Package removal from testing for bug in stable

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Eugene Zhukov-3
Hello,

The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer
version, without a bug).

How autoremoval is relevant in this case?

[1] Although my question is generic, #826864 triggered this question

Thanks,
Eugene

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Rene Engelhard
Hi,

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:31:51AM +0300, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
> The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
> bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer
> version, without a bug).

The BTS dows not know that. And if you look at the version graph[1]
it thiks it's affected.

If it's fixed in testing/sid you need to appropriately close it with
a proper version..

> How autoremoval is relevant in this case?

See above.

Regards,

Rene

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Jakub Wilk-4
In reply to this post by Eugene Zhukov-3
* Eugene Zhukov <[hidden email]>, 2016-06-17, 10:31:
>The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
>bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer version,
>without a bug).
>
>How autoremoval is relevant in this case?
>
>[1] Although my question is generic, #826864 triggered this question

According to the bug log, you haven't managed to reproduce the bug. So
how do you know the newer version is not affected by it?

NB, at first glace it doesn't look like a problem with epubcheck itself,
but with binfmt (jarwrapper?).

I don't know anything about Java, but relying on binfmt seems awfully
brittle to me.

--
Jakub Wilk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Simon Richter-2
In reply to this post by Eugene Zhukov-3
Hi,

On 17.06.2016 09:31, Eugene Zhukov wrote:

> The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
> bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer
> version, without a bug).

In this case, send a mail to [hidden email], with "notfound",
the bug number and the version number in testing -- this will correctly
track the bug as unfixed in stable, but not affecting testing or unstable.

   Simon


signature.asc (484 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Eugene Zhukov-3
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Simon Richter <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 17.06.2016 09:31, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
>
>> The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
>> bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer
>> version, without a bug).
>
> In this case, send a mail to [hidden email], with "notfound",
> the bug number and the version number in testing -- this will correctly
> track the bug as unfixed in stable, but not affecting testing or unstable.

Thanks, that's the kind of answer I was looking for.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Adam D. Barratt
In reply to this post by Simon Richter-2
On 2016-06-20 4:09, Simon Richter wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 17.06.2016 09:31, Eugene Zhukov wrote:
>
>> The package is marked for autoremoval from testing, however the RC[1]
>> bug is reported against version in stable (testing has a newer
>> version, without a bug).
>
> In this case, send a mail to [hidden email], with "notfound",
> the bug number and the version number in testing -- this will correctly
> track the bug as unfixed in stable, but not affecting testing or
> unstable.

No, it won't.

What "notfound" does is remove an explicit entry in the list of "found"
versions. If what you want to say is that the bug is fixed in the
version in testing, you need to use "fixed".

Regards,

Adam

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package removal from testing for bug in stable

Simon Richter
Hi Adam,

On 20.06.2016 09:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote:

>> In this case, send a mail to [hidden email], with "notfound",
>> the bug number and the version number in testing -- this will correctly
>> track the bug as unfixed in stable, but not affecting testing or
>> unstable.

> What "notfound" does is remove an explicit entry in the list of "found"
> versions. If what you want to say is that the bug is fixed in the
> version in testing, you need to use "fixed".

Indeed. Thanks!

   Simon



signature.asc (484 bytes) Download Attachment