On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 21:29 +0000, Neil Williams wrote: > I've tidied up the patch which turns this silent error into a more > noisy warning but does not try to fix the underlying issue. The patch > is based on one by Johannes Ernst <johannes.er...@gmail.com>, as > detailed in the attached patch. (The only other change is to put the > patch into the series file *in the middle* due to problems with the > gnutls changes needing to be last.)
>From the bug log, it looks like this hasn't been fixed in unstable yet; is that correct? I appreciate that the unstable package won't be able to migrate, but I'd prefer to see this fixed there as well rather than the patch being dropped straight in to squeeze. [...] > Distribution: testing-proposed-updates > Urgency: medium [...] > I'm guessing medium here, quite happy to change that to suit release > team preference. fwiw, urgency is irrelevant for t-p-u uploads; the package enters testing once all builds are available and a team member adds an approval hint, which is one of the reasons we prefer to avoid t-p-u where possible. I might be missing something, but this change looks wrong: + nonblocking?0:(int)timeout_ms?1000:timeout_ms); If timeout_ms is non-zero, a hard-coded value of 1000 will be used; otherwise timeout_ms will be passed, which seems to be exactly what the change was trying to avoid? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
