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

Re: nano update request



Jordi Mallach <jordi@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 02:41:26AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>>> translation updates. There's a segfault and memleak fixes in CVS that I
>>> can apply to 2.0.1 and upload to unstable if there's chances of getting
>>> it accepted in etch. If not, I'll just wait for 2.0.2, not targetted at
>>> etch.
>> segfault/memleak certainly sound like important bugfixes to me; I'm willing
>> to consider them.
> I uploaded nano 2.0.2-1 to unstable nearly 3 weeks ago, with the
> intention of getting it approved in etch. Unfortunately, I didn't review
> the diff closely enough, and besides the above segfault/memleak fixes,
> there are other minor bugfixes which appear (after 3 weeks) to be stable
> and safe (no reports in the upstream mailing list, no known regressions,
> etc.).
>
> If approving 2.0.2-1 is possible, this is my prefered option, obviously.
> The diff is "big", but excluding comments and docs, it's not that scary.

I have reviewed it and think it's fine. I would like to have Frans
approval, as nano has a udeb, though.


> - General:
>         - Miscellaneous comment fixes. (DLR)

Really rocked the diff, that one.

Marc
-- 
BOFH #52:
Smell from unhygenic janitorial staff wrecked the tape heads

Attachment: pgpsfkAIG1ZY7.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: