Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Fri 2022-03-18 09:13:08 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Unfortunately it looks like the upload failed:
>
> gnupg2_2.2.27-2+deb11u1.dsc: Refers to non-existing file
> 'gnupg2_2.2.27.orig.tar.bz2.asc'

Sigh.  thanks for the note.  I've just tried again, this time including
the orig.tar.bz2.asc in the upload.

--dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Cyril Brulebois]

Adam D. Barratt  (2022-02-19):
> That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package builds a
> udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.

No objections, thanks.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Thu, 2022-03-17 at 19:29 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Thu 2022-03-17 17:49:04 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Sat, 2022-02-19 at 22:24 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > > On Sat 2022-02-19 17:09:21 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > > Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
> > > > 
> > [...]
> > > > That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package
> > > > builds a
> > > > udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.
> > > 
> > > Understood -- i'll wait for a d-i ack before uploading.
> > 
> > As we're getting very close to the window for 11.3 closing, please
> > feel
> > free to upload.
> 
> I've just uploaded gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1 to bullseye now.  Please
> let
> me know if there are any problems.

Unfortunately it looks like the upload failed:

gnupg2_2.2.27-2+deb11u1.dsc: Refers to non-existing file
'gnupg2_2.2.27.orig.tar.bz2.asc'

Regards,

Adam

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Thu 2022-03-17 17:49:04 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2022-02-19 at 22:24 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> On Sat 2022-02-19 17:09:21 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> > Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
>> > 
> [...]
>> > That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package
>> > builds a
>> > udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.
>> 
>> Understood -- i'll wait for a d-i ack before uploading.
>
> As we're getting very close to the window for 11.3 closing, please feel
> free to upload.

I've just uploaded gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1 to bullseye now.  Please let
me know if there are any problems.

thanks for your ongoing work maintaining debian stable!

 --dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Sat, 2022-02-19 at 22:24 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Sat 2022-02-19 17:09:21 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
> > 
[...]
> > That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package
> > builds a
> > udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.
> 
> Understood -- i'll wait for a d-i ack before uploading.

As we're getting very close to the window for 11.3 closing, please feel
free to upload.

Regards,

Adam

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Sat 2022-02-19 17:09:21 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
>
> On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> Please consider an update to GnuPG in debian bullseye, from version
>> 2.2.27-2 to 2.2.27-2+deb11u1.
>> 
>
> The version mentioned above is correct, but the proposed changelog is
> not:
>
> +gnupg2 (2.2.27-2+deb11+1) bullseye; urgency=medium
>
> (it should be "deb11u1", not "deb11+1").

thanks for catching that, i've corrected it and pushed the corrected
version to the debian/bullseye branch in salsa.

> That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package builds a
> udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.

Understood -- i'll wait for a d-i ack before uploading.

   --dkg


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev]

but yes its a 5 tree debian, oldstable stable testing unstable experimental

On Sat, Feb 19, 2022, 18:10 Adam D. Barratt 
wrote:

> Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
>
> On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > Please consider an update to GnuPG in debian bullseye, from version
> > 2.2.27-2 to 2.2.27-2+deb11u1.
> >
>
> The version mentioned above is correct, but the proposed changelog is
> not:
>
> +gnupg2 (2.2.27-2+deb11+1) bullseye; urgency=medium
>
> (it should be "deb11u1", not "deb11+1").
>

it is unstable / experimental

>
> > The fixes, by Christoph Biedel and Raphaël Hertzog, are narrowly
> > targeted and fix real, significant issues that a subset of users
> > have.
> > They have been in debian unstable and testing for a while now without
> > issue:
> >
> > --
> >   [ Raphaël Hertzog ]
> >   * Avoid network interaction in generator. Closes: #993578
> >
> >   [ Christoph Biedl ]
> >   * Backport "Scd: Fix CCID driver for SCM SPR332/SPR532". Closes:
> > #982546
> > --
> >
> > The debdiff from the version in bullseye (2.2.27-2) is attached.
>
> Thanks.
>
> That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package builds a
> udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.
>

these doesnt tell me anythjng, im no debian dev

>
> Regards,
>
> Adam
>
>

Re: Bug#1004452: bullseye-pu: package gnupg2/2.2.27-2+deb11u1

[Adam D. Barratt]

Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i

On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Please consider an update to GnuPG in debian bullseye, from version
> 2.2.27-2 to 2.2.27-2+deb11u1.
> 

The version mentioned above is correct, but the proposed changelog is
not:

+gnupg2 (2.2.27-2+deb11+1) bullseye; urgency=medium

(it should be "deb11u1", not "deb11+1").

> The fixes, by Christoph Biedel and Raphaël Hertzog, are narrowly
> targeted and fix real, significant issues that a subset of users
> have.
> They have been in debian unstable and testing for a while now without
> issue:
> 
> --
>   [ Raphaël Hertzog ]
>   * Avoid network interaction in generator. Closes: #993578
> 
>   [ Christoph Biedl ]
>   * Backport "Scd: Fix CCID driver for SCM SPR332/SPR532". Closes:
> #982546
> --
> 
> The debdiff from the version in bullseye (2.2.27-2) is attached.

Thanks.

That looks fine to me, but will need a d-i ack as the package builds a
udeb; tagging and CCing accordingly.

Regards,

Adam