Control: tags -1 + patch
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 04:50:24 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> But in any case gadfly is also buggy, as it's using the substvar
> ${source:Version} as the base for the binary version, which should
> not include the binNMU version part. And using ${binary:Version}
> which is
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + patch
Bug #623578 [gadfly] gadfly: build wrong version of the packaging during a
binNMU
Added tag(s) patch.
--
623578: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=623578
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 623578
Bug #623578 {Done: Samuel Thibault } [dpkg] gadfly: build
wrong version of the packaging during a binNMU
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you may need t
reopen 623578
tags 623578 - patch
clone 623578 -1
notfixed -1 1.16.7
reassign 623578 gadfly
found 623578 1.0.0-15
block 623578 by -1
thanks
Hi!
On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 23:20:11 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Andreas Metzler, le Sun 14 Oct 2012 15:44:16 +0200, a écrit :
> > Afaict (Both by looking
Hi!
On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 21:03:51 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 03:14 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Mmm, +b1 is indeed here, but dak is still REJECTing it, saying that
> > there is no such source version in unstable:
> >
> > python-kjbuckets_1.0.0-15+b4_hurd-i386.deb:
On Mon, 2012-10-15 at 03:14 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Mmm, +b1 is indeed here, but dak is still REJECTing it, saying that
> there is no such source version in unstable:
>
> python-kjbuckets_1.0.0-15+b4_hurd-i386.deb: trying to install to
> unstable, but could not find source
The build log i
Samuel Thibault, le Sun 14 Oct 2012 23:20:11 +0200, a écrit :
> Andreas Metzler, le Sun 14 Oct 2012 15:44:16 +0200, a écrit :
> > Afaict (Both by looking at 684625 which is not fixed and by checking
> > the newest binNMU on my up to date testing system) we are
> > currently still doing binNMUs with
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 623578 dpkg
Bug #623578 [gadfly] gadfly: build wrong version of the packaging during a
binNMU
Bug reassigned from package 'gadfly' to 'dpkg'.
No longer marked as found in versions gadfly/1.0.0-14 and gadfly/1.0.0-15.
Ignoring request to
reassign 623578 dpkg
found 623578 1.16.0.2
done 623578 1.16.7
thanks
Hello,
Andreas Metzler, le Sun 14 Oct 2012 15:44:16 +0200, a écrit :
> Afaict (Both by looking at 684625 which is not fixed and by checking
> the newest binNMU on my up to date testing system) we are
> currently still doing binN
On 2012-05-25 Samuel Thibault wrote:
> reopen 623578
> found 623578 1.0.0-15
> thanks
> Debian Bug Tracking System, le Thu 21 Apr 2011 18:51:09 +, a écrit :
> > #623578: gadfly: build wrong version of the packaging during a binNMU
> >
> > It has been closed by Matthias Klose .
> Err, no, th
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 623578 + patch
Bug #623578 [gadfly] gadfly: build wrong version of the packaging during a
binNMU
Added tag(s) patch.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
623578: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bug
tags 623578 + patch
thanks
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 03:03:27AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Why setting that particular version and not let it use the changelog
> version?
Yes, adding epoch to changelog would add it to all packages and probably would
be the cleanest way.
Otherwise, I attached a
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 623578
Bug #623578 {Done: Matthias Klose } [gadfly] gadfly: build
wrong version of the packaging during a binNMU
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
all fixed versions will be cleared, and you may need
reopen 623578
found 623578 1.0.0-15
thanks
Debian Bug Tracking System, le Thu 21 Apr 2011 18:51:09 +, a écrit :
> #623578: gadfly: build wrong version of the packaging during a binNMU
>
> It has been closed by Matthias Klose .
Err, no, the bug is still there, binNMUs still get built wrongly:
14 matches
Mail list logo
