control: tag 858250 -pending
control: affects 858250 -stretch +sid
control: notfound 858250 0.1.1+dfsg1-2
On Thu, 18 May 2017 12:48:11 +0100
Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Control: tag -1 wontfix moreinfo
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2017-05-08 00:40, Roger Shimizu wrote:
> > Since you say it should fix unstab
Control: tag -1 wontfix moreinfo
Hi,
On 2017-05-08 00:40, Roger Shimizu wrote:
Since you say it should fix unstable first, then stretch or t-p-u,
now I think we may just leave runc/0.1.1+dfsg1-2 (current in stretch)
as it is in stretch. Because it builds OK (without FTBFS) for stretch.
The #858
control: tag 861953 -moreinfo
On Mon, 8 May 2017 08:40:52 +0900
Roger Shimizu wrote:
> What's your opinion?
I proposed two plans. Either is fine to me.
Please kindly help to decide, so as to avoid a few packages get removed in
stretch.
Thank you!
Cheers,
--
Roger Shimizu, GMT +9 Tokyo
PGP/GP
[ CC: original Bug #858250 ]
On Sun, 07 May 2017 21:02:00 +
Niels Thykier wrote:
> Roger Shimizu:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: unblock
> >
> > Please unblock package runc
> >
> > Since there's already a
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Control: forcemerge 858250 861966
Roger Shimizu:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please unblock package runc
>
> Since there's already a newer package in unstable, I guess it's
> nec
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package runc
Since there's already a newer package in unstable, I guess it's
necessary to use "testing-proposed-updates"
Here I'm fixing #858250, which is FTBFS RC issue.
As
6 matches
Mail list logo
