On 2 July 2013 10:56, Steve M. Robbins <st...@sumost.ca> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I'd like some more information regarding these two bugs, where Boost > has defined but not used a local typedef. > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 09:24:20AM +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote: >> severity 710210 serious >> severity 710211 serious > > So a "serious" bug is defined as: a severe violation of Debian policy > (roughly, it violates a "must" or "required" directive), or, in the > package maintainer's or release manager's opinion, makes the package > unsuitable for release. > > I looked through policy in vain for an applicable directive. Did you > have one in mind? If not, what is your rationale for this severity? >
I did not have a specific directive in mind. I was forwarding the severity of the blocked bug. Please consider the severity as you like. > I can guess you are concerned that this compiler warning causes a > build failure for other packages that treat errors as warnings. I > agree this is a nuisance and will endeavour to fix the issue. > Appreciated. Libraries should not be generating avoidable compiler warnings. Anyway, fixing in boost is certainly better than applying the workaround in multiple packages. Small patch is a plus. > However, in general I cannot agree that this alone makes it "serious". > The build failure is caused by the package using -Werror. An easy > workaround is to add -Wno-unused-local-typedef for those packages > using Boost and -Werror. > > Regards, > -Steve > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
