Package: General
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: 51lv3rb...@protonmail.com
Dear Maintainer,
After using the command apt search 'package_name' if the package can't be
found I get the following error message, when the error happened and every
other instance I have a good internet connection. I'm ass
Hello!
I've noticed I've spent quite a lot of time debugging various
situations where the debian/control definitions for
depends/breaks/replaces/conflicts/provides are not optimal.
The waste of time is two-fold:
1) apt is not verbose enough
2) the cycle to rebuild/tests is too slow
As an exampl
Control: reassign -1 command-not-found
Control: tags -1 + wontfix
Hi Silverback!
unable to open database file
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/share/command-not-found/CommandNotFound/util.py", line 23, in
crash_guard
callback()
File "/usr/lib/command-not-found", line 90, in m
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 command-not-found
Bug #985833 [general] General: when searching repos I get an error message
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'command-not-found'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #985833 to the same values
previously set
Ignoring
Hi Harald,
Quoting Harald Dunkel (2021-03-24 16:02:17)
> On 3/24/21 2:49 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:33:53PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> >> So what would be your suggestion?
> > If you are still asking about getting this package into bullseye
> > then I'm afraid
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:02:17PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > If you are still asking about getting this package into bullseye then I'm
> > afraid it's not possible. Otherwise, as already suggested, it's possible
> > to have it in bullseye-backports after fixing problems keeping it outside
> >
On 3/24/21 2:49 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:33:53PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
So what would be your suggestion?
If you are still asking about getting this package into bullseye then I'm
afraid it's not possible. Otherwise, as already suggested, it's possible
to ha
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:33:53PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > > For my own part, I run freeipa-server on CentOS 7. I am not affected
> > > by #970880. I would be very happy with freeipa-client in Bullseye, even
> > > if freeipa-server doesn't make it.
> > The deadline for adding new packages t
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:33:53PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 3/24/21 11:05 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:02:37AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> > > For my own part, I run freeipa-server on CentOS 7. I am not affected
> > > by #970880. I would be very happy with
On 3/24/21 11:05 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:02:37AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
For my own part, I run freeipa-server on CentOS 7. I am not affected
by #970880. I would be very happy with freeipa-client in Bullseye, even
if freeipa-server doesn't make it.
The deadl
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:02:37AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> I understand that freeipa-server has a very serious problem (#970880),
> making it unfit for Bullseye. It is *highly* painful that it puts
> freeipa-client at risk for the next release, too. We had something
> similar for Buster about
Hi folks,
I understand that freeipa-server has a very serious problem (#970880),
making it unfit for Bullseye. It is *highly* painful that it puts
freeipa-client at risk for the next release, too. We had something
similar for Buster about 2 years ago, AFAIR.
For my own part, I run freeipa-server
12 matches
Mail list logo
