Comment 3 for bug 1887535

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 6:16 PM Dan Streetman
<email address hidden> wrote:
>
> @mjt I'd really like to make progress on this; I've submitted upstream 3 times now with no response, and there's no response in the Debian PR:
> https://salsa.debian.org/qemu-team/qemu/-/merge_requests/14
>
> can you provide your opinion?
>
> @paelzer even if upstream doesn't respond, and @mjt doesn't want this in
> Debian, we need to merge this in Ubuntu. I wasted hours figuring this
> out, and other members of my team have also wasted hours - days -
> because of this. I wonder how many community members have similarly
> wasted time due to this bug.

I'm ok taking this change going forward even if not accepted upstream
as it isn't a functional but a packaging decision at this point.
I tagged the bug to pull it in on the next cycles merges at whatever
stage it is. Nevertheless we should continue the upstream discussion.

I reviewed and acked on salsa and I also pinged mjt, just in case he
has missed the MR.

On the qemu-trivial list I saw that Michael asked you to resend to
qemu-devel as it isn't "exactly trivial and it needs some review from
the developers".
And on that resend thread Daniel denied the patch as-is in:
  https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-09/msg07966.html
I think once you continue to drive that to a resolution this will get
upstream merged eventually and can be applied from there.

But I'd have two more things you won't like that much since the bug
has SRU-tasks:
1. The "time wasted" argument is hard and I know from other cases how
that feels, but the answer should be that one should never try to
build a package locally out of the dir anyway (and it isn't a problem
for sbuild, launchpad-builders, ...).
2. Due to #1 and for forcing millions of downloads to qemu users not
having a change I'm tempted to say that we should not consider SRUing
it IMHO.
Maybe we can bundle it with another upload that we'd need to do anyway.