On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 08:59:32AM -0700, Neil Mayhew wrote: > On 2022-01-28 22:33, tony mancill wrote: > > I noticed that 8.12.42 was released a couple days ago [4]. > > My thought was to let 8.12.41 transition to testing (5 days) before > > uploading to unstable again, in case that impacts whether/when Ubuntu > > picks up the update. Let me know if you know otherwise. > > That sounds like the best approach. I don't know the details of how Ubuntu > picks up the updates, but I have a bug report open with Ubuntu and I'll > follow up there once 8.12.41 reaches testing. I'll mention that you're > planning to package 8.12.42 as well.
For what it's worth, the 8.12.42 update doesn't do much for Debian and Ubuntu, so I see that as something that can be deferred and or skipped until a more substantial release is available. Particularly if it helps 8.12.41 migrate all the way through... The jar dependency bumps in [1] don't change anything because Debian uses the packaged version of the library and commons-io is already well-past 2.7 [2]. > I see that the mips64el build failed, and it was in the Java part of > the build, with a JRE panic. I don't know much about Java, > unfortunately, so I'm sorry I can't help with that. I believe that was just bad luck, meaning an extant bug in OpenJDK (maybe only on Zero), or at least not caused by libphonenumber. > Can 8.12.41 still transition to testing even with mips64el failing? No. I have already given it back for a rebuild and will keep an eye on it and mipsel. Cheers, tony [1] https://github.com/google/libphonenumber/commit/9a7be5813db8c0713c111d1c5735c777ce3838f1 [2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/commons-io
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
