Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
47 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Aurelien Jarno
On 2019-04-13 13:07, Philipp Kern wrote:

> On 4/13/2019 12:49 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the
> > deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and
> > associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll
> > also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes
> > files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive.
> I'm curious how the GPG bit works given that there is no guarantee that
> the signature can be validated at any other point in time than ingestion
> on ftp-master - especially considering the rotation/expiry of subkeys
> and buildd keys.

All the old buildd keys can be fetch from fasolo and can be used to
validate the signatures.

> In this case the files already come from a trusted
> source and should be ingested as-is, I guess? (Not that I particularly
> like the fact that it's only a point in time validation.)

Yes in that case, it's possible to resign the changes files, or let the
buildds to rebuild the corresponding packages.

--
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
[hidden email]                 http://www.aurel32.net

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Joerg Jaspert
In reply to this post by Aurelien Jarno
On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

>> How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the
>> time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks.

> The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the
> deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and
> associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll
> also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes
> files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive.

> It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.

Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this
is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8.
Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
"sometime in the future" point.

--
bye, Joerg

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
Hello!

Just as a heads-up: Sending mail to [hidden email] ends up sending
the mail to debian-alpha@, debian-hppa@, debian-ia64@, ... simultaneously,
so it would be better to avoid using this address in the discussion.

Thanks,
Adrian

--
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - [hidden email]
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - [hidden email]
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Svante Signell-2
In reply to this post by Aurelien Jarno
On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 12:59 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

> On 2019-04-13 12:37, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Before even thinking about uploading the hurd-i386 and kfreebsd
> > unstable/experimental packages to debian-ports, is there enough
> > disk space for this on it?  It seems my DD account is not enabled
> > on ftp.ports.debian.org so I can't check myself.
>
> Disk space should be fine to import hurd-i386. There might be enough
> space to also import kfreebsd-*, but only for the short term. As the
> number of packages in unstable is increasing regularly, we will need
> to get more disk space soon, probably before the buster release.
> Unfortunately the disk space on the ganeti cluster where the
> porta.d.o VM is hosted is also getting low.
>
> The CPU and RAM is however probably to low to add the 3 ports, unless
> wereduce the number of archive-install run per day (currently running
> every 6 hours).

One problem with debian-ports is that the sources, most interesting the
*.debian.tar.* files. You cannot any longer add deb-src to the
sources.list and apt-get source <package>; dpkg-buildpackage ...

As I understand it the sources have to be added to where the binary
package are e.g.
http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/ and
the way to build from source is dget
http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/gdb_7.12-6.1+pie.dsc
etc.

Is there space in ftp.ports.debian.org also for the source packages?



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:23:42 +0200, a ecrit:

> One problem with debian-ports is that the sources, most interesting the
> *.debian.tar.* files. You cannot any longer add deb-src to the
> sources.list and apt-get source <package>; dpkg-buildpackage ...
>
> As I understand it the sources have to be added to where the binary
> package are e.g.
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/ and
> the way to build from source is dget
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/gdb_7.12-6.1+pie.dsc
> etc.

For unstable/experimental packages, one can simply use the main archive
deb-src line, debian-ports only needs to host the binaries.

> Is there space in ftp.ports.debian.org also for the source packages?

The question is only for packages in the "unreleased" distrib, which
shouldn't be numerous (or else it means the work is not going upstream).

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Svante Signell-2
On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 10:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:

> Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:23:42 +0200, a ecrit:
> > One problem with debian-ports is that the sources, most interesting
> > the
> > *.debian.tar.* files. You cannot any longer add deb-src to the
> > sources.list and apt-get source <package>; dpkg-buildpackage ...
> >
> > As I understand it the sources have to be added to where the binary
> > package are e.g.
> > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/
> >  and
> > the way to build from source is dget
> > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/gdb_7.12-6.1+pie.dsc
> > etc.
>
> For unstable/experimental packages, one can simply use the main
> archive deb-src line, debian-ports only needs to host the binaries.

I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever get
hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:52:19 +0200, a ecrit:

> On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 10:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:23:42 +0200, a ecrit:
> > > One problem with debian-ports is that the sources, most interesting
> > > the
> > > *.debian.tar.* files. You cannot any longer add deb-src to the
> > > sources.list and apt-get source <package>; dpkg-buildpackage ...
> > >
> > > As I understand it the sources have to be added to where the binary
> > > package are e.g.
> > > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/
> > >  and
> > > the way to build from source is dget
> > > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/gdb_7.12-6.1+pie.dsc
> > > etc.
> >
> > For unstable/experimental packages, one can simply use the main
> > archive deb-src line, debian-ports only needs to host the binaries.
>
> I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
> there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever get
> hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?

That version of glibc is in the "unreleased" distribution, not
"unstable". See the main/binary-hurd-i386/Packages.gz files of the
different distribs:

http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/dists/

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Svante Signell-2
On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 11:33 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:

> Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:52:19 +0200, a ecrit:
> >
> > I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
> > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
> > there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever
> > get
> > hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?
>
> That version of glibc is in the "unreleased" distribution, not
> "unstable". See the main/binary-hurd-i386/Packages.gz files of the
> different distribs:
>
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/dists/

Yes, the glibc version is there, but where are the sources, i.e.
the *2.27.orig.tar.*, *2.27-8+hurd.1.debian.tar.* and *2.27-
8+hurd.1.dsc files?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 14:29:48 +0200, a ecrit:

> On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 11:33 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:52:19 +0200, a ecrit:
> > >
> > > I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
> > > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
> > > there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever
> > > get
> > > hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?
> >
> > That version of glibc is in the "unreleased" distribution, not
> > "unstable". See the main/binary-hurd-i386/Packages.gz files of the
> > different distribs:
> >
> > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/dists/
>
> Yes, the glibc version is there, but where are the sources, i.e.
> the *2.27.orig.tar.*, *2.27-8+hurd.1.debian.tar.* and *2.27-
> 8+hurd.1.dsc files?

They were not uploaded at the time. I don't know if the current
debian-port upload queue can now take them for the unreleased distrib.

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

James Clarke-2
On 14 Apr 2019, at 14:14, Samuel Thibault <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 14:29:48 +0200, a ecrit:
>> On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 11:33 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>>> Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:52:19 +0200, a ecrit:
>>>>
>>>> I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
>>>> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
>>>> there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever
>>>> get
>>>> hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?
>>>
>>> That version of glibc is in the "unreleased" distribution, not
>>> "unstable". See the main/binary-hurd-i386/Packages.gz files of the
>>> different distribs:
>>>
>>> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/dists/
>>
>> Yes, the glibc version is there, but where are the sources, i.e.
>> the *2.27.orig.tar.*, *2.27-8+hurd.1.debian.tar.* and *2.27-
>> 8+hurd.1.dsc files?
>
> They were not uploaded at the time. I don't know if the current
> debian-port upload queue can now take them for the unreleased distrib.

Yes, it can, has done for as long as I've been around (though admittedly that's
only a few years). The Sources file remains empty, but the .dsc etc get put in
the pool alongside the .deb; see, for example silo[1].

One day I (or someone else) will finish dak-for-ports so we can have non-empty
Sources files and use deb-src, among other things...

James

[1] https://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-sparc64/main/s/silo/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Aurelien Jarno
In reply to this post by Samuel Thibault-8
On 2019-04-14 15:14, Samuel Thibault wrote:

> Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 14:29:48 +0200, a ecrit:
> > On Sun, 2019-04-14 at 11:33 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Svante Signell, le dim. 14 avril 2019 10:52:19 +0200, a ecrit:
> > > >
> > > > I cannot follow your reasoning here, e.g. at  
> > > > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/glibc/
> > > > there are no source packages, only binary ones. How would I ever
> > > > get
> > > > hold of your source changes to build that version of glibc?
> > >
> > > That version of glibc is in the "unreleased" distribution, not
> > > "unstable". See the main/binary-hurd-i386/Packages.gz files of the
> > > different distribs:
> > >
> > > http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/dists/
> >
> > Yes, the glibc version is there, but where are the sources, i.e.
> > the *2.27.orig.tar.*, *2.27-8+hurd.1.debian.tar.* and *2.27-
> > 8+hurd.1.dsc files?
First of all note that hurd-i386 on debian-ports is a bit peculiar as
only the unreleased suite is available. This package should have been
obsoleted by the newer 2.28 versions from unstable now that they are
also buildable on hurd.

There are two issues there.
- The original upload doesn't contain the source files, that's why there
  are not available. If the upload had contained the sources file, they
  would have been present in the same directory.
- The upload should have been rejected as the sources are not present.
  This works for other architectures, so there is probably a bug in
  mini-dak which doesn't check that properly for architectures with only
  unreleased.

> They were not uploaded at the time. I don't know if the current
> debian-port upload queue can now take them for the unreleased distrib.

mini-dak is based on .changes file. For that you need to upload the
source and binaries all together.

Aurelien

--
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
[hidden email]                 http://www.aurel32.net

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Aurelien Jarno
In reply to this post by Samuel Thibault-8
On 2019-04-12 23:01, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the
> time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks.

Note that there is no need for the removed architectures to be hosted on
debian-ports, especially if you are not satisfied by the way it works.
Feel free to get them hosted somewhere else.

Aurelien

--
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
[hidden email]                 http://www.aurel32.net

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Aurelien Jarno
In reply to this post by Svante Signell-2
On 2019-04-14 10:23, Svante Signell wrote:

> On Sat, 2019-04-13 at 12:59 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On 2019-04-13 12:37, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Before even thinking about uploading the hurd-i386 and kfreebsd
> > > unstable/experimental packages to debian-ports, is there enough
> > > disk space for this on it?  It seems my DD account is not enabled
> > > on ftp.ports.debian.org so I can't check myself.
> >
> > Disk space should be fine to import hurd-i386. There might be enough
> > space to also import kfreebsd-*, but only for the short term. As the
> > number of packages in unstable is increasing regularly, we will need
> > to get more disk space soon, probably before the buster release.
> > Unfortunately the disk space on the ganeti cluster where the
> > porta.d.o VM is hosted is also getting low.
> >
> > The CPU and RAM is however probably to low to add the 3 ports, unless
> > wereduce the number of archive-install run per day (currently running
> > every 6 hours).
>
> One problem with debian-ports is that the sources, most interesting the
> *.debian.tar.* files. You cannot any longer add deb-src to the
> sources.list and apt-get source <package>; dpkg-buildpackage ...
The sources for the unstable and experimental suites are the ones from
the main debian archive, so one can just use the deb-src entries from
the main archive.

There is no deb-src entry for the unreleased packages as debian-ports
hosts multiple architectures and thus might have multiple versions for
different architectures in unreleased. You probably do not want that
"apt-get source foobar" returns you version 1.0.0-1+sh4, while there is
also a hurd-i386 version numbered 1.0.0-1+hurd.

There might be a way to fix that by using a different suite for each
architecture, but that nobody has found that critical enough to write
the corresponding code. Feel free to do so. Note also that it will break
the --target-release option of apt.

> As I understand it the sources have to be added to where the binary
> package are e.g.
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/ and
> the way to build from source is dget
> http://ftp.ports.debian.org/debian-ports/pool-hurd-i386/main/g/gdb/gdb_7.12-6.1+pie.dsc
> etc.
>
> Is there space in ftp.ports.debian.org also for the source packages?

That's not a problem of disk space, the sources are there as you show
yourself above.

Aurelien

--
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
[hidden email]                 http://www.aurel32.net

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
In reply to this post by Aurelien Jarno
Aurelien Jarno, le dim. 14 avril 2019 16:08:20 +0200, a ecrit:
> On 2019-04-12 23:01, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the
> > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks.
>
> Note that there is no need for the removed architectures to be hosted on
> debian-ports, especially if you are not satisfied by the way it works.
> Feel free to get them hosted somewhere else.

I don't see a reason for not hosting it on debian-ports, it'll make it
way simpler for the rest of the workflow with buildd etc.

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Narcis Garcia
In reply to this post by Joerg Jaspert
Good reasons about Hurd; bad news for a GNU operating system.
Removal instead of a port?
Just now?

El 12/4/19 a les 22:48, Joerg Jaspert ha escrit:
> Hi
>
> back in August 2018 we discussed architecture inclusion into
> unstable/experimental.
>
> Today we had our regular FTPMaster meeting and discussed hurd and both
> kfreebsd architecture and decided to remove them from unstable and
> experimental 2 weeks from now.
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
Narcis Garcia, le dim. 14 avril 2019 21:50:55 +0200, a ecrit:
> Good reasons about Hurd; bad news for a GNU operating system.
> Removal instead of a port?

See the rest of the discussion.

ftpmaster just say they'll remove it from the main archive. Meaning we
have to copy the packages to the debian-ports archive before they remove
them from the main archive.

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Matthias Klose
In reply to this post by Joerg Jaspert
On 13.04.19 17:01, Joerg Jaspert wrote:

> On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
>>> How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the
>>> time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks.
>
>> The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the
>> deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and
>> associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll
>> also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes
>> files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive.
>
>> It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.
>
> Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this
> is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8.
> Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
> "sometime in the future" point.

well, please go back in history to see the same short notice for the hppa
removal, and then do the exercise how long it took to integrate that
architecture on debian-ports.


>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Samuel Thibault-8
In reply to this post by Samuel Thibault-8
Hello,

Samuel Thibault, le sam. 13 avril 2019 12:16:54 +0200, a ecrit:

> Holger Levsen, le sam. 13 avril 2019 09:50:25 +0000, a ecrit:
> > I can see how the ftpteam doesnt want to delay this *after* the Buster
> > release,
>
> Ok, if it can't be after Buster releases because e.g. ftpmaster wants to
> clean the archive before it, the discussion is moot, I can just make the
> non-official Hurd release this week (since the scripts currently work
> it's really quick to do) with the RC bugs, and we can make the move and
> let scripts etc. be broken for a couple of months until I have time to
> fix them back.

So I could produce some hurd CD images with the archive from this
week-end.  AurĂ©lien injected the hurd-i386 archive to debian-ports, and
we got the buildds running. Various scripts will start breaking but at
least package building will continue like before. Perhaps I'll have time
to fix the CD image building scripts before the Buster release, to make
more recent image builds, but as I said I can't promise anything.

Samuel

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Aurelien Jarno
In reply to this post by Joerg Jaspert
On 2019-04-13 17:01, Joerg Jaspert wrote:

> On 15371 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>
> > > How is the move to debian-ports supposed to happen? I won't have the
> > > time to do anything about it within the 2 weeks.
>
> > The process to inject all packages to debian-ports is to get all the
> > deb, udeb and buildinfo files from the archives (main and debug) and
> > associate them with the .changes files that are hosted on coccia. We'll
> > also need to fetch all the associated GPG keys used to sign the changes
> > files. Then we can inject that in the debian-ports archive.
>
> > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.
>
> Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this
> is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8.
> Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
> "sometime in the future" point.
The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday.
I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least 4
more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some margin
to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that (especially in
the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk space for the
debian-ports machine.

--
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
[hidden email]                 http://www.aurel32.net

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-{i386,amd64} removal

Joerg Jaspert
On 15381 March 1977, Aurelien Jarno wrote:

>> > It would be nice to have a bit more than 2 weeks to do all of that.
>> Ok. How much? Is 6 or 8 weeks better? I don't think, given how long this
>> is on the table already, it doesn't make much difference if its 2 or 8.
>> Just something thats clear defined and not some random, non-clear
>> "sometime in the future" point.
> The hurd-i386 architecture has been moved to to debian-ports yesterday.
> I hope it shows the willingness to do that. Please give us at least 4
> more weeks to do the remaining kfreebsd-*. That will provide some margin
> to account for the non-infinite free time to work on that (especially in
> the freeze period) and possibly to get more disk space for the
> debian-ports machine.

Thats ok, end of May is a nice point to take.

Thanks for the work and the timeframe for the rest!

--
bye, Joerg

123