Hello!
> > Please unblock package galera-4 to fix MariaDB upgrade as reported in
> > #988089.
>
> I appreciate a fix for that bug, but did you really have to do that by
> uploading a new upstream release too? How is the new upstream release
> related to that bug?
Yes, the upstream package is a m
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: buster
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
I propose that the latest version of MariaDB 10.3.30 would be included
in the upcoming stable release update of Debian. Package is ready at
https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mari
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package galera-3 to allow new upstream maintenance
release into Bullseye.
unblock: galera-3/25.3.33-1
[ Motivation ]
The new upstream version 25.3.33 is a maintenance relea
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package mariadb-10.5 to allow new upstream maintenance
release into Bullseye.
[ Motivation ]
The new upstream version 10.5.11 is a maintenance release that only
fixes bugs.
Control: retitle -1 buster-pu: package mariadb-10.3 10.3.31-0+deb10u1
New MariaDB 10.3.31 is out and it is also a security update. I'll take
this with the sec team since stable updates are not on the horizon
according to release.debian.org.
latest version to Bullseye is important as the upstream
bugs might cause data loss or data to drift in the Galera cluster.
Changelog:
galera-4 (26.4.9-0+deb11u1) bullseye; urgency=medium
[ Otto Kekäläinen ]
* New upstream release 26.4.9. Includes multiple bug fixes, see
https://github.com
Hello!
I uploaded this now: mariadb-10.3_10.3.31-0+deb10u1_source.changes
ACCEPTED into oldstable-proposed-updates->oldstable-new
Uploading without prior permissions is allowed according to
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2018/04/msg7.html
I will do the same for MariaDB 10.5 a
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: buster
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
I propose that the latest version of MariaDB 10.3 (includes security
fixes) would be included in the upcoming stable release update of
Debian. Package is almost ready at
https://sals
There hasn't been any responses from release team to
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=988255 in the past
week nor is there a release date for Debian 10.10 at
https://release.debian.org/
If the security team wants I can also target this as a security update
for Debian Buster?
- Ot
* Drop MIPS and libatomic patches applied now upstream
* Upstream issue MDEV-25114 about Galera WSREP invalid state
fixed (Closes: #989898)
-- Otto Kekäläinen Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:26:21 -0800
-35604
* Drop MIPS and libatomic patches applied now upstream
-- Otto Kekäläinen Sat, 20 Nov 2021 12:53:28 -0800
> > mariadb-10.5 (1:10.5.13-0+deb11u1) bullseye; urgency=medium
> >
> >* New upstream version 10.5.13. Includes security fixes for:
> > - CVE-2021-35604
> >* Drop MIPS and libatomic patches applied now upstream
> >
> > -- Otto Kekäläinen
> > Before I submit the final debdiff and changelog I will wait for the
> > release date to show up at https://release.debian.org/
>
> Why? The longer you wait, the fewer changes you have to actually get the
> update
> into the next point release. It'd be better to send those debdiffs early and
>
> On Fri, 2021-11-26 at 22:32 -0800, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > Thanks Paul for the schedule update. Maybe link those emails from
> > release.debian.org so that they are easy to find in the future..?
> >
The current text on https://release.debian.org/ is good, helps a lot
in
MariaDB 10.6.5 has been uploaded to Sid and will replace 10.5 as soon as it
has the initial bugs weeded out and is same or better overall quality as
10.5.
> When we were faced with a similar situation for 10.3 last year, we
> decided to proceed anyway as 10.5 was about to become the default
> version and 10.3 was then removed from unstable shortly afterwards.
True
> Looking at the current status of the 10.6 packages in unstable, it
> doesn't seem l
Hey,
Next MariaDB for Bullseye release tracked in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000342
Status: the stable release team decided not to release the latest
MariaDB 10.5.13 even though it was prepared and uploaded for Bullseye.
Apparently on the grounds that Debian testing does n
Hi!
> Yes, please fix the situation in unstable/testing. It looks like 10.6
> isn't migrating because your reverse depends need fixing first (did you
> report that to the maintainers?); having 10.6 migrate would ease the
> situation a bit because then we can just remove 10.5. I think it would
Wai
Package: release.debian.org
Currently mariadb-10.6 is blocked from migrating to testing due to
test failure in ruby-mysql2/0.5.3-3
Please consider adding a migration hint[1, 2] like:
force-skiptest ruby-mysql2/0.5.3-3
We are currently waiting for upstream ruby-mysql2 to make a new
release 0.5.4
> > According to https://release.debian.org/ the next stable update is
> > due
> > in February. Please include this update to MariaDB.
> >
>
> That was the plan, yes. As you probably noticed, we're a little behind
> schedule
That's fine as long as it is just about a couple of weeks, and not
long e
/codership/documentation/blob/master/release-notes/release-notes-galera-25.3.35.txt
-- Otto Kekäläinen Wed, 02 Mar 2022 21:39:54 -0800
Debdiff attached. Created with commands:
git diff --stat debian/25.3.34-0+deb11u1..bullseye | xz >
25.3.36-0+deb11u1.debdiff.stat.xz
git diff debian/25.3.3
/codership/documentation/blob/master/release-notes/release-notes-galera-26.4.10.txt
-- Otto Kekäläinen Wed, 02 Mar 2022 21:26:00 -0800
Debdiff attached. Created with commands:
git diff --stat debian/26.4.9-0+deb11u1..bullseye | xz >
26.4.11-0+deb11u1.debdiff.stat.xz
git diff debian/26.4.
Hi Adam!
Could you please also approve upload of galera-4 and galera-3 to
Bullseye stable updates?
Thanks
Hi!
On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 4:09 AM Paul Gevers wrote:
..
> 2023-01-12 - Milestone 1 - Transition and toolchain freeze
> 2023-02-12 - Milestone 2 - Soft Freeze
> 2023-03-12 - Milestone 3 - Hard Freeze - for key packages and
> packages without autopkg
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Control: affects -1 + src:mariadb
Please unblock package mariadb (=10.11), so it can be included in
Debian Bookworm instead of previous mariadb-10.6 (=10.6).
[ Reason ]
MariaDB 10.11 is t
Can I proceed to upload MariaDB 10.5.19 to proposed stable updates?
Control: retitle -1 unblock: mariadb/1:10.11.2-1
MariaDB Foundation just announced 10.11.2 GA, so I uploaded 10.11.2 so
that Bookworm users will get the latest version. The old version
10.11.1-5 had been in unstable for only 1-2 days, so this move delayed
the process by 1-2 days as 'days in unstab
> On my daily updated system, I today saw this:
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>libdbd-mariadb-perl
> The following packages have been kept back:
>mariadb-server
> The following packages will be upgraded:
>chromium chromium-common chromium-driver chromium-sandbox
> glib
> On Fri, 2023-02-17 at 08:00 -0800, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > Can I proceed to upload MariaDB 10.5.19 to proposed stable updates?
>
> A week's a little early for a personal poke...
Page https://release.debian.org/ said mid-February so I was worried I
would miss the window
Hi!
Based on
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=mariadb-server&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all
this 10.5.19-0+deb11u1 is still pending and a stable update of Debian
11 "Bullseye" has not yet been made in March 2023?
Is it OK if I merge in one regression fix and upload a new version?
h
elog[4]:
mariadb (1:10.11.2-2) unstable; urgency=medium
.
[ Otto Kekäläinen ]
* SUMMARY: This version has a lot of bug fixes, quality fixes, documentation
and translation updates and it is tailored for the Debian 12 "Bookworm"
release and all potentially functional
debian/25.3.25-2..debian/25.3.26-1 | xz >
galera-3_25.3.26-1.debdiff.gz).
Changelog:
galera-3 (25.3.26-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* New upstream version 25.3.26
-- Otto Kekäläinen Tue, 23 Apr 2019 13:23:35 +0300
galera-3_25.3.26-1.debdiff.gz
Description: application/gzip
-27449
- CVE-2022-27451
- CVE-2022-27452
- CVE-2022-27455
- CVE-2022-27456
- CVE-2022-27457
- CVE-2022-27458
- CVE-2022-32083
- CVE-2022-32085
- CVE-2022-32086
- CVE-2022-32087
- CVE-2022-32088
-- Otto Kekäläinen Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:33:01 -0800
version 10.3.37.
-- Otto Kekäläinen Fri, 11 Nov 2022 20:54:48 -0800
This release does not (at least not yet) have any CVE tracked vulnerabilities.
I realize you might not be interested to include this in a LTS release
if there are no critical fixes to point out, but I decided to file
this
Page https://release.debian.org/ says next stable update is mid-late
November. Are you OK if I upload this to bullseye?
- Otto
Hi Emilio!
I didn't get a reply to this, so asking again.
On Sun, 20 Nov 2022 at 17:57, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>
> Hello Emilio!
>
> MariaDB 1:10.3.37-0+deb10u1 is ready for upload at
> https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.3/-/commits/buster
>
> Do yo
> I assume there are no other changes in the new releases that might be
> relevant / interesting to users (and thus worthy of mentioning in the
> changelog)?
Misc bugfixes but nothing special to highlight, and nothing that is
known to fix any of the 5 bugs tracked at bugs.debian.org for
mariadb-10
On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 at 01:18, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
>
> Hi Otto,
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 5:33 AM Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > I didn't get a reply to this, so asking again.
>
> I could take care of the upload but if you'd like to do that, please
> feel fre
ma 29. heinäk. 2019 klo 10.39 Andrey Rahmatullin (w...@debian.org) kirjoitti:
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:36:57AM +0200, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > > librsync2 is available in unstable, please binNMU burp, csync2 and
> > > duplicity.
> > >
> > > From h
ma 29. heinäk. 2019 klo 10.25 Andrey Rahmatullin (w...@debian.org) kirjoitti:
>
> librsync2 is available in unstable, please binNMU burp, csync2 and
> duplicity.
>
> From https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/07/msg00093.html I guess
> Otto (Cced) is interested in keeping rdiff-backup? In tha
Turns out I had some extra time for this flying back from DebConf and it
needed changes to only one file for this, so new rdiff-backup with
librsync2 was uploaded yesterday...
loses: #928758)
-- Otto Kekäläinen Fri, 02 Aug 2019 18:10:23 +0100
:
- CVE-2019-2737
- CVE-2019-2739
- CVE-2019-2740
- CVE-2019-2758
- CVE-2019-2805
* Multiple Gitlab-CI/Salsa-CI improvements
* Update libmariadb3 symbols to match MariaDB Connector C 3.1 API
* Add Lintian override for new test binary wsrep_check_version
-- Otto Kekäläinen Fri
commit b7529cdcab61f416e3fc003e42c50153475f1bd1 (HEAD -> buster, origin/buster)
Author: Otto Kekäläinen
Date: Tue Aug 27 23:52:54 2019 +0200
Amend changelog to surely include all changes since 1:10.3.15-1
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 80556fc88..c0dfdf308 100
> The cross-build changes aren't really appropriate for stable, but I'm
> going to ACK the whole and hope it works out.
Thanks!
All fixes are related to critical bugs or build failures, but true,
cross-build problems are not actually that relevant build problems. It
would be a pity to not have He
la 14. syysk. 2019 klo 16.57 Adam D. Barratt
(a...@adam-barratt.org.uk) kirjoitti:
>
> On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 21:10 +0300, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > To clarify, 10.3.18 has been uploaded to Debian unstable. Issue is
> > still open for Buster and Stretch.
>
> Is there a
> [For reference, X-Debbugs-Cc is generally better than your mail client's
> CC when submitting bugs, as it means the recipient gets the mail from
> the BTS with the bug number included]
[rant] I'll try to remember, but this UI that is based on me
remembering all the option names and syntaxes (or
> Some poking around on Github suggests that the fix is
> https://github.com/MariaDB/server/commit/47f8a18fec604983e47fdf7c822d94b26d85cade
>
> If this is actively breaking systems, couldn't we simply apply that
> patch to the current versions in stretch and buster, as a least-change
> option?
We
Hello!
MariaDB 10.3.20 is already out and I am in the process of preparing it..
Hello!
I kindly ask assistance from the Debian release team what to do about
MariaDB 10.5.
I have been working on MariaDB 10.5 packaging since August[1] and I've
had it in unstable since early September[2]. It is currently however
stuck on two migration excuses:
1) Builds on armhf stopped workin
Hello!
> > 1) Builds on armhf stopped working earlier this month due to compiler
> > bug #972564, perhaps in cmake or gcc. Upstream gcc has confirmed at
> > least one issue. There is no schedule on when it will be fixed and
> > there is nothing to my knowledge that I could reasonably do about
> >
Hello!
> To start with item 2:
>
> > 2) autopkgtest for mariadb-10.3/1:10.3.24-2 fail on i386 (and armhf
> > when it build earlier this month). The test is installing
> > "mariadb-server" which in unstable pulls in mariadb-10.5. I silenced
> > this false positive (or indifferent failure of access
Hello!
> Could you please add some whitelist/override for debci so that at
> least the issue of "autopkgtest for mariadb-10.3/1:10.3.24-2" failing
> would go away [...]
I see you did this in https://release.debian.org/britney/hints/elbrus, thanks!
We also found a hack to get around the amrhf bui
> https://release.debian.org/britney/update_output.txt.gz says this;
>
> trying: mariadb-10.5
> skipped: mariadb-10.5 (1, 0, 30)
> got: 31+0: a-1:a-27:a-1:a-0:i-0:m-0:m-0:p-0:s-2
> * s390x: libmariadbclient-dev
>
> So, migrating mariadb-10.5 to testing would make libmariadbclient-dev
> non-
> If you want to keep src:mariadb-10.3 around, one or the other. Or you
> could upload a new version of mariadb-10.3 which drops the package.
Ok, I will upload a new 10.3. I want it to stay around for a bit more
until the transition of 10.5 is fully completed and verified to
replace 10.3 in full.
Hello!
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 at 21:08, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
..
> I see there's a mariadb-10.3 update in experimental (for 10.3.27).
> Based on the above, I assume that an upload to unstable is also
> planned?
No, that was an experiment which turned out to be a very stupid one
and I will no pursu
> Well, my point was more that we already have buster > unstable, and
> that I was assuming you'd fix that by uploading a package to unstable,
> rather than an even newer package to buster. :-)
As MariaDB 10.5 is already in unstable, it is in practice impossible
to do any 10.3 uploads to unstable
adb-10.5
commits : 197
authors :
187 Otto Kekäläinen 94.9%
2 Christian Göttsche 1.0%
2 Helmut Grohne 1.0%
1 Aurelien Jarno 0.5%
1 Bastian Germann 0.5%
1 Christian Ehrhardt 0.5%
1 Daniel Black0.5%
1 Faustin Lammler 0.5%
> As previously discussed, as things stand, in order to include this
> update in the point release we will also need to copy it to testing and
> unstable either during, or before, the point release, to avoid version
> skew.
This is outside the domain of my expertise, but just to be sure: there
can
Ok, uploaded.
I don't guarantee that a machine currently running mariadb-server-10.3
and mariadb-server-10.3 binary packages in testing or unstable can
upgrade to the latest in Buster, since the Buster has been maintained
with upstream changes only, and the 10.3.x version in unstable has
also had
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo
Control: severity -1 normal
Based on #950309 security updates don't seem to warrant 'serious', so
dropping to 'normal'.
Also removing tag moreinfo that was inherited from a stable update bug
report template. apparently it is not part of the process.
Thanks for pointing out this mistake.
Unfortunately it was already uploaded. There are frequently releases to
unstable/testing so I don't expect this to cause any bigger problems.
Past and future changelog entries will not have this mistake.
https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.3/blob
Ok, I will amend the changelog and re-upload today 1:10.3.22-0... to buster
updates.
> tail: cannot open '/home/debci/.kodi/temp/kodi.log' for reading: No such file
> or directory
> tail: no files remaining
This is the only output in the test log, otherwise it is installing
packages and everything else seemed to go fine.
Test source says it just starts the app, but now it does n
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo
> Tagging your bug "moreinfo" means that it's not ready for processing by
> SRM. Is that what you intended?
Thanks for a quick response. I just copied the previous stable update
email I've sent without realizing that it wasn't directly suited.
Sorry for the mistakes.
T
For unstable the plan is to upload MariaDB 10.5 soon, and therefore
uploads of MariaDB 10.3 are already discontinued. Since we already
have MariaDB 10.4 in Debian experimental, it is not even possible to
do any uploads of MariaDB 10.3 because of triggering the NEW queue and
version conflicts/downgr
Hi!
su 5. heinäk. 2020 klo 14.24 Adam D. Barratt
kirjoitti:
> On Sun, 2020-07-05 at 11:00 +0300, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > For unstable the plan is to upload MariaDB 10.5 soon, and therefore
> > uploads of MariaDB 10.3 are already discontinued.
>
> How soon is "soon&q
.
-- Otto Kekäläinen Sat, 04 Jul 2020 15:31:51 +0300
Since the amendment is so small I will not attach a new debdiff.
Latest source always visible at
https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.3/-/tree/buster
2016-09-12 15:16 GMT+03:00 Adam D. Barratt :
> On 2016-09-11 14:41, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2016-09-10 at 14:42 +0300, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>>>
>>> The powerpc build of the security release 10.0.26-0+deb8u1 fails to
>>> build due to an upst
Hello!
