Oh, for reference I've attached the init scripts I'm talking about. On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Patrick C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, I was hoping for it to be put into backports. I'm not very > familiar with the versioning system for Ubuntu, but I am familiar enough > that the first thing I did to check for the new version was look > hardy-backports and, as a last resort, Intrepid. > > I would consider 1.8.2 to be a "bugfix-only" update since the only thing > the changelog lists besides bugfixes are "VCHECK" entries. In PvPGN, those > reside in a user-modifiable text file that check for new versions of the > client programs. Since the client programs are updated independently of > PvPGN, the user usually maintains this file (versioncheck.txt) themselves. > The developers just update the default version as a convenience to anyone > who has to set it up. > > 1.8.3 has three entries (besides VCHECK) starting with the word "added", so > I suppose that wouldn't be considered a bugfix-only release. > > As for Ubuntu-specific "bugs", there aren't any, but there are a few > improvements/fixes I can think of for Ubuntu-specific elements, but I don't > know what the Ubuntu policy about this is. As it is, PvPGN has to be run as > root due to permissions issues. If it would be possible to create a system > user for the service and simply give that user ownership of /etc/pvpgn and > /var/lib/pvpgn, that would be one less network-facing service running as > root. Although I don't have the expertise to make my own packages, I did > modify the install I have on my machine (it's still the same package that > Ubuntu uses, the up-to-date one exists separately and is not in the path). I > added a restricted system user (shell: /bin/false, home directory that does > not exist, UID below 1000, etc.) gave it ownership of /etc/pvpgn and > /var/lib/pvpgn, and then modified the start and restart options of the PvPGN > init script (/etc/init.d/pvpgn) so that it calls start-stop-daemon with the > option "--chuid pvpgn-srv", and running the processes as pvpgn-srv instead > of root. Also, the init script itself is rather clunky compared to that of > the Tremulous server I have installed. The one used by Tremulous > (/etc/init.d/tremulous-server) serves more or less the same purpose but has > a neater layout and uses sub routines for starting and stopping instead of > manually running start-stop-daemon with the same syntax each time if the > first parameter is either start, stop, restart, etc. The result is that if I > want to change a parameter that the script uses the start-stop-daemon > command, I have to do it in three places instead of one. > > Perhaps the init script/permissions issue could be updated/changed, and > 1.8.2 could be added to Hardy while 1.8.3 gets added to the backports? > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Mike Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Thanks Patrick. This isn't really considered out-of-date by our >> standards, since packages aren't typically updated starting from a >> couple months BEFORE the new version of Ubuntu is released (ie Hardy >> packages were updated to the most recent version roughly 6 months ago, >> so if THEY themselves hadn't been updated for a few months, a 10 month >> old package is not hard to imagine). This is to keep everything stable, >> as the packages released in Ubuntu have been tested for months before >> the release so we know they work. If we just upgrade to a new version, >> no one has tested it, and it could break functionality for the entire >> userbase, which isn't acceptable. I would suggest reading >> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports, I think it will >> explain things well. >> >> Basically, there are two options, not mutually exclusive: >> 1) There are bugs that a new version fixed. If the new version is bugfix >> only, we can upgrade to it. Otherwise, we can just patch our version based >> on the changes for the specific bugs that affect Ubuntu. >> 2) The new version can be put in backports. >> >> So, is there a specific bug affecting you in pvpgn that you would like >> fixed? If so, then you want to make a bug report about it, and if it is >> fixed in a later version, we will take the patch and apply it to our >> current version. >> >> Also if you think the new version should be put in backports, then that >> approach can be considered as well. >> >> I hope this explains some things! >> >> -- >> package out of date >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253336 >> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber >> of the bug. >> >> Status in "pvpgn" source package in Ubuntu: New >> >> Bug description: >> Binary package hint: pvpgn >> >> There are no up-to-date packages for PvPGN (current version 1.8.3 as of >> July 18th) in Ubuntu (all versions). That makes what this package lists as >> "latest release" (1.8.1-1.1) 10 months old. Not counting the patches added >> by the Ubuntu developers, the version of the actual software is just under >> one year old (released 1.8.1 was released August 17th 2007). >> >> Upstream Changelog: http://pvpgn.berlios.de/index.php?page=changelog >> News Archive with Upstream Release Dates: >> http://pvpgn.berlios.de/index.php?page=newsarchive >> > > ** Attachment added: "pvpgn-initscript" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/16433250/pvpgn-initscript ** Attachment added: "tremulous-server-initscript" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/16433251/tremulous-server-initscript -- package out of date https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253336 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
