Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Adam D. Barratt]

Control: tags -1 + pending

On Tue, 2017-09-26 at 01:11 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Sat 2017-09-23 19:46:42 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 23:07 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > > I've built this against a stretch system and tested it on a
> > > stretch
> > > system, and it still works.
> > > 
> > > Please advise me whether i should make an upload.
> > 
> > With a slightly more definite changelog stanza, please go ahead. :-
> > )
> 
> Thanks, I've uploaded.
> 

Flagged for acceptance.

Regards,

Adam

Processed: Re: Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] stretch-pu: gnupg2
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
863734: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863734
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Sat 2017-09-23 19:46:42 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 23:07 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> I've built this against a stretch system and tested it on a stretch
>> system, and it still works.
>> 
>> Please advise me whether i should make an upload.
>
> With a slightly more definite changelog stanza, please go ahead. :-)

Thanks, I've uploaded.

 --dkg

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Georg Faerber]

On 17-09-23 19:46:42, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 23:07 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > 
> > I've built this against a stretch system and tested it on a stretch
> > system, and it still works.
> > 
> > Please advise me whether i should make an upload.
> > 
> 
> With a slightly more definite changelog stanza, please go ahead. :-)

\m/ Thanks! :)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Adam D. Barratt]

Control: tags -1 +confirmed -moreinfo

On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 23:07 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Wed 2017-09-20 23:37:27 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > To save digging them out:
> > 
> > 
> > I'm assuming that there haven't been any relevant regressions or
> > follow-up fixes since the -8 upload?
> > 
> > In any case, we can't simply transplant -8 to p-u, so would need to
> > see
> > a debdiff for either a -6+deb9u1 or -8~deb9u1 upload (depending on
> > how
> > you structure the changelog), built against and tested on stretch,
> > before confirming an upload.
> > 
> 
> Attached is the debdiff framed as -8~deb9u1 (visible on the "stretch"
> branch in https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-gnupg/gnupg2.git/) ,
> which
> is basically the same as the debdiff against -8, except for:
> 
>  * a new debian/changelog entry
>  * updated debian/gbp.conf to point to the relevant branch and be
>    buildable from stretch's git-buildpackage
>  * updated Vcs-Git: field in debian/control to point to find the
>    relevant branch
> 
> I've built this against a stretch system and tested it on a stretch
> system, and it still works.
> 
> Please advise me whether i should make an upload.
> 

With a slightly more definite changelog stanza, please go ahead. :-)

Regards,

Adam

Processed: Re: Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tags -1 +confirmed -moreinfo
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] stretch-pu: gnupg2
Added tag(s) confirmed.
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] stretch-pu: gnupg2
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
863734: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863734
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 00:24 +0200, Georg Faerber wrote:
> On 17-07-15 23:29:09, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Adam D. Barratt  (2017-07-13):
> > > Finally, unless I missed one when checking back through the
> > > thread, we
> > > also need a d-i ack.
> > 
> > From a few quick tests, spotted no issues in d-i.
> 
> So...any chance of getting this into 9.2?
> 

Well, my original mail a couple of months ago asked for things other
than the d-i ack, which is why the above quote starts "finally", and
there doesn't appear to have been any response to those points. You
didn't send your mail to the person who can actually provide them. I've
fixed the latter point by adding a CC.

To save digging them out:


I'm assuming that there haven't been any relevant regressions or
follow-up fixes since the -8 upload?

In any case, we can't simply transplant -8 to p-u, so would need to see
a debdiff for either a -6+deb9u1 or -8~deb9u1 upload (depending on how
you structure the changelog), built against and tested on stretch,
before confirming an upload.


Regards,

Adam

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Georg Faerber]

On 17-07-15 23:29:09, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Adam D. Barratt  (2017-07-13):
> > Finally, unless I missed one when checking back through the thread, we
> > also need a d-i ack.
> 
> From a few quick tests, spotted no issues in d-i.

So...any chance of getting this into 9.2?

Thanks & cheers,
Georg


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Cyril Brulebois]

Adam D. Barratt  (2017-07-13):
> Finally, unless I missed one when checking back through the thread, we
> also need a d-i ack.

From a few quick tests, spotted no issues in d-i.


KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Tue, 2017-07-11 at 11:16 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Sun 2017-06-25 18:39:34 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > On Sat 2017-06-17 17:36:39 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >> Unfortunately we ran out of time to handle this before the release, so
> >> converting it to a proto-p-u request.
> >
> > Thanks for this conversion, Adam.  Please let me know if you need any
> > feedback from on it from me or anyone else on the pkg-gnupg-maint team.
> 
> ping on https://bugs.debian.org/863734 (sending gnupg2/2.1.18-8 to
> stretch proposed-updates) -- please let me know if you need anything
> else.

To be entirely honest, the size of the diff and the number of patches
still worries me, as it makes it very difficult to review. I'm assuming
that there haven't been any relevant regressions or follow-up fixes
since the -8 upload?

In any case, we can't simply transplant -8 to p-u, so would need to see
a debdiff for either a -6+deb9u1 or -8~deb9u1 upload (depending on how
you structure the changelog), built against and tested on stretch,
before confirming an upload.

Finally, unless I missed one when checking back through the thread, we
also need a d-i ack.

Regards,

Adam

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Sun 2017-06-25 18:39:34 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Sat 2017-06-17 17:36:39 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Unfortunately we ran out of time to handle this before the release, so
>> converting it to a proto-p-u request.
>
> Thanks for this conversion, Adam.  Please let me know if you need any
> feedback from on it from me or anyone else on the pkg-gnupg-maint team.

ping on https://bugs.debian.org/863734 (sending gnupg2/2.1.18-8 to
stretch proposed-updates) -- please let me know if you need anything
else.

thanks for your work keeping debian healthy!

   --dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Sat 2017-06-17 17:36:39 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> retitle 863734 stretch-pu: gnupg2
> user release.debian@packages.debian.org
> usertags 863734 = pu
> tags 863734 = stretch moreinfo
> thanks
>
> On Sat, 2017-06-03 at 15:31 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Daniel Kahn Gillmor  (2017-06-03):
>> > Ping on the unblock request for gnupg2/2.1.18-8 -- i've heard from
>> > several people that this version of the package is better for them in
>> > stretch than 2.1.18-6, and i'm getting concerned about tht timing.
>> > 
>> > sorry for the nudge,
>> > 
>> >   --dkg
>> 
>> Well I had more time during May than I have during early June to look at
>> packages with such a huge debdiff, so sorry for not being able to answer
>> in just a few days.
>
> Unfortunately we ran out of time to handle this before the release, so
> converting it to a proto-p-u request.

Thanks for this conversion, Adam.  Please let me know if you need any
feedback from on it from me or anyone else on the pkg-gnupg-maint team.

Regards,

 --dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Adam D. Barratt]

retitle 863734 stretch-pu: gnupg2
user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertags 863734 = pu
tags 863734 = stretch moreinfo
thanks

On Sat, 2017-06-03 at 15:31 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor  (2017-06-03):
> > Ping on the unblock request for gnupg2/2.1.18-8 -- i've heard from
> > several people that this version of the package is better for them in
> > stretch than 2.1.18-6, and i'm getting concerned about tht timing.
> > 
> > sorry for the nudge,
> > 
> >   --dkg
> 
> Well I had more time during May than I have during early June to look at
> packages with such a huge debdiff, so sorry for not being able to answer
> in just a few days.

Unfortunately we ran out of time to handle this before the release, so
converting it to a proto-p-u request.

Regards,

Adam

Processed: Re: Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> retitle 863734 stretch-pu: gnupg2
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8
Changed Bug title to 'stretch-pu: gnupg2' from 'unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8'.
> user release.debian@packages.debian.org
Setting user to release.debian@packages.debian.org (was 
a...@adam-barratt.org.uk).
> usertags 863734 = pu
Usertags were: unblock.
Usertags are now: pu.
> tags 863734 = stretch moreinfo
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] stretch-pu: gnupg2
Added tag(s) stretch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
863734: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863734
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Cyril Brulebois]

Daniel Kahn Gillmor  (2017-06-03):
> Ping on the unblock request for gnupg2/2.1.18-8 -- i've heard from
> several people that this version of the package is better for them in
> stretch than 2.1.18-6, and i'm getting concerned about tht timing.
> 
> sorry for the nudge,
> 
>   --dkg

Well I had more time during May than I have during early June to look at
packages with such a huge debdiff, so sorry for not being able to answer
in just a few days.


KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

Ping on the unblock request for gnupg2/2.1.18-8 -- i've heard from
several people that this version of the package is better for them in
stretch than 2.1.18-6, and i'm getting concerned about tht timing.

sorry for the nudge,

  --dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Tue 2017-05-30 22:48:20 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Jonathan Wiltshire  (2017-05-30):
>> Control: tag -1 moreinfo
>> 
>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:41:48PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> > Please unblock package gnupg2
>> > 
>> > The gnupg2 source package 2.1.18-8 contains a significant number of
>> > useful fixes from 2.1.18-6, and should be propagated into testing.
>> 
>> Cc-ing the d-i RM for an ack.
>
> TBF I'm not thrilled by the amount of patches and the limited time before
> the release. :(

I'm also not thrilled by the amount of patches, but these are clear
bugfixes from upstream. They've been in unstable for several weeks now,
and i've avoided an unblock specifically because i wanted to hear from
people that they solve their problems and don't introduce new ones.
that seems to be the case.  :/

> ISTR we mainly use gpgv from src:gnupg2, through the gpgv-udeb package.
> Any chance you could pinpoint changesets affecting it, so that I can
> concentrate on those only?

sure thing.  Most of these don't affect gpgv.  The most relevant patches
for gpgv are these two patches from upstream which have an effect on the
use of specific file descriptors (the first catches errors in
mis-configured invocations, and the second ensures that gpgv works
cross-platform on windows):

0032-gpg-common-Make-sure-that-all-fd-given-are-valid.patch
debian/patches/0040-gpgv-w32-Fix-status-fd.patch

however, the following other patches since 2.1.18-6 all touch some
source file that contributes to the build of gpgv, though i think none
of them are relevant for gpgv generally, let alone for d-i's specific
use of gpgv -- the gpgv source is just mixed together with
GnuPG's other functionality:

0044-gpg-Make-export-options-work-with-export-secret-keys.patch
0048-gpg-Fix-attempt-to-double-free-an-UID-structure.patch
0050-gpg-Flush-stdout-before-printing-stats-with-check-si.patch
0059-gpg-Handle-critical-marked-Reason-for-Revocation.patch
0065-gpg-Fix-printing-of-offline-taken-subkey.patch
0072-g10-Minor-fixes.patch
0074-g10-invalidate-the-fd-cache-for-keyring.patch
avoid-spurious-warnings/0078-gpg-Avoid-spurious-warnings-about-trust-packets.patch
skel-file-removal/0077-g10-remove-skeleton-options-files.patch
skip-missing-signing-keys/0076-g10-Skip-signing-keys-where-no-secret-key-is-availab.patch

(for example, gpgv doesn't do export-secret-keys at all, but it does
include g10/main.h, which that 0044-*.patch does have to modify.
similarly, gpgv doesn't read config files at all, but
skel-file-removal/0077*.patch touches g10/openfile.c.)

Let me know if you have any more questions,

--dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Cyril Brulebois]

Jonathan Wiltshire  (2017-05-30):
> Control: tag -1 moreinfo
> 
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:41:48PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > Please unblock package gnupg2
> > 
> > The gnupg2 source package 2.1.18-8 contains a significant number of
> > useful fixes from 2.1.18-6, and should be propagated into testing.
> 
> Cc-ing the d-i RM for an ack.

TBF I'm not thrilled by the amount of patches and the limited time before
the release. :(

ISTR we mainly use gpgv from src:gnupg2, through the gpgv-udeb package.
Any chance you could pinpoint changesets affecting it, so that I can
concentrate on those only?

Thanks already.


KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Jonathan Wiltshire]

Control: tag -1 moreinfo

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:41:48PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Please unblock package gnupg2
> 
> The gnupg2 source package 2.1.18-8 contains a significant number of
> useful fixes from 2.1.18-6, and should be propagated into testing.

Cc-ing the d-i RM for an ack.

Thanks,

-- 
Jonathan Wiltshire  j...@debian.org
Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw

4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC  74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51

Processed: Re: Bug#863734: unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tag -1 moreinfo
Bug #863734 [release.debian.org] unblock: gnupg2/2.1.18-8
Added tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
863734: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863734
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems