Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:39:56AM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: > I would like to know if the following changes to gcc-mingw-w64 would > be acceptable for Jessie, before uploading the package to unstable; > they fix #773342, a serious bug filed against mingw32 (upgrading from > Wheezy causes the package to lose its copyright file). Yes, with a small query: > --- a/debian/rules > +++ b/debian/rules > @@ -254,6 +254,9 @@ binary-indep: build-indep > dh_link -i > dh_compress -i > dh_fixperms -i > +# This is the first version where we fix up the /usr/share/doc/mingw32 link > +# Once this is in the archive we'll switch to a first_split_version-style approach > + echo dir_to_symlink /usr/share/doc/mingw32 /usr/share/doc/gcc-mingw-w64-base $(deb_version)~ mingw32 > debian/mingw32.maintscript > dh_installdeb -i Is there a reason for not just creating debian/migw32.maintscript in the package? Why generate it as part of the build? > Note that this package builds using gcc-4.9-source, and allowing it to > transition from unstable to Jessie would effectively mean pulling > unstable's gcc-4.9 source into Jessie too. If necessary I can upload > to unstable and upload again to t-p-u once the unstable package has > aged enough. Let's go with your second plan please - fix in unstable and then upload to t-p-u later. Thanks, -- Jonathan Wiltshire jmw@debian.org Debian Developer http://people.debian.org/~jmw 4096R: 0xD3524C51 / 0A55 B7C5 1223 3942 86EC 74C3 5394 479D D352 4C51
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature