It seems that the package net-irc/inspircd is severely outdated. We have newer ebuilds for this package, yet i am told it is maintainer locked to hansmi@gentoo.org who seems to have gone awol, so neither the person proxy maintaining it nor us are able to submit new ebuilds IMPORTANT NOTE: InspIRCd 1.0.7 (-r2) is almost 6 months out of date now. It contains several security and stability issues that were *FIXED* several months ago in the latest stable version, 1.1.8. Allowing someone to send an updated ebuild for this to the current version would fix these issues. I would not like to see this ebuild pulled due to inactivity, when it is not inactivity on our part which is causing these huge delays. If required, i will submit an ebuild *myself*, however i am hoping this will not be neccessary as i may be able to get the attention of the current proxy-maintainer of the ebuild and get him to submit an update to this bug report. Regards Craig Edwards Lead Developer, InspIRCd
Someone kindly stick something valid to metadata.xml (probably maintainer-needed); nenolod@nenolod.net is not an existing bugzilla alias and as such plain useless.
Both bug #142185 and metadata.xml (<description>Indirectly maintaining through hansmi@gentoo.org</description>) suggest that this should be assigned to hansmi@gentoo.org then.
the reason we submitted this here is that we cannot get hold of hansmi, and when we could get hold of him he told us to speak to nenolod, nenolod no longer seems interested in maintaining this ebuild.
Created attachment 121943 [details] 1.1.8 ebuild A 1.1.8 ebuild that one of our users created, might save you some time and effort.
@hansmi: sticking emails that don't exist in bugzilla to metadata.xml is useless...
Craig: You didn't even try to contact me by mail because then I'd answered within hours. It's just that I've pretty much given up on IRC. About nenolod's e-mail address: it used to work and he even has it on his website. However, given that he's not interested in the ebuild anymore, I suggest that we put Craig in as the external maintainer. Craig, are you okay with this?
Btw.: I'll put the new ebuild into portage soon. Most likely during the weekend. And yes, it's on my todo list.
Yes i'm ok with being external maintainer for this project. Glad to hear from you hansmi :-)
Commited to CVS. I removed the inspircd_os_is_linux26 function because it wasn't used (and also it's very dangerous when cross-compiling). Can you please verify it does what you want?
This should not be a problem. What is the relation between CVS and 'live' ebuilds, e.g. how long can i expect to wait before the ebuild becomes available to users? Thanks
Just thinking, how was the change made, does it always return 1 for 'is 2.6' now? This is used to determine if the program should use epoll or select, epoll is preferred.
(In reply to comment #10) > What is the relation between CVS and 'live' ebuilds, e.g. how long > can i expect to wait before the ebuild becomes available to users? It has to go through the CVS to rsync process and then be rsynced to all mirrors. Under normal circumstances it shouldn't take more than 2-3 hours. (In reply to comment #11) > Just thinking, how was the change made, does it always return 1 for 'is 2.6' > now? All I did was remove the function definition ("inspircd_os_is_linux26() { … }") after searching for "linux26" through the whole ebuild. It wasn't used anywhere. You could've just diffed your version with one grabbed from http://viewcvs.gentoo.org/ :-)
Ahh, i didnt know there was a viewcvs. Thanks :-)
did this get put into portage yet? :-)
(In reply to comment #14) > did this get put into portage yet? :-) Due to whatever reason, it wasn't commited back then and still laying around in my work directory. My bad. I've commited it now, but had to remove anything related to x86-freebsd. It's nothing we use in gentoo-x86.
The initscript should "provide ircd". Also the package is not properly set up to log to a file ("--logfile /var/log/inspircd/ircd.log" option, the proper logfile + permissions are not created).
(In reply to comment #16) > The initscript should "provide ircd". Thanks, added (without bump yet). > Also the package is not properly set up to log to a file ("--logfile > /var/log/inspircd/ircd.log" option, the proper logfile + permissions are not > created). Craig, can you please provide a diff on the ebuild for this?
Created attachment 124460 [details, diff] inspircd ebuild diff
Created attachment 124462 [details, diff] inspircd init.d diff (sorry these arent in one file, i know they should be. I was in a rush.)
Created attachment 124509 [details, diff] inspircd init.d diff (new) The previous diff was missing "--", so it didn't pass "--logfile" as an argument to inspircd. I couldn't obsolete the previous diff (because the bug status is "resolved - test-request"?)
Btw, 1.1.9+IsleOfMull is also out as of June, 17: http://www.inspircd.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1141
(In reply to comment #20) > The previous diff was missing "--", so it didn't pass "--logfile" as an > argument to inspircd. Thanks, I added this parameter to CVS. > I couldn't obsolete the previous diff (because the bug status is "resolved - > test-request"?) Reopening. (In reply to comment #21) > Btw, 1.1.9+IsleOfMull is also out as of June, 17: > http://www.inspircd.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1141 Can we reuse the old ebuild or does it need modifications?
Created attachment 124544 [details, diff] inspircd init.d diff (new #2) forgot "provide ircd"
(In reply to comment #23) > forgot "provide ircd" Had you checked what's on your rsync server, you would have noticed that I added that already yesterday.
Created attachment 124546 [details, diff] inspircd ebuild diff (new) This one also installs the includes (useful for building modules).
> Had you checked what's on your rsync server, you would have noticed that I > added that already yesterday. Good point. Sry.
(In reply to comment #25) > This one also installs the includes (useful for building modules). Thanks, added to 1.1.8-r2 (once I got your feedback, I'll add 1.1.9 anyway).
1.1.9 should require no changes to function correctly. I'm fine with all the changes made and also ok with 1.1.9 being in the ebuild
(In reply to comment #28) > 1.1.9 should require no changes to function correctly. > I'm fine with all the changes made and also ok with 1.1.9 being in the ebuild Thanks, it's all bumped to 1.1.9 now.
(In reply to comment #29) > (In reply to comment #28) > > 1.1.9 should require no changes to function correctly. > > I'm fine with all the changes made and also ok with 1.1.9 being in the ebuild > > Thanks, it's all bumped to 1.1.9 now. > Same is valid for .11, too satmd, InspIRCd QA
(In reply to comment #30) > Same is valid for .11, too Bumped to .11 in CVS. Next time, please open a new bug to keep stuff separated.