X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Message-ID: <1324213329.2251.12.camel@localhost> Subject: Re: [geda-user] PCB sync request for the upcoming Ubuntu long term support release From: Peter Clifton To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:02:09 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20111216183708.GA30970@malakian.lan> References: <20111216183708 DOT GA30970 AT malakian DOT lan> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk --=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 10:37 -0800, Andrew Poelstra wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 05:28:18PM +0000, Justyn Butler wrote: > > > > [snip] > >=20 > > Given the large number of bug fixes etc since the last snapshot (and > > because PCB is a non-essential package) I would expect that a sync > > request for pcb from unstable would be accepted, if I've understood > > the process correctly. > > Does that sound sensible? If so shall I do it, or does someone else > > better know what they're doing? > > >=20 > What needs to be done before we can do a fresh bugfix release > of pcb? Is it just that somebody with permissions needs to take > the time, or are there pending showstoppers that need dealing > with? I've fixed the snapping bugs DJ mentioned to me (which started to irritate me when I was working on a layout last week!). There is a bug I've encountered.. certainly in the PCB+GL branch, but I'm not sure about git HEAD, where PCB will crash when using the "F" short-cut (lookup connection). So far, my valgrind and gdb foo have not been very helpful, as I've not managed to indentify exact steps to reproduce the issue. I saw it at least two or three times at work the other day though, so I think the right strategy is to try and work under gdb or valgrind on that particular design, and see if that sheds any light on the issue. Best wishes, Peter --=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAABAgAGBQJO7eRRAAoJEOo4D/b1x+QV7skH/12L3S/k+vsZFD4AdKnUuXZQ S7yn+GuDO28L8igOsJV87QGCrNly5Cnlk3jNcwx4WajgWlvAkZ0rii4omOuQm1AB Jqa9PuSRxo/gqms5M3L1Nac+aMHa8yfIX5v+AXf91snGnjqRpZ+3DZt2F98A6qFt /1MTBOuxnkd3keV+9NHse5FwUzDsVls6SarzdF0Gr8MUV/lMrj9ruquj+aYui+CR ZKUpjTisSoJ22LOM2dlayx80zvGFUTBs/pAbrIUK/kA7necMKxSeX08Soy7Kjg+Z fIVZpPEPUy9YOBIZfnmpn7aGWFAF7sROAL+SkNsLaKa9Q7OIiZ5Ujrm2sbxmWrk= =1rsT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-LyQ4+Vgj3lCY8CMXYdyY--