Hello,
On Tue 29 Oct 2019 at 08:32AM +01, Tobias Frost wrote:
>> For example, you would not be able to do this:
>>git clone salsa:something
>>cd something
>>make some straightforward change
>>git tag# } [1]
>>git push # }
>> Instead you would have to download the .origs
Helmut Grohne writes ("Re: Building Debian source packages reproducibly (was:
Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format)"):
> I think I'd trust the tag2upload service given the documentation you
> presented about it. I'm less faithful in all dgit installations being
>
Hi Didier
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Of course, all of this can only work if we can have, or make the ".git to
> .dsc" conversion reproducible; hence my query.
Now, please read the first mail of this thread again. Yes, maybe parts
of it are unclear,
Hi Ian,
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 12:54:57PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I wonder if I have misunderstood you, because:
>
> The tag2upload proposal is based on dgit, which already provides this.
> dgit indeed defines an isomorphism between source packages and git
> trees, and dgit clone gives a git
Helmut Grohne writes ("Re: Building Debian source packages reproducibly (was:
Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format)"):
> In other words, I want these formats (source package and tagged git
> tree) to be isomorphic (minus history). This requirement is too strong
> sin
On 2019-10-29 08:32, Tobias Frost wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:53:00PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
(...)
For example, you would not be able to do this:
git clone salsa:something
cd something
make some straightforward change
git tag# } [1]
git push # }
Instead you would
Hi Ian,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:53:00PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
(...)
> For example, you would not be able to do this:
>git clone salsa:something
>cd something
>make some straightforward change
>git tag# } [1]
>git push # }
> Instead you would have to download the
Hi Ian,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 05:53:00PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> The sticking point, as I understand it, is that this still does not
> allow dak to verify that the *contents* of the .dsc were as intended
> by the uploading human. [0]
>
> In the tag2upload proposal, the conversion from git t
On October 28, 2019 5:53:00 PM UTC, Ian Jackson
wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Building Debian source packages
>reproducibly (was: Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format)"):
>> Effectively tag2upload would replace DAK as the entry point for
>> packages into
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes ("Building Debian source packages reproducibly
(was: Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format)"):
> Where I'm coming from is that we were discussing the tag2upload
> problem at miniDebConf Vaumarcus. [...]
I appreciate your efforts to
Scott Kitterman writes ("Re: Building Debian source packages reproducibly (was:
Re: [RFC] Proposal for new source format)"):
> Effectively tag2upload would replace DAK as the entry point for
> packages into the archive (the equivalent to the current source
> package signature
one by now I think it's reasonable to assume
>> > it's difficult, and thinking that it's so is not excessively
>> > pessimistic.
>>
>> Generating a reproducible source package given a particuar git commit
>> is trivial. All you have to do is use
On Monday, October 28, 2019 9:45:36 AM EDT Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > Where I'm coming from is that we were discussing the tag2upload problem at
> > miniDebConf Vaumarcus. The heart of the problem is that FTP-Master are
> > (c
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Where I'm coming from is that we were discussing the tag2upload problem at
> miniDebConf Vaumarcus. The heart of the problem is that FTP-Master are
> (currently) not going to accept .dscs built reproducibly by a (even trusted
ting a reproducible source package given a particuar git
> > commit
> > is trivial. All you have to do is use "git archive". For example:
>
> When talking about upstream projects, sure.
>
> But generating Debian source packages (.dsc and friends) from a
> `deb
t it's so is not excessively
> > pessimistic.
>
> Generating a reproducible source package given a particuar git commit
> is trivial. All you have to do is use "git archive". For example:
When talking about upstream projects, sure.
But generating Debian source packag
Thanks for the link.
The numbers I got from Zack are similar.
Jan.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> >it's a too big a job to do by myself, and maybe the answer already
> exists:
> >
> >When I would download all
Hi Jan,
>it's a too big a job to do by myself, and maybe the answer already exists:
>
>When I would download all Debian source packages, extract them, determine
> of each the programming language it is written in and the SLOC, what would be
> the percentages of each
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 12:57:01PM +0100, Jan de Haan wrote:
>When I would download all Debian source packages, extract them, determine
> of each the programming language it is written in and the SLOC, what would be
> the percentages of each programming language used?
The Debsources
Hi All,
it's a too big a job to do by myself, and maybe the answer already exists:
When I would download all Debian source packages, extract them, determine
of each the programming language it is written in and the SLOC, what would be
the percentages of each programming language
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> ho ho -- smart ;) not sure even which version to assign if someone
> would decide to close this bug report ;)
I have retitled the bug asking for this to be documented. I think both
the manual page and the --help output need to mention
ho ho -- smart ;) not sure even which version to assign if someone
would decide to close this bug report ;)
Apparently this feature is working out of the box "by design", as
James McCoy points out. Since Contents-* file format is the same for
-sources as for any other architecture listing conten
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 06:40:18PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> > >I have just realized that this helpful Contents-sources.gz I had
> > >on my drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as
> > >I thought it was ;-)
>
> > >Raphael, is
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >I have just realized that this helpful Contents-sources.gz I had
> >on my drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as
> >I thought it was ;-)
> >Raphael, is there a chance to reincarnate this "service" or was it
> >superseded by a better s
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
> > drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as I thought it
> > was ;-)
> > Raphael, is there a chance to reincarnate this "service" or was it
> > superseded by a better solution?
> apt-file
nah -- that one for binary pkgs only AFAIK.
måndagen den 4 juni 2012 23.41.42 skrev Yaroslav Halchenko:
> I have just realized that this helpful Contents-sources.gz I had on my
> drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as I thought it
> was ;-)
>
> Raphael, is there a chance to reincarnate this "service" or was it
> supers
* Yaroslav Halchenko , 2012-06-04, 17:41:
I have just realized that this helpful Contents-sources.gz I had on my
drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as I thought
it was ;-)
Raphael, is there a chance to reincarnate this "service" or was it
superseded by a better solution?
I have just realized that this helpful Contents-sources.gz I had on my
drive is more than a year old and is not updated by cron as I thought it
was ;-)
Raphael, is there a chance to reincarnate this "service" or was it
superseded by a better solution?
Thanks in advance
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Micha
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> But in principle it does sound like a good idea to feed this information
> into UDD. What do you think about keeping content of binary and source
> packages inside UDD?
Sounds very good to me.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
On Fri, Oct 01, 2010 at 08:45:34AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 06:13:45PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > > I *think*, if Raphael hadn't stepped up first and saved you the bother,
> > > you could probably get this information out of UDD.
> >
> > AFAIK (and supported by
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 06:13:45PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > I *think*, if Raphael hadn't stepped up first and saved you the bother,
> > you could probably get this information out of UDD.
>
> AFAIK (and supported by [1]) UDD doesn't even have the Contents of binary
> packages.
But in p
Jon Dowland wrote:
> I *think*, if Raphael hadn't stepped up first and saved you the bother,
> you could probably get this information out of UDD.
AFAIK (and supported by [1]) UDD doesn't even have the Contents of binary
packages.
The only other alternative (but there's no guarantee that all th
I *think*, if Raphael hadn't stepped up first and saved you the bother, you
could probably get this information out of UDD.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian
Am Donnerstag, den 30.09.2010, 14:38 -0400 schrieb Michael Hanke:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:33:54PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, den 30.09.2010, 14:31 -0400 schrieb Michael Hanke:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I want to determine in what Debian _source_ packages a file with a
> > > p
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 02:21:45PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Michael Hanke wrote:
> > Is there any way to accomplish this, without having to create a
> > complete mirror of the archive and parse all tarballs?
>
> As of a few minutes ago:
> http://lintian.debian.org/~geissert/Contents-source
Michael Hanke wrote:
> Is there any way to accomplish this, without having to create a
> complete mirror of the archive and parse all tarballs?
As of a few minutes ago:
http://lintian.debian.org/~geissert/Contents-sources.gz
(for the time being, to be updated every four days.)
Cheers,
--
Rapha
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Michael Hanke wrote:
> I want to determine in what Debian _source_ packages a file with a
> particular name exists. There used to be a webservice that had all?
> source packages indexed and allowed for this type of query, but I cannot
> remember what it was -- mayb
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:33:54PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 30.09.2010, 14:31 -0400 schrieb Michael Hanke:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I want to determine in what Debian _source_ packages a file with a
> > particular name exists. There used to be a webservice that had all?
> > source
Am Donnerstag, den 30.09.2010, 14:31 -0400 schrieb Michael Hanke:
> Hi,
>
> I want to determine in what Debian _source_ packages a file with a
> particular name exists. There used to be a webservice that had all?
> source packages indexed and allowed for this type of query, but I cannot
> remember
Hi,
I want to determine in what Debian _source_ packages a file with a
particular name exists. There used to be a webservice that had all?
source packages indexed and allowed for this type of query, but I cannot
remember what it was -- maybe it doesn't exist anymore.
Is there any way to accomplis
On 12/8/06, Ken&Tam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello, my name is Kenneth. I am looking source files. I have looked over
your web site and no link is available to allow persons to access the
source directory.
If you do this by email request, then I am requesting the packages
"IceApe & IceDove".
I
Ken&Tam wrote:
> Hello, my name is Kenneth. I am looking source files. I have looked over
> your web site and no link is available to allow persons to access the
> source directory.
Debian does distribute source (*.diff.gz and *.orig.tar.gz, or *.tar.gz)
and binaries (*.deb) simultaniously.
> If
Hello, my name is Kenneth. I am looking source files. I have looked over
your web site and no link is available to allow persons to access the
source directory.
If you do this by email request, then I am requesting the packages
"IceApe & IceDove".
I do hope that you provide a link on your webs
* Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> * Marc Haber wrote:
> > Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I just asked too to be a part of the maintainer team for dpatch.
> >
> > I see. Let me summarize: You post your offer to adopt the package
> > 60 seconds before another team which has already collabora
* Marc Haber wrote:
> Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I just asked too to be a part of the maintainer team for dpatch.
>
> I see. Let me summarize: You post your offer to adopt the package 60
> seconds before another team which has already collaborated announces
> taking over the package
Hello Marc,
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-18 13:42]:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:51:45 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-17 21:45]:
> >> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:02:16 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >* Marc Haber <[E
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:51:45 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-17 21:45]:
>> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:02:16 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-16 15:43]:
>> >> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:40:33 +0
Hello Marc,
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-17 21:45]:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:02:16 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-16 15:43]:
> >> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:40:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Since I
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:02:16 +0100, Nico Golde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-16 15:43]:
>> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:40:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Since I do care about dpatch, and I do use it a lot in my packages,
>> >I will be w
Hello Marc,
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-16 15:43]:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:40:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Since I do care about dpatch, and I do use it a lot in my packages,
> >I will be willing to help out / adopt this package.
>
> After organizing on
> > >I don't have time to properly maintain dpatch, nor do I use it anymore,
> > >so a new maintainer is probably justified, to say the least.
> > >
> > >You might consider this an O:, even. It is only RFA, because I do not
> > >want to upload a new, probably half-broken dpatch just to orphan it.
>
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:40:33 +0900, Junichi Uekawa
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Since I do care about dpatch, and I do use it a lot in my packages,
>I will be willing to help out / adopt this package.
After organizing on IRC, Junichi and I will take over the package.
Gergely has agreed, and an uplo
Hi,
* Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-16 11:08]:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:50:36 +0100, Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >retitle 264567 RFA: dpatch -- patch maintenance system for Debian source
> >packages
> >thanks
> >
> >I don&#
Hi,
> >retitle 264567 RFA: dpatch -- patch maintenance system for Debian source
> >packages
> >thanks
> >
> >I don't have time to properly maintain dpatch, nor do I use it anymore,
> >so a new maintainer is probably justified, to say the least.
> >
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:50:36 +0100, Gergely Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>retitle 264567 RFA: dpatch -- patch maintenance system for Debian source
>packages
>thanks
>
>I don't have time to properly maintain dpatch, nor do I use it anymore,
>so a new maintainer is p
retitle 264567 RFA: dpatch -- patch maintenance system for Debian source
packages
thanks
I don't have time to properly maintain dpatch, nor do I use it anymore,
so a new maintainer is probably justified, to say the least.
You might consider this an O:, even. It is only RFA, because I d
56 matches
Mail list logo
