[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#517130: marked as done (linux-modules-extra-2.6: Potential GPL violations)

Your message dated Sun, 27 Dec 2009 09:48:06 +0000
with message-id <1261907286.774609.3506.nullmailer@kmos.homeip.net>
and subject line Package linux-modules-extra-2.6 has been removed from Debian
has caused the Debian Bug report #517130,
regarding linux-modules-extra-2.6: Potential GPL violations
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
517130: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=517130
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: linux-modules-extra-2.6
Version: 2.6.26-6
Severity: serious

Dear all,

Shortly before the lenny release, it was noted that the
binary packages produced by linux-modules-extra-2.6 contain absolutely
no relation to the source with which they were built.  It is therefore
possible, and indeed likely, that the archive may end up containing
binaries for which the source has expired.

This was dealt with (quietly) for lenny by the ftpteam auditing the
build logs and binaries to check that the sources were all present, and
inserting the source entries into the special lenny-r0 suite to ensure
that they will be retained even if their source packages are revised in
a stable point release.

The ftpteam considers this a RC bug for squeeze and an improved manner
of handling the source dependencies for these modules must be found.  At
FOSDEM, preliminary discussions were held regarding adding a method by
which binary packages could declare that they were built using a
particular version of another source or binary package so that the
archive can track this and ensure that the relevant source is kept
around.  This will of course require some dpkg-dev and dak changes and
consensus that the idea is a sane one before it can be implemented.  A
proposal will be sent to debian-devel@ soon.  Whichever solution is
arrived at needs to deal with the problem at all points in the release
cycle, not just at stable or point releases.

Thanks,

Mark
(on behalf of the ftpteam)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 2.6.30-4+rm

You filled the bug http://bugs.debian.org/517130 in Debian BTS
against the package linux-modules-extra-2.6. I'm closing it at *unstable*, but it will
remain open for older distributions.

For more information about this package's removal, read
http://bugs.debian.org/552369. That bug might give the reasons why
this package was removed and suggestions of possible replacements.

Don't hesitate to reply to this mail if you have any question.

Thank you for your contribution to Debian.

--
Marco Rodrigues

--- End Message ---
Reply to: