On 2013-04-08 10:58, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Dear release team, > > TL;DR: This issue is fixable with 18 binNMUs of which 14 are arch:all. > > On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 05:46:57PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> We can move discussion of the conffile issue to a new bug / thread if >> needed. > > Let me give you some data on this. The basic issue was first found by > Andreas Beckmann as #681194. Packages built with squeeze debhelper would > create package catalogs using packaging scripts and only remove them on > purge. With the wheezy version package catalogs were turned into > conffiles, but I forgot to properly handle the removed-but-not-purged > case. Upon installation of a rebuilt package the previous left-over > package catalog would be treated as a modified configuration file. This > was fixed in debhelper/9.20120830 (migrated). It can indeed affect > upgrades from squeeze to wheezy, if a package removed by an > administrator is later reintroduced as a dependency during the upgrade. > > [...]
Just if I understand it correctly - the requirement for triggering this bug is to: * install the Squeeze version of one of the affected packages below * remove said package (but do not purge it) * install the Wheezy version of the affected package Is that correctly asserted of me? > > Here is the result from my sid work machine (as a lower bound of what > would need to be fixed). > > ===== > [...] > jade_1.2.1-47.1+b1_amd64.deb: affected - has lib, but it is not M-A:same AFAICT > [...] > linuxdoc-tools_0.9.68_amd64.deb: affected - no libs > [...] > openjade1.3_1.3.2-11.1+b1_amd64.deb: affected - no libs > openjade_1.4devel1-20.1+b1_amd64.deb: affected - has lib, but it is not M-a:same AFAICT > [...] > > [...] > > What do you think about the RCness of this issue? Should it be fixed for > wheezy? Adam already indicated that he leans towards "no". > > Helmut > > If my assertion above is correct, then I inclined to agree. Though if there are other ways to trigger the issue in these packages we might want to at least fix a couple of arch:all cases as well (e.g. sgml-base has a popcon of 70k and it is not the only one). Plus we might as well get those 4 packages binNMU'ed regardless since they are practically "free" fixes. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
