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

Re: RFS: archivemount (updated package, 3rd try)

On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:48:39AM +0300, Nanakos Chrysostomos wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 08:53:33AM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:


> > The original problem was that fuse-utils wasn't available on kfreebsd
> The problem was not in kfreebsd but in hurd-i386. 

I have the slight feeling we're talking about different issue here.

According to #613119, which you even close in your changelog, it's been
about kfreebsd, and as far as I can tell there's been no fuse-utils package
on kfreebsd nor hurd and there is now no fuse package on both of them.
So this problem isn't solved at all.

I currently can't say if archivemount is of any use without the rest of
the fuse tools or not. Looking at the blocking bug #613300 I don't think
it is but I've not digged that deep yet. If it is indeed useful to have
on kfreebsd without fuse the dependency has to be adjusted accordingly
[!kfreebsd-i386 !kfreebsd-amd64]. Otherwise using linux-any seems to be
a good solution, it's not worth to build a package on architectures where
it can't be used anyway.

> The problem still remains even if Daniel Baumann has adopted and
> uploaded a new version of the fuse package. Please check [0] again to see
> that the status of hurd-i386 architecture has a dependency installability.
> So even with this change archivemount will remain in the current state
> and useless for all linux users. I prefer the package to be sponsored
> and used for now only from linux and kfreebsd users and when everything is 
> ready we will upload the package again including the missing architecture.
> I included kfreebsd-any in the Architecture Field and re-uploaded the package.
> Please bare in mind that the package remains in the current state for more
> than 300 days waiting fuse-utils for the hurd-i386 arch.

Uh since when is hurd a release architecture? The migration seems to be
stopped by the RC bug mentioned above.

> > only a dummy package. This requires some re-evaluation of the situation and
> > adjustmend of the archivemount depends.
> Do we need that for the moment?

IMO it would make sense to do it now while you're at it, I'd guess that
Daniel would like to fate out the old fuse-utils package sooner or later
anyway. So switching now to a versioned depends on fuse >=2.8.5-2 is IMO

Beside that:
There's still lintian barking at the issue with the description. I'm not sure
if lintian is 100% right there and if the deselect issue is still present but
double spaces in front of the * should do the trick. IMHO all the (useless)
dotted empty lines are a bit ugly, I would revert that.

You should also check your changelog, beside closing a bug which
isn't fixed with arch kfreebsd-any the changelog only states the change from
any to linux-any. The changes to debian/rules are also missing.

And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
     [ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]

Reply to: