Re: Reimplement mksplit.pl in C

Hi Marcelo! On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 22:55:38 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > somewhere I read that a reimplementation of mksplit.pl in C was > needed in order to remove a dependency of dpkg on Perl, but I > can't find the reference anymore. The main reasons for this are to not be subject to

Re: [PATCH dpkg 0/3] supporting seemless package renames (dpkg --configure --ignore-not-installed)

shouldn’t be hard to fix. > Secondly, AFAIK, Guillem Jover some time ago added a notice of > disappeared packages to --status-fd dpkg output, so theoretically any > high-level package manager can use it (practically, I don't know > whether apt uses/will use it or not, but cupt does n

Re: Review wanted for conffile handling functions in dpkg

Hi! On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 21:03:25 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Joey Hess wrote: > > So, I wrote a patch to dpkg in 2008 to add a dpkg-conffile command, > > that handles renaming and removal of conffiles. > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-dpkg/2008/01/msg00143.html >

Accepted dpkg 1.15.7 (source all amd64)

e, so that newly added files get installed. . [ Guillem Jover ] * Report deferred trigger errors on status-fd. Closes: #574599 Thanks to Michael Vogt . * When creating hard links to normal files on extraction use the .dpkg-new filename for source as the file is n

Re: Bug#574956: dpkg drops zero-epoch in status file

Hi! On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 12:56:08 +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote: > The problem: > To compare versions with the same version number apt generates > a hash over a few informations which are available online and > in dpkgs status file: all dependencies and the installation size. > (as these are li

Adding chroot support to the dpkg functional testsuite (was Bug#580984...)

[ Moving this to the debian-dpkg where it is relevant, CCing debian-embedded for the cross-installation bit. ] Hi! On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 18:55:13 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: [ Bug in “dpkg --root” support. ] > > > I think this feature deserves a non-regression test given how seldom > > > it's

Re: file filtering in dpkg -i

Hi! On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 13:34:28 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > for a project of mine (embedded/thin client system) I need to bring up > a reasonably useful system in as little disk space as possible. This > involves careful selection of packages, file system, etc., but one > part of this is also t

Re: Use "--previous" when updating PO files for manpages

Hi! On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 17:59:09 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 00:47:17 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Right, and also as discussed I filed a bug report on gettext (#538137) > > to be able to use --previous for msgmerge, so that we can use it > >

Accepted dpkg 1.15.7.2 (source all amd64)

round known limitations. * Add "supports" command to dpkg-maintscript-helper to ensure the wanted command is supported before calling it. . [ Guillem Jover ] * Add powerpcspe support to ostable and triplettable. Thanks to Sebastian Andrzej Siewior and Kyle Moffett .

Re: [PATCH] libdpkg: use mmap if available to parse package info files

Hi! On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 13:36:16 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Use mmap instead of slurping entire "Packages" or "available" files > into memory. This should reduce memory pressure on low-memory > machines. > > Reported-by: Bill Allombert > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder > --- > Bill Allom

Re: l10n: Humble patch for typos and update-po request

Hi! On Sat, 2010-05-22 at 18:32:36 +0200, Omar Campagne wrote: > diff -rupN man/dpkg.1 mannew//dpkg.1 > -additional options set on the command line, and thru this file descriptor, > +additional options set on the command line, and through this file descriptor, Small nitpick. Thru is a correct si

Re: Call for tests: C rewrite of update-alternatives

Hi! On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 21:01:10 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > I just completed the C rewrite of update-alternatives. It passes the test > suite (which covers many use cases) but I would still like to have some > beta-testers before I push that to master. Perfect! > So please test what's in

Re: Call for tests: C rewrite of update-alternatives

Hi! On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 22:22:00 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 07 Jun 2010, Guillem Jover wrote: > > In vim I use something like: > > > > ,--- > > let c_space_errors=1 > > set list > > set listchars=tab:»-,trail:· > > `--- > > &g

Re: Announcment: The Psys Library

Hi! On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 10:19:40 +0200, Denis Washington wrote: > Note that the psys library is only useful for adding and removing software > which complies to the Linux Standard Base (LSB) specifications [1]. Most > notably, it is assumed that the data files of a software package are > install

Re: Feature request: Reset configuration

Hi! On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 19:58:01 +0200, Daniel Bock wrote: > 2. Request replacements from dpkg. > sudo dpkg -i --force-confmiss /path/to/samba-common.deb > > This tells dpkg to replace missing configuration files with those > from the .deb. You might find the original package .deb in > /var/cac

Re: Feature request: Reset configuration

On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 14:42:44 +0200, Daniel Bock wrote: > Am 02.07.2010 13:43, schrieb Guillem Jover: > > I might have missed something but isn't: > > > > $ dpkg --force-confmiss --force-confnew -i foo.deb > > > > what you are looking for (given the patc

Re: Feature request: Reset configuration

On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 08:50:25 +0200, Daniel Bock wrote: > Am 03.07.2010 08:14, schrieb Guillem Jover: > >Ah! Ok, so it seems I missread your mail. Yes, this was already filed > >as bug #102609, for which Henning Makholm had provided a really simple > >patch, that I'v

Re: armelfp: new architecture name for an armel variant

Hi! On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 21:07:10 +0300, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote: > On Tuesday 06 July 2010 20:45:33 Paul Brook wrote: > > Debian is pure soft-float (i.e. -mfloat-abi=soft). > > Right, all the more reason for a new flavour then :) Actually, this only seems to me to indicate the option tha

Re: [rfc] leverage -x/-X tar call to pass more tar options

Hi! On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 00:20:02 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > I'm in the process of moving apt-listchanges to C, slowly, and the > attached patch would make it really easier for me to work with dpkg-deb. Just OOC, why C and not C++ being it supposedly part of the apt namespace? Ok, I've che

dpkg test-suite code coverage

Hi! I've just pushed support for the test-suite code coverage for the C and perl parts in dpkg. To enable it, one needs to configure with --enable-coverage. And then “make coverage” from the top build dir. I also rsynced the current (at the time) coverage output to:

Re: Two quick bug reports

Hi! On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:01:47 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Trying to remove iceweasel causes update-alternatives to segfault > for me. iceweasel prerm does > > update-alternatives --remove x-www-browser /usr/bin/iceweasel > update-alternatives --remove gnome-www-browser /usr/bin/icew

Re: Two quick bug reports

On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 16:31:41 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 09:01:47 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Trying to remove iceweasel causes update-alternatives to segfault > > for me. iceweasel prerm does > > > > update-alternatives --remove x-www

Next upload 2010-07-27 (dpkg 1.15.8)

Hi! Ok, so we've accumulated quite some changes, and it's about time to do another upload. Let's make (end of the) 27th a temptative date in case no one reports any serious issues from master, for which additional testing would be appreciated by other people. Raphaël mentioned he has some new cod

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8 (source all amd64)

rectory before copying the debian-provided version of that directory in place. Closes: #590297 . [ Guillem Jover ] * Require gettext 0.18: - Remove embedded gettext files from the repository, now properly installed by autopoint for all po/ directories. - Add versioned Bui

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.2 (source all amd64)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:20:01 +0200 Source: dpkg Binary: libdpkg-dev dpkg dpkg-dev libdpkg-perl dselect Architecture: source amd64 all Version: 1.15.8.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Dpkg Developers Changed-By: Guillem

Re: dpkg upload 1.15.8.2

Hi! On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 13:48:54 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > next time, when uploading a piece as critical as dpkg, please look at the > archive state before uploading. dpkg 1.15.8.2 had so strict dependencies > that it could not be built anymore (due to debhelper, dpkg-dev and > libdpkg-perl

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.3 (source all amd64)

(1.15.8.3) unstable; urgency=low . [ Raphaël Hertzog ] * Fix dpkg-divert test suite to cope with + and other special characters for regexps in the build directory name. Thanks to Jonathan Nieder for the patch and to Phil Kern for the report. Closes: #591182 . [ Guillem Jover

Re: Compilation patch for Solaris and Darwin

Hi! On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:26:32 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > Please find attached a patch to fix compilation on at least Solaris and > Darwin of dpkg-1.15.8.3. Both platforms do not have _POSIX_MAX_PATH > defined, unless limits.h is included. Further, linking fails, because > of missing lib

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.4 (source all amd64)

591654 591692 591885 591993 Changes: dpkg (1.15.8.4) unstable; urgency=low . [ Guillem Jover ] * Fix use after free segfault on update-alternatives --remove-all. Closes: #591653, #591654 * Always print a massage on warning when parsing control files. * On database parsing only

Re: [PATCH] improve dpkg-source documentation of git format

Hi! On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 17:00:44 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Based on a patch by Tanguy Ortolo. Pushed, thanks! regards, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists

Re: dpkg-1.15.8.4

Hmm, forgot to reply to the initial mail... On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 23:59:58 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Sandro Cazzaniga wrote: > > I've packaged dpkg-1.15.8.4 and I send you new patch (that fix string > > format error). > > What is the precise error that you saw? These s

Re: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

Hi! [ I'm leaving for two days, and running out the door just right now, so this mail is a bit rushed, and might contain inaccuracies and repetition due to lack of proper review, sorry about that, I'll try to clarify anything unclear once I get back. ] On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 14:01:37 +0300,

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.5 (source all amd64)

594218 594440 594513 595175 595208 595299 595468 595556 595615 595643 595968 596173 596333 596417 596518 596657 Changes: dpkg (1.15.8.5) unstable; urgency=low . [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not print a warning when parsing status or status log files on half-installed packages w/o a

Re: How should this string be translated?

Hi! On Thu, 2010-10-07 at 23:35:04 +0200, Ask Hjorth Larsen wrote: > [...]. Translator > comments can sometimes prevent grave mistakes, and also save a lot of > time, so I would definitely recommend putting them above strings like > this one. (I don't want to preach, but this was the most perplex

Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

Hi! I'd like to apply two patches for the next dpkg 1.15.8.6 upload. And would like to run them through you to avoid having to possibly revert them from dpkg's sid git branch. Those are related to the fsync()/sync() changes in dpkg from some time ago, the patches would: 1) Switch back from syn

Re: Is the configure script suposed to detect libncursesw ?

Hi! On Sat, 2010-10-23 at 10:05:26 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Cyril Brulebois (23/10/2010): > > I'll try and see whether I can come up with a fix. > > I think the attached patch does what we want: make having ncurses > mandatory except if one passes --without-dselect. Thanks both, queued f

Re: Is the configure script suposed to detect libncursesw ?

Hi! On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 17:17:27 -0500, Michael Schmidt wrote: > Is the configure script provided by the package supposed to check if > libncursesw is installed?? > Because I tried to compile the deselect part, and in the configure fase it > didn't complain. Then when I wnated to make (compile)

Re: I'm sad because you want to throw me out of the list.

Hi! On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 09:34:14 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Michael Schmidt wrote: > > I'm new to programming in c and I liked the dpkg package, because I thought > > it was fun to understand how exactly the packages are managed. That is why I > > started looking at the

Re: problems with autoreconf

Hi! On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 20:43:17 -0500, Michael Schmidt wrote: > man/Makefile.am:3: PO4A_V_$(V: non-POSIX variable name > man/Makefile.am:4: PO4A_V_$(AM_DEFAULT_VERBOSITY: non-POSIX variable name > man/Makefile.am:7: PO4A_RM_V_$(V: non-POSIX variable name > man/Makefile.am:8: PO4A_RM_V_$(AM_DEFA

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 23:18:47 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:35:54AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Those are related to the fsync()/sync() changes in dpkg from some time > > ago, the patches would: > > > > 1) Switch back from sync() to fsy

Re: Transferring conffiles between packages (Re: Bug#564254: conflicting /etc/bash_completion)

Hi! On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 15:14:36 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > On 2010-01-08, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > I got this on the buildd: > > Unpacking bash-completion (from .../bash-completion_1%3a1.1-3_all.deb) ... > > dpkg: error processing > > /home/buildd/build/chroot-unstable/var/cache/apt/archive

Re: problems with autoreconf

On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 07:20:42 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 20:43:17 -0500, Michael Schmidt wrote: > > then i tried running the configure script and it broke like this > > > checking for bcopy... yes > > checking for memcpy... yes > > checking

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 10:41:46 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2010-11-06 08:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 23:18:47 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:35:54AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > What are the impl

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

Hi! On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 10:20:29 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sat, 06 Nov 2010, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Finally, while accepting patch 2) alone might make sense, accepting 1) > > alone would not. > > BTW, I think we should go with patch 2 alone currently (i.e. just

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 16:33:14 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Guillem Jover wrote: > > The worst that could happen on other file systems w/o the sync()/fsync() > > before rename()s for extracted files was that the dpkg database might > > get slightly out of sync relative to

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

Hi! On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 08:21:05 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Philipp Kern wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 07:50:23PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:35:54AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > > 1) Switch back

Re: Pre-approval request for dpkg sync() changes for squeeze

Hi! On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 19:31:00 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 09:58:47AM +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > > All this is with a standard squeeze kernel on an otherwise idle system. > > It should be noted that with lots of other disk activity such as writing > > to USB disks, t

Next upload 2010-11-24 (dpkg 1.15.8.6)

Hi! Ok, so let's target the next dpkg upload for the 24th. Sending this mostly in case translators still want to get some changes in, as this might probably be the last upload targetting squeeze. I know this is with quite short notice, sorry about that, but we need to upload rather soon. In case s

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.6 (source all amd64)

ile if the source package provides vendor specific patch sets. . [ Guillem Jover ] * Disable by default usage of synchronous sync(2), as it causes undesired I/O on unrelated file systems. Closes: #588339, #595927, #600075 * Add new --force-unsafe-io to disable safe I/O operatio

Re: Next upload 2010-11-24 (dpkg 1.15.8.6)

Hi! On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 08:32:22 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Miguel Figueiredo wrote: > > As dpkg translation is not short neither trivial would be great to have a > > last > > Call For Translations with a weekend to work on it. > > Don't mind if it's after commiting th

Re: The fsync issue

Hi Ben! On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 13:31:20 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Just got this from Christoph Helwig: > > 13:23 < hch> bwh: if you guys are interested in helping dpkg review and ack > the > per-fs sync ioctl path that sage weil sent out a couple of weeks > ago > 1

Re: The fsync issue

On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 01:41:19 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Guillem Jover wrote: > > Unfortunately that patch does not seem much appealing, it's Linux only, > > not even in mainline, and it would need for dpkg to track on which file > > system each file is located and

Re: The fsync issue

On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 15:01:15 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 07:59 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 13:31:20 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > Just got this from Christoph Helwig: > > > > > > 13:23 < hch> bwh:

Re: Updated dpkg translations in the GIT repo

Hi! On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 08:23:09 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > On 2010-12-09 02:41 +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > > > I have just updated the Spanish translation for dpkg and dselect in the GIT > > repository. I'm sorry I was not able to work on this when the last call for > > tr

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.7 (source all amd64)

606315 607253 607259 607292 607302 607306 607437 607501 Changes: dpkg (1.15.8.7) unstable; urgency=low . [ Guillem Jover ] * Defer symlink renames so that there's never a point were a symlink is broken, this is particularly important for shared libraries. Closes: #605536

Re: Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.7 (source all amd64)

Hi! On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 17:58:41 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Julien Cristau wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 02:32:17 +, Guillem Jover wrote: > > >* On Linux use sync_file_range() to initiate asynchronous writeback > > > of jus

Re: Streaming Package Installation for dpkg/APT

Hi! On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 09:55:29 +0530, Ishan Jayawardena wrote: > I would like to know about the streaming package installation for > dpkg/APT. I read about this from last year's summer of code ideas list > of Debian [1], and found it interesting. I also found that it had not > been taken by an

Switching default dpkg BTS view

# Hi! # # After discussing it on IRC, I'm switching with this mail the default # view for dpkg to the one using usertags. I've modified the original # usertags view we had to one which is a bit more compact, and which # has the severity before the dpkg-class to more easily visualize the # important

Re: Switching default dpkg BTS view

user d...@packages.debian.org usercategory dpkg-program-view * status * dpkg-program * severity * classification usercategory dpkg-class-view * status * dpkg-class * severity * classification thanks Ok, restoring to the old -maint view format, as it's easier this way when triaging based

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.10 (source all amd64)

: Guillem Jover Description: dpkg - Debian package management system dpkg-dev - Debian package development tools dselect- Debian package management front-end libdpkg-dev - Debian package management static library libdpkg-perl - Dpkg perl modules Closes: 611545 Changes: dpkg (1.15.8.10

Re: [SCM] dpkg's main repository branch, master, updated. 1.15.8.10-272-g58e7276

Hi! On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 15:48:37 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > > The following commit has been merged in the master branch: > > commit 58e7276b69be105735eccb3c18c2b28d3a2ec2e5 > [...] > > + * Always warn when parsing any pa

Re: Upcoming FTPMaster meeting

Hi! On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 13:15:47 +, Philipp Kern wrote: > On 2011-02-11, Hideki Yamane wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 08:20:02 +0100 > > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> I have not seen any word about XZ support. > >> When you deployed support for new source package formats, you forbid > >> lzma

Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

u don't like arm-linux-gnueabihf, then something like arm-linux-gnueabivfp or whatever you want, I don't think I particularly care much, it would need to be prefixed arm-linux-gnueabi though so that the matches work transparently. Beware, both patches completely untested! > On

Re: [PATCH] lib/dpkg: removed duplicated #include

Hi! On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 22:28:44 +0100, Andrea Gelmini wrote: > Signed-off-by: Andrea Gelmini > --- > lib/dpkg/path.c |1 - > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/dpkg/path.c b/lib/dpkg/path.c > index b2c958b..cdb77b3 100644 > --- a/lib/dpkg/path.c > +++ b

Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

[ Sorry for entangling the armhf bug with the i386 stuff, subsequent replies should probably remove debian-arm and the bug report from them. ] On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 13:30:19 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 18.02.2011 11:13, Guillem Jover wrote: > >[ CCing Matthias, as I'd lik

Re: x86 triplets and multiarch [Was, Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?]

On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 23:38:36 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:32:19AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Given the above we'd need to either switch to i586-linux-gnu or > > i386-linux-gnu, it seems to me both will imply the same amount of > > chang

Re: Bug#594179: dpkg armhf patch acceptance status?

On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 07:32:19 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > The gcc-4.4:i386 package seems to be compiled on Debian to target i586 > as the base instruction set, as can be seen in its debian/rules2:388, > which implies changing the triplet would not affect this (barring the > smal

Re: dpkg: multiarch symlink not present in fresh installs

Hi! On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 14:41:47 +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 02:36:24PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > On Tue, 01 Mar 2011, Colin Watson wrote: > > > I noticed this > > > (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/+bug/727106) while doing > > > a debootstrap test

Re: [PATCH] Correct passing of DPKG_ADMINDIR to maintainer scripts with --root

Hi! On Tue, 2011-03-01 at 17:11:05 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > --- a/src/help.c > > +++ b/src/help.c > > @@ -186,6 +186,11 @@ preexecscript(struct command *cmd) > >size_t instdirl; > > > >if (*instdir) { > > +if (strstr(admindir, instdir) == admindir) >

Re: Speeding up dpkg, a proposal

On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 18:49:44 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2011, Phillip Susi wrote: > > It would be much better to use aio to queue up all of the syncs at once, > > so that the elevator can coalesce and reorder them for optimal writing. > > I'm not convinced it would help. You'

Re: [PATCH] Add new variables, DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH and DEB_BUILD_MULTIARCH

Hi! On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 15:11:10 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Add new variables that return the "ideal" GNU triplet for each architecture > which should be used as the path component for library installation. > diff --git a/multiarchtable b/multiarchtable > new file mode 100644 > index 00

Re: [PATCH] Add new variables, DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH and DEB_BUILD_MULTIARCH

On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 19:04:16 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 03:47:00AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > So I guess this would need either the corresponding fixup in > > debian/rules, > > Ah, yes; hadn't realized that this was being done via

Re: [PATCH] Add new variables, DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH and DEB_BUILD_MULTIARCH

On Wed, 2011-03-09 at 11:43:05 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > For my part I don't yet see a consensus around a single triplet that armhf > will be able to use as both GNU triplet and multiarch triplet, so I think > there's still a possibility that armhf will need to be added here as well; > but we

Re: Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.7 (source all amd64)

Hi! On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 11:09:07 +0100, Sven Mueller wrote: > Am 29.12.2010 20:04, schrieb Guillem Jover: > > On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 17:58:41 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > >> It is ok since fsync() is still called afterwards. Both are only useful > >> to avoid t

Next upload 2011-03-27 (dpkg 1.16.0)

Hi! There's lots of changes in master (around 400) accumulated during these past months, most of which are refactoring and cleanup, some of them will allow to start doing progress on multiarch on the archive. Several regressions have already been fixed in the past few weeks, as Raphaël and me usu

Re: Next upload 2011-03-27 (dpkg 1.16.0)

Hey! On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 05:04:49 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > There are still some few commits I want to push hopefully tomorrow, > and to be able to spot any possible new regression this next sunday > (2011-03-27) seems like a good target date for the upload. So I got a pretty n

Re: Bootstrapping a foreign architecture with multiarch

Hi! On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 22:31:07 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > dpkg cannot be executed inside the chroot because it has not > necessarily been unpacked at this stage, it certainly has not been > configured. (dpkg is running from outside the chroot). (An Essential package does not need to be con

Accepted dpkg 1.16.0 (source all amd64)

591858 594179 596841 598922 600854 604914 605719 606080 608829 611741 612203 612465 612472 613023 616096 616502 617923 619311 619541 620380 Changes: dpkg (1.16.0) unstable; urgency=low . [ Guillem Jover ] * Use DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE environment variable as package name on dpkg-divert

Re: application of path-exclude/include to "dpkg --list"

Hi! On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 11:20:00 +0100, Marcin Owsiany wrote: > It seems that currently the path-exclude/path-include options > specified in /etc/dpkg/dpkg.cfg* are not taken into account in the dpkg > --list output. Right, that was on purpose, the idea is that those paths might have as well be

Accepted dpkg 1.16.0.1 (source all amd64)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 07:28:20 +0200 Source: dpkg Binary: libdpkg-dev dpkg dpkg-dev libdpkg-perl dselect Architecture: source amd64 all Version: 1.16.0.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Dpkg Developers Changed-By: Guillem

Accepted dpkg 1.16.0.2 (source all amd64)

: Guillem Jover Description: dpkg - Debian package management system dpkg-dev - Debian package development tools dselect- Debian package management front-end libdpkg-dev - Debian package management static library libdpkg-perl - Dpkg perl modules Changes: dpkg (1.16.0.2) unstable

[SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

ugh. Here's the changelog: dpkg (1.15.8.11) stable; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not segfault on “dpkg -i --no-act”. * Add missing semicolon to the vsnprintf() compat declaration. Thanks to Robert Millan. Closes: #612203 * Fix typo in «dpkg-name --overwrite» argumen

Re: Problems when compiling

Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 14:05:56 +0200, Daniel Lobato wrote: > Hi and sorry for the forthcoming terminal output, the two mails in a > row, and the newbieness of the question, > > I apparently cannot compile dpkg from > git://git.debian.org/git/dpkg/dpkg.git > > The steps that I have followed a

Re: Installing packages with a diverted hardlink

Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 13:41:32 +0200, Daniel Lobato wrote: > Hi everyone! I am introducing myself to dpkg development and I am > starting by trying to solve a bug, Steve Langasek purposed me to solve > this old one http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=245322 > > Basically the prob

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

Hi! On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 07:38:44 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > We've fixed several regressions on the 1.15.x series, and I'd like to > upload a new 1.15.8.11 release targetting squeeze. Forgot to mention, that for these two there's functional test cases: > [ Guil

Re: Bug#622322: popularity-contest: popcon tries to access dpkg internal files and fails with multiarch: same packageso

On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 23:08:51 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:51:57PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, Bill Allombert wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:11:59PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > > You can invoke "dpkg -L" less often by giving

Re: Debdelta and Streaming Package Installation for dpkg/APT

Hi! On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 23:44:25 +0200, A Mennucc wrote: > here is a reply to a message you sent me long ago; this message also > referenced a message in debian-dpkg [1], so I am CC-ing them as well. Ah perfect, had in mind talking about the apt/debdelta integration GSoC proposal [0] with you g

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 16:24:28 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 07:38 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > [ Guillem Jover ] > > * Do not segfault on “dpkg -i --no-act”. > > * Add missing semicolon to the vsnprintf() compat declaration. > >

Accepted dpkg 1.15.8.11 (source all amd64)

) stable; urgency=high . [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not segfault on “dpkg -i --no-act”. * Add missing semicolon to the vsnprintf() compat declaration. Thanks to Robert Millan. Closes: #612203 * Fix typo in «dpkg-name --overwrite» argument parsing so that it actually works at all

Re: dotdee: a proposal for improving conffile management in Debian

Hi! On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 11:03:39 -0500, Dustin Kirkland wrote: > IN PRACTICE > Once integrated with dpkg, I'd like dotdee to be a utility that human > system administrators could run to manually turn a generic conffile > into a ".d" style configuration directory, such that they could append > t

Accepted dpkg 1.16.0.3 (source all amd64)

: Guillem Jover Description: dpkg - Debian package management system dpkg-dev - Debian package development tools dselect- Debian package management front-end libdpkg-dev - Debian package management static library libdpkg-perl - Dpkg perl modules Changes: dpkg (1.16.0.3) unstable

Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/7] conffiledb revisited

Hi! On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 02:42:17 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Here is the result of a blind rebase of the conffiledb patches sent a > while ago, rebased against dpkg master. Untested. I'll include a few > thoughts with each message. Probably I have terribly mutilated the > patches; please

Re: Debdelta and Streaming Package Installation for dpkg/APT

Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 09:47:47 +0200, A Mennucc wrote: > Il 25/04/2011 07:28, Guillem Jover ha scritto: > > But my main problem right now is that I didn't find clear > > documentation of the “debdelta” file format, the closest thing that I > > found was the debpat

Re: [RFC] Trigger directives that do not put packages in triggers-awaited

Hi! On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 22:53:12 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > please find attached a patch that implements 2 new directives > "interest-noawait" and "activate-noawait" for the triggers control file. > > They work exactly like "interest" and "activate" but the package > that activate the trig

Moving dpkg-gentdeb into /usr/bin/

Hi Neil! I've just noticed you moved dpkg-gentdeb into /usr/bin/ from /usr/share/embdebian-tools/ [0], and that you expect to merge that command into dpkg-dev during this Debian release cycle. But the implementation behind that command has never been discussed on this list, and I think I can speak

Re: Declarative Diversions - Report 3

Hi! [ I mentioned this before, but could you try to send mails only in plain text? Not in plain text and html? Thanks! ] On Tue, 2011-07-05 at 01:36:22 +0100, Sam Dunne wrote: > The next week will be pushing for the release of preliminary code and after > that it will be bug testing and working

Re: Some upcoming dpkg changes, test and feedback welcome

Hi! On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 21:14:40 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > 1/ Makefile snippets for use in debian/rules > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/hertzog/dpkg.git;a=commitdiff;h=pu/makefile-snippets Ok, so this is somewhat what I was proposing long time ago in

Re: [SCM] dpkg's main repository branch, master, updated. 1.16.0.3-191-ge135afd

Hi! On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 06:43:51 +, Raphaël Hertzog wrote: > The following commit has been merged in the master branch: > commit e135afdb35d0ac179657def901965a448115a981 > Author: Raphaël Hertzog > Date: Wed Jul 20 08:29:05 2011 +0200 > > dpkg: fix possible segfault in findbreakcycle

Re: Declarative Diversions - Report 3

Hi! On Fri, 2011-07-15 at 07:05:55 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > [ I mentioned this before, but could you try to send mails only in > plain text? Not in plain text and html? Thanks! ] [ Just found your private mail from the other day on my spam box. Please try to send your mails to th

Re: dpkg-reconfigure does not set DPKG_MAINTSCRIPT_PACKAGE (et al)

Hi! On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 12:50:22 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > I keep seeing people complain that this bug is not fixed, but every > time I look at it, I find myself unable to fix it, and with issues like > these: > > * Where are these variables documented? > (Appears that they're basically not,

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >