Package: python-uno
Version: 1:3.5.3-5
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 7.2
during an upgrade, the python-uno preinst script calls:
/usr/lib/libreoffice/program/unopkg
This file seems to come from the libreoffice-core pacakge. According
to the policy:
"Pre-Depends are also required
On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 16:59:53 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> In any case a multi-arch enabled dpkg will not miss wheezy.=20
Guillem,
Are you really in a position to declare this? The release team as
previously said [0] directly to you that they were looking for an upload
in Octoboer in order to e
I'm unable to reproduce this bug.
Is anyone else able to reproduce this bug?
stew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Thomas,
I'm unable to reproduce this. It also looks like there has been a new
version of this package uploaded since your report was filed.
Are you still able to reproduce this bug?
stew
pgpv5RoqsO69c.pgp
Description: PGP signature
tags 625050 unreproducible
thanks
I'm unable to reprodue this bug on amd64. Is anyone else able to
reproduce this?
pgpyxuCTCDifg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I don't understand your response. I don't know what chrooted users have
to do with this bug.
The problem is that you are allowing the dtc user to run any program
they wish as root. This means that any apache vulnerability easily
becomes a remote root vulnerability. If your intention is to let d
Thomas Goirand writes:
> I don't see any configuration file there.
seriously?
How about named.conf?
How about vhosts.conf?
root@testdtc:~# source /etc/apache2/envvars
root@testdtc:/root# apache2 -S
192.168.122.137:* is a NameVirtualHost
default server www.foo.com (/var/lib/dtc/e
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:31:19 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> The goal of my software is to handle the configuration of the server. If
> we follow what you are saying, then an administrator would have to spend
> hours to setup his server manually for a single installation. Do you
> think that this i
Package: dtc-common
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.2
dtc seems to put lots of configuation files in /var/lib/dtc, contrary to
policy.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (600, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Archi
Package: dtc-common
Severity: critical
Tags: security
Justification: root security hole
the install script gives sudo access to the dtc user (the user that is running
apache) unrestricted access to chrootuid, which essentially gives root access
to the dtc account:
root@testdtc:/var/lib/dtc/etc#
Source: dtc
Version: missing source for shared/gfx/skin/grayboard/js/DD_roundies-min.js
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 2.2.1
shared/gfx/skin/grayboard/js/DD_roundies-min.js is minimized javascript without
included source. Upstream provides non-minimized source which is clearly the
prefe
Package: dtc-common
Version: 0.32.10-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.4
It seems to me that the package tries to subvert policy 10.7.4 here. Other
bugs have been opened against this source package in the past (for example
#414469, #402432, #414484). I think that trying to get arou
Source: php-net-ping
Version: 2.4.5-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
The source code claims to be copyright by several of the upstream authors, but
the source code itself doesn't have these copyright claims anyway. The
sourcecode claims to be held by the the PHP Group. Please upda
Source: php-html-common
Version: 1.2.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
debian/copyright refers to the php 2.02 license, but the source code refers to
the 3.01 license. The copyright files claims that PHP Group is the copyright
holder of this software. Where did that information c
> anything other than GPL-1
Pardon me, that should read "anything other than GPL-2"
stew
pgp2z1IzSCAwf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Source: tumgreyspf
Version: 1.35-7
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
As discussed offline in email with maintainer, this package claims that the
software is GPL-2+, when it seems that there is no reason to believe it is
anything other than GPL-1
bye,
stew
-- System Information:
Debia
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 21:43:02 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 07/12/2011 08:43 PM, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> > Source: libnatpmp
> > Version: 20101211-2
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: Policy 12.5
> >
> >
> > Some of the source files
Source: libnatpmp
Version: 20101211-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
Some of the source files carry a MIT like license which is not mentioned in the
package copyright file
bye,
stew
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (600, 'unst
Source: nova
Version: 2011.2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
In reviewing this source package, I find several problems with the copyright
file:
tools/ajaxterm/sarissa* are LGPL, but this is not mentioned in
debian/copyright. The rest of ajaxterm is public domain
In the smoketest
Source: dtc
Version: 0.32.10-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
shared/gfx/xanjaxXHR.js appears to be distributed under the AGPL, but this
license isn't mentioned in debian/copyright. (there are also several other
copies of this same file)
---
debian/copyright contains the followin
Source: mlmmj
Version: 1.2.17-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
find_email_adr.c is the source package is a 4-clause BSD license. This license
is not documented in any of the copyright files. This needs to be documented,
as does the copyright holder of this file.
As an asside. Is
reassign 632142 emacs23
thanks
So the problem here is really that cedet, speedbar, eieio are now
implemented by emacs directly. These packages, which are no longer in
testing/unstable, should not have targetted emacs23. But since that cat
is already out of the bag, the easiest way to avoid this
When you say "Installing ecb results in a broken package due to several
errors regarding missing libs from CEDET (though all such packages are
installed)" What packages do you mean? CEDET is part of emacs, so there
should be no additional packages. Do you have cedet packages installed
From stable
Source: conky
Severity: serious
Justification: 3.3
Trying to email the maintainer of this package results in:
550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in virtual alias table
A valid email address is required by policy 3.3.
bye,
stew
pgpjPuXzVeQUE.pgp
Description: PGP signa
Source: tolua++
Severity: serious
Justification: 3.3
Trying to email the maintainer of this package results in:
550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in virtual alias table
A valid email address is required by policy 3.3.
bye,
stew
pgpzHfXgEANvW.pgp
Description: PGP sig
Source: gnome-mplayer
Severity: serious
Justification: 3.3
Trying to email the maintainer of this package results in:
550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in virtual alias table
A valid email address is required by policy 3.3.
bye,
stew
pgpQRkvA7srwA.pgp
Description: P
Source: gecko-mediaplayer
Severity: serious
Justification: 3.3
Trying to email the maintainer of this package results in:
550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in virtual alias table
A valid email address is required by policy 3.3.
bye,
stew
pgpMqZv6Iehpe.pgp
Descriptio
Source: gtkglext
Justification: 3.3
Severity: serious
The listed maintainer of this package is William Pitcock
, however the only listed MX record for this
domain is unusable:
stew@tang:~ $ host -t mx sacredspiral.co.uk
sacredspiral.co.uk mail is handled by 5 ifrit.dereferenced.org.
Source: pidgin-audacious
Justification: 3.3
Severity: serious
The listed maintainer of this package is William Pitcock
, however the only listed MX record for this
domain is unusable:
stew@tang:~ $ host -t mx sacredspiral.co.uk
sacredspiral.co.uk mail is handled by 5 ifrit.dereferenced.or
Source: pidgin-mpris
Justification: 3.3
Severity: serious
The listed maintainer of this package is William Pitcock
, however the only listed MX record for this
domain is unusable:
stew@tang:~ $ host -t mx sacredspiral.co.uk
sacredspiral.co.uk mail is handled by 5 ifrit.dereferenced.org.
Source: qpopper
Justification: 3.3
Severity: serious
The listed maintainer of this package is William Pitcock
, however the only listed MX record for this
domain is unusable:
stew@tang:~ $ host -t mx sacredspiral.co.uk
sacredspiral.co.uk mail is handled by 5 ifrit.dereferenced.org.
s
Source: upse
Justification: 3.3
Severity: serious
The listed maintainer of this package is William Pitcock
, however the only listed MX record for this
domain is unusable:
stew@tang:~ $ host -t mx sacredspiral.co.uk
sacredspiral.co.uk mail is handled by 5 ifrit.dereferenced.org.
stew
Source: xorg
Version: 1:7.6+7
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
The debian/copyright for this package is confusing to me. It seems to try to
indicate that the copyright holder of this software changes depending on
whether this is a debian or a ubuntu package? Can this be clarified?
Package: diff-ext
Version: 0.3.2-1.1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
The listed maintainer of this package is:
Maintainer: Andrea Veri
However, attempting to email this address results in:
andrea.ver...@gmail.com
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO::
host gma
tags 617303 +pending
tags 617303 +fixed-upstream
tags 548854 +pending
thanks
Since the maintainer of this package seems MIA, and hasn't responded to
any of the bugs in this package in the last few years, I intend to
hijack this package.
I've sent the maintainer a private email, and I uploaded
Package: unhide.rb
Version: 12-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
the unhide.rb packages lists this as Maintainer:
Debian Forensics
however, emailing that address results in:
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT
TO::
host lists.alioth.debian.org [217.196.43.134]:
Package: rsakeyfind
Version: 1.0.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
the rsakeyfind packages lists this as Maintainer:
Debian Forensics
however, emailing that address results in:
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT
TO::
host lists.alioth.debian.org [217.196.43.134
Package: rkhunter
Version: 1.3.8-3
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
The 1.3.8-3 upload of rkhunter had the Maintainer listed as:
Maintainer: Debian Forensics
However, emailing that address results in:
SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT
TO::
host lists.alioth.debia
Source: b43-fwcutter
Version: 1:013-3
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
debian/copyright states that this package is GPL, however, it appears to have a
2 clause BSD license, and some code in the public domain. The BSD license
requires that copyright holders be listed, and they are not
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 20:37:34 -0800, Vincent Cheng
wrote:
> As promised earlier, I've re-packaged Dropbox (based off of Ivan's work) and
> have tried to address the licensing issues in the packaging. I would be
> grateful if any Debian developers/maintainers could look through my
> packaging and h
On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:41:47 -0800 (PST), Rian Hunter wrote:
> hi all
>
> we recently released a distribution of dropbox that corrects all the
> complains listed in these debian bug reports. thanks for the feedback,
> please let me know if there is anything i can do to make dropbox comply to
>
found 610338 0.15~svn3447
thanks
> Have you seen updated packages?
No, I only looked at the version in testint/unstable. Marking the bug
accordingly.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debi
Source: psi-plus
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 2.2.1, Policy 12.5
There are many files which are LGPL-2.1+ and many files which are GPL2+, your
debian/copyight is not accurate about this saying only that the software is
LGPL-2+ and pointing to GPL instead of the LGPL
--
I noticed that
Source: libtextcat
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
The maintainer of this package is listed as: "Daniele Favara
", however the dsslive.org domain doesn't accept email. A
working email address is required by policy 3.3
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers
Package: bgoffice-dict-downloader
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
the domain name of the Maintainer address does not accept email.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architect
Package: bgoffice-computer-terms
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
debian-addons-bg-maintain...@openfmi.net is not a valid email address, since
its only listed MX server does not allow SMTP connections.
This was discovered when dinstall tried to send email to the maintainers, which
boun
Package: docbookwiki
Version: 0.9.1cvs-15
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
There are many files in the tarball which are GFDL licensed some with and some
without invariant sections, this license is not, however, mentioned in the
copyright file
-- System Information:
Debian Release:
Package: docbookwiki
Version: 0.9.1cvs-11
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 10.7.4
the maintainer scripts directly modify /etc/sudoers which is a conffile of the
sudo package.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (600, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'
Package: tilecache
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
Trying to send email to the maintainer address of this package caused the
following DSN:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipien
Package: gadmin-openvpn-server
Version: 0.1.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 9.1.1
The configuration created by gadmin-openvpn-server contains these two lines:
log/etc/gadmin-openvpn/server/openvpn-server.log
status /etc/gadmin-openvpn/server/openvpn-server-status.log
I don't see
retitle 594519 multiple copyright problems make software non-redistributable as
currently packaged
thanks
I encouraged the submitter to submit this bug after he raised concerns
on IRC about some of software in this package. I thought that I'd
better take a closer look at this source myself, and
I rejected titantools with a message saying that because of a bug in
dak, we are unable to easily handle non-sourceful uploads that move a
package from main to non-free. As we are bogged down with other stuff,
the quickest way to get titantools through new is going to be making a
sourceful upload.
forcemerge 588019 592077
tags 588019 +pending
thanks
I've uploaded the patch from Jakub Wilk from 592077 to DELAYED/3. It
fixes both bugs. Thanks Jakub.
interdiff attached
stew
pgpX7Wczs0ZUV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
<<< message/external-body; name*=us-ascii''%2ftmp%2fblueman_1.21-4_bl
Package: python-gobject
Version: 2.21.4-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
Version 2.22.4 included the pygi sources. Some files from that source contain
distribution licenses not mentioned in debian/copyright.
>From the pygi source packages's copyright file:
Licence: (gi/pygi-foreig
According to this:
http://live.gnome.org/PyGI
"PyGI have been merged in PyGObject". Looking at the sources of each,
it does appear that the source of pygi is now included in the pygobject
source package, making pygi obsolete.
stew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.deb
tags 542476 +pending
minor 542476 minor
thanks
Downgrading this bug as it is only a documentation bug. The software
works fine when invoked correctly.
"(require gnuserv-compate)" instead of "(require gnuserv)"
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 547960 patch
thanks
It seems like neither python-numeric nor python-numpy dependencies are
needed here. I looked through the code and find nowhere that it is
importing from either package.
When I built the package without the dependencies, the game still seemed
functional.
Are any of the m
I'm not able to reproduce this bug. Are you still able to? If you
move your ~/.jppyrc so that a new default config, does the problem still
occur?
Thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
reassign 520982 src:kdelibs
thanks
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 07:18:41AM +0100, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 March 2009 06:27:12 Mike O'Connor wrote:
> > Package: kdelibs
> > Version: 3.5.10.dfsg.1-2
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: dfsg #1
> &g
Package: kdelibs
Version: 3.5.10.dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: dfsg #1
in the orig.tar.gz, the win subdirectory contains in.h which is licensed GPL2+
and pwd.h which is 4-clause BSD. This combination is well known to not be
distributable.
readdir.{h,c} is ASL 1.1 which is also not c
Package: kdelibs
Version: 3.5.10.dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: dfsg #1
While working on #520485, I noticed that we are distributing several files for
while we don't seem to have a distribution license.
kio/kssl/kssl/{cert_bundle,certbundle_Makefile} say:
Copyright (c) 1998 Ralf S. E
Package: kdelibs
Version: 4:3.5.10.dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
Sune suggested I look at kde packages to see if they have adequate
debian/copyright. I'm sorry but they don't seem to. Although I only
did a very brief check, I see several problems right away. Below are
s
fix bison error (Thanks Matt Kraai) (Closes: 516057)
+ * Change incorrect GPL pointer from GPL to GPL-2
+
+ -- Mike O'Connor Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:46:45 -0400
+
acpica-unix (20061109-0.1) unstable; urgency=low
* Non-maintainer upload with permission of the maintainer.
diff -u acpica
Maintainer,
The patch attached to this bug seems to get this package building again.
Do you intend to upload a fix soon? Would you like this fix to be
NMUed?
thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Maintainer,
The attached patch does indeed seem to get this package building again.
Do you intend to make an uplaod soon? Would you like to have this bug
NMUed?
thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Ian,
The attched patch does seem to get this package buliding again. Would
you like this to be NMUed? Do you inted to upload a fix?
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: webcit
Version: 7.37-dfsg-6
Severity: serious
Justification: 12.5
I was asked to review this source package in NEW, and found problems
with this package which caused me to reject the package. It appears
that some of the problems with this source also exist in the packages in
stable, test
, and unstable.
- Forwarded message from Mike O'Connor -
From: Mike O'Connor
To: Michael Meskes ,
Debian Citadel Team
Cc: Debian Installer
Subject: libcitadel_7.42-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 05:54:26 +
Hi Maintainer,
REJECT: fix debian/copy
Package: axiom
Version: 20081101-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.3
mail sent to the maintainer address for this package bounces with the following
message:
Dr. Camm Maguire is no longer employed by INTECH. Please email him at
c...@maguirefamily.org instead.
Package: python-excelerator
Version: 0.6.3a-3.1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
python-excelerator contains an outdated copy of antlr.py from the antlr
package, however the copyright file for python-excelerator doesn't contain the
required attribution to the ANTLR project, the licens
sed-updates; urgency=medium
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * fixed debian/patches/05_powerpc_asm.patch to get it building on ppc again
+(Closes: 495211)
+ * Uploading to testing-proposed-updates to fix the bug for lenny, becuase
+the cvs version in unstable isn't a valid candidate fo
Release managers,
This bug was fixed in sid by uploading a new cvs pull of the upstream
source, which HE as noted, was not acceptable for a freeze exception. I
have prepared and tested a minimal fix of this bug to the version of
this package in lenny, which consists of a one line change to a file
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Daniel Dickinson wrote:
> Yes, I need help. I know how to get the source files and dependencies
> but I haven't worked out out to get dpkg-buildpackage to generate a
> debugging package. I've been trying to get a chance to read policy
> since the informat
I can reprocude and get the same stacktrace on AMD64 iff I run both
jackd and winecfg as root. when running them as a non-privileged user,
i only get test-failed.
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 498770 unreproducible
tags 498770 moreinfo
thanks
I'm also unable to reproduce this bug,
Daniel,
Can you still reproduce it? Can you rebuild the package with debugging
info to get a better stacktrace? If you need help doing so, please ask.
Thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digi
Ian,
In looking over outstanding RC bugs in lenny, I noticed #495211 which is
still outstanding in lenny. Marc Brockschmidt has noted that the CVS
pull that you uploaded in order to fix this bug in sid is not
appropriate for a freeze exception to move to lenny. Do you have plans
to try to make a
Package: wget
Version: 1.11.4-1
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Justification: Policy 12.5
The wget(1) manpage and the wget info page are both distributed under
the terms of the GFDL, however /usr/share/doc/wget/copyright does not
mention the GFDL.
Here is a patch:
diff -ruN wget-1.11.4.orig/debi
Upon closer inspection, it looks like the problem is bigger than just an
incomplete copyright file. Several of the files, for example,
happydoclib/formatter/xmlformatterbase.py contain the statments:
# This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
# under certain conditions. For d
Package: python-happydoc
Version: 2.1-6
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
many of the files distributed in the python-happydoc package have
Copyright statements in them which aren't reflected in
/usr/share/doc/python-happydoc/copyright. For example:
/usr/share/pyshared/happydoclib/doc
retitle 494296 kdebase-bin: Uninstallable in Sid
tag 494296 unreproducible
reassign 494296 kdebase-bin
thanks
I cannot reproduce this bug either, marking it as unreproducible, but
since this is a problem installing kdebase-bin not rosegarden, I'm
reassigning.
Can you please show us the output of
tags 482223 patch
Well this package got RMed before I was able to patch, but I'm sending a
patch anyway in case someone wants to pick this package back up.
Below is a dpatch which can be dropped into debian/patches and
debian/patches/00-list which gets libinstrudeo building again. I didn't
bothe
tags 483320 patch
thanks
below is a patch which gets maint-guide building again.
thanks,
stew
diff -ru maint-guide-1.2.12+nmu1.orig/debian/rules
maint-guide-1.2.12+nmu1/debian/rules
--- maint-guide-1.2.12+nmu1.orig/debian/rules 2008-06-03 11:21:47.0
-0400
+++ maint-guide-1.2.12+nmu
tag 484230 fixed-upstream
thanks
This problem goes away when I use the newer freecycle-0.6.1.1alpha from
upstream.
thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: freecycle
Version: 0.6.1alpha-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
if I start freecycle as "freecycle /path/to/wav" or by starting it
with no arguments or if start freecycle then use "Open Wave" from the
File menu, freecycle segfaults.
here's a stacktrace:
(gdb) bt
notfixed 478484 0.4.5-7
thanks
oops. -7 failed to fix this issue. It is fixed by -8 instead. sorry.
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 481261 pending
thanks
The problem here is that recordmydesktop expects to be recording to a
file ending in .ogv, when krecordmydesktop requests to record to a file
ending in .tmp, recordmydesktop actually records to .tmp.ogv.
I'll prepare a qa upload to address this bug.
stew
signature.as
tag 477454 upstream
severity 477454 minor
thanks
Although this abuse is unfortunate, I fail to see what makes this bug
release critical.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 476999 patch
Attached is a patch which fixes this bug.
thanks,
stew
diff -ruN gnupg2-2.0.9.orig/keyserver/gpgkeys_curl.c gnupg2-2.0.9/keyserver/gpgkeys_curl.c
--- gnupg2-2.0.9.orig/keyserver/gpgkeys_curl.c 2008-04-21 23:24:29.0 -0400
+++ gnupg2-2.0.9/keyserver/gpgkeys_curl.c 2008-04-
tags 476169 pending
thanks
I'm planning to NMU this package with the aforementioned patch on April
21st unless someone beats me to it.
thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 476169 patch
thanks
Attached is a patch which fixes this bug.
thanks,
stew
diff -ruN capisuite-0.4.5.orig/debian/patches/python2.5-fix-build.diff capisuite-0.4.5/debian/patches/python2.5-fix-build.diff
--- capisuite-0.4.5.orig/debian/patches/python2.5-fix-build.diff 1969-12-31 19:00:00.0
> Do you think, we need to provide such files in debian source package?
Absolutely, it is required by the license, since this is the preferred
form for modification.
thanks,
stew
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
tags 474809 fixed-upstream
thanks
This bug is fixed upstream, there is a 0.8.0 release of gxneur to go
with the 0.8.0 release of xneur:
http://xneur.ru/wiki/Downloads
since this newer release of neur changed public structs, this SHOULD have been
an
soname bump in libxnconfig9, right?
stew
s
Package: gxneur
Version: 0.6.2-2
Severity: serious
The following files:
src/interface.c
src/interface.h
src/support.c
src/support.h
contain the header:
/*
* DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE - it is generated by Glade.
*/
There are no glade source files included in the .orig.tar.gz from
tag 474855 patch
thanks
Attached is a patch which fixes this bug.
Thanks,
stew
diff -ru pearpc-0.4.0.orig/src/cpu/cpu_jitc_x86/x86asm.h pearpc-0.4.0/src/cpu/cpu_jitc_x86/x86asm.h
--- pearpc-0.4.0.orig/src/cpu/cpu_jitc_x86/x86asm.h 2008-04-15 02:51:52.0 -0400
+++ pearpc-0.4.0/src/cpu/cpu_
tags 476026 patch
thanks
attached is a patch which fixes this bug.
Thanks,
stew
diff -ru survex-1.0.39.1.orig/debian/rules survex-1.0.39.1/debian/rules
--- survex-1.0.39.1.orig/debian/rules 2008-04-14 23:18:24.0 -0400
+++ survex-1.0.39.1/debian/rules 2008-04-14 23:18:45.0 -0400
@
tags 476017 patch
thanks
attached is a patch which fixes this error.
Thanks,
stew
diff -ru zimpl-2.05.ds2.orig/debian/rules zimpl-2.05.ds2/debian/rules
--- zimpl-2.05.ds2.orig/debian/rules 2008-04-14 23:03:38.0 -0400
+++ zimpl-2.05.ds2/debian/rules 2008-04-14 23:06:38.0 -0400
@@ -
-maintainer upload.
+ * Make sure .deb contains the same files when built twice (Closes: #441720)
+
+ -- Mike O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:12:30 -0500
+
multisync0.90 (0.91.0-4) unstable; urgency=low
* debian/patches/05_fix_desktop_file.patch: New file, fixes bin
Has any progress been made on fixing this bug?
I'm interested in seeing this package be included in lenny. If there
has not yet been any effort into making this package installable on
ia64, or to make it compliant with the new python policy, I'd be happy
to work on getting it there.
stew
signa
retitle 444718 RM: sope -- RoQA; NPOASR; RC-Buggy
reassign 444718 ftp.debian.org
severity 444718 normal
thanks
sope was never released upstream. It is currently buggy, unmaintained,
and has never been part of a stable release.
I think it therefore makes a good candidate for removal.
thanks,
ste
tags 441711 pending
thanks
I got bdefreese-guest to commit the patch to the debian-games svn
repository, however he is not able to upload. Marking the bug as
pending until a sponsor can be found.
thanks,
stew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
