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

Re: Bug#835966: RM: polyorb -- RoQA; unmaintained, RC-buggy



Hi,

I can't upload anything any longer I'm sorry. And one have to be cautious with polyorb, compilation of the package doesn't mean it is functional. Polyorb version is linked to the compiler so may be it should be interesting to try to run the bank demo code.

Cordially, xavier

----- Mail original -----
De: "Svante Signell" <svante.signell@gmail.com>
À: "Mattia Rizzolo" <mattia@debian.org>
Cc: "xavier grave" <xavier.grave@csnsm.in2p3.fr>, 835966@bugs.debian.org, debian-ada@lists.debian.org
Envoyé: Dimanche 4 Septembre 2016 17:59:01
Objet: Re: Bug#835966: RM: polyorb -- RoQA; unmaintained, RC-buggy

Xavier: ping!

>From Aug 31:
> I don't see any activity going on this package, and it already has 2
> unaswered RC bugs (#790664 from half 2015).

On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 13:11 +0000, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 03:09:29PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 12:43 +0000, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 01:26:20PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  
> > > > With the attached patches polyorb builds fine with gcc-6/gnat-
> > > > 6. With these
> > > > patches all serious bugs are fixed.
> > > > 
> > > >   * Enable build with gnat-6: Closes #790664, #831255, #835966
> > > >     New debian patches: debian_control.patch,
> > > > debian_rules.patch,
> > > >     debian_patches_series.patch
> > > >     New source patches: src_csupport.c.patch,
> > > >     examples_corba_echo_echo-impl.adb.patch
> > > >     Modified patches: hardening.patch
> > > Do you mind uploading a fixed polyorb?  (a NMU, I suppose).
> > 
> > I'm not a DD/DM, so I need a sponsor for doing that.
> 
> Let's try to wait for Xavier to see whether he would be kind enough
> to
> upload your patches (or somebody else from debian-ada, I know nothing
> about ada, I'd prefer to see somebody from the team…), otherwise I am
> available to sponsor them.
>


Reply to: