Re: [review] waagent: Windows Azure Linux Agent (part1)
Hideki Yamane <henrich@debian.or.jp> writes:
> Hi,
Hi,
>
> On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 10:08:22 +0100
> Arnaud Patard (Rtp) <arnaud.patard@rtp-net.org> wrote:
>> > Yes, let's add "5.Debian 6.0+" :-)
>>
>> no, wheezy+. I really doubt that there's enough stuff on kernel side to
>> have things working on squeeze.
>
>>> >> 3.Suse (SLES) 11SP2+
>
> SLES11 is shipped with Linux kernel 2.6.32, it's same as Squeeze.
> So I thought Debian 6.0 is okay. But SLES11 "SP2" is 3.0.10.
> Yes, probably you're right. It should be Wheezy+.
>
> Anyway, let's ask to upstream to add Debian :)
>
>
I don't know the exact requirements to be listed here. Maybe asking in
diff -Nup form will be enough ? :)
>> Well, it's upstream README. The example can be extracted but I'm not
>> sure it's usefull. In most cases, one should only install the agent and
>> there's nothing else to do.
>
> Yes, its upstream one but proposal for upstream to improving is good
> thing, IMO. And I said in previous mail, handling .conf file in post/pre
> script is not good habit.
>
>
>> This version of the agent has been taken from github before that any
>> versionning scheme has been choosen by upstream (it's from 6th of june
>> and 1.1 has been released on the 9th of november). I've made a 1.1-1
>> yesterday and will update it when the 1.2 is there.
>
> Okay.
>
I've put a deb for 1.2 with your previous comments addressed, except for
the post/pre stuff (which have been changed a little bit but don't
address the concerns you had). You'll find them here:
http://contrib.hupstream.com/azure/debian/repo-unstable/
>
>> In fact, I'm not even sure that the current changelog entries should be
>> kept before uploading to the archive so it'll be 1.1-1 or 1.2-1 with the
>> usual "Initial release (Closes: )" line.
>
> You don't need to keep current changelog entries.
> If you want to keep it, then version should be with epoch like 1:1.1-1.
>
I'd like to avoid keeping old entries before uploading, mainly because
I'd like to avoid uploading a version with an epoch.
>
>> > and don't specify "testing", you should set "unstable" or "experimental"
>> > if you don't have special reason (i.e. release managers ask you)
>>
>> I know. It's testing because my repo is for testing. It'll be fixed
>> before uploading in the archive.
>
> Okay, but stay to set "unstable" is good manner in that case.
>
>
>> > Please submit ITP request to BTS and get its number, then put it as (Closes: #nnnnnn)
>> >
>>
>> will do today.
>
> Thanks!
>
submitted as bug #695575.
Arnaud
Reply to: