Debian Bug report logs - #565675
RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support

Package: wnpp; Maintainer for wnpp is wnpp@debian.org;

Reported by: marc.leeman@gmail.com

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:30:01 UTC

Severity: wishlist

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:30:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to marc.leeman@gmail.com:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to debian-devel@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Sun, 17 Jan 2010 21:30:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

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

From: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>


* Package name    : pthsem
  Version         : 2.0.7
  Upstream Author : Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
* URL             : http://www.auto.tuwien.ac.at/~mkoegler/index.php
* License         : GPL
  Programming Lang: C
  Description     : pth replacement with semaphore support
 This package provides GNU Portable Threads enhanced with semaphore
 support.
 .
 Pth is a very portable POSIX/ANSI-C based library for Unix platforms
 which provides non-preemptive priority-based scheduling for multiple
 threads of execution (aka ``multithreading'') inside event-driven
 applications. All threads run in the same address space of the server
 application, but each thread has it's own individual program-counter,
 run-time stack, signal mask and errno variable.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:39:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:39:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #10 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Cc: sthibault@debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100
Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > * Package name    : pthsem
> 
> Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> package?  Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.

The situation with GNU pth is:
* pth in debian is orphaned (#543857)
* the last upstream relase is from 08-Jun-2006 (2.0.7)
* the last release was mainly updating copyright + updating autotool files
* I tried to contact upstream (Ralf S. Engelschall), while doing the
  first versions of semaphore support for pth, but failed to get an answer.
* I don't remember an answer from Ralf S. Engelschall on the
  pth-users list in the last year(s).

pthsem up to 2.0.7 is GNU pth with some patches applied (semaphore
support, valgrind support and various fixes).

As upstream seams to be dead, I decided to "fork" in the upcoming
release.

Please look at:
http://bcusdk.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=bcusdk/bcusdk;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pthsem/master

* pthsem is now able to cope with system time changes, if it can use a
  monotonic clock.

* moved to automake based build system

* GIT repository does not contain any autotool generated files any more,
  so they get updated at every checkout.

* compat package for building pth applications with pthsem

* includes lintian clean debian packaging (derived from the "offical"
  debian packages)

pthsem is an essential dependency of linknx/eibd, so it tested by its
users on various plattforms (x86 and various embedded linux variants).

Regards,
Martin Kögler





Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:51:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:51:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #15 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:48:24 +0100
Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > * Package name    : pthsem
> > 
> > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> > package?  Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
> 
> The situation with GNU pth is:

I guessed so, but still.

The problem is that people know pth, but they don't know pthsem (yet).
It will be a long time before people discover that there is a new
interesting pthsem package that basically does the same as pth with
quite a few extra features, is not dead etc.  Why not just replacing the
existing pth package with pthsem to avoid that delay?

Were I Martin Kögler, I'd even just request GNU to become the new
maintainer of pth.

Samuel




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:15:10 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:15:10 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #20 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:13:32 +0100
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
>> Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
>> > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
>> > > * Package name    : pthsem
>> >
[..]
>
> The problem is that people know pth, but they don't know pthsem (yet).
> It will be a long time before people discover that there is a new
> interesting pthsem package that basically does the same as pth with
> quite a few extra features, is not dead etc.  Why not just replacing the
> existing pth package with pthsem to avoid that delay?

Why not creating a dummy package pth with only compat mode ? This
package will be transationnal and will provide a depend to pthsem

Regards

Bastien




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:57:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:57:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #25 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:55:17 +0200
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> > > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > * Package name    : pthsem
> > > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the
> > > existing pth package?
> > 
> > The situation with GNU pth is:
> 
> I guessed so, but still.

[...]

> Were I Martin Kögler, I'd even just request GNU to become the new
> maintainer of pth.

...which is usually done by writing to <maintainers@gnu.org>.

It is counter-productive to start a fork just because GNU pth is
unmaintained upstream (it is not an officially "orphaned" GNU package,
AFAICS, but that doesn't matter much if it really is neglected).




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:30:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:30:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #30 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:26:55 +0100
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:48:24AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> > > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > * Package name    : pthsem
> > > 
> > > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> > > package?  Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
> > 
> > The situation with GNU pth is:
> 
> I guessed so, but still.
> 
> The problem is that people know pth, but they don't know pthsem (yet).
> It will be a long time before people discover that there is a new
> interesting pthsem package that basically does the same as pth with
> quite a few extra features, is not dead etc.  Why not just replacing the
> existing pth package with pthsem to avoid that delay?

pth and pthsem can be installed in parallel, as they use different
filenames (pth.h+libpth.so* / pthsem.h/libpthsem.so*). Both packages
use the same symol names in their libraries.

The libpthsem-compat provides/conflicts libpth-dev. It contains stub
files for pth.m4, pth.h and pth-config, which "redirect" to the pthsem
files. Software built with libpthsem-compat installed will link
against libpthsem.

My intention was not to replace pth, but to provide a migration path.

> Were I Martin Kögler, I'd even just request GNU to become the new
> maintainer of pth.

I must admit, that I have not read anything about GNU maintainers, but
GNU has usually a bigger "philosophical overhead". 

I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
need.

Regards,
Martin Kögler




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:12:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>. (Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:12:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #35 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, 565675@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: [gmail] Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:04:30 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
> I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> need.

All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
community and the upstream developer. Martin is very active in
supporting his environment and in that respect I am to inclined to
support his decision.

Can we conclude that pthsem is a valid branch, worth a seperate package?

An alternative for Martin is probably to include/hide pthsem in bcusdk;
but that would not be as clean IMHO (ffmpeg anyone?)

-- 
  greetz, marc
Radioactive cats have 18 half-lives.
crichton 2.6.26 #1 PREEMPT Tue Jul 29 21:17:59 CDT 2008 GNU/Linux
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 20:33:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 20:33:05 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #40 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>, 565675@bugs.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:26:45 +0200
Martin Koegler wrote:
> I must admit, that I have not read anything about GNU maintainers,
> but GNU has usually a bigger "philosophical overhead".

Then I suggest you to read the appropriate documenation [1] before
jumping to premature and possibly incorrect conclusions (what does the
phrase "philosophical overhead" entail?).

A fork is done when there is some kind of unresolvable
conflict/disagreement (be it technical or not).  Forking is a
fundamental right, so there's nothing wrong in forking pth.  But there
are too many (forked) packages in Debian, and the Debian QA team would
have to maintain the original pth package for some time at least,
which is a burden.  If there are people actively working to enhance
pth, the best (for GNU, Debian, and literally everyone else) is to
take over the package upstream.

(OTOH, speaking generally, it is sad to see a package "reborn" under
another name just because the prospective new maintainer cannot
communicate successfully with the original one to negotiate the
takeover.  I once again urge you to write to <maintainers@gnu.org> to
avoid this unpleasant scenario.)

[1] The gnu-standards package in Debian (both documents available also
    online at http://gnu.org/prep).




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:27:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:27:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #45 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>
To: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>, 565675@bugs.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, marc.leeman@gmail.com, yavor@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [gmail] Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:23:33 +0100
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
> (OTOH, speaking generally, it is sad to see a package "reborn" under
> another name just because the prospective new maintainer cannot
> communicate successfully with the original one to negotiate the
> takeover.  I once again urge you to write to <maintainers@gnu.org> to
> avoid this unpleasant scenario.)

Don't read to much into this; pth is for sure a smaller effort in
Martins' work. We just want to get over this small hurdle in order to
get his really interesting stuff included (which depends on this).

OK, sent a short note to maintainers@gnu.org. I'll keep the list updated
about the progress.

-- 
  greetz, marc
Kleeneness is next to Godelness.
crichton 2.6.26 #1 PREEMPT Tue Jul 29 21:17:59 CDT 2008 GNU/Linux
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:57:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to <wnpp@debian.org>, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Thu, 21 Jan 2010 22:57:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #50 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Yavor Doganov <yavor@gnu.org>
To: Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at>, 565675@bugs.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, yavor@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Bug#565675: ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 00:52:01 +0200
Marc Leeman wrote:
> > (OTOH, speaking generally, it is sad to see a package "reborn"
> > under another name just because
> 
> Don't read to much into this; 

Well, as a matter of fact I don't.  Probably I wouldn't have replied
to the thread if pth wasn't a GNU package, but my opinion would be the
same.  A fork should be the last resort, when all efforts to prevent
the fork have been tried and failed.  The introduction of a forked
package in a distro is a separate issue, but it naturally is something
not to be taken lightly.

> pth is for sure a smaller effort in Martins' work.  We just want to
> get over this small hurdle in order to get his really interesting
> stuff included (which depends on this).

Avoiding this "small hurdle" will result in a much bigger hurdle for
every distribution, especially Debian when you take into account the
number of packages and supported architectures.  Every new package
results in extra load on the infrastructure (which is not only
machines), possible user confusion, possible and very likely further
effort by QA/security/release teams, etc.

> OK, sent a short note to maintainers@gnu.org.

Thanks!




Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, wnpp@debian.org, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:14:45 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to wnpp@debian.org, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:14:45 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #55 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org>
To: 565675@bugs.debian.org
Cc: control@bugs.debian.org
Subject: pthsem: changing back from ITP to RFP
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:07:15 +0000
retitle 565675 RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
noowner 565675
thanks

Hi,

This is an automatic email to change the status of pthsem back from ITP
(Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug hasn't seen
any activity during the last 6 months.

If you are still interested in adopting pthsem, please send a mail to
<control@bugs.debian.org> with:

 retitle 565675 ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
 owner 565675 !
 thanks

However, it is not recommended to keep ITP for a long time without acting on
the package, as it might cause other prospective maintainers to refrain from
packaging that software. It is also a good idea to document your progress on
this ITP from time to time, by mailing <565675@bugs.debian.org>.

Thank you for your interest in Debian,
-- 
Lucas, for the QA team <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>




Changed Bug title to 'RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' from 'ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' Request was from Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:16:15 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Removed annotation that Bug was owned by Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. Request was from Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:16:16 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Changed Bug title to 'ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' from 'RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' Request was from Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 19:06:07 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Owner recorded as Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. Request was from Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 19 Feb 2011 19:06:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, wnpp@debian.org, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>:
Bug#565675; Package wnpp. (Mon, 27 May 2013 13:27:25 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to wnpp@debian.org, Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. (Mon, 27 May 2013 13:27:25 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #68 received at 565675@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org>
To: 565675@bugs.debian.org
Cc: control@bugs.debian.org
Subject: pthsem: changing back from ITP to RFP
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 15:24:25 +0200
retitle 565675 RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
noowner 565675
tag 565675 - pending
thanks

Hi,

This is an automatic email to change the status of pthsem back from ITP
(Intent to Package) to RFP (Request for Package), because this bug hasn't seen
any activity during the last 12 months.

If you are still interested in adopting pthsem, please send a mail to
<control@bugs.debian.org> with:

 retitle 565675 ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support
 owner 565675 !
 thanks

However, it is not recommended to keep ITP for a long time without acting on
the package, as it might cause other prospective maintainers to refrain from
packaging that software. It is also a good idea to document your progress on
this ITP from time to time, by mailing <565675@bugs.debian.org>.

Thank you for your interest in Debian,
-- 
Lucas, for the QA team <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>



Changed Bug title to 'RFP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' from 'ITP: pthsem -- pth replacement with semaphore support' Request was from Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Mon, 27 May 2013 13:31:16 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Removed annotation that Bug was owned by Marc Leeman <marc.leeman@gmail.com>. Request was from Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Mon, 27 May 2013 13:31:17 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.


Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Wed Apr 23 18:53:39 2014; Machine Name: beach.debian.org

Debian Bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.