From noreply at nord-box.com Mon Dec 4 02:47:50 2017 From: noreply at nord-box.com (NORD-BOX) Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 05:47:50 +0300 Subject: Motorcycle panniers pre-sale Message-ID: <5a24b7567528f-2c21282420a-8-1679@action-gamez.com> Hello, You have received MGE newsletter. Please read it here: http://sep1.action-gamez.com/cmVlbHQxMjsydDI4MmMyLTE0YTA5LTc2OA%3D%3D I don't want to receive MGE newsletters anymore: http://sep1.action-gamez.com/c2JudXVlcmNic2MyMWk7MjAyODI2Mi1hNDE5Ny04 Motorcycle panniers pre-sale http://nord-box.com?head 2 x motorcycle panniers for 299?? Regular price 599?? You save 50% Pre-order now!: http://www.nord-box.com/?text http://www.nord-box.com/ http://www.nord-box.com/ http://www.nord-box.com/ http://www.nord-box.com/ Universal mounting brackets for any type of motorcycle INCLUDED http://www.nord-box.com/?tvirtinimai Wach video how looks our panniers http://www.nord-box.com/shop/nordbox-motorcycle-panniers-46-litre/?video -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anbe at debian.org Thu Dec 21 04:14:02 2017 From: anbe at debian.org (Andreas Beckmann) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 05:14:02 +0100 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... Message-ID: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> Hi, here are my observations after analyzing a few pbuilder --twice failures in experimental. I only did full (source+arch+indep) builds. The command sequence being tested is roughly: 1. debian/rules clean 2. dpkg-source 3. debian/rules build binary 4. debian/rules clean 5. dpkg-source 6. debian/rules build binary 1.-3. are utilized by regular builds and tested by normal archive-wide rebuilds, therefore I'll only consider packages passing these steps. Possible failure scenarios for the second build: 4. debian/rules clean There are bugs related to make distclean and debian/rules clean, they usually don't show up during 1. since the source tree is not in a configured state (no Makefile?) and the debian/ tree is not in a built state. a) make distclean may fail, probably an upstream bug * #884898, icu/experimental, parallel distclean race b) passes, but leaves new/modified files in the source tree * This is the majority of bugs, usually generated filed don't get deleted properly. The subsequent error from dpkg-source is pretty obvious. c) passes, but leaves new/modified in the debian/ tree * #884419, #884815: override_dh_clean does not run dh_clean resulting in debian/$PKG/ package build directories and debhelper logfiles being left in the tree. Subsequent dpkg-source will choke on unknown binary files under debian/ There is a lintian check coming: #884817 "lintian: check for override_dh_clean target missing call to dh_clean". * there may be text-only changes in debian/ that don't trigger errors, but cause differing source package to be built in 2./5. d) passes, but deletes files that cannot be regenerated * #884706, #884813, #884819, #884889 This passes the subsequent dpkg-source (since it will just warn on deleted files by default, which is very convient to get rid of generated files that are shipped in the upstream tarball), but will fail during the following build 5. dpkg-source a) may fail as a consequence of 4.b), 4.c) b) may build a source package that differs from the one built in 2. Testing for these bugs easily may need some new features in pbuilder, e.g. a --one-and-a-half option :-) A possible candidate is git/experimental 1:2.15.1+next.20171214-1 which should add a 'debian/git-core/usr/share/doc/git-core -> git' symlink (#884890). 6. debian/rules build binary a) may fail as a consequence of 4.d) How could we check for these bugs? I think the interesting failures to look for are 4.a), 5.b), 6.a) (leaving out the probabe majority 5.a)), since they may make working with the packages difficult by failing in non-obvious ways. I would also consider these as RC. We would probably need some enhancements for pbuilder to allow testing points 4. and 5. without doing a full --twice run. Also I don't know whether it is easily possible to classify pbuilder --twice failures to the command that failed and whether it was first or second build. Given proper pbuilder support (deliver build result from the first build even if 4. debian/rules clean failed), testing for 4.a) should be trivially possible to do for reproducible builds with only marginal computation time requirements. Does the reproducible build effort currently test for reproducibility of source packages? In that case testing for 5.b) could hopefully be done with reproducible builds as well, it would just require another dpkg-source call. Failures for 5.a) could be filtered out unless someone volunteers for the bug filing. Testing for 6.a) effectively doubles the compute power needed for a rebuild test, so maybe that should be rather left to infrequent specialized archive-wide rebuilds. Andreas From pabs at debian.org Thu Dec 21 06:01:28 2017 From: pabs at debian.org (Paul Wise) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 14:01:28 +0800 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > How could we check for these bugs? I guess the archive-wide rebuilds should be the location for this. https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/ArchiveTesting IIRC Lucas used to do semi-regular testing of this. > I think the interesting failures to look for ... I'd suggest testing all of the points eventually though. > Given proper pbuilder support (deliver build result from the first build > even if 4. debian/rules clean failed), testing for 4.a) should be > trivially possible to do for reproducible builds with only marginal > computation time requirements. The other thread has a response to this: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20171213103337.n7so73u5lmhbrfje at layer-acht.org > Does the reproducible build effort currently test for reproducibility of > source packages? It is focussed on binary packages. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise From tg at mirbsd.de Thu Dec 21 22:44:30 2017 From: tg at mirbsd.de (Thorsten Glaser) Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 22:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> Message-ID: Andreas Beckmann dixit: >How could we check for these bugs? Why are these bugs anyway? I mean, not why they are defined as bugs (I do know the rule), but why does this rule exist (or, at least, still exist)? Even quite some time ago, I?d assume a build to always start from a clean state (.dsc or, nowadays, a VCS). Package uploads are made after cowbuilder (pbuilder) or sbuild. So, is this still necessary? Apologies for getting slightly off with the topic. bye, //mirabilos (no offence intended, just curious) -- This space for rent. https://paypal.me/mirabilos to support my work. From holger at layer-acht.org Fri Dec 22 16:32:50 2017 From: holger at layer-acht.org (Holger Levsen) Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:32:50 +0000 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> Message-ID: <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 05:14:02AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Does the reproducible build effort currently test for reproducibility of > source packages? no. the creation of Debian source packages is not reproducible at the moment. I don't recall whether we found a fundamental problem with it or if simply we had other fishes to fry. (I guess it's probably that this would require pristine-tar which would be a fundamental change if we'd make this a must....) -- cheers, Holger -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tg at mirbsd.de Fri Dec 22 16:59:35 2017 From: tg at mirbsd.de (Thorsten Glaser) Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:59:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> Message-ID: Holger Levsen dixit: >On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 05:14:02AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >> Does the reproducible build effort currently test for reproducibility of >> source packages? > >no. the creation of Debian source packages is not reproducible at the >moment. I don't recall whether we found a fundamental problem with it or Debian source packages are the *source* form of everything in Debian; therefore, they are (per definitionem) ?correct?, as they are taken and copied, not (re)created. >(I guess it's probably that this would require pristine-tar which would pristine-tar is not perfect and does not work on all architectures or with all workflows, not even all VCSes. This does not sound desirable. Standard workflow for a ?second? upload is to download the previous one, reusing the same origtgz, creating a second Debian source pak? kage with it, and then using debdiff to validate the changes, anyway. (I do. Don?t you?) So I don?t think that?s something that needs to be explored. bye, //mirabilos -- 13:22??neurodamage? mira, what's up man? I have a CVS question for you in #cvs 13:22??neurodamage? since you're so good w. it ? ?neurodamage:#cvs? i love you 16:06? Thank god I found you =) 20:03??bioe007:#cvs? mira2k: ty 18:36??ThunderChicken:#cvs? mirabilos FTW! 23:03??mithraic:#cvs? aaah. thanks From holger at layer-acht.org Fri Dec 22 17:51:58 2017 From: holger at layer-acht.org (Holger Levsen) Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 17:51:58 +0000 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> Message-ID: <20171222175158.m6oecxoxwz3djh2g@layer-acht.org> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 04:59:35PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > >On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 05:14:02AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > >> Does the reproducible build effort currently test for reproducibility of > >> source packages? > > > >no. the creation of Debian source packages is not reproducible at the > >moment. I don't recall whether we found a fundamental problem with it or > > Debian source packages are the *source* form of everything in Debian; > therefore, they are (per definitionem) ?correct?, as they are taken > and copied, not (re)created. yes. the question was, whether it's possible to do this in a bit by bit reproducible way. as became clear again here, this ain't easy and doesn't get us much anyway, so we didnt pursue it further. -- cheers, Holger -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mattia at debian.org Fri Dec 22 21:43:34 2017 From: mattia at debian.org (Mattia Rizzolo) Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 22:43:34 +0100 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> Message-ID: <20171222214333.GA20603@mapreri.org> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 04:32:50PM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > no. the creation of Debian source packages is not reproducible at the > moment. I don't recall whether we found a fundamental problem with it or > if simply we had other fishes to fry. Actually, Guillem went ahead and did this himself. He also thought it would be hard, but after trying only few changes to dpkg were needed. Look: mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % mkdir ../a ../b mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % dpkg-source -b . dpkg-source: info: using options from diffoscope/debian/source/options: --tar-ignore=.*.sw? --tar-ignore=*/*~ --tar-ignore=,,* --tar-ignore=.[#~]* --tar-ignore=.deps --tar-ignore=.git --tar-ignore=.gitattributes --tar-ignore=.gitignore --tar-ignore=.gitmodules dpkg-source: info: using source format '3.0 (native)' dpkg-source: info: building diffoscope in diffoscope_89.tar.xz dpkg-source: info: building diffoscope in diffoscope_89.dsc mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % dcmd mv ../diffoscope_89.dsc ../a mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % dpkg-source -b . dpkg-source: info: using options from diffoscope/debian/source/options: --tar-ignore=.*.sw? --tar-ignore=*/*~ --tar-ignore=,,* --tar-ignore=.[#~]* --tar-ignore=.deps --tar-ignore=.git --tar-ignore=.gitattributes --tar-ignore=.gitignore --tar-ignore=.gitmodules dpkg-source: info: using source format '3.0 (native)' dpkg-source: info: building diffoscope in diffoscope_89.tar.xz dpkg-source: info: building diffoscope in diffoscope_89.dsc mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % dcmd mv ../diffoscope_89.dsc ../b mattia at warren ..vel/reproducible/diffoscope/diffoscope (git)-[master] % cd .. mattia at warren ~/devel/reproducible/diffoscope % diffoscope a/diffoscope_89.dsc b/diffoscope_89.dsc |##################################################################################################################################| 100% Time: 0:00:00 mattia at warren ~/devel/reproducible/diffoscope % So, yes, source packages can be built reproducibly! :D -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From holger at layer-acht.org Sat Dec 23 08:27:50 2017 From: holger at layer-acht.org (Holger Levsen) Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 08:27:50 +0000 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <20171222214333.GA20603@mapreri.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> <20171222214333.GA20603@mapreri.org> Message-ID: <20171223082750.uwfcvccewtmebayo@layer-acht.org> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:43:34PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Actually, Guillem went ahead and did this himself. He also thought it > would be hard, but after trying only few changes to dpkg were needed. > Look: [...] > So, yes, source packages can be built reproducibly! neat, thanks for pointing this out! In which version of dpkg was that feature? -- cheers, Holger -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mattia at debian.org Sat Dec 23 17:25:28 2017 From: mattia at debian.org (Mattia Rizzolo) Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 18:25:28 +0100 Subject: packages that FTBFS twice in a row ... In-Reply-To: <20171223082750.uwfcvccewtmebayo@layer-acht.org> References: <9480d47b-cc74-442e-b9c3-01643b17f909@debian.org> <20171222163250.oyv46kcxkybi2psc@layer-acht.org> <20171222214333.GA20603@mapreri.org> <20171223082750.uwfcvccewtmebayo@layer-acht.org> Message-ID: <20171223172527.GC20603@mapreri.org> On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 08:27:50AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:43:34PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > So, yes, source packages can be built reproducibly! > > neat, thanks for pointing this out! In which version of dpkg was that > feature? dpkg (1.18.11) unstable; urgency=medium ? * Make dpkg-source generate reproducible source packages when run standalone, by honoring SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH. ? * Perl modules: ? - Fix reproducible source package support in Dpkg::Source::Archive, by sorting the tar contents with --sort=name. ? -- Guillem Jover Sun, 06 Nov 2016 03:09:02 +0100 -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kehufuwu at mail4.caiwuziyouren.com.cn Mon Dec 25 22:05:03 2017 From: kehufuwu at mail4.caiwuziyouren.com.cn (=?UTF-8?B?6LSi5Yqh6Ieq55Sx5Lq6?=) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:05:03 +0800 (CST) Subject: =?utf-8?b?5pyJ5L2NQ0VP5YG35YG35YWz5rOo5LqG5L2g77yM5bm257uZ5L2g5Y+R5p2l?= =?utf-8?b?5LiA5bCB56eB5L+hKGFkKQ==?= Message-ID: <1878003643.1663340.1514239503616.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kehufuwu at mail4.cwzyr.com Fri Dec 29 20:05:40 2017 From: kehufuwu at mail4.cwzyr.com (=?UTF-8?B?6LSi5Yqh6Ieq55Sx5Lq6?=) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 04:05:40 +0800 (CST) Subject: =?utf-8?b?5YWz5LqO4oCc5oi/5Lqn5paw5pS/4oCd55qE57uf5LiA5Zue5aSN77ya5Zev?= =?utf-8?b?44CB5a+544CB5rKh6ZSZ44CB5bCx5piv6L+Z5qC3KEFEKQ==?= Message-ID: <260828224.127281.1514577940454.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: