On 17.08.2016 [13:12:19 -0000], Chris J Arges wrote: > Can you rebase your fix on 1:2.5+dfsg-5ubuntu10.4 (due to the > regression fix mentioned in #25)?
Will do! > Another thing about your backport is that it dropped the qem2 bits > from the patch. Is there a reason for this? If so please mention it in > the debian/patch file. Ah yes, those sections of the upstream fix do not apply cleanly due to differing context (not even present). That does bring up another question, though: @smkbot or anyone else that might know. It seems the original series was 4 patches (http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-02/msg06037.html), and there was a follow-on of 7 patches that fixed a regression in that series (http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-03/msg05424.html). Do we need to backport all 11 patches? In the first series, at least, there is mention that patch 1/4 fixes an issue for reading VHD images. While I realize that this particular bug is just for creating/converting images, would it also be appropriate to backport the full set of fixes for VHD/VPC? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1490611 Title: Using qemu >=2.2.1 to convert raw->VHD (fixed) adds extra padding to the result file, which Microsoft Azure rejects as invalid To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1490611/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs