[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1064297: RFS: foolsm/1.0.21-1 -- Link connectivity monitor tool

retitle 1064297 RFS: lsm/1.0.21-1 -- Link connectivity monitor tool


As the source package has changed the package could be retrieve by the following url. 

The source builds the following binary packages:

  foolsm - Link connectivity monitor tool
  lsm - Link connectivity monitor tool - transitional package

To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/lsm/

Alternatively, you can download the package with 'dget' using this command:

  dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lsm/lsm_1.0.21-1.dsc


Em 24/03/2024 16:50, Lucas Castro escreveu:

Em 23/03/2024 13:08, Tobias Frost escreveu:
Control: tags -1 moreinfo

The source package name is still being renamed, and the source package
rename is not explictly stated in the changelog.

Source package already kept old project name, only binary renamed.


I had talked about the source package rename on IRC, and no problem was pointed as serious then the my conclusion it wasn't going to be a problem.

But, by the way, it's going to be kept as it was.


(I think this renane shouldn't be done, to keep the history of the
package, not only the tracker but also the BTS and all the other
services working on source packages.)

(You should also bump the timestamp in the d/changelog, when uploading a
new package to mentors.)
Timestamp bumped.

The patch in package should be fowarded; as it only changes *comments*,
consider dropping it completly.

Dropped the patch, ASAP I'll forward to upstream.


Already uploaded to mentors.


--
tobi

Thanks Tobias.



On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:25:04 -0300 Lucas Castro <lucas@gnuabordo.com.br>
wrote:
Em 06/03/2024 05:49, Daniel Gröber escreveu:
Hi Lucas,

On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 03:29:49PM -0300, Lucas Castro wrote:
Are you sure you want to change the source package name? Doing so
fractures
the history of the package on tracker.d.o and it's not really
necessary.
The upstream has changed software name but it's a good point about
tracker.d.o.
Right, so users will try to `apt install foolsm` in the future, but
the
source package name is largeley irellevant to them.

Quick package review:

     - d/postinst: I don't think it's useful to print the message
about editing
       the config. I've only seen packages do that in special
circumstances, do
       you have a justification for it being necessary here?
Really, really not. I really would like improve that, I guess to
write good
doc and manual pages is enough.
I would argue users (sysadmins in this case) are going to be
familiar with
the concept of having to configure a package before it becomes
useful and
while the daemon not being started at package installation is
unconventional in Debian automatic config reloading is by far not
universal
so any config change to make lsm useful is going to elicit a restart
anyway.

So I just don't see why we'd want a conspicuous message telling
people what
they already know :)

     - You declare Replaces+Conflicts on lsm but you don't seem to
take any
       care for the new binary package to actually be compatible
with the old
       one since the config location changed.
I'm in doubt, when the old config exist, if set dpkg to copy the
old config
from old location to the new one or if I just print/show up a
message to
users notifying about path update requirement.
I think an automatic upgrade is the way to go in this case as long
as the
config format is still fully compatible to the old lsm-1.0.4, but
since
copying will leave cruft behind for the user to cleanup manually I
think we
should mv the config.

If it's good/allowed do the copy, it could be applied in postinst.
I think
print/show up message is rightest way.
Consider that people upgrade Debian systems for many, many years
without
reinstalling. So every bit of cruft we leave behind due to
transitions such
as this accumulates. I don't see a technical need for not doing so
in this
case so I think we should clean up behind ourselves and move the
config to
the new location.

You should then absoluteley print a message in the log to note this
fact,
but perhaps not as conspicuously as you're printing the "configure
me"
message. Something like "Moving $OLD_PATH to $NEW_PATH" should
suffice
since the package(s) involved should be obvious from the filenames.
Just uploaded to mentors again, now the update occur smoothly.


--Daniel
Thanks for taking time on testing update.

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x42F79A5E0A4D5598.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: