NEW changes in proposedupdates
Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: qt4-x11_4.4.3-1+lenny1_sparc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: lighttpd_1.4.19-5+lenny1_sparc.changes ACCEPT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1ni1ci-0004ur...@ries.debian.org
NEW changes in oldproposedupdates
Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: sendmail_8.13.8-3+etch1_sparc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: fuse_2.5.3-4.4+etch1_sparc.changes ACCEPT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1ni1ck-0004uf...@ries.debian.org
Bug#570346: nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100218084847.17084.72353.report...@ian.lenk.info
Bug#570356: transition: directfb - soname change
Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Severity: normal follow-up to http://bugs.debian.org/569815 DirectFB 1.2.9 introduce a soname change. libdirectfb-dev reverse build-depends: -- gst-plugins-bad0.10 libsdl1.2 splashy cairo freesci directvnc links2 lives mplayer qingy xine-lib gtk+2.0 -- Could you schedule this transition and the related binNMUs ? As a side note, I would like to push Phonon 4.3.80/Qt 4.6.2 (directfb->gtk->qt)to Sid, right after directfb transition. Another bug report will follow to track Phonon and Qt schedule. Cheers, Fathi -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002181109.20233.f...@debian.org
Re: Please BinNMU 5 packages to fix their dependencies
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 07:39:45PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 19:04 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 06:57:20PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:39:17AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > > nmu gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 > > > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild with > > > > fixed dh_xulrunner, see #567746' > > > > dw gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 > > > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'xulrunner (>= > > > > 1.9.1.6-2)' > > > > > > I'm wondering... is the >= syntax properly handled ? 1.9.1.6-2 has been > > > available on (some) architectures for a few days, but none of the > > > packages above have apparently been attempted to be built. > > > > Cyril Brulebois enlighted me with the obvious: the dep-wait should be on > > xulrunner-dev (>= 1.9.1.6-2), not xulrunner. > > dep-waits fixed. It seems the nmus haven't triggered on the architectures where xulrunner-dev >= 1.9.1.6-2 is available. Could you check what is happening ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100218104312.ga28...@glandium.org
Bug#570360: transition: phonon and qt4-x11 - schedule
Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Severity: normal follow-up to http://bugs.debian.org/570356 Qt 4.6.2 is ready for an upload to Sid. We would like to plan the move and couple it with Phonon. phonon library is now provided by phonon source package instead of qt4-x11 source package. The Qt version 4.6 series is binary compatible with the 4.5.x series. Applications compiled for 4.5 will continue to run with 4.6. Could you schedule this upload (after directfb transition) ? Cheers, Fathi -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201002181144.30392.f...@debian.org
Re: Please BinNMU 5 packages to fix their dependencies
Mike Hommey wrote: [...] On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:39:17AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: nmu gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild with fixed dh_xulrunner, see #567746' dw gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'xulrunner (>= 1.9.1.6-2)' [...] It seems the nmus haven't triggered on the architectures where xulrunner-dev >= 1.9.1.6-2 is available. Could you check what is happening ? Which package / architecture combinations haven't been tried that you think should have been? The archive is still at xulrunner 1.9.1.6-1 for alpha, armel, mips, powerpc and sparc. So far as I can see, all other architectures have built all of the binNMUs, with a couple of exceptions for e.g. gluezilla being not-for-us on mipsel. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/29561960fa6e4195ad289d8c9105b...@internal.avcosystems.com
Re: Please BinNMU 5 packages to fix their dependencies
Mike Hommey writes: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 07:39:45PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 19:04 +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: >> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 06:57:20PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: >> > > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:39:17AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: >> > > > nmu gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 >> > > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild with >> > > > fixed dh_xulrunner, see #567746' >> > > > dw gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 >> > > > gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'xulrunner >> > > > (>= 1.9.1.6-2)' >> > > I'm wondering... is the >= syntax properly handled ? 1.9.1.6-2 has been >> > > available on (some) architectures for a few days, but none of the >> > > packages above have apparently been attempted to be built. >> > Cyril Brulebois enlighted me with the obvious: the dep-wait should be on >> > xulrunner-dev (>= 1.9.1.6-2), not xulrunner. >> dep-waits fixed. > It seems the nmus haven't triggered on the architectures where > xulrunner-dev >= 1.9.1.6-2 is available. Could you check what is > happening ? I don't see this. The binNMUs haven't triggered for alpha, armel, mips, powerpc and sparc, which all have no newer version of xulrunner in the archive: https://buildd.debian.org/pkg.cgi?pkg=xulrunner%2Cgluezilla%2Cgaleon%2Cchmsee%2Cgnome-python-extras%2Cxiphos&maint=&dist=unstable Marc -- Fachbegriffe der Informatik - Einfach erklärt 18: Vorbereitet für den Multimediaeinsatz Es sind noch zwei Slots auf dem Motherboard frei. (Peter Berlich) pgpUEwyyT6a4H.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#570346: marked as done (nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4)
Your message dated Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:58:31 +0100 with message-id <877hqag3h4@solon.marcbrockschmidt.de> and subject line Re: Bug#570346: nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4 has caused the Debian Bug report #570346, regarding nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 570346: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=570346 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)" --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Micha Lenk writes: > nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account for > uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)" *sigh* I'm amazed that the libgoffice-0.8 package is first containing a /usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.7 and then /usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.8. lintian actually warns about this (serious!) bug in the packaging and it still went into the archive. Please fix the package name to correctly encode the SONAME. I've scheduled binNMUs for all r-deps of goffice that haven't been rebuild since its last upload: abiword gnucash nip2 Marc -- BOFH #410: Electrical conduits in machine room are melting. pgpFwUcsocEhp.pgp Description: PGP signature --- End Message ---
Re: Please BinNMU 5 packages to fix their dependencies
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:41:00AM -, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Mike Hommey wrote: > [...] > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:39:17AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote: > >nmu gluezilla_2.4.3-1 galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 > >gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild > >with fixed dh_xulrunner, see #567746' dw gluezilla_2.4.3-1 > >galeon_2.0.7-1.2 chmsee_1.0.7-1.2 gnome-python-extras_2.25.3-4.1 > >xiphos_3.1.2-1 . ALL . -m 'xulrunner (>= 1.9.1.6-2)' > [...] > >It seems the nmus haven't triggered on the architectures where > >xulrunner-dev >= 1.9.1.6-2 is available. Could you check what is > >happening ? > > Which package / architecture combinations haven't been tried that > you think should have been? > > The archive is still at xulrunner 1.9.1.6-1 for alpha, armel, mips, > powerpc and sparc. So far as I can see, all other architectures have > built all of the binNMUs, with a couple of exceptions for e.g. > gluezilla being not-for-us on mipsel. M I was basing my mail on https://buildd.debian.org/pkg.cgi?pkg=galeon and likewise for others packages, which only show the logs for the non binNMUs version for the ones that are currently not dep-wait. Turns out the buildd site is wrong, since http://packages.debian.org/sid/galeon lists the binNMU versions. Sorry for the noise. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100218121808.ga13...@glandium.org
Bug#570356: transition: directfb - soname change
Fathi Boudra writes: > follow-up to http://bugs.debian.org/569815 > > DirectFB 1.2.9 introduce a soname change. > > libdirectfb-dev reverse build-depends: > -- > > gst-plugins-bad0.10 > libsdl1.2 > splashy > cairo > freesci > directvnc > links2 > lives > mplayer > qingy > xine-lib > gtk+2.0 > > -- > > Could you schedule this transition and the related binNMUs ? We will do so as soon as unstable is in a better shape again. We still need to clean up the rests of the jpeg mess and finish the current set of transitions off. Afterwards, we will need to do something about our mips and mipsel buildds, which both have a serious backlog of several hundred packages (mips has almost 600 packages in needs-build). So, yeah, we know about this, and will schedule it, but would like you to wait a bit. This, of course, also holds for the Qt/Phonon transitions. Thanks for the patience, Marc -- Fachbegriffe der Informatik - Einfach erklärt 253: Interessante Projekte Schwierige Dinge, die noch niemand mit Erfolg angepackt hat. Vorzugsweise mit "Bleeding Edge Technology". (Michael Olbricht) pgpy43nHXW6k9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ghc6 still fails to build on ia64; what to do?
Hi, Am Sonntag, den 14.02.2010, 14:46 +0100 schrieb Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt: > Luk Claes writes: > > Kari Pahula wrote: > >> The lack of ghc6 on ia64 has kept it from testing since 6.10.1. I > >> never got it built with a 6.10 compiler but seems like we're pretty > >> close to getting there with 6.12. Is it impossible that there's > >> something wrong with the buildd? Could I just upload the package that > >> I built on merulo? Any advice on this? > > Yes, you can upload the package that builds on merulo as you obviously > > tested it quite well. > > > > It is possible thqt there is something wrong with the buildd, though it > > would be good to see if the haskell packages compile ok with the > > compiler you built on merulo, so please upload and we could try to > > rebuild ghc6 on the buildd afterwards. > > Well, building of -9 failed again, so I guess the bootstrapping is not > the only problem. Note that merulo is slightly newer than caballero > (Madison core vs. the older McKinley core), so the differences we are > seeing might be related to this. Perhaps someone from the ia64 porters > could shed some light on this? Are there porters on d-release, or should someone actually notify them about this problem? Assuming nobody steps up to fix this, or nobody is able to, what is the plan B: Somewhen the Haskell packages will be ready on the other arches (there are issues to sort out until then, but solvable ones). Will we just remove the ia64 haskell packages then? Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#570346: nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4
Hi, Am Donnerstag, den 18.02.2010, 12:58 +0100 schrieb Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt: > Micha Lenk writes: > > nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account > > for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)" > > *sigh* > > I'm amazed that the libgoffice-0.8 package is first containing a > /usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.7 and then /usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.8. > > lintian actually warns about this (serious!) bug in the packaging and it > still went into the archive. Please fix the package name to correctly > encode the SONAME. > > I've scheduled binNMUs for all r-deps of goffice that haven't been > rebuild since its last upload: > abiword gnucash nip2 maybe you did not fetch all, the amd64 package of gnucash, version 2.2.9-4, is also broken and needs a rebuild. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nome...@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nome...@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Bug#570346: nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4
Hi, On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 23:58 +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 18.02.2010, 12:58 +0100 schrieb Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt: > > Micha Lenk writes: > > > nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account > > > for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)" [...] > > I've scheduled binNMUs for all r-deps of goffice that haven't been > > rebuild since its last upload: > > abiword gnucash nip2 > > maybe you did not fetch all, the amd64 package of gnucash, version > 2.2.9-4, is also broken and needs a rebuild. That rebuild was indeed scheduled earlier today; gnucash_2.2.9-4+b1 on amd64 depends on "libgoffice-0-8 (>= 0.8.0)" and was installed in to the archive during the 19:52 dinstall tonight. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1266535372.5435.55.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net
Bug#570462: nmu: second round for the php5 transition
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi, Please schedule the following binNMUs: nmu xcache wikidiff2 . alpha hppa armel mips ia64 powerpc mipsel sparc . -m "Rebuild against PHP 5.3" dw xcache wikidiff2 . alpha hppa armel mips ia64 powerpc mipsel sparc . -m "php5-dev (>= 5.3.1-3)" nmu ffmpeg-php graphviz . alpha armel mips mipsel ia64 powerpc sparc . -m "Rebuild against PHP 5.3" dw ffmpeg-php graphviz . alpha armel mips mipsel ia64 powerpc sparc . -m "php5-dev (>= 5.3.1-3)" nmu ossp-uuid . armel mips mipsel sparc . -m "Rebuild against PHP 5.3" dw ossp-uuid . armel mips mipsel sparc . -m "php5-dev (>= 5.3.1-3)" nmu xapian-bindings . mips mipsel sparc . -m "Rebuild against PHP 5.3" dw xapian-bindings . mips mipsel sparc . -m "php5-dev (>= 5.3.1-3)" nmu mapserver ming sqlrelay php-imagick . ALL . -m "Rebuild against PHP 5.3" dw mapserver ming sqlrelay php-imagick . ALL . -m "php5-dev (>= 5.3.1-3)" The php-ps binNMU FTBFS on powerpc due to a libtiff.a error. Please give it back if it has been fixed already. And that should be it. There are still some packages that need to be updated because they FTBFS because of the (not-so-)new API: php-adodb (mine, will try to fix it during the WE), php-ssh2, php-imlib, zeroc-ice, php-clamav, php-apc. Another upload of php5 will follow as soon as the current version is built and installed on mips* (so that the binNMUs can be built there), to fix the RC bug affecting parallel building and possibly some regressions. Should that new Debian revision be uploaded with urgency=medium? Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Developer www.debian.org - get.debian.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
NEW changes in proposedupdates
Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.18-1_sparc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: user-mode-linux_2.6.26-1um-2+21lenny3_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: user-mode-linux_2.6.26-1um-2+21lenny3_amd64.changes ACCEPT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1nii2x-00056d...@ries.debian.org
