On 07/27/08 13:35, tabris wrote:
> it appears that neocalderon.net is now a squatter domain.
>
> Meanwhile, I'm unsure who to contact regarding a replacement for
> procinfo that I started last year, procinfo-ng.
> http://freshmeat.net/projects/procinfo-ng/
>
> Basically the goals included a) fixing all the 32bit/64bit problems b)
> fixing or replacing broken features c) eliminating the more useless
> features.
>
> So who do I need to contact to find a debian package maintainer for a)
> procinfo-18 b) procinfo-ng ?
Try sending a similar email to debian-devel.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
07-28-2008, 04:32 PM
tabris
procinfo maintainership
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
So who do I need to contact to find a debian package maintainer for a)
procinfo-18 b) procinfo-ng ?
did you try to contact the maintainer of procinfo? If they're not
interested, look at http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
Yes, I tried to contact the maintainer. the maintainer's email address
is neo@neocalderon.net and that domain is now owned by a squatter.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
07-28-2008, 07:51 PM
Bernd Zeimetz
procinfo maintainership
tabris wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>>>> So who do I need to contact to find a debian package maintainer for a)
>>>> procinfo-18 b) procinfo-ng ?
>>>>
>>
>> did you try to contact the maintainer of procinfo? If they're not
>> interested, look at http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
>>
> Yes, I tried to contact the maintainer. the maintainer's email address
> is neo@neocalderon.net and that domain is now owned by a squatter.
>
Thanks for the info. As I wasn't able to find any other email adress or
activity from the maintainer, I've orphaned the package and it will be
listed within the orphaned packages on http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
soon. So you could either adopt it and take care of it on your own...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
07-28-2008, 08:29 PM
tabris
procinfo maintainership
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Thanks for the info. As I wasn't able to find any other email adress or
> activity from the maintainer, I've orphaned the package and it will be
> listed within the orphaned packages on http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
> soon. So you could either adopt it and take care of it on your own...
>
If I were to do so (or find a maintainer) would they have the option
of obsoleting procinfo-18 and replacing it with procinfo-ng ? The old
procinfo code is a) grotty b) very very 1990's C c) broken on 64bit
platforms d) many features are broken e) other features are pointless on
2.6 kernels (cat /proc/filesystems, done as a every 2 seconds poll? wtf?)
Procinfo-NG is a) hopefully more readable b) At least early-2000's C++
c) Working on 64bit x86 and 32bit x86 (don't have any PPC or SPARC Linux
boxen to test on yet) d) fixed some broken features e) added new ones f)
never implemented the more odd features like polling /proc/filesystems
and /proc/modules
If there are any questions over the maintainership of the
procinfo-ng upstream codebase, I'll open it to other interested developers.
07-28-2008, 08:37 PM
Bernd Zeimetz
procinfo maintainership
tabris wrote:
> Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> Thanks for the info. As I wasn't able to find any other email adress or
>> activity from the maintainer, I've orphaned the package and it will be
>> listed within the orphaned packages on http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
>> soon. So you could either adopt it and take care of it on your own...
>>
> If I were to do so (or find a maintainer) would they have the option
> of obsoleting procinfo-18 and replacing it with procinfo-ng ?
yes, although I doubt it would be able to go in Lenny as it is frozen now.
procinfo maintainership
