Hey folks,
Aurelien Jarno (2018-03-07):
> On 2017-08-06 20:55, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > debian-installer used to re-link all the libraries going into the initrd
> > in order to strip unneeded symbols, using mklibs. That is the reason why
> > libnewt0.52-pic was needed. Unfortunately it was subje
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 891482 src:linux
Bug #891482 [installation-reports] No nVME disk?
Bug reassigned from package 'installation-reports' to 'src:linux'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #891482 to the same values
previously set
Ignoring reque
Processing control commands:
> tags 892935 pending
Bug #892935 [src:libdebian-installer] libdebian-installer: Please add support
for "nodoc" build options and profile
Added tag(s) pending.
--
892935: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=892935
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow.
Control: tags 892935 pending
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 06:29:24PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> Source: libdebian-installer
> Version: 0.114
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
> User: debian-ri...@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: riscv64
>
> Hi,
>
> We need changes in this package to h
Matt Taggart (2018-03-14):
> On 03/13/2018 10:28 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>
> > What extra security would signing images bring here?
>
> For me, assurance that nobody had interfered with the daily image that
> I will use to install a system. Many systems I install with a daily
> are for testin
2018-03-14 18:29 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo:
Please consider applying the patch (that I will upload in minutes, to have a bug
number) or providing some alternative solution to the same effect.
See attached file, with bugnumber :)
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
>From 7cc3872838a212335c4
Source: libdebian-installer
Version: 0.114
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
User: debian-ri...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: riscv64
Hi,
We need changes in this package to help to bootstrap the riscv64 architecture,
in particular it will help to skip using doxygen (in a clean way) for the time
being.
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:02:13 +0100
Source: console-setup
Binary: keyboard-configuration console-setup console-setup-mini
console-setup-linux console-setup-freebsd bdf2psf console-setup-udeb
console-setup-amiga-ekmap cons
console-setup_1.180_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
console-setup_1.180.dsc
console-setup_1.180.tar.xz
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Your message dated Wed, 14 Mar 2018 09:34:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#892900: fixed in console-setup 1.180
has caused the Debian Bug report #892900,
regarding console-setup: The last update console-setup 1.179 fails in its
postinstallation scripts
to be marked as done.
This mea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:02:13 +0100
Source: console-setup
Binary: keyboard-configuration console-setup console-setup-mini
console-setup-linux console-setup-freebsd bdf2psf console-setup-udeb
console-setup-amiga-ekmap console-setup-ata
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 892900 + pending
Bug #892900 [console-setup] console-setup: The last update console-setup 1.179
fails in its postinstallation scripts
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
892
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 892900 grave
Bug #892900 [console-setup] console-setup: The last update console-setup 1.179
fails in its postinstallation scripts
Severity set to 'grave' from 'important'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need
Package: console-setup
Version: 1.179
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
*** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
Today's upgrade to console-setup 1.179 broke postinstallation scripts.
There's another problem that the scripts attempt to modify the file
/etc/default/
On 03/13/2018 10:28 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
What extra security would signing images bring here?
For me, assurance that nobody had interfered with the daily image that I
will use to install a system. Many systems I install with a daily are
for testing and get thrown away rather quickly (a
15 matches
Mail list logo
