Bug#860425: unblock: emacs24/24.5+1-9
Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo
Rob Browning:
> Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> writes:
>
>> Rob Browning:
>
>> Ok. Is there any easy way to figure this out? I am ready to consider
>> additionally targeted fixes for non-deterministic build failures.
>
> I suspect both of those fixes may be appropriate. I'll see what I can
> come up with.
>
Ok, given this and that the current diff is trivially reviewable, please
go ahead with the upload to unstable and notify us via this bug once it
has been built on all release architectures (by removing the moreinfo
tag). ...
>> If it is just a question of moving two insecure commands from one list
>> (auto-try) to another (manual request) or even just removing them, then
>> I am quite happy to accept it for stretch.
>>
>> The stretch-can-defer/stretch-ignore means we won't stall the release
>> for that bug, but often we are still happy to accept a targeted fix for
>> it. :)
>
> Understood. What's the proper procedure there, i.e. presumably I'd need
> to upload new packages to unstable, and then would I send an incremental
> debdiff, and an additional unblock request, or would I send a full
> debdiff...?
>
> Thanks
>
The procedure depends on what we are dealing with, though we generally
prefer to reuse open unblock bugs. An incremental (or full) debdiff
since testing is generally preferred - also as a self-control test for
you to assert that the source dir hasn't been affected by a partial
patch (e.g. from an earlier iteration).
Thanks,
~Niels
Reply to: