kexec-reboot" command to do a kexec reboot. "kexec-reboot" is a
scrip
Am 22.09.23 um 21:40 schrieb Khalid Aziz:
I want to change the behavior to:
- No package config option to do automatic kexec reboot.
- "reboot" command causes a cold reboot
- Use "kexec-reboot" command to do a kexec reboot. "kexec-reboot" is a
script installed by kexec-tools package.
- kexec-t
On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 21:29, Khalid Aziz wrote:
>
> On 9/22/23 2:01 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 20:41, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> >>
> >> Any comments/feedback? I intend to proceed with implementing new
> >> behavior next week after Wednesday unless there are objections or ot
On 9/22/23 2:01 PM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 20:41, Khalid Aziz wrote:
Any comments/feedback? I intend to proceed with implementing new
behavior next week after Wednesday unless there are objections or other
ideas.
Hi,
In the next version of systemd, due in trixie in a c
On Fri, 22 Sept 2023 at 20:41, Khalid Aziz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I implemented automatic kexec reboot support to kexec-tools package many
> years ago when Debian used init. It worked well except for some corner
> cases. To support this, I also added a package config option to enable
> kexec reboot
Hello,
I implemented automatic kexec reboot support to kexec-tools package many
years ago when Debian used init. It worked well except for some corner
cases. To support this, I also added a package config option to enable
kexec reboots on reboot command. Since Debian started using systemd,
au
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Amin Bandali
* Package name: libgedit-gtksourceview
Version : 299.0.4
Upstream Contact: Sébastien Wilmet
* URL : https://github.com/gedit-technology/libgedit-gtksourceview
* License : LGPL-2.1+
Programming Lang: C
De
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:07:39PM +0900, Simon Richter wrote:
> Yes and no. We're providing a better service than pulling the rug under the
> users, but we could do better by communicating that these packages are in
> need of new maintainers instead of waiting for them to bit-rot to a point
> wher
Sune Vuorela writes:
> I do think that this is another point of "we should kill our babies if
> they don't take off". And preferably faster if/when "we lost" the race.
> We carried around the debian menu for a decade or so after we failed to
> gain traction and people centered on desktop files.
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Bo YU
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: filecheck
Version : 0.0.23
Upstream Contact: s.pankev...@gmail.com
* URL : https://github.com/mull-project/FileCheck.py
* License : Apache-2.0 license
Pr
Hi,
On 9/22/23 16:41, Christoph Biedl wrote:
That's not surprising: lpr is an old technology, it may be simple but it
has quirks. People moved on, and if they cared a little, they let go.
Erm. We're talking about printers here. lpr is the protocol with the
fewest quirks.
I agree that the d
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:11 AM Steve Langasek wrote:
>
>
> SPDX defines an xml format only. They lost before they'd even started.
>
> debian/copyright is supposed to be human-readable first and foremost. XML
> need not apply.
Not true. From [1]:
> Shall be in a human readable form.
> [...]
>
Hi,
please go with python-control for the source package name. This is
required for consistency with https://repology.org/.
Regards,
Stephan
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:30 AM Kurva Prashanth
wrote:
>
> On 2023-09-21 23:50, Christoph Biedl wrote:
> > Kurva Prashanth wrote...
> >
> >> * Package na
On 2023-09-22 02:20, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 08:37:53PM +, Kurva Prashanth wrote:
>> It seems debian python team following certain convention when naming
>> packages for python modules, libraries prefixed with "python-" and
>> python3 packages are prefixed with "pyh
At 2023-09-22T02:11:15-0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> SPDX defines an xml format only. They lost before they'd even
> started.
>
> debian/copyright is supposed to be human-readable first and foremost.
> XML need not apply.
Very much +1 on everything quoted.
That said, SPDX's license list and the
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 08:43:25AM -, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2023-09-08, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > Since Debian's machine-readable format has been around longer than
> > either of the newer formats you mentioned, it seems like it would
> > make more sense for the tools to incorporate a parse
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 08:43:25AM -, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> I do think that this is another point of "we should kill our babies if
> they don't take off". And preferably faster if/when "we lost" the race.
>
> We carried around the debian menu for a decade or so after we failed to
> gain tracti
On 2023-09-08, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> Since Debian's machine-readable format has been around longer than
> either of the newer formats you mentioned, it seems like it would
> make more sense for the tools to incorporate a parser for it rather
I do think that this is another point of "we should k
Russ Allbery wrote...
> Since I wrote my original message, I noticed that rlpr is orphaned.
If only rlpr were the only one :-|
When looking into the reverse dependencies of lpr/lprng at the beginning
of this thread, I found several orphaned packages, some for already for
more than ten years. To
Hi,
Host lintian.debian.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
is this expected ?
Jérémy
24 matches
Mail list logo
