Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1253020 > unrolled thread

Bug#1078640: puma: will FTBFS during trixie support period

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Bug#1078640: puma: will FTBFS during trixie support period Timo Röhling <roehling@debian.org> - 2025-07-16 20:40 +0200
    Bug#1078640: puma: will FTBFS during trixie support period Lucas Kanashiro <kanashiro@riseup.net> - 2025-07-17 02:20 +0200
      Bug#1078640: puma: will FTBFS during trixie support period Timo Röhling <roehling@debian.org> - 2025-07-18 11:40 +0200

#1253020 — Bug#1078640: puma: will FTBFS during trixie support period

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

as an alternative proposal, the attached patch fixes the bug by 
re-generating the example certificates before the test.

Cheers
Timo

On Wed, 28 May 2025 14:49:16 +0200 Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> 
wrote:
> tags 1078640 patch
> thanks
> 
> Hello. The attached trivial patch (to be imported with quilt) should fix this bug.
> 
> Thanks.
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   │ Timo Röhling                                       │
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀   │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1  23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1253041

Hi,

> Em 16 de jul. de 2025, à(s) 18:47, Timo Röhling <roehling@debian.org> escreveu:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> as an alternative proposal, the attached patch fixes the bug by re-generating the example certificates before the test.

I am not sure if we want to add Java runtime as dependency here. I discussed that with Athos Ribeiro and he has a patch just updating the certificates for the period of 5 years (to also cover LTS). This is not the best solution since we will need to renew them every freeze, but it is the best we can get without adding more dependencies.

Cheers,
Lucas Kanashiro.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1253134

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

* Lucas Kanashiro <kanashiro@riseup.net> [2025-07-17 02:13]:
>I am not sure if we want to add Java runtime as dependency here. I 
>discussed that with Athos Ribeiro and he has a patch just updating the 
>certificates for the period of 5 years (to also cover LTS). This is not 
>the best solution since we will need to renew them every freeze, but it 
>is the best we can get without adding more dependencies.

I have no strong feelings one way or the other. I think it would be best 
to (re-)generate certificates at build time to avoid spurious failures 
when the certificates expire, and I wanted to have the RC bugfix for 
trixie. I marked the additional dependencies with <!nocheck> so it is 
clear they are not actually required for the package build itself. 
Ultimately, I am happy to leave this design decision up to you as the 
maintainer.


Cheers
Timo

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   │ Timo Röhling                                       │
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀   │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1  23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist

csiph-web