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

Re: Need a review and a sponsor for xpdf ITA upload



Dear Svante,

On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 08:42:02AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> Even if the bug fixes warrant an upload to sid->testing->stretch, I don't want
> to go through the effort of doing that, especially being a new maintainer. 

You could look at this again after we upload to experimental.  It might
be easier to cherry pick the fixes.

> > > Seems like the above command does not work. One example is that
> > > the file in Debian: xpdf_3.04.orig.tar.gz is not the one found at
> > > the upstream site.  (some files and directories are omitted).
> > 
> > Once a given upstream tarball has been uploaded, all subsequent uploads must
> > match that tarball exactly.  Perhaps the previous maintainer has repacked it
> > (either intentionally or by using some tool not aware of what the upstream
> > ships)?  In any case, your options include only using the tarball in the
> > archive, or bumping the upstream version number.
> 
> Let's start with installing the real upstream tarball before upgrading to my
> patched version of xpdf. Can I just create a new version with that tarball and
> upload via dput to mentors.debian.net, and then sending an RFS to the mailing
> list?

Ah, now I understand why you want to do this.

You could do this as a QA upload.  However, I think that it is best just
to do everything in one upload.  It is not obvious that "installing the
real upstream tarball" alone has any value.

-- 
Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: