Please merge ddclient (3.7.3-2) from Debian unstable

It will also fix bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ddclient/+bug/77570

There are revisions to the existing Ubuntu package. Are you saying those can be dropped?

Yes :-)

Why ?

Because I talked to Debian maintainer to update things there...

1- First, I'm member of DDclient project and know what's happening there directly.
2- Every Ubuntu changes can be dropped, some of them not fixed in the last version, like debian/config (members.dyndns.com should be members.dyndns.org).
3- I've done the last packages of DDclient for Ubuntu, because Debian maintainer didn't update it.

Please tell me what need more to process this sync ?

NB: On IRC it was found that there were previous changes which haven't been included in Debian, thus this package is being merged now & it not a sync candidate.

It will also fix bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ddclient/+bug/116066

Is an UVF exception now needed for ddclient?

The UVF now ends on 30th August.. please check https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GutsyReleaseSchedule

[22:03] <Hobbsee> Kmos: no, UVF does *not* start on the 30th, that's new package freeze.

Yes, it is needed; please follow https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess#head-9c768217b322f8567d24d91647eaf0a256a73046

What was wrong with this patch (was it actually wrong or did the upstream just disagree and we need to keep it):

[r71] patches/ubuntu/dyndns_com.diff: Removed patch since it's invalid

It was removed in upstream, and it's valid.. because DynDNS.com only wants to be .com when we're talking about the service they offer, but to use it they want and it only works with dyndns.org, like members.dyndns.com doesn't work, only members.dyndns.org

I'm part of the upstream and we've talked directly to DynDNS.com team! So no problem about that...

If the patch is valid, then we should include it and do this as a merge, not a sync.

The patch dyndns_com.diff is not valid, so that's why it's removed upstream. Exaclty this is a merge, not a sync.. check title of the bug.

Removing motu-uvf. I don't have time to go through this in detail. If someone credible does and wants to re-subscribe motu-uvf after confirming this is correct, that's fine.

so the patch is both valid, and is not valid?

I'm leaving this one well alone....I don't have the time or inclination to audit this, and I'm not convinced of Marco's ability to know what is going on here (because what needs to be done to it has changed repeatedly, and is still unclear).

The Patch that Scott had mentioned isn't valid. That's what I mean...

  * Merge from Debian unstable (LP: #132694).
  * Changed some files inside debian/ to match DynDNS.com
    - debian/po: all .po files
    - debian/config
    - debian/ddclient.templates
    - debian/ddclient.xml
    - debian/copyright
    - debian/ddclient.pod
    - debian/ddclient.8
  * debian/control: bump debhelper to 5.0.38 and initscripts to ubuntu version.
  * debian/rules: call dh_installinit with -u multiuser (Teardown spec)
  * debian/patches: Removed patches not used in series and Ubuntu.

Needs futher technical review that I certainly don't have time for.

The merged version
 - lacks the lsb log messages in the init script
 - lacks debian/patches/sample_ubuntu.diff

apart from that it looks ok to me.

Hi! Thanks for your review, I'll fix that..

The patch looks ok to me now.

The bug now lacks all the UVFe bits which is still not approved. Please resubscribe motu-uvf when you have the UVFe prepared.

Ok. I will do it :-)

This new version 3.7.3 has a new "ChangeLog", not the old "Changelog". that's why it's compared Changelog (old) with ChangeLog (new)

To see the difference.. now compares Changelog with Changelog on both versions.

After discussion between members of the motu-uvf team on irc, we've decided to let dholbach decide on this one.

Daniel can audit this code, and then approve or deny it - the MOTU UVF team does not have the time to audit every line of code, and has less than complete confidence that even this incarnation (the 4th, if i count correctly?) is correct.

Thankyou.

Marco: can I ask you to not remove the patch files? That way the Ubuntu diff to Debian is not that big. The ones you identified and removed seem to not get applied anyway (debian/patches/series)

Thanks again - apart from that it looks good.

ddclient (3.7.3-2ubuntu1) gutsy; urgency=low

  * Merge from Debian unstable (LP: #132694) & (LP: #77570).
  * Changed some files inside debian/ to match DynDNS.com (LP: #116066).
    - debian/po: all .po files
    - debian/config
    - debian/ddclient.templates
    - debian/ddclient.xml
    - debian/copyright
    - debian/ddclient.pod
    - debian/ddclient.8
  * debian/control: bump debhelper to 5.0.38 and initscripts to ubuntu version.
  * debian/rules: call dh_installinit with -u multiuser (Teardown spec)
  * debian/patches: Add sample_ubuntu.diff.

ddclient (3.7.3-2) unstable; urgency=low

  * Apply changes suggested by Marco Rodrigues (thanks, Marco):
    + Upgrade debian/compat to debhelper 5 (no adaptation needed)
    + Add README.ssl to debian/docs (great oversight :)
    + Add missing sample-* files to debian/examples.
  * Fix patch for ip-up sample script (which used an IP as interface
    name because my misreading of a bug report - shame on me).

ddclient (3.7.3-1) unstable; urgency=low

  * New upstream release.
  * Disable patches that were adopted upstream:
    + cachedir.diff: Cache files are now stored in /var/cache anyway.
    + daemon_interval.diff, daemon_check.diff: Handling of the -daemon option
      was fixed upstream.
    + update-new-config.patch: Upstream checks for config changes now as
      well.
    + smc-barricade-7401bra.patch: New router type adopted upstream.
    + abuse_msg.diff: Upstream fixed the unblock pointer for dyndns abuse.
    + help_nonroot.diff: Help option now works for non-root users.
    + cisco_fw.diff: URL for ip information fixed upstream.
    + silence_undefined.diff: No more warning about undefined variables.
    + checked_ssl_load.diff: Successful inclusion of SSL library now checked.

 -- Marco Rodrigues <email address hidden> Sat, 06 Oct 2007 10:40:53 +0100