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

Re: Bug#988814: unblock: gtk+2.0/2.24.33-2

Hi again,

Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> (2021-05-21):
> Paul Gevers <elbrus@debian.org> (2021-05-20):
> > Ok from my side. As this upload is to fix the d-i issue I'm pretty
> > sure that debian-boot is also fine, but I promised kibi this morning
> > that I'll follow the process and wait for an explicit ACK from their
> > side.
> Yes, please don't rush it into testing.
> I'm currently debugging a regression from bullseye that's seen with
> the combination of updated udebs from both cdebconf and gtk+2.0. After
> a few attempts, I'd say that's an issue with cdebconf, but I'd rather
> have that confirmed before we start getting packages into bullseye.
> (Basically we have the obvious benefits from no longer hanging, but
> also a buggy focus; I'll track this in a separate bug report once I
> know a little bit more, and loop Simon back in.)

OK, I think we're good now, the regression was detailed in:

and that was addressed thanks to a different approach in cdebconf
regarding the original bugfix (trying not to run into gtk+2.0's infinite
loop, which itself is avoided thanks to the gtk+2.0 patch, what a maze),
as discussed in:

Once cdebconf was updated with this new approach, I've tested d-i built
against unstable's udebs, and it seems to be working quite nicely, see
tests listed in this comment:

I'm happy to have gtk+2.0 migrate to testing as soon as seems reasonable
from the release team point of view. Ditto for cdebconf, but I can file
a separate request for that, as is customary for unblock requests.

Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org)            <https://debamax.com/>
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: