Bug#1013329: razor 2.85 is really 2.84
Hi vagrant,
thanks for pushing this to bdo.
On 21/06/2022 23:41, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
On 2022-06-20, Malte S. Stretz wrote:
TL;DR: It looks like the Debian 2.85 razor package you've been recently
working on according to
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/razor/-/commits/debian/latest is really 2.84
>> […]
The current "upstream" version was uploaded to debian in 2008 currently
present in old-old-stable (e.g. two releases prior to the current stable
release):
https://tracker.debian.org/news/303771/accepted-razor-1285-1-source-amd64/
The best thing might be to actually update to the newest upstream
release, if there is indeed one newer than 2.85... and kind of ignore
that unfortunate problem...
... though there might be security issues that are not correctly tracked
that are fixed in the upstream 2.85, but not in the debian packages
because of the version discrepancy; that might be worth confirming and
possibly notifying the security team.
The good news: There doesn't seem to be any security relevant changes
in https://github.com/toddr/Razor2-Client-Agent/compare/v2.84...v2.85
There even don't seem to be many functional changes, most of the changes
are cleanup/build related things. v2.86 also was just a build related
thing.
The bad news: All the current Debian patches won't apply anymore since
there was some excessive reformatting applied upstream.
OTOH will some of them not be needed anymore since it looks they were
partially incorporated upstream.
All that said, not sure I have the energy to tackle this kind of tangled
problem at the moment...
Would you like help with that? My Debian packaging know how is a bit
rusty but I could create a PR on Salsa which
* Merges the Upstream repo into the current Salsa repo (ie. switching it
over to https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit#Using_the_upstream_repo
without losing any history) at upstream v2.84
* Fixes up the Quilt patches and merge that state with upstream v2.85
* Bump the whole stuff to v2.86
What do I get out of that? I'd like to include my IPv6 patch on top of
all of this.
Regards,
Malte
Reply to: