Previously I tried to be nice and gave you pointers which I hoped would give you insight as to why your behavior is unhelpful, which in turn would result in improved behavior. That did not have the intended effect. So now I'm NOT going to be nice, so I added community@debian.org in the address list because: 1) I consider your behavior in violation of the CoC: https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct 2) You and possibly others will complain about my style of communication, so it'll end up in the Debian Community Team's plate anyway. On 2023-01-19 I wrote in https://bugs.debian.org/1029159#16: > On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 17:41:33 +0100 xevilstar <vmxevilstar@gmail.com> wrote: > > Package: linux-headers-6.2.0-rc4 > > Version: 6.2.0-rc4-2 > > > > I am trying to dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc linux-6.2-rc4.tar.gz > > Because I strongly want to learn how to contribute. > > It's great that you want to learn how to contribute, but please don't abuse > the Debian BTS for that. Only use that to report actual issues in actual > existing packages/versions. > > There are various resources that will help you get started, f.e. on > wiki.debian.org and there's also #debian-mentors on IRC where you can ask > questions related to Debian packaging. But the available resources should > already teach you how you can start making contributions and also when it's > appropriate to submit a RFS bug and how to do it. > > As for learning how to build a Debian kernel, please read the debian-kernel- > handbook which explains many things on how the Debian kernel gets build. > > As for (potential) issues wrt rt packages, you may want to take a look at: > https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/merge_requests/629 > > Where the commits should tell you how to deal with that. > > Good luck! Despite me asking you to NOT file bugs for packages/versions which do not exist in the Debian archive, you continue to do so: On 2023-01-30 I wrote in https://bugs.debian.org/1030013#12 > On Monday, 30 January 2023 10:49:32 CET xevilstar wrote: > > The new rc kernel version 6.2~rc6 is out, still not displayed on > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/linux Can I dput the packages ? > > Stop filing bug reports on things which are not bugs. > And it's not just one, but several. For emphasis: *And it's not just one, but several.* (on 2023-01-30!) This mail contains quotes from several different bug reports, but not 'even' all of them. > You said you wanted to contribute, but all you've accomplished thus far is > annoy people and cause people to spend time on things which are MUCH better > spend on actual issues. Please stop! > > The focus is, as it should be, on getting the kernel ready for the Bookworm > release and that should be version 6.1. > Until Bookworm is released, any later version is not important to the Debian > kernel team, so stop *continuously* asking for it. Before that I said in https://bugs.debian.org/1027921#25: > On Wednesday, 4 January 2023 16:39:33 CET Renato Gallo wrote: > > 5.10 should be EOL by now > > Please refrain from comments like that. > It doesn't help at all and is also plain false. 5.10 is Bullseye's kernel and it's also a Super Long Term Support release, meaning it will probably receive ~ 20 YEARS of support. But that's not the point I want to make here, which is that you send an unsolicited email, aka spam, to a bug report with which you were not involved and your message was plain wrong and unhelpful. Then in https://bugs.debian.org/1022126#112 this happened: On Monday, 20 February 2023 10:30:43 CET vmxevilstar@gmail.com wrote: > I have stopped sending kernel packages as per your request (you defined > it spamming). > For who might be interested I am making the 6.2.0 kernel amd64 packages > myself ... > Since this version fixes bug 1022126 (and, I am sure others), This is another bug you inserted yourself into with not only an unhelpful reply, but one which angered the OP of that bug. How is that helping? Why are you surprised that this kind of behavior is considered spamming? Contributing is about helping the maintainer(s) of a package by lessening their load or in case there is no maintainer, by f.e. adopting a package. Or if there is a maintainer but for some reason has been unable to work on their package for a while, work on that *with their permission*. The Debian kernel package does not fall in that category, quite the opposite. On 2023-01-15 https://bugs.debian.org/1028965 happened: RFS: linux/6.1.6-1~exp1 [ITP] -- Linux for multiprocessor On Sunday, 15 January 2023 20:40:16 CET I wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jan 2023 15:59:13 +0100 vmxevilstar@gmail.com wrote: > > Package: sponsorship-requests > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "linux": > > * Package name : linux > > > > Version : 6.1.6-1~exp1 > > Upstream contact : Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> > > > > * URL : https://www.kernel.org/ > > * License : Unicode-data, LGPL-2.1, GPL-2+-or-X11, CRYPTOGAMS, > > LGPL-2.1 or BSD-2-clause, GPL-2 or BSD-2-clause, GPL-2, Xen-interface > > > * Vcs : https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux > > > > Section : kernel > > JFTR: This isn't the way and Salvatore isn't the Upstream contact and was > not made aware of this (prior). By pointing you to resources to learn how to contribute I had hoped that you would've learned that such an action is considered an EXTREMELY hostile take-over attempt. I've wasted more then enough time on this already, so I'll conclude with 2 bug reports which are essentially the same. Filed yesterday https://bugs.debian.org/1032876: On Monday, 13 March 2023 10:13:38 CET Renato Gallo wrote: > Source: linux > Version: 6.2.5 > Severity: critical > Tags: newcomer > Justification: bugfix > > I came across the new stable kernel release that fixes some bugs actually > present in the system and today https://bugs.debian.org/1032924 On Tuesday, 14 March 2023 08:42:39 CET Renato Gallo wrote: > Package: linux-image-amd64 > Severity: important > Tags: newcomer security > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-experimental-changes@lists.debian.org, > debian-kernel@lists.debian.org, Debian Security Team > <team@security.debian.org> > > Dear Maintainers > > I am reporting the new stable kernel release 6.2.6 which fixes some realtek > bugs the link to the changelog is > > https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/ChangeLog-6.2.6 > ... > Can you please package it and send it to experimental ? since If I do it is > spamming ? It's considered spamming because you keep abusing the BTS for bugs which aren't bugs, for kernel versions which aren't in Debian, repeated after having been asked multiple times to stop doing that and now you've also expanded the X-Debbugs-Cc field so that more people see it. Let me REPEAT the quote of my reply on 2023-01-30 from above: > The focus is, as it should be, on getting the kernel ready for the Bookworm > release and that should be version 6.1. > Until Bookworm is released, any later version is not important to the Debian > kernel team, so stop *continuously* asking for it. While I have REPEATEDLY and EXPLICITLY asked you to stop doing that! I have wasted a considerable amount of time to collect all this 'evidence' after having wasted a lot of time previously trying to steer you in a direction which could be helpful instead of wasteful that you have been so far. I could've spend that time on *actual* contributions. And you not only have wasted my time and annoyed me on multiple occasions, but also others. If I see any more of these useless and annoying bug reports from you or you inserting yourself into other people's bug reports with useless and annoying replies, then I'm going to spend a considerable amount of time on you again, but this time to figure out how to get you banned from the BTS! I will now close your useless bug reports and I will not respond again. Any reaction will have to come from the Community Team who are likely not as fed up with this and surely are better at communicating. Diederik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.