Re: Condor Upload
Hi Tim,
thanks for coming back.
Am Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 04:39:50PM -0500 schrieb Tim Theisen:
> Since bookworm uses cgroups v2 and memory enforcement is considered and
> essential part of HTCondor, we had to hold off until version 10.2.0 was
> release. So, I waited and forgot about it.
Just to make sure you understood release policy: There is zero chance
that htcondor will be included into bookworm since this is frozen which
means no new packages will be accepted any more (new in terms not in
testing).
> I have uploaded HTCondor 10.3.0 and it builds on x86_64. And passed lintian
> with warnings. (I resolved all errors.) So, now it build on x86_64 on salsa.
> On i386, it is supposed to use C code for one program and instead it is
> trying to use x86_64 assembler. So, I would have to look at changes needed
> to build on i386.
I'm waiting until you confirm that the issue mentioned in your other
mail is solved.
> I see that it failed piuparts testing. I imagine that this also needs fixing
> before it is accepted.
Well, the package needs to pass the new queue to be accepted in
unstable. The result will be that this new package is the only
version inside the Debian archive which makes the piuparts test
void.
> Let me now what you think.
I think you should make absolutely sure that debian/copyright is precise
and is mentioning all copyrights in single files that are deriving from
the main copyright of the code. Htcondor needs to pass the new queue
due to the change in the name of the binary. As a consequence ftpmaster
will check d/copyright and to my experience this takes long (in terms of
one to several months). In case ftpmaster finds some issue you have to
fix this and re-upload which sometimes (not always) takes the same
waiting time again. I'd recommend some
grep -Ri copyright | grep -v 'Condor Team, Computer Sciences Department'
as a starting point what files need extra mentioning.
> I really want to get this in. Updating from 10.3.0 to 10.4.0 will be much
> easier than going from 8.6.8 to 10.3.0.
Sounds promising for the future.
Thanks a lot for your cooperation
Andreas.
> On 3/1/23 11:13, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi again,
> >
> > I admit I had quite some hope that we would manage to get condor into
> > shape in the end of last year. Unfortunately this did not happen.
> > I wonder whether it is more in the sense of our users to remove the
> > really outdated version of condor from Debian at all now since it is
> > clear that it will not reach the next stable release any more. Any
> > new upload of what we have needs to pass Debian New queue anyway.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Andreas.
> >
> > PS: I perfectly understand that you are busy and the Debian packaging
> > might have lower priority. So if you do not manage to respond in
> > the next month I'll decide myself and will ask for removal.
> > No matter what will happen I'll happily help you to re-introduce
> > any new version of condor and you can ping me about this in
> > future.
> >
> > Am Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 08:32:20PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > > Hi Tim,
> > >
> > > seems we lost track from condor again. Due to the fact that the freeze
> > > process is starting tomorrow and ftpmaster should not accept libraries
> > > with version bumps, it is not possible that condor will be part of the
> > > next stable release.
> > >
> > > I really hope you will continue working on this package anyway, to get
> > > it somehow into shape may be for backports.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Andreas.
> > >
> > > Am Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:35:19PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > > > Hi Tim,
> > > >
> > > > Am Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 06:19:05AM -0600 schrieb Tim Theisen:
> > > > > We want to stay with the 10.0.x versions are these are our LTS versions and
> > > > > quite stable.
> > > > >
> > > > > The 10.1.x versions are our feature releases and have a short support
> > > > > lifetime.
> > > > Thanks for the helpful clarification. I've adapted d/watch to report
> > > > only even minor version numbers (which is a bit weak since it will not
> > > > report 10.10 but there is some time left until then. ;-))
> > > > > So, for Debian I think that it is best to stay with any version where 0 is
> > > > > the second number.
> > > > Done in Git.
> > > > > Could you give me the steps to add the pristine tar. I have never done that
> > > > > and I don't fully understand it. Do you start with our official tarball, or
> > > > > generate one from the github repository?
> > > > The generation is done by uscan via
> > > >
> > > > uscan --verbose --force-download
> > > >
> > > > and the import of pristine-tar is done via
> > > >
> > > > gbp import-orig --pristine-tar --no-interactive /PATH/TO/condor_VERSION.orig.tar.xz
> > > >
> > > > I know there is some gbp command which does everything in one rush but
> > > > since I always forget this one this is my workflow. ;-)
> > > >
> > > > > There is one file in msconfig, do_tests.pl. It is required to run our test
> > > > > suite on all platforms. I know that this file is logically in the wrong
> > > > > directory. I will restore it at some future date.
> > > > Thanks a lot for the additional background hint. I've adapted
> > > > Files-Excluded in d/copyright accordingly. It looks a bit nasty, but
> > > > well, it does what it is supposed to do. ;-)
> > > >
> > > > > More answers below.
> > > > >
> > > > > As always, your help is greatly appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/23/22 02:59, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > > > > I did the following other changes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Added pristine-tar for the **latest** upstream release
> > > > > > (your packaging was 10.0.0 - I injected 10.1.1)
> > > > Reverted to 10.0.0.
> > > >
> > > > > > 2. I removed dir msconfig/ completely from upstream source
> > > > > > since it seems to be Windows only
> > > > Left msconfig/do_tests.pl where it is.
> > > >
> > > > > > 3. I had to tweak dh_install files since the upstream build
> > > > > > does not install to debian/tmp/usr any more but rather to
> > > > > > debian/tmp. This is **not** **fully** **fixed** - some
> > > > > > of the debian/*.install files do not find the files mentioned
> > > > > > there. Please fix this.
> > > > > > Note: There is no need to specify debian/tmp in the
> > > > > > beginning since this is default.
> > > > > Thank you for the tip. This was done before my time by Michael Hanke.
> > > > It might be that in some ancient compat level of debhelper this was
> > > > needed. So its no mistake in principle - just not a nice reading for
> > > > your fellow team members.
> > > >
> > > > > > I have no idea what might have caused this change and I started working
> > > > > > on this in commit 5cde13597e7[3] - but I did not finished it since I'm
> > > > > > not sure how the package layout should be done.
> > > > > Something changed somewhere such that the files are not landing where they
> > > > > belong.
> > > > Do you see any chance to move them right into place?
> > > >
> > > > Hope this helps
> > > > Andreas.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://fam-tille.de
> > > --
> > > http://fam-tille.de
> > >
> > >
> --
> Tim Theisen (he, him, his)
> Release Manager
> HTCondor & Open Science Grid
> Center for High Throughput Computing
> Department of Computer Sciences
> University of Wisconsin - Madison
> 4261 Computer Sciences and Statistics
> 1210 W Dayton St
> Madison, WI 53706-1685
> +1 608 265 5736
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: