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

Bug#1077117: marked as done (slime: needs rebuild against dh-elpa >=2.1.5)

Your message dated Fri, 26 Jul 2024 08:57:33 +0000
with message-id <E1sXGlZ-003iPw-Mc@fasolo.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#1077117: fixed in slime 2:2.30+dfsg-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #1077117,
regarding slime: needs rebuild against dh-elpa >=2.1.5
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1077117: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077117
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: slime
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
User: debian-emacsen@lists.debian.org
Usertags: dh-elpa-2.1.5-rebuilds

Dear maintainer,

This package needs a no-change upload to rebuild it against dh-elpa
>=2.1.5.  This is because binNMUs cannot be used to rebuild arch:all
packages.

The update is needed to resolve a problem for users upgrading between
stable releases.  In some circumstances, old .elc files can be left
behind, and Emacs will try to load them.  In the best case there will
be warnings that the .el file cannot be found, so the .eln file cannot
be produced.  In the worst case the package could break.

This is an RC bug because it's a Policy violation to leave the files
behind upon removal of the old version.

Please do something like this:

      % dch Rebuild against newer dh-elpa.
      % dch -r
      % git commit debian/changelog -mchangelog

and upload.

Thanks.
-- 
Sean Whitton

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: slime
Source-Version: 2:2.30+dfsg-2
Done: David Bremner <bremner@debian.org>

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
slime, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.

A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 1077117@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
David Bremner <bremner@debian.org> (supplier of updated slime package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 16:30:54 +0900
Source: slime
Architecture: source
Version: 2:2.30+dfsg-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Common Lisp Team <debian-common-lisp@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: David Bremner <bremner@debian.org>
Closes: 1077117
Changes:
 slime (2:2.30+dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Rebuild against dh-elpa 2.1.5, thanks to spwhitton@spwhitton.name
     (Closes: #1077117)
   * Add myself to uploaders.
Checksums-Sha1:
 68b1af652afb181ac64f261f4a2e8463d72a5171 2363 slime_2.30+dfsg-2.dsc
 8a82fca6bc74d16604279978be2af5cf731b98e3 19192 slime_2.30+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz
Checksums-Sha256:
 333fc074b0fb721d8282ad9eb5c307eae743a4730b4cc548a97086ade41a20ab 2363 slime_2.30+dfsg-2.dsc
 ca931c458460cfa3fb5d5d93e608d1047f262e779c49910c2383c45d778628dd 19192 slime_2.30+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz
Files:
 ce1f8448d5a0b8fd81dd942d5f8c4129 2363 lisp optional slime_2.30+dfsg-2.dsc
 8693695e235fc23821eb8fd54f874d4b 19192 lisp optional slime_2.30+dfsg-2.debian.tar.xz

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=v+ez
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: pgp4a8IUmy1kS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: