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

Bug#694378: marked as done (unblock: apt-cacher-ng/0.7.11-1)

Your message dated Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:19:50 +0100
with message-id <1367075990.13168.72.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#694378: please allow up-to-date apt-cacher-ng in wheezy
has caused the Debian Bug report #694378,
regarding unblock: apt-cacher-ng/0.7.11-1
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.)


-- 
694378: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694378
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

Please unblock package apt-cacher-ng

it solves #683803 and #677983 (*) since version 0.7.8. These changes are
especially required to support http.debian.net redirection properly and
to stop the total breakage of "apt-get update" runs on some systems.

There are upstream changes but I consider most of them harmless (I am
upstream) or they have been tested in Unstable/Experimental for already
16 weeks. Little problems in 0.7.8's changes have been solved in 0.7.10
(18 days in Unstable without new bug reports).

(*): assumed, no user complaints this time while previous fixing
attempts caused very prompt responses

$ debdiff apt-cacher-ng_0.7.6-1_amd64.deb apt-cacher-ng_0.7.10-1_amd64.deb 
File lists identical (after any substitutions)

Control files: lines which differ (wdiff format)
------------------------------------------------
Depends: libbz2-1.0, libc6 (>= 2.10), libgcc1 (>= 1:4.1.1), liblzma5 (>= [-5.1.1alpha+20110809),-] {+5.1.1alpha+20120614),+} libstdc++6 (>= 4.6), libwrap0 (>= 7.6-4~), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.4), debconf (>= 0.5) | debconf-2.0, adduser
Installed-Size: [-1158-] {+1175+}
Version: [-0.7.6-1-] {+0.7.10-1+}

unblock apt-cacher-ng/0.7.10-1

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.5.0+ (SMP w/4 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 18:47 +0100, Andreas B. Mundt wrote:
> again (cf. #683803) I was bitten by (apt-cacher-ng  0.7.6-1):
> 
> Sun Feb 17 11:47:50 2013|http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/popt/libpopt0_1.16-7_i386.deb storage error [301 Moved Permanently], last errno: Operation now in progress
> Sun Feb 17 11:56:55 2013|http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libc/libcap2/libcap2_2.22-1.2_i386.deb storage error [301 Moved Permanently], last errno: Operation now in progress
> 
> This happens rarely, but even with "RedirMax: 0", and it spoils the debian-lan 
> setup.
> 
> So please consider the fixed package for wheezy.  Offering a fixed package 
> in backports doesn't make Debian better, because either you use the package from
> backports which will not be better by being in backports or you don't use acng 
> at all - which will not need a fixed package.  And it causes extra work  
> to include backport repositories, especially for debian-lan.

I do hope I won't end up regretting doing so, but... unblocked.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: