[Debian GNUstep maintainers] Bug#561944: GNUstep transition

[Neil McGovern]

On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 09:33:08PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> The cure for #581940 (gorm.app) depends on -base/-gui from
> experimental.  The specific fix can be backported easily if a new
> upstream gorm.app release is not acceptable at this point.  Gürkan is
> the de-facto maintainer, so he can tell more about the plan for this
> bug.
> 

A backport would certainly be preferred...

> > 568307 [           ] Generates incomplete nfont bundles which makes the art backend unusable
> 
> Fixed in experimental by providing a defoma-free art backend.
> GNUstep-specific .nfont bundles are generated via fc-cache now.
> 
> > 585531 [           ] [Debian GNUstep maintainers] TimeMon Preferences window's weird	behavior
> 
> A fairly old bug in the cairo backend, fixed in 0.17/0.18.  Combined
> with the bug above (affecting only art), it makes GNUstep unusable in
> squeeze/sid right now.  Fixed in experimental.
> 
> > 558993 [           ] Subject: FTBFS: NSWindow.m:198: fatal error: method definition not in  @implementation context
> 
> An embarassing bug that could be prevented if the upload of
> gnustep-base/1.19.3 didn't happen.  But the damage has been done, and
> various upstream authors have been quite disturbed (e.g., latest
> Ubuntu stable release shipping a non-releasable core GNUstep libraries
> combination).  Nothing to do here except move forward or backward.
> 
> FWIW, technically speaking we can release without a transition, by
> "just" uploading gnustep-base/1.19.1 with an epoch (however, this will
> still require binNMUs of all packages that were uploaded since then
> because of the NS{U}Integer/CGFloat types which break the ABI, at
> least on 64-bit archs).
> 
> But if we go that route, there are quite some important bugfixes that
> we'll have to backport (including security -- the not-so-recent CVEs
> about gdomap vulnerabilities), and I'm not sure we'll succeed...
> Needless to say, we'll be completely alone in maintaining those
> modified versions throughout the squeeze lifetime; upstream doesn't
> give a damn about 1.19.x/0.17.x...
> 

Ok, so at the moment let's have a soft ACK for this transition. Could
you try and get it ready to move into testing, with the RC bugs fixed?
If it doesn't work, or gets things entangled up, then we may have to
look at a t-p-u upload with the latter suggested route.

Neil
-- 
<Yoe> is _that_ gunnar?
<weasel> yes
<Yoe> what happened to his tires?
<towersbe> He's shrunk. I think his wife washed him at too high a temperature.