On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:23:04AM -0400, Jon Bernard wrote:
This is a bug report against liburcu/0.7.4-1 but you seem to have closed
it in an ltt-control upload. If it wasn't a liburcu bug in the first
place, you should have reassigned the bug before closing it; if it is a
liburcu bug OTOH, you
* Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:04:59PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> > Package: liburcu1
> > Version: 0.7.4-1
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: Policy 8.6
>
> This is a bug report against liburcu/0.7.4-1 but you seem to have closed
> it in an ltt-control upload. If
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:04:59PM -0400, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Package: liburcu1
> Version: 0.7.4-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 8.6
This is a bug report against liburcu/0.7.4-1 but you seem to have closed
it in an ltt-control upload. If it wasn't a liburcu bug in the first
place,
3 would have been in lieu of 2, which is in retrospect a better choice in this
case, and will give you the opportunity to tighten liblttng-ctl0's own shlibs
while you're at it. Please take care to have ltt-control build-depend on a
version of liburcu-dev with this fix. (I presume liburcu-dev alr
* Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> 3 would have been in lieu of 2, which is in retrospect a better choice in this
> case, and will give you the opportunity to tighten liblttng-ctl0's own shlibs
> while you're at it. Please take care to have ltt-control build-depend on
> a version of liburcu-dev with this fi
* Jon Bernard wrote:
> * Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> > Jon Bernard writes:
> >
> > > Is there an easier way of doing this without searching through the source
> > > to
> > > find all liburcu calls and then pinning them to a specific version in the
> > > symbols file? - or is that how it's done?
> >
* Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Jon Bernard writes:
>
> > Is there an easier way of doing this without searching through the source to
> > find all liburcu calls and then pinning them to a specific version in the
> > symbols file? - or is that how it's done?
>
> You can run dpkg-gensymbols on a build
Jon Bernard writes:
> Is there an easier way of doing this without searching through the source to
> find all liburcu calls and then pinning them to a specific version in the
> symbols file? - or is that how it's done?
You can run dpkg-gensymbols on a build tree of 0.6.6, copy the resulting
symb
* Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Package: liburcu1
> Version: 0.7.4-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: Policy 8.6
>
> lttng-tools's postinst fails on my system, which still has liburcu1
> 0.6.7-2 (from testing), demonstrating that liblttng-ctl0 needs a
> versioned dependency on liburcu1. I would say
Package: liburcu1
Version: 0.7.4-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 8.6
lttng-tools's postinst fails on my system, which still has liburcu1
0.6.7-2 (from testing), demonstrating that liblttng-ctl0 needs a
versioned dependency on liburcu1. I would say liburcu1 is primarily
at fault here (th
10 matches
Mail list logo
