On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 03:23:24PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 04:55:43PM -0400, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 10:46:48PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > > On freed 16 July 2010, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > > > I guess that only a manual build of a binNMU old scheme on hppa will
> > > > > save you from having a sourceful upload and rebuilds on all
> > > > > architectures. Probably the hppa buildd admins (in Cc) can help here?
> > > >
> > > > One issue is that any further updates to the package, either via
> > > > security or directly through p-u, will have the same problem.
> > > >
> > > > The hand-build will fix this particular instance but the source
> > > > versioning will need to be carefully chosen for any future update in
> > > > order to avoid the issue occurring again (-6.0.2 not being built from
> > > > the -6 source also rather violates the principle of least surprise.)
> > >
> > > Since the issue is still present I'll just make a new sourceful rebuild
> > > with a
> > > DSA -2 tomorrow.
> >
> > We'll need to uÃpdate libmikmodanyway, part of the original fix was wrong,
> > see the report from Tomas Hoger.
>
> great - fyi, I tried to do binNMUs, but I couldn't get the process
> right. I received rejections for not having the matching source in the
> archive (also tried adding versioned Source: entries for bin packages
> in the control file to no avail).
Ok. What version number should I use for the new upload so that it's
more recent than the misnamed hppa build?
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100727221523.ga16...@galadriel.inutil.org
