Hi developers,
I have unfortunate news regarding /usr-merge. I uncovered yet another
problem that we haven't seen mentioned earlier. We do not yet know how
to deal with it and it may take some time to come up with a good
compromise. As a result, please pause further moves from / to /usr.
Exception
On 2023-12-01 12:30, Simon McVittie wrote:
This does not prevent to have 127.0.0.1. I don't think this is a good use of
time to fix builds broken because there is no IPv4 loopback. This is the
same kind of artificial conditions as the 1-core builders.
Unfortunately, no, it's a bit more complicat
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Anthony Fok
* Package name: golang-github-microsoft-dev-tunnels
Version : 0.0.25-1
Upstream Author : Microsoft Corporation
* URL : https://github.com/microsoft/dev-tunnels
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: Go
Descri
On Sun, 10 Sept 2023 at 02:57, Gunnar Hjalmarsson
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> With fontconfig 2.14, which entered testing last January, upstream
> fontconfig prefers Noto over DejaVu in /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-latin.conf.
> The change was not preceded by any discussion I'm aware of. It appears
> to be related
Hi,
> > Dmitri, could you re-run the numbers with the debian-maintainer keyring?
>
> That is correct. I have updated the results now.
> The 2,455 no public key has now become 1,238
Another is the DN keyring.
Also I'd expect many keys to be found in older versions of the keyring
package/keyring
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Georges Khaznadar
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: rl-renderpm
Version : 4.0.3
Upstream Contact: the ReportLab team
* URL : https://www.reportlab.org/
* License : LGPL,MIT/X
Programming Lang:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 12:20:16AM +, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> And many of them cannot be verified using debian-keyring:
> 2,455 no public key
> 3 wrong key usage
And how many can be verified? Do any show broken signatures?
> Should we stop requiring signed .dsc on uploads?
We had exact
Hi,
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 at 10:50, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
> Salvo Tomaselli writes:
>
> >> hi, on "no public key" list there are my uploads, I'm debian maintainer
> >> (https://nm.debian.org/person/fantu/), I signed with my key and I have
> >> DM upload right for them
> >> (https://qa.debian.org
Hi Vincent, Simon,
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 09:24:00AM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> I don't think this is a good use of time to fix builds broken because
> there is no IPv4 loopback.
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:30:50AM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> I agree that we should consider a working 127.0
On Fri, 01 Dec 2023 at 09:24:00 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> This does not prevent to have 127.0.0.1. I don't think this is a good use of
> time to fix builds broken because there is no IPv4 loopback. This is the
> same kind of artificial conditions as the 1-core builders.
Unfortunately, no, it'
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Georges Khaznadar
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: rl-accel
Version : 0.9.0
Upstream Contact: the ReportLab team N
* URL : https://www.reporlab.org/
* License : MIT/X
Programming Lang: C, Pyth
Salvo Tomaselli writes:
>> hi, on "no public key" list there are my uploads, I'm debian maintainer
>> (https://nm.debian.org/person/fantu/), I signed with my key and I have
>> DM upload right for them
>> (https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=fantonifabio%40tiscali.it)
>
> I think he just
On 2023-11-30 22:42, Dale Richards wrote:
I recently submitted a patch for uvloop that was FTBFS on IPv6-only
builds (#1024079) and it really didn't take very long. While
building/running in IPv6-only environments is not currently mandated in
the Policy it's a fairly safe bet that it could/should
Il 01/12/2023 01:20, Dimitri John Ledkov ha scritto:
Hi,
Currently dak requires signatures on .changes & .dsc uploads. .changes
with signatures are publicly announced and then .dsc are published in
the archive with signatures. .changes references .dsc.
All .dsc have Checksums-Sha256 for the
On 2023-11-30 21:38, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
Now I would like to know if being able to run in an IPv6-only environment is
a must have feature for any debian package?
I run an IPv6 only LAN on my home network, where I use `jool`, and
`dns64-prefix`+`unbound` to interoperate with legacy IP space
Also note that some of the listed packages are signed with 1024-bit DSA
(Logjam attack), which would be more concerning if there were no
additional release signatures.
Regards
Stephan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
16 matches
Mail list logo
