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

Bug#1022003: marked as done (transition: gssdp/gupnp 1.2->1.6 (+ rygel 0.42.0))

Your message dated Sun, 18 Dec 2022 13:02:42 +0100
with message-id <Y58BYqfquvoESSgj@ramacher.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#1022003: transition: gssdp/gupnp 1.6: Status update + prepared to start
has caused the Debian Bug report #1022003,
regarding transition: gssdp/gupnp 1.2->1.6 (+ rygel 0.42.0)
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.)


-- 
1022003: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1022003
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: transition

Hello release team,

I'd like to transition gssdp/gupnp to 1.6 version as part of current
GNOME release.

I've just uploaded the new versions of gssdp and gupnp 1.6.0 to
binary-NEW/experimental.

I will team-upload new releases of the following reverse dependencies as
part of gnome-team:

* rygel (0.42.0-1 just uploaded to binary-NEW/experimental) 
  - FYI internal soname bump for broken plugin ABI, but there are no
    external plugins (all built from src:rygel).
* gupnp-tools (0.12.0-1 just uploaded to experimental)
* gupnp-igd (needs cherry-pick https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gupnp-igd/-/commit/79a1e4cf8c256132978a1d8ab718c8ad132386de )

I've just done QA uploads to unstable for latest version of
dleyna-{core,renderer,server} to make it easier to cherry-pick upstream
changes for gssdp/gupnp 1.6 (not yet in a released version).
I can do qa uploads of dleyna-* but would prefer if these packages where
simply removed from testing as they've been orphaned for many years
(since their initial upload to debian).
Will file a bug for each package and point out the upstream commits
respectively:
* https://github.com/phako/dleyna-core/commit/b88f231affc697be813d7c77c17e3130df81cb9a
* https://github.com/phako/dleyna-renderer/commit/b3a06c8bc4b91803d7bde312f49a68109b8ad8d4
* https://github.com/phako/dleyna-server/commit/e7f64192643f5783e19482a11697de9ec3eea033

I will file bugs for remaining (and offer to NMU if no response),
fixed-upstream (not yet in a released version):

* caja-extensions -- https://github.com/mate-desktop/caja-extensions/issues/110
* librm -- https://gitlab.com/tabos/librm/-/commit/c9aae663ff40c1ab171476652eba68c174d96ba2 + https://gitlab.com/tabos/librm/-/commit/a849d9a6a6624d5f3c6a70dd63590d1a2b79d1af


Regards,
Andreas Henriksson


PS. Once I've filed all bug reports I'll set them as blockers for this bug
report.


Ben file:

title = "gupnp";
is_affected = .depends ~ "libgupnp-1.2-1" | .depends ~ "libgssdp-1.2-0" | .depends ~ "libgupnp-1.6-0" | .depends ~ "libgssdp-1.6-0";
is_good = .depends ~ "libgupnp-1.6-0" | .depends ~ "libgssdp-1.6-0";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libgupnp-1.2-1" | .depends ~ "libgssdp-1.2-0";

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 2022-10-30 16:58:21 +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 09:46:11AM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> > TL;DR I consider myself ready to start the transition now, with removals
> > in the plan.
> [...]
> > Unless someone tells me I missed something I'll start uploading to
> > unstable as soon as I feel I have a free time slot (which might be later
> > today).
> 
> gssdp_1.6.0-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> gupnp_1.6.0-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> gupnp-igd_1.2.0-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> gupnp-tools_0.12.0-2_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> rygel_0.42.0-2_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
> 
> I'll try to poke caja-extensions maintainers to see if they want to
> upload to unstable (but since I haven't heard anything so far I'll
> probably go ahead and NMU it again to unstable tomorrow).
> 
> I've also filed RM bugs for dleyna-*
> see: #1023131 #1023133 #1023134 #1023135
> 
> I've poked the librm bug report again and raised severity to serious.
> Please consider removing librm (+ roger-router) from testing when
> it's the only remaining blocker for finishing the transition.

The old packages got removed from testing some time ago. Closing.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher

--- End Message ---
Reply to: