-=| Bastian Blank, Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:10:26PM +0200 |=- > > I intend to NMU this bug on September, 20th with the patch sent 2 months > ago. > > [1]: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=30;filename=diff;att=1;bug=415668
Bastian, thank you both for your patience and persistence. It would be best if you make sure the ports appear in upstream CVS first. Otherwise once they implement them with a different implementation IDs, the databases created with "official" firebird engine will not be openable on Debian on the same architecture and vice versa. As long as I see, they have s390x (for the upcoming 2.5 release) using implementation ID of 78 (your patch has 79) and no implementation ID for s390 (your patch has 78). How different are s390 and s390x? Are the pointer sizes different or native integers or alignment rules? Is the s390x port enough for Debian? You may want to see http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-2559?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:cvs-tabpanel for the upstream bug report about s390x. Their CVS is browsable at http://firebird.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/firebird/firebird2/ Lastly, if you are interested in co-maintaining Firebird, help is much appreciated :) -- dam
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
