Quoting Rich Gray (<email address hidden>):
> Is the patch applied to the amd64 .deb attached in post #13? Or another
> case of post #20? :)
The amd64 .deb in post #13 was wrong - the patch wasn't being applied.
The one in post 20 was confirmed to fix the bug. The debdiff is in
comment #23 for trivial recreation of amd64 .deb.
Odd, this seems to have fallen off the radar. It should be proposed
for SRU. I'll start the necessary steps in the morning, or will be happy
if you'd like to do it sooner.
Quoting Rich Gray (<email address hidden>):
> Is the patch applied to the amd64 .deb attached in post #13? Or another
> case of post #20? :)
The amd64 .deb in post #13 was wrong - the patch wasn't being applied.
The one in post 20 was confirmed to fix the bug. The debdiff is in
comment #23 for trivial recreation of amd64 .deb.
Odd, this seems to have fallen off the radar. It should be proposed
for SRU. I'll start the necessary steps in the morning, or will be happy
if you'd like to do it sooner.