Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
Newsgroups: linux.debian.bugs.dist,linux.debian.maint.java,linux.debian.devel.release
Subject: Bug#975874: buster-pu: package openjdk-11/11.0.9.1+1-1~deb10u1
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 18:40:02 +0100
Message-ID: <Bi0Kd-2RE-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
References: <Bfh4R-8C-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <Bfh4R-8C-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BgNFn-6O7-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <Bfh4R-8C-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BhUYa-7Qq-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <Bfh4R-8C-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BhUYa-7Qq-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Old-Return-Path: <debbugs@buxtehude.debian.org>
Reply-To: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>, 975874@bugs.debian.org
Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Resent-Cc: Debian Release Team <debian-release@lists.debian.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 35
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1035574 linux.debian.maint.java:11942 linux.debian.devel.release:98744

On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 11:28 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> [adding d-java to Cc for greater visibility]
> 
> On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 09:21 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-11-25 at 20:23 -0800, tony mancill wrote:
> > > I propose that openjdk-11 be updated to upstream 11.0.9.1+1 in
> > > the
> > > upcoming stable point release.  This update addresses a
> > > regression
> > > [1] introduced in upstream release 11.0.9+11, which is present in
> > > buster via a security upload [2].  This keeps Debian on par with
> > > other vendors - e.g. RedHat [3], Ubuntu [4], and AdoptOpenJDK [5]
> > > -
> > > and introduces the same upstream version currently available in
> > > testing and unstable.
> > 
> > The versioning here appears to cause issues in at least Jenkins -
> > see 
> > https://issues.jenkins.io/projects/JENKINS/issues/JENKINS-64212
> 
> Have there been any further issues that people are aware of?
> 
> The Jenkins fix is not yet available to most users if I understand
> correctly, so we need to consider the tradeoffs between the
> regression on the OpenJDK side and requiring manual intervention on
> Jenkins installations (and possibly other things confused by the
> version string).

To tie up a couple of IRC conversations with Moritz, the fixed Jenkins
versions have now been released, so we can probably just tell people
they need to upgrade.

Regards,

Adam