MariaDB 10.2 is now in beta and about to be released in December.
Considering the announced freeze dates, is there something I should
consider before preparing and uploading mariadb-10.2 to replace
mariadb-10.0?
Can mariadb-10.0 to mariadb-10.2 upgrade be considered as a transition
and thu
Hello!
2016-10-17 22:01 GMT+03:00 Rene Engelhard :
> This means I'll orphan mysql-connector-c++ (well, remove myself from
> Uploaders:,
> which makes it having no Uploader at all). Dmitry, if you want/need it
> for mysql-connector-c++ feel free to add yourself and upload 1.1.7 to whatever
> you w
2016-10-18 11:38 GMT+03:00 Rene Engelhard :
> Simple: Because LO uses the C++ bindings and not the C bindings? If you
> mean why I don't build mysql-connector-c++ against mariadb, see my initial
> mail. Newer versions of it do not build with it. (the version in sid is
> ooold.)
MariaDB Connector C
Hello!
We have not filed a mass bug report against packages regarding
transitioning to default-mysql-*. Would you like to file it?
I made a Lintian rule that is now in use, but a mass bug filing would
speed things up.
ndant packages point of view, so I don't expect
any hickups during the upgrade.
2016-10-04 0:18 GMT+03:00 Otto Kekäläinen :
> Hello!
>
> MariaDB 10.2 is now in beta and about to be released in December.
> Considering the announced freeze dates, is there something I should
> cons
Hello release team!
The meeting minutes from last month gave me the impression that you
will eventually ask me to do something regarding MySQL/MariaDB:
http://meetbot.debian.net/debian-release/2016/debian-release.2016-01-27-18.59.html
"ACTION: jmw will mail release team and include pkg-mysql-main
Hello!
2016-03-23 23:44 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort :
> On 23/02/16 12:43, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>> Hello release team!
>>
>> The meeting minutes from last month gave me the impression that you
>> will eventually ask me to do something regarding MySQL/MariaDB:
&
Hello!
2016-03-23 23:44 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort :
> We decided to make mariadb the default provider. That would mean having
> mariadb
> as the default alternative in packages relationships, or have mariadb provide
> something à la default-mta. We'd also need a solution for libmysqlclient
2016-06-01 20:03 GMT+03:00 Andreas Beckmann :
>>> I have already documented it here:
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/MySQL/virtual-mysql-server
>>
>> Any progress on this? Have you already filed bugs?
>
> #815567 shows that virtual-mysql-server does not help with Build-Depends.
Yes, we started d
Hello!
What does the release team think of introducing new purely virtual
packages named default-mysq-*, which are provided only by mariadb-*
packages?
This is modeled after how default-jdk or default-mta works.
In code if would look like this:
https://github.com/ottok/mariadb-10.0/commit/e162c74
2016-07-02 17:53 GMT+03:00 Otto Kekäläinen :
> This is modeled after how default-jdk or default-mta works.
Actually default-jdk is a real metapackage, while default-mta is a
pure virtual package. I am not sure which way to pick here now.
https://packages.debian.org/jessie/default-mta
ht
Hello!
Report of status and request for comments from the release team
regarding the next steps:
2016-04-11 21:38 GMT+01:00 Otto Kekäläinen :
> 1. MariaDB as default
On the pkg-mysql-maint team we have discussed providing a new scheme
to complement the existing virtual-mysql-* scheme. We p
2016-07-05 12:41 GMT+03:00 Jonathan Wiltshire :
> I don't think I understand why you would have both virtual-mysql-* and
> default-mysql-* packages for dependencies (leaving aside build-deps). If a
> package requires one of the variants, it will need an explicit dependency.
> If it doesn't care, it
2016-07-05 19:52 GMT+03:00 Robie Basak :
> PROPOSAL B
The whole pkg-mysql-maint team is behind the proposal Robie now wrote
about. We have been discussing actively and engineering it during the
last two days. It was also one of the topics discussed at the
MariaDB/MySQL Bof at DebConf yesterday and
Hello!
Repositories at http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-mysql/ now contain
the changes we decided on earlier in the week and next we'll upload
them to experimental.
We plan to send the message below to debian-devel@ once we have out
new packages in experimental for general testing. Please let u
Hello maintainers of packages that depend in MySQL/MariaDB!
TL;DR;
We will soon ask you to change packages that depend on MySQL or
MariaDB as follows:
BEFORE: Build-Depends: libmysqlclient-dev
AFTER: Build-Depends: default-libmysqlclient-dev
BEFORE: Depends: mysql-server | virtual-mysql-server
Hello!
2016-08-16 7:44 GMT+03:00 Rene Engelhard :
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 05:22:22PM +0300, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>> Hello maintainers of packages that depend in MySQL/MariaDB!
>
> Not everyone is required to read -devel. Mailing them where they read
> it (and be it Cc&
Hello!
2016-09-05 9:57 GMT+03:00 Ondřej Surý :
> could you elaborate a bit more why you are forcing all Build-RDeps to
> change B-D to default-libmysqlclient-dev instead of just changing the
> semantics of libmysqlclient-dev?
>
> I understand the default-mysql-client and default-mysql-server, but
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: jessie
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
The powerpc build of the security release 10.0.26-0+deb8u1 fails to
build due to an upstream regression (see Bug#832931). This has been
fixed in 10.0.27, but as it is not a security
Hello!
2017-05-12 12:26 GMT+03:00 Ondřej Surý :
> Therefore I am proposing a one time fix specifically targeted at
> stretch. I would like to prepare 'mysql-transitional' package that will
> create a couple of dummy/transitional packages structured like this:
>
> mysql-server depends on default-my
Hello!
I prepared the MariaDB 10.0.36 at
https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.0
in case you want to upload it as a security update to oldstable.
- Otto
Hello!
su 26. elok. 2018 klo 10.47 Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk)
kirjoitti:
>
> On 2018-08-25 20:11, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > I prepared the MariaDB 10.0.36 at
> > https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.0
> > in case
Hello!
I just realized that the upload of mariadb-10.3 into Debian includes
the following transitions:
- libmariadbd18 -> libmariadbd19
- libmariadbclient18 becomes deprecated and fully replaced by the
libmariadb3 library already in Debian for a longer time (source
package mariadb-connector-c)
Te
ma 7. tammik. 2019 klo 11.20 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (po...@debian.org)
kirjoitti:
..
> https://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mariadb-10.3.html points to an autopkgtest
> failure on pam-mysql too, though that one doesn't seem to have a corresponding
> bug report yet.
That's right, there is no bug report
Hello!
ma 7. tammik. 2019 klo 10.38 Otto Kekäläinen (o...@debian.org) kirjoitti:
>
> ma 7. tammik. 2019 klo 11.20 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (po...@debian.org)
> kirjoitti:
> ..
> > https://packages.qa.debian.org/m/mariadb-10.3.html points to an autopkgtest
> > failure on pa
> Go ahead with that upload.
Done yesterday and builds went OK:
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/mariadb-10.3
Ironically we have a new regression now in the Perl module designed
for MariaDB (ibdbd-mariadb-perl/1.10-1): autopkgtests now fail
apparently because there is a ' character wrong in the tes
(Regarding https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=919395
and https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=919374)
One of the failures is due to not finding header file mysql_time.h
In Debian stable and testing the file
/usr/include/mysql/mysql_time.h is provided by libmariadbclien
-- Forwarded message -
From: Sergei Golubchik
Hi, Otto!
On Jan 15, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Introducing MariaDB 10.3 (and the libmaraidb3 it includes) changed
> somewhat how packages build compared to MariaB 10.1. In effect there
> are bunch of regre
possible to offer backwards
compatibility? How do you suggest this is resolved?
Below is the file listing I sent you on December 10th, which I did not
get much replies to. Maybe you want to re-review it and comment if
something is misplaced?
ti 11. jouluk. 2018 klo 10.38 Otto Kekäläinen (o...@deb
su 20. tammik. 2019 klo 1.44 Andreas Beckmann (a...@debian.org) kirjoitti:
>
> On 2019-01-19 21:14, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> > Getting back to the current case: I assume this is caused by
> > libmariadbclient-dev being turned into a virtual package provided by
> > libmariadb-dev. I'll test whether
2017-07-15 0:56 GMT+03:00 Ian Jackson :
...
> of the package. To clarify: the proposal is to upgrade from
> 10.1_10.1.23-9+deb9u1 to this 10.1.24-0+deb9u1.
>
> I wasn't able to find the upstream changelog in the source package.
> Admittedly I didn't look very hard - I eyeballed the source package.
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
