Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Debian Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-development/)
-   -   About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-development/245350-about-current-state-yum-package-lenny.html)

Thomas Goirand 02-14-2009 07:13 AM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Hi,

Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a
working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts of yum
based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs.

Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum in Debian
haven't been active for a long time, and the current package in Lenny is
simply not working. I consider that having a non-working yum package in
Debian Lenny is a grave regression.

With a little bit of communication, I've been able to make a working yum
package, and I could setup a CentOS on a Xen dom0 Lenny server. Please
read this:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=496137

Having yum working means that we need the python-iniparse and
python-gpgme packages (which will both reach SID after Lenny is out, as
said the new package maintainers), as SHOULD depend on it. The Lenny
version doesn't unfortunately.

My proposal, as it's of course too late for the first release of Lenny,
is that python-iniparse and python-gpgme, plus a patched version of Yum,
would be prepared and send in "lenny proposed updates". The thing is that:

- I don't know what is the way to send it to proposed updates
- I'm not comfortable with python packages, and I don't think it's a
good idea that I take over the maintainership of yum in Debian, even
though I really need this package. Any volunteer out there?

Any suggestion?

Thomas


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Thomas Goirand 02-14-2009 08:06 AM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
I forgot to add...

The current maintainer of yum AND rpm (Anibal Monsalve Salazar
<anibal@debian.org>) has been unactive for quite a long time now, there
are outstanding very serious bugs without even any reply from him since
2006. We really need something to be done for rpm as well.

I have contacted the people from RedHat (marc@redhat.com, that was
marked as upstream contact), maybe they would be interested in helping.

Thomas Goirand


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Luk Claes 02-14-2009 08:08 AM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a
> working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts of yum
> based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs.

Indeed.

> Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum in Debian
> haven't been active for a long time, and the current package in Lenny is
> simply not working. I consider that having a non-working yum package in
> Debian Lenny is a grave regression.

I've put the co-maintainer in Cc so he can comment on whether he wants
to take over full maintainership or wants extra co-maintainers or wants
to orphan the package...

> With a little bit of communication, I've been able to make a working yum
> package, and I could setup a CentOS on a Xen dom0 Lenny server. Please
> read this:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=496137
>
> Having yum working means that we need the python-iniparse and
> python-gpgme packages (which will both reach SID after Lenny is out, as
> said the new package maintainers), as SHOULD depend on it. The Lenny
> version doesn't unfortunately.

Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug
report.

> My proposal, as it's of course too late for the first release of Lenny,
> is that python-iniparse and python-gpgme, plus a patched version of Yum,
> would be prepared and send in "lenny proposed updates". The thing is that:
>
> - I don't know what is the way to send it to proposed updates

http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates

> - I'm not comfortable with python packages, and I don't think it's a
> good idea that I take over the maintainership of yum in Debian, even
> though I really need this package. Any volunteer out there?

Waiting for an answer of the co-maintainer...

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Luk Claes 02-14-2009 09:04 AM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I forgot to add...
>
> The current maintainer of yum AND rpm (Anibal Monsalve Salazar
> <anibal@debian.org>) has been unactive for quite a long time now, there
> are outstanding very serious bugs without even any reply from him since
> 2006. We really need something to be done for rpm as well.

anibal is one of the maintainers of rpm, but not of yum. rpm was
uploaded less than a month ago to experimental, I don't think you can
blame them for being inactive.

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Andres Salomon 02-14-2009 02:58 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:08:49 +0100
Luk Claes <luk@debian.org> wrote:

> Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a
> > working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts
> > of yum based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs.
>
> Indeed.
>
> > Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum in Debian
> > haven't been active for a long time, and the current package in
> > Lenny is simply not working. I consider that having a non-working
> > yum package in Debian Lenny is a grave regression.
>
> I've put the co-maintainer in Cc so he can comment on whether he wants
> to take over full maintainership or wants extra co-maintainers or
> wants to orphan the package...
>
> > With a little bit of communication, I've been able to make a
> > working yum package, and I could setup a CentOS on a Xen dom0 Lenny
> > server. Please read this:
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=496137
> >
> > Having yum working means that we need the python-iniparse and
> > python-gpgme packages (which will both reach SID after Lenny is
> > out, as said the new package maintainers), as SHOULD depend on it.
> > The Lenny version doesn't unfortunately.
>
> Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug
> report.
>
> > My proposal, as it's of course too late for the first release of
> > Lenny, is that python-iniparse and python-gpgme, plus a patched
> > version of Yum, would be prepared and send in "lenny proposed
> > updates". The thing is that:
> >
> > - I don't know what is the way to send it to proposed updates
>
> http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates
>
> > - I'm not comfortable with python packages, and I don't think it's a
> > good idea that I take over the maintainership of yum in Debian, even
> > though I really need this package. Any volunteer out there?
>
> Waiting for an answer of the co-maintainer...
>
> Cheers
>
> Luk

I was only working on it on behalf of OLPC. Since I'm no longer with
them, I don't really have any interest in working on it. I would suggest
giving it to someone who has a use for it.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Thomas Goirand 02-14-2009 04:41 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Luk Claes wrote:
> Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug
> report.

Very simple: yum crashes with a not-so-nice error message when I try to
boostrap a CentOS complaining about the iniparse python module not being
present.

I should have add it to the bug report, but it didn't talk about
python-iniparse, #496137 was just about python-gpgme. I have just added
an entry for it in the BTS to make that clear.

> http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates

My question was more: what's the way to have a package uploaded in pu.
Should I write in a particular list? This one maybe?

Andres Salomon wrote:
> I was only working on it on behalf of OLPC. Since I'm no longer with
> them, I don't really have any interest in working on it. I would suggest
> giving it to someone who has a use for it.

Then I guess both rpm and yum should be orphaned. Could this be done now
so we can move on?

Luk Claes wrote:
> anibal is one of the maintainers of rpm, but not of yum. rpm was
> uploaded less than a month ago to experimental, I don't think you can
> blame them for being inactive.

Sure it was, but still with the same upstream version, which doesn't fix
#509444. I hope that a newer upstream version can be uploaded soon. The
changelog is quite impressive though, and seems to be a good work (I
didn't read more than the changelog). It shows Loic Minier
<lool@dooz.org>, not Anibal Monsalve Salazar or Andres Salomon that
still seems to be unactive on maintainership. I'm now adding Loic as Cc:
as he seems to be the one that cares about all this, and I guess Andres
shouldn't be in the loop anymore (as per what he said).

Thanks you 2 for your replies, and a big up (especially to you Luck),
for all the (impressive) work on the Lenny release.

Thomas Goirand

P.S: Loic, tu sembles etre un compatriote vu ton nom, je me trompes ? :)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Luk Claes 02-14-2009 05:15 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>> Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug
>> report.
>
> Very simple: yum crashes with a not-so-nice error message when I try to
> boostrap a CentOS complaining about the iniparse python module not being
> present.
>
> I should have add it to the bug report, but it didn't talk about
> python-iniparse, #496137 was just about python-gpgme. I have just added
> an entry for it in the BTS to make that clear.

Ok

>> http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates
>
> My question was more: what's the way to have a package uploaded in pu.
> Should I write in a particular list? This one maybe?

It's all mentioned on that page. If it's not clear, please tell me what
part so we can update it.

> Andres Salomon wrote:
>> I was only working on it on behalf of OLPC. Since I'm no longer with
>> them, I don't really have any interest in working on it. I would suggest
>> giving it to someone who has a use for it.
>
> Then I guess both rpm and yum should be orphaned. Could this be done now
> so we can move on?

Well only yum is offered for adoption.

> Luk Claes wrote:
>> anibal is one of the maintainers of rpm, but not of yum. rpm was
>> uploaded less than a month ago to experimental, I don't think you can
>> blame them for being inactive.
>
> Sure it was, but still with the same upstream version, which doesn't fix
> #509444. I hope that a newer upstream version can be uploaded soon. The
> changelog is quite impressive though, and seems to be a good work (I
> didn't read more than the changelog). It shows Loic Minier
> <lool@dooz.org>, not Anibal Monsalve Salazar or Andres Salomon that
> still seems to be unactive on maintainership. I'm now adding Loic as Cc:
> as he seems to be the one that cares about all this, and I guess Andres
> shouldn't be in the loop anymore (as per what he said).

Right, though that might be related to not wanting to rush things before
the release which will hopefully not be an argument anymore now :-)

Cheers

Luk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Thomas Goirand 02-15-2009 02:08 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Luk Claes wrote:
>>> http://www.debian.org/releases/proposed-updates
>> My question was more: what's the way to have a package uploaded in pu.
>> Should I write in a particular list? This one maybe?
>
> It's all mentioned on that page. If it's not clear, please tell me what
> part so we can update it.

What's not clear is how the upload itself is made. I understand that it
should be discussed in this list, but then what? Just give here a link
to the .dsc file in this list?

Last before I stop annoying you with this issue: can I add an entry
here, saying that yum shall be fixed?

http://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases/PointReleases/5.0.1

Thomas Goirand


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Philipp Kern 02-15-2009 04:31 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:08:57PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Last before I stop annoying you with this issue: can I add an entry
> here, saying that yum shall be fixed?
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases/PointReleases/5.0.1

I'm curious why python-pyme is not sufficient. Anyway: there won't be
new packages introduced into Lenny. I'm uncomfortable targetting this
at this point. IMHO it's at you now to provide a set of patches that
you think need to be applied to the packages in question to make yum
work again. Attach them to the bug report and ping us again. And
remember: no new packages.

Thanks in advance,
Philipp Kern
--
.'`. Philipp Kern Debian Developer
: :' : http://philkern.de Release Assistant
`. `' xmpp:phil@0x539.de Stable Release Manager
`- finger pkern/key@db.debian.org

Thomas Goirand 02-15-2009 05:35 PM

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny
 
Philipp Kern wrote:
> I'm curious why python-pyme is not sufficient.

It's simply a MISTAKE that has been done by the last maintainer of yum,
python-pyme is NOT the correct python package, python-gpgme is the right
one. python-pyme is fully in python, while python-gpgme is written in C.
Maybe it would be possible to have yum working with python-pyme (I
didn't dive into it, and have no intention to do so), but I think it's
really not worth so much trouble having a special crafted yum that will
be different from upstream, when the solution is to use the correct package.

> Anyway: there won't be
> new packages introduced into Lenny. I'm uncomfortable targetting this
> at this point. IMHO it's at you now to provide a set of patches that
> you think need to be applied to the packages in question to make yum
> work again.

How can I provide a set of patches when the problem is that 2 python
modules are needed? We can't ship these 2 python modules in yum, this
goes against the policy, and against any reasonable thinking.

> Attach them to the bug report and ping us again. And
> remember: no new packages.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Philipp Kern

No new package == no working yum.

Note that I perfectly understand the release cycle of Lenny, how it
works, and why it's like that. No new package, end of the story. But I
think, this time, it would be harmful to not make an exception, simply
because of an established principle. Again, this is a grave regression.

So what do you suggest now? Leave a BROKEN package in the distribution,
simply because it's the rule? IMHO it would even be better to REMOVE yum
from Lenny than leaving it the way it is right now: it's NOT working,
and it will never will unless we provide the dependencies. So better
remove it, and provide it in Lenny backports. This is my suggestion if
there is really no other choice (I still feel like we should make an
exception here...).

What I still don't get, is that I'm pretty sure that I have sent an RC
bug against the package a long time ago, and I don't understand why it
was not in the BTS. I feel so bad that I didn't check for it enough...

Thomas Goirand


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:14 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.