Hello! > > > I happened upon #921599 at $work and saw you tagged it as pending, > > > so I wondered if there are commits to the git repo on salsa or a merge > > > request or something where this bug is fixed? > > This is the PR https://github.com/MariaDB/mariadb-connector-c/pull/101 > > and this is the issue that I have opened on jira > > https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-18721. I don't know when it is > > going to be included in Debian thought. > > I see - I was expecting the 'pending' tag to mean that an agreed-upon > solution had been committed to the packaging repo, just waiting to be > uploaded when other fixes to go along are ready... > > > > We don't want to wait for the proper fix to be uploaded and migrate to > > > buster, but I thought we might contribute some useful real-world > > > testing... > > Thanks for that! I think that compiling with the patch and trying to > > reproduce https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=921599#10 > > would be sufficient. > > I did that, and it looks good. Additionally, I filed a merge request on > salsa with the patch: > https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.3/merge_requests/15 > > However I'm not sure a -2 from master can be included into buster at > this point, as the "Use upstream conf defaults" commit that has already > been merged is fixing a bug of only "wishlist" severity?
I added some comments to the Merge Request, perhaps you did not notice? https://salsa.debian.org/mariadb-team/mariadb-10.3/merge_requests/15 > Looking at commit ids alone (e.g > https://github.com/MariaDB/mariadb-connector-c/commit/eb6e47252aaf8abe29b207e7e1fe79ec95c49cf1) > it is hard to track which version if MariaDB Connector C has this. In > particular if it is on the upcoming MariaDB 10.3.14 or not. > A Forwarded line like e.g. Forwarded: > https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-18019 would be nice.
