Re: Next version of libtemplates-parser in Debian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Le 21/05/2011 15:37, Pascal Obry a écrit :
>
> Ludocic,
>
>> - repackage 11.5 with a new aliversion number (you can disconnect this
>> new aliversion from the upstream version number:
>> libtemplates-parser12-dev)
>> - wait for a new upstream version
>>
>> Pascal, I see you have made some minor changes to Templates Parser
>> since 11.5; would it be a problem for you to tag the latest revision
>> and officially release it as e.g. 11.6? [Context: Xavier is starting
>> to migrate Debian packages to gnat-4.6]
>
> Ok, I've just created the v11.6.0 tag (current master in the git
> repository). Note that the branch/tag nomenclature has changed a bit
> since the move to Git.
>
> Note also that AWS master is also now pointing to this version of the
> template-parser submodule. Let me know if something not clear.
I have build a 4.1 libxmlada and a 11.6 libtemplates-parser.
No lintian problems with libxmlada but I get this one with
libtemplates-parser :
W: libtemplates-parser11.6: shlib-with-executable-stack
usr/lib/libtemplates_parser.so.11.6
N:
N: The listed shared libraries declares the stack as executable.
N:
N: Executable stack is usually an error as it is only needed if the code
N: contains GCC trampolines or similar constructs which uses code on the
N: stack. One possible source for false positives are object files built
N: from assembler files which don't define a proper .note.GNU-stack
N: section.
N:
N: To see the permissions on the stack, run readelf -l on the shared
N: library and look for the program header of type GNU_STACK. In the flag
N: column, there should not be an E flag set.
N:
N: Severity: normal, Certainty: possible
N:
Any idea how to fix/solve this ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk3afb8ACgkQVIZi0A5BZF6ZUgCgsrkwTo92rkSdCXeRfkt36baz
pQoAoJvjB/S5n5RammUeZBBThGCpd507
=PDtL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: