postgrey broken in gutsy

[Cyber Dog]

Ping...

... Again, I'm not familiar with the release process, but I'm very
concerned with the lack of progress on this.  It's confirmed, 'high
priority', affects high visibility applications, has been patched
successfully in Debian for a long time now, and has a working fix
posted to the bug (some of us on the ticket have tested it
successfully).  I feel bad hassling the maintainers directly like
this, but I see no other way to get this issue attention.  If
something more is expected of myself, or other people who've
experienced the issue, please post instructions to the bug report so
we may know how to help.  If I should be talking to someone else, let
me know who.  Otherwise, can we please get the ball rolling again on
releasing this?

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/db4.4/+bug/153996

Thanks-

On Nov 15, 2007 12:33 PM, Cyber Dog <cyberdog3k at gmail.com> wrote:
> Going strong for a week now.  As someone not familiar with the
> review/release process, is there something more I/we can do to get the
> fixed package approved?  This is the only showstopper keeping me from
> upgrading my mail servers to gutsy.  I've also recently begun having
> problems with clamav under feisty (another story), so the sooner the
> better as far as I'm concerned.
>
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2007 2:52 PM, Cyber Dog <cyberdog3k at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/5/07, dAniel hAhler <ubuntu+lists at thequod.de> wrote:
> > > Cyber Dog wrote:
> > >
> > > > Now, unfortunately, reclassifying the bug seems to have equally failed
> > > > at getting it any attention.  I've gotten several "me too" updates
> > > > over the past couple weeks, but no updates from developers.  It
> > > > appears most users are resorting to mixing Debian packages into their
> > > > systems to resolve this issue.  I find it hard to believe that
> > > > importing an existing Debian patch could be so complicated for the
> > > > maintainers to do, but then again I'm not involved in the process
> > > > either.  The bottom line is, this bug seems to be fairly popular, and
> > > > rather severe, but apparently we still haven't gotten the attention of
> > > > the right people.  Ideas?
> > >
> > > I've looked into it, triaged the bugs around it (it affects subversion,
> > > too), documented the ways to reproduce the bugs and attached patches for
> > > hardy and gutsy-proposed.
> > >
> > > See https://launchpad.net/bugs/153996.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, quite a lot of programs depend on libdb4.4 (and other
> > > packages from db4.4), which I have not tested/looked into (see
> > > "apt-cache rdepends libdb4.4").
> > >
> > > I've documented everything I've found out at the above bug, you may want
> > > to test the patch (see
> > > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuPackagingGuide/BuildFromDebdiff for
> > > building fixed packages yourself).
> > >
> > > Hope this helps. I'm not really sure about the fix, but it reverts
> > > something from 8.1ubuntu2 - and the bug in Debian did something similar
> > > from 8.1 to 9 - and reverted it in version 10 (IIRC).
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for taking up this issue!  I've tested your ppa build, and all
> > the results seem good thus far... postgrey is finally stable, and I've
> > noted no new problems.  Hopefully this fix can get approved for
> > release.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://daniel.hahler.de/
> > >
> >
>