On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:35:08 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Thanks, lets see who the next iteration goes...
>
Most likely like the previous ones, e.g.
http://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/amd64/20100826-00:06/
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 11:58 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 11:03:44AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 22:15:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 10:41 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 09:23:59 +0100, Ian
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 11:03:44AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 22:15:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 10:41 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 09:23:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > I can't see any historical version of
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 22:15:58 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 10:41 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 09:23:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >
> > > I can't see any historical version of util/get-packages in SVN which has
> > > the echo+gpg+cp commands
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 10:41 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 09:23:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> > I can't see any historical version of util/get-packages in SVN which has
> > the echo+gpg+cp commands at this point. So it looks like some local
> > build admin debug or som
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 09:23:59 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I can't see any historical version of util/get-packages in SVN which has
> the echo+gpg+cp commands at this point. So it looks like some local
> build admin debug or something. Looking back over the historical amd64
> logs it seems the
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 08:07 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/build-logs.html now shows only amd64
> failing so I guess most issues are fixed. The amd64 log is ends with:
> [...]
> I'm not sure overwriting /etc/apt/trusted.gpg is a valid thing for the
> build to be d
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 07:16 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Just a note to mention that daily builds are still failing for weird
> archive signing key problems.
Something to do with the new key announced in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/08/msg6.html ?
> W: GPG error: ft
Just a note to mention that daily builds are still failing for weird
archive signing key problems.
BUILDING IMAGE FOR build_netboot
make[2]: `sources.list.udeb' is up to date.
warning, in file '/var/lib/dpkg/available' near line 22924 package
'ttf-sil-nuosusil':
Only exact versions may be used
9 matches
Mail list logo
