Hi Cyril, On 12/08/2022 01:33, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Hi Matthieu, > > Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.bae...@tessares.net> (2022-08-11): >> Thank you for having CCed me, provided a fix so quickly and for the >> detailed explanations! Sorry, I didn't notice the regression when >> testing on my side. > > Absolutely no problems; it's easy to spot things when some daily build > breaks, much easier than spotting all the changes in a set of 18 binary > packages which tend to hardcode a strict dependency toward sibling > packages…
Thank you! :-) >> Do we need to revert your workaround when #1015263 will be fixed? If >> yes, are you tracking this issue and planning to do the revert or do >> you prefer if someone else looks at that? > > At the moment, I didn't think that far ahead… First things first: I hope > this issue doesn't become more widespread, so I'm hoping debhelper gets > a fix sooner than later. If more hotfixes like this are needed, I'll > probably plan on tracking individual changes to coordinate reverts. In > the meanwhile, if you could take care of cancelling that change in that > particular package when the time comes, that'd be awesome! Otherwise, I > do have sticky notes and a large desk, I can deal with it. :) OK, yes, no issue for me, I just subscribed to the debhelper bug (#1015263) and I will revert the modification in debian/rules when needed. Cheers, Matt -- Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions www.tessares.net
