On 2018-02-17 23:31, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > Hi Yaroslav, > > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 07:18:56PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: >> >> On Wed, 07 Feb 2018, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 09:50:41AM -0300, Leonhard Weber wrote: >>>> Hi, >> >>>> I'd like to second the request for a bpo release due to the exact same >>>> rationale. >> >>>> In the meantime deferring btrfs bpo upgrades because of btrbk. >> >>> :-o >> >>> Dear Yaroslav, >> >>> I am CCing you in the hopes of closing this bug (open since >>> 2017-10-17) because you sponsored uploads of btrbk. >> >> I could close it but I guess you meant "fix/address" it? for that >> unfortunately I don't have bandwidth ATM... FWIW quick&dirty >> backports are also available from neurodebian > > Sorry for the delay. Yes, I meant please fix/address it when you can > ;-) > > > Hi Axel, > > On a somewhat tangentially related topic, please address these two > lintian errors when you have a chance: > https://lintian.debian.org/maintainer/a...@tty0.ch.html#btrbk >
python-script-but-no-python-dep The issue here is that btrbk does not depend on python. There are python scripts for use with (experimental) kdf encryption, I still want to ship them, but the people enabling this know about they have to install python. Is there a way to just silence this lintian report? debian-rules-is-dh_make-template This one is new to me, I'm not sure how to resolve it, I'm not a debian user myself and have limited knowledge about the packaging system. I will happily merge pull requests which fix this on: https://github.com/digint/btrbk-packaging/tree/debian > > Sincerely, > Nicholas >
