No migration of vzquota
Hi Debian release and ftp teams I'm unsure about who of you to ask, so that is why I'm sending to both of you. The following is my issue: The package vzquota do not migrate to testing as you can see here: http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=vzquota https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=vzquota On 5th of april I re-uploaded the package due to that there were some temporary problem with powerpc builds that caused the transition to fail. At that time I also changed the architecture from any to specific versions, just as for the vzctl package to make sure that they are not built on not-supported architectures anyway. However this seems to have caused the glitch that it considers some architectures to be "out of date" even though they have never been successfully built on those architectures. Is this something that you can help me with, or do I need to upload again with arch any just to fix this? Best regards, // Ola -- --- Inguza Technology AB --- MSc in Information Technology / o...@inguza.comAnnebergsslingan 37\ | o...@debian.org 654 65 KARLSTAD| | http://inguza.com/Mobile: +46 (0)70-332 1551 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --- -- 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/20100419061629.gc28...@inguza.net
Re: No migration of vzquota
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 08:16:29AM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > However this seems to have caused the glitch that it considers > some architectures to be "out of date" even though they have never > been successfully built on those architectures. Wrong. $ rmadison vzquota | grep 3.0.12-2 vzquota | 3.0.12-2 | unstable | source, alpha, armel, hppa, mips, mipsel, s390 You may want to file a binary removal bug against ftp.debian.org to get rid of them if it's really unsupported on those architectures. If they weren't there they wouldn't be out-of-date, right? Kind regards, Philipp Kern -- .''`. Philipp KernDebian Developer : :' : http://philkern.de Stable Release Manager `. `' xmpp:p...@0x539.de Wanna-Build Admin `-finger pkern/k...@db.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#578346: transition: camlp5
Stéphane Glondu a écrit : > The following packages need to go to testing together: > [...] Sorry, I made a mistake while generating the above line. The correct hint is: > easy camlp5/5.13-1 coq/amd64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/armel/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 > coq/hppa/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/i386/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/ia64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 > coq/kfreebsd-amd64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/kfreebsd-i386/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 > coq/mips/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/mipsel/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/powerpc/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 > coq/s390/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/sparc/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 ledit/amd64/2.01-6 > ledit/armel/2.01-6 ledit/hppa/2.01-6 ledit/i386/2.01-6 ledit/ia64/2.01-6 > ledit/kfreebsd-amd64/2.01-6 ledit/kfreebsd-i386/2.01-6 ledit/mips/2.01-6 > ledit/mipsel/2.01-6 ledit/powerpc/2.01-6 ledit/s390/2.01-6 ledit/sparc/2.01-6 > ssreflect/amd64/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/armel/1.2+dfsg-4 > ssreflect/hppa/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/i386/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/ia64/1.2+dfsg-4 > ssreflect/kfreebsd-amd64/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/kfreebsd-i386/1.2+dfsg-4 > ssreflect/mips/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/mipsel/1.2+dfsg-4 > ssreflect/powerpc/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/s390/1.2+dfsg-4 > ssreflect/sparc/1.2+dfsg-4 -- Stéphane -- 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/4bcbfc63.6050...@debian.org
Bug#578346: marked as done (transition: camlp5)
Your message dated Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:53:27 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#578346: transition: camlp5 has caused the Debian Bug report #578346, regarding transition: camlp5 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.) -- 578346: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578346 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: transition User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hello, The following packages need to go to testing together: easy camlp5/5.13-1 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/amd64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/armel/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/hppa/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/i386/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/ia64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/kfreebsd-amd64/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/kfreebsd-i386/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/mips/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/mipsel/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/powerpc/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/s390/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 coq/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6/sparc/8.2.pl1+dfsg-6 ledit/2.01-6/amd64/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/armel/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/hppa/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/i386/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/ia64/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/kfreebsd-amd64/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/kfreebsd-i386/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/mips/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/mipsel/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/powerpc/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/s390/2.01-6 ledit/2.01-6/sparc/2.01-6 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/amd64/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/armel/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/hppa/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/i386/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/ia64/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/kfreebsd-amd64/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/kfreebsd-i386/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/mips/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/mipsel/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/powerpc/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/s390/1.2+dfsg-4 ssreflect/1.2+dfsg-4/sparc/1.2+dfsg-4 Thanks in advance, -- Stéphane -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Mon, April 19, 2010 07:46, Stéphane Glondu wrote: > Stéphane Glondu a écrit : >> The following packages need to go to testing together: >> [...] > > Sorry, I made a mistake while generating the above line. The correct > hint is: Added; thanks. Regards, Adam --- End Message ---
Bug#578356: Please binNMU oprofile_0.9.6-1 on all architectures against newer libbfd (binutils)
Package: release.debian.org X-Debbugs-CC: oprof...@packages.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu oprofile is dynamically linked against binutils' libbfd, which doesn't have a stable ABI and bumps soname quite often. From /usr/lib/oprofile/libopagent.so.1.0.0: Dynamic Section: NEEDED libbfd-2.20.so => not found NEEDED libdl.so.2 NEEDED libc.so.6 SONAME libopagent.so.1 libbfd-2.20.so is now replaced by libbfd-2.20.1-system.20100303.so. This renders linking against libopagent impossible. More info can be found on #558412. Thanks, Arthur. -- 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/g2ydacf4781004190149k81db0339u84717229ce34e...@mail.gmail.com
Re: No migration of vzquota
Hi, Ola Lundqvist schrieb: > I assume I file a bug against ftp.debian.org, right? yes: reportbug ftp.debian.org | ANAIS Cheers, Torsten -- 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/4bcc24bb.1010...@debian.org
Re: No migration of vzquota
Hi Philipp Oh. I was wrong then. In any case they should never have been built. :-) Thanks for clarifying this. I assume I file a bug against ftp.debian.org, right? // Ola Quoting "Philipp Kern" : On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 08:16:29AM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: However this seems to have caused the glitch that it considers some architectures to be "out of date" even though they have never been successfully built on those architectures. Wrong. $ rmadison vzquota | grep 3.0.12-2 vzquota | 3.0.12-2 | unstable | source, alpha, armel, hppa, mips, mipsel, s390 You may want to file a binary removal bug against ftp.debian.org to get rid of them if it's really unsupported on those architectures. If they weren't there they wouldn't be out-of-date, right? Kind regards, Philipp Kern -- .''`. Philipp KernDebian Developer : :' : http://philkern.de Stable Release Manager `. `' xmpp:p...@0x539.de Wanna-Build Admin `-finger pkern/k...@db.debian.org -- --- Inguza Technology AB --- MSc in Information Technology / o...@inguza.comAnnebergsslingan 37\ | o...@debian.org 654 65 KARLSTAD| | http://inguza.com/Mobile: +46 (0)70-332 1551 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --- -- 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/20100419112622.1480725ugwfek...@webmail.inguza.net
Bug#578369: nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Hi! Another round off needed binNMUs found via dak auto cruft's: nmu aeolus . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu ams . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu jaaa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu japa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" Best regards, Alexander -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.4 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32.11-dsa-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- 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/20100419110254.18095.72768.report...@ries.debian.org
Bug#578371: nmu: gvfs, ifuse, ipheth against libimobiledevice1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Hi! Another round off needed binNMUs found via dak auto cruft's: nmu gvfs_1.6.0-1 . alpha amd64 hppa i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 mips powerpc s390 . -m "Build against libimobiledevice1" Best regards, Alexander -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.4 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32.11-dsa-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- 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/20100419111555.22699.71753.report...@ries.debian.org
Bug#570360: transition: phonon and qt4-x11 - schedule
Hi, On Thu, February 18, 2010 11:44, Fathi Boudra wrote: > 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 new qt4-x11 and phonon versions have now transitioned to testing. Please feel free to start uploading KDE4.4 to unstable. Sune mentioned that there might be some binNMU requests for packages which weren't otherwise getting an update; is that the case? 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/b791086bf6f6bab35edffed84f179f3d.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#578369: nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa
* Alexander Reichle-Schmehl [100419 13:02]: > nmu aeolus . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > nmu ams . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > nmu jaaa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > nmu japa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" That should be: nmu aeolus_0.8.2-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu ams_2.0.1-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu jaaa_0.4.2-2 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu japa_0.2.1-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" Best Regards, Alexander -- 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/20100419112422.ga3...@melusine.alphascorpii.net
Bug#578330: pu: package alien-arena/7.0-1+lenny2
On Sun, April 18, 2010 23:48, Michael Gilbert wrote: > hi, i've built a proposed update that corrects two security > vulnerabilities in the alien-arena package. please review the > attached debdiff. Please go ahead. 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/840b6faefb80be3ccff38e8aa78c1e67.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#578356: marked as done (Please binNMU oprofile_0.9.6-1 on all architectures against newer libbfd (binutils))
Your message dated Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:10:13 +0100 with message-id <89ee58bbe5227a1f2bc119d12039c882.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org> and subject line Re: Bug#578356: Please binNMU oprofile_0.9.6-1 on all architectures against newer libbfd (binutils) has caused the Debian Bug report #578356, regarding Please binNMU oprofile_0.9.6-1 on all architectures against newer libbfd (binutils) 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.) -- 578356: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578356 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org X-Debbugs-CC: oprof...@packages.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu oprofile is dynamically linked against binutils' libbfd, which doesn't have a stable ABI and bumps soname quite often. From /usr/lib/oprofile/libopagent.so.1.0.0: Dynamic Section: NEEDED libbfd-2.20.so => not found NEEDED libdl.so.2 NEEDED libc.so.6 SONAME libopagent.so.1 libbfd-2.20.so is now replaced by libbfd-2.20.1-system.20100303.so. This renders linking against libopagent impossible. More info can be found on #558412. Thanks, Arthur. --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Mon, April 19, 2010 09:49, Arthur Loiret wrote: > oprofile is dynamically linked against binutils' libbfd, which doesn't > have a stable ABI and bumps soname quite often. From > /usr/lib/oprofile/libopagent.so.1.0.0: > > Dynamic Section: > NEEDED libbfd-2.20.so => not found [...] > libbfd-2.20.so is now replaced by libbfd-2.20.1-system.20100303.so. Scheduled. Regards, Adam --- End Message ---
Bug#578371: marked as done (nmu: gvfs, ifuse, ipheth against libimobiledevice1)
Your message dated Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:12:54 +0100 with message-id <6b0d5b743568a604a95619ae3ecdb107.squir...@adsl.funky-badger.org> and subject line Re: Bug#578371: nmu: gvfs, ifuse, ipheth against libimobiledevice1 has caused the Debian Bug report #578371, regarding nmu: gvfs, ifuse, ipheth against libimobiledevice1 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.) -- 578371: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578371 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Hi! Another round off needed binNMUs found via dak auto cruft's: nmu gvfs_1.6.0-1 . alpha amd64 hppa i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 mips powerpc s390 . -m "Build against libimobiledevice1" Best regards, Alexander -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.4 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32.11-dsa-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Mon, April 19, 2010 12:15, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: > Another round off needed binNMUs found via dak auto cruft's: > > nmu gvfs_1.6.0-1 . alpha amd64 hppa i386 ia64 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 > mips powerpc s390 . -m "Build against libimobiledevice1" Scheduled. Regards, Adam --- End Message ---
Bug#578369: marked as done (nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa)
Your message dated Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:20:05 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#578369: nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa has caused the Debian Bug report #578369, regarding nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa 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.) -- 578369: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=578369 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Hi! Another round off needed binNMUs found via dak auto cruft's: nmu aeolus . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu ams . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu jaaa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" nmu japa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" Best regards, Alexander -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.4 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32.11-dsa-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Mon, April 19, 2010 12:24, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote: > * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl [100419 13:02]: >> nmu aeolus . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" >> nmu ams . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" >> nmu jaaa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" >> nmu japa . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > > That should be: Assuming that the version number refers to the unstable source, either syntax is fine. > nmu aeolus_0.8.2-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" 0.8.4-2 is the current version in the archive, although it seems to be FTBFS on many arches. The failures largely appear to be due to the use of "-march=native" so I haven't given them back. > nmu ams_2.0.1-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > nmu jaaa_0.4.2-2 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" > nmu japa_0.2.1-3 . ALL . -m "Build against libclalsadrv2" These have all been scheduled. Regards, Adam --- End Message ---
NEW changes in proposedupdates
Processing changes file: nfs-utils_1.1.2-6lenny2_multi.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/e1o3ryo-0004bc...@ries.debian.org
Re: Bug#570360: transition: phonon and qt4-x11 - schedule
Hi, On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > The new qt4-x11 and phonon versions have now transitioned to testing. > Please feel free to start uploading KDE4.4 to unstable. Thanks for the follow up. We won't upload KDE 4.4.2 to unstable. KDE 4.4.3 is near [1] (around 10 days). We prefer to wait for it. [1] http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.4_Release_Schedule Cheers, Fathi on behalf of Debian Qt/KDE team -- 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/n2y6a2e33621004190956oee611878g6eed334799c26...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#578369: marked as done (nmu: aeolus, ams, jaaa, japa)
Hello folks, On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > 0.8.4-2 is the current version in the archive, although it seems to be > FTBFS on many arches. The failures largely appear to be due to the use of > "-march=native" so I haven't given them back. > fixed with my next upload. Cheers. -- Alessio Treglia Ubuntu MOTU Developer | Homepage: http://www.alessiotreglia.com 0FEC 59A5 E18E E04F 6D40 593B 45D4 8C7C DCFC 3FD0 -- 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/u2ue5354091004191035n9741a2ean4bb459ce6e5d1...@mail.gmail.com
graphicsmagick testing propagation
Hi! According to http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=graphicsmagick, graphicsmagick 1.3.12-1 won't transition to testing because it would introduce new bug #559811. However, this bug was closed by the current version in testing, and also doesn't affect the unstable version. This is correctly tracked by the BTS as well, so I wonder why the testing scripts disagree. The latest uploads failed to build on hurd-i386, leaving it with a stale binary that predates even the version currently in testing. Could this be the source of the confusion? As the hurd breakage doesn't seem to have an easy fix, can you try to mend it with a hammer and apply a force-hint, or should I ask for removal of the hurd binaries from unstable? Regards, Daniel. -- 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/20100419194533.ga20...@hamnixda.de
Bug#578430: pu: package apache2/2.2.9-10+lenny8
Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Severity: normal Please review apache2/2.2.9-10+lenny8 for inclusion in 5.0.5. Here is the changelog: apache2 (2.2.9-10+lenny8) stable-security; urgency=low * Add missing psmisc dependency for killall used in the init script. Closes: #568542 * Fix potential memory leaks related to the usage of apr_brigade_destroy(). The memory leak patch has been included in 2.2.15 (released 6 weeks ago), without problems. The full debdiff is at http://people.debian.org/~sf/apache2_2.2.9-10+lenny8.debdiff After the package is accepted, remember to binNMU apache2-mpm-itk to build against the new apache2-src. TIA. Stefan -- 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/201004192207.22018...@sfritsch.de
