On 2023-01-10 09:36:04 [+0100], Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > Hello Sebastian, Hi Helge,
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 09:38:31PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Sorry, I was really tired yesterday evening and just wanted to send a > short "ack". no worries. Just warning before I get all the credit ;) > > Oki. That means if I intend to upload xz-utils to Buster with translated > > man-pages than I need to check with you first? > > Let's separate this: > For buster I don't think anyone will care anymore. > > For bookworm: Yes, see: > https://wiki.debian.org/PackageTransition > Case #9: xz-utils is B, manpages-fr / manpages-de is A > > For some reason I did not realize this, it is now prepared for > manpages-l10n for the next release (slated next week, pending > upstream release). I did not create a bug for this (but please > do so, if you think it is necessary). > > For your update you should use as version "<< 4.1.0-1". > (and remember to put it in for both manpages-de and manpages-fr) Okay, will do. > This will note prevent this bug, but see below for this case. However, > it will fix peoples systems not using backports and upgrading from > bullseye to bookworm after release. > > And this also explains why this bug was not seen on our side: During > this time maintainership both for upstream and for the Debian package > transitioned to new persons. And when I got responsible, I simply did > not realise this one was forgotten. > > For bullseye: > Do you want to publish a backport for xz-utils? Then it gets > complicated. I planned to upload the latest v5.2.X release to bullseye. Code wise it contains only fixes. Feature wise it contains more translations. There is a bug open in xz-utils that the man-page for xz vanished in xz-utils. It was provided by manpages-de but the release in Bullseye does not have it. The release team does not know about it and I have no idea if they allow so I'm checking with you first before i collides somehow with manpages-fr ;) > > > Technically, we treat debian-unstable and debian-backport as if they > > > were two different distributions (say arch and fedora). > > > > > > What got lost (and I will investigate this later this week, maybe > > > tomorrow) are the correct package relations. I have a vague idea, but > > > I will check. And the next upload (including the one to bpo) will have > > > the correct ones. > > > > Since "recently" xz provides translated man-pages and sid is not > > affected. My understaning is that the bpo version of man-pages gets a > > breaks statement against xz. If so that would >= 5.2.7. > > Should I reassing the bug to manpages-l10n or do you do it yourself? > > Will be done, see above. And given that upstream got the translated man > pages in April 2020, I understand the quotes around "recently". > > From your changelog I gathered the version "(<< 5.3.3alpha-0.0)". The man-pages started to appear in 5.2.7 which I uploaded to unstable at the time. It was later superseded by the 5.3-beta series which become 5.4 (non-beta) and was cooked at the same time in experimental. … > As a side note: > We have man page translations for several other languages as well. > Over time, they will disappear, so I suggest to move them to xz-utils > as well. I can send the po files to you and inform the translators > about this, if you want. Then you can include them in your next upload > (to fix bug "-1") as well. I would forward them to upstream if there is anything. Right now there are man pages in ro/de/fr. > Greetings > > Helge > Sebastian
