Processing of snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.changes
snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: snacc_1.3bbn-6.dsc snacc_1.3bbn-6.diff.gz snacc-doc_1.3bbn-6_all.deb snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc0_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon
Bug#249740: marked as done (FTBFS: Out of date aclocal.m4 inter alia)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:17:15 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#249740: fixed in snacc 1.3bbn-6 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 19 May 2004 00:26:27 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 18 17:26:27 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from zoot.lafn.org [206.117.18.6] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BQEuh-0001yM-00; Tue, 18 May 2004 17:26:27 -0700 Received: from localhost (host-66-81-192-63.rev.o1.com [66.81.192.63]) by zoot.lafn.org (8.12.3p3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i4J0QMxF064170 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 18 May 2004 17:26:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from kraai by localhost with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BQ6yc-8h-Gb for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 18 May 2004 08:57:58 -0700 Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 08:57:58 -0700 From: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FTBFS: Out of date aclocal.m4 inter alia Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version 0.70, clamav-milter version 0.70j Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,DATE_IN_PAST_06_12, HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: snacc Version: 1.3bbn-5.1 Severity: serious This package fails to build from source: ... cd ../.. && \ /bin/sh /tmp/buildd/snacc-1.3bbn/missing --run automake-1.7 --foreign compiler/core/Makefile warning: `configure.ac' and `configure.in' both present. at /usr/bin/automake-1.7 line 5412 warning: proceeding with `configure.ac'. at /usr/bin/automake-1.7 line 5412 configure.ac:63: version mismatch. This is Automake 1.7.9, configure.ac:63: but the definition used by this AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE configure.ac:63: comes from Automake 1.7.6. You should recreate configure.ac:63: aclocal.m4 with aclocal and run automake again. make[4]: *** [Makefile.in] Error 1 make[4]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/snacc-1.3bbn/compiler/core' make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/snacc-1.3bbn/compiler' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/snacc-1.3bbn' make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/snacc-1.3bbn' make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package ... I regenerated aclocal.m4, but this just revealed problems with dh_movefiles. -- Matt Kraai[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://ftbfs.org/ --- Received: (at 249740-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 10:23:43 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 03:23:43 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BweeU-0002xd-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 03:23:42 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BweYF-uS-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:17:15 -0400 From: Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#249740: fixed in snacc 1.3bbn-6 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:17:15 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Source: snacc Source-Version: 1.3bbn-6 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of snacc, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc0_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc0_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb snacc-doc_1.3bbn-6_all.d
snacc override disparity
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb: package says section is devel, override says libdevel. libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb: package says section is devel, override says libdevel. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct and the package wrong please fix the package so that this disparity is fixed in the next upload. If you feel the override is incorrect then please reply to this mail and explain why. [NB: this is an automatically generated mail; if you replied to one like it before and have not received a response yet, please ignore this mail. Your reply needs to be processed by a human and will be in due course, but until then the installer will send these automated mails; sorry.] -- Debian distribution maintenance software (This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])
snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc-dbg_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc-dev_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb libsnacc0_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/libsnacc0_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb snacc-doc_1.3bbn-6_all.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/snacc-doc_1.3bbn-6_all.deb snacc_1.3bbn-6.diff.gz to pool/main/s/snacc/snacc_1.3bbn-6.diff.gz snacc_1.3bbn-6.dsc to pool/main/s/snacc/snacc_1.3bbn-6.dsc snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/snacc/snacc_1.3bbn-6_i386.deb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 249740 Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Bug#174032: marked as done (splay: man page doesnt mention -vv -vvv)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:32:05 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#174032: fixed in splay 0.9.5.2-6 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Dec 2002 06:52:38 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 23 00:52:37 2002 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from tx.symonds.net [64.246.28.87] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18QMS5-sU-00; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:52:37 -0600 Received: from tc210-203-46-81.3-17.pl.ebtnet.net ([210.203.46.81] helo=debian) by tx.symonds.net with asmtp (Exim 4.04) id 18QMS3-0008T6-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 01:52:37 -0500 Received: from jidanni by debian with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18QKMZ-000302-00; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:38:47 +0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="BIG5" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Dan Jacobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Debian Bug Tracking System" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: splay: man page doesnt mention -vv -vvv X-Mailer: reportbug 2.2 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:38:47 +0800 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: Package: splay Version: 0.9.5.2-1 Severity: minor Tags: upstream see: -v Verbose, Very verbose, Very very verbose. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux debian 2.4.18-k7 #1 Sun Apr 14 13:19:11 EST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=zh_TW.Big5, LC_CTYPE=zh_TW.Big5 Versions of packages splay depends on: ii libc62.2.5-15GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libid3-3.7-133.7.13-4.1 Library for manipulating ID3v1 and ii libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 1:2.95.4-12 The GNU stdc++ library -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 174032-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 17:33:58 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 10:33:58 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwlMs-0002Cb-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:33:58 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwlL3-te-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:32:05 -0400 From: John Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#174032: fixed in splay 0.9.5.2-6 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:32:05 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Source: splay Source-Version: 0.9.5.2-6 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of splay, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: splay_0.9.5.2-6.diff.gz to pool/main/s/splay/splay_0.9.5.2-6.diff.gz splay_0.9.5.2-6.dsc to pool/main/s/splay/splay_0.9.5.2-6.dsc splay_0.9.5.2-6_i386.deb to pool/main/s/splay/splay_0.9.5.2-6_i386.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. John Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated splay package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 13:00:00 +0100 Source: splay Binary: splay Architecture: source i386 Version: 0.9.5.2-6 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: John Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Changed-By: John Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: splay - Sound player for MPEG-1,2 layer 1,2,3 Closes: 174032 246971 Changes: splay (0.9.5.2-6) unstable; urgency=low . * Cleaned remains of xsplay from debian/* * Modified splay man page to reflect lack of x
Bug#229998: marked as done (spong-www: unnecessary gifs)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#229998: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jan 2004 21:03:29 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 27 13:03:29 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from (frogcircus.org) [66.45.230.197] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AlaMr-0005J6-00; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:03:29 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by frogcircus.org with local; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:59:45 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: spong-www: unnecessary gifs X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:59:45 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE,HTML_10_20, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: spong-www Version: 2.7.7-1 Severity: minor I might be missing something, but as far as I can tell the gifs distributed with spong-www are never used: % dlocate -L spong-www | xargs grep '\.gif' /usr/share/spong/html/history.html: /usr/share/spong/html/home.html: /usr/share/spong/html/host.html: /usr/share/spong/html/lan.html: /usr/share/spong/html/service.html: /usr/share/spong/html/unix.html: /usr/sbin/spong-rrd:From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 11:53:03 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmbP-0007Rl-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:53:03 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmWP-0002vk-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 From: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Stenac?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#229998: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Source: spong Source-Version: 2.7.7-4 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of spong, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz spong_2.7.7-4.dsc to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.dsc A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Clément Stenac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated spong package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:45:59 +0200 Source: spong Binary: spong-server spong-client spong-www spong-common Architecture: source all Version: 2.7.7-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Clément Stenac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Changed-By: Clément Stenac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: spong-client - A systems and network monitoring system -- client programs spong-common - A systems and network monitoring system -- common libraries spong-server - A systems and network monitoring system -- server programs spong-www - A systems and
Bug#229966: marked as done (spong-www: incorrect domain rrd link)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#229966: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jan 2004 18:22:53 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 27 10:22:52 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from (frogcircus.org) [66.45.230.197] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AlXrQ-0004g9-00; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:22:52 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by frogcircus.org with local; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:19:06 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: spong-www: incorrect domain rrd link X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:19:06 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: spong-www Version: 2.7.7-1 Severity: minor The web interface at cgi-bin/www-spong.cgi contains a link in the top frame to "Spong RRD Charts" which links to /spong/rrd/index.html. Once a specific domain is selected, there is another "Spong RRD Charts" link within the host frame (in addition to the top link), which points to /spong/rrd/. Both links lead to a page which presents a list of all the domains in the system, which can then be selected to view their rrd charts. I would have expected the link in the top frame to link to this page (as it does). However, I expected the link in the host frame to link to the rrd charts for that domain (i.e. /spong/rrd/domain.tld/) -- this would present a more intuitive interface, and would eliminate the need to select the domain twice when viewing rdd charts through a specific domain's page. Charles -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux frogcircus.org 2.4.24-6um #3 Mon Jan 5 20:30:58 EST 2004 i686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US Versions of packages spong-www depends on: ii debconf 1.3.22 Debian configuration management sy ii perl 5.8.2-2Larry Wall's Practical Extraction ii spong-common 2.7.7-1A systems and network monitoring s ii wwwconfig-common 0.0.33 Debian web auto configuration -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 229966-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 18:56:11 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 11:56:11 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmeR-0008BD-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:56:11 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmWP-0002vi-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 From: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Stenac?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#229966: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 5 Source: spong Source-Version: 2.7.7-4 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of spong, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz spong_2.7.7-4.dsc to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.dsc A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached
Bug#229965: marked as done (spong-www: rdd domain directories have incorrect permissions set)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#229965: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jan 2004 18:16:45 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 27 10:16:45 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from (frogcircus.org) [66.45.230.197] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AlXlV-0004Yb-00; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:16:45 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by frogcircus.org with local; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:12:59 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: spong-www: rdd domain directories have incorrect permissions set X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:12:58 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: spong-www Version: 2.7.7-1 Severity: normal After running spong-rrd, the domain directories created in /var/lib/spong/rrd/www/domain.tld had 700 permissions, preventing them from being being viewed with a web browser. Note that all of the files within that directory have proper permissions set. If this is intentioanl, the user should at least be notified that it is happening. Charles -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux frogcircus.org 2.4.24-6um #3 Mon Jan 5 20:30:58 EST 2004 i686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US Versions of packages spong-www depends on: ii debconf 1.3.22 Debian configuration management sy ii perl 5.8.2-2Larry Wall's Practical Extraction ii spong-common 2.7.7-1A systems and network monitoring s ii wwwconfig-common 0.0.33 Debian web auto configuration -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 229965-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 18:56:10 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 11:56:10 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmeQ-0008B1-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:56:10 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmWP-0002vg-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 From: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Stenac?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#229965: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 4 Source: spong Source-Version: 2.7.7-4 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of spong, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz spong_2.7.7-4.dsc to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.dsc A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Clément Stenac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated spong package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please con
Bug#229934: marked as done (spong-www: rdd not integrated)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#229934: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jan 2004 15:45:15 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 27 07:45:15 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from (frogcircus.org) [66.45.230.197] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AlVOt-0005Lq-00; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 07:45:15 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (uid 1000) by frogcircus.org with local; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:41:34 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: spong-www: rdd not integrated X-Mailer: reportbug 2.37 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:41:34 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_01_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: spong-www Version: 2.7.7-1 Severity: important rdd support is not integrated into the spong-www package. Further, there is insufficient information in the contained README and sample plugins to get rdd working properly. Specifically, the rrdcgi and rrdtool programs are not included in the package. It would be most helpful to have (even if it be in a separate spong-rdd package) rdd fully installed and configured by default. Charles -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux frogcircus.org 2.4.24-6um #3 Mon Jan 5 20:30:58 EST 2004 i686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US Versions of packages spong-www depends on: ii debconf 1.3.22 Debian configuration management sy ii perl 5.8.2-2Larry Wall's Practical Extraction ii spong-common 2.7.7-1A systems and network monitoring s ii wwwconfig-common 0.0.33 Debian web auto configuration -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 229934-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 18:56:10 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 11:56:10 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmeP-0008Ap-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:56:09 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmWP-0002ve-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 From: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Stenac?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#229934: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 3 Source: spong Source-Version: 2.7.7-4 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of spong, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz spong_2.7.7-4.dsc to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.dsc A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Clément Stenac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated spong package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with
Bug#245972: marked as done (spong-client: Spong HTTP check does not set User-Agent Header)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#245972: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Apr 2004 14:23:26 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 26 07:23:26 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from asmodis.mb-net.net [193.22.253.2] (Debian-exim) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BI714-0004fB-00; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 07:23:26 -0700 Received: from i538745cf.versanet.de ([83.135.69.207] helo=tardis.intranet.mb-net.net ident=Debian-exim) by asmodis.mb-net.net with asmtp (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA:16) (Exim 4.31) id 1BI712-0008Is-66 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:23:24 +0200 Received: from bus by tardis.intranet.mb-net.net with local (Exim 4.31) id 1BI710-0002cS-IM; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:23:22 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Michael Bussmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: spong-client: Spong HTTP check does not set User-Agent Header X-Mailer: reportbug 2.56 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:23:22 +0200 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 1 Package: spong-client Version: 2.7.7-3 Severity: wishlist Hi, What about adding a User-Agent Header in the HTTP queries spong sends out? A simple "$method $urlpath HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: $hname:$port\r\nUser-Agent: Spong\r\n\r\n", 10 ); in line /usr/share/spong/Spong/Network/plugins/check_http:45 would add one, so website admins can filter spong queries from their webserver statistics (e.g. IgnoreAgent Spong* for webalizer). Best regards, MB -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (300, 'unstable'), (5, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.5 Locale: LANG=C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Versions of packages spong-client depends on: ii debconf 1.4.22 Debian configuration management sy ii perl 5.8.3-3Larry Wall's Practical Extraction ii spong-common 2.7.7-3A systems and network monitoring s -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 245972-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 18:53:02 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 11:53:02 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmbO-0007RZ-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:53:02 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwmWP-0002vo-00; Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 From: =?utf-8?q?Cl=C3=A9ment_Stenac?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $ Subject: Bug#245972: fixed in spong 2.7.7-4 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:47:53 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2 Source: spong Source-Version: 2.7.7-4 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of spong, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-client_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-common_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-server_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/spong/spong-www_2.7.7-4_all.deb spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.diff.gz spong_2.7.7-4.dsc to pool/main/s/spong/spong_2.7.7-4.dsc A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.
Processing of ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.changes
ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: ucbmpeg_1r2-10.dsc ucbmpeg_1r2-10.diff.gz ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon
ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: ucbmpeg_1r2-10.diff.gz to pool/non-free/u/ucbmpeg/ucbmpeg_1r2-10.diff.gz ucbmpeg_1r2-10.dsc to pool/non-free/u/ucbmpeg/ucbmpeg_1r2-10.dsc ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.deb to pool/non-free/u/ucbmpeg/ucbmpeg_1r2-10_i386.deb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > owner 265968 ! Bug#265968: rdiff-backup: Can't restore incremental backups Owner recorded as Alec Berryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#265968: marked as done (rdiff-backup: Can't restore incremental backups)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:25:41 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Inproper command? has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 00:31:27 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 15 17:31:27 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from edoras.nas.com [66.114.32.34] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BwVPK-0007EA-00; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:26 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by edoras.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D41EB54D; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edoras.nas.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (edoras.nas.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64703-07; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debian1.loaner.com (dsl-47-134.nas.com [66.114.47.134]) by edoras.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A02CEB542; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kingsley by debian1.loaner.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1BwVPK-0003g8-00; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:26 -0700 Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:31:26 -0700 From: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: rdiff-backup: Can't restore incremental backups Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Reportbug-Version: 2.43 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040803i Sender: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nas.com Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: rdiff-backup Version: 0.13.4-3 Severity: critical Tags: sid Justification: causes serious data loss Thanks for maintaining rdiff-backup. It's concept is great. The main reason I'm writing is to report that, at least on my box, rdiff-backup seems to be unable to restore incremental backups. I suspect that I'm doing something wrong, but, since no one knows if they can restore data until they try and the consequences of failing can be severe, I decided to email you. For example, when I type: $ rdiff-backup --restore-as-of 3M /etc/passwd /tmp it reports: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/rdiff-backup", line 23, in ? rdiff_backup.Main.Main(sys.argv[1:]) File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/Main.py", line 259, in Main take_action(rps) File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/Main.py", line 239, in take_action elif action == "restore-as-of": Restore(rps[0], rps[1], 1) File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/Main.py", line 451, in Restore if not restore_root_set: assert restore_set_root(src_rp) AssertionError However, incremental files exist: $ ls -l /mnt/backup/rdiff-backup-data/increments/etc/passwd* reports: -rw-r--r--1 root root 259 Aug 16 2003 /mnt/backup/rdiff-backup-data/increments/etc/passwd-.2004-07-07T01:21:01-07:00.diff.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 399 Aug 16 2003 /mnt/backup/rdiff-backup-data/increments/etc/passwd.2004-07-07T01:21:01-07:00.diff.gz Thanks, Kingsley -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.7-1-k7 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages rdiff-backup depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-13 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii librsync1 0.9.6-8 Binary diff library based on the r ii python2.3 2.3.1-2 An interactive high-level object-o ii rdiff 0.9.5-2 Binary diff tool for signature-bas -- no debconf information -- --- Received: (at 265968-done) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Aug 2004 21:26:29 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 16 14:26:29 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail.bowdoin.edu [139.140.14.83] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Bwozt-0007
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > owner 253057 ! Bug#253057: rdiff-backup: reports unchanged files as changed Owner recorded as Alec Berryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#255935: marked as done (IOError: [Errno 24] Too many open files:)
Your message dated Mon, 16 Aug 2004 17:37:09 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Housekeeping has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Jun 2004 21:39:19 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 23 14:39:18 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from edoras.nas.com [66.114.32.34] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1BdFSg-RZ-00; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:39:18 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by edoras.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F0CEB905; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:41:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edoras.nas.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (edoras.nas.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24132-07; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from debian1.loaner.com (dsl-47-131.nas.com [66.114.47.131]) by edoras.nas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5886EEB8AD; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kingsley by debian1.loaner.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1BdFSg-0004p3-00; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:39:18 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: IOError: [Errno 24] Too many open files: X-Mailer: reportbug 2.43 Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 14:39:18 -0700 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: "Kingsley G. Morse Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at nas.com Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: Package: rdiff-backup Version: 0.13.4-1 Severity: normal Tags: sid First of all, thanks for maintaining Debian's rdiff-backup package. I like it an use it. It seems that rdiff-backup can open too many files under some circumstances with this command: rdiff-backup -v3 \ --exclude /c \ --exclude /mnt/dos \ --exclude /mnt/dos_backup \ --exclude /mnt/backup \ --exclude /tmp \ --exclude /proc \ --exclude /home/kingsley/tmp \ / \ /mnt/backup It returns this error message after about an hour: File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/Main.py", line 265, in Backup File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/backup.py", line 51, in Mirror_and_increment File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/backup.py", line 226, in patch_and_increment File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rorpiter.py", line 279, in __call__ File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/backup.py", line 607, in fast_process File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/backup.py", line 593, in inc_with_checking File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/increment.py", line 44, in Increment File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/increment.py", line 73, in makesnapshot File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 213, in copy_with_attribs File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 96, in copy File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 118, in copy_reg_file File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 213, in copy_with_attribs File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 96, in copy File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 118, in copy_reg_file File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 933, in write_from_fileobj File "/usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages/rdiff_backup/rpath.py", line 912, in open File "/usr/lib/python2.3/gzip.py", line 94, in __init__ IOError: [Errno 24] Too many open files: '/mnt/backup/rdiff-backup-data/increments/var/spool/news/message.id/961/<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.2004-06-16T01:20:39-07:00.snapshot.gz' Exception exceptions.TypeError: "'NoneType' object is not callable" in > ignored Exception exceptions.TypeError: "'NoneType' object is not callable" in > ignored Exception exceptions.TypeError: "'NoneType' object is not callable" in > ignored A similar error message was returned by ve
Bug#253057: More information
Hi Marc, Thanks for reporting. Two questions for you. First, have the timestamps or permissions on these files changed? I don't think they would in the course of normal system usage, but we may as well cover all our bases. Secondly, is there anything interesting about the increment diff files? They'd be located in the 'increments' subdirectory of the 'rdiff-backup-data' folder in the backup root directory. In particular, what are the sizes of the diff.gz files of the files that shouldn't have changed? Thanks, Alec signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 253057 +moreinfo Bug#253057: rdiff-backup: reports unchanged files as changed There were no tags set. Tags added: moreinfo > owner 206252 ! Bug#206252: rdiff-backup: won't follow symlinked toplevel directories Owner recorded as Alec Berryman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#265968: acknowledged by developer (Inproper command?)
Hi Alec, You were right. Thanks for graciously and concisely solving my problem. Perhaps rdiff-backup should emit a more descriptive error message. Cheers, Kingsley --
Bug#265968: acknowledged by developer (Inproper command?)
begin quotation of Kingsley G. Morse Jr. on 2004-08-16 15:21:11 -0700: > Perhaps rdiff-backup should emit a more descriptive error message. It could on a number of points, not just on this particular one. I'll look in to adding more descriptive error messages. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#190118: Update to bug
Hello, This bug has been fixed upstream by compiling gnucash against GtkHTML-1.1 see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84707#c11 -- Gordon Heydon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
