Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi Julien, Il giorno ven, 01/03/2013 alle 11.31 +0100, Julien Cristau ha scritto: On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 08:00:27 +0100, Joachim Wiedorn wrote: [...] The next step is creating hylafax 6.0.6-5 as mentioned by Ivo De Decker. Should I already prepare these updated package of hylafax now? If possible, yes. The new hylafax version has been uploaded 5 days ago to unstable. The diff against the testing version are the ones already agreed upon, i.e., a very small subset of what was already in unstable. Could you please check if the package may be unblocked? Moreover, I checked the capi4hylafax package that is currently waiting for a pre approval requested on 28 January by Joachim Wiedorn, and I would gladly upload it after the approval. These two packages, if migrated to testing, would really be right ones for the next release. Thanks, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1363503279.4793.7.camel@blatta
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4 / -5
Hallo Giuseppe, Giuseppe Sacco wrote on 2013-03-11 00:16: I checked your package diff, rebuilt the package and tested it. Then I uploaded it, so hopefully it should enter unstable. Perfectly! Tomorrow I will also check capi4hylafax -19. If you still need a sponsor, I'll gladly upload the package. This would be very nice. Unfortunately until now I haven't any answer about my pre-approval of capi4hylafax ...300-19 from release team: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699171 But without the updated capi4hylafax the RC bug #661482 cannot be solved. --- Have a nice day. Joachim (Germany) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130311171724.2830c...@jupiter.home
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hello Guiseppe, Giuseppe Sacco wrote on 2013-03-01 10:44: The diff I'll use is almost what Ivo suggested in http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/12/msg00886.html Until now I haven't your updated package. So I have made one with the following debdiff (see attached file). And I have already tested both packages (hylafax-server 6.0.6-19 with capi4hylafax ...300-19) with piuparts. You see the (successful) result in attached logfile. I have already uploaded this package to mentors.d.n for sponsoring. Do you have time to review and sponsor this upload? If not I can write RFS. See: https://mentors.debian.net/package/hylafax --- Have a nice day. Joachim (Germany) debdiff_hylafax-606-5.diff.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data hyl+c4h_amd64_wheezy_piu.log.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi Joachim, Il 10/03/13 20.03, Joachim Wiedorn ha scritto: Hello Guiseppe, [...] I have already uploaded this package to mentors.d.n for sponsoring. Do you have time to review and sponsor this upload? If not I can write RFS. See: https://mentors.debian.net/package/hylafax I checked your package diff, rebuilt the package and tested it. Then I uploaded it, so hopefully it should enter unstable. Tomorrow I will also check capi4hylafax -19. If you still need a sponsor, I'll gladly upload the package. Thanks, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/513d1460.7070...@eppesuigoccas.homedns.org
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Il giorno ven, 01/03/2013 alle 08.00 +0100, Joachim Wiedorn ha scritto: [...] The next step is creating hylafax 6.0.6-5 as mentioned by Ivo De Decker. Should I already prepare these updated package of hylafax now? I have been waiting for capi4hylafax being accepted, but now I think I'll package and upload hylafax 6.0.6-5 with only wheezy changes during this week end. The diff I'll use is almost what Ivo suggested in http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/12/msg00886.html Bye, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1362131097.3536.10.camel@server-000
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 08:00:27 +0100, Joachim Wiedorn wrote: Hello Julien, Julien Cristau wrote on 2013-02-28 22:11: This version 3:6.0.6-5 should be uploaded to unstable. is there an ETA for that new upload? At first we need an updated version of capi4hylafax to solve one half of the problems between hylafax and capi4hylafax. This new version is already on mentors.d.o ready for wheezy: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=697733 And I have asked the release team for pre-approval: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699171 Thanks, I'll try and have a look at that soon. The next step is creating hylafax 6.0.6-5 as mentioned by Ivo De Decker. Should I already prepare these updated package of hylafax now? If possible, yes. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 00:12:57 +0100, Ivo De Decker wrote: Hi Joachim, On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:39:27PM +0100, Joachim Wiedorn wrote: a) create the updated version 3:6.0.6-5 which is the same as 3:6.0.6-1 and then create the next version 3:6.0.6-6 which all needed patches for Wheezy, or There is no need to create a 3:6.0.6-5 identical to 3:6.0.6-1 first. You can just create 3:6.0.6-5, based on 3:6.0.6-1, with the changes for wheezy (and without other changes from 3:6.0.6-2, 3:6.0.6-3 and 3:6.0.6-4 that are not appropriate for wheezy). This version 3:6.0.6-5 should be uploaded to unstable. Hi, is there an ETA for that new upload? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hello Julien, Julien Cristau wrote on 2013-02-28 22:11: This version 3:6.0.6-5 should be uploaded to unstable. is there an ETA for that new upload? At first we need an updated version of capi4hylafax to solve one half of the problems between hylafax and capi4hylafax. This new version is already on mentors.d.o ready for wheezy: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=697733 And I have asked the release team for pre-approval: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699171 The next step is creating hylafax 6.0.6-5 as mentioned by Ivo De Decker. Should I already prepare these updated package of hylafax now? --- Have a nice day. Joachim (Germany) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130301080027.2fd6b...@jupiter.home
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi Joachim, On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 06:39:27PM +0100, Joachim Wiedorn wrote: As said I will try to update capi4hylafax because of this RC bug. If I can fix this RC in capi4hylafax, then I must move this bug to the capi4hylafax package before upload, right? You should file a separate unblock request for capi4hylafax, once it is in unstable (with the rc bug fix). There is no need to change the bugs before the upload. It might be best to revert all the changes in unstable (since -1) that are not suitable for wheezy, and try to get a version in unstable that fixes both RC bugs in a non-intrusive way (based on -1). That way, the package could be tested in unstable before it gets to wheezy. The changes that are in -2 could go to experimental for now. Which is the best way? a) create the updated version 3:6.0.6-5 which is the same as 3:6.0.6-1 and then create the next version 3:6.0.6-6 which all needed patches for Wheezy, or There is no need to create a 3:6.0.6-5 identical to 3:6.0.6-1 first. You can just create 3:6.0.6-5, based on 3:6.0.6-1, with the changes for wheezy (and without other changes from 3:6.0.6-2, 3:6.0.6-3 and 3:6.0.6-4 that are not appropriate for wheezy). This version 3:6.0.6-5 should be uploaded to unstable. After the wheeze release, you can upload a new version (which includes the changes from 3:6.0.6-4) to unstable. If you really want to upload such a version before the release, you can do that in experimental. b) create the updated version 4:6.0.6-1 which is the same as 3:6.0.6-1 and then create the next version 4:6.0.6-2 which all needed patches for Wheezy, or There is no need to increase the epoch here. c) create a special Wheezy version 3:6.0.6-2+deb7u1 with all needed patches for Wheezy. This wouldn't work, as you can't upload 3:6.0.6-2+deb7u1 to unstable, because unstable has 3:6.0.6-4, which is higher. What is your opinion? I would prefer way c). I think a (without a separate upload identical to 3:6.0.6-1) is the most obvious way. But in practice, any upload of hylafax to unstable that includes that necessary fixes (but no other changes) and that has a version higher than 3:6.0.6-4 will do :) Cheers, Ivo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130105231255.gc24...@ugent.be
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hello! Ivo De Decker wrote on 2012-12-22 22:35: As there is still an RC bug in sid, I don't think it makes sense to do a TPU upload for the other one now. I'm attaching the TPU fix for 682824 for reference. As said I will try to update capi4hylafax because of this RC bug. If I can fix this RC in capi4hylafax, then I must move this bug to the capi4hylafax package before upload, right? It might be best to revert all the changes in unstable (since -1) that are not suitable for wheezy, and try to get a version in unstable that fixes both RC bugs in a non-intrusive way (based on -1). That way, the package could be tested in unstable before it gets to wheezy. The changes that are in -2 could go to experimental for now. Which is the best way? a) create the updated version 3:6.0.6-5 which is the same as 3:6.0.6-1 and then create the next version 3:6.0.6-6 which all needed patches for Wheezy, or b) create the updated version 4:6.0.6-1 which is the same as 3:6.0.6-1 and then create the next version 4:6.0.6-2 which all needed patches for Wheezy, or c) create a special Wheezy version 3:6.0.6-2+deb7u1 with all needed patches for Wheezy. What is your opinion? I would prefer way c). --- Have a nice day. Joachim (Germany) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130103183927.33e1f...@jupiter.home
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 22:35:33 +0100, Ivo De Decker wrote: It might be best to revert all the changes in unstable (since -1) that are not suitable for wheezy, and try to get a version in unstable that fixes both RC bugs in a non-intrusive way (based on -1). That way, the package could be tested in unstable before it gets to wheezy. The changes that are in -2 could go to experimental for now. Agreed. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi, On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 12:18:43PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm --- 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2010-06-20 00:29:50.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2012-10-12 23:53:34.0 +0200 @@ -4,8 +4,9 @@ if [ $1 = purge ]; then [ -d /etc/hylafax ] rm -f /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax -if which ucf /dev/null 21; then - ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -fi +#rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax + +# clear and deregister config file out from ucf database +which ucf /dev/null ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes +which ucfr /dev/null ucfr --purge hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi might want an 'exit 0' here to make sure the script doesn't exit with an error if ucfr doesn't exist. diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/rules 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules --- 6.0.6-1/debian/rules2012-06-17 14:47:42.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules2012-10-13 00:08:17.0 +0200 @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@ do chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/$$i; done chmod 775 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax chmod 4777 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp + chmod og+t $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp Why a separate chmod call for the same directory? chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/dev chown uucp $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd chmod 600 $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd Probably because the first chmod has to be 1777, not 4777. I tried to create a new patch for a TPU version which fixes both issues. However, I ran into a few problems: After the changes in the patch from http://bugs.debian.org/685230#35, piuparts still complains about permissions on upgade from squeeze to wheezy. This is easy to fix with a chmod in the postinst (which is also in -4 in sid). With these changes, 682824 seems really fixed. The fix for 661482 is a different story. I don't see any fix for 661482 in the TPU patch. Looking at the version in sid, it seems piuparts still gives some errors, because hylafax-server changes the ownership of /var/spool/hylafax, which is also in capi4hylafax. I reopened 661482 in sid. As there is still an RC bug in sid, I don't think it makes sense to do a TPU upload for the other one now. I'm attaching the TPU fix for 682824 for reference. It might be best to revert all the changes in unstable (since -1) that are not suitable for wheezy, and try to get a version in unstable that fixes both RC bugs in a non-intrusive way (based on -1). That way, the package could be tested in unstable before it gets to wheezy. The changes that are in -2 could go to experimental for now. Cheers, Ivo diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog index 21112d9..797b0ff 100644 --- a/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,18 @@ +hylafax (3:6.0.6-2~wheezy1) UNRELEASED; urgency=high + + [ Giuseppe Sacco ] + * Added restricted deletion flag on tmp directory (Closes: #682824) + * Update postinst and postrm scripts for hylafax-client +TODO: doesn't really fix 661482 + + [ Ivo De Decker ] + * Fixes for wheezy. Thanks to Julien Cristau for the review: +Make sure hylafax-client.postrm exists successfully. +Use correct chmod call for /var/spool/hylafax/tmp. + * Also fix permissions for tmp dir on upgrade. + + -- Ivo De Decker ivo.dedec...@ugent.be Sat, 22 Dec 2012 20:33:42 +0100 + hylafax (3:6.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream relase. Converted to 6.0 branch instead of 6.1 since the diff --git a/debian/hylafax-client.postinst b/debian/hylafax-client.postinst index 4cf156e..c0043fd 100644 --- a/debian/hylafax-client.postinst +++ b/debian/hylafax-client.postinst @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ else ucf $newfile /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi +# register config file with package name to ucf +ucfr hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes + rm -f $newfile # diff --git a/debian/hylafax-client.postrm b/debian/hylafax-client.postrm index 80cde8b..582b5ca 100644 --- a/debian/hylafax-client.postrm +++ b/debian/hylafax-client.postrm @@ -4,8 +4,11 @@ if [ $1 = purge ]; then [ -d /etc/hylafax ] rm -f /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax -if which ucf /dev/null 21; then - ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -fi +#rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax + +# clear and deregister config file out from ucf database +which ucf /dev/null ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes +which ucfr /dev/null ucfr --purge hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi + +exit 0 diff --git a/debian/hylafax-server.postinst b/debian/hylafax-server.postinst index 2b88f0d..6500995 100644 --- a/debian/hylafax-server.postinst +++ b/debian/hylafax-server.postinst @@ -309,6 +309,12 @@
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 00:27:15 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco wrote: Hi Cyril and Julien, this a diff from the version currently sitting in testing (6.0.6-1) and a possible upload to t-p-u (6.0.6-2~wheezy1). As you may see, I limited all changes to what is strictly required in order to fix two really important bugs already corrected in unstable. If you approve this, then I will upload the packages to t-p-u. Sorry for the delay. diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/changelog 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/changelog --- 6.0.6-1/debian/changelog2012-06-20 09:19:56.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/changelog2012-10-13 00:12:55.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +hylafax (3:6.0.6-2~wheezy1) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=high + + * Added restricted deletion flag on tmp directory (Closes: #682824) + * Update postinst and postrm scripts for hylafax-client (Closes: #661482) + + -- Giuseppe Sacco eppes...@debian.org Fri, 12 Oct 2012 22:02:09 + + hylafax (3:6.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream relase. Converted to 6.0 branch instead of 6.1 since the diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst --- 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 2012-01-16 09:31:30.0 +0100 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 2012-10-12 23:55:15.0 +0200 @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ ucf $newfile /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi +# register config file with package name to ucf +ucfr hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes + rm -f $newfile # diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm --- 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2010-06-20 00:29:50.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2012-10-12 23:53:34.0 +0200 @@ -4,8 +4,9 @@ if [ $1 = purge ]; then [ -d /etc/hylafax ] rm -f /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax -if which ucf /dev/null 21; then - ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -fi +#rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax + +# clear and deregister config file out from ucf database +which ucf /dev/null ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes +which ucfr /dev/null ucfr --purge hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi might want an 'exit 0' here to make sure the script doesn't exit with an error if ucfr doesn't exist. diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/rules 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules --- 6.0.6-1/debian/rules2012-06-17 14:47:42.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules2012-10-13 00:08:17.0 +0200 @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@ do chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/$$i; done chmod 775 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax chmod 4777 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp + chmod og+t $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp Why a separate chmod call for the same directory? chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/dev chown uucp $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd chmod 600 $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi Cyril and Julien, this a diff from the version currently sitting in testing (6.0.6-1) and a possible upload to t-p-u (6.0.6-2~wheezy1). As you may see, I limited all changes to what is strictly required in order to fix two really important bugs already corrected in unstable. If you approve this, then I will upload the packages to t-p-u. Thanks, Giuseppe diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/changelog 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/changelog --- 6.0.6-1/debian/changelog2012-06-20 09:19:56.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/changelog2012-10-13 00:12:55.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +hylafax (3:6.0.6-2~wheezy1) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=high + + * Added restricted deletion flag on tmp directory (Closes: #682824) + * Update postinst and postrm scripts for hylafax-client (Closes: #661482) + + -- Giuseppe Sacco eppes...@debian.org Fri, 12 Oct 2012 22:02:09 + + hylafax (3:6.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream relase. Converted to 6.0 branch instead of 6.1 since the diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst --- 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 2012-01-16 09:31:30.0 +0100 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postinst 2012-10-12 23:55:15.0 +0200 @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ ucf $newfile /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi +# register config file with package name to ucf +ucfr hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes + rm -f $newfile # diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm --- 6.0.6-1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2010-06-20 00:29:50.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/hylafax-client.postrm2012-10-12 23:53:34.0 +0200 @@ -4,8 +4,9 @@ if [ $1 = purge ]; then [ -d /etc/hylafax ] rm -f /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax -if which ucf /dev/null 21; then - ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes -fi +#rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty /etc/hylafax + +# clear and deregister config file out from ucf database +which ucf /dev/null ucf --purge /etc/hylafax/pagesizes +which ucfr /dev/null ucfr --purge hylafax-client /etc/hylafax/pagesizes fi diff -ruN 6.0.6-1/debian/rules 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules --- 6.0.6-1/debian/rules2012-06-17 14:47:42.0 +0200 +++ 6.0.6-2~wheezy1/debian/rules2012-10-13 00:08:17.0 +0200 @@ -224,6 +224,7 @@ do chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/$$i; done chmod 775 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax chmod 4777 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp + chmod og+t $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/tmp chmod 755 $(d_server)/var/spool/hylafax/dev chown uucp $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd chmod 600 $(d_server)/etc/hylafax/hosts.hfaxd signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Il giorno lun, 01/10/2012 alle 10.23 +0200, Julien Cristau ha scritto: [...] The BTS thinks #661482 and #682824 are RC bugs affecting the version in testing. You are right, I am going to prepare and updated package during this weekend. Thanks, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1349348459.7256.33.camel@scarafaggio
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hi Julien, could you please explain why you would remove hylafax from wheezy (I am probably missing something here)? Isn't the package currently in testing good enough? All RC bugs have been already solved. If you think it is compulsory to fix these bugs on the wheezy version, than I may prepare an upload as suggested by Cyril. Bye, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1349077190.20698.6.camel@scarafaggio
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 09:39:50 +0200, Giuseppe Sacco wrote: Hi Julien, could you please explain why you would remove hylafax from wheezy (I am probably missing something here)? Isn't the package currently in testing good enough? All RC bugs have been already solved. If you think it is compulsory to fix these bugs on the wheezy version, than I may prepare an upload as suggested by Cyril. The BTS thinks #661482 and #682824 are RC bugs affecting the version in testing. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121001082345.gb5...@coloquinte.cristau.org
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 00:44:03 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Hello Giuseppe, Giuseppe Sacco giuse...@eppesuigoccas.homedns.org (18/08/2012): during last month there were one seriuos and one grave bugs against hylafax. Both of them have been fixed almost three weeks ago while upting the package with some changes due to better use debconf. The list of diff is not that long, and is restricted to the debian/ directory. Could you please unblock hylafax? I'm afraid a rewritten packaging isn't something we're going to unblock, especially when moving things from dh_installdirs to *.dirs is noisy, when the debhelper build-dep is bumped, but not the compat level (it was set to 9 already, oops), when the Build-Depends gets wrapped, making it harder to spot what changed, etc. Could we see what the actual changes to the package currently in testing would be, to get the bugs fixed, with no unrelated changes? From there, we might consider an upload to t-p-u? Ping. With no answer we'll need to remove the package from wheezy. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Hello Giuseppe, Giuseppe Sacco giuse...@eppesuigoccas.homedns.org (18/08/2012): during last month there were one seriuos and one grave bugs against hylafax. Both of them have been fixed almost three weeks ago while upting the package with some changes due to better use debconf. The list of diff is not that long, and is restricted to the debian/ directory. Could you please unblock hylafax? I'm afraid a rewritten packaging isn't something we're going to unblock, especially when moving things from dh_installdirs to *.dirs is noisy, when the debhelper build-dep is bumped, but not the compat level (it was set to 9 already, oops), when the Build-Depends gets wrapped, making it harder to spot what changed, etc. Could we see what the actual changes to the package currently in testing would be, to get the bugs fixed, with no unrelated changes? From there, we might consider an upload to t-p-u? Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#685230: unblock hylafax 3:6.0.6-4
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi, during last month there were one seriuos and one grave bugs against hylafax. Both of them have been fixed almost three weeks ago while upting the package with some changes due to better use debconf. The list of diff is not that long, and is restricted to the debian/ directory. Could you please unblock hylafax? I thank you very much, Giuseppe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1345298228.9345.6.camel@scarafaggio
