* Eddy Petrișor [Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:54:03 +0200]: > Hello release team,
Hello, Eddy (and Mercurial maintainers). Here are my thoughts on the issue: - a patch for this should really get an ACK from the maintainers - if not, you should follow the usual procedures for NMUs for < RC bugs, which start by waiting at least a week for a response - I'm doubtful this bug warrants a t-p-u upload, but since we've allowed them for non-RC bugs during this cycle, I won't block it if you come to an agreement with the maintainers that this is an appropriate solution (Just for the record, I think it's an unfortunate use of /etc loading of extensions if a warning is going to be inevitably printed when the extension packages are removed but not purged. I also realize this does not have an easy solution without cooperation from upstream.) So, Eddy, let's wait a bit to hear what the maintainers think. Cheers, > Mercurial's hgk extension fails to start if the configuration files of another > extension are still present after a package removal. > This is bug #513183 - hgk fails to start when hg emits warnings. > This happens under relatively common conditions (package of an extension > is removed, but not purged). > The hgk extension provides the command "hg view" which is an equivalent of > gitk in mercurial world. Since I know how important gitk is for me I thought > I should try to fix the problem for mercurial. > I provided a workaround and prepared an NMU which should have made the > problem go away with a simple upload[*] and approval from the release team. > The interdiff, the dsc , the .changes file and the new diff.gz are attached. > Changelog is: > mercurial (1.0.1-5.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low > . > * Non-maintainer upload. > * added a workaround for the crash of hgk when hg was emitting > warnings (Closes: #513183) > Since, as I can see, the maintainer of mercurial hasn't acted at all > since I provided > the patch and NMU, > I am requesting pre-aproval and a sponsor for mercurial/1.0.1-5.2. > The detailed description of the problem and the way I worked around it > is described at: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=513183#67 > For your convenience, is reproduced here (unimportant bits removed): > > I spent some time n this bug, first trying to fix hgk itself, then > > realising I was fighting someone else's battle and in the end I > > settled for a (quite) elegant workaround. > > [..] > > Here is the description of the changes. > > workaround for 513183 so hg view works > > tcl/tk is very sensitive about stuff which is printed to stderr > > and considers anything printed to be on stderr to be a sign of > > an error. > > To avoid hgk's crash because of warnings, we print warnings > > only when the quiet option is absent. We suppress > > warnings in hg by calling from "hg view" a wrapper, hg-hgk, > > which requests quiet operation, disabling warnings. > > In order to preserve user's possible preference for another hg > > via HG environment variable, we make sure in the wrapper we > > call that HG, not the system hg, if HG was initally set. > [*] I mistekenly forgot to set the distribution to "testing-proposed-updates" > instead of "unstable" in the files in the NMU proposal, but I built on > lenny, so that is minor edit which is fixed now in the attachments. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Que no te vendan amor sin espinas -- Joaquín Sabina, Noches de boda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org