Re: Bug#1057755: Qt WebEngine Security Support In Stable
Hej, Am Sonntag, 17. Dezember 2023, 00:33:58 CET schrieb Soren Stoutner: [...] > > No matter what angelfish does, qtwebview-opensource-src will in any > > case also need a rebuild. > > Qt WebView is deprecated upstream. It was based on the same Apple > WebKit source that WebViewGTK uses. It was replaced quite a while > ago by Qt WebEngine, which is based on Google’s Chromium. There is > no Qt 6 version of Qt WebView, so it will go entirely away at that > point. There is one: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/qt6-webview Are you perhaps confusing Qt WebView with Qt WebKit ? > But this brings up an interesting question. Why are the Qt source > packages building private-dev binary packages? There was probably > some historical reason for doing so, but handling security support in > stable would be a lot easier if we stopped shipping private headers > that other packages can build- depends on. Perhaps Dmitry or Patrick > could provide some background. Usually, we try to avoid packaging the private headers. But for some packages, we just need to. And that's because other packages depend on them incl. other Qt submodules. We don't have a rule set in stone, but we usually package private headers when either another Qt submodule needs them (e.g. qtwebview needs the private headers of qtwebengine, hence we package them) or when important KDE components need them (e.g. qtwayland). -- Med vänliga hälsningar Patrick Franz
Re: Bug#1057755: Qt WebEngine Security Support In Stable
On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 01:22:13PM -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: >... > Bookworm released with qtwebengine-opensource-src 5.15.8+dfsg-1, but > 5.15.13+dfsg-1~deb12u1 was later uploaded. >... That's not true, bookworm released with 5.15.13+dfsg-1~deb12u1. > At this point, the biggest remaining question is what is the private header > that angelfish is using in Qt WebEngine and why? >... No matter what angelfish does, qtwebview-opensource-src will in any case also need a rebuild. > Thanks, > > Soren cu Adrian
Bug#1058700: marked as done (nmu: dar_2.7.13-2)
Your message dated Sat, 16 Dec 2023 21:52:03 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1058700: nmu: dar_2.7.13-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #1058700, regarding nmu: dar_2.7.13-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1058700: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058700 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dar User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Severity: normal Hi, if I see this correctly then dar 2.7.13-2 won't migrate to testing because it was built using openssl 3.0.12-1. This version isn't in testing and if everything goes according to then plan then openssl 3.1.4-2 will migrate to testing in ~3days. Therefore I suggest to binNMU dar to pickup current openssl so it can migrate: nmu dar_2.7.13-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "Update Built-Using for openssl" Sebastian --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 2023-12-14 19:43:54 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:dar > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > if I see this correctly then dar 2.7.13-2 won't migrate to testing > because it was built using openssl 3.0.12-1. This version isn't in > testing and if everything goes according to then plan then openssl > 3.1.4-2 will migrate to testing in ~3days. Therefore I suggest to binNMU > dar to pickup current openssl so it can migrate: > > nmu dar_2.7.13-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "Update Built-Using for openssl" Scheduled. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---
Processed: Re: Bug#1057706: transition: dpdk
Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #1057706 [release.debian.org] transition: dpdk Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 1057706: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1057706 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1057706: transition: dpdk
Control: tags -1 confirmed Hi Luca On 2023-12-07 11:41:04 +, Luca Boccassi wrote: > We have prepared the src:dpdk 23.11 ABI transition. Please go ahead Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Processed: Re: Bug#1058781: transition: zxing-cpp
Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #1058781 [release.debian.org] transition: zxing-cpp Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 1058781: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058781 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1058781: transition: zxing-cpp
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 2023-12-15 23:00:43 -0500, Boyuan Yang wrote: > I am looking to upload zxing-cpp 2.x (currently 2.2.1-1~exp1) to Debian Sid. A > library SONAME bump is needed in this transition (libzxing2 -> libzxing3). Please go ahead. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Processed: Re: Bug#1058742: transition: libcotp
Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #1058742 [release.debian.org] transition: libcotp Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 1058742: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1058742 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1058742: transition: libcotp
Control: tags -1 confirmed Hi On 2023-12-15 11:41:09 +, Francisco Vilmar Cardoso Ruviaro wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Dear Release Team, > > I would like to update libcotp in unstable to the 3.0.0-1. Please go ahead. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Re: g2clib transition
Hi Alastair On 2023-12-16 11:14:28 +, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > Hi, > > There is a minor transition I wish to proceed. g2clib upstream have added an > SOVERSION of .0 > > so the package name has changed libg2c0d -> libg2c0 > > Three dependencies will need rebuilding: pygrib, ncl and grads. > > I also maintain these 3 packages and they trivially rebuild. So this can be > done in a day, without impacting other transitions. > > May I proceed? Please turn this into a transition bug. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1055254: marked as done (transition: dav1d)
Your message dated Sat, 16 Dec 2023 21:34:06 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1055254: transition: dav1d has caused the Debian Bug report #1055254, regarding transition: dav1d to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1055254: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1055254 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear Release Team, Please schedule a transition slot for dav1d. The auto-generated ben tracker looks good: https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-dav1d.html All reverse deps (ffmpeg, libavif, libheif, vlc and xine-lib-1.2) build fine with the new version in experimental. Thanks, Dylan --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 2023-11-06 11:24:14 +0100, Dylan Aïssi wrote: > Le dim. 5 nov. 2023 à 22:01, Sebastian Ramacher a > écrit : > > > > Please go ahead. > > > > Thanks, uploaded! The old binaries got removed from testing. Closing Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---
g2clib transition
Hi, There is a minor transition I wish to proceed. g2clib upstream have added an SOVERSION of .0 so the package name has changed libg2c0d -> libg2c0 Three dependencies will need rebuilding: pygrib, ncl and grads. I also maintain these 3 packages and they trivially rebuild. So this can be done in a day, without impacting other transitions. May I proceed? Best regards Alastair -- Alastair McKinstry, GPG: 82383CE9165B347C787081A2CBE6BB4E5D9AD3A5 e: mckins...@debian.org, im: @alastair:mckinstry.ie
