Re: Bug#847575: closed by Hilko Bengen <bengen@debian.org> (no embedded dietlibc)
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: close -1
Control: reassign -2 release.debian.org
Control: severity -2 normal
Control: retitle -2 nmu: e2fsck-static
Control: tags -2 + jessie pending
On Tue, 2016-12-27 at 12:31 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> retitle -1 release.debian.org: binNMU for e2fsck-static to rebuild against latest dietlibc
> reassign -1 release.debian.org
> user release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> usertag -1 binnmu
> thanks
Thankfully none of that worked. I say thankfully, because you'd have
given release.d.o an allegedly RC bug (it may be RC for e2fsprogs, it's
certainly not so for release.d.o) and removed the original bug from
where it belongs. (The binNMU doesn't resolve the fact that the original
issue existed - and for some versions still exists - in e2fsprogs.)
> Agreed, that seems to be the best way to handle things. So that means
> we would need to do a binNMU for e2fsck-static/1.42.12-2 for the
> following architectures:
>
> alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 powerpc ppc64 s390 sparc
>
> I've reassigned this to the release team to see if the Stable Release
> Managers agree (which hopefully they will).
Only three of those architectures - amd64, i386 and powerpc - are in
stable so are the only ones that are relevant as far as the release.d.o
bug is concerned. I've scheduled binNMUs for those; you'll have to
handle the others separately, or explain which Debian architectures you
actually meant (for instance, "arm" hasn't been used as a Debian
architecture name for several releases now).
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: