Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/)
-   -   tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you. (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/378522-tor-lsb-hey-look-package-script-dont-complain-_me_-im-just-installing-you.html)

Chen Lei 05-30-2010 05:14 AM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/5/30 Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 00:39:14 -0400,
> *Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote:
>>
>> So, clearly, there's some disagreement about what's fixed and what's broken.
>> But printing out a passive-agressive warning to end-users is not the
>> solution. The error message is confusing and very, very unhelpful. Worse,
>> it's not _meant_ to be helpful to the poor end user -- it's meant to try to
>> goad the other packager into action. Such things need to be taken up with
>> FESCO, not fought about in user-visible debug output.
>
> See: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/347
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

I don't why the tor maintainer don't want to keep consistence with
fedora package guideline and tor upstream.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Chen Lei 05-30-2010 05:38 AM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/5/30 Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org>:
> On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:06:12AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> See: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/347
>
> Yeah, I remember this coming up before with the issue of zillions of
> dependencies.
>
> The problem here is the output. I know (as discussed in that ticket,
> actually) that the Fedora guidelines don't forbid output in the post
> scripts. I think it _should_ be forbidden except in the case of errors, but
> that's not the issue here. The problem is _what_ the message says, its tone,
> and to whom it is addressed. All unhelpful and bad for Fedora.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller * * * * * mattdm@mattdm.org * * * * *<http://mattdm.org/>
> --

It's actually the same problem and both caused by the misusing of
redhat-lsb. The tor package looks very different from other daemons in
fedora, e.g. vsftpd squid etc, a small package with so many
subpackages and a metapackage seems quite strange.


Chen Lei
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Chen Lei 06-01-2010 01:43 AM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/6/1 Ryan Rix <ry@n.rix.si>:
> On Mon 31 May 2010 1:55:26 pm Paul Wouters wrote:
>> since that's the preference
>> of the maintainer, which violates fedora packagaging policies
>
> Then a provenpackager should fix it regardless of whether the maintainer "is
> too busy to fix it." and even then, they shouldn't be maintaining packages
> they are too busy to fix! That's just as bad as blatently refusing to fix
> this issue.
>
> --
> Ryan Rix
> == http://hackersramblings.wordpress.com | http://rix.si/ ==
> == http://rix.si/page/contact/ if you need a word * * * * ==
>

The maintainer refuse some others to co-maintain tor package or help
him to solve this issue. It's a bit complicated to fix this, fedora
policy seems don't permit provenpackagers to commit a package if the
maintainer are very unwilling to do so. It should be decided by fesco
in which condition that a provenpackager can commit a package
regardless the unwillingness of the package owner.


Chen Lei
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Chen Lei 06-01-2010 04:04 PM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/6/1 Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>:
>> I've definately talked to quite a few of them (online and in person) over
>> the years this has been going on. I even had a tor package made and
>> submitted it, but Enrico and my package crossed paths and his was a day
>> earlier, so his "personal" version instead of a "fedora" version got
>> accepted:
>
> The reason I asked is that they might be more willing to yank the package
> from the current maintainer if there is someone willing to step in and
> fix things rather than having to orphan it.
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

I'd like to see that fesco can assign some co-maintainers for tor and
maybe some more packages from Enrico.


Regardless of violating fedora package guideline, his package style is
quite strance, e,g,

He add noarch documention to tor main package, then leave tor binary
into -core subpackage, he also add an useless upstart conf as an
alternatives to initsrcipt, the package layout is very different with
tor upstream and other packages in fedora.

Chen Lei
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Chen Lei 06-01-2010 04:07 PM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/6/2 Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com>:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>
>>>> Does FESCO know you'd be willing to become the maintainer?
>>>
>>> I've definately talked to quite a few of them (online and in person) over
>>> the years this has been going on. I even had a tor package made and
>>> submitted it, but Enrico and my package crossed paths and his was a day
>>> earlier, so his "personal" version instead of a "fedora" version got
>>> accepted:
>>
>> The reason I asked is that they might be more willing to yank the package
>> from the current maintainer if there is someone willing to step in and
>> fix things rather than having to orphan it.
>
> I am willing to maintain or co-maintain it, and pull it into compliance
> with fedora package guidelines.
>
> Paul
>
+1 for you.

As the maintainer of vidalia and polipo, I really like to see tor
fedora to be more compliance with Fedora package guideline and the tor
package from upstream.


Chen Lei
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Chen Lei 06-02-2010 02:46 AM

tor-lsb -- hey, look, package script, don't complain to _me_. I'm just installing you.
 
2010/6/2 Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at>:
> Chen Lei wrote:
>> The maintainer refuse some others to co-maintain tor package or help
>> him to solve this issue. It's a bit complicated to fix this, fedora
>> policy seems don't permit provenpackagers to commit a package if the
>> maintainer are very unwilling to do so. It should be decided by fesco
>> in which condition that a provenpackager can commit a package
>> regardless the unwillingness of the package owner.
>
> FYI, FESCo decided on this particular issue that a provenpackager can fix
> tor to comply with our initscripts guidelines for released Fedoras. (As far
> as I know, the maintainer already fixed the Rawhide package.)
>
> * * * *Kevin Kofler
>
>

No yet, as I known:), he only add a sysv initscripr to cvs, the
package in rawhide still use -lsb and -upstart. Also the upstart
subpackage works silly, it may need further optimization or obsolete
from tor package.

See
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=176044
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/fileinfo?rpmID=1999845&filename=/etc/rc.d/init.d/tor
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:38 PM.

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