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

Bug#696102: marked as done (unblock: postgresql-9.1/9.1.7-1 postgresql-8.4/8.4.15-1, 8.4.15 for squeeze-updates)

Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:46:51 +0000
with message-id <1356040011.24016.5.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#696102: unblock: postgresql-9.1/9.1.7-1 postgresql-8.4/8.4.15-1, 8.4.15 for squeeze-updates
has caused the Debian Bug report #696102,
regarding unblock: postgresql-9.1/9.1.7-1 postgresql-8.4/8.4.15-1, 8.4.15 for squeeze-updates
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.)


-- 
696102: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=696102
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: unblock

ten days ago, new PostgreSQL microreleases were announced:
http://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1430/

They've been in Debian unstable and my rather popular backports PPA
for over a week now, without any regression reports in Debian, Ubuntu,
or the upstream bug list. 8.4 built on all architectures, 9.1
everywhere but armel where it apparently needs a give-back (I'll ask
on the armel buildd list for this).

For unstable, 8.4's upgrade to 8.4.15 is by and large a no-op, as
there are no PL/Perl related changes (It only builds a
postgresql-plperl-8.4 package these days which is required for
upgrades from Squeeze).

9.1's upgrade includes a simple build system patch which fixes build
with Python 3.3. This is not relevant for testing (it does not have
any effect there), but important if you want to build it in
experimental. Debdiff attached.

For stable, the corresponding 8.4.15 update is on

  http://people.debian.org/~mpitt/psql/squeeze/

together with a full debdiff. I asked about this on -release@ but
didn't get a response there, so I'll try again here.

All packages pass the upstream testsuite (runs during package build),
and the postgresql-common integration test suite.

Please note that this updates from 8.4.13 to 8.4.15. I prepared an
8.4.14 update in October, but my request [1] never got answered, and I
forgot about it so I failed to follow up on this. I moved that version
aside to [2] in case it's still relevant for anyone.

OK to upload 8.4.15 for stable?

Thanks for considering,

Martin

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/10/msg00003.html
[2] http://people.debian.org/~mpitt/psql/squeeze-8.4.14

unblock postgresql-8.4/8.4.15-1
unblock postgresql-9.1/9.1.7-1

-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 19:30 +0100, Martin Pitt wrote:
> ten days ago, new PostgreSQL microreleases were announced:
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/news/1430/
> 
> They've been in Debian unstable and my rather popular backports PPA
> for over a week now, without any regression reports in Debian, Ubuntu,
> or the upstream bug list. 8.4 built on all architectures, 9.1
> everywhere but armel where it apparently needs a give-back (I'll ask
> on the armel buildd list for this).

Both unblocked. fwiw, separate unblock bugs might be easier from a
tracking point of view.

> For stable, the corresponding 8.4.15 update is on
[...]
> Please note that this updates from 8.4.13 to 8.4.15. I prepared an
> 8.4.14 update in October, but my request [1] never got answered, and I
> forgot about it so I failed to follow up on this. I moved that version
> aside to [2] in case it's still relevant for anyone.

Apologies for not getting back to you about that yet, and for somehow
managing to miss the earlier mail; bugs help again here. :-) I've added
a to-do item to review the squeeze diffs; I'll try and get that sorted
out over the weekend.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: