Re: mercurial: pre-approving and sponsoring a possible NMU upload to t-p-u to fix an important bug (#513183)
* Eddy Petrișor [Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:54:03 +0200]:
> Hello release team,
Hello, Eddy (and Mercurial maintainers).
Here are my thoughts on the issue:
- a patch for this should really get an ACK from the maintainers
- if not, you should follow the usual procedures for NMUs for < RC
bugs, which start by waiting at least a week for a response
- I'm doubtful this bug warrants a t-p-u upload, but since we've
allowed them for non-RC bugs during this cycle, I won't block it
if you come to an agreement with the maintainers that this is an
appropriate solution
(Just for the record, I think it's an unfortunate use of /etc loading of
extensions if a warning is going to be inevitably printed when the
extension packages are removed but not purged. I also realize this does
not have an easy solution without cooperation from upstream.)
So, Eddy, let's wait a bit to hear what the maintainers think.
Cheers,
> Mercurial's hgk extension fails to start if the configuration files of another
> extension are still present after a package removal.
> This is bug #513183 - hgk fails to start when hg emits warnings.
> This happens under relatively common conditions (package of an extension
> is removed, but not purged).
> The hgk extension provides the command "hg view" which is an equivalent of
> gitk in mercurial world. Since I know how important gitk is for me I thought
> I should try to fix the problem for mercurial.
> I provided a workaround and prepared an NMU which should have made the
> problem go away with a simple upload[*] and approval from the release team.
> The interdiff, the dsc , the .changes file and the new diff.gz are attached.
> Changelog is:
> mercurial (1.0.1-5.2) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low
> .
> * Non-maintainer upload.
> * added a workaround for the crash of hgk when hg was emitting
> warnings (Closes: #513183)
> Since, as I can see, the maintainer of mercurial hasn't acted at all
> since I provided
> the patch and NMU,
> I am requesting pre-aproval and a sponsor for mercurial/1.0.1-5.2.
> The detailed description of the problem and the way I worked around it
> is described at:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=513183#67
> For your convenience, is reproduced here (unimportant bits removed):
> > I spent some time n this bug, first trying to fix hgk itself, then
> > realising I was fighting someone else's battle and in the end I
> > settled for a (quite) elegant workaround.
> > [..]
> > Here is the description of the changes.
> > workaround for 513183 so hg view works
> > tcl/tk is very sensitive about stuff which is printed to stderr
> > and considers anything printed to be on stderr to be a sign of
> > an error.
> > To avoid hgk's crash because of warnings, we print warnings
> > only when the quiet option is absent. We suppress
> > warnings in hg by calling from "hg view" a wrapper, hg-hgk,
> > which requests quiet operation, disabling warnings.
> > In order to preserve user's possible preference for another hg
> > via HG environment variable, we make sure in the wrapper we
> > call that HG, not the system hg, if HG was initally set.
> [*] I mistekenly forgot to set the distribution to "testing-proposed-updates"
> instead of "unstable" in the files in the NMU proposal, but I built on
> lenny, so that is minor edit which is fixed now in the attachments.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
Que no te vendan amor sin espinas
-- Joaquín Sabina, Noches de boda
Reply to: