[Pkg-samba-maint] Samba 4.0: Upload to unstable.

[Clement Wong]

Wait for 4.1? Or is it easy to upload 4.1 to unstable in the future
according to the policy?

BR,
Clement

> On Sep 25, 2013, at 21:39, Steve Langasek <vorlon at debian.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 05:12:46PM +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 02:37:36AM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
>>> Lintian still gives a lot of errors and warnings. Before we can upload
>>> to unstable we should fix most of them (or silence them if what we do
>>> is correct). This is the lintian output I get:
>
>> Some comments on a number of those:
>
>>> E: libnss-winbind: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_wins.so lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_wins.so.2 libnss_wins.so
>>> E: libnss-winbind: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_winbind.so lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libnss_winbind.so.2 libnss_winbind.so
>
>> I committed a fix for those.
>
> This is a wrong fix.  These are not shlibs, they're DSOs, and lintian is
> wrong to report this error for them.
>
>>> E: samba-common-bin: python-script-but-no-python-dep usr/bin/samba-tool
>>> E: samba-common-bin: python-script-but-no-python-dep usr/sbin/samba_kcc
>
>>> E: samba: python-script-but-no-python-dep usr/sbin/samba_dnsupdate
>>> E: samba: python-script-but-no-python-dep usr/sbin/samba_spnupdate
>>> E: samba: python-script-but-no-python-dep usr/sbin/samba_upgradedns
>
>> Don't spend time on these. Some people think experimenting with :all
>> dependencies should happen in unstable instead of experimental, and don't
>> mind breaking stuff on the way.  This error will likely go away in the
>> next version of lintian (#711988).
>
> Just because lintian wasn't caught up doesn't mean it's experimental.
>
>>> W: samba-dsdb-modules: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig
>>> W: samba-dsdb-modules: postrm-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig
>>> W: samba-testsuite: postinst-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig
>>> W: samba-testsuite: postrm-has-useless-call-to-ldconfig
>
>> Lintian suggests that this is actually a bug in debhelper.
>
> Yes, that seems to be the case.
>
>>> And what's up with the branches btw? We currently have samba_4.0,
>>> samba_4.0_integrate and samba_4.0_integration. I just merged the
>>> commit done by Andrew in samba_4.0 to the samba_4.0_integration
>>> branch. Is there any reason the samba_4.0_integration branch can't be
>>> pushed to samba_4.0 and we can't just all work on in the samba_4.0
>>> branch?
>
>> I merged everything into samba_4.0. We should just continue development
>> there.
>
> Should we delete the other branches now as obsolete?
>
> What else needs to be done yet before we upload?
>
> --
> Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
> Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
> Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
> slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-samba-maint mailing list
> Pkg-samba-maint at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-samba-maint