Debian Bug report logs - #607969
sqlite: Still useful?

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Toggle useless messages

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

From: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 13:02:45 +0100

Package: sqlite
Version: 2.8.17-6
Severity: important

Hi,

Is this package still useful since we also have an sqlite3
package?  They have the same description other than that
short description has a 3 in it.

From what I find it says that sqlite3 is compatible with
all versions.  So I don't see the point of keeping this
version around.


Kurt

Message #10 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>

To: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>, 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 13:32:33 +0100

Hi Kurt,

On Sat, 2010-12-25 at 13:02 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Package: sqlite
> Version: 2.8.17-6
> Severity: important
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is this package still useful since we also have an sqlite3
> package?  They have the same description other than that
> short description has a 3 in it.
> 
> From what I find it says that sqlite3 is compatible with
> all versions.  So I don't see the point of keeping this
> version around.
 It isn't useful anymore. It doesn't have an active development, but
has a long reverse dependency including Mono and PHP5. I've contacted
some of them back somewhen and the consensus was to leave it for Squeeze
and remove after it is released.

Regards,
Laszlo/GCS

Message #15 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>

To: 607969@bugs.debian.org

Cc: 607969-subscribe@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Ping re sqlite removal?

Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 21:32:40 -0500

Just noticed this bug, and as Squeeze has been released, is it time to
remove this?

Message #20 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>

To: Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: Ping re sqlite removal?

Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 07:03:18 +0200

On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 21:32 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> Just noticed this bug, and as Squeeze has been released, is it time to
> remove this?
 Indeed, sqlite should be removed. It's unsupported a long time ago. The
last upstream release was on 19th December of 2005 (yes, almost six
years ago)[1].

/GCS
[1] http://www.sqlite.org/changes.html

Message #25 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>

To: Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: Ping re sqlite removal?

Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:07:02 -0600

On 08/28/2011 12:03 AM, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 21:32 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
>> Just noticed this bug, and as Squeeze has been released, is it time to
>> remove this?
>  Indeed, sqlite should be removed. It's unsupported a long time ago. The
> last upstream release was on 19th December of 2005 (yes, almost six
> years ago)[1].
> 
> /GCS
> [1] http://www.sqlite.org/changes.html

Did you want me to file the removal bug?

Micah

Message #30 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>

To: Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>

Cc: 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: Ping re sqlite removal?

Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:37:28 +0100

Hi Micah,

On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 22:07 -0600, Micah Gersten wrote:
> On 08/28/2011 12:03 AM, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> > On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 21:32 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> >> Just noticed this bug, and as Squeeze has been released, is it time to
> >> remove this?
> >  Indeed, sqlite should be removed. It's unsupported a long time ago. The
> > last upstream release was on 19th December of 2005 (yes, almost six
> > years ago)[1].
> > [1] http://www.sqlite.org/changes.html
> Did you want me to file the removal bug?
 Will do it in the afternoon with other related bugreports.

Regards,
Laszlo/GCS

Message #35 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>

To: Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: Ping re sqlite removal?

Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 02:54:59 -0600

On 02/07/2012 12:37 AM, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
> Hi Micah,
> 
> On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 22:07 -0600, Micah Gersten wrote:
>> On 08/28/2011 12:03 AM, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2011-08-27 at 21:32 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
>>>> Just noticed this bug, and as Squeeze has been released, is it time to
>>>> remove this?
>>>  Indeed, sqlite should be removed. It's unsupported a long time ago. The
>>> last upstream release was on 19th December of 2005 (yes, almost six
>>> years ago)[1].
>>> [1] http://www.sqlite.org/changes.html
>> Did you want me to file the removal bug?
>  Will do it in the afternoon with other related bugreports.
> 
> Regards,
> Laszlo/GCS

Hate to be a nudge, but it's 3 weeks later :)  I'd like to be sure this
will be gone from wheezy before I go slashing away in precise.

Thanks,
Micah

Message #40 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>

To: 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>

Subject: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100

Control: severity -1 serious

Hi,

I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not
compile in some new ports.

Raising severity so at the very least it gets auto-removed from
testing and thus it does not get included in the next stable release
(it already was included in the last, despite opinions in this bug
about the contrary).

I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the
package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were
interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now).


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>

Message #52 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Neil Williams <codehelp@debian.org>

To: 607969@bugs.debian.org

Subject: block

Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 15:11:27 -0700

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

block 606989 by 760116
tag 760116 + help
thanks

At least one package needs to migrate to sqlite3 and although the two
look compatible, the API has appreciable changes between libsqlite0 and
libsqlite3.

I am looking at the code changes required for this migration, help
would be appreciated.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #59 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu>

To: 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:33:32 +0100

Hi,

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100 "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo"
<manuel.montezelo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not
> compile in some new ports.
> 
> Raising severity so at the very least it gets auto-removed from
> testing and thus it does not get included in the next stable release
> (it already was included in the last, despite opinions in this bug
> about the contrary).
> 
> I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the
> package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were
> interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now).
Filing bugs against reverse dependencies to migrate to sqlite 3 would be
a better start IMO.
Probably it is too late to convert everything for Jessie:

$ apt-cache rdepends sqlite
sqlite
Reverse Depends:
  phpbb3
 |movabletype-opensource
  sqlite:i386
  sqlite-doc
  qsf
  phpbb3
  lire
  imms-common
  csync2
  beancounter

Dear Release Team, should this package be released with Jessie?

Cheers,
Balint

Message #67 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu>

Cc: 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:48:03 +0100

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

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33:32 +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:

> Dear Release Team, should this package be released with Jessie?
> 
The only way I can see us not shipping it is if we remove it along with
the remaining rdeps.  Now is not the time to migrate them over to
sqlite3 in jessie.

Cheers,
Julien

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #75 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: László Böszörményi (GCS) <gcs@debian.org>

To: Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu>

Cc: 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:52:02 +0100

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100 "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo"
> <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not
>> compile in some new ports.
 It should compile on all of them by now. The buildd archive shows
that arm64 and ppc64el are fine, even mips and sparc.

>> I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the
>> package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were
>> interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now).
 Yes, I was about to ask its removal as upstream no longer supports
it. But it works correctly and I got personal mails that they would
still use it on low-end (embedded?) machines where sqlite3 would
require more CPU and/or memory.

> Filing bugs against reverse dependencies to migrate to sqlite 3 would be
> a better start IMO.
 I've mailed all of them some years ago, but there are still some use it.

> Probably it is too late to convert everything for Jessie:
 It is late.

> Dear Release Team, should this package be released with Jessie?
 I'm open for everything, but please do note that the removal would
mean removing the dependent packages as well.

Cheers,
Laszlo/GCS

Message #83 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Bálint Réczey <balint@balintreczey.hu>

To: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

Cc: 607969@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@debian.hu>, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:52:59 +0100

Hi Julien,

2014-10-29 10:48 GMT+01:00 Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33:32 +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
>
>> Dear Release Team, should this package be released with Jessie?
>>
> The only way I can see us not shipping it is if we remove it along with
> the remaining rdeps.  Now is not the time to migrate them over to
> sqlite3 in jessie.
I fully agree. How about marking this bug jessie-ignore or decreasing
the severity?
I periodically look for RC bugs to fix (like hopefully many others
:-)) and those would make that bug stop appearing on the list.

Cheers,
Balint

Message #91 received at 607969@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu>

To: 607969@bugs.debian.org, "treczey.hu>,Cc: 607969"@bugs.debian.org, 607969-submitter@bugs.debian.org, Micah Gersten <micahg@ubuntu.com>, "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>, Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>, "László Böszörményi (GCS)" <gcs@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#607969: sqlite: Still useful?

Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:28:13 +0100

Hi Laszlo,

On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:52:02 +0100
=?UTF-8?B?TMOhc3psw7MgQsO2c3rDtnJtw6lueWkgKEdDUyk=?= <gcs@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Balint Reczey <balint@balintreczey.hu> wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 20:08:21 +0100 "Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo"
> > <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I stumbled upon this bug by chance when looking at why it did not
> >> compile in some new ports.
>  It should compile on all of them by now. The buildd archive shows
> that arm64 and ppc64el are fine, even mips and sparc.
> 
> >> I guess that it's better to just ask FTP masters to remove the
> >> package, but I'll leave that to other people, since they were
> >> interested in doing that in the past (all in copy now).
>  Yes, I was about to ask its removal as upstream no longer supports
> it. But it works correctly and I got personal mails that they would
> still use it on low-end (embedded?) machines where sqlite3 would
> require more CPU and/or memory.
In this case I think this bug could be simply closed by answering the
question ("Yes.").  :-)

Having reverse dependencies is actually useful to keep the code tested.

Cheers,
Balint

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.