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

Bug#243938: ITP: rkhunter

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Frederik Dannemare wrote:

> On Tuesday 09 August 2005 05:41, Matt Taggart wrote:
> > The ITP for rkhunter has been quiet since Feb 15.
> >
> > Frederik,
> > I understand your concern about waiting for upstream to integrate
> > patches you sent so that the initial version of the package gets to
> > start out with a more reasonable debian diff. Has upstream taken them
> > yet? 
> Not to my knowledge. At least I haven't heard anything from upstream yet 
> regarding a merge of my patches.

Could you send to this bug report the changes requested of upstream, so that
we can help with this process, or at least have these documented here.

> > I don't think we should wait forever and if they haven't been 
> > accepted then I think you should proceed.
> I guess you're right. I'm under an expreme work load at work these 
> months, though, so my time is limited. 

Perhaps someone else can take the packaging to get it going, and when you
are under less pressure and have more time can co-maintain or take it over?

> > I and others are waiting for this package and it would be good if
> > something was available in the next few weeks.
> I'll see what I can do. Hopefully, I'll manage to find some time in the 
> upcoming weekends...

Do not apply more stress than necessary. Myself, or one of the others here
would be happy to get the package into shape and get it uploaded to get
things started, then when you have more time you can begin to do either
co-maintainence, or take over the package.

> >
> > The package available in,
> >
> >   http://people.debian.org/~ema/packages/
> >
> > is dated Jan 06. Is this the most recent attempt at packaging
> > available?
> I suspect it is.

This is Emanuele's last attempt, we haven't heard anything from him here, so
we can assume it is the latest. However, I imagine it needs to be updated to
a newer version, and perhaps integrate your changes that you sent to upstream.


Reply to: