On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 06:46:49PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > Thank You! > > I have been effectively offline in a very unexpected fashion due to heavy > work load during the day, and broken equipment at night. I finally have my > hardware back together so I can do some development work, and when I went to > see the bug reports on my package, I found the bug and the NMU. > > Aside from the need to thank you for your help with my package when I was > not there to take care of it myself, > my main reason for this e-mail was to make sure that I accepted the NMU > properly. Some things have changed while I wasn't looking and I want to make > sure I do it right the first time. > > I saw in the change log that the nmu was noted with the closes: statement > inside parentheses. This is just some peoples' convention; other people don't use the parens.
> Is this what kept the bug from being closed? No. When the .changes "Changed-By" field matches neither the "Maintainer" field nor any of the comma-separate elements of the list of "Uploaders", dak considers it an NMU, and uses tag + fixed rather than mail to -done. > Can I complete this process with a 1.2-4 upload with a closes: in > the changelog? That is correct. A maintainer upload can either independently close the bug (probably based on the .diff prior to the NMU), acknowledge the NMU (typically with some entry like: Acknowledge NMU; closes: #123456), or *neither*. In the last case, now that the BTS implements version tracking, the bug will no longer be considered closed. (Amaya: do you know if this is really right? Will the bug get magically tag - fixed??) The initial version tracking announcement is at: http://ftp-master.debian.org/~ajt/version-tracking-announce which seems to imply that the existing use of "fixed" is basically obsolete. > One other thing, Why are there two changelogs, one named changelog and one > named changelog.orig that seem to both be identical? (I don't remember there > being two, but I'm getting old ;-) and don't trust my memory. Probably a mistake ... There is only one changelog in 1.2.2 in stable: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/spider/spider_1.2-2.diff.gz > >From the changes in the libraries that prompted this NMU it appears that I > will have to upgrade these libraries. Is there anything I should be aware of > when upgrading these guys? (i.e. is there one package that will pull in all > the rest, or should I explicitly install all the libraries in the depends. > (I just got this system back together, and I don't want to break it ;-) > > The system was tracking unstable until maybe 6 month ago, because I tend to > track unstable, I also tend to avoid a "dist-upgrade", so I probably have a > mix of packages. I've always just relied on apt-get to keep the dependencies > tied together. > > Once I get my system upgraded to the new libraries, I'll get this upload > done ASAP. It is important that uploads to unstable are always compiled on unstable, else dependencies (especially of libraries) will be wrong, and might inihibit transition propogation. You can use a chroot (like pbuilder or debootstrap) for this. The NMU diff does everything necessary for this transition; since xlibs-dev went away, each of the given replacement libraries must be listed in Depends; there is no longer a single dependency "metapackage". Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
