On Nov 1, 2012 3:00 PM, "Chuan-kai Lin" <cklin@debian.org> wrote:
>
> I am planning to downgrade bison in unstable by uploading an older
> bison package with a higher epoch number. This approach seems to be
> the path of least resistance, unless the release team wants to get
> involved.
>
> Felipe, is it really necessary to downgrade the unstable version all
> the way back to 2.4? Testing has bison 1:2.5.dfsg-2.1, which was
> uploaded about a year ago and not affected by #689700. Unless anyone
> objects, I will bump the version number of bison 1:2.5.dfsg-2.1 to
> 2:2.5.dfsg-3 and upload it to unstable tomorrow.
Yes, sorry. I mean the version currently in testing. For some reason I thought it was 2.4.
>
> Note that this downgrade is a temporary measure intended to
> accommodate the special circumstances of the freeze. Once wheezy is
> released and the freeze lifted, I will again upload the latest version
> of bison. The broken packages will have to support the new behavior
> (or alternatively convince bison upstream that they new behavior is
> broken).
Yes, my upstream has fixed the issue, but the patch apparently got tangled with other stuff and had some trouble backporting it.
Thanks!