Re: deluser on purge

2006-11-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:12:24PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> In the case of adduser, there is a strong case for not doing deluser at >>> *all* on purge, because it's impossible to ensure that there are no >

Re: deluser on purge (was: Piuparts testing status update)

2006-11-14 Thread Marc Haber
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:01:16PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Russ Allbery wrote: > > This is something that I'd really like to see us sort out in policy, > > since I think we should be able to describe consistent behavior with > > regard to system users and package purging

Re: deluser on purge (was: Piuparts testing status update)

2006-11-14 Thread Marc Haber
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:12:24PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > In the case of adduser, there is a strong case for not doing deluser at > > *all* on purge, because it's impossible to ensure that there are no > > off-line or remote resources referencing

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:44:38PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > I ran some piuparts tests over etch on i386. I filed quite a lot of > bugs, but there are some logs that still need reviewing. I WON'T REVIEW > THEM MYSELF. > Here is a list of packages that fail when all packages except essential

Re: deluser on purge (was: Piuparts testing status update)

2006-11-14 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Russ Allbery wrote: > This is something that I'd really like to see us sort out in policy, > since I think we should be able to describe consistent behavior with > regard to system users and package purging to our users. What makes the most sense to me is to not delete the use

Re: deluser on purge

2006-11-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:12:24PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >> This is something that I'd really like to see us sort out in policy, >> since I think we should be able to describe consistent behavior with >> regard to system users and package purging t

Re: deluser on purge (was: Piuparts testing status update)

2006-11-14 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:12:24PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> Hmm, I would read policy in a way that since a package can not rely on > >> its dependencies being present during purge, their pure absence alone > >> should not be a valid reason to fail. If this on the other hand is a > >> valid e

Re: Bug#398658: lintian: Please detect unconditional use of some nonessential pkgs during purge

2006-11-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Please detect the unconditional use of debconf, adduser, update-inetd, > etc inside "purge" conditional or case, or at the top of a script, > before conditionals or cases. "etc." is going to be read as if it wasn't present unless someone spells it out f

deluser on purge (was: Piuparts testing status update)

2006-11-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:35:12PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: >> Hmm, I would read policy in a way that since a package can not rely on >> its dependencies being present during purge, their pure absence alone >> should not be a valid reason to fail

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is at least true for the "debconf" errors; since "debconf is a > cache", it isn't useful to fail when the cache has already been removed. > I guess this is why some packages use: >. /usr/share/debconf/confmodule || true > They should really us

Bug#370454: marked as done (developer.php: bad handling of emails with Capital Letters)

2006-11-14 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:07:24 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line developer.php: bad handling of emails with Capital Letters has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not

Bug#392969: marked as done (ddpo: package overview messed up)

2006-11-14 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:07:24 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line developer.php: bad handling of emails with Capital Letters has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not

Re: fixing bugs in orphaned packages

2006-11-14 Thread AnĂ­bal Monsalve Salazar
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:59:30PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote: >I've been looking for bugs to fix in etch and have found one which looks >easily fixable in an orphaned package. I'm not (yet) a DD, however. >Would you like me to prepare and NMU and send it to my sponsor or you to >upload, or put a

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:35:12PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 03:13:42PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > For the "adduser" errors, it might be reasonable to intentionally fail, as a > > mechanism to alert the admin that "the user hasn't and can't be removed". > > Sa

Re: fixing bugs in orphaned packages

2006-11-14 Thread Michael Ablassmeier
hi Matthew, On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:59:30PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote: > I've been looking for bugs to fix in etch and have found one which looks > easily fixable in an orphaned package. I'm not (yet) a DD, however. > Would you like me to prepare and NMU Orphaned packages do have the QA gr

fixing bugs in orphaned packages

2006-11-14 Thread Matthew Johnson
I've been looking for bugs to fix in etch and have found one which looks easily fixable in an orphaned package. I'm not (yet) a DD, however. Would you like me to prepare and NMU and send it to my sponsor or you to upload, or put a patch on the BTS? Matt -- Matthew Johnson http://www.matthew.ath.

Bug#398658: lintian: Please detect unconditional use of some nonessential pkgs during purge

2006-11-14 Thread Justin Pryzby
Package: lintian Severity: wishlist On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 03:13:42PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 08:07:27PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:44:38PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > > Here is a list of packages that fail when all packages e

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 03:13:42PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > For the "adduser" errors, it might be reasonable to intentionally fail, as a > mechanism to alert the admin that "the user hasn't and can't be removed". > Same > for update-inetd. Is that the intent? Hmm, I would read policy in a

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Justin Pryzby
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 08:07:27PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:44:38PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Here is a list of packages that fail when all packages except essential > > ones, apt and debfoster wxhere removed, but didn't fail when all > > important&require

Re: Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 06:44:38PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > Here is a list of packages that fail when all packages except essential > ones, apt and debfoster wxhere removed, but didn't fail when all > important&required packages were kept. This indicates a missing > dependency on an important

Re: XS-Vcs-field

2006-11-14 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:31:32 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On dom, 2006-11-12 at 14:02 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: >> I suggest that we specify tow headers: and SCM specific header, >> XS-Vcs- where name is one keyword from a specified list (bzr, >> cvs, svn, darcs, gi

Bug#398332: marked as done (www.debian.org: QA pages claim to be W3C-clean but are not)

2006-11-14 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:42:10 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line www.debian.org: QA pages claim to be W3C-clean but are not has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not

Piuparts testing status update

2006-11-14 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
dmin phpsysinfo powertweakd powertweak-extra shfs-utils vserver-debiantools zabbix-server-mysql Logs for these packages are available on http://ox.blop.info/bazaar/buildlogs/20061114.debconfucf/ Here is a list of packages that fail when all packages except essential ones, apt and debfoster wxhere removed,