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

Installed setserial 2.15-9 (source i386)



Installed:
setserial_2.15-9_i386.deb
  to dists/potato/main/binary-i386/base/setserial_2.15-9.deb
  replacing setserial_2.15-8.deb
setserial_2.15-9.diff.gz
  to dists/potato/main/source/base/setserial_2.15-9.diff.gz
  replacing setserial_2.15-8.diff.gz
setserial_2.15-9.dsc
  to dists/potato/main/source/base/setserial_2.15-9.dsc
  replacing setserial_2.15-8.dsc


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Format: 1.6
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 10:25:00 +0100
Source: setserial
Binary: setserial
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.15-9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Gordon Russell <g.russell@dcs.napier.ac.uk>
Description: 
 setserial  - Controls configuration of serial ports.
Closes: 40051 40957 40964 40965 40993
Changes: 
 setserial (2.15-9) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * The bug reports are starting to back up now. Sorry for any delay.
     This release is more experimental than usual. PCMCIA users please
     investigate with a little caution. The routines which protected you
     have been removed from the control script and put into the C code.
   * The patch to make compilation on sparcs and alphas was not applied
     correctly. It was broken anyway. I have now read the manual on autoconf
     and fixed it. Hope this is better for everyone...
     (closes: #40051)
   * setserial does not check for the existence of update-modules - I use
     this in the postinst file, to support module loading and unloading from
     the kernel. Although modutils is "required", and thus I should not have
     to worry about it not being there, in truth if the serial module is
     hardwired in the kernel, then it will never be unloaded, and thus I
     do not really need modutils. So I will agree with the bug submitter, and
     ignore its absence if that is the case.
     (closes: #40957)
   * In the postinst file for i386, I talk about saving when you "logout". I
     really ment to say "shutdown or halt your machine".
     (closes: #40993)
   * Apparently the setserial as supplied from upstream does not AUTOSAVE
     all the needed information to make a successful reload of all useful data.
     I have edited the setserial.c code to do it properly, and send the changes
     upstream.
     A moan about the size of the /etc/init.d/setserial file was present.
     Personally I don't see why it matters, but I have recoded much of the
     code in c and put it into the executable. Again I will forward the
     changes upstream. Of course, this is likely to produce even more bug
     reports...
     Please try to put only one bug in each report. This one griped about a few
     things, which makes it hard to close. However, everything else is really
     wishlist stuff so I am making the bold step of closing it anyway. If people
     are unhappy they should resubmit the bugs seperately...
     The additional problems were:
        o manual page does not contain some useful information which is only
          found in the docs - wishlist stuff, and maintaining a changed manual
          page when the upstream maintainer changes is frequently is not my
          idea of fun.
        o complaint that if root sets the wrong configuration on the serial
          ports, shutdowns and then reboots, then wrong configuration is still
          there - root is a dangerous user and I don't know what to do to make
          it safer!
     (closes: #40964, #40965) (duplicated reports)
Files: 
 6e0a6d876ac5a6e2dd1b9bdd03b02832 636 base required setserial_2.15-9.dsc
 7f2a89a57761352ac297e6fc5bbfb8a2 18753 base required setserial_2.15-9.diff.gz
 bf0807d154307815949acbb53f4ef18a 29906 base required setserial_2.15-9_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBN4xoPBxn498MyaYJAQG2GAQAgWOzce7EtmRPYCdkHJdKn6HrDlBfg025
Fe36ddT0/NSONrmY0bKjZXDGJ5L5iCClIHvEr1rgrJf19HxZRZ5DisPipeESVPlV
g8xlvIZNyZzwmzFkwpXTZ/NRkEwKBakJIgjyk7ubgM3RP4oEXjsKpqDPr9OlFZJJ
oTM8Zjcz/dM=
=nME2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: