Merge ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/exim4:fix-lp1927755-bionic into ubuntu/+source/exim4:ubuntu/bionic-devel
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Approved by: | git-ubuntu bot |
Approved revision: | not available |
Merge reported by: | Bryce Harrington |
Merged at revision: | 6cbf24a464ec1e316d356cbaf6001964cc4ffd1b |
Proposed branch: | ~bryce/ubuntu/+source/exim4:fix-lp1927755-bionic |
Merge into: | ubuntu/+source/exim4:ubuntu/bionic-devel |
Diff against target: |
71 lines (+49/-0) 3 files modified
debian/changelog (+10/-0) debian/patches/fix-coding-typo.patch (+38/-0) debian/patches/series (+1/-0) |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
git-ubuntu bot | Approve | ||
Athos Ribeiro (community) | Approve | ||
Canonical Server Reporter | Pending | ||
Review via email: mp+429330@code.staging.launchpad.net |
Description of the change
Backports a fix to a regression caused by a CVE update last year to the bionic version of exim4. The issue only crops up when people self-compile our exim4 package, however this workflow seems to not be unusual if, for example, people want to enable some non-standard functionality or modules. Even though importance is Low, the error is pretty obvious and the fix super straightforward.
PPA: https:/
Results: (from http://
exim4 @ amd64:
01.09.22 21:56:52 Log 🗒️ ✅ Triggers: exim4/4.
exim4 @ arm64:
01.09.22 21:57:48 Log 🗒️ ✅ Triggers: exim4/4.
exim4 @ armhf:
01.09.22 21:57:32 Log 🗒️ ✅ Triggers: exim4/4.
exim4 @ ppc64el:
01.09.22 21:55:30 Log 🗒️ ✅ Triggers: exim4/4.
exim4 @ s390x:
01.09.22 21:56:47 Log 🗒️ ✅ Triggers: exim4/4.
There was an error fetching revisions from git servers. Please try again in a few minutes. If the problem persists, contact Launchpad support.
Thanks, Bryce!
It seems like the SRU template is at LP: #1927755, but the changelog references LP: #1971489.
Also, I am curious about how the SRU team will take this proposal, since it is an issue in the source package, but not in the binary package. This partially fits into the FTBFS case in https:/ /wiki.ubuntu. com/StableRelea seUpdates# Other_safe_ cases, where one could read as a suggestion to stage the SRU (block-proposed). Still, this FTBF(reconfigur ed)S.
Now, if we are modifying this through an SRU, does it mean we support the source modifications as well? If so, should we further test the modified sources (e.g., run autopkgtests on a modified build as well)?
In the other hand, as mentioned in the description, the error is pretty obvious and the fix super straightforward.
This LGTM. I will add a needs info tag so we can fix the bug reference in the changelog.