On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:01:20PM +, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> Firstly, I'm sorry that you didn't get any response on this, and thank
> you for pushing this issue. I must confess to being rather frustrated
> by the situation as well as not having any spare cycles for Debian
> work for a whil
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 06:26:45PM -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On Tue 2016-10-11 23:48:15 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > Those patches are posted here:
> >
> > https://github.com/bestpractical/gnupg-interface/pull/1
> >
> > I'd like to upload them to debian as well, though they are
On Tue 2016-10-11 23:48:15 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Those patches are posted here:
>
> https://github.com/bestpractical/gnupg-interface/pull/1
>
> I'd like to upload them to debian as well, though they are *not*
> interoperable with versions of GnuPG prior to 2.1.x, due to GnuPG's
> non
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 22:14:13 +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
> > Attached is a patch series.
>
> Hi gregor et al,
>
> Thanks so much for preparing this patch series and tidying up some
> non-related issues with the package while I've been unavailable! I
> applied your patch series to master and
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:44:28PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:10:30 +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
>
> > Help untangling this mess would be very welcome, as both Dominic and I
> > are rather short on time. Tagging and copying possible candidates :)
>
> Good news: I got the pa
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:48:15PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> Does any of you RT hackers know how to run specific tests manually
> without needing to re-run the entire ~10 minute suite so i can reduce
> the cycle time as i'm debugging this stuff and trying to propose fixes?
./configure --
Hi all--
On Tue 2016-10-11 16:44:28 -0400, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:10:30 +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
>
>> Help untangling this mess would be very welcome, as both Dominic and I
>> are rather short on time. Tagging and copying possible candidates :)
>
> Good news: I got the pack
On Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:10:30 +0300, Niko Tyni wrote:
> Help untangling this mess would be very welcome, as both Dominic and I
> are rather short on time. Tagging and copying possible candidates :)
Good news: I got the package to build.
Bad news: Only by forcing gpg1 even harder in the test suite.
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 help
Bug #839580 [src:request-tracker4] request-tracker4: FTBFS in testing (failed
tests)
Added tag(s) help.
--
839580: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839580
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tag -1 help
On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 10:42:49AM +, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Package: src:request-tracker4
> Version: 4.2.13-2
> Severity: serious
> t/mail/gnupg-outgoing-signed_encrypted.t (Wstat: 3584 Tests: 68
> Failed: 14)
> Failed tests: 10-11, 18-19, 27-28, 35-36, 4
Package: src:request-tracker4
Version: 4.2.13-2
Severity: serious
Dear maintainer:
I tried to build this package in stretch with "dpkg-buildpackage -A"
(which is what the "Arch: all" autobuilder would do to build it)
but it failed:
11 matches
Mail list logo
