On 12 Aug 2020, at 20:16, Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 8:04 PM Sudip Mukherjee > <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:54 PM Jessica Clarke <jrt...@debian.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 12 Aug 2020, at 19:51, Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> HI Jess, >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:21 PM Jessica Clarke <jrt...@debian.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 12 Aug 2020, at 19:15, Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Control: tags 957380 + patch >>>>>> Control: tags 957380 + pending >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear maintainer, >>>>>> >>>>>> I've prepared an NMU for istgt (versioned as 0.4~20111008-3.1) and >>>>>> uploaded it to DELAYED/2. Please feel free to tell me if I >>>>>> should cancel it. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, I've been meaning to do this but it's just not a high enough >>>>> priority for me. Could you please however use `typedef` instead, as I >>>>> believe the intent of the code (based on how these ones are written, >>>>> and what's around it) is to have `ISTGT_LU_TASK_TYPE` be the type name, >>>>> not `enum ISTGT_LU_TASK_TYPE`? Would you also be willing to file it as >>>>> a merge request against https://salsa.debian.org/bsd-team/istgt? > > https://salsa.debian.org/bsd-team/istgt has UNRELEASED changes and the > version is 0.5~20120901-1 there. But since there is no pristine-tar or > upstream branch, I am unable to generate > istgt_0.5~20120901.orig.tar.gz to build and test with the proposed > patch.
Ah, yes and that 0.5 work looks half-baked. I've created a new 0.5 feature branch for that and rewound master (yes, bad practice, I know, but I highly doubt anyone else has a clone) to the 0.4~20111008-3 release so you should be good to use it as-is now. Jess
