Re: S-P-U for #611820 ?

["Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>]

On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 17:08 +0100, Sean Finney wrote:
> recently, someone found #611820, where a bug in the sorting logic would
> omit certain upgrade scripts from being processed when updating from one
> version of an application to another.  this is a pretty nasty thing to
> have happen, as there is no error and the admin is left to believe that
> everything upgraded as expected--but likely to be left with a broken
> app/database combination.
> 
> the fix is relatively small[1][2], would this be something you'd accept
> to spu?
[...]
> [1]
> http://git.debian.org/?p=dbconfig-common/dbconfig-common.git;a=commitdiff;h=e0d8c2d7c9aff51a745b4ec316d981bbc5cc98d6
> 
> [2]
> http://git.debian.org/?p=dbconfig-common/dbconfig-common.git;a=commitdiff;h=4c24ab2ed7d52e446dcacb48883f583d4e788dba

Thanks for your mail.  The fix from [2] looks fine, but I'm not
immediately clear how [1] relates to #611820; from a quick look, the
only part of dbconfig-common which ever uses "set -u" is the testsuite?

Regards,

Adam