Bug#964069: transition: adplug
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition adplug uses a versioned soname. Packages which should only require binNMU: adplay mpd ocp https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-adplug.html
Bug#960974: buster-pu: package postfix/3.4.14-0+deb10u1
On Tuesday, June 30, 2020 12:26:01 PM EDT Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 + confirmed > > On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 21:42 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > In the 6 weeks since this request was originally filed, there have > > been two more postfix bugfix releases. I'd like to upload 3.4.14 > > instead. I'm attaching two debdiffs: > > > > stable.debdiff is the diff from what's currently in stable. > > update.debdiff is the change from the original request in May. > > > > Given the upcoming point release, I really would like to get this in > > now. > > Sorry for the delay. Please go ahead. Thanks. Just did the dput. Should be available shortly for review/accept. Scott K signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Processed: retitle 947351 to buster-pu: package cloud-init/20.2-2+deb10u1
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 947351 buster-pu: package cloud-init/20.2-2+deb10u1 Bug #947351 [release.debian.org] buster-pu: package cloud-init/18.3-6 Changed Bug title to 'buster-pu: package cloud-init/20.2-2+deb10u1' from 'buster-pu: package cloud-init/18.3-6'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 947351: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=947351 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#956195: buster-pu: package cloud-init/18.3-6+deb10u1
On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:13:34PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > As discussed in #947351, this is a more targeted fix prepared for > > buster-pu. The updated debdiff is attached. > > The metadata for #936030 implies that this issue affects the package in > unstable. Is that correct? If not, please add an appropriate fixed > version to that bug to more accurately indicate which versions are > affected. I just updated the larger cloud-init buster-pu request in #947351. Let's leave this one alone for now; If we get cloud-init updated to 20.2 in buster then we won't need it. noah
RFC: Clean-up of old kernel ABIs at point releases
[MFT and Reply-To set to debian-release, to try and avoid spamming too many people with the discussion] Hi, When the kernel ABI version has been increased between two point releases, we currently remove the old versions as part of the point release, to avoid carrying cruft. This has unfortunate side-effects for a number of use cases, including CI setups which immediately stop working as the packages they attempt to install no longer exist in the archive. If we were instead to change this policy to, for example, remove the packages after the subsequent point release instead, can anyone see any problems that this might cause, whether for tooling, tools or anything else? Regards, Adam
Processed: Re: Bug#962237: buster-pu: package perl/5.28.1-6+deb10u1
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + confirmed Bug #962237 [release.debian.org] buster-pu: package perl/5.28.1-6+deb10u1 Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 962237: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=962237 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#962237: buster-pu: package perl/5.28.1-6+deb10u1
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 22:34 +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > As per #962234 for stretch and my remarks on #961443 I'd like to > uploaded a targeted fix for these no-dsa security issues: > > https://metacpan.org/pod/release/XSAWYERX/perl-5.28.3/pod/perldelta.pod > +perl (5.28.1-6+deb10u1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium With that finalised, please go ahead; thanks. Regards, Adam
Bug#960974: buster-pu: package postfix/3.4.14-0+deb10u1
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 21:42 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > In the 6 weeks since this request was originally filed, there have > been two more postfix bugfix releases. I'd like to upload 3.4.14 > instead. I'm attaching two debdiffs: > > stable.debdiff is the diff from what's currently in stable. > update.debdiff is the change from the original request in May. > > Given the upcoming point release, I really would like to get this in > now. > Sorry for the delay. Please go ahead. Regards, Adam
Processed: Re: Bug#960974: buster-pu: package postfix/3.4.14-0+deb10u1
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + confirmed Bug #960974 [release.debian.org] buster-pu: package postfix/3.4.12-0+deb10u1 Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 960974: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=960974 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#963340: buster-pu: package iptables-persistent/1.0.14
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + moreinfo Bug #963340 [release.debian.org] buster-pu: package iptables-persistent/1.0.14 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 963340: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=963340 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#963340: buster-pu: package iptables-persistent/1.0.14
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Sun, 2020-06-21 at 22:19 +0200, gustavo panizzo wrote: > I'd like to fix the bugs #961589 and #963012 in Buster uploading That sounds like it would probably be OK, however: > iptables-persistent 1.0.14 which is already in testing and backports. I'm not sold on this as a solution currently. > The updated package has been part of backports since Oct 2019 without > report of problems, I personally use it on all systems I administer > without problems. Unfortunately, while useful input as to the stability of the changes, none of that directly makes it suitable for a stable update. > Besides fixing this 2 bugs this version changes the way iptables > rules are flush (to be better IMHO),allows to toggle the rule saving > for individual components (iptables, ip6tables and ipset) without > changing the defaults and setups the iptables, ip6tables and ipset > services in systemd using alternatives (See #926927) What actual issues are these fixing for users of the current package in stable? "Better" isn't very descriptive. :) >From looking over the diff: 1) the whitespace unification makes it quite hard to find some of the real changes 2) debhelper compat changes and the dh-exec migration aren't really "minimal changes required to resolve the issue", and generally wouldn't be appropriate for a change in stable 3) Does this hunk: --- iptables-persistent-1.0.11/debian/ipset-persistent.prerm1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100 +++ iptables-persistent-1.0.14+deb10u1/debian/ipset-persistent.prerm 2020-06-21 21:12:04.0 +0200 @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +#!/bin/sh + +set -e + +# Remove alternatives +update-alternatives --remove-all ipset.service Do exactly what it suggests and remove any alternative using that name, whether or not it was installed by this package? Again, how does this benefit users of the package in stable, given that nothing else is providing or using the alternatives? As a side note: + * Rebuild for buster-updates. Even if this gets to proposed-updates, and subsequently buster, buster- updates is an additional suite that this request definitely does need meet the requirements for. Regards, Adam
