* Package name    : opentracker
  Version         : 0.20120528
  Upstream Author : Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org>
* URL             : http://erdgeist.org/arts/software/opentracker
* License         : Beer ware
  Programming Lang: C
  Description     : An open and free bittorrent tracker

opentracker is a open and free bittorrent tracker project. It aims for
minimal resource usage and is intended to run at your wlan
router. Currently it is deployed as an open and free tracker
instance. Read our free and open tracker blog and announce your
torrents there (but do not hesitate to setup your own free trackers!).

Unfortunately, I don't think that opentracker is free. I couldn't find
any real licensing terms in it.

Giovanni.

Giovanni,

opentracker is considered "Beerware", which is a legitimate licensing
mechanism (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beerware ). The author's
own commentary very much reinforces the fact that one may do whatever
one wishes with the software:
http://opentracker.blog.h3q.com/2010/08/05/flattered-by-pirates/ .

To quote the Wikipedia article cited above:

/*
 * ----------------------------------------------------------
 * "THE BEER-WARE LICENSE" (Revision 42):
 * <phk@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote this file. As long as you retain this notice
 * you can do whatever you want with this stuff. If we meet some day,
 * and you think this stuff is worth it, you can buy me a beer in
 * return Poul-Henning Kamp
 * ----------------------------------------------------------
 */

The author also discusses this very subject (uncertainty regarding
opentracker's licensing terms) at
http://tanguy.ortolo.eu/blog/article11/coding-bittorrent-tracker , and
offers the following:

"If anyone ever would have asked, I would have provided a special
permission to re-distribute opentracker under every brain-fart-licencing
scheme is the flavour of the year now. Hand written, if necessary. I'm
astonished what the community nowaday demands from programmers to
graciously accept the software given away for free.

Take it or leave it."

So, there we have it; the software is free in every sense of the word.

Ben Johnson, 2012-12-17 22:39-0500:

Yes, but is that license well-known enough so we can consider the simple
statement “this software is considered beerware”, with neither a license
text nor a link to such a text, as a valid indication that this software
is indeed licensed under the terms of that free license?

I would not be that optimistic. The author has indeed made his intention
clear: this program is certainly intended to be free. But is it really?
That would not be the first license bug we encounter…

Ben, if you achieve to get erdgeist to explicit that license, by either
adding the full license text (that is only three lines) or a link to its
original text on the Web to te source package, that would be great.  I
tried that, and failed (I think I only managed to annoy him), but you
may have more chance.

Thank you for the reply, Tanguy.

The "README" that is included with the source states the following (at
the very bottom):

-------------------------------------------
License information:

Although the libowfat library is under GPL, Felix von Leitner aggreed
[sic] that the compiled binary may be distributed under the same beer
ware license as the source code for opentracker. However, we like to
hear from happy customers.
-------------------------------------------

It seems fair to say that there is no ambiguity regarding the author's
intentions with respect to licensing. (You seem to agree with this
assessment.)

Then question then becomes whether or not the "Beerware" license is
sufficiently well-known to be considered for inclusion in Debian. One
of the comments from your blog post (cited previously in this
discussion) states:

"thursday 02 june 2011 à 03:42 Anonymous said : #8

    The license is Beerware http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beerware, and
should be fine, Debian for example has plenty of code with such
license already."

Is it possible to authenticate this statement? In particular, "...
Debian for example has plenty of code with such license already."

If this statement is true, and Debian already includes software that
is licensed as "Beerware", then I do not see the problem with
including opentracker.

Out of curiosity, what's to stop me from downloading the opentracker
source code, adding a licensing notice of my choosing to the "README"
file (while leaving the original notice intact), and then
redistributing the software to the Debian project under the new license?

Would Debian demand that I provide written permission from the
original author? In what form? How could Debian be sure that the
document granting permission is genuine?

Obviously, it would be much simpler if erdgeist would simply add the
actual license text (even if only three lines), or even a link to the
Beerware Wiki article, to the README. I haven't had any luck
contacting him over the years, either (regarding documentation
questions, mostly), but I'll keep at it.

Thanks again,

* Package name    : opentracker
* Version         : 0.20120528
* Upstream Author : Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org>
* URL             : http://erdgeist.org/arts/software/opentracker
* License         : Beer ware
* Programming Lang: C
* Description     : An open and free bittorrent tracker

opentracker is a open and free bittorrent tracker project. It aims for
minimal resource usage and is intended to run at your wlan
router. Currently it is deployed as an open and free tracker
instance. Read our free and open tracker blog and announce your
torrents there (but do not hesitate to setup your own free trackers!).

Following up on the license discussion,

a) it was established that Beer ware is DFSG-free
b) I contacted the author and asked him if he's OK with adding a LICENSE file declaring the software as Beer Ware.
   The answer is yes, as he made clear in the forum post mentioned above and as it's declared
   on the opentracker web site. We have more than 3 yes already, so licensing issue *resolved*.

Suggested contents of LICENSE file:

/*
 * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * "THE BEER-WARE LICENSE" (Revision 42):
 * Dirk Engling <erdgeist@erdgeist.org> wrote this file. As long as you retain
 * this notice you can do whatever you want with this stuff. If we meet some
 * day, and you think this stuff is worth it, you can buy me a beer in return
 *   Dirk Engling
 * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 */

This passes the devscripts' licensecheck.

I would thus go ahead and start packaging opentracker if there are no objections, co-maintainers welcome.

I was inactive for quite a while, so I have to catch up on a lot of things like collab-maint etc. - please be patient with me ;)

Alex

Hi!

First, thanks for the work on the license!

Second, I see this is now an ITP, which is awesome. Do you need help
pushing this forward?

If you get a working debian/ directory that makes lintian happy, I can
help you out with the rest of the logistics (including debian-maint and
so on).

A.

Challenge accepted:

https://github.com/brainstorm/opentracker/tree/master/debian

Might still be a bit rough in the edges but it does pass debuild lintian ;)

Thanks!

Looking at this, I wonder if some features should be enabled in the
build. I am thinking of:

WANT_SYSLOGS
WANT_V6
WANT_COMPRESSION_GZIP

... but i am not sure what those options do exactly or if we could
enable more.

i am not sure why there is both a cron.d *and* a init.d - they seem to
serve the same purpose, no?

also, there is a copyright mention missing for ot_rijndael.c (public
domain).

i am also curious to know why you overrode the build/install/clean
targets in  debian/rules, didn't the default work?

normally, you want to override only parts of debhelper automated
targets, for example:

override_dh_auto_clean:
        dh_auto_clean
        # do some more cleaning here that dh_auto_clean missed...

we usually encourage people to use their real names in debian, so i
think the Maintainers: field should also have your full name next to the
email address.

finally, would you want to host this code on debian.org's git
repositories? this is what the sample Cvs-* urls point to. i can help
you get the required credentials if you wish, and it would make further
collaboration easier.

thanks!

All good points, fixed in my last two commits on GitHub. Let me know what you think.

If you think there needs to be further followup changes, sure, give me credentials on Debian repo.

Thanks!
Roman

30 aug 2014 kl. 23:01 skrev Antoine Beaupré <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx>:

As far as I can see, ipv6/ipv4 compatibility is configured at compile-time and it’s mutually exclusive. Therefore other distros created packages for each option:

http://www.rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/search.php?query=opentracker-ipv4

Obviously for the time being it would be advisable to do the same, unless someone wants to introduce the necessary C changes/configuration to detect ipv4/ipv6 on runtime.

Also, there was already an Ubuntu PPA I forgot to check earlier:

https://launchpad.net/~mystic-mirage/+archive/ubuntu/opentracker

Well that's dumb. :) I am not sure how would would make that work in the
debian package, short of compiling it twice, which also seems dumb, only
less so.

Full IPv6 support was a goal in *squeeze*, so i would feel kind of bad
introducing a package without it at this point. Also, from what I
remember, it's pretty easy to implement IPv6 support with backwards IPv4
compatibility - so it seems odd that the option disables ipv4. Maybe we
can talk with upstream?

There's a good example on how to setup an IPv6 daemon here:

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+IPv6-HOWTO/chapter-section-using-api.html

Thank you for those changes.

It seems you are patching upstream directly in the git
repo. Unfortunately, the Debian archive doesn't yet support the "git"
format for uploads, so we still need to create patches and ship them in
debian/patches when we change upstream. So those last two commits
changing the Makefile should probably be reverted.

*but* since those are only Makefile settings, it should be possible to
pass in the proper value in the Makefile.

I *think* you should be able to setup those variables with a target
like:

override_dh_auto_build:
        dh_auto_build -- -DWANT_ACCESSLIST_BLACK \
        -DWANT_IP_FROM_QUERY_STRING -DWANT_COMPRESSION_GZIP \
        -DWANT_IP_FROM_PROXY \
        -DWANT_LOG_NUMWANT -DWANT_MODEST_FULLSCRAPES \
        -DWANT_SPOT_WOODPECKER -DWANT_SYSLOGS

PREFIX should be automatically fed from the regular dh processes, CC as
well. The default LIBOWFAT settings seemed alright.

For this you would need to create an account on alioth, then I can ask
for an authorization:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2012/01/msg00006.html

Thanks!

A.

Not sure I like that package so much.

 * it ships a copy of libowfat, which is already in the archive and on
   which we should (build-)depend on
 * it seems to provide two completely different source packages for ipv6
   support - this should be possible within a single source package, and
   ideally having dual stack ipv6 support
 * patches are directly applied to the tree instead of quilted so the
   orig tarball doesn't correspond to the upstream one

I notice that WANT_RESTRICT_STATS is enabled there, maybe we should
consider that as well...

a.

Reading the code quickly, it seems that WANT_DEV_RANDOM should probably
be used as well, otherwise the RNG is seeded on time(NULL), which is
bad.

I also looked at WANT_V6 and it seems mostly concerned about storage,
display and data structures, but network routines seem to do the right
thing, so i wonder why this is necessarily exclusive...

a.

31 aug 2014 kl. 22:25 skrev Antoine Beaupré <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx>:




Humm, I agree that this might seem confusing and I’m not a crypto expert, but the seed is still relative to the timestamp, not NULL… it’s not random(null), but random(time(null)). Time(NULL) returns current time:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7550269/what-is-timenull-in-c

Also, as I mentioned before, srandomdev() does not exist in modern linux distributions, only srandom(). It does exist though in FreeBSD, but we are not concerned about it here…





What makes you think so? Again, I am not an expert, but it does seem like networking code:

static int64_t ot_try_bind( ot_ip6 ip, uint16_t port, PROTO_FLAG proto ) {
  int64 sock = proto == FLAG_TCP ? socket_tcp6( ) : socket_udp6( );

#ifndef WANT_V6
  if( !ip6_isv4mapped(ip) ) {
    exerr( "V4 Tracker is V4 only!" );
  }
#else
  if( ip6_isv4mapped(ip) ) {
    exerr( "V6 Tracker is V6 only!" );
  }
#endif


Since IPV4 is still the most popular stack today, should we package it with it enabled and look for an improvement (transparent ipv4/ipv6 support) later on?

Thanks Antoine!
Roman

My point being that it would take some effort to have ipv4/ipv6 support in place:

http://long.ccaba.upc.es/long/045Guidelines/eva/ipv6.html

I’m CC’ing Dirk on upstream, maybe he has something to say or future plans about this...


10 sep 2014 kl. 16:28 skrev Roman Valls Guimera <brainstorm@nopcode.org>:

Right, that is what i meant - seeding on the timestamp is bad.

True, srandomdev() is only on FreeBSD, i am not sure anymore how to seed
the RNG with /dev/random here...

Let's say it's not a blocker for now.

This seems to decide between TCP and UDP, but both are in IPv6.

This seems to be just a check that could easily be removed.

Sure, let's start with that - can we file a bug upstream or something?

A.

Hi,

I've been playing around with opentracker packaging on Linux only.

I made some improvements to Roman's packaging work.

I believe the Makefile has to be patched to support DESTDIR convention.

The package also need to build depends on the following packages:

 * libowfat-dev
 * zlib1g-dev
 * freebsd-glue: needed to find srandomdev on linux build

What is the current status on opentracker packaging?
I'm willing to help if needed (I'm not a DD though).

Cheers,
thanks for your work,
Geoff

Where?

Understood.

It's pretty much stalled, as you can see from the bug tracker.

Then please push a git repo with this somewhere! :)

a.

Hi Antoine,

Le 10/03/2015 02:45, Antoine Beaupré wrote :

Unpublished actually, I believed my work was not good|mature enough to
share. But anyway, here is my git repo, it is not related to Roman's git
repo (ie. i started from scratch with git-buildpackage).

http://git.kaliko.me/?p=opentracker-debian.git


The package is still missing a systemd/sysV conf files, a manual, a
watch file and probably needs more work.

Cheers,
Geoff

Dear Customer,

USPS courier was unable to contact you for your parcel delivery.

Please review delivery label in attachment!

Sincerely,
Alex Mooney,
USPS Mail Delivery Agent.

Laba diena,


Noriu Jus informuoti apie šių metų pasikeitimą dėl atnaujintos visos Lietuvos įmonių bazės 2018 metų sausio vidurio.
Visi juridiniai asmenys pateikti bazėje yra veikiantys, realiai vykdantys veiklą, turintys įdarbintų darbuotojų. Duomenys pagal Sodrą, Registrų centrą.

Bazėje nurodoma ir apyvarta, darbuotojų atlyginimai, darbuotojų skaičius, transporto skaičius ir daug kitų duomenų, kuriuos matysite pavyzdyje.

Duomenis galima filtruoti pagal veiklas, miestus ir kitus duomenis.


Šią bazę verta turėti visoms įmonėms. Pateiksiu priežastis:

1) Kontaktai pateikti bazėje direktorių ir kitų atsakingų asmenų, didelė tikimybė Jums surasti naujų klientų, partnerių, tiekėjų, kai tiesiogiai bendrausite su direktoriais, komercijos vadovais.

2) Konkurentų analizavimas, tiekėjų atsirinkimas pagal Jums reikalingus kriterijus, galite atsifiltruoti pagal įmonės dydį, bazėje nurodoma kiek įmonės skolingos Sodrai.

3) Lengva, greita ir patogu dirbti su šia baze, elektroninius pašto adresus galite importuoti į elektroninių laiškų siuntimo programas ar sistemas iš kurių siunčiate elektroninius laiškus.
Taip pat galite importuoti mobiliųjų telefonų numerius į SMS siuntimo programas.


Išsirinkite iš "Veiklų sąrašo" veiklas kurių Jums reikia.
( Sąrašas prisegtas laiške excel faile )

Parašykite, kurias veiklas išsirinkote
ir atsiųsime pavyzdį ir pasiūlymą su sąlygomis įmonių bazei įsigyti



Pagarbiai,
Tadas Giedraitis
Tel. nr. +37067881041

Laba diena,


Noriu Jus informuoti apie šių metų pasikeitimą dėl atnaujintos visos Lietuvos įmonių bazės 2018 metų sausio vidurio.
Visi juridiniai asmenys pateikti bazėje yra veikiantys, realiai vykdantys veiklą, turintys įdarbintų darbuotojų. Duomenys pagal Sodrą, Registrų centrą.

Bazėje nurodoma ir apyvarta, darbuotojų atlyginimai, darbuotojų skaičius, transporto skaičius ir daug kitų duomenų, kuriuos matysite pavyzdyje.

Duomenis galima filtruoti pagal veiklas, miestus ir kitus duomenis.


Šią bazę verta turėti visoms įmonėms. Pateiksiu priežastis:

1) Kontaktai pateikti bazėje direktorių ir kitų atsakingų asmenų, didelė tikimybė Jums surasti naujų klientų, partnerių, tiekėjų, kai tiesiogiai bendrausite su direktoriais, komercijos vadovais.

2) Konkurentų analizavimas, tiekėjų atsirinkimas pagal Jums reikalingus kriterijus, galite atsifiltruoti pagal įmonės dydį, bazėje nurodoma kiek įmonės skolingos Sodrai.

3) Lengva, greita ir patogu dirbti su šia baze, elektroninius pašto adresus galite importuoti į elektroninių laiškų siuntimo programas ar sistemas iš kurių siunčiate elektroninius laiškus.
Taip pat galite importuoti mobiliųjų telefonų numerius į SMS siuntimo programas.


Išsirinkite iš "Veiklų sąrašo" veiklas kurių Jums reikia.
( Sąrašas prisegtas laiške excel faile )

Parašykite, kurias veiklas išsirinkote
ir atsiųsime pavyzdį ir pasiūlymą su sąlygomis įmonių bazei įsigyti



Pagarbiai,
Tadas Giedraitis
Tel. nr. +37067881041

opentracker seems not to have passed NEW.
Can someone shine a light on this?

Hi,

On Wed, 18 May 2022 19:42:25 +0200 Bastian Germann <bage@debian.org> wrote:

 > Control: tags -1 - pending
 >
 > opentracker seems not to have passed NEW.
 > Can someone shine a light on this?

Actually I think it never made it to NEW in the first place. I had
created #991585 RFS [1] that was closed by batm but I did not receive
(or did not see) any upload to NEW queue nor REJECT.

I have updated the package in salsa [2] and will try to find a mentor to
upload it to NEW.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=991585

[2] https://salsa.debian.org/gagath/opentracker

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
opentracker, 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 685575@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Agathe Porte <debian@microjoe.org> (supplier of updated opentracker 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)
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 15:45:05 +0200
Binary: opentracker
Source: opentracker
Architecture: amd64 source
Version: 0.0~git20210823.110868e-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Agathe Porte <debian@microjoe.org>
Changed-By: Agathe Porte <debian@microjoe.org>
Closes: 685575
Description:
 opentracker - Open and free bittorrent tracker
Changes:
 opentracker (0.0~git20210823.110868e-1) experimental; urgency=low
 .
   * Initial release (Closes: #685575)
Checksums-Sha1:
 012418cbf1af4f8eb7c28bc3c904e33a0a838957 5146 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.buildinfo
 c5e5bb7201abe4fe9e5c26422f0e8719e45a1352 39952 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.deb
 15d4ad8c6f9c759ba9dba1ea4a2eea031c436c2a 1499 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.dsc
 fbe1e90b553de8e7781a0686210439af31aca95b 52924 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e.orig.tar.xz
 715f85ae231716d012e07f0117bd7c5f3b008332 6028 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.debian.tar.xz
 9d38980b245073276c61f4c244326e2fb1f5ac5b 5213 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_source.buildinfo
Checksums-Sha256:
 c580c7f3210eb747730a9631c748c0db5439f2cfafeb0ab4adfde94e660d0599 5146 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.buildinfo
 9388af4204c2ed8d10ec8bbdb8ee4691d54685d1d0b4488b1543b7c6de97311b 39952 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.deb
 40d84da67b4cd7985a44f814e9a35706cfaf2637f1074bd96ecfb4c977a2088d 1499 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.dsc
 3672848a6ea3dabd395d67a1ee34ca9fafde8f10b4136984c0dbfe1351b7e158 52924 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e.orig.tar.xz
 f221d4ad3153266ca9904d10b6920da5a603768b41eaedf2f2801fcd30560b80 6028 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.debian.tar.xz
 dc352d097b8d25d7c6285b667b357f28d8631d5b2fbed299728ff2906a6faf6c 5213 opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_source.buildinfo
Files:
 b10d978557e2ece9d5ce8e10034098ca 5146 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.buildinfo
 08dad0e7dc27a4116150c8ee57a1d31f 39952 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_amd64.deb
 4e683e7053189bc82639194ebb090c36 1499 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.dsc
 7f513e09a0680c8403906362e9c29418 52924 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e.orig.tar.xz
 ba04656a33fa2e05107d3fabe8401bde 6028 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1.debian.tar.xz
 176c8248ab14d8c24ff6c9e7a839e9e7 5213 net optional opentracker_0.0~git20210823.110868e-1_source.buildinfo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iIoEARYKADIWIQTumtb5BSD6EfafSCRHew2wJjpU2AUCYo3VtBQcc3RlZmFub3JA
ZGViaWFuLm9yZwAKCRBHew2wJjpU2AeEAQCNDRZ/lNAEyfZua39T3cQFN0e+GXWY
GLZbtAyINQ4zRAD/XYN8PvTNLcqzKUodOI9VX7o04H5N9Oo+E/wRmygXOAI=
=m1gW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----