On Sun, 2013-02-03 at 00:46 +0100, Florian Schlichting wrote: > Hi Adalbert, > > > > Thanks for testing. I've put up r450, r451, r452, r455, r457 in the same > > > place, if you're up for a second round. > > > They all fail > > That's what I thought - there wasn't anything left in the upstream > commits that looked like it could have anything to do with it. > > > I am not a C coder and even less a vpnc expert, but for me the diff > > between r449 and 450 does not look dangerous. So I had the idea that the > > bug might not have been introduced in r450 at all. Instead, it could > > have been fixed by one of the debian patches which were applied to the > > r449 debian package. > > > > When you look at the patch files from snapshot.debian.org you will find > > that vpnc_0.5.3r449-3_amd64.deb contains more patches than > > vpnc_0.5.3r512-1_amd64.deb (especially 07_bug496718.patch and > > 08_bug640978.patch look "promising" to me). I guess you did not apply > > those debian patches to the debs you gave me for the bisect? > > both patches were applied upstream, 07_bug496718.patch is upstream's > r453 and r454 (and I brought it back for r450/1/2 that I built for you); > 08_bug640978.patch was applied a little later but it has a very clear > and different error message (you always carry out your testing from the > command line, so NetworkManager wouldn't hide any errors from vpnc, no?)
Yes, all tests were performed from the command line. > The only big thing left that I can make out in the diff between > 0.5.3r449-3 and 0.5.3r450-1 (attached) is that r450 makes use of > a number of hardening build flags by virtue of dh compat level 9. This > also causes the build log to be full of warnings, mainly about ignored > return values which shouldn't make a difference, but who knows. To be > sure, I've built one last version, the current r512-2 with dh > compatibility level lowered back to 8 as in r449-3: > > http://fschlich.userpage.fu-berlin.de/vpnc/vpnc_0.5.3r512-3~rc1_amd64.deb > > If that doesn't help, I'm out of ideas; we can go ask upstream if they > see something, or you could try to debug the issue by finding out what's > going on while vpnc hangs (try strace/ltrace), or you could clone my > git repo from https://github.com/fschlich/Debian-vpnc and do a proper > git-bisect on the commits between debian/0.5.3r449-3 and > debian/0.5.3r512-1... > > Florian I made the bisect on your git repo and the bad commit seems to be cb394e1acb7565c4d918fd8662009a74c7b32758 In other words, 8dbfc0191aa815d5ab70c9ca6246cdf9356387f2 is the last working commit/revision. I also checked out upstream svn trunk in order to find the last working revision, but, so far, I could not find any revision that actually works. I have no clue why -- my expectation was that r449 should be working, but it is not. Now, a few questions come into my mind: 1. Which debian git revision was used for the debian package vpnc_0.5.3r449-3_amd64.deb? From which upstream svn revision was that git revision created? 2. How about debian patches, are they already included in the git repo? 3. Is there an easy way to build debian packages from the git tree? When bisecting I used to do the builds via a simple "make" command. Is this the exact way the code is compiled when debian packages are generated? Adalbert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
