On 07/27/2012 11:08 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 15:42 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>> bug - "reportbug release.debian.org" and selecting the "unblock" option
>>> will set the correct usertags for you.
>>
>> what is the diffe
On 07/26/2012 03:29 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Developer, DD
> As per the constitution; includes non-uploading DDs.
> New Maintainer needs to be renamed to New Developer.
>
> [Non-]Uploading Developer
> To distinguish where necessary, but usually we can use
> Sponsor instea
> Other than all the above, I have read interesting ideas on objective criteria
> in Steve McIntyre's report. Basically my point of this e-mail is that I
> welcome a debate on changing the MIA and NMU procedures to introduce objective
> criteria with short periods of time so that it becomes easie
Hi
When you want the unstable version of your package in the release, it
needs to be ready to migrate when it has aged enough in unstable.
Reasons why it can not be ready:
* RC bugs against the version in unstable that are not present in the
version in testing (according to the BTS). If the RC b
On 06/22/2012 04:31 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back
>>> Step 2: dpkg --add-architecture i386 && apt-get update
>>> St
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Luk Claes
* Package name: softiwarp-kernel
Version : ??
Upstream Author : Bernard Metzler
* URL : https://gitorious.org/softiwarp/kernel
* License : GPL-2 or BSD
Programming Lang: C
Description : Soft-iWARP
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Luk Claes
* Package name: libsiw
Version : 0.9?
Upstream Author : Bernard Metzler
* URL : https://gitorious.org/softiwarp/userlib
* License : GPL-2 or BSD
Programming Lang: C
Description : user space library for
On 03/11/2012 09:37 AM, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finn
On 01/31/2012 08:01 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> On 31.01.2012 18:14, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm planning to file bugs against all packages that currently
>> fail the piuparts test with a 'ucf: command not found' error in
>> wheezy and sid. Currently 22 binary packages from 16 source
>
On 01/27/2012 12:54 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> On 2012-01-26 02:45, Paul Wise wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 2:41 AM, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> On 01/25/2012 01:24 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We are considering removing the following packages from
On 01/25/2012 01:24 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
> We are considering removing the following packages from testing as
> they have unfixed RC bugs filed against them. The packages can be
> found in the attached dd-list (or at [0]).
For anyone who is not online the list of 10 packages is:
David A
On 01/08/2012 04:22 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
>
>> I recently setup zram (for compressed swap space in RAM) on an older low RAM
>> machine. I was quite happy with the result and started now to do the same
>> setup also on my other machines. I am wo
On 11/27/2011 06:22 PM, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Hey,
Hi Marga
> Recently [1], dpatch's maintainer uploaded a new version indicating
> that dpatch is now deprecated. Following that, he filed a bug [2] so
> that lintian might warn that dpatch's makefile has been deprecated
> since 2003, and t
Hi
The following packages block the perl transition and will become testing
removal candidates soon unless the bugs get fixed:
* ifeffit (#648839)
* uwsgi (#640347)
* libdbd-interbase-perl (#648857)
* libcrypt-gcrypt-perl (#634598)
* prima (#628500)
* nginx (#649061)
* libsignatures-perl (#636132
On 11/16/2011 05:23 PM, Nick Leverton wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:48:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>>
>> There is no one way to deal with this, we should only deal with this
>> on a case-by-case basis and use a number of strategies. ...
>
>> encourage our upstreams to rename and or work
On 11/03/2011 07:20 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> Quoting Bill Allombert (bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr):
>
>>> What about moving the su-to-root binary to a different binary package ?
>>> Bill what's your PoV about spliting it ?
>>
>> I am not very keen creating a new Debian package for a 3k
On 11/01/2011 01:31 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#645656: network-manager in Gnome"):
>> Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 16:37 +, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>>> I agree with the original submitter of this bug that network-manager
>>> needs to be optional. In particular, gnome-c
On 11/01/2011 08:58 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 31 octobre 2011 à 13:10 +, Jonathan Wiltshire a écrit :
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:49:01PM +0200, Frank lin Piat wrote:
>>> Specious "depends" relationship [AFAICT]:
>>> backintime-gnome - GNOME front-end for backintime
>>>
On 10/13/2011 05:12 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Marco wrote:
>> On Oct 13, Salvo Tomaselli wrote:
>>> Some systems have quite a small /boot partition, I've had some problems
>>> with a
>> /boot partitions nowadays are mostly useless, unless e.g. you are doing
>> something stupid like a RAID 5 ro
On 09/20/2011 01:12 PM, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
Hi
> Policy is clear on packages in main aren't allowed to depend on
> packages outside of main. Now in a fair amount of cases this has been
> worked around by having the package outside of main as alternative
> dependency and a packag
On 09/13/2011 03:14 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> - enable people to subscribe to bug traffic only if it matches specific
> tags (the idea being of forwarding upstream only the traffic for
> "confirmed" bugs)
>
> - add a DELAYED-like mechanism where upstream is notified of a bug only
> if
On 08/13/2011 09:59 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Neil McGovern , 2011-08-01, 22:07:
>> As noted in our previous mail [0DAY:DDA], bug #625449 has been opened
>> against developers-reference. This now seems to be drawing itself to a
>> conclusion. We would still welcome use of delayed queues where
>> ap
On 08/01/2011 09:31 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:38:13AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>> * Package name: apt-clone
>> Version : 0.7.9nexenta28
>> * URL : see below
>> * License : CDDL
>
> You may want to run this by debian-legal. Last I
On 07/22/2011 10:19 AM, Picca Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote:
> Hello,
Hi
> I hope that this mailing list is the right one for that kind of questions.
>
> I am investigating the availability of packages for de IBM General
> Parallel File System (GPFS) [1] for Debian. It seems that this kind of
> distri
On 07/03/2011 02:50 PM, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Ralf
> is it an RC bug when a package in unstable depends on packages in
> eperimental (that is, can only be installed in unstable+experimental
> but not in unstable alone)? I always thought so, but when looking into
> policy I only found menti
On 06/06/2011 10:16 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 11:20:07 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:18:34PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The main decision which needs to be made is whether, as a project, we
want source only uploads or
On 05/29/2011 05:31 PM, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I received an auto-reject because of a lintian error message that, as my
> system
> says, is correctly overridden. Could anyone please tell me which lintian
> version we use to determine auto-rejection and also which lintian version
> we're
> suppos
On 05/29/2011 05:02 PM, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>> Currently there are still some outstanding issues before we can really
>> start using multiarch. You can find the status at the wiki page [1].
>
>> It seems that the main blocker at the mome
On 05/28/2011 03:32 PM, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 14:48, Luk Claes wrote:
>> It seems that the main blocker at the moment is bug #618288 in apt.
>
> Fixed in branch for a while, just not yet uploaded. [0]
>
> But it can't be a blocker as dpk
On 05/28/2011 03:52 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 05/28/2011 02:48 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Currently there are still some outstanding issues before we can really
>> start using multiarch. You can find the status at the wiki page [1].
>
>> [1] http://wiki.debian.org
Hi
Currently there are still some outstanding issues before we can really
start using multiarch. You can find the status at the wiki page [1].
It seems that the main blocker at the moment is bug #618288 in apt.
Please help to fix the outstanding bugs for the build tools (pmake,
freebsd-buildutil
On 05/26/2011 06:04 PM, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Michael Biebl]
>> Clearing the dependency_libs is always safe, afaics, so I'd rather say it is
>> something like
>>
>> if depended-on
>> clear dependency_libs
>> else
>> remove *.la files
>
> Seems like the following would work instead
On 05/26/2011 11:55 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 26.05.2011 10:46, schrieb Simon McVittie:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2011 at 08:47:06 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
>>> remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
&
Hi
Just to remember people that one can follow the status of the .la file
dependency_libs clearing goal at Andreas' overview page [1].
A package entry followed by nothing more than a colon (:) means that the
package ships an .la file with a cleared dependency_libs field.
A package entry that cont
On 04/06/2011 01:55 AM, Carsten Hey wrote:
> * Luk Claes [2011-04-05 23:11 +0200]:
>> On 04/05/2011 11:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Carsten Hey wrote:
>>>> * Steve Langasek [2011-04-04 19:37 -0700]:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:00:36AM +0200,
On 04/05/2011 11:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Carsten Hey wrote:
>> * Steve Langasek [2011-04-04 19:37 -0700]:
>>> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:00:36AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
>
* Find a sane solution for managing /bin/sh. Currently diversions are
used, which looks like the wrong
On 04/04/2011 10:42 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 08:32:50PM +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> On ma, 2011-04-04 at 19:43 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>>> Regarding the root shell issue, I wouldn't have an issue with it
>>> being /bin/sh. The admin is always free to chsh it to the
On 04/04/2011 09:32 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On ma, 2011-04-04 at 19:43 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> However, there have got to be hundreds of packages using bash
>> without a dependency. Do we have any information on the
>> affected packages (i.e. all those with a #!/bin/bash shebang in any
>
Hi
bash is not the default system shell anymore. It's now only the default
user shell. As such it is not required for a sysadmin to boot and
install software. Besides that some users would like to get rid of bash
in their environment which is obviously not easily done atm.
The most obvious reason
also e-mail us to propose a
new goal, including
> a description of the goal and an indication of how progress on the
issues may be tracked
> (e.g. a pointer to a set of appropriate user-tagged bugs).
# bootperformance
Advocate: Petter Reinholdsen and Luk Claes
State: confirmed
Wiki: ht
On 03/28/2011 12:05 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> reassign 619820 dash,bash
> block 619820 by 540512
> thanks
>
> On Sonntag, 27. März 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> # which packages are essential affects the entire distribution
>> reassign 619820 general
>
> For the distro we have solved^wdecided
On 02/14/2011 08:39 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 11:33:10 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
Since there is no support for auto-building arch-independent binaries
>>>
>>
On 02/13/2011 07:00 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> On su, 2011-02-13 at 18:49 +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> I don;t think that is a good idea, there are way too many people not building
>> and testing their packages properly already, we don't want to give that work
>> to
>> the buildd-admins...
>
>
On 01/23/2011 03:06 PM, Magicloud Magiclouds wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to make a custom debian-installer cd. I have done this
> before, things worked fine. But this time, I got a problem.
> My running kernel installed from
> linux-image-2.6.36.3i686_bfs363.reiser4_i386.deb. It contains a namin
On 12/27/2010 01:45 PM, Neil Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Dec 2010 13:19:57 +0100
> Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>
>> ]] Rahul Amaram
>>
>>
>> | I am the maintainer for calendarserver. I have a query reg. preinst
>> | script. I need to perform some action during preinst before the
>> | upgrade of cale
On 12/26/2010 02:10 PM, Malte Forkel wrote:
> Am 25.12.2010 20:18, schrieb Michael Banck:
>>
>> Why can't this be part of pbuilder itself? Did your patches got
>> rejected by the pbuilder author and if so, what was his rationale?
>> Maybe if he thinks they should not be part of pbuilder, they shou
On 11/22/2010 11:11 AM, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>>> The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this
>>> problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than
>>> recommending
On 10/17/2010 04:47 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Luca Falavigna, le Sun 17 Oct 2010 16:41:31 +0200, a écrit :
>> Julien Danjou
>> XCB Developers
>> Jamey Sharp
>> Josh Triplett
>>libpthread-stubs0 (U)
>
> That's expected on linux ports.
Why an empty package instead of no binary package on
Hi Raphael
On 09/26/2010 08:40 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Of course there are multiple reasons. Though I think one of the most
>> obvious ones is that we as a project don't do a genuine stable release
>> often so sometimes del
On 09/26/2010 05:02 PM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Why would non-frequent snapshots help more than frequent snapshots?
>>
>> Because in that case they could really be used and supported for
>> installing, better us
On 09/26/2010 04:40 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi Luk,
Hi Lucas
Note that this is my personal opinion and does not represent the opinion
of the Release Team perse.
> On 26/09/10 at 15:55 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I think this is completely the wrong question, we'd better as
Hi Raphael
On 09/23/2010 02:30 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Raphael's article is now published, and is probably a good basis for
>>> discussing CUT on -de...@.
>>> Free link: http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/406301/bd522a
On 09/23/2010 09:00 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 22/09/10 at 15:01 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
>>> CUT discussions at debconf10 and recent news of the birth of Linux Mint
>>
>> discussions on CUT have continued after debconf on the
On 08/15/2010 06:17 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 04:57:40PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> It's very strange that you think it's ok to mark a bug as fixed in a
>> specific version even if there was nothing changed in the package to get
>> the bug
On 08/15/2010 04:41 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 04:25:19PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> When I go through RC bugs I see more and more bugs which are both found
>> and fixed with the same version.
>>
>> This does NOT work: these bugs are treat
Hi
When I go through RC bugs I see more and more bugs which are both found
and fixed with the same version.
This does NOT work: these bugs are treated as if they are not fixed at all.
Please do not version bug closures when there were no changes to the
source package to get the bug fixed!
Note
On 06/28/2010 04:40 PM, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I reported in Bug#587420, all twitter client should support OAuth since
> twitter
> will discard basic auth. If they not, we should drop them from Squeeze
> release.
Will they also not be usable anymore with identi.ca and similar twitt
On 05/30/2010 07:57 PM, C. Gatzemeier wrote:
> Am Sun, 30 May 2010 15:02:41 +0100
> schrieb Stephen Gran :
>
>> There are already well understood mechanisms for ensuring that uids
>> are the same across multiple systems. I don't think adduser is the
>> place for that.
I guess you should have a d
On 05/26/2010 08:05 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm still feeling uneasy about this whole bash->dash thing. We sacrified
> a lot of usability in the name of POSIX compliance (only a minority of
> users care) and a few seconds spared during boot (who cares? I only boot
> my laptop for kerne
On 05/11/2010 01:09 PM, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:49:46PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:37:56 +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 05:25:16PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Is it really a good idea to have init depend
On 05/08/2010 11:47 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 19:27:54 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
(Beside the nitpick on "we want" vs "we possibly want") I'd argue that
it's because we want a faster boot from our users ASAP.
As far as I'm concerned, "faster boot" is irrelevant.
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>> Hi Clint
>>
>> You seem to send the message that you can judge from the sideline how
>> things should be run, so I hereby invite you to join the Release Team
>> and do a proper job.
>>
>> If you don't tak
Hi Clint
You seem to send the message that you can judge from the sideline how
things should be run, so I hereby invite you to join the Release Team
and do a proper job.
If you don't take the challenge I'll interpret that as you being a
coward who does not deserve to be heard in the future.
Plea
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Now that /sbin/fsck is provided by util-linux it should be possible to
> drop the Essential attribute from the e2fsprogs. How do we do this?
The whole archive needs to be scanned to see if no functionality of
e2fsprogs is used without (build) dependency. Dropping the flag its
Norbert Preining wrote:
> Dear Luk, dear Jörg, dear ftp-master, dear whoever,
>
> please help me with fixing that problem:
>
> Now I have the following problem:
> - sending a dcut rm of the files I get:
> Log of processing your commands file
> /dcut.Norbert_Preining__preining_debian_org_.12651574
Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On 02/02/2010 03:37, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> can someone explain me how to track down a lost upload? Yesterday I
>> uploaded maildir-util 0.6-1 and got the email
>> Uploaded successfully
>> but since then nothing has happened, and I don't see it
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:20:38AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Dienstag, 12. Januar 2010, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>>> Please don't forget to usertag the reports. Using the "ftbfs-gcc-4.5"
>>> usertag should make it easier to track them (which would later make th
Bastian Venthur wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sorry to bring this topic up again, but what is the status of Python
> 2.6 and Squeeze? I wrote a mail to doko on 2009-12-13 asking him what
> his plans are and if he needs help but didn't receive an answer yet. Has
> anyone more information?
python 2.6 wi
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 23:43:44 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>>> It seems like apt is not installed with debootstrap anymore.
>>> And it seems to be staying like this.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure when
Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>
> It seems like apt is not installed with debootstrap anymore.
> And it seems to be staying like this.
>
> I'm not sure when this happened, but apt used to be
> build-essential=yes but now it's not.
Are you saying that build-essential=yes was still in use?
It also look
Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Il giorno Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:11:18 +0100
> Luca Falavigna ha scritto:
> Here's a follow-up to include some more packages, and to remove those
> which were already fixed in the meantime.
> --
> PACKAGES TO BE REMOVED
> --
>
> These
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 03/12/09 at 23:55 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 03 2009, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>>
>>> Right now we're working on updating the Debian Python Policy. Once we'll
>>> be happy with the first set of patches, we'll send them to debian-python
>>> mailing list. I
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 07:45:30PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Unfortunately Debian does not seem to be able to also have real
>> constructive discussion about complex issues on the lists. So for these
>> issues we usually have real discussions on
Joey Hess wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
>> The question of whether someone is doing an adequate job of maintaining a
>> package is a legitimate one. The identity of their employer is immaterial
>> to an objective examination of this question.
>
> I think this argument only makes sense if the dis
Joey Hess wrote:
> So, Debian is no longer an open project?
Why would having pointless discussions and flames on the lists
and because of that private discussions to get real solutions mean that
Debian is not an open project anymore?
The problems are known and are on the lists, the start of discu
Frans Pop wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>> * Frans Pop [2009-12-03 14:11]:
>>> [1] IMO this question is fair since Matthias is listed as sole
>>> maintainer for Python packages.
>> I agree it's a fair question but you guys should really CC Matthias
>> since -devel is not a required list.
>
> I
Matthijs Mohlmann wrote:
> I'm the maintainer of pdns-recursor. This program uses swapcontext which is
> not available on all platforms.
>
> Recently the mips, mipsel and sparc architecture got support for those calls.
> So I sent a mail to @buildd.debian.org
> for enabling this. But until now I
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 09:46:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> gnat-4.4 FTBFS on mipsel which is blocking gcc-defaults from migrating
>> to testing which is blocking at least the poppler and gnome related
>> transitions. xulrunner was
Andreas Marschke wrote:
> On Saturday 28 November 2009 09:46:51 Luk Claes wrote:
>> gnat-4.4 FTBFS on mipsel which is blocking gcc-defaults from migrating
>> to testing which is blocking at least the poppler and gnome related
>> transitions. xulrunner was reuploaded again
Hi
gnat-4.4 FTBFS on mipsel which is blocking gcc-defaults from migrating
to testing which is blocking at least the poppler and gnome related
transitions. xulrunner was reuploaded again and needs to be built
everywhere first before we can reconsider forcing it in.
cmake and xulrunner had some str
Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> Hi
Hi
> I've just met an uninstallable package with 3-week-old RC bug, caused by
> soname change of one of dependences. This bug could be fixed by a simple
> rebuild - I've checked if package builds against today's sid - yes it
> does.
>
> I've never done an NMU
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Philipp Kern writes:
>
>> On 2009-11-19, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> This could only work if the built package is needed on the same buildd
>>> it was built.
>> That depends on the assumptions. If the assumption is that the bui
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Sune Vuorela writes:
>
>> On 2009-11-18, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>>> I am a bit confused with respect to how buildd autosigning is required
>>> for this. It makes it sound somehow like it would affect porter binary
>> Basicalyl, the turnaround time is too long if we
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:54:18AM +, Philipp Kern a écrit :
>
>> there might not be clusters of arm yet but I saw offers for clusters of mips.
>
> Hi Philipp
>
> I also saw this cluster and got quite curious until I realised that most
> programs I package are not par
Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> Hi!
>
> First of all, thanks for this great roundup. There are just some few
> questions that popped up in my mind that I hope haven't asked yet
> (wasn't able to check all the responses completely ...). Sorry if there
> are duplications, a reference to the answer fo
Clint Adams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I don't think it's good to waste buildd time on failing to build packages.
>> I also don't think anyone is stopped from setting up a service that
>> allows source-only uploads a
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:41:51AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> I think one would be surprised how many packages get used on 'exotic'
>> architectures. Most users don't specifically search for a piece of
>> software, they want to hav
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 08:27:22AM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez a écrit :
>> Unless your proposal is just for unstable but doesn't want to change the
>> policy for testing migration?
>
> Hi,
>
> Testing migration works the way it should: if a package is never built on an
> arc
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Philipp Kern writes:
>
>> On 2009-11-16, Simon Huggins wrote:
>>> If you throw away the binaries, a DD can upload a binary package with a
>>> sole binary that prints out banana and a source package that builds the
>>> right thing presumably. Are there any checks to
Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 09:38:38AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
>> requiring binary uploads ensures that the package has been build-tested
>> *somewhere* prior to upload, and avoids clogging up the buildds with
>> preventable failures (some of which will happen on
for instance.
Thanks for looking at the listed issues though.
> Le dimanche 08 novembre 2009 à 12:48 +0100, Luk Claes a écrit :
>> - anjuta not yet built on all arches
>
> This is a consequence of the subversion FTBFS on said architectures. It
> can be given-back once svn
Bill Allombert wrote:
> 13. Remote Network Interaction; Use with the GNU General Public License.
>
> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the
> Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting
> with it remotely through a computer
Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:45:57AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> Personally, I think that the extreme trade-off of making source upload
>> the default (which seems to be what you are arguing for) would be too
>> risky in term of degraded package quality. Look for th
Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 09:42, Michal Čihař wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Dne Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:39:38 +0100
>> Sandro Tosi napsal(a):
>>
>>> As a personal note, as one of those unlucky people with a very slow
>>> network connection: if binary packages built by maintainer have to be
>>
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 09:39:38AM +0100, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 08:30, Adam Majer wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 02:58:19PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26 2009, Adam Majer wrote:
> Or here's a radical idea - allow source only
Michal Čihař wrote:
> Hi
>
> Dne Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:39:38 +0100
> Sandro Tosi napsal(a):
>
>> As a personal note, as one of those unlucky people with a very slow
>> network connection: if binary packages built by maintainer have to be
>> discarded, than *please* allow a way to actually not uplo
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:48:11PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Currently there are 4 rather big transitions going on, none of which is
>> ready to transition. Following are the things that currently are an
>> issue or that show
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:53:18PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 12:48:11PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Currently there are 4 rather big transitions going on, none of which is
>>> ready to transi
Hi
Currently there are 4 rather big transitions going on, none of which is
ready to transition. Following are the things that currently are an
issue or that show why the 4 transitions are coupled:
* xulrunner:
- iceweasel crashes (#552178)?
- freej FTBFS on amd64 (no bug filed yet)
- gdl not buil
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 09:28:01AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 05:00:53PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Surely the answer to that question is obvious: fix the bugs Lintian is
>> finding that prevent upload. They're the equivalent of RC bugs (
1 - 100 of 305 matches
Mail list logo
