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

Bug#626489: ITP: airoscript-ng -- User interface for aircrack-ng

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 01:20:47AM +0200, Christian Kastner wrote:
> On 05/12/2011 09:38 PM, David Francos Cuartero wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 06:10:07PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> >> Are you aware that aircrack-ng is RC-buggy[0], not in testing, and
> >> (for the moment) undistributable?
> > My god, I saw that bug lots of time ago, but since I saw aircrack-ng 
> > in sid and the ticket said it was GPL2+ Confirmed... even tough I
> > can't see any more movement nor the ticket being closed since april.
> There was some action on #588588 again today. Let's hope it leads to a
> resolution.

> Since your QA page indicates that you are just getting started with
> Debian development (great!) and you appear to have some closer contacts
> with aircrack-ng, have you thought about asking to co-maintain the
> aircrack-ng package? There are already two maintainers, but they don't
> appear to be very active, at least on aircrack-ng. One of them is a DD,
> so he might be available as a sponsor.
I'll ask them if they need any help =)
I've got a little history about that...

I wanted to package stuff for debian, so I choose airoscript, it's
already been... two years maybe.

When I sent the ITP, It was rejected due to airoscript's poor
development (it was without devel for months), so I talked to
upstream and adopted the development, that, and many other 
projects got all of my time, and I couldn't get into debian packaging

Right now I'm willing to revive that intentions, starting from where
I left.

While this is still unresolved, I'm going to check if there's some
needs-adoption package that I might be interested in packaging =)

> >> Until this is fixed, there is little point in packaging an UI for it.
> > I agree. But as said, if aircrack-ng is being redistributed in
> > sid, what's happening there? [1]
> > [1] http://packages.debian.org/sid/aircrack-ng
> The package was removed only from testing (not sid) as to allow the
> Squeeze release to progress -- #588588 was RC and blocking it.
I see. Then It makes sense to not get airoscript into debian until
aircrack-ng does it. It's an unresolvable dependence after all. 
I already have a package done for it, ready for when aircrack-ng
solves its license problems.
> Christian

Reply to: