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

Steve Langasek vorlon at debian.org
Wed Sep 25 20:19:18 UTC 2013


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 09:45:03PM +0200, Clement Wong wrote:
> Wait for 4.1?

That doesn't answer "what needs to be done".  Unless there are specific
things that we should be working on / testing, there's no reason to wait for
4.1.

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

Once 4.1 is released we would update to it in unstable.  So yes, there's no
reason to block the upload to unstable waiting for 4.1.

-- 
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

> > 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?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-samba-maint/attachments/20130925/33de2352/attachment.sig>


More information about the Pkg-samba-maint mailing list