On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 01:38:34PM -0600, D. Jared Dominguez wrote: >Hrmph. There was a 32-bit issue in 0.9.0-1 that was supposed to be >fixed in 0.9.0-2: >https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764797 >https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=764796 > >Any chance you can test with efibootmgr from unstable? I've looked at >the changes upstream and don't see anything that seems like it'd be >relevant to "efibootmgr -v" segfaulting. However, about "efibootmgr >-c -d /dev/sda -o 1 -w -L debian -l \EFI\debian\grubia32.efi" >failing, these changes are in unstable's efibootmgr and might be >relevant: > >8c725c629f2ead41532c4b908e9c713187a7f564 - Make -o's behavior >actually match the documented behavior. >b857ce058d6f7fa3fa47c839bc86de243cd1fd4e - Make all the other places >we're parsing XXXX also do a better job. > >Once you test against unstable's efibootmgr, Peter Jones (upstream) >can help us try to triage this bug more.
Same behaviour using current upstream head - see the comments in upstream's issue tracker: https://github.com/vathpela/efibootmgr/issues/21 https://github.com/vathpela/efivar/issues/11 >Relatedly, there are a bunch of fixes since 0.9.0-2. Actually, all >changes since then are bug fixes. How hard would it be at this point >in the game to get an exception to pull 0.11.0 into testing? Depends on how big they are, I guess, and how important they look. There are serious issues here, but not all of the changes are just serious bugfixes AFAICS? -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Into the distance, a ribbon of black Stretched to the point of no turning back -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
