Le mer. 3 juil. 2024 à 23:04, Andres Salomon <dilin...@queued.net> a écrit :
> > > On 6/25/24 16:34, Jérémy Lal wrote: > > > > > > Le mar. 25 juin 2024 à 22:22, Salvatore Bonaccorso <car...@debian.org > > <mailto:car...@debian.org>> a écrit : > [...] > > > > Thanks a lot for your work Adrian. Please note that there is > currently > > a nodejs upload pending for releasing via a DSA, which will rebase > > nodejs to 18.20.3+dfsg-1~deb12u1 so this might invalidate those > > changes. > > > > Jérémy, Aron is that something you want to have included in your > > prepared update? > > > > > > Indeed, it's applied to 18.20.3+dfsg-1~deb12u1, along with other skipped > > tests. > > I'll resume work on this by the end of the week. > > > > While we wait for this, is there any reason to keep the existing > 18.20.3+dfsg-1~deb12u1 upload in the embargoed security queue? Security > packages are actively building against it, which is a bit of a problem > for reproducibility. Someone actually asked me about oddities in the > chromium package that was originally built for bookworm-security, and > now sits in the 12.6 point release. It turns out that it built against > the embargoed nodejs, but since that nodejs package was never released, > they can't use it to reproduce the chromium in 12.6. > > If there's a new nodejs bookworm-security package being uploaded at some > point and the currently embargoed nodejs package will never be released, > perhaps we should REJECT it now? > Sorry, probably me being overbooked here. I was supposed to check the regressions against it, and been on another job since then.
