Bug#728273: ITP: r-bioc-makecdfenv -- BioConductor CDF Environment Maker

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-bioc-makecdfenv Version : 1.36.0-1 Upstream Author : Rafael A. Irizarry a.o. * URL : http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/makecdfenv.html * License : Artistic-2.0 Prog

Bug#728277: ITP: r-bioc-bsgenome -- BioConductor infrastructure for Biostrings-based genome data packages

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-bioc-bsgenome Version : 1.28.0-1 Upstream Author : Herve Pages * URL : http://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/BSgenome.html * License : Artistic-2.0 Programming Lang: R De

Re: porting OpenRC to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD

On 10/30/2013 01:38 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 10/29/2013 09:34 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Sun, 27 Oct 2013 02:47:56 +0800 Thomas Goirand wrote: >>> Note that OpenRC already works on some (non-Debian) BSD platforms, and >>> that it should be trivial to have it to build on kFr

Bug#728282: ITP: pynfft -- a Pythonic wrapper around the NFFT library

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Ghislain Vaillant * Package name: pynfft Version : 1.1.0 Upstream Author : Ghislain Vaillant * URL : http://pythonhosted.org/pyNFFT/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: Python Description : a Pythonic wrapper aroun

Re: Bug#727754: New "security-aware-resolver" virtual package.

This one time, at band camp, Charles Plessy said: > Package: debian-policy > Version: 3.9.4 > Severity: wishlist > > Le Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:28:32AM +0200, Ondřej Surý a écrit : > > Hi James, > > > > since the authoritative-name-server idea was rejected by the list, I was > > going to propose

Bug#728285: ITP: r-bioc-rsamtools -- GNU R binary alignment (BAM), variant call (BCF), or tabix file import

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andreas Tille * Package name: r-bioc-rsamtools Version : 1.12.4-1 Upstream Author : Martin Morgan, Hervé Pagès * URL : http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/Rsamtools.html * License : Artistic-2.0 Prog

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On 29/10/13 23:51, Svante Signell wrote: > On Tue, 2013-10-29 at 00:51 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > >>> (Also, do remember that any decisive outcome other than “support >>> multiple ones including systemd” and “systemd-only” will need to >>> lead to the removal of GNOME from Debian. >> >> Absolu

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Op 29-10-13 09:26, Steve Langasek schreef: > I see no reason that, if upstart were chosen as the default, porters could > not use it for our non-Linux ports as well. With some work, sure. > This is a much better outcome > across our distribution as a whole than to require developers to continue >

link building services proposal

My name is Alex Martin, We are providing blog posts, blog roll, and contextual links. We have over 1000 blog sites. Our Parameters for Link Building: * Permanent Links * Only thematic Links * Links from Unique IP's * Regular Caching sites * Less Outbound Links * Links from PR 1 to PR 4

Re: systemd effectively mandatory now due to GNOME

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 08:47:00PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:15:10PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:29:10PM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 12:13:34PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > > And this is

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Hi, Le mardi, 29 octobre 2013 15.08:01 Russ Allbery a écrit : > However, making all package maintainers continue to go through the > pain of maintaining SysV init scripts to support Hurd and kFreeBSD > doesn't strike me as a good outcome. It does for me. First we're not talking about _all_ packa

Re: Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

on Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:08:01 -0700 Russ Allbery wrote: > However, I, as a packager, want to stop writing and maintaining SysV init > scripts because they're awful. I didn't really expect this. I'd assumed until now that most maintainers would be concerned that existing init scripts don't work pro

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Hi Steve, On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 09:31:37AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:22:54AM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > > Having read the parts of the ctte bug, it feels odd to preclude the > > option of supporting multiple init systems from discussion or > > consideration. If

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 03:10:16PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote: > The interfaces of all init systems (except sysvinit, but are we really > considering that one?) still are somewhat in flux, so this is the point > where we can still influence and shape them. > > > Imagine a world where upstart and

Re: Jessie release goal: DNSSEC as default recursive resolver

Op 29-10-13 17:35, Ian Jackson schreef: > Wouter Verhelst writes ("Re: Jessie release goal: DNSSEC as default recursive > resolver"): >> There is nothing in DNSSEC which makes it inherently incompatible with >> using DNS forwarders. Talking to the root DNS servers is fun and all, >> but there's re

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Op 30-10-13 00:16, Russ Allbery schreef: > Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez writes: >> On 28/10/13 20:14, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > >>> For those who haven't seen it, Lennart has posted some of his comments >>> about all this on G+: >>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/115547683951727699051/posts/8R

Re: Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 15:10:16 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: > Furthering this thought leads to turning non-Linux ports > into derivatives as presented by others in this thread. If packages are no longer required to provide SysV init scripts, producing a non-Linux Debian derivative would at least entai

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

]] Wouter Verhelst > Yes, absense of documentation is common on Unix and Linux systems; but > no, I do not think that this is okay, or that we should in any way > encourage that sort of thing. By absense of documentation, are you referring to the almost 10% of the source base that are comments o

Re: Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Steven Chamberlain dixit: […] >substitute Upstart here if you prefer), each package's maintainer could: […] * Write scripts for one system and generate the other from it or even * Write “Debian init declaration” and let something take care of generating an initscript and whatever the other syst

Bug#728321: ITP: php-opencloud -- library to work with OpenStack clouds

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: David Prévot * Package name: php-opencloud Version : 1.6.0 Upstream Author : Rackspace developers * URL : http://php-opencloud.com/ * License : Apache-2.0 Programming Lang: PHP Descri

Re: Re: Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:05:48 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > * Write scripts for one system and generate the other from it > or even > * Write “Debian init declaration” and let something take care > of generating an initscript and whatever the other systems > use out of it Perhaps an existin

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

2013/10/30 Helmut Grohne : > What is going to happen with non-Linux ports? Debian is not Debian without non-Linux ports. As for me, I think it is not very hard to maintain diffrent init systems for different kernels. Especially if Debian GNU/Linux get rid of sysvinit: writing systemd or upstrart

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 04:29:24PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > While I agree with your point, it's pretty difficult to reimplement the > "interesting" parts of systemd in other implementations of pid1 if > whoever wrote the "interesting" parts does not document it, does not say > what it's supp

Re: Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce

Hi, On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:31:23 +0100 Steve McIntyre wrote: > We've had this discussion multiple times over the years. I've been > told multiple times that we still have a non-negligible set of users > owning/running hardware that can't do DVDs. I'm not 100% convinced > myself of how large or cri

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

previously on this list Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek contributed: > Hi Helmut, > "exec" vs. "ExecStart=" and "export" vs. "Environment=" is easy. > Anyone can whip up a sed script to convert between those. The question > is how to deal with more advanced options. Let's say that I have a > systemd u

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

previously on this list Helmut Grohne contributed: > Most participants in this thread appear to agree that the sysvinit > *interface* for services (shell scripts) is suboptimal. Not so sure, I have various thoughts on this and even the reasons that it is considered sub optimal but think some like

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 08:59:00PM +0400, Игорь Пашев wrote: > Debian is not Debian without non-Linux ports. You are entitled to your opinion, which is what this is. Debian certainly was Debian without non-Linux ports prior to February 2011, and some are of the opinion that it should be again in f

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 07:25:55PM +, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > Couldn't they just be ignored not to mention already having existing or > far more functional and robust *options* that work with any init system. A cursory glance at the example above… > > PrivateTmp=yes > > InaccessibleDirectorie

Re: Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 20:39:32 + Jonathan Dowland wrote: > [...] Debian without non-Linux ports prior to February > 2011, [...] That's only when a non-Linux Debian port (GNU/kFreeBSD) first became a _release architecture_; it existed as a port since May 2003. Hurd has been an official unstable

Bug#728337: ITP: libcookie-baker-perl -- simple cookie string generator and parser

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Florian Schlichting * Package name: libcookie-baker-perl Version : 0.02 Upstream Author : Masahiro Nagano * URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Cookie-Baker * License : GPL-1+, Artistic Programming Lang: Perl Descript

Re: Proposal: Let's have a GR about the init system

Olav wrote: >On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 05:37:50PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote: >> I don't mean to be rude but please read up on systemd and see the pros >> of cons such as on LWN.net comments or any distro mailing list as many >> are tired of systemd discussion and this wide ranging and much of the >

Bug#728341: ITP: libenum-perl -- perl module for sets of ordered constants like enums in C

Package: wnpp Owner: gregor herrmann Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org * Package name: libenum-perl Version : 1.05 Upstream Author : Neil Bowers * URL : https://metacpan.org/release/enum * License : Art

Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce

Wouter wrote: > >The last time I used the full stack of CDs where there was no decent >alternative option was when I was helping a customer prepare a set of >installation instructions for a code escrow situation. > >Since one of the requirements there was the ability to produce a 100% >bit-for-bit

Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce

Zack wrote: >On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:57:29PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> > I would not be opposed to changing the default for xfce for now, and >> > reverting it if gnome's improvements make it a better choice. >> >> OK. I suggest that we *try* that for now. > >If we try, what will be the c

Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:09:30PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Wouter wrote: > > > >The last time I used the full stack of CDs where there was no decent > >alternative option was when I was helping a customer prepare a set of > >installation instructions for a code escrow situation. > > > >Since

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

previously on this list Jonathan Dowland contributed: > > Couldn't they just be ignored not to mention already having existing or > > far more functional and robust *options* that work with any init system. > > A cursory glance at the example above… > > > > PrivateTmp=yes > > > InaccessibleDir

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Kevin Chadwick writes: > Well I meant that they would be used by systemd and ignored likely > noisily by default by others. However this really should be the job of > the service in any case as depending on a third party service for > security that isn't extra such as potentially PrivateTmp that

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

previously on this list Russ Allbery contributed: > > Well I meant that they would be used by systemd and ignored likely > > noisily by default by others. However this really should be the job of > > the service in any case as depending on a third party service for > > security that isn't extra su

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Theodore Ts'o writes: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:21:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Well, I've said this before, but I think it's worth reiterating. >> Either upstart or systemd configurations are *radically better* than >> init scripts on basically every axis. They're more robust, more >>

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:21:27PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Well, I've said this before, but I think it's worth reiterating. Either > upstart or systemd configurations are *radically better* than init scripts > on basically every axis. They're more robust, more maintainable, easier > for the

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:18:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > I suspect you and I have a root disagreement over the utility of exposing > some of those degrees of freedom to every init script author, but if you > have some more specific examples of policy that you wanted to change but > couldn't,

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Theodore Ts'o writes: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:18:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: >> I suspect you and I have a root disagreement over the utility of >> exposing some of those degrees of freedom to every init script author, >> but if you have some more specific examples of policy that you wan

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 09:50:53PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:18:29PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > I suspect you and I have a root disagreement over the utility of exposing > > some of those degrees of freedom to every init script author, but if you > > have some mor

Re: porting OpenRC to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD

Thomas Goirand writes: > I'm very happy to tell everyone that this is *FIXED* !!! > > http://youtu.be/zoNoi8BgQjs > > :D :D :D Wow. That's absolutely great zigo! Although the "Caching service dependencies" seems to be a regression to me months ago, where the cache should be generated only once

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On 10/31/2013 02:50 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > The most basic is the idea that whether you can control (via shell > scrpit fragments) whether or not a service should start at all, and > what options or environments should be enabled by pasing some file. > The fact that we can put that sort of thing

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

]] Russ Allbery (Cleaned up the Cc line somewhat) > You can do quite a bit with the hooks that are part of the specification > of both types of files. For example, logic that you may add to control > whether the service should start at all can be implemented by adding a > pre-start stanza to th

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

Tollef Fog Heen writes: > ]] Russ Allbery > (Cleaned up the Cc line somewhat) >> You can do quite a bit with the hooks that are part of the specification >> of both types of files. For example, logic that you may add to control >> whether the service should start at all can be implemented by a

Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.

On 10/30/2013 11:58 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Wouter Verhelst > >> Yes, absense of documentation is common on Unix and Linux systems; but >> no, I do not think that this is okay, or that we should in any way >> encourage that sort of thing. > > By absense of documentation, are you referrin