Hi Jochen,
On 30-07-2021 14:12, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 python-fakeredis
> Control: affects -1 redis
> Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/jamesls/fakeredis/pull/303
>
> I've proposed a fix upstream and will upload to Debian later today.
Thanks, but the autopkgtest
Control: reassign -1 python-fakeredis
Control: affects -1 redis
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/jamesls/fakeredis/pull/303
I've proposed a fix upstream and will upload to Debian later today.
Cheers Jochen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> I have no idea about Redis/Fakeredis, adding Ondřej as he did all the
> uploads, lately.
Hey Ondřej, any input here? Otherwise, not sure what to suggest...
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org chris-lamb.co.uk
* Chris Lamb [2021-07-25 16:37]:
Chris Lamb wrote:
Sure thing -- I've forwarded this upstream here:
https://github.com/redis/redis/issues/9273
Okay, so the latest reply there suggests that this is (now) the
expected and behaviour of Redis going forward.
I still don't quite grasp what it
Chris Lamb wrote:
> Sure thing -- I've forwarded this upstream here:
>
> https://github.com/redis/redis/issues/9273
Okay, so the latest reply there suggests that this is (now) the
expected and behaviour of Redis going forward.
I still don't quite grasp what it is that fakeredis is testing
forwarded 991451 https://github.com/redis/redis/issues/9273
thanks
Hi Jochen,
> As far as I read https://redis.io/topics/data-types-intro this should be
> allowed, but I don't really [know] Redis. Can you report this to upstream if
> you agree?
Sure thing -- I've forwarded this upstream here:
Hi Chris,
* Chris Lamb [2021-07-25 10:01]:
I'd be happy to report this to Redis upstream, but I have no evidence
that this indicates an actual bug in Redis itself or any kind of "When
I see X we see Y but we should see Z". I lack knowledge about what
python-fakeredis is actually testing here
Hi Paul,
> > However, why the slight change to security-related overflow handling
> > in bitfield fields *on i386 systems* should result in this failure
> > eludes me... :/
>
> The changelog mentions some other bug fixes, the first one looks
> potentially related (new failure):
> Fail EXEC
Hi Chris,
On 24-07-2021 10:54, Chris Lamb wrote:
> However, why the slight change to security-related overflow handling
> in bitfield fields *on i386 systems* should result in this failure
> eludes me... :/
The changelog mentions some other bug fixes, the first one looks
potentially related
Paul Gevers wrote:
> With a recent upload of redis the autopkgtest of python-fakeredis fails
> in testing when that autopkgtest is run with the binary packages of
> redis from unstable. It passes when run with only packages from testing.
Just to confirm that I can reliably and locally reproduce
Source: redis, python-fakeredis
Control: found -1 redis/5:6.0.15-1
Control: found -1 python-fakeredis/1.4.5-2
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm bullseye
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: breaks needs-update
Dear maintainer(s),
With a recent
11 matches
Mail list logo
