Bug#633561: pu: package kfreebsd-8/8.1+dfsg-8+squeeze1
2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt : >> * Fix net802.11 stack kernel memory disclosure (CVE-2011-2480). >> (Closes: #631160) >> - 000_net80211_disclosure.diff > > This looks okay, although I think you meant #631161. Yes, indeed #631161. > Your last message > in the log there says "uploaded to unstable, but the bug is still open > with no fixed versions recorded. Please could you clarify the status > here? #631161 was fixed with kfreebsd-8 8.2-3, but it closed the wrong bug (same confusion you noted above). #631160 was fixed with kfreebsd-9 as the bug log indicates. >> * Merge backported if_msk driver from 8-STABLE. (Closes: #628954) >> - 000_msk_backport.diff > > This should be okay, assuming that the resulting driver has been tested > on Squeeze systems. Yes, it has been. > A targetted fix would be preferable, but it sounds > from the upstream report as if that's not particularly easy to > accomplish. Upstream won't help on this, they consider 8.1 deprecated in favour of 8.2 (from which this fix was obtained). Besides, I wouldn't risk messing with the driver in this way. Upstream have different policies than us, but they're familiar with the codebase and know what they're doing. >> * Disable buggy 009_disable_duped_modules.diff. It was disabling many >> more modules than built into kernel (e.g. all USB modules). > > A few queries here, I'm afraid. > > - What's the effect of re-enabling the (duplicate) building of the > modules which were intended to be disabled? Just wasted space. > - Does this affect which modules end up in the udebs? > > - The changelog comment from when the patch was introduced says that it > made a ~4MB difference to the size of the image. As that was 2007, I'm > assuming that the size difference is a fair bit larger now? The difference today is roughly 8 MiB. However, one should note that the ~4MB difference from 2007 is likely to have "saved" more size than it should (since my patch disabled more modules than it should). I wouldn't take it as reference. > - If the impact of the patch was to disable all USB modules, why was it > not disabled sooner? The USB drivers most users care about have either never been built as modules (e.g. umass), or only begun recently to be provided as modules (e.g. ulpt). Since freebsd-utils 8.2+ds1-1, devd is able to auto-load most USB modules. This allowed us to move some drivers (e.g. ulpt) off the kernel, and at that point the problem was noticed. -- Robert Millan -- 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/CAOfDtXOO-wS0SLpcbh7=zahy47_-tnil1z53fdqkhnjmdpj...@mail.gmail.com
Processed: block 637809 with 640346
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 637809 with 640346 Bug #637809 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.14 Was blocked by: 628507 637602 631045 638894 628499 636132 638367 636762 629255 636651 628505 639677 628503 634531 636656 634397 628501 634141 628500 Added blocking bug(s) of 637809: 640346 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637809: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637809 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131633750216693.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: block 637809 with 640347
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 637809 with 640347 Bug #637809 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.14 Was blocked by: 631045 637602 628507 638894 628499 640346 636132 638367 636762 629255 636651 628505 639677 628503 634531 636656 634397 628501 634141 628500 Added blocking bug(s) of 637809: 640347 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637809: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637809 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131633757616815.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt : > How much testing have the proposed patches had on Squeeze systems? kfreebsd-9_ada_devices.patch and zfs_packed_la_array.patch have been tested for over a month (both in unstable/wheezy and my squeeze desktop with ZFS). raid_number_uniqueness.patch and xen_disk_names.patch have been tested for 4 months in unstable/wheezy. Please keep in mind the version of Debian GRUB is used with makes a very small difference. The version of Debian it's been built with could make a difference, but we force specific GCC version anyway, so both builds are compiled with GCC 4.4 in squeeze and in wheezy. -- Robert Millan -- 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/caofdtxm9opehvza0jvkh8aruhibhu_pz0j4s_o1blve_1de...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#637111: pu: package freebsd-libs/8.1-6
2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt : > On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 14:51 +, Robert Millan wrote: >> * Move libsbuf.so.0 to /lib (needed by /sbin/zfs and /sbin/zpool). >> (Closes: #637100) >> * Move libipx.so.2 to /lib (needed by ifconfig). > > Have the portions of this change which affect the udebs been run past > the d-i team? They're in testing and being used for new builds already. In any case, D-I team please if you have any objection to libsbuf.so.0 and libipx.so.2 being in /lib, please let us know. These libraries are needed in /lib because zfs and zpool are linked with them, see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636668#55 for the bug report. -- Robert Millan -- 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/CAOfDtXPRytKgR=ErAHJThdcqv0YdviX=u4qnb15dqxrt0ve...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Gajim 0.13.4-4
On 09/17/2011 07:48 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 09:34 +0200, Yann Leboulanger wrote: I fixed an important functionality bug in Gajim that makes it use 100% CPU when connecting (#634880) [0]. I added a patch (attached) that is already in newer versions of Gajim for months [1]. The package is ready, can I ask my Debian developper to upload it? [...] [0] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=634880 [1] http://trac.gajim.org/ticket/5991 You mention that the patch is "in newer versions [...] for months" but the package in unstable still appears to check for PENDING_READ before checking for IS_CLOSED. Please could you confirm exactly when the patch was applied? You are perfectly right. Another commit has been pushed some days later: http://hg.gajim.org/gajim/rev/50980325f73d I re-created gajim_0.13.4-4 package. with the attached patch. It it available here: http://www.lagaule.org/debian/gajim/0.13/ Thanks for your comment. Should I ask my debian developper to upload it? -- Yann Index: src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py === --- src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py Sun Sep 18 12:54:42 2011 +0200 +++ src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py Sun Sep 18 12:54:42 2011 +0200 @@ -362,20 +362,25 @@ self.unplug_idle(fd) return False + read_write = False if flags & PENDING_READ: #print 'waiting read on %d, flags are %d' % (fd, flags) obj.pollin() - return True + read_write = True - elif flags & PENDING_WRITE: + elif flags & PENDING_WRITE and not flags & IS_CLOSED: obj.pollout() - return True + read_write = True - elif flags & IS_CLOSED: + if flags & IS_CLOSED: # io error, don't expect more events self.remove_timeout(obj.fd) self.unplug_idle(obj.fd) obj.pollend() + return False + + if read_write: + return True return False def process(self):
Re: v86d 0.1.10 for Squeeze?
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:26:27PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Any chance of debdiffs for stable and oldstable so we can look at > possibly getting this resolved in the next point release? (For which > the NEW queue will be frozen during the weekend of October 1st). For stable it would be http://pinky.die-welt.net/~evgeni/v86d_0.1.9→10-1.diff (with changing the version to 0.1.10-0squeeze1?) For oldstable I did not produce any debdiff, as I dont think anyone is using v86d there, but I could apply the only-CVE patch on the package. regards Evgeni -- Bruce Schneier can read and understand Perl programs. -- 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/20110918145714.gb3...@dorei.kerker.die-welt.net
Bug#641020: pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14
Hi, On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:42:57PM +0200, Arthur de Jong wrote: > I would like to upload a new release of nss-pam-ldapd for squeeze that > fixes a few annoying bugs. These are all one or two-line changes that > have been available in the development series for some time now. thanks, please go ahead. > Attached is a debdiff. > > I would also like to have your feedback on whether #619881 is suitable > for a squeeze update. It does introduce new functionality though it > shouldn't affect much of the existing code: > http://lists.arthurdejong.org/nss-pam-ldapd-commits/2010/msg00302.html > The bug log itself contains some arguments from users for fixing this in > squeeze. I don't find these very convincing, to be honest, given that it is quite useable even without this feature. I wouldn't oppose a note documenting this shortcoming, but it sounds they could need a backport instead. Kind regards Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#637020: pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5
Robert, am Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 03:45:12PM +0200 hast du folgendes geschrieben: > 2011/8/8 Philipp Kern : > > I presume that it would still unshare the volume prior to umount? > > > > Your change seems to contradict the OpenSolaris ZFS documentation[1]. It > > postulates that automatic mount management is what you want and the other > > way > > is legacy. Now the consequence of that chance is that the ZFS data > > structures > > tell that they should be automounted at $location but we ignore that now? > > > > Doesn't that have the potential for breakage upon the next reboot after > > installing that stable update? (Especially for machines with a single > > kFreeBSD&ZFS instance, i.e. servers?) > > Uhm yes, you're right. The real problem is that partman-zfs shouldn't > be marking filesystems as auto-mountable, it should use legacy mode. > I've documented this as bug #637086 (and reverted my change in sid). > > As for zfsutils, please consider this package update instead. I > discarded the automount part, and I'm also proposing addition of the > bash-completion script that was added in 8.2-3. please use version "8.1-4+squeeze1" and target stable. Otherwise ACK, please go ahead. Kind regards Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: tagging 641020
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 641020 + confirmed Bug #641020 [release.debian.org] pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14 Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 641020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641020 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131635863225848.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: tagging 637020
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 637020 + confirmed Bug #637020 [release.debian.org] pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5 Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637020 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131635918228304.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Re: v86d 0.1.10 for Squeeze?
On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 16:57 +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:26:27PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > Any chance of debdiffs for stable and oldstable so we can look at > > possibly getting this resolved in the next point release? (For which > > the NEW queue will be frozen during the weekend of October 1st). > > For stable it would be > http://pinky.die-welt.net/~evgeni/v86d_0.1.9→10-1.diff > (with changing the version to 0.1.10-0squeeze1?) Thanks. As mentioned on IRC, I'd prefer a diff that didn't involve moving the "now upstream" patches in to the source, and dropping the patches; it makes the diff noisier and less "obvious" than would be ideal for stable. In terms of the other fixes, #525415 might be okay. What's the intent of * Add manual_add_modules uvesafb to the initramfs-hook (thanks Ubuntu!) ? > For oldstable I did not produce any debdiff, as I dont think anyone is > using v86d there, but I could apply the only-CVE patch on the package. That would be good; thanks. 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/1316360669.21594.128.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Gajim 0.13.4-4
On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 13:29 +0200, Yann Leboulanger wrote: > On 09/17/2011 07:48 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-08-21 at 09:34 +0200, Yann Leboulanger wrote: > >> I fixed an important functionality bug in Gajim that makes it use 100% > >> CPU when connecting (#634880) [0]. I added a patch (attached) that is > >> already in newer versions of Gajim for months [1]. [...] > > You mention that the patch is "in newer versions [...] for months" but > > the package in unstable still appears to check for PENDING_READ before > > checking for IS_CLOSED. Please could you confirm exactly when the patch > > was applied? > > You are perfectly right. Another commit has been pushed some days later: > http://hg.gajim.org/gajim/rev/50980325f73d Thanks. That does look more like the current package. :-) Please could you provide a debdiff against the current stable package (i.e. "debdiff $stable.dsc $new.dsc") for a final check? 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/1316360836.21594.130.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
tag 637114 + confirmed thanks On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 12:55 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/9/17 Adam D. Barratt : > > How much testing have the proposed patches had on Squeeze systems? > > kfreebsd-9_ada_devices.patch and zfs_packed_la_array.patch have been > tested for over a month (both in unstable/wheezy and my squeeze > desktop with ZFS). > > raid_number_uniqueness.patch and xen_disk_names.patch have been tested > for 4 months in unstable/wheezy. Thanks. 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/1316360891.21594.131.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Processed: Re: Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 637114 + confirmed Bug #637114 [release.debian.org] pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15 Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637114: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637114 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.13163608975537.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Re: tentative upload to stable-proposed-updates [cython]
On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 22:21 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > I wonder would an upload to s-p-u be ok to fix a regression in cython > package, which is apparently of importance for some users (who even > triaged repository to the specific commit resolving the issue). Patch > (see commit below) will be trivial. Thanks for working on this. As far as I can see from the log in #641128, this issue is not yet resolved in unstable? If that's correct, then while I'd be likely to accept a stable update fixing the issue, it should be handled in unstable first. Once that's happened and there's been no obvious regressions then we can look at updating stable. 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/1316361336.21594.135.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#637840: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3
tag 637840 + confirmed thanks On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 13:55 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 19:33 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > >> - fast-import: accept no-op "feature notes" command for frontends > >>use to declare they require an importer able to write notes. [...] > I just looked over the other updates going into squeeze for the next > point release, and this change definitely looks out of place. Let's > drop it. Okay. Please feel free to go ahead with the remaining changes. 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/1316361594.21594.137.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Processed: Re: Bug#637840: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 637840 + confirmed Bug #637840 [release.debian.org] pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3 Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637840: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637840 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.13163616008984.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#637020: pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5
2011/9/18 Philipp Kern : > please use version "8.1-4+squeeze1" and target stable. Otherwise ACK, > please go ahead. Uploaded, thanks. Btw, is there any guideline on when to use X.Y+squeezeZ and then to just increment Y? I notice that both schemes are used. -- Robert Millan -- 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/caofdtxng8hv8o0t3spfbjud4hvqk+m98zo9blufwsx1djvd...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#638190: pu: package shelldap/0.2-1+squeeze1
tag 638190 + confirmed thanks On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 19:56 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Please find attached the proposed debdiff without the Recommends > addition. It takes upstream patch but with the discussed change to use > an eval block, and a require instead of use. Thanks. Assuming the resulting package has been tested on squeeze, 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/1316365809.21594.159.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Processed: Re: Bug#638190: pu: package shelldap/0.2-1+squeeze1
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 638190 + confirmed Bug #638190 [release.debian.org] pu: package shelldap/0.2-1+squeeze1 Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 638190: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638190 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131636581529905.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
[Fwd: Re: Gajim 0.13.4-4]
"Yann Leboulanger" wrote, Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:32:50 +0200 > On 09/18/2011 05:47 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Please could you provide a debdiff against the current stable package > > (i.e. "debdiff $stable.dsc $new.dsc") for a final check? > > Sure. It's attached Thanks. I'd generally prefer 0.13.4-3+squeeze1 as a version number, but please go ahead. Regards, Adam diff -u gajim-0.13.4/debian/changelog gajim-0.13.4/debian/changelog --- gajim-0.13.4/debian/changelog +++ gajim-0.13.4/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +gajim (0.13.4-4) stable; urgency=low + + [ Étienne Loks ] + * Fix CPU high load when connecting first. Closes: #634880 + + -- Yann Leboulanger Thu, 21 Jul 2011 21:15:34 +0100 + gajim (0.13.4-3) unstable; urgency=low * Fix a problem when canceling password keyring creation. only in patch2: unchanged: --- gajim-0.13.4.orig/debian/patches/01_cpu_load.patch +++ gajim-0.13.4/debian/patches/01_cpu_load.patch @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +Index: src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py +=== +--- src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py Sun Sep 18 12:54:42 2011 +0200 src/common/xmpp/idlequeue.py Sun Sep 18 12:54:42 2011 +0200 +@@ -362,20 +362,25 @@ + self.unplug_idle(fd) + return False + ++ read_write = False + if flags & PENDING_READ: + #print 'waiting read on %d, flags are %d' % (fd, flags) + obj.pollin() +- return True ++ read_write = True + +- elif flags & PENDING_WRITE: ++ elif flags & PENDING_WRITE and not flags & IS_CLOSED: + obj.pollout() +- return True ++ read_write = True + +- elif flags & IS_CLOSED: ++ if flags & IS_CLOSED: + # io error, don't expect more events + self.remove_timeout(obj.fd) + self.unplug_idle(obj.fd) + obj.pollend() ++ return False ++ ++ if read_write: ++ return True + return False + + def process(self):
Re: [Fwd: Re: Gajim 0.13.4-4]
On 09/18/2011 07:38 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: "Yann Leboulanger" wrote, Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:32:50 +0200 On 09/18/2011 05:47 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Please could you provide a debdiff against the current stable package (i.e. "debdiff $stable.dsc $new.dsc") for a final check? Sure. It's attached Thanks. I'd generally prefer 0.13.4-3+squeeze1 as a version number, but please go ahead. Ok, will change that and ask my debian developper to upload it. -- Yann -- 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/4e762e6b.9080...@lagaule.org
Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
2011/9/18 Adam D. Barratt : > On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 12:55 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: >> kfreebsd-9_ada_devices.patch and zfs_packed_la_array.patch have been >> tested for over a month (both in unstable/wheezy and my squeeze >> desktop with ZFS). >> >> raid_number_uniqueness.patch and xen_disk_names.patch have been tested >> for 4 months in unstable/wheezy. > > Thanks. Please go ahead. Uploaded, thank you. -- Robert Millan -- 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/CAOfDtXMj3vP6raQ1mF+tnf6u8nYkWQrj1eB1RnN8SxyQUq=g...@mail.gmail.com
Processed: tagging 640922, tagging 641155, tagging 636945, tagging 633460, tagging 637114, tagging 633475 ...
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 640922 + squeeze Bug #640922 [release.debian.org] pu: package eglibc/2.11.2-10 (Was: Bug#639897: Please don't check /proc/mounts) Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 641155 + squeeze Bug #641155 [release.debian.org] pu: package mdadm/3.1.4-1+8efb9d1+squeeze1 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 636945 + squeeze Bug #636945 [release.debian.org] pu: package ace/5.7.7-4 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 633460 + squeeze Bug #633460 [release.debian.org] pu: package freebsd-utils/8.1-4+squeeze1 Bug #633475 [release.debian.org] pu: package freebsd-utils/8.1-4+squeeze1 Added tag(s) squeeze. Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 637114 + squeeze Bug #637114 [release.debian.org] pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 633475 + squeeze Bug #633475 [release.debian.org] pu: package freebsd-utils/8.1-4+squeeze1 Bug #633460 [release.debian.org] pu: package freebsd-utils/8.1-4+squeeze1 Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #633475 to the same tags previously set Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #633460 to the same tags previously set > tags 623148 + squeeze Bug #623148 [release.debian.org] pu: package webkit/1.2.7-0+squeeze2 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 641020 + squeeze Bug #641020 [release.debian.org] pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 637653 + squeeze Bug #637653 [release.debian.org] pu: gdebi/0.6.4+squeeze1 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 637020 + squeeze Bug #637020 [release.debian.org] pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 628907 + squeeze Bug #628907 [release.debian.org] pu: package mesa/7.7.1-5 Added tag(s) squeeze. > tags 637384 + pending Bug #637384 [release.debian.org] pu: package lintian/2.4.3+squeeze1 Added tag(s) pending. > tags 638190 + squeeze Bug #638190 [release.debian.org] pu: package shelldap/0.2-1+squeeze1 Added tag(s) squeeze. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 638190: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638190 628907: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=628907 637114: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637114 640922: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=640922 637384: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637384 641020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641020 633475: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=633475 641155: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641155 637653: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637653 623148: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=623148 636945: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=636945 633460: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=633460 637020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637020 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131638246415310.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#637664: Re: Bug#637664: pu: package tzdata/2011h-0squeeze1
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 06:57:01PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 16:40 +0200, Youssef Eldakar wrote: > > On 01/-10/-28163 09:59 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:23 +0400, Eugene Barbashin wrote: > [Russian law changes on October 30th] > > > For the record, after some discussion with the maintainers on IRC and as > > > the next point releases for both stable and oldstable are due to occur > > > before mid-October, we've decided not to push an update earlier. There > > > may be an update to either package before the point release in order to > > > incorporate any further changes. > > > > Well, in Egypt, as of the last Friday of April 2011, a Squeeze > > installation has incorrect time. I believe pushing an update is worth > > reconsidering. > > If it's broken for more than four months now, why has nobody mentioned > the issue before? > > tzdata maintainers - any thoughts here? I know Aurelien mentioned that > there was probably another update for lenny/squeeze appearing before the > point releases in any case, but I'm not sure what the status is there. > On my side can only confirm that upgrading from 2011d to 2011h indeed changes the Egyptian timezone. So maybe we can simply push it to proposed-updates. About further updates for lenny/squeeze, we are in the period where governments like to do this kind of change, so it's difficult to predict what is going to happen. Anyway for the current status, 2011h is in s-p-u, while sid has 2011j, bringing DST changes for Samoa, New Foundland and creating a South Soudan entry. 2011k is going to be released on September 26th, bringing changes to Palestine and Belarus. So it looks like we can already upload 2011i for Lenny, and push 2011j to volatile just after. For Squeeze we can go directly to 2011j. Can I already start with the upload to o-s-p-u or should I open a bug for that? -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- 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/20110918215218.gc27...@hall.aurel32.net
Re: request to upload update-inetd 4.38+nmu1+squeeze1
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 20:14 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 11:03 +0200, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 07:33:47PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote [edited]: > > > On Sun, 2011-09-11 at 22:22 +0200, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote: > > > > update-inetd parses successfully the /proc/pid/stat file of inetd only > > > > when > > > > the latter comes from the default "Provides: inet-superserver" package > > > > (ie. > > > > openbsd-inetd) but fails to do so for inetutils-inetd and rlinetd. > > > > > > What about xinetd? > > > > The patched code is within an inetd-specific (read: non-xinetd) if clause > > for > > sending a SIGHUP. That's never the case for xinetd[0] which is restarted via > > invoke-rc.d instead. > > Ah, okay. Please go ahead; thanks. The upload happened, and I've flagged the package for acceptance at the next dinstall. 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/1316383386.21594.169.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#637020: pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5
tag 637020 + pending thanks On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 18:51 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/9/18 Philipp Kern : > > please use version "8.1-4+squeeze1" and target stable. Otherwise ACK, > > please go ahead. > > Uploaded, thanks. I've marked the package for acceptance at the next dinstall. > Btw, is there any guideline on when to use X.Y+squeezeZ and then to > just increment Y? I notice that both schemes are used. +squeezeZ is generally preferable as it's more obvious that it was a post-release update and much easier to avoid clashes with previously used version numbers. 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/1316383431.21594.172.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
tag 637114 + pending thanks On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 21:20 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > 2011/9/18 Adam D. Barratt : > > On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 12:55 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > >> kfreebsd-9_ada_devices.patch and zfs_packed_la_array.patch have been > >> tested for over a month (both in unstable/wheezy and my squeeze > >> desktop with ZFS). > >> > >> raid_number_uniqueness.patch and xen_disk_names.patch have been tested > >> for 4 months in unstable/wheezy. > > > > Thanks. Please go ahead. > > Uploaded and marked for acceptance at the next dinstall. 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/1316383406.21594.171.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#641020: pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14
tag 641020 + pending thanks On Sun, 2011-09-18 at 17:05 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:42:57PM +0200, Arthur de Jong wrote: > > I would like to upload a new release of nss-pam-ldapd for squeeze that > > fixes a few annoying bugs. These are all one or two-line changes that > > have been available in the development series for some time now. > > thanks, please go ahead. The package was uploaded, and I've marked it for acceptance at the next dinstall. 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/1316383398.21594.170.ca...@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org
Processed: Re: Bug#641020: pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 641020 + pending Bug #641020 [release.debian.org] pu: package nss-pam-ldapd/0.7.14 Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 641020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=641020 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131638340320218.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#637020: pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 637020 + pending Bug #637020 [release.debian.org] pu: package zfsutils/8.1-5 Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637020: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637020 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131638343720393.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: Re: Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tag 637114 + pending Bug #637114 [release.debian.org] pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15 Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637114: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637114 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- 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/handler.s.c.131638341320250.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Uploading linux-2.6 (3.0.0-4)
I intend to upload a new version of linux-2.6 to unstable tomorrow. This will include upstream stable update 3.0.4 and various other bug fixes. It should not involve an ABI bump. Let me know if there is anything this should wait for. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat. - John Lehman, Secretary of the US Navy 1981-1987 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
stable-proposed-updates: considering cpufrequtils
Hi Release Team,
I'm wondering if it's worth updating cpufrequtils in Squeeze to the
current version in testing/unstable.
There are a couple of fixes that are worth considering in there and
namely: fixing support for linux 3.0 (some modules have been moved
and broke assumptions in cpufrequtils init scripts) and support for AMD
family 20 CPUs.
There are extra harmless changes, if necessary I can uppload to spu a
new package that only contains the two fixes above.
The diff since Squeeze is:
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index cf79284..e746194 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,17 @@
+cpufrequtils (007-2) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Bulk load only helper modules. Linux 3.0 shuffled cpufreq modules
+locations a bit and now cpu drivers and helpers are in the same directory
+(closes: #636141).
+ * Use modprobe -b in loadcpufreq to honour blacklisted modules
+(closes: #592488).
+ * Load powernow-k8 for AMD family 20 (i.e. AMD E-350 cpus)
+(closes: #627811).
+ * Stop changing printk levels when loading cpufreq modules (closes: #624575
+and closes: #596235).
+
+ -- Mattia Dongili Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:13:41 +0900
+
cpufrequtils (007-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream version
diff --git a/debian/cpufrequtils.loadcpufreq.init
b/debian/cpufrequtils.loadcpufreq.init
index 0738441..d216035 100644
--- a/debian/cpufrequtils.loadcpufreq.init
+++ b/debian/cpufrequtils.loadcpufreq.init
@@ -37,6 +37,8 @@ set -e
# if not enabled then exit gracefully
[ "$ENABLE" = "true" ] || exit 0
+MODPROBE="modprobe -b"
+
load_detected_cpufreq_modules() {
#if /usr/sbin/laptop-detect; then LAPTOP=1; fi
CPUINFO=/proc/cpuinfo
@@ -117,7 +119,7 @@ load_detected_cpufreq_modules() {
# K7
MODULE=powernow-k7
;;
-15|16|17)
+15|16|17|20)
# K8
MODULE=powernow-k8
;;
@@ -149,18 +151,14 @@ load_detected_cpufreq_modules() {
}
load_modules() {
-#stop the kernel printk'ing at all while we load.
-PRINTK=$(cat /proc/sys/kernel/printk)
-[ "$VERBOSE" = no ] && echo "1 1 1 1" > /proc/sys/kernel/printk
-
#build a list of current modules so we don't load a module twice
LIST=$(/sbin/lsmod|awk '!/Module/ {print $1}')
#get list of available modules (governors and helpers)
LOC="/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/drivers/cpufreq"
if [ -d $LOC ]; then
- MODAVAIL=$( ( find $LOC -type f -name "*.o" -printf "basename %f
.o\n"; \
- find $LOC -type f -name "*.ko" -printf "basename %f .ko\n" ) |
/bin/sh)
+ MODAVAIL=$( ( find $LOC -type f -name "cpufreq_*.o" -printf
"basename %f .o\n"; \
+ find $LOC -type f -name "cpufreq_*.ko" -printf "basename %f
.ko\n" ) | /bin/sh)
else
MODAVAIL=""
fi
@@ -168,34 +166,31 @@ load_modules() {
#echo "Loading cpufreq modules:"
for mod in $MODAVAIL; do
#echo " $mod"
-echo $LIST| grep -q -w "$mod" || modprobe $mod >/dev/null ||
/bin/true
+echo $LIST| grep -q -w "$mod" || $MODPROBE $mod >/dev/null ||
/bin/true
done
#cpufreq is built in on powerpc; just return
if [ "$(uname -m)" = "ppc" ]; then
-echo "$PRINTK" > /proc/sys/kernel/printk
return 0
fi
#new style detection system
if [ ! "$FREQDRIVER" = "" ]; then
# user overridden value in /etc/default/loadcpufreq
-modprobe "$FREQDRIVER"
+$MODPROBE "$FREQDRIVER"
MODULE="$FREQDRIVER"
else
load_detected_cpufreq_modules
if [ ! -z "$MODULE" ] || [ ! -z "$MODULE_FALLBACK" ] ; then
- if [ ! -z "$MODULE" ] && modprobe "$MODULE" 2>/dev/null ;
then
+ if [ ! -z "$MODULE" ] && $MODPROBE "$MODULE" 2>/dev/null ;
then
:
- elif modprobe "$MODULE_FALLBACK" 2>/dev/null ; then
+ elif $MODPROBE "$MODULE_FALLBACK" 2>/dev/null ; then
MODULE="$MODULE_FALLBACK"
else
unset MODULE
fi
fi
fi
-
-echo "$PRINTK" > /proc/sys/kernel/printk
}
check_kernel() {
--
mattia
:wq!
--
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/20110918225201.ga15...@kamineko.org
Re: request to upload update-inetd 4.38+nmu1+squeeze1
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:03:06PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote [edited]: > The upload happened, and I've flagged the package for acceptance at the > next dinstall. great, thanks Adam! -- Every great idea is worthless without someone to do the work. --Neil Williams -- 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/20110918223940.GH3458@mobee
NEW changes in proposedupdates
Processing changes file: zfsutils_8.1-4+squeeze1_kfreebsd-amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: nss-pam-ldapd_0.7.14_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: update-inetd_4.38+nmu1+squeeze1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: grub2_1.98+20100804-14+squeeze1_kfreebsd-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/e1r5t4l-0002gq...@franck.debian.org
Re: Upcoming Point Releases
On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 10:33 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:27:55 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-09-11 at 23:59 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >> I believe we're now ready to do the kernel update, having got most
> >> of
> >> the security fixes done separately. I'm going to start a build now
> >> and
> >> intend to upload tomorrow unless I hear any objection to this (or I
> >> find
> >> a problem myself).
> >
> > Nobody appears to have objected, and it was uploaded. I've just
> > marked
> > the upload for acceptance at the next dinstall; thanks.
>
> Unfortunately the upload FTBFS on several architectures.
>
> The ia64 log contains a few "cast from pointer to integer of different
> size" warnings,
A few such warnings are, regrettably, normal.
> and dies with:
>
> /build/buildd-linux-2.6_2.6.32-36-ia64-4ELC7i/linux-2.6-2.6.32/debian/build/source_ia64_none/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c:6214:
>
> error: 'e1000_suspend' undeclared here (not in a function)
> /build/buildd-linux-2.6_2.6.32-36-ia64-4ELC7i/linux-2.6-2.6.32/debian/build/source_ia64_none/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c:6214:
>
> error: 'e1000_resume' undeclared here (not in a function)
> make[8]: *** [drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.o] Error 1
> make[7]: *** [drivers/net/e1000e] Error 2
> make[6]: *** [drivers/net] Error 2
>
> armel, mips{,el} and sparc all failed with:
>
> /build/buildd-linux-2.6_2.6.32-36-armel-fnA8Ad/linux-2.6-2.6.32/debian/build/source_armel_none/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c:
>
> In function '__e1000e_disable_aspm':
> /build/buildd-linux-2.6_2.6.32-36-armel-fnA8Ad/linux-2.6-2.6.32/debian/build/source_armel_none/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c:5323:
>
> error: implicit declaration of function 'pci_pcie_cap'
> make[8]: *** [drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.o] Error 1
> make[7]: *** [drivers/net/e1000e] Error 2
> make[6]: *** [drivers/net] Error 2
I understand and have fixes for both of these failures. Following those
changes I have successfully compiled all the modified drivers on the
ia64 and sparc porter boxes (but not attempted a complete package
rebuild).
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
If more than one person is responsible for a bug, no one is at fault.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
