Bug#796345: [Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#796345: redhat-cluster/libdlm + lvm + perl transition

[Christoph Berg]

Re: Ferenc Wagner 2015-12-22 <874mfbfh6y@lant.ki.iif.hu>
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort  writes:
> 
> > This is the last blocker for the perl transition. Packages should be
> > installable now in unstable. Please let us know if you make progress
> > with this or if you hit any blockers.
> 
> Short progress report: no blockers.
> 
> I encountered unexpected problems, but they are mostly solved by now.
> While waiting for the review of my sponsor, I'm doing QA tests.

pacemaker 1.1.13-1 is now in NEW.

Thanks to Feri for preparing this release!

Merry Christmas,
Christoph
-- 
c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#796345: [Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#796345: redhat-cluster/libdlm + lvm + perl transition

[Ferenc Wagner]

Emilio Pozuelo Monfort  writes:

> This is the last blocker for the perl transition. Packages should be
> installable now in unstable. Please let us know if you make progress
> with this or if you hit any blockers.

Short progress report: no blockers.

I encountered unexpected problems, but they are mostly solved by now.
While waiting for the review of my sponsor, I'm doing QA tests.
-- 
Regards,
Feri.

Bug#796345: [Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#796345: redhat-cluster/libdlm + lvm + perl transition

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

On 17/12/15 14:09, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Ferenc Wagner  writes:
> 
>> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort  writes:
>>
>>> On 16/12/15 00:12, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>>
 Niko Tyni  writes:

> So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as
> discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker
> package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker
> would be broken by the libdlm update?

 No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package.  I'm
 already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they
 can be uploaded.  Both will go through NEW though, so it will take some
 time.
>>>
>>> I can speed things up if they block a transition... Got an eta for this?
>>
>> That sounds useful!  I expect to get pacemaker_1.1.13-1 ready for upload
>> today, taking some shortcuts.
> 
> Now the Perl transition is rolling and I can't build Pacemaker anymore,
> because some of its build dependencies are broken.  Is there still a
> reason to hurry the uploads?

This is the last blocker for the perl transition. Packages should be installable
now in unstable. Please let us know if you make progress with this or if you hit
any blockers.

Cheers,
Emilio

Bug#796345: [Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#796345: redhat-cluster/libdlm + lvm + perl transition

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

On 17/12/15 14:09, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Ferenc Wagner  writes:
> 
>> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort  writes:
>>
>>> On 16/12/15 00:12, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>>
 Niko Tyni  writes:

> So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as
> discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker
> package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker
> would be broken by the libdlm update?

 No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package.  I'm
 already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they
 can be uploaded.  Both will go through NEW though, so it will take some
 time.
>>>
>>> I can speed things up if they block a transition... Got an eta for this?
>>
>> That sounds useful!  I expect to get pacemaker_1.1.13-1 ready for upload
>> today, taking some shortcuts.
> 
> Now the Perl transition is rolling and I can't build Pacemaker anymore,
> because some of its build dependencies are broken.  Is there still a
> reason to hurry the uploads?

Yes, it'd be good to get this fixed ASAP, so that we can rebuild or remove
redhat-cluster.

The perl rdeps should be installable again at some point today, hopefully.

Cheers,
Emilio

Bug#796345: [Debian-ha-maintainers] Bug#796345: redhat-cluster/libdlm + lvm + perl transition

[Ferenc Wagner]

Ferenc Wagner  writes:

> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort  writes:
>
>> On 16/12/15 00:12, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
>>
>>> Niko Tyni  writes:
>>> 
 So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as
 discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker
 package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker
 would be broken by the libdlm update?
>>> 
>>> No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package.  I'm
>>> already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they
>>> can be uploaded.  Both will go through NEW though, so it will take some
>>> time.
>>
>> I can speed things up if they block a transition... Got an eta for this?
>
> That sounds useful!  I expect to get pacemaker_1.1.13-1 ready for upload
> today, taking some shortcuts.

Now the Perl transition is rolling and I can't build Pacemaker anymore,
because some of its build dependencies are broken.  Is there still a
reason to hurry the uploads?
-- 
Regards,
Feri.