Re: broken cvs in squeeze-security

2012-04-07 Thread Philipp Kern
On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 10:07:35AM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Thorsten Glaser [120406 13:47]: > > Bernhard R. Link dixit: > > >The effect you see is usually not from a unclean chroot, but from a > > >non-minimal chroot. > > Non-minimal is unclean. > A unclean chroot is one with modificatio

Re: broken cvs in squeeze-security

2012-04-07 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Thorsten Glaser [120406 13:47]: > Bernhard R. Link dixit: > > >The effect you see is usually not from a unclean chroot, but from a > >non-minimal chroot. > > Non-minimal is unclean. A unclean chroot is one with modifications that make it unsuiteable for building packages. A package failing to

Re: broken cvs in squeeze-security

2012-04-06 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 11:43 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Bernhard R. Link dixit: > >The following patch moves he deletion behind dh_compress, > >thus actually matching something. > > OK. Thanks! fwiw, I assume s/\.gz//g on the affected lines would also have worked. > Should I upload this, or

Re: broken cvs in squeeze-security

2012-04-06 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Bernhard R. Link dixit: >The effect you see is usually not from a unclean chroot, but from a >non-minimal chroot. Non-minimal is unclean. >It essentially means that the cvs package misses >either code to mitigate this or misses a Build-Conflicts. Possibly… the package from squeeze and older is