[pkg-bacula-devel] Current status of merging development2 branch

Wed May 30 11:57:34 UTC 2012

Hi Alexander!

On Sun, 27 May 2012 02:40:22 +0200, Alexander Golovko wrote:
> There is a list of changes in binary packages, builded from revision
> 0f4409a468a6749837e6b852024b6a52f93c74cb (revision before merge) and
> a0cfd0fd8d5d7cc420828f21d7ab4a30211f3b44 (current last commit).
>
> I try do not miss anything significant, but will see later...

Well, that is fantastic, thanks.  

> ###############################################################################
> Changes in installed files
> ###############################################################################
[...]
> /var/lib/bacula/log:
>  - removed (packages now builded with correct log dir)

While at it, we should also considering migrating to /run, thus
depending upon initscripts (>= 2.88dsf-13.3):

  <https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/RunDirectory>

> /usr/share/doc/bacula-common/examples/nagios/check_bacula/Makefile.gz:
>  - added (but subject for remove)

Would it be better to provide a separate nagios-bacula-plugin,
coordinating that with the Debian Nagios Team?

  <http://pkg-nagios.alioth.debian.org/>

> /etc/bacula/bconsole.conf:
>  - added (subject for remove?)

Why?  That file is mandatory, so we should provide it anyway.

> /usr/share/man/man8/bregex.8.gz,
> /usr/share/man/man8/bwild.8.gz:
>  - added manpages

I would replace them with upstream's versions as quilt patches:

  <http://www.bacula.org/git/cgit.cgi/bacula/tree/bacula/manpages/bregex.8>
  <http://www.bacula.org/git/cgit.cgi/bacula/tree/bacula/manpages/bwild.8>

> /usr/share/doc/bacula-common/README.Debian.gz:
>  - reflect changes about removing bconsole wrapper

See below for the bconsole path.

> /usr/share/lintian/overrides/bacula-console,
> /usr/share/lintian/overrides/bacula-console-qt:
>  - added wrong strings (subject for remove)

Do you mean that we can remove both the two overrides below?  I have not
recompiled it yet, so this is a pure speculation ;-)

- debian/bacula-console-qt.lintian-overrides
  pkg-not-in-package-test bat usr/share/menu/bacula-console-qt

  This should have been fixed by:

    <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=a0cfd0fd8d5d7cc420828f21d7ab4a30211f3b44>

- debian/bacula-console.lintian-overrides 
  menu-command-not-in-package usr/share/menu/bacula-console:2 usr/bin/bconsole

  This should have been fixed by:

    <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=1fab6a25a5af0806b09692e0a696f4a9d2d0f146>

  ...but please see my comments below.

> /usr/bin/bconsole, /usr/sbin/bacula-console:
>  - bconsole was shell wrapper, but now vanilla bconsole search it
> config in the same place,
>    so this wrapper removed. for compatibility provided simlink, so no
> changes for users

I think that bconsole should stay in /usr/sbin given that upstream
install it there:

  <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=d92858c57ec47449e5ce49b81e27af026a77a098>
  <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=1fab6a25a5af0806b09692e0a696f4a9d2d0f146>

> ###############################################################################
> Changes in packages metadata:
> ###############################################################################
[...]
> bacula-console/conffiles:
>  - added /etc/bacula/bconsole.conf (i think, this is merge error)

See above for the reason why it should stay there.

> ###############################################################################
> Changes in sources:
> ###############################################################################
[...]
> A lot of. Most significant:
>
> debian/rules is now use debhelper

Finally, thank you very much to Hauke and you.

> ###############################################################################
> Some info about merges:
> ###############################################################################
>
> This is not very accurate info, for details see merge commits.
>
>
> * 570e78a Deploy alternative backup scripts
>     NOT YET PROCESSED
> * 007c95d Sort debian/additions a bit
>     NOT YET PROCESSED

Should we process these two before any upload to unstable?

> * 0e942e7 Adjust bat.conf and bconsole.conf as well
>     REJECTED

Is this because of f968df9 below?

> * d77e917 Fix errors in man pages
>     APPLIED

This should be pushed upstream, I will do later on.

> * 112e36a Install bsmtp to /usr/sbin as intended by upstream
>     APPLIED + fixes

I still dislike bsmtp (see #519567 and #620825, both fixed on my local
repository) and I would have liked to switch to sendmail on Debian, but
I agree that if we want to provide an easy switch from users coming from
other OSes this is the Right Thing™ to do.

> * 8b01282 Get rid of useless common-functions
>     REJECTED

I could not find any rationale for that, would you elaborate, please?

> * 6fdee4f Override missing templates files check
> * 4b7fa18 Don't set passwords at build time but ask for them
>     REJECTED

Both because of the rejection of f968df9, see below.

> * a4382f0 Properly set logdir
>     APPLIED

Only in development2 branch :-(

> * f968df9 Install conffiles, don't mess with them
>     REJECTED

Your Git commit shows:

  Bug 585037 can be closed by properly escaping variables in sed expressions.

  Debian is not FreeBSD, package after installing must work :) so best way
  will be migrate to ucf usage for installing config files

...while Hauke's Git commit shows:

  Instead of pushing sed statements over files in /etc that an admin might
  have changed, just install them and let dpkg handle everything else,
  including removal.

  Currently this means that processes shouldn't be started after install
  since they don't have proper config. We might consider changing that by
  sourcing properly created random passwords but let's revisit that later.

  Closes: 585037

At a first view Hauke's approach is more Debian-like: /etc files are
conffiles (see `dpkg-query -s dpkg`), so they should be treated as such.

> * 21014db Add missing build-dependency on procps
>     REJECTED

This is not needed because procps is pulled by other packages during the
build process, so we should track this down.  Hauke, do you remember why
procps was needed?

> * 621a064 Update Vcs-* in debian/control
>     APPLIED

Updated to anonscm.debian.org:

  <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=86d60666353c720b4f9aad6978d391cc5ecd907d>

Testing packages available at (I have not tested them yet, sorry, I am
quite in a hurry in Real Life ATM):

  <http://pkg-bacula.alioth.debian.org/tmp/merging-development2-branch/dev2.0109.1/>

Now, except the questions I asked above, if I am right there is only one
commit left from the development branch, which however I have not
checked yet if it is needed or not:

  <http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-bacula/bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=bdd0d231ae1055f297d2ababb0e317f0227ddf80>

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-bacula-devel/attachments/20120530/6dca9c65/attachment.pgp>