Bug#811640: regarding dasher gcc6 ftbfs / 5.0 beta

intrigeri intrigeri at debian.org
Sun Aug 28 11:39:26 UTC 2016


Hi Andreas!

Andreas Henriksson:
> Read your bug report (#835533) and spent a few seconds looking at
> the gcc6 ftbfs (#811640).

Thanks a lot!

> The current ftbfs looks trivial to resolve bit apparently noone
> cares enough about the package.

OK, this is a useful data point.

> Since you mentioned there was upstream activity I looked at how they solved
> it in:
> https://github.com/ipomoena/dasher/blob/master/Src/Gtk2/DasherAppSettings.cpp#L81
> (Not sure this is the correct upstream repository though.)

> This does not look correct at all to me.
> [...]
> Without investigating any deeper I think this must result in a use-after-free.

> We need someone that's interested in dasher to maintain it properly.
> Apparently upstream could use an extra pair of eyes to help keep them
> safe.

Good to know.

> This is thus my attempt at suckering you, who have shown atleast
> a bit of interest in dasher, to be that person.

I'm afraid I cannot be that person, simply because I am mostly
illiterate at C/C++. Sorry!

But I do appreciate your attempt at fixing the social/organizational
problem that's hidden behind the mere surface of FTBFS bug reports :)

> If not, the quick route would probably just be to add a patch with
> the above suggested solution (which I've verified fixes the build)
> and do an NMU to get dasher back into testing.

I'll think about it. In theory I could do that, but I'm not keen on
"forcing" into a Debian stable release software that 1. will soon
be obsolete since upstream has a new major version in the works;
2. gets little care from its formal maintainers. If I did that I would
feel responsible to effectively maintain the package in stable (which
can imply getting fixes in sid first) during the lifetime of Stretch,
which would not be reasonable a commitment to make, even though there
are great chances that the maintenance work takes absolutely no time.

Should I point the Debian Accessibility team / ML to this bug?

Cheers,
-- 
intrigeri



More information about the pkg-gnome-maintainers mailing list