Hi Andrew, On Sat, Jun 28, 2025 at 04:35:36PM +0100, Andrew Bower wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 09:15:48AM +0100, Andrew Bower wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 09:36:05AM -0300, Carlos Henrique Lima Melara wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 08:11:40AM +0100, Andrew Bower wrote: > [...] > > > > I would be happy to try to make another contribution to mop up other > > > > bugs and issues found by lintian in acct after the trixie release if I > > > > get a chance. > > > > > > That's awesome! If you want to start working already, we can prepare an > > > upload to experimental with your fixes and after the trixie release we > > > can send to unstable (I'm not sure how familiar you are with Debian > > > development lifecycle, but now we are in the freeze [1] to release the > > > new stable release, trixie, so uploads to unstable should be only > > > targeted to fix things in trixie). > [...] > > I have a few fixes ready and some more I would like to add > > I have completed my work refreshing 'acct' for forky now, subject to > feedback! > > The full set of changes I propose is here: > > https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/acct/-/merge_requests/8
Cool, I saw the activity but did not had time to look at it during the week. I'll try to look tomorrow evening. > > The first three commits I think are candidates for including in trixie. > > 1) Import a buffer overflow patch applied in Ubuntu (#1108428). > 2) Update metadata for the above. > 3) Add autopkgtest > > The autopkgtest could reduce the load on the release team if we seek to > add the Ubuntu patch. I am aware there's a risk that a failing > autopkgtest makes things worse but I think we could derisk that by > cycling it through 'experimental' and simply removing the test if > the pseudo-excuses show it to be necessary and not be in a worse > position than before the test. Ok, will read the backlog and probably we can go the proposed way of experimental -> check test results -> file unblock bug. Cheers, Charles
