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

Bug#682827: marked as done (nmu: libgeier0_0.13-1)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Jul 2012 15:44:36 +0200
with message-id <20120728134436.GA19803@spike.0x539.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#682827: nmu: libgeier0_0.13-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #682827,
regarding nmu: libgeier0_0.13-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
682827: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=682827
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

nmu libgeier0_0.13-1 . ALL . -m "rebuild to work around xmlsec issue (bug #675513)"

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:17:18PM -0400, John Belmonte wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 3:58 AM, Philipp Kern <pkern@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:41:57PM -0400, John V. Belmonte wrote:
> >> Package: release.debian.org
> >> Severity: normal
> >> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> >> Usertags: binnmu
> >>
> >> nmu libgeier0_0.13-1 . ALL . -m "rebuild to work around xmlsec issue (bug #675513)"
> >
> > Where's the proposed patch to xmlsec?
> 
> I've just uploaded xmlsec1_1.2.18-2 which has the fix.
> 
> If we can't get that xmlsec1 update into wheezy, for now I think it's
> sufficient to rebuild libgeier against the existing version 1.2.18-1.
> The issue would only come up again if wheezy somehow got a newer
> upstream version of xmlsec1.

Can we get rid of that check altogether? (Even upstream?) It does not make
sense at all in a Debian context and I wonder what the first check (minor <
XMLSEC_VERSION_MINOR) should tell me.

As far as I can see it will now prevent *at runtime* that you use an older
xmlsec than the one $package was compiled with. At least you are already
using `dh_makeshlibs -V' (which I hate but I guess here it then makes
some sense).

I've unblocked xmlsec1 and scheduled the binnmus of libgeier.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: