> Hi,
>
> I'm considering packaging syslinux from your git repository (topmost
> commit "ext4: Fix 64bit feature") for Debian.
>
> Currently syslinux version 6.03 is packaged, but the patch queue is
> quite large (18 patches at the moment, mostly cherry-picked from your
> git repository). I think updating has advantages:
> * I can drop most of the patches, making it easier to deal with issues
> (less likely they were introduced in Debian)
> * Your git version gets a bit of testing
>
> Since this decision will sooner or later affect a few distributions I
> wanted to ask: Do you think that's a good idea or would you prefer I
> package 6.04-pre1 instead? Some other distributions, like Fedora do
> that and it will still allow me to drop quite a few patches.
>
> Thanks for your advise
> Lukas
Fedora's Syslinux package has been (partially) broken for a very long
time, even when its bug tracker contains the required patches. It is
not a coincidence that other RPM-based distributions have come up with
their own Syslinux 6.xx packages (instead of basing them on Fedora's).
So, Fedora doesn't seem to be a "good" benchmark / parameter /
guidance
regarding Syslinux packaging at this time.
While I am writing this, 6.04-pre1 is more than 19 months old, with
around 20 (or so) relevant commits pushed after it.
Talking about proposed patches from Debian, a few days ago Gene wrote:
"I'll try to get to these soon"
Debian's Syslinux package is also using a gnu-efi version more recent
than upstream Syslinux.
I would like to see these proposed patches evaluated, and, if
appropriate, incorporated in Syslinux; then I'd like to see an update
to the gnu-efi submodule in Syslinux (there is really no point in
delaying this); and then a new Syslinux 6.04-pre2.
FWIW, my suggestion / wish: upstream Syslinux performing the
aforementioned actions, then releasing 6.04-pre2, and then Debian could
have a "6.04-pre2", or "6.04-0.1" (or "0.2" if you
want) or similar.
Regards,
Ady.