On 2016-01-18 07:52:41, Danny Edel wrote: > Hi Antoine, > > Now that borgbackup is clear to enter and stay in testing again, it may > be time to revisit the backport to stable : ) > > On 01/09/2016 04:57 PM, Antoine Beaupré wrote: >> from what i understand, there are two dependencies that need to be >> backported: >> >> * setuptools-scm: backported by Gianfranco already, but out of date >> (1.8 backported vs 1.10 in stretch) > > I don't think that this is a showstopper. > > According to setup.py[1] borgbackup only requires 1.7 (this is mirrored > to d/control Build-Depends), which is satisfied already in jessie-backports. > > > [1]: > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/borgbackup.git/tree/setup.py?id=dc168cf8cc7f50870dd1aca8c2329660a7017f4f#n260 > >> * python3-msgpack: backport missing. zigo contacted, said he would >> backport himself. i'll open a bug report about this on msgpack to >> track that > > Is there any news on this? I tested a no-change-rebuild in a > jessie-backports pbuilder (seemed to go fine, but I don't know how to > correctly verify that), and was able to compile borgbackup with the > resulting package.
The bug report is in: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810535 no news from the other maintainer, i suggest you take it there... make sure that borg really runs with the new msgpack, because there are serious performance problems with the older one... > Right now borgbackup-doc built this way has privacy breach (loads > javascripts from external url when browsing local doc), which does not > happen when building it on sid. > > Any thoughts? I am not sure it's an issue that warrants blocking the backport - it's a bug in the toolchain, not specific to borg, no? a. -- The secret of life is to have no fear; it's the only way to function. - Stokely Carmichael
