[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sources vs udeb mismatch in sarge



Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> cdebconf: udeb's are from 0.72, but in sarge is 0.74.
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge

I've been sorta planning to accept 0.74, since it's had a lot of testing
time. It does actually have some UI behavior change, so who knows if
this will end up confusing people.

> discover: udeb's are from 2.0.7-2, but in sarge is 2.0.7-2.1
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge (no
>      udeb-related changes anyway)
> evms: udeb's are from 2.5.1-1, sarge has 2.5.2-1
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge
> freetype: udeb's are from 2.1.7-2.3, sarge has 2.1.7-2.4
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge
> glib2.0: udeb's are from 2.4.8-1, sarge has 2.6.4-1
>  Ew... is it safe to have 2.6 udeb's in sarge? I hope so... Reverting
>    sarge to 2.4 is not possible (short of doing an epoch'd upload)
> hdparm: udeb's are from 5.9-4, sarge has 6.1-1
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge

None of these are actually used by the installer, so they all get
updated to match the debs whenever I or someone else wakes up and does
it.

> glibc: udeb's are from 2.3.2.ds1-20, sarge has 2.3.2.ds1-21
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge
> nano: udeb's are from 1.2.4-3, sarge has 1.2.4-5
>  Suggested resolution: accept the udeb's from sid into sarge

These and other frozen debs will have their udebs updated as the release
team accepts new versions.

> And these three packages have newer udeb's in sarge than there are
> sources for:
> 
> os-prober: udeb's are from 1.04, sarge has 1.03
>  Suggested resolution: Put 1.04 source package in sarge

If you can tell why my existing hint to do that on newraff failed..

> zlib: udeb's are from 1:1.2.2-4, sarge has 1:1.2.2-3
>  Suggested resolution: Freeze-exception for 1:1.2.2-4

I forget if d-i actually uses zlib udeb for anything. Given the small
changes in -4 from -3 and the long time it's sat in unstable I agree
this is better than a t-p-u upload.

> e2fsprogs: udeb's are from 1.35-8, but in sarge is 1.35-6
>  Suggested resolution: upload a 1.35-8sarge1 to
>    testing-proposed-updates, which is a version-only change w.r.t.
>    1.35-8
>  Backup resolution: get 1.35-8 unchanged as it used to be in unstable
>    into sarge (but this is slightly hacky, so not preferred from ftp
>    team perspective)

agreed.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: