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

Re: Bug#544588: dovecot-antispam: should have a versioned dovecot dependency

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:44:26AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 17:08:07 (CET), Clint Adams wrote:
> > severity 564682 serious
> > quit
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 08:50:36AM +1030, Ron wrote:
> >> I'll have a chat to Jaldhar about final plans for squeeze.  So far we've
> >> been somewhat running on the promise of a stable ABI "coming soon".
> >> I'll see what news there is with that.  Merging the packages is surely
> >
> > Since the dovecot-antispam in squeeze is completely useless with
> > the dovecot in squeeze, something should be flagged RC.
> AFAIUI, this issue can be fixed by a binNMU

Previously a binNMU would get this working with a new dovecot version again,
but that's not actually true for the current version of dovecot that we have.
Sourceful changes are going to be required to make this usable again, and
nobody has had time to diagnose or make a patch for that yet.

> nmu dovecot-antispam_1.2+20090702-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against dovecot 1.2.15, Closes: #544588'
> Since this is AFAIUI the (only) issue why the package has been removed
> from squeeze, would the RT please consider an unblock of
> dovecot-antispam_1.2+20090702-1+b2?

No, it's not the only issue.  If it was we'd have headed off the removal
with a binNMU request before now.  Clint confirmed that the dspam backend
is in fact still working right now, but anyone using the SA backend is
going to find that dovecot itself will fail to operate for them if they
install a binNMU'd version of this package with the dovecot currently in
squeeze.  So it's not really suitable for release until that is fixed
(unless we dropped the SA backend).

As I indicated in #53, upstream knows about this, and I can confirm again
that as of today there is still no patch to fix it that has been applied
there.  Until we get that fixed, this package is of limited use and should
not be considered a release candidate.


Reply to: