Re: sendmail 220.127.116.11-1(was: Re: Richard A Nelson (Rick) <email@example.com> MIA)
[please drop -devel from further follow-ups; this is drifting further
On Sun, November 7, 2010 22:05, Harald Jenny wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 12:52:06PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 08:09 +0100, Harald Jenny wrote:
>> > On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 04:48:08PM -0700, Richard A Nelson wrote:
>> > > sendmail_8.14.4-1_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
>> > > So, barring bugs, it should hit testing soon
>> > Thanks - and I hope the release team will allow this transition to
>> take place.
>> Which libmilter problem are you referring to? There don't appear to be
>> any RC bugs closed by the upload.
> Well I tried to change bug
> to severity grave as I thought this would make this a release-critical bug
> but failed to do so, please see the last mail in the thread before the
> solved message (not enough experience with bugs.debian.org yet).
Yes, you need to use the control@ bot, not just include a "Severity:"
header in a follow-up.
>> With a little massaging of the diff (tarball-in-tarball with versioned
>> directory names sucks), I can get down to
>> 146 files changed, 2092 insertions(+), 999 deletions(-)
>> but that's still quite large for an update at this point. :-/
> I know this but the above mentioned bug make almost any software depending
> on libmilter unusable (or at least unstable) and as this release was
> uploaded to unstable already it won't be possible to only get the
> important changes for libmilter in an updated 8.14.3 version.
Well, it /could/ be updated via tpu still, if someone can isolate the
changes required and produce a proposed diff. I'm really not overly keen
on importing a new upstream version in to testing at this point, after 18
months with no maintainer uploads and a handful of NMUs.