Bug#686387: unblock: upstart/1.5-1, mountall/2.39, ifupdown/0.7.3, udev/175-8 sysvinit/2.88dsf-33
- To: Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>
- Cc: 686387@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#686387: unblock: upstart/1.5-1, mountall/2.39, ifupdown/0.7.3, udev/175-8 sysvinit/2.88dsf-33
- From: intrigeri <intrigeri@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 12:16:54 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 85ehi6eajd.fsf@boum.org>
- Reply-to: intrigeri <intrigeri@debian.org>, 686387@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20121105080357.GA7214@virgil.dodds.net> (Steve Langasek's message of "Mon, 5 Nov 2012 00:03:57 -0800")
- References: <20120831200248.710.62287.reportbug@borges.dodds.net> <20120915133458.GC5308@radis.cristau.org> <20120918070811.GB29602@virgil.dodds.net> <20120919174201.GI5308@radis.cristau.org> <85fw4umz1k.fsf@boum.org> <20121105080357.GA7214@virgil.dodds.net>
Control: retitle -1 unblock: upstart/1.5-1, udev/175-7.1
Hi,
Steve Langasek wrote (05 Nov 2012 08:03:57 GMT) :
> [...] so I'm preparing an NMU for udev now with the change
> Julien indicated.
All the necessary bits have now entered testing, but the udev one,
that has been maturing in sid since mid-November. Re-titling
accordingly. Steve, please correct me if I missed something.
I've looked at the interdiff between the proposed udev diff Julien
reviewed and mostly ACK'd back in September, and the changes that
actually made it into unstable. The only new changes are:
* a few 2>/dev/null / -q added to remove some noise
as explained by Steve on #686378
* don't inconsistently inline init_is_upstart once
So, it looks like udev/175-7.1 could now be unblocked without any
additional review.
*However*, one possible regression was spotted (#696509), so it's
getting less clear to me. Steve, what's your take on that regression?
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
Reply to: