Debian Bug report logs - #1006472
nemo packaging includes the wrong tex recommendation

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: David Mohammed <fossfreedom@ubuntu.com>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: nemo packaging includes the wrong tex recommendation

Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 23:56:34 +0000

Package: nemo
Version: 5.2.4-1
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: fossfreedom@ubuntu.com

Dear Maintainer,

   * What led up to the situation?
Examining the menu shows an unexpected texdoctk application
   * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
     ineffective)?
installed nemo with its recommendations
   * What was the outcome of this action?
See above
   * What outcome did you expect instead?
No texdoctk in my menu.

In the upstream packaging the tex recommendation for nemo is untex.
It does seem overkill for Debian nemo to install an app most people I would dare to suggest wouldn't have a clue what it is all about and wonder why it is installed.

Please can the nemo package for Debian replace the texlive-binaries recommendation with untex which is the upstream recommendation


-- System Information:
Debian Release: bookworm/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 5.16.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU thread; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_GB:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages nemo depends on:
ii  cinnamon-desktop-data      5.2.1-1
ii  desktop-file-utils         0.26-1
ii  gsettings-desktop-schemas  42~beta-1
ii  gvfs                       1.48.1-4
ii  libatk1.0-0                2.36.0-3
ii  libc6                      2.33-7
ii  libcairo-gobject2          1.16.0-5
ii  libcairo2                  1.16.0-5
ii  libcinnamon-desktop4       5.2.1-1
ii  libexempi8                 2.6.1-1
ii  libexif12                  0.6.24-1
ii  libgail-3-0                3.24.31-1
ii  libgdk-pixbuf-2.0-0        2.42.6+dfsg-2
ii  libglib2.0-0               2.70.4-1
ii  libglib2.0-data            2.70.4-1
ii  libgsf-1-114               1.14.47-1+b1
ii  libgtk-3-0                 3.24.31-1
ii  libnemo-extension1         5.2.4-1
ii  libnotify4                 0.7.9-3
ii  libpango-1.0-0             1.50.4+ds-1
ii  libpangocairo-1.0-0        1.50.4+ds-1
ii  libselinux1                3.3-1+b1
ii  libx11-6                   2:1.7.2-2+b1
ii  libxapp1                   2.2.8-1
ii  libxml2                    2.9.12+dfsg-6
ii  nemo-data                  5.2.4-1
ii  shared-mime-info           2.1-2
ii  xapp                       2.2.8-1

Versions of packages nemo recommends:
ii  catdoc              1:0.95-5
ii  cinnamon-l10n       5.2.2-1
ii  exif                0.6.22-2
ii  gnome-disk-utility  42~beta-2
ii  gvfs-backends       1.48.1-4
ii  gvfs-fuse           1.48.1-4
ii  id3                 1.1.2-3
ii  librsvg2-common     2.52.5+dfsg-3+b1
ii  nemo-fileroller     5.2.0-2
ii  odt2txt             0.5-7
ii  poppler-utils       20.09.0-3.1
ii  python3             3.9.8-1
ii  python3-xlrd        1.2.0-2
ii  texlive-binaries    2021.20210626.59705-1

Versions of packages nemo suggests:
ii  eog                  42~beta-2
ii  evince [pdf-viewer]  41.3-3
ii  totem                42~beta-1
ii  xdg-user-dirs        0.17-2

-- no debconf information

Message #8 received at 1006472-submitter@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabio Fantoni <noreply@salsa.debian.org>

To: 1006472-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#1006472 marked as pending in nemo

Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2022 10:57:47 +0000

Control: tag -1 pending

Hello,

Bug #1006472 in nemo reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:

https://salsa.debian.org/cinnamon-team/nemo/-/commit/18ef0c8db21c6c32b1424b1c518e4242ccfcb27b

------------------------------------------------------------------------
d/control: replace texlive-binaries with untex in nemo recommends

Closes: #1006472
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(this message was generated automatically)
-- 
Greetings

https://bugs.debian.org/1006472

Message #15 received at 1006472-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Debian FTP Masters <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>

To: 1006472-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#1006472: fixed in nemo 5.4.0-1

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:36:08 +0000

Source: nemo
Source-Version: 5.4.0-1
Done: Fabio Fantoni <fantonifabio@tiscali.it>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
nemo, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 1006472@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Fabio Fantoni <fantonifabio@tiscali.it> (supplier of updated nemo package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 22:58:57 +0200
Source: nemo
Architecture: source
Version: 5.4.0-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Cinnamon Team <debian-cinnamon@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Fabio Fantoni <fantonifabio@tiscali.it>
Closes: 1006472
Changes:
 nemo (5.4.0-1) experimental; urgency=medium
 .
   [ Debian Janitor ]
   * Trim trailing whitespace.
   * gir1.2-nemo-3.0: Add Multi-Arch: same.
 .
   [ Fabio Fantoni ]
   * New upstream version 5.4.0
   * d/control: replace texlive-binaries with untex in nemo
     recommends (Closes: #1006472)
   * Simplify d/watch
   * d/control:
     - remove libnotify-dev from build-deps
     - remove old breaks/replaces
     - bump some deps and reverse-deps breaks to 5.4
   * Bumped Standards-Version to 4.6.1
   * Remove empty d/patches/series
   * Restrict selinux build-dep and configure option to linux-any
Checksums-Sha1:
 8fe215e5d307953a7c7ec83e29872303937f8d3c 2995 nemo_5.4.0-1.dsc
 91bfdc6cbd75fd44be170088a8a680a152c835fe 1478487 nemo_5.4.0.orig.tar.gz
 b6d68dd619363fdca79f1265c2faa1bc30e52fae 10060 nemo_5.4.0-1.debian.tar.xz
 3cee582c2ecfda0b9e83178c7c21b8605db8497d 18925 nemo_5.4.0-1_amd64.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 116746416fbf736c603284d4b599c57800f0f634c646d54f15c6bfd6cad4a692 2995 nemo_5.4.0-1.dsc
 d27a8eec51c8aa1309de72433d774f69df15307de85cd7531534fb9e0b8a2922 1478487 nemo_5.4.0.orig.tar.gz
 d978835a17dad05808a1ea21fffe0c557eb0b824084260a05e656ef12f8122ba 10060 nemo_5.4.0-1.debian.tar.xz
 e9537b5f813fbfd0d61a00e85fca4a81e3bc8c812e3c0b17ec595d677feafcc4 18925 nemo_5.4.0-1_amd64.buildinfo
Files:
 50d9d4dec4f15193b934135ee40d921a 2995 misc optional nemo_5.4.0-1.dsc
 1a5aa6443f6b9426741d65fcc8248393 1478487 misc optional nemo_5.4.0.orig.tar.gz
 9b903e964b6d1c64229f57f95fc33751 10060 misc optional nemo_5.4.0-1.debian.tar.xz
 6c5f606b3b1023b1252c43cc75952edc 18925 misc optional nemo_5.4.0-1_amd64.buildinfo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=XiT/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #20 received at 1006472@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl>

To: 1006472@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Upload to unstable?

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 22:12:46 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello maintainer of nemo,

would you consider to upload this fix to unstable? It is currently only 
in experimental.

I've found this issue, because it makes the Cinnamon live image 
non-reproducible.
See https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleInstalls/LiveImages.

With kind regards,
Roland Clobus

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #25 received at 1006472@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabio Fantoni <fantonifabio@tiscali.it>

To: Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl>, 1006472@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Upload to unstable?

Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2022 23:00:03 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Il 24/07/2022 22:12, Roland Clobus ha scritto:
> Hello maintainer of nemo,
>
> would you consider to upload this fix to unstable? It is currently 
> only in experimental.
>
> I've found this issue, because it makes the Cinnamon live image 
> non-reproducible.
> See https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleInstalls/LiveImages.
>
> With kind regards,
> Roland Clobus

Hi, nemo and major of cinnamon 5.4 components are in experimental due 
many bugs still present related to big changes, upstreamsolved a lot of 
problems with the latest versions which i uploaded to experimental and 
tried a bit in the last few days but didn't have much time for in-depth 
testing.

I think however that within a few weeks with the next bugfixes they will 
be good enough to be able to migrate them to unstable.

Is it a problem to wait up to a few more weeks or I should upload this 
change to unstable faster?

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #30 received at 1006472@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl>

To: fantonifabio@tiscali.it, 1006472@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Upload to unstable?

Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 20:57:44 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello Fabio,

On 24/07/2022 23:00, Fabio Fantoni wrote:
> Il 24/07/2022 22:12, Roland Clobus ha scritto:
>> would you consider to upload this fix to unstable? It is currently 
>> only in experimental.
...
> I think however that within a few weeks with the next bugfixes they will 
> be good enough to be able to migrate them to unstable.
> 
> Is it a problem to wait up to a few more weeks or I should upload this 
> change to unstable faster?

No need to hurry. I now know that you are planning to bring the fix to 
unstable in a few weeks, when the issues are fixed.

I'm working together with Phil Hands on https://openqa.debian.net which 
contains automated testing. At the moment a Cinnamon image is not (yet) 
tested, but it could be possible to have a Cinnamon image with the 
packages from experimental (using apt-pinning) and some tests.
See e.g. the start-stop test for the GNOME apps:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/65161
or the general tests of the live image:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=sid&build=20220711T170000Z_sid&groupid=14

With kind regards,
Roland Clobus

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #35 received at 1006472@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Joshua Peisach <itzswirlz2020@outlook.com>

To: "fantonifabio@tiscali.it" <fantonifabio@tiscali.it>, "1006472@bugs.debian.org" <1006472@bugs.debian.org>, Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl>

Subject: Re: Bug#1006472: Upload to unstable?

Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 02:36:55 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hey everyone - chipping in as I have been kind of lame in helping with this process.

I'll spin up a Debian VM and get testing, though I don't think any of the issues are critical. The packages should be safe to enter unstable IMO as already lots of point revisions has been made upstream. Also, cinnamon is broken in Ubuntu Kinetic at the moment 😋

When that is all said and done, I'll get to updating xapp to 2.2.14, nemo-fileroller and nemo-python to 5.4.1.

-Josh


________________________________
From: Roland Clobus
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:57 PM
To: fantonifabio@tiscali.it; 1006472@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Bug#1006472: Upload to unstable?

Hello Fabio,

On 24/07/2022 23:00, Fabio Fantoni wrote:
> Il 24/07/2022 22:12, Roland Clobus ha scritto:
>> would you consider to upload this fix to unstable? It is currently
>> only in experimental.
...
> I think however that within a few weeks with the next bugfixes they will
> be good enough to be able to migrate them to unstable.
>
> Is it a problem to wait up to a few more weeks or I should upload this
> change to unstable faster?

No need to hurry. I now know that you are planning to bring the fix to
unstable in a few weeks, when the issues are fixed.

I'm working together with Phil Hands on https://openqa.debian.net which
contains automated testing. At the moment a Cinnamon image is not (yet)
tested, but it could be possible to have a Cinnamon image with the
packages from experimental (using apt-pinning) and some tests.
See e.g. the start-stop test for the GNOME apps:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/65161
or the general tests of the live image:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=sid&build=20220711T170000Z_sid&groupid=14

With kind regards,
Roland Clobus

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #40 received at 1006472@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Fabio Fantoni <fantonifabio@tiscali.it>

To: Joshua Peisach <itzswirlz2020@outlook.com>, 1006472@bugs.debian.org, Roland Clobus <rclobus@rclobus.nl>

Subject: Re: Bug#1006472: Upload to unstable?

Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 10:43:01 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Il 28/07/2022 04:36, Joshua Peisach ha scritto:
> Hey everyone - chipping in as I have been kind of lame in helping with 
> this process.
>
> I'll spin up a Debian VM and get testing, though I don't think any of 
> the issues are critical. The packages should be safe to enter unstable 
> IMO as already lots of point revisions has been made upstream. Also, 
> cinnamon is broken in Ubuntu Kinetic at the moment 😋

There are still many issues with cinnamon 5.4 and some parts was rebased 
only in these days in cinnamon-settings-daemon and 
cinnamon-control-center and seems still a work in progress (I did't test 
them for now, I'll do in the weekend) so I think is not good to migrate 
to unstable/testing now

About ubuntu 22.10 I don't use it, what is broken? In latest days I 
tested only the experimental but in unstable FWIK there was only an 
issue with cinnamon-settings cause by libnotify 0.8.0-1 and solved in 
0.8.1-1 FWIK (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1015006)

>
> When that is all said and done, I'll get to updating xapp to 2.2.14, 
> nemo-fileroller and nemo-python to 5.4.1.

xapp have only one commit that don't affect cinnamon FWIK and can wait 
and about these 2 nemo extensions I'll do in the weekend also excluding 
nemo-*-build-deps_*.buildinfo nemo-*-build-deps_*.changes from imported 
source

what told you Bage about nemo-audio-tab and other extensions you are 
preparing for NEW where files was not really excluded?

>
> -Josh
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Roland Clobus
> *Sent:* Monday, July 25, 2022 1:57 PM
> *To:* fantonifabio@tiscali.it; 1006472@bugs.debian.org
> *Subject:* Bug#1006472: Upload to unstable?
>
> Hello Fabio,
>
> On 24/07/2022 23:00, Fabio Fantoni wrote:
> > Il 24/07/2022 22:12, Roland Clobus ha scritto:
> >> would you consider to upload this fix to unstable? It is currently
> >> only in experimental.
> ...
> > I think however that within a few weeks with the next bugfixes they 
> will
> > be good enough to be able to migrate them to unstable.
> >
> > Is it a problem to wait up to a few more weeks or I should upload this
> > change to unstable faster?
>
> No need to hurry. I now know that you are planning to bring the fix to
> unstable in a few weeks, when the issues are fixed.
>
> I'm working together with Phil Hands on https://openqa.debian.net which
> contains automated testing. At the moment a Cinnamon image is not (yet)
> tested, but it could be possible to have a Cinnamon image with the
> packages from experimental (using apt-pinning) and some tests.
> See e.g. the start-stop test for the GNOME apps:
> https://openqa.debian.net/tests/65161
> or the general tests of the live image:
> https://openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=sid&build=20220711T170000Z_sid&groupid=14 
> <https://openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=sid&build=20220711T170000Z_sid&groupid=14>
>
> With kind regards,
> Roland Clobus

[OpenPGP_signature (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.