Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #7872 > unrolled thread

Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 09:30 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 09:40 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 22:00 +0100
          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 18:40 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 19:30 +0100
              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 23:30 +0100
                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 00:10 +0100
                  Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 01:00 +0100
                    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-25 12:10 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:50 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 16:10 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 16:20 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 20:20 +0100
                              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 21:40 +0100
                                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 09:30 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Cheng <vcheng@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 20:30 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 21:50 +0100
                          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 09:50 +0100
                            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 11:40 +0100
                              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-27 13:10 +0100
                                Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2015-11-28 12:20 +0100
                  Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 09:30 +0100
                    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 09:40 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)  <umlaeute@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 10:00 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 10:50 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Tristan Seligmann <mithrandi@mithrandi.net> - 2015-11-26 14:40 +0100
                        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:10 +0100
                      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-26 15:30 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:30 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <sandro.tosi@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 09:40 +0100
          Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 10:30 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 13:40 +0100
              Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 22:40 +0100
            Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Bernd Zeimetz <bernd@bzed.de> - 2015-12-06 20:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:40 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Daniele Tricoli <eriol@mornie.org> - 2015-11-23 12:50 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 13:50 +0100
      Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> - 2015-11-23 18:20 +0100
        Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Dmitry Shachnev <mitya57@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 10:40 +0100
    Re: Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> - 2015-11-24 09:10 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#7872 — Pushing a bunch of packages to jessie-backports

Hi,

FYI, I intend to push the below packages to jessie-backports, as part of
the upload of OpenStack Liberty:

alabaster contextlib2 kazoo python-cachetools python-cffi python-cliff
python-crank python-ddt python-docker python-eventlet python-git
python-gitdb python-hypothesis python-ldap3 python-mock python-mysqldb
python-pathlib python-repoze.who python-setuptools python-smmap
python-unicodecsv python-urllib3 requests routes ryu sphinx sqlalchemy
turbogears2 unittest2 zzzeeksphinx

If you maintain one of the above packages and want to manage the bpo
upload yourself, please let me know ASAP. All of them are already built
and ready on my laptop, I'm waiting for a few more OpenStack packages to
migrate to Stretch, and I'll press the Enter key.

As I already bloged about it, and that I am also sending a mail here, I
will *not* send individual emails to maintainers: it would take too long
to do that, and a broadcast of the type I'm hereby doing is probably
more efficient. I hope everyone understands it.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#7873

[Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-23]
> FYI, I intend to push the below packages to jessie-backports, as part of
> the upload of OpenStack Liberty:
> 
> alabaster contextlib2 kazoo python-cachetools python-cffi python-cliff
> python-crank python-ddt python-docker python-eventlet python-git
> python-gitdb python-hypothesis python-ldap3 python-mock python-mysqldb
> python-pathlib python-repoze.who python-setuptools python-smmap
> python-unicodecsv python-urllib3 requests routes ryu sphinx sqlalchemy
> turbogears2 unittest2 zzzeeksphinx

please follow the right procedure at least with packages I maintain.
(I want too see debdiff and have enough time to check it, that includes
sending it to the right email, f.e. foo@packages.debian.org).

About sqlalchemy - Sandro is already working on it AFAICT, so you can
skip this one.

> As I already bloged about it, and that I am also sending a mail here, I
> will *not* send individual emails to maintainers: it would take too long

so my packages are out of limits for you

> to do that, and a broadcast of the type I'm hereby doing is probably
> more efficient. I hope everyone understands it.

I don't
-- 
evil general Piotr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7878

On 11/23/2015 09:32 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-23]
>> FYI, I intend to push the below packages to jessie-backports, as part of
>> the upload of OpenStack Liberty:
>>
>> alabaster contextlib2 kazoo python-cachetools python-cffi python-cliff
>> python-crank python-ddt python-docker python-eventlet python-git
>> python-gitdb python-hypothesis python-ldap3 python-mock python-mysqldb
>> python-pathlib python-repoze.who python-setuptools python-smmap
>> python-unicodecsv python-urllib3 requests routes ryu sphinx sqlalchemy
>> turbogears2 unittest2 zzzeeksphinx
> 
> please follow the right procedure at least with packages I maintain.

Would you mind explicitly tell what you call "the right procedure"? As
much as I know, it's not mandatory to do anything but uploading to
backports. I've wrote this message is just out of courtesy.

> (I want too see debdiff and have enough time to check it

None of the packages listed include any difference from Sid, they are
just rebuilt with my key without change.

> that includes
> sending it to the right email, f.e. foo@packages.debian.org).

As I wrote, that's too much work to write individual mails, and here,
you know already, so what do you need to know more?

> About sqlalchemy - Sandro is already working on it AFAICT, so you can
> skip this one.

Ok. Let's hope he's finished soon then. What's the blocker, ATM? FYI, I
will not treat this as a blocker for my upload, so if he's not done
before me, I'll upload SQLAlchemy to jessie-backports anyway. Then of
course, you can re-upload corrections if you see fit. Let's hope you'll
take this the correct way (ie: I do not intend any offense by uploading
first, it's just that I don't think waiting is necessary), and don't
make such a deal.

>> As I already bloged about it, and that I am also sending a mail here, I
>> will *not* send individual emails to maintainers: it would take too long
> 
> so my packages are out of limits for you

Could you care to explain what you mean here?

I deny the fact that these are *your* packages btw, and like it or not,
they will appear in backports, as I need them. There's nothing which can
prevent me from doing so, unless you want to backport them yourself
first of course (which would be more than welcome).

> I don't

I'm not surprised by the type of reaction I'm seeing from you again.
Maybe you could consider switching to a more positive attitude, like I
just saw from Daniele Tricoli? He's fine with me uploading first, then
he may take over later if he needs. Why not?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7881

[Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-23]
> > please follow the right procedure at least with packages I maintain.
> 
> Would you mind explicitly tell what you call "the right procedure"? As
> much as I know, it's not mandatory to do anything but uploading to
> backports. I've wrote this message is just out of courtesy.

1) build in jessie
2) test in jessie
3) send current maintainer debdiff and a note that you plan to upload it
   to backports

but you're right 3) is not valid...

http://backports.debian.org/Contribute/ contains:

| Inform the Maintainer
| 
| It is a good idea to contact the maintainer of the package in Debian
| prior to your upload to let them know or even share ideas and common
| pitfalls (like special dependencies)"

is "only" in "Best Practice" section. I was mislead by the
backports.debian.org domain change (s/net/org/) few years ago.

I will close all bugs reported against packages with bpo in version.
(yay! I'm RC-bug free again!)


I chose 1 (one!) package¹ and it FTBFS so you failed to do 1) and I'm
guessing you didn't do 2) as well (how could you test a package that
doesn't build?)

> > (I want too see debdiff and have enough time to check it
> 
> None of the packages listed include any difference from Sid, they are
> just rebuilt with my key without change.

I'm very good at guessing and I guessed that you did exactly that!

I don't blame you that much, it's not possible to check 150 packages
correctly. You're doing a good job with openstack anyway given the
amount of work for one person. I just expect more from MY packages (and
it doesn't matter much if they're in Ubuntu or in backports where I'm
not officially maintaining them)

Anyway, I documented what you need to change in order to do backport
in the changelog and hope your will fix it before uploading.

> Ok. Let's hope he's finished soon then. What's the blocker, ATM? FYI, I
> will not treat this as a blocker for my upload, so if he's not done

That is exactly the reason I react fast and without any sugar to your
help. I know you do what you want and when you want

> course, you can re-upload corrections if you see fit. Let's hope you'll
> take this the correct way (ie: I do not intend any offense by uploading
> first, it's just that I don't think waiting is necessary), and don't
> make such a deal.

oh, so you will do something I told you not to do and hope I will not
take it the wrong way?

> >> As I already bloged about it, and that I am also sending a mail here, I
> >> will *not* send individual emails to maintainers: it would take too long

oh, right, you bloged about it. It's all right then.

> > so my packages are out of limits for you
> 
> Could you care to explain what you mean here?

it means I ask you (as that's all I can do) to not upload packages I
maintain.

[¹] OK, OK, I chose the one I knew needs changes in Jessie, I'm evil
-- 
evil general Piotr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7890

On 11/23/2015 09:54 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>> so my packages are out of limits for you
>>
>> Could you care to explain what you mean here?
> 
> it means I ask you (as that's all I can do) to not upload packages I
> maintain.

If you don't say you'll maintain the packages in backports (which I
warmly would welcome) and at the same time tell that you don't want me
to upload to stable-backports, what other choice do I have but to ignore
you? It wouldn't be a reasonable answer to give-up uploading OpenStack
to jessie-backports just because of this.

The rest of your message is only provocation (for example, when you
write that I don't do tests, when you perfectly know I run a CI to do
functional testing). I don't think replying to it will help.

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7891

[Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-24]
> If you don't say you'll maintain the packages in backports (which I
> warmly would welcome) and at the same time tell that you don't want me
> to upload to stable-backports, what other choice do I have but to ignore
> you?

see my first email

PS I'm getting all the emails from backports even if I wasn't the one
who uploaded so this is official after all.
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7893

On 11/24/2015 07:29 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-24]
>> If you don't say you'll maintain the packages in backports (which I
>> warmly would welcome) and at the same time tell that you don't want me
>> to upload to stable-backports, what other choice do I have but to ignore
>> you?
> 
> see my first email

Which part of it? The one where you're asking for a mail per package, or
the one where you're telling that your packages are off limit? The 2
parts are contradicting each other btw, so it's confusing.

> PS I'm getting all the emails from backports even if I wasn't the one
> who uploaded so this is official after all.

This isn't new, and it's been discussed at large. Basically, we would
all like the BTS to have the feature to select which is the maintainer
for a given suite. It is supposed to be fixed for the PPA^WBikeshed
support. In the mean time, we have to deal with it.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7894

[Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-24]
> Which part of it? The one where you're asking for a mail per package, or

debdiff of what you want to upload + time for me to check it (a week, I
will respond most probably in 24h, though)

> the one where you're telling that your packages are off limit? The 2
> parts are contradicting each other btw, so it's confusing.

this part is a response to what you wrote, see what I quoted

> > PS I'm getting all the emails from backports even if I wasn't the one
> > who uploaded so this is official after all.
> 
> This isn't new, and it's been discussed at large. Basically, we would
> all like the BTS to have the feature to select which is the maintainer
> for a given suite. It is supposed to be fixed for the PPA^WBikeshed
> support. In the mean time, we have to deal with it.

until this is fixed, I consider it official Debian archive and thus
any upload of *my* package that I do not approve: a hijack
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7895

On 11/25/2015 12:00 AM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> [Thomas Goirand, 2015-11-24]
>> Which part of it? The one where you're asking for a mail per package, or
> 
> debdiff of what you want to upload + time for me to check it (a week, I
> will respond most probably in 24h, though)

I'll have to repeat myself then: there's no change but an entry in
debian/changelog for all packages which I listed, including the ones you
maintain. Or is it that you still require a debdiff for that? I hope
not, this would be an annoying loss of time for both you and me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7897

> > debdiff of what you want to upload + time for me to check it (a week, I
> > will respond most probably in 24h, though)
> 
> I'll have to repeat myself then: there's no change but an entry in

I will not repeat myself. I already wrote why I think you should do
that.
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7906

On 11/25/2015 12:07 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>> debdiff of what you want to upload + time for me to check it (a week, I
>>> will respond most probably in 24h, though)
>>
>> I'll have to repeat myself then: there's no change but an entry in
> 
> I will not repeat myself. I already wrote why I think you should do
> that.

I've uploaded all what I prepared to this URL:
http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7907

> I've uploaded all what I prepared to this URL:
> http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/

THANK YOU!

| $ dget http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc
| dget: retrieving http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc
|   % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time  Current
|                                  Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed
| 100  2208  100  2208    0     0   2759      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--  2760
| dget: retrieving http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/routes_2.2.orig.tar.gz
|   % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time  Current
|                                  Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed
|   0     0    0     0    0     0      0      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:--     0curl: (22) The requested URL returned error: 404 Not Found
| dget: curl routes_2.2.orig.tar.gz http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/routes_2.2.orig.tar.gz failed
| routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc:
|       Good signature found
|    skipping  routes_2.2.orig.tar.gz (not present)
|    skipping  routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.debian.tar.xz (not present)
| dscverify: routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc didn't specify any files present locally
| Validation FAILED!!

that's the first mistake most backporters do, they forgot to include orig tarball
(ftp masters would detect that and reject your package, additional work for them)

solution: pass -sa to dpkg-source ("--force-orig-source" in sbuild or "--debbuildopts -sa" in pbuilder)

| $ sbuild
| dh_testdir
| dh_testroot
| rm -rf dist build
| find . -name "*\.py[co]" -delete
| find . -name "\._*" -delete
| rm -rf docs/_build
| dh_clean Routes.egg-info/* build-docs
| dpkg-source: info: using source format `3.0 (quilt)'
| dpkg-source: info: building routes using existing ./routes_2.2.orig.tar.gz
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/requires.txt, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/not-zip-safe, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/top_level.txt, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/dependency_links.txt, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/SOURCES.txt, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: warning: ignoring deletion of file Routes.egg-info/PKG-INFO, use --include-removal to override
| dpkg-source: info: building routes in routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.debian.tar.xz
| dpkg-source: info: building routes in routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc
| sbuild (Debian sbuild) 0.65.2 (24 Mar 2015) on piotro.shiva.flightbox.pl
| 
| ╔══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
| ║ routes 2.2-1~bpo8+1 (amd64)                                26 lis 2015 15:50 ║
| ╚══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════╝
| 
| Package: routes
| Version: 2.2-1~bpo8+1
| Source Version: 2.2-1~bpo8+1
| Distribution: jessie
| Machine Architecture: amd64
| Host Architecture: amd64
| Build Architecture: amd64
| 
| I: NOTICE: Log filtering will replace 'build/routes-vU6ObA/routes-2.2' with '«PKGBUILDDIR»'
| I: NOTICE: Log filtering will replace 'build/routes-vU6ObA' with '«BUILDDIR»'
| I: NOTICE: Log filtering will replace 'var/lib/schroot/mount/jessie-amd64-sbuild-f18e36b9-a8f5-4b90-a0b8-55df3891c3af' with '«CHROOT»'
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Update chroot                                                                │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| Ign http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie InRelease
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports InRelease
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie Release.gpg
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie Release
| Get:1 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/main amd64 Packages/DiffIndex [7819 B]
| Get:2 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/contrib amd64 Packages/DiffIndex [1057 B]
| Get:3 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/non-free amd64 Packages/DiffIndex [919 B]
| Get:4 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/contrib Translation-en/DiffIndex [643 B]
| Get:5 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/main Translation-en/DiffIndex [4093 B]
| Get:6 http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie-backports/non-free Translation-en/DiffIndex [643 B]
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie/main Sources
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie/main amd64 Packages
| Hit http://ftp.pl.debian.org jessie/main Translation-en
| Fetched 15.2 kB in 2s (6504 B/s)
| Reading package lists...
| Reading package lists...
| Building dependency tree...
| Reading state information...
| 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Fetch source files                                                           │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| 
| Local sources
| ─────────────
| 
| /tmp/build/routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc exists in /tmp/build; copying to chroot
| 
| Check architectures
| ───────────────────
| 
| 
| Check dependencies
| ──────────────────
| 
| Merged Build-Depends: build-essential, fakeroot
| Filtered Build-Depends: build-essential, fakeroot
| dpkg-deb: building package `sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy' in `/«BUILDDIR»/resolver-fTSapT/apt_archive/sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy.deb'.
| OK
| Ign file: ./ InRelease
| Get:1 file: ./ Release.gpg [299 B]
| Get:2 file: ./ Release [2119 B]
| Ign file: ./ Translation-en
| Reading package lists...
| Reading package lists...
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Install core build dependencies (apt-based resolver)                         │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| Installing build dependencies
| Reading package lists...
| Building dependency tree...
| Reading state information...
| The following NEW packages will be installed:
|   sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy
| debconf: delaying package configuration, since apt-utils is not installed
| 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
| Need to get 0 B/822 B of archives.
| After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
| Selecting previously unselected package sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy.
| (Reading database ... 11867 files and directories currently installed.)
| Preparing to unpack .../sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy.deb ...
| Unpacking sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy (0.invalid.0) ...
| Setting up sbuild-build-depends-core-dummy (0.invalid.0) ...
| Merged Build-Depends: base-files, base-passwd, bash, bsdutils, coreutils, dash, debianutils, diffutils, dpkg, e2fsprogs, findutils, grep, gzip, hostname, init, libc-bin, login, mount, ncurses-base, ncurses-bin, perl-base, sed, sysvinit-utils, tar, util-linux, libc6-dev | libc-dev, gcc (>= 4:4.9.1), g++ (>= 4:4.9.1), make, dpkg-dev (>= 1.17.11), debhelper (>= 9), dh-python, python-all (>= 2.6.6-3~), python-setuptools (>= 0.6b3), python-sphinx (>= 1.3), python3-repoze.lru, python3-all, python3-setuptools, python3-sphinx, python-six, python3-six
| Filtered Build-Depends: base-files, base-passwd, bash, bsdutils, coreutils, dash, debianutils, diffutils, dpkg, e2fsprogs, findutils, grep, gzip, hostname, init, libc-bin, login, mount, ncurses-base, ncurses-bin, perl-base, sed, sysvinit-utils, tar, util-linux, libc6-dev, gcc (>= 4:4.9.1), g++ (>= 4:4.9.1), make, dpkg-dev (>= 1.17.11), debhelper (>= 9), dh-python, python-all (>= 2.6.6-3~), python-setuptools (>= 0.6b3), python-sphinx (>= 1.3), python3-repoze.lru, python3-all, python3-setuptools, python3-sphinx, python-six, python3-six
| dpkg-deb: building package `sbuild-build-depends-routes-dummy' in `/«BUILDDIR»/resolver-Blgj_w/apt_archive/sbuild-build-depends-routes-dummy.deb'.
| OK
| Ign file: ./ InRelease
| Get:1 file: ./ Release.gpg [299 B]
| Get:2 file: ./ Release [2119 B]
| Ign file: ./ Translation-en
| Reading package lists...
| Reading package lists...
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Install routes build dependencies (apt-based resolver)                       │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| Installing build dependencies
| Reading package lists...
| Building dependency tree...
| Reading state information...
| Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
| requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
| distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
| or been moved out of Incoming.
| The following information may help to resolve the situation:
| 
| The following packages have unmet dependencies:
|  sbuild-build-depends-routes-dummy : Depends: python-sphinx (>= 1.3) but it is not going to be installed
| E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
| apt-get failed.
| Package installation failed
| Not removing build depends: cloned chroot in use
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Cleanup                                                                      │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| Purging /«BUILDDIR»
| Not cleaning session: cloned chroot in use
| E: Package build dependencies not satisfied; skipping
| 
| ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
| │ Summary                                                                      │
| └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
| 
| Build Architecture: amd64
| Build-Space: 0
| Build-Time: 0
| Distribution: jessie
| Fail-Stage: install-deps
| Host Architecture: amd64
| Install-Time: 0
| Job: /tmp/build/routes_2.2-1~bpo8+1.dsc
| Machine Architecture: amd64
| Package: routes
| Package-Time: 0
| Source-Version: 2.2-1~bpo8+1
| Space: 0
| Status: failed
| Version: 2.2-1~bpo8+1
| ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
| Finished at 20151126-1550
| Build needed 00:00:00, 0k disc space
| E: Package build dependencies not satisfied; skipping

that's why I don't believe you built it in jessie. python-sphinx is not backported
and you didn't mention any patches

solutions:
1) backport python-sphinx, or
2) use patch from Ubuntu: https://patches.ubuntu.com/r/routes/routes_2.2-1ubuntu1.patch


now that you have working package, you can test it in jessie. After
upload, please subscribe routes' bugs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7908

[Piotr Ożarowski, 2015-11-26]
> that's the first mistake most backporters do, they forgot to include orig tarball
> (ftp masters would detect that and reject your package, additional work for them)
> 
> solution: pass -sa to dpkg-source ("--force-orig-source" in sbuild or "--debbuildopts -sa" in pbuilder)

the second one is missing changelog items and your packages have this one too.

solution: pass -vFOO to dpkg-source (where FOO is version in stable)
("--force-orig-source --debbuildopt -vFOO" in sbuild and 
"--debbuildopts '-sa -vFOO'" in pbuilder)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7911

Hi Piotr,

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 7:09 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
> [Piotr Ożarowski, 2015-11-26]
>> that's the first mistake most backporters do, they forgot to include orig tarball
>> (ftp masters would detect that and reject your package, additional work for them)
>>
>> solution: pass -sa to dpkg-source ("--force-orig-source" in sbuild or "--debbuildopts -sa" in pbuilder)

No, that's not necessary as long as the orig tarball is already
present in the archive in another suite (which would be true for
backports, since the package is supposed to be derived from the
current version in testing).

> the second one is missing changelog items and your packages have this one too.
>
> solution: pass -vFOO to dpkg-source (where FOO is version in stable)
> ("--force-orig-source --debbuildopt -vFOO" in sbuild and
> "--debbuildopts '-sa -vFOO'" in pbuilder)

No, the -v flag is no longer required as of April of this year [1]. It
is merely "recommended" now [2].

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-backports-announce/2015/04/msg00000.html
[2] http://backports.debian.org/Contribute/#index7h3

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7913

[Vincent Cheng, 2015-11-26]
> >> solution: pass -sa to dpkg-source ("--force-orig-source" in sbuild or "--debbuildopts -sa" in pbuilder)
> 
> No, that's not necessary as long as the orig tarball is already
> present in the archive in another suite (which would be true for
> backports, since the package is supposed to be derived from the
> current version in testing).

any pointers to docs/announcements? That's news to me...
Does that mean backports are just another suite now and I actually can
tell zigo to not hijack my packages?

> > the second one is missing changelog items and your packages have this one too.
> >
> > solution: pass -vFOO to dpkg-source (where FOO is version in stable)
> > ("--force-orig-source --debbuildopt -vFOO" in sbuild and
> > "--debbuildopts '-sa -vFOO'" in pbuilder)
> 
> No, the -v flag is no longer required as of April of this year [1]. It
> is merely "recommended" now [2].

ACK
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7917

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

 ❦ 26 novembre 2015 21:33 +0100, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> :

>> No, that's not necessary as long as the orig tarball is already
>> present in the archive in another suite (which would be true for
>> backports, since the package is supposed to be derived from the
>> current version in testing).
>
> any pointers to docs/announcements? That's news to me...

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2013/03/msg00007.html
-- 
There is a great discovery still to be made in Literature: that of
paying literary men by the quantity they do NOT write.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7912

Hi Piotr,

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 7:02 AM, Piotr Ożarowski <piotr@debian.org> wrote:
>> I've uploaded all what I prepared to this URL:
>> http://sid.gplhost.com/bpo/
>
> THANK YOU!
>
[build log snipped]
> that's why I don't believe you built it in jessie. python-sphinx is not backported
> and you didn't mention any patches
>
> solutions:
> 1) backport python-sphinx, or
> 2) use patch from Ubuntu: https://patches.ubuntu.com/r/routes/routes_2.2-1ubuntu1.patch

Backports packages are allowed to build-dep on other backported
packages of the same suite (i.e. you can build packages destined for
jessie-backports in a chroot with packages from both jessie and
jessie-backports to satisfy build dependencies). Given that Thomas has
already mentioned in the very beginning of this thread that he intends
on backporting sphinx to jessie-backports as well (which satisfies the
unmet build-dep above), I think it's safe to assume that he will be
uploading packages to backports in the necessary order to satisfy
build dependencies.

FWIW, I see no *technical* reason to reject Thomas' backported
packages. It looks to me that he's done everything he needs to do
according to the backports rules, and that you're imposing additional
requirements that (strictly speaking) he doesn't have to meet (i.e.
providing debdiffs for every backports upload).

Regards,
Vincent

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7914

[Vincent Cheng, 2015-11-26]
> > that's why I don't believe you built it in jessie. python-sphinx is not backported
> > and you didn't mention any patches
> >
> > solutions:
> > 1) backport python-sphinx, or
> > 2) use patch from Ubuntu: https://patches.ubuntu.com/r/routes/routes_2.2-1ubuntu1.patch
> 
> Backports packages are allowed to build-dep on other backported
> packages of the same suite (i.e. you can build packages destined for

that's right, same as in any other suite. That's why I mentioned
backporting sphinx as one of solutions

> jessie-backports in a chroot with packages from both jessie and
> jessie-backports to satisfy build dependencies). Given that Thomas has
> already mentioned in the very beginning of this thread that he intends
> on backporting sphinx to jessie-backports as well (which satisfies the
> unmet build-dep above), I think it's safe to assume that he will be
> uploading packages to backports in the necessary order to satisfy
> build dependencies.

right, he listed sphinx among those he wants to backport (I missed that
fact). I checked jessie-backports and it didn't contain it (it still
doesn't). Building and uploading in the right order was always the plan,
right?

> FWIW, I see no *technical* reason to reject Thomas' backported
> packages. It looks to me that he's done everything he needs to do
> according to the backports rules, and that you're imposing additional
> requirements that (strictly speaking) he doesn't have to meet (i.e.
> providing debdiffs for every backports upload).

I still stand by this requirement - I'm the one who gets all the emails
and bug reports and I do not welcome NMUs that do not fix RC bugs.
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7918

On 11/26/2015 04:02 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> that's why I don't believe you built it in jessie

I did. I'm running with sbuild on Jessie + Jessie backports, and of
course, I'm also managing a local repository with the packages already
rebuilt for jessie-backports, which will be part of the upload.

Now, feel free to not believe me, I don't mind. But please don't write
public accusations, when you don't actually know what I'm doing, and
haven't checked your facts.

> python-sphinx is not backported and you didn't mention any patches

I did backport python-sphinx too. It is present in these packages, and I
also mentioned it in this list.

> solutions:
> 1) backport python-sphinx

Which is what I did. Routes is by the way not the only package that
needed this build dependency.

> After upload, please subscribe routes' bugs.

Will do. FYI, I'm still waiting for the removal of
python-repoze.{what,what-plugins,who-plugins}, which is blocking the
migration of Keystone, and which therefore makes my efforts useless
(there's no point of uploading OpenStack without keystone). So for the
moment, my uploads are stalled.

On 11/26/2015 09:33 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> I actually can tell zigo to not hijack my packages?

Unless you want to maintain the backports yourself: no. This is not a
hijack anyway, you're the only one calling it this way.

On 11/26/2015 09:42 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> Building and uploading in the right order was always the plan,
> right?

Building in the right order is necessary for checking that
(build-)dependencies are satisfied, yes. Though I don't think I actually
need to upload in a specific order: I can push all at once if it is
within a single dak run (if I'm wrong here, let me know).

On 11/26/2015 03:02 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> If he decides to upload broken package, I cannot do anything.

Seriously, change your attitude.

On 11/26/2015 03:02 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> and even if he's able to generate
> debdiff (out of broken packages) then there's something wrong with his
> CI/sbuild setup and we'll figure that out. He will also subscribe bugs
> from all these packages just to shut up this asshole (and that's a
> good outcome, even if I had to be rude; being nice doesn't work with
> him, I tried that for few years, he just ignores you)

And again. I'm getting really tired of these gratuitous accusations even
before anything happens.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7919

> > python-sphinx is not backported and you didn't mention any patches
> 
> I did backport python-sphinx too. It is present in these packages, and I
> also mentioned it in this list.

you did mention you will backport sphinx. Yes, I missed that and I'm sorry for
that. I did check if it's backported and it still isn't.

> Will do. FYI, I'm still waiting for the removal of
> python-repoze.{what,what-plugins,who-plugins}, which is blocking the
> migration of Keystone, and which therefore makes my efforts useless
> (there's no point of uploading OpenStack without keystone). So for the
> moment, my uploads are stalled.

what's blocking you with sphinx?

> Unless you want to maintain the backports yourself: no. This is not a
> hijack anyway, you're the only one calling it this way.

I don't have time for it now and I don't want additional work caused by
you (sorry, I still don't trust you, not anymore).

Note that even if it "officially" is somewhere else (or is it not?) -
I will get all the DAK emails and bugs. Ubuntu fixed the fist part by
changing Maintainer to a mailing list. It doesn't solve the bugs issue
in our BTS (which is more annoying).

The easiest way is to simply play nice with current maintainer. I asked
you for changes you want to upload and you didn't provide them until
yesterday (and there's a difference between "just a rebuild" and "just a
rebuild with backported other build dependencies") - I could easily read
that from f.e. build logs or resulting binaries (which you didn't
originally provide).

> On 11/26/2015 09:42 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
> > Building and uploading in the right order was always the plan,
> > right?
> 
> Building in the right order is necessary for checking that

you realize some packages will have to go though NEW and sphinx is one of them?

> (build-)dependencies are satisfied, yes. Though I don't think I actually
> need to upload in a specific order: I can push all at once if it is
> within a single dak run (if I'm wrong here, let me know).

if you upload A that doesn't have to go through NEW and new B that A build
depends on, A is broken.
(if all of them will end up in NEW, ftp-masters will take care of that)
-- 
Piotr Ożarowski                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl          www.griffith.cc           www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web