XPost: linux.debian.bugs.dist

Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: [email protected]
Usertags: transition
Control: affects -1 + src:fuse3
X-Debbugs-CC: [email protected]

Hi RMs,

There were some ABI breaks in the latest versions of fuse3 and thus
those were not packaged. Upstream to solve these issues, along with
other fixes, increased the soname of the library. This release is
still RC, but packaged and available from experimental. I've done the
rebuilds and the API basically the same, only two packages FTBFS.
The first is vuos (bug filed [1]) a relatively new package. The other
is qemu, but as its failure is not related to fuse3, I did not file it
yet. It failed for me in the past too, but not on buildds. Especially
that it built fine with the new fuse3 package version in a tainted
chroot. I suspect it's not a real problem but some issue in my setup.
I added kibi as Cc as fuse3 has an udeb.

Thanks for consideration,
Laszlo/GCS
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/1098735

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Processing control commands:

affects -1 + src:fuse3

Bug #1099045 [release.debian.org] transition: fuse3
Added indication that 1099045 affects src:fuse3

--
1099045: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1099045
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Processing control commands:

tags -1 confirmed

Bug #1099045 [release.debian.org] transition: fuse3
Added tag(s) confirmed.

--
1099045: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1099045
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format...

Your message dated Wed, 2 Apr 2025 19:45:47 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1099045: transition: fuse3
has caused the Debian Bug report #1099045,
regarding transition: fuse3
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)


--
1099045: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1099045
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Feb 2025 15:59:03 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(2021-04-09) on buxtehude.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-126.6 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,
BODY_INCLUDES_CONTROL_AFFECTS,BODY_INCLUDES_PACKAGE,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,
DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FROMDEVELOPER,
HAS_PACKAGE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,
USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST,USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST autolearn=ham
autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 8; hammy, 147; neutral, 38; spammy, 0.
spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:sk:stravin,
0.000-+--H*RT:sk:stravin, 0.000-+--Hx-spam-relays-external:311,
0.000-+--H*RT:311, 0.000-+--H*RT:108
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Received: