On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 09:04:24PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Iain, > > thanks for the patch, however db5.3 will be obsoleted by db6.0 (in NEW), so > this won't be fixed. > > Would it be possible for you to check if db6.0 is affected?
OK, thanks for the info. I checked it out of git and had a look and that part of the code is the same. The patch applies too, so I'm fairly confident it's still needed. The git repo for 6.0 is in a bit of a strange state so I didn't manage to get a source package out of it yet to do a build in order to confirm/deny this. (The 01_... patch appears to be applied but without .pc; after reverse applying I get ,---- | dpkg-source: info: building db6.0 using existing | ./db6.0_6.0.19.orig.tar.xz | patching file docs/api_reference/CXX/dbcursor.html | Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Skipping patch. | 1 out of 1 hunk ignored | patching file docs/api_reference/C/dbcursor.html | Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Skipping patch. | 1 out of 1 hunk ignored | dpkg-source: info: fuzz is not allowed when applying patches | dpkg-source: info: if patch '001-documentation_update.patch' is | correctly applied by quilt, use 'quilt refresh' to update it | dpkg-source: error: LC_ALL=C patch -t -F 0 -N -p1 -u -V never -g0 -E -b | -B .pc/001-documentation_update.patch/ --reject-file=- < | db6.0-6.0.19.orig.Jtpc7Z/debian/patches/001-documentation_update.patch | gave error exit status 1 `---- ) Cheers! -- Iain Lane [ [email protected] ] Debian Developer [ [email protected] ] Ubuntu Developer [ [email protected] ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
