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

Re: Bug#393411: Source package contains non-free IETF RFC/I-D's

Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>> The second problem seems to be generic.  The reason I looked at
>> packages in testing was that they are the packages that are going to
>> be released, and if I look at what's in unstable, it seems that I
>> might miss what's going to be in etch (e.g., e2fsprogs seems to be
>> frozen, and the version in unstable now doesn't seem to be going into
>> etch).
>> Should I look at packages in unstable, and only if the package is
>> frozen, look at the one in testing, instead?
> You should check the packages in testing.

This is what I'm doing now.

> Then check the packages in unstable.

I'm doing this step manually now.

> Note what packages fixed the problem in unstable, file an RC bug for
> the testing version and close it for the unstable version. That then
> reflects the reality and will keep track of the problem.

Hm, I know how to submit a bug for the version in testing (this is
what I've done), but I don't know how to close it for the unstable
version.  How do I do that?

> Note what packages started to be buggy in sid. Hopefully none.

Exactly -- I intend to mirror and check unstable for regressions in
this area.  I submitted a lintian check for this, if something like it
can be installed, it would also help avoid this problem in the future.


Reply to: