From paul.whittaker at drisq.com Fri Feb 1 21:16:54 2019 From: paul.whittaker at drisq.com (Paul Whittaker) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2019 21:16:54 +0000 Subject: [Resolvconf-devel] Bug#877695: Confirmation of bug #877695 References: <150712213101.32414.10525021078307792915.reportbug@annuminas.mathom.us> Message-ID: <8aa417e4-ff60-1122-a8c9-a15395d5c9ce@drisq.com> Just want to confirm that this is still a problem, and that the second fix suggested by Michael Stone (specifically, expanding '@(br|eth)' into '@(br|eth|en)' in /etc/resolvconf/interface-order) would have avoided things breaking for me recently. In my case, I was having problems due to conflicts between my own wired network settings in /etc/network/interfaces and the settings provided by NetworkManager.  Looking at the contents of interface-order, its intent certainly appears to be for my wired network to have taken priority, and that wasn't what I was seeing. When calling 'resolvconf -u' from a system script (i.e. with LANG unset in the environment), 'list-records' would list my wired 'en' interface settings after the 'NetworkManager' entry.  This caused me problems by putting NetworkManager's 127.0.1.1 nameserver entry first in resolv.conf. Unhelpfully, when trying to debug this from a terminal with LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, the opposite order was produced, hiding the problem. Patching interface-order to expand '@(br|eth)' into '@(br|eth|en)' fixes this behaviour, and lists my wired interface's settings first regardless of environment variable settings. (Michael also proposed a solution which listed the 'eno|ens|enp|enx' cases separately, but this would not have worked for me.  My USB Ethernet dongles are all named 'enusb0' by a custom udev rule, to make them easier to manage than the default long 'enx${MAC_ADDR}' names, and they would not have been matched by that longer pattern.) Best regards, Paul. From mika at debian.org Thu Feb 21 12:05:43 2019 From: mika at debian.org (Michael Prokop) Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 13:05:43 +0100 Subject: [Resolvconf-devel] Bug#847440: pending In-Reply-To: <20170507205723.GA17932@fliwatuet.svr02.mucip.net> References: <20170507205723.GA17932@fliwatuet.svr02.mucip.net> <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> Message-ID: <2019-02-21T12-35-16@devnull.michael-prokop.at> * Bernhard Schmidt [Sun May 07, 2017 at 10:57:24PM +0200]: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:18:47AM +0000, Thomas Hood wrote: > > package resolvconf > > tags 847440 pending > > stop > You set this to Pending almost five months ago, do you still plan to > apply this for Stretch? I'm re-asking the same question for buster. :) We have resolvconf 1.79 in stable, testing and unstable, its upload dating back to 2016-05-30. Is someone still working on resolvconf? regards, -mika- -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From jdthood at gmail.com Fri Feb 22 07:41:24 2019 From: jdthood at gmail.com (Thomas Hood) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 08:41:24 +0100 Subject: [Resolvconf-devel] Bug#847440: Bug#847440: pending In-Reply-To: <2019-02-21T12-35-16@devnull.michael-prokop.at> References: <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> <20170507205723.GA17932@fliwatuet.svr02.mucip.net> <2019-02-21T12-35-16@devnull.michael-prokop.at> <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> Message-ID: Hi there, I am still the maintainer, at least on paper. After my attempt to get through the new maintainer process failed (several years ago now) I tried to find someone to take over as maintainer of resolvconf but I was not successful. (Know anyone who might be interested?) As I felt it was my duty I carried on as maintainer with a sponsor, but not being a member of the project my interest in Debian gradually declined and releases became less and less frequent. The importance of the package has also declined, especially now that the package is no longer part of Ubuntu base. I use Ubuntu, not Debian. Doing a new release has been on my TODO list for many months but it didn't have a high enough priority to get executed. Sometimes, the longer one avoids a task, the more one avoids it. I still want to do a new release in order to close the open bugs, none of which is RC. Setting a deadline should help. I hereby set a deadline for myself of the end of March 2019. I realize that is too late for Buster. Cheers, Thomas Hood Op do 21 feb. 2019 13:09 schreef Michael Prokop : > * Bernhard Schmidt [Sun May 07, 2017 at 10:57:24PM +0200]: > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:18:47AM +0000, Thomas Hood wrote: > > > > package resolvconf > > > tags 847440 pending > > > stop > > > You set this to Pending almost five months ago, do you still plan to > > apply this for Stretch? > > I'm re-asking the same question for buster. :) > We have resolvconf 1.79 in stable, testing and unstable, > its upload dating back to 2016-05-30. > > Is someone still working on resolvconf? > > regards, > -mika- > _______________________________________________ > Resolvconf-devel mailing list > Resolvconf-devel at alioth-lists.debian.net > https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/resolvconf-devel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From berni at debian.org Fri Feb 22 07:58:25 2019 From: berni at debian.org (Bernhard Schmidt) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 08:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Resolvconf-devel] Bug#847440: Bug#847440: pending In-Reply-To: References: <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> <20170507205723.GA17932@fliwatuet.svr02.mucip.net> <2019-02-21T12-35-16@devnull.michael-prokop.at> <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> Message-ID: <5bf72346-f9de-941e-96f6-c1555152c616@debian.org> Hi Thomas, having no time or motivation to work on a package is not a shame, but could you please properly orphan the package then (or give us the permission to do so if you don't want to read up on the procedure)? I'd like to at least do a QA upload for Buster with the git repository migrated to Salsa and #847440 fixed. I don't want to maintain it either (barely using it), but having it officially orphaned would lower the bar for NMUs. Best Regards, Bernhard From jdthood at gmail.com Sat Feb 23 20:58:16 2019 From: jdthood at gmail.com (Thomas Hood) Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2019 21:58:16 +0100 Subject: [Resolvconf-devel] Bug#847440: Bug#847440: pending In-Reply-To: <5bf72346-f9de-941e-96f6-c1555152c616@debian.org> References: <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> <20170507205723.GA17932@fliwatuet.svr02.mucip.net> <2019-02-21T12-35-16@devnull.michael-prokop.at> <5bf72346-f9de-941e-96f6-c1555152c616@debian.org> <148118966718.19296.12582304967135804514.reportbug@foudres> Message-ID: I will orphan the package if I can't meet my self-imposed deadline. I'll also RFA it again, although that didn't attract any interest on previous occasions. Please feel free to do a QA NMU. Regards, Thomas Op vr 22 feb. 2019 08:58 schreef Bernhard Schmidt : > Hi Thomas, > > having no time or motivation to work on a package is not a shame, but > could you please properly orphan the package then (or give us the > permission to do so if you don't want to read up on the procedure)? I'd > like to at least do a QA upload for Buster with the git repository > migrated to Salsa and #847440 fixed. > > I don't want to maintain it either (barely using it), but having it > officially orphaned would lower the bar for NMUs. > > Best Regards, > Bernhard > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: