On 11/28/2013 09:56 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jakub Wilk writes ("Re: debconf as a registry"):
>> I suggest the following test instead:
>>
>> 1) DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get install $package
>> 2) rm -rf /var/cache/debconf
>> 3) DEBIAN_PRIORITY=low apt-get install --reinstall $package
>>
>
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 05:40:35PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Steve Langasek , 2013-11-29, 12:01:
> >What do you propose as a mechanism for agreeing to a reduced NMU
> >delay for archive-wide changes?
> My proposal is to realize that reduced delay for archive-wide
> changes is not needed.
> Ser
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Kamal Mostafa
* Package name: hershey-fonts
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Kamal Mostafa
* URL : http://www.whence.com/hershey-fonts/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : Hershey vector fonts librar
On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 15:12 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 01:57:39PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 09:22 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > Some precision about the MIPS machines:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 09:04:56PM +0100, Niels Thykier w
Package: wnpp
Owner: Radu-Bogdan Croitoru
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libhtml-prettyprinter-perl
Version : 0.03
Upstream Author : Claus Schotten
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/HTML-P
Ian Jackson writes:
> I've heard it observed that it's rather odd that a developer doing an
> upload can only reduce the delay from the default, and not increase it.
> I found this a moderately convincing line of reasoning but arguably it
> should be accompanied by a change to the migration time
Your message dated Sat, 30 Nov 2013 22:31:55 +0100
with message-id <20131130213155.gn6...@jadzia.comodo.priv.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#730871: general: Filesystem? Some problems with sizes
of files.
has caused the Debian Bug report #730871,
regarding general: Filesystem? Some problems with size
On 2013-11-29 09:22, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 09:04:56PM +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Note that s390x and powerpc could also do with more porters, but at
>> this time we are not giving an official warning for them.
>
> I see on http://release.debian.org/jessie/arch_qualify
Joey Hess writes ("Re: Release sprint results - team changes, auto-rm and arch
status"):
> Reducing the upload urgency to medium by default both seems to have hard
> to quantify risks in reducing the quality of testing, and undercuts the
> motivation for this proposal. So I'm curious why this resu
At DebConf there was an interesting proposal by Colin and Steve to
reduce testing migration times for packages that have an succeeding
autopkgtest. This would increase motivation for adding autopkgtests to
packages. More importantly, it would speed up testing propigation,
without a sacrifice in tes
On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 05:56:51PM +0100, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Niels Thykier , 2013-11-28, 21:04:
Hi,
> >We believe that it should be acceptable for most uploads to
> >unstable to be uploaded with medium urgency, to reduce the delay
> >for testing migrations.
>
> Huh. §5.6.7 says that Urgency “
* Niels Thykier , 2013-11-28, 21:04:
Starting today, all non-key packages with RC bugs in Jessie for more than 15
days will be considered for auto-removal, even if they have reverse
dependencies. This also means that the removal of these packages will cause
the removal of all their reverse depe
On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 00:13:06 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> If it was FAT32, then it wouldn't even accept files bigger than 2GB.
> That is by the way an information which we miss here: what kind of
> filesystem is on that flash medium?
Oh, by the way, the OP had this observation after copying fai
* Steve Langasek , 2013-11-29, 12:01:
What do you propose as a mechanism for agreeing to a reduced NMU delay for
archive-wide changes?
My proposal is to realize that reduced delay for archive-wide changes is not
needed.
Seriously, such changes will take months or years anyway, so what does r
On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 00:13:06 +0800
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > May be the file you're trying to copy is sparse [1]? GNU tar does
> > support this. Flash drives typically contain FAT32 on them which
> > doesn't support sparse files, so when copying such a file from a
> > "real" file system to FAT3
On 11/30/2013 11:56 PM, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
> May be the file you're trying to copy is sparse [1]? GNU tar does
> support this. Flash drives typically contain FAT32 on them which
> doesn't support sparse files, so when copying such a file from a "real"
> file system to FAT32 the kernel's
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 19:37:41 +0400
Евгений Просветов wrote:
> When I copied 15.2G file to free 64G flash, I've encountered the next
> error:
>
> root@home-desktop:~# cp backup272291.tar /media/84D0-F52A/
> cp: запись «/media/84D0-F52A/backup272291.tar»: Файл слишком
> велик
> cp: не удалось расш
Package: general
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer,
When I copied 15.2G file to free 64G flash, I've encountered the next error:
root@home-desktop:~# cp backup272291.tar /media/84D0-F52A/
cp: запись «/media/84D0-F52A/backup272291.tar»: Файл слишком
велик
cp: не удалось расширить
«/media/84D0-F
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Thomas Bechtold
* Package name: ruby-rspec-puppet
Version : 0.1.6
Upstream Author : Tim Sharpe
* URL : https://rubygems.org/gems/rspec-puppet
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : RSpec tests for
19 matches
Mail list logo
