Re: Freeze exception for inetutils 2:1.8-1
Hi,
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner.
On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 12:55 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> We currently have 1.6 in the archive and the biggest difference between
> that and 1.8 is lots of code rearrangment, cleanup and mechanical
> changes, which would make my life more difficult when having to deal
> with both code bases.
[...]
> The delta only relevant to code ending up in Debian binary packages:
[...]
> After manually trimming out license header additions and fixups (in
> iu-trimmed_1.6-1.8.patch) we end up with:
>
> $ diffstat -n1 iu-trimmed_1.6-1.8.patch | tail -1
> 86 files changed, 1206 insertions(+), 1642 deletions(-)
[...]
> Which is still quite a bit, but mostly containing the listed code changes
> above, and also several bug fixes and code changes including:
Thanks for trimming down the diff. It does mostly look ok, although is
still quite large.
Are there any other distributions currently shipping 1.8?
> * Switch from getopt to argp.
> * It merges several of the patches present in Debian.
> * ping new -w option (there's a wishlist bug report about this, needed to
> make inetutils-ping option compatbile with iputils-ping, relied upon by
This is the non option-parsing related sections of ping/ping.c (and much
of the ping6.c changes) and the added function at the bottom of
ping/ping_common.c?
> other programs).
> * Fixes an RC bug in inetd about IPv6 support.
I assume that's #519316. Looking at the diff you provided, that appears
to be trivially fixable in the current packages.
> I'm also willing to commit to fixing any possible regression
> introduced by such upload within 10 days from bug filing.
Were we to look at releasing with 1.8, I'd also prefer to have a version
in unstable which had been bug free for a little while before migrating
it.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: