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

Bug#787800: marked as done (RFS: iperf3/3.0.11-1)

Your message dated Mon, 20 Jul 2015 19:41:38 -0700
with message-id <CACZd_tAshSTSdRZEzzwHwk6qcx6VTWddf3FNakq4-cMBtCGq3g@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#787800: RFS: iperf3/3.0.11-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #787800,
regarding RFS: iperf3/3.0.11-1
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.)


-- 
787800: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=787800
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "iperf3"

 * Package name    : iperf3
   Version         : 3.0.11-1
   Upstream Author : Jon Dugan, ESnet
 * URL             : http://software.es.net/iperf/
 * License         : BSD-3-clause
   Section         : net

It builds those binary packages:

iperf3     - Internet Protocol bandwidth measuring tool
libiperf-dev - Internet Protocol bandwidth measuring tool (development files)
libiperf0  - Internet Protocol bandwidth measuring tool (runtime files)

To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL:

http://mentors.debian.net/package/iperf3


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/i/iperf3/iperf3_3.0.11-1.dsc

More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.example.com.

Changes since the last upload:

perf3 (3.0.11-1) unstable; urgency=medium

  * new upstream version
  * bumped standards version to 3.9.6 


  Regards,
   Raoul Gunnar Borenius

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi Raoul,

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Raoul Borenius <borenius@dfn.de> wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 04:08:25PM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
>> Hi Raoul,
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Raoul Borenius <borenius@dfn.de> wrote:
>> > Hallo Vincent,
>> >
>> > Thanks for taking the time to check my package!
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 03:21:43PM -0700, Vincent Cheng wrote:
>> >> Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
>> >> Control: owner -1 !
>> >>
>> >> Hi Raoul,
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Raoul Borenius <borenius@dfn.de> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > perf3 (3.0.11-1) unstable; urgency=medium
>> >> >
>> >> >   * new upstream version
>> >> >   * bumped standards version to 3.9.6
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Your changes look ok, but I've noticed that src:iperf3 builds library
>> >> packages that are installed into multiarch paths (because you're using
>> >> dh compat level 9), but your packages are not actually
>> >> multiarch-ified. Please implement multiarch support in your package
>> >> [1].
>> >
>> > Thanks for pointing that out! I've followed the multiarch guide
>> > and rebuilt the iperf package:
>> >
>> > https://mentors.debian.net/package/iperf3
>>
>> Your -dev package should be declared as MA: same as well. Adding
>
> Ah, ok. I misread the recipe because it just talked about adding
> MA: same to the library package. Thanks!

Any package that is co-installable on different archs, i.e. ships all
arch-specific files in multiarch directories with all other files
being identical across different archs, should be declared as MA:
same.

It may be worth reading up on the specification if you're unsure about
the semantics of MA-related fields. [1]

>> multiarch support to your package is also worth mentioning in
>> d/changelog.
>
> Ok, added that! Would you mind checking once more?
>
> https://mentors.debian.net/package/iperf3

Looks good, uploaded; thanks for your contribution to Debian! I've
left some feedback on the other RFS bug reports you have open (#787801
and #787802) a while ago, by the way.

Regards,
Vincent

[1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec

--- End Message ---
Reply to: