Status: `Rules-Requires-Root: no` being the new default

2024-12-30 Thread Niels Thykier
Niels Thykier: Hi, This is an update on the MBF for `Rules-Requires-Root: no` as the new default. Two weeks further down the line with another update. :) # Qualitative updates: * I have asked the release team to look into whether we should go ahead with this for Trixie or wait until a

Status: `Rules-Requires-Root: no` being the new default

2024-12-16 Thread Niels Thykier
Hi, This is an update on the MBF for `Rules-Requires-Root: no` as the new default. # Qualitative updates: * The bugs have all been filed. Most where filed on Dec 7, but I had to file 15 special cases manually, which happened Dec 14. * A number of permission denied issues have been iden

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-31 Thread Alberto Garcia
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 10:24:04AM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > b) various packages already ignore s390x (gnome? others?) WebKitGTK still builds in s390x, but the Skia graphics library does not support big-endian machines so if the Cairo backend is ever dropped then we probably won't be able

s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Berli Gayathri
Hi everyone, I am employed with IBM as a Debian maintainer for the S390x. I would like to assume responsibility for this bundle. I previously replied to the bug below about updating it due to OpenSSL errors. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1080317 Many changes and bugs have b

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Elizabeth K. Joseph
On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 5:49 AM Marco d'Itri wrote: > > On Oct 28, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > It also appears true that IBM has an interest in s390x, but today > I wonder if their interest could actually be just in Debian providing > a base for the Ubuntu port (which I understand used to be

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Oct 28, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > It also appears true that IBM has an interest in s390x, but today I wonder if their interest could actually be just in Debian providing a base for the Ubuntu port (which I understand used to be funded by IBM). And if this is still true now that IBM owns Re

Re: s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Simon McVittie
e the cause of interest for curious people, > in general it seems to cause more problems than we need. I believe the latest status from porters outside Debian is that the GTK and librsvg issues are believed to be caused by a regression in src:pixman, and not actually the GNOME libraries' fa

s390x architecture status?

2024-10-28 Thread Chris Hofstaedtler
Hello! I want to draw attention to, from my point of view, open questions/problems with the s390x architecture. In short, it seems to me, that: a) there are no porters left (to fix serious problems) b) various packages already ignore s390x (gnome? others?) c) general, including upstreams, interes

Status of OpenMAX IL

2024-08-25 Thread Simon Richter
Hi, it seems the only OpenMAX implementation got removed from unstable, and ffmpeg drops OpenMAX support as well because that implementation was providing the header files. That is a bit suboptimal for me, because the VisionFive2 hardware video encoder is also interfaced using OpenMAX IL.

Re: make vcswatch detect "archived" status

2024-08-03 Thread Jeremy Stanley
is on our end. There's no metadata for archived project status, just a convention that projects empty out their default Git branch and replace the readme with ad hoc information about ceasing maintenance or moving to another service. Also OpenDev currently only hosts a few thousand projects

make vcswatch detect "archived" status

2024-08-03 Thread Alexandre Detiste
Hi Simon, I think there could be a more global solution for this problem: the vcswatch service could know about Gihub & Opendev infamous "This project has been archived ..." and the wontfix/upstream bug could be filed automatically to notify the maintainers that the current upstream dropped the

Bug#1076804: ITP: faadelays -- Python package to access FAA airport status data

2024-07-23 Thread Edward Betts
: MIT Programming Lang: Python Description : Python library for FAA airport status data This library facilitates access to real-time airport status data from the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) NAS Status API. The FAA, an agency of the United States Departme

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-28 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 02:28:30PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > > Can you please look at libproxy<->glib-networking? libproxy excuses show > > glib-networking tests failing, but they are working in sid. > > And that's not missing a versioned Depends and/or Breaks? I.e. this is a > test only failure

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-28 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 27-04-2024 7:52 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: Can you please look at libproxy<->glib-networking? libproxy excuses show glib-networking tests failing, but they are working in sid. And that's not missing a versioned Depends and/or Breaks? I.e. this is a test only failure? Paul Ope

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-27 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 07:38:42PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi, > > On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > > What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems with > > packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for > > speech-dispatch

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-24 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 24-04-2024 7:42 p.m., Jérémy Lal wrote: Inform the Release Team and we can either schedule the combination manually, add a hint or both. Isn't it processed automatically ? What needs manual intervention and what doesn't ? Well, the migration software *tries* to figure out com

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-24 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 24-04-2024 7:38 p.m., Paul Gevers wrote: On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems with packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for speech-dispatcher/0.11.5-2 on Inform the Rel

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-24 Thread Jérémy Lal
Le mer. 24 avr. 2024 à 19:39, Paul Gevers a écrit : > Hi, > > On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > > What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems > with > > packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for > > speech-dispatcher/0.1

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-24 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi, On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems with packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for speech-dispatcher/0.11.5-2 on Inform the Release Team and we can either schedule the combi

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-24 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 08:51:48AM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > If you wonder how you are able to help with the migration, here are > some things to do: > * Fix FTBFS bugs > * Check the status of autopkgtests [1] and report or fix any issues > related to failing tests. >

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-23 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
through all the packages hat need to migrate. Since the time_t bugs are now also RC in trixie, I will reraise the severity of all time_t bugs to serious in 1 week. If you wonder how you are able to help with the migration, here are some things to do: * Fix FTBFS bugs * Check the status of

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-21 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
Hi Andreas, please stop reopening the time_t bugs where transitions are staged in experimental. When we eventually start those transitions, they do not need to change the package name again as they will enter unstable with a new SONAME and built with the 64 bit time_t ABI. Cheers -- Sebastian Ra

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-20 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
Lists updated to omit packages not in testing: On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 09:22:02PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Let's start with the first category. Those are packages that could be > binNMUed, but there are issues that make those rebuilds not have the > desired effect. This list include pack

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-20 Thread Jens Reyer
On 18.04.24 21:22, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: Hi, as the progress on the t64 transition is slowing down, I want to give an overview of some of the remaining blockers that we need to tackle to get it unstuck. I tried to identify some clusters of issues, but there might be other classes of issues.

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-20 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
All missing bugs about wrong deps are now filed. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
Hi thanks for checking all the packages and filing bugs! On 2024-04-20 00:43:30 +0500, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 09:22:02PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > Let's start with the first category. Those are packages that could be > > binNMUed, but there are issues that

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
Hi Andreas On 2024-04-19 10:49:15 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > I've spotted these Debian Med packages. > > > gentle gentle required a rebuild for wxwidgets3.2 on mips64el. Done > > jellyfish The t64 changes were reverted. crac needs to rebuilt for this change so that libjellyfish-2.0-2t64 can

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
On 2024-04-19 10:34:45 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: > Sebastian Ramacher writes: > > > Hi, > > > > as the progress on the t64 transition is slowing down, I want to give an > > overview of some of the remaining blockers that we need to tackle to get > > it unstuck. I tried to identify some cluste

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Andrey Rakhmatullin
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 09:22:02PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Let's start with the first category. Those are packages that could be > binNMUed, but there are issues that make those rebuilds not have the > desired effect. This list include packages that > * are BD-Uninstallabe, > * FTBFS b

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Étienne Mollier
Hi Sebastian, Andreas Tille, on 2024-04-19: > I've spotted these Debian Med packages. […] > Am Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 09:22:02PM +0200 schrieb Sebastian Ramacher: […] > > jellyfish > > quorum […] > No idea how we can help here. Please let us know if we can do > something. About these two packages,

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Andreas Tille
es Upstream is working on bug #1067271. > vg This package is in a bad state in any case and we are aware of this. However, could you explain in how far is this affecting t64 transition since 32bit architectures are excluded? > If you maintain any of the packages above, please check their

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hello, On Thu, 2024-04-18 at 21:22 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Finally, packages that need rebuilds but currently have open FTBFS (RC + > ftbfs tag) bugs: > (...) > virtualjaguar I already have a tentative patch and will fix the package within the next days. I am also preparing to fix two

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Simon Josefsson
Sebastian Ramacher writes: > Hi, > > as the progress on the t64 transition is slowing down, I want to give an > overview of some of the remaining blockers that we need to tackle to get > it unstuck. I tried to identify some clusters of issues, but there might > be other classes of issues. Thanks

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-19 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
On 2024-04-19 06:02:03 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > On 2024-04-18 Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > [...] > > Let's start with the first category. Those are packages that could be > > binNMUed, but there are issues that make those rebuilds not have the > > desired effect. This list include packages t

Re: Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-18 Thread Andreas Metzler
On 2024-04-18 Sebastian Ramacher wrote: [...] > Let's start with the first category. Those are packages that could be > binNMUed, but there are issues that make those rebuilds not have the > desired effect. This list include packages that > * are BD-Uninstallabe, > * FTBFS but with out ftbfs-tag

Status of the t64 transition

2024-04-18 Thread Sebastian Ramacher
were already removed from testing are also on these lists. If you maintain any of the packages above, please check their status and help get them fixed. Any help in filing bugs, fixing packages, requesting removals, etc. is appreciated so that we can look into unblocking the whole stack and migrate

Bug#1068521: ITP: kf6-kstatusnotifieritem -- Implementation of Status Notifier Items

2024-04-06 Thread Patrick Franz
/frameworks/kstatusnotifieritem * License : LGPL, CC0 Programming Lang: C++ Description : Implementation of Status Notifier Items KStatusNotifierItem provides an implementation of Status Notifier Items. Package will be maintained within the Debian Qt/KDE team.

Bug#1068212: ITP: python-grpcio-status -- Status proto mapping for gRPC

2024-04-01 Thread Yogeswaran Umasankar
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Yogeswaran Umasankar X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, kd8...@gmail.com * Package name: python-grpcio-status Version : 1.62.1 Upstream Contact: The gRPC Authors * URL : https://github.com/OctopusAI/grpcio-status

Re: /usr-merge status update + next steps

2023-08-28 Thread Luca Boccassi
On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 at 10:21, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Let me also put this into numbers. Across all suites, we have around > 2200 binary packages shipping files in aliased locations. If you > disregard systemd units, we're left with 1030 packages. In other words, > more than half of the binary pack

Re: /usr-merge status update + next steps

2023-08-22 Thread Helmut Grohne
Control: forwarded -1 https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debhelper/-/merge_requests/108 Control: tags -1 + patch On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 11:19:56PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Related to that: > dh_installsystemd (and the old, deprecated dh_systemd_enable) currently only > consider systemd unit fi

Re: /usr-merge status update + next steps

2023-08-20 Thread Michael Biebl
Am 19.08.23 um 23:14 schrieb Helmut Grohne: ## dh_usrmerge I intend to add a new tool dh_usrmerge to debhelper (not yet implemented). Its purpose is performing the path canonicalization in binary packages. As long as the moratorium is in effect, this helper must not be used. It shall be possibl

Re: /usr-merge status update + next steps

2023-08-20 Thread Paul Gevers
Hi Helmut, On 19-08-2023 23:14, Helmut Grohne wrote: I recognize that this is quite a non-standard way to ask for a MBF. Does anyone object to me doing it in this way? I recall I said this before, but just in case. In my opinion (with my Release Team member hat on, but not on behalf of the t

/usr-merge status update + next steps

2023-08-19 Thread Helmut Grohne
Hi, Yeah, I know we have too many /usr-merge discussions. Still, there is reason to continue posting. My last summary/status was https://lists.debian.org/20230712133438.ga935...@subdivi.de from July 12th and I'm giving an update of what happened since then here and explain how I want to

Bug#1032496: ITP: kylin-status-manager -- System status D-Bus service for UKUI

2023-03-07 Thread MouseZhang
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: MouseZhang X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, sendbypyt...@foxmail.com * Package name: kylin-status-manager Version : 3.22.0.0-1 Upstream Contact: Kylin Team * URL : https://gitee.com/openkylin/kylin-status-manager

Re: 回复: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-04 Thread 桑猛
gt; 收件人: "debian-devel@lists.debian.org" , > "sangm...@loongson.cn" , "Santiago Vila" > , "张 宁" , > "zhangdan...@loongson.cn" > 抄送: > 主题: 回复: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch > > Hi, All > > I have updated my

回复: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-03 Thread 张 宁
zhangn1985/rebootstrap 发件人: Paul Wise 已发送: 2022 年 11 月 4 日 星期五 2:45 收件人: Zhang Ning; debian-devel@lists.debian.org; sangm...@loongson.cn; Santiago Vila 主题: Re: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch On Thu, 2022-11-03 at 18:45 +0800,

Re: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-03 Thread Paul Wise
On Thu, 2022-11-03 at 18:45 +0800, Zhang Ning wrote: > 7, m4, diffutils: need help, I don't know where is correct > upstream[1][2], the patch[3][4] is for generated files, but Debian > source has these files, thus how can I submit these patch to Debian > source? these two packages don't have VCS.

Re: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-03 Thread Zhang Ning
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 12:31:10PM +0100, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote: > Quoting Zhang Ning (2022-11-03 11:45:17) > > 6, gcc, binutils: need help, I don't know how to submit a patch to Debian > > toolchain-team, don't accept a poll request. > > > > 7, m4, diffutils: need help, I don't

Re: rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-03 Thread Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
Quoting Zhang Ning (2022-11-03 11:45:17) > 6, gcc, binutils: need help, I don't know how to submit a patch to Debian > toolchain-team, don't accept a poll request. > > 7, m4, diffutils: need help, I don't know where is correct upstream[1][2], > the patch[3][4] is for generated files, but Debian

rebootstrap status update for Loongarch

2022-11-03 Thread Zhang Ning
Hi, Helmut as you mentioned, missing upstream status, I want to update below, and my fork[0] is updated. another purpose of this email is asking for help. status update: 1, Linux: I will send patch to debian-kernel once dpkg name is settled. 2, glibc: https://salsa.debian.org/glibc-team/glibc

转发: rebootstrap status report for Loongarch

2022-11-02 Thread 张 宁
Hi, Helmut While dpkg name for Loongarch is still under discussion[0], rebootstrap can be done parallelly. I have initialed some work at https://salsa.debian.org/zhangn1985/rebootstrap corrently git commit msg is a mess, just recorder of my work. reorder commit msg is on my TODO list, but I need

Bug#1021535: ITP: powersupply-gtk -- Graphical power status tool for Linux mobile devices

2022-10-10 Thread Arnaud Ferraris
: MIT Programming Lang: Python Description : Graphical power status tool for Linux mobile devices Powersupply is a simple GTK+3 application monitoring the status of power supply nodes, exposing the current battery and USB power status through a simple UI. This application is aimed

Bug#1014220: ITP: yambar -- lightweight and configurable status panel (bar, for short) for X11 and Wayland

2022-07-02 Thread Birger Schacht
Lang: C Description : lightweight and configurable status panel (bar, for short) for X11 and Wayland yambar is a lightweight and configurable status panel (bar, for short) for X11 and Wayland, that goes to great lengths to be both CPU and battery efficient - polling is only done when

Bug#1006773: ITP: plasma-gamemode -- Plasma status icon for the GameMode daemon

2022-03-04 Thread Aurélien COUDERC
/plasma-gamemode * License : GPL, LGPL, BSD, CC0 Programming Lang: C++, QML Description : Plasma extention for the GameMode daemon Plasma status icon for Feral Interactive’s GameMode daemon (already packaged as gamemode). The package will be maintained under the Debian KDE Extras

Re: Status of weekly live builds

2021-11-29 Thread Steve McIntyre
Peter wrote: > >I've just noticed that the weekly live builds (both the free ones [0] >and the unofficial non-free ones [1]) have not been updated since August >9, 2021. Is this on purpose or did some machinery get stuck? I disabled the testing live image builds after the bullseye release, and I

Status of weekly live builds

2021-11-29 Thread Peter Wienemann
Dear all, I've just noticed that the weekly live builds (both the free ones [0] and the unofficial non-free ones [1]) have not been updated since August 9, 2021. Is this on purpose or did some machinery get stuck? Best regards, Peter [0] https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-live-builds

Bug#998254: ITP: golang-github-soundcloud-go-runit -- go library wrapping runit service status

2021-11-01 Thread Benjamin Drung
/soundcloud/go-runit * License : Expat   Programming Lang: Go   Description : go library wrapping runit service status  go-runit go library wrapping runit service status This library was vendored in prometheus-node-exporter and is now packaged separately. -- Benjamin Drung Senior

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2021-01-21 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
ote that this is "family 6" Pentium-M processors, not "family 15" Pentium4-M. I wouldn't mind the "i386" port baseline bumped up to i686-with-SSE2 (and MMX), with gcc configured accordingly: I recall some reports that telling gcc to use SSE2 really improved seve

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2021-01-20 Thread Craig
Hello. 32-bit Pentium 4 user reading this out of personal interest throwing in a comment. If the choice is to primarily support pae or non pae for 32-bit moving forward, then I suggest non-pae for the reason that everyone can use it. If you have more than 4GB of memory you probably have a 64-bit

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2021-01-11 Thread Stephan Seitz
Am Sa, Dez 12, 2020 at 20:27:16 + schrieb Steve McIntyre: It's still quite new, but we have a package in the archive for this now: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/debian-crossgrader Well, yes, but it is only in unstable. I tried to install it but apt wanted to replace many packages. Using

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-20 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 08:27:16PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Stephan wrote: > >Am Sa, Dez 12, 2020 at 18:09:02 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk: > >>4. People who wrongly installed i386 on amd64-capable hardware. > > > >Well, some releases ago befor multi-arch I used to install i386 even on > >am64-

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-18 Thread Michael Stone
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 02:47:22PM -0500, Devops PK Carlisle LLC wrote: I understand your point about 32 bit being updated forever, and perhaps it does not need to be. Perhaps the happy medium would be to freeze it at some point, but leave it available as-is so that legacy software with 32 bit d

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-16 Thread Devops PK Carlisle LLC
I understand your point about 32 bit being updated forever, and perhaps it does not need to be. Perhaps the happy medium would be to freeze it at some point, but leave it available as-is so that legacy software with 32 bit dependencies can still be installed and run. In other words, no longer deve

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-15 Thread Michael Stone
On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 11:40:29AM -0500, Devops PK Carlisle LLC wrote: Being philosophically opposed to throwing a good machine into a landfill, I tend to hang on to equipment for a long time. My play/experimentation and last-ditch backup box is a 10 year old laptop. I hear that, but at least

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-15 Thread Christian Kastner
On 15.12.20 01:55, Russ Allbery wrote: > Increasingly most of the people who work on Debian don't have i386 > hardware lying around, particularly i386 hardware that requires an i386 > kernel or that exercises the full range of older boot processes. If you > do, testing and reporting good bugs woul

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-15 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 05:13:54PM -0500, Calum McConnell wrote: > Since (AFAIK) there is a substantial speed penalty to installing a non-pae > kernel on a -pae processor, The penalty is not using more than 4 Gb of RAM (the only related speed penalty I know about is using PAE vs not using it). --

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:36 PM Adrian Bunk wrote: > A bigger worry for i386 would be the availability of microcode updates This is also a big problem for amd64, since only the newest generations of Intel processors get BIOS/UEFI and or microcode updates, so lots of amd64 users (including myself

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Calum McConnell writes: > A very fair point, and quite equitably put. If I was remotely > comfortable tweaking kernels, or used a 32 bit machine regularly, I > would be more comfortable volunteering.  As it is, I have only really > learned to maintain packages in the past few months, and I feel

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 02:54:37PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > > The quantity of hardware is useful data, but I think this is also a place > where it's important to stress the specific problem that Debian has, > namely that we need people to do the work. >... The list of Debian release architect

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Calum McConnell
On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 14:54 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Calum McConnell writes: > > The point I'm making is that i386 processors are still incredibly > > common, and we shouldn't abandon their users. > > Not abandoning users is a powerful motivating force, but it still has to > succeed in motiva

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
In practice, whether or not i386 will be dropped as release archticture in bullseye will likely be decided by whether I will stay the only committed porter, or whether other people will ASAP send (belatedly) replies to the proter roll call [1]. This discussion started due to lack of people testi

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
Hi, Quoting Russ Allbery (2020-12-14 23:54:37) > > The point I'm making is that i386 processors are still incredibly common, > > and we shouldn't abandon their users. > > Not abandoning users is a powerful motivating force, but it still has to > succeed in motivating people. Debian can't make a

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 01:22:11PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2020-12-13 at 01:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > [...] > > While the ongoing > > costs of maintaining a full port were a consideration, of equal concern was > > the fact that we believed we would not be able to provide secur

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Calum McConnell writes: > As I showed in my (slightly over dramatic, very over-long) email this > morning, there are more people with i386 kernels than there are total > users of every other release architecture. Even if you only look at > non-pae kernels, its still about double the total instal

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Calum McConnell
On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 10:02 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > One possible intermediate option shy of dropping the i386 architecture > would be to drop the i386 kernel and instead help all i386 installs > switch > to the amd64 kernel while still running i386 binaries.  (That said, this > will obviously

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Ben Hutchings writes: > I agree that kernel security support for i386 is seriously lacking. > The Spectre mitigations were actually available for both x86 > architectures at the same time, but the initial Meltdown mitigation was > amd64-specific and was not extended to i386 until Linux 4.19. Th

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-14 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2020-12-13 at 01:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: [...] > While the ongoing > costs of maintaining a full port were a consideration, of equal concern was > the fact that we believed we would not be able to provide security support > for the architecture as a whole at par with other architect

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-13 Thread Devops PK Carlisle LLC
Being philosophically opposed to throwing a good machine into a landfill, I tend to hang on to equipment for a long time. My play/experimentation and last-ditch backup box is a 10 year old laptop. During COVID I spent a little time updating and upgrading it and came up with this: https://go.carlis

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-13 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 06:09:02PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > Ubuntu have chosen to support the first use-case, and only the first > > use-case. They longer ship a complete, bootable i386 operating system; > > instead, they have an i386 second-class-citizen architecture that > > is sufficient to

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread Calum McConnell
Hi all, As someone who runs amd64/i386 multiarch, this statement from Adrian: > i386 hardware is so numerous and widely spread, that every tiny fraction > of i386 users might be more users than half of our release architectures > combined. It is not even clear whether this is just an exaggeration

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread peter green
Then there was the short netbook boom, but AFAIR some early ones had 64bit CPUs but 32bit-only firmware. My memory is that at the height of the boom the dominant processors were the N270 and N280, which are 32-bit only. By the time 64-bit netbook processors showed up the boom was on the dec

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread Simon McVittie
On Sat, 12 Dec 2020 at 18:09:02 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > 3. Computers that do support MMX and SSE2, but do not support 64bit. Right, that's basically the second use-case I mentioned, but moving the boundary for what we do and don't support to be more modern. We could put the boundary anywhere w

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread Steve McIntyre
Stephan wrote: >Am Sa, Dez 12, 2020 at 18:09:02 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk: >>4. People who wrongly installed i386 on amd64-capable hardware. > >Well, some releases ago befor multi-arch I used to install i386 even on >am64-capable hardware if ram was quite low (=< 8GB) and if the chance >wasn’t

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread Stephan Seitz
Am Sa, Dez 12, 2020 at 18:09:02 +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk: 4. People who wrongly installed i386 on amd64-capable hardware. Well, some releases ago befor multi-arch I used to install i386 even on am64-capable hardware if ram was quite low (=< 8GB) and if the chance wasn’t that low that you nee

Re: Release status of i386 for Bullseye and long term support for 3 years?

2020-12-12 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 05:46:26PM +, Simon McVittie wrote: >... > I think it's necessary to consider what the purpose of the i386 port is, > and set expectations and an appropriate baseline based on that. > > I see two possible use-cases for i386: > > 1. It's a compatibility layer for legacy

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-21 Thread Bastian Blank
On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 10:24:18AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > On 8/19/20 7:28 PM, Ansgar wrote: > > Well, I can't fix it without creating dgit-ng (and setting up > > infrastructure for that) as dgit upstream won't accept patches from me. > That is just one of the reasons why I think that salsa s

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-20 Thread Bernd Zeimetz
On 8/19/20 7:28 PM, Ansgar wrote: > Well, I can't fix it without creating dgit-ng (and setting up > infrastructure for that) as dgit upstream won't accept patches from me. That is just one of the reasons why I think that salsa should be used for "official" services like tag2upload. -- Ber

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-19 Thread Ansgar
On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 10:15 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > On Fri 14 Aug 2020 at 09:04AM +02, Ansgar wrote: > > There are also other issues such as the system seeming to accepting > > uploads from known-compromised keys last I looked at it, though > > maybe security experts disagree how much of an is

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-19 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello Ansgar, On Fri 14 Aug 2020 at 09:04AM +02, Ansgar wrote: > There are also other issues such as the system seeming to accepting > uploads from known-compromised keys last I looked at it, though maybe > security experts disagree how much of an issue this is in practice. If what you say about

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-19 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello Holger, On Thu 13 Aug 2020 at 10:27PM GMT, Holger Levsen wrote: > hi Sean, > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 02:22:15PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: >> (It's worth noting that unlike salsa tags, the tags on dgit.debian.org >> are immutable. The maintainer pushes a tag to salsa but tag2upload >> co

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-14 Thread Ansgar
Sean Whitton writes: > Ian and I implemented something along these lines last summer and it's > available to try from the archive; here is how: > <https://spwhitton.name/blog/entry/tag2upload/> > > As to the current status: FTP Team members objected to having >

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Holger Levsen
hi Sean, On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 02:22:15PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > (It's worth noting that unlike salsa tags, the tags on dgit.debian.org > are immutable. The maintainer pushes a tag to salsa but tag2upload > copies it to dgit.debian.org, where it becomes a permanent record.) how is that a

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello Thomas, On Thu 13 Aug 2020 at 10:36PM +02, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 8/13/20 10:07 PM, Sean Whitton wrote: >> >> As to the current status: FTP Team members objected to having >> uploader-signed git tags on dgit.debian.org be the canonical record of >> an uploade

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Thomas Goirand
ething, there was a discussion a >>> while ago about automatically generating a source package and uploading >>> it whenever a Debian release is (signed-)tagged in Salsa. >>> >>> If I did remember correctly: may I kindly inquire what the status on >>> tha

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Sean Whitton
ly generating a source package and uploading >> it whenever a Debian release is (signed-)tagged in Salsa. >> >> If I did remember correctly: may I kindly inquire what the status on >> that is? > > I think I was the one with that idea [0], and I threw around some code la

Re: Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
> > If I did remember correctly: may I kindly inquire what the status on > that is? I think I was the one with that idea [0], and I threw around some code last winter, but I never really finished this; as I've stuck to using `dgit push- source` for now. The idea would be to have: a

Tagging in Salsa -> upload: status?

2020-08-13 Thread Christian Kastner
Unless I'm grievously misremembering something, there was a discussion a while ago about automatically generating a source package and uploading it whenever a Debian release is (signed-)tagged in Salsa. If I did remember correctly: may I kindly inquire what the status on that is?

Bug#964498: ITP: luastatus -- Universal status bar content generator

2020-07-07 Thread Viktor Krapivenskiy
status bar content generator luastatus is a universal status bar content generator. It allows the user to configure the way the data from event sources is processed and shown, with Lua. Its main feature is that the content can be updated immediately as some event occurs. It also avoids heavy

Re: Lintian status reporting on packages overview broken?

2020-06-18 Thread merkys
On 2020-06-18 11:18, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 6/18/20 10:15 AM, mer...@debian.org wrote: >> In addition to that, "Watch" column displays dashes ("-") only. > That's due to #932296 Thanks a lot for the explanation! Best, Andrius

Re: Lintian status reporting on packages overview broken?

2020-06-18 Thread Sebastiaan Couwenberg
On 6/18/20 10:15 AM, mer...@debian.org wrote: > In addition to that, "Watch" column displays dashes ("-") only. That's due to #932296 Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >