Re: Bug#1080956: SaunaFS
Hi,
Am Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 03:33:07PM +0200 schrieb Urmas Rist:
>
> I think MR's (I assume they are the equivalent to Github's PR's?) are the
> best right now, so I can also have a look at them.
Yes, MRs on Gitlab (Salsa) are the equivalent to Github's PR's.
> My main worry is that the Debian 12 changes might conflict or introduce
> unnecesary changes with the current package on sid (e.g, I/Tony had to
> disable a -Werror on Debian 12, which is not needed for newer sid and
> Debian 13).
This should be made conditional. "Closing our eyes" just for the sake
of backports
> I know there are backports, but I'm not sure how they should be handled.
> Is it better to have another branch for this?
Yes, having a separate branch makes perfectly sense. We also can't
currently create some official backport. If you want to upload to
backports.debian.org the package needs to be in testing first (and
its not even in unstable :-( )
> I don't mind helping to maintain one for Debian 12 until it's EOL,
> though it might become harder for later SaunaFS versions (if more
> dependencies are added).
I personally would really target to Debian 13. This is where
backports.debian.org is helpful.
> More importantly, Tony discovered a bug with the pam limits on open
> files. There's still the old Lizardfs limits file (actually I checked,
> there's also another lizardfs file). I think it's a big bug, so I'm
> wondering if one could resubmit the package to FTP again with a fix?
Congratulations to Tony! ;-)
I would *not* do any action right now. Just lets wait until the
package hits unstable. We need to do some Source only upload than
anyway and this could contain the fix.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
https://fam-tille.de
Reply to: