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

Re: emacs23: proposed squeeze update (23.2+1-3)



On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 13:26 -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> I just uploaded emacs23 23.2+1-3 to unstable, and I'd like to include it
> in squeeze if possible.  It contains all of the relevant changes from
> the current 23.2+1-2.1 NMU (already in squeeze),

The NMU isn't in squeeze yet.  I unblocked it during debconf but it was
still a couple of days away from migrating.

> one minor build fix,
> and a patch for the GNU/kFreeBSD startup hang (#559392, serious).
> 
> Here are the new changelog entries.  These are the new changes:
> 
>   * Don't try to "mkdir $(infodir)" in doc/*/Makefile.in.

That was already listed as being fixed in the NMU, fwiw.

>   * Fix startup hang on GNU/kFreeBSD (fix-kfreebsd-startup.diff).
>     Thanks to antoine beaupre <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx> for the report
>     and Petr Salinger <Petr.Salinger@seznam.cz> for the patch.
>     (closes: #559392)

Looking at the diff, debian/control{,.in} contain this:

+Standards-Version: 3.7.2

which isn't mentioned in the changelog and seems an unusual thing to
add. :)

There's also a couple of build-dependency changes between the NMU (and
possibly earlier uploads, I only checked the diff against the NMU as I'd
already unblocked that) and the new upload; were they intentional?

quilt (>= 0.42-1~) ->  quilt (>= 0.42)
debhelper (>= 7) -> debhelper (>= 7.0.50~)

[...]
> diff -Nru emacs23-23.2+1/debian/changelog emacs23-23.2+1/debian/changelog
> --- emacs23-23.2+1/debian/changelog	2010-08-03 18:53:18.000000000 -0500
> +++ emacs23-23.2+1/debian/changelog	2010-08-14 11:57:49.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1,16 +1,45 @@
> -emacs23 (23.2+1-2.1) unstable; urgency=low
> +emacs23 (23.2+1-3) unstable; urgency=low

It's more conventional here to include the NMU changelog (so the
changelog contains -2, -2.1, -3 in that order).  This avoids the large
diff but also means that the BTS automatically knows that any bugs
marked as fixed in -2.1 are fixed in -3 without them having to be
mentioned again in -3.

Regards,

Adam


Reply to: