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.
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 05/26/2010 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 05/30/2010 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 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
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 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
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 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
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 09/26/2010 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
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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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 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
>>>
>>
Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Just to bring that back to discussion:
>
> With lenny the provided glibc seems to be incompatible to kernel 2.4.
> There are many systems out there still running with kernel 2.4 cause
> stability. (My servers which needs to be stable all run Kernel 2.4.)
s/lenny/etch/
> Is
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Adeodato Simó wrote:
>> The weekend of February 14th is going to be our tentative target for
>> release. We've checked with all the involved teams (which are many!),
>> and the date works for all of them.
Just to clarify: we've checked with key people if the date would be o
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a
> working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts of yum
> based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs.
Indeed.
> Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> I forgot to add...
>
> The current maintainer of yum AND rpm (Anibal Monsalve Salazar
> ) has been unactive for quite a long time now, there
> are outstanding very serious bugs without even any reply from him since
> 2006. We really need something to be done for rpm as well
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>> Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug
>> report.
>
> Very simple: yum crashes with a not-so-nice error message when I try to
> boostrap a CentOS complaining about the iniparse python modul
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Vincent Danjean wrote:
>> 3) perhaps, try to push what is available in lenny backport into a
>> point-release
>>of lenny. This will depends on how many bug fix are present, how intrusive
>>the changes are, the release maintainers opinion, ...
>>
>> For me, 3 is not
Michael S. Gilbert wrote:
> Summary of the problem: Some packages such as foo2zjs, pciutils,
> ttf-mathematica4.1, etc. have components that download files external
> to the Debian archives (from the internet) at runtime, which is
> problematic in many ways.
If possible, the to be downloaded data
Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Thanks to the unoffical buildd network we are also able to provide autobuild
> packages for the following architectures: arm, armel, amd64, ppc, i386, ia64
> und alpha. Possibly mips and sparc will follow. You can find more
> informations about the buildstatus of a package
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 17 février 2009 à 00:31 -0500, Michael S. Gilbert a écrit :
>> 2. Components of the package may stop working in the midst of a
>> stable release's lifetime
>
> This is a problem that affects much more than this kind of packages. All
> packages relying on an exte
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello,
Hi
> as announced earlier during the lenny dev cycle, I would like to switch to
> the new source package formats ("3.0 (quilt)" and "3.0 (native)") during
> the squeeze cycle so that we can benefit from the numerous improvements.
> For this kind of important change
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 08:06:16PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
>> I'm wondering if making super servers become optionnal wouldn't be a worthy
>> goal for squeeze.
>
> Why? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Having a superserver installed isn't
> broken. Why should every
Fabian Greffrath wrote:
> However, I think the toolame package in stable may stay both for the
> convenience of our users and because it's not *that* bad after all. I
> have prepared a package targeted at Lenny that fixes two portability
> bugs and some minor lintian warnings. It can be found at
Martín Ferrari wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
In our call to move away from net-tools, I want to first start with
identifying the packages that still use it:
> * ifconfig, route: the most difficult ones, both can be replaced by
> calls to "ip", maybe except for some obscure options.
> * netstat : sstat provi
Mike Hommey wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that the autobuilt webkit on amd64 depends on the sqlite
> library package from experimental. This sounds pretty unfortunate, as
> webkit doesn't require a specific version of libsqlite, and would work
> fine with the unstable one. On the other hand, as a use
Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi Luk,
>
> On Freitag, 20. März 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Below a list of packages/maintainers that use ifconfig/route/netstat:
>
> How did you create that list? You seem to be missing a few..
By looking at dependency relations with the net-tools
Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi Luk,
Hi Holger
> On Samstag, 21. März 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>>>> Below a list of packages/maintainers that use ifconfig/route/netstat:
>>> How did you create that list? You seem to be missing a few..
>> By looking at dependency relati
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21 2009, Holger Levsen wrote:
>
>
>>> netstat
>>> ---
>> munin
>
> Err, isn't munin a hugely complex beasty, that has to be
> configured for the network, and usually lives on a signle machine and
> polls others? and does alerting and graphing a
Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 04:24:59PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Mike O'Connor (25/03/2009):
>>> Yes, there have definately been times when packages are rejected from
>>> NEW that only got there becuase of a package addition. I'd say its
>> ...
>> And while the new pack
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup wasn't working yet. Sorry
> about that.
>
> Now almost a month ago, I asked Don Armstrong to create architecture
> tags in the BTS. I've always
Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>>> Hi,
>> Hi
>>
>>> I thought I'd sent out this mail, but apparently I did that when I had
>>> just reinstalled my laptop and the mailsetup
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Adeodato Simó writes:
>
>> * Goswin von Brederlow [Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:33:32 +0200]:
>> Mark Hymers has talked about providing a mechanism to ensure source
>> packages stay on the pool when other stuff has been built from them (eg.
>> kernel module packages). With
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Luk Claes writes:
>
>> Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> Adeodato Simó writes:
>>>
>>>> * Goswin von Brederlow [Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:33:32 +0200]:
>>>> Mark Hymers has talked about providing a mechanism to ensure
Vincent Bernat wrote:
> OoO Lors de la soirée naissante du dimanche 05 avril 2009, vers 17:53,
> Paul Wise disait :
>
>>> How packages that run on Linux only should handle those new architectures?
>
>> Same as for stuff that only runs on i386; port them to kFreeBSD or
>> restrict them to linux
Hi
This is just to inform you that there will be soon a point release of
Etch: 4.0r8 tomorrow and Lenny: 5.0.1 on Saturday.
In a point release packages in oldstable or stable will get updated.
Most of these packages will already be in the security archive, though
some of them are fixes for major
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Josselin
> the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
> This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
> packages rely on the contents of this file.
There were warnings since December 2007 [1], though you're right
Luk Claes wrote:
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi Josselin
>
>> the point release of lenny contains a change to /etc/debian_version.
>> This was done without any kind of warning, despite the fact that some
>> packages rely on the contents of this
Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm sorry that it took us so much time to make a working yum package,
> but we were quite overloaded with our work, taking over all the
> customers of another web hosting company (taking all our time doing
> support). Anyway, I could today take the time to upload a
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Hi,
>
> a long time ago, packages using GConf used to ship schemas
> in /etc/gconf/schemas. Now, they are moved to /usr/share/gconf/schemas.
> However, during upgrades, dpkg would let the old file in place since it
> was a conffile. This is why dh_gconf still adds, in the
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Michal Čihař writes:
>
>> Dne Sat, 25 Apr 2009 07:10:24 +0300
>> Peter Eisentraut napsal(a):
>>
>>> Like lintian, your list falsely includes packages that use cdbs to build,
>>> which automatically updates config.{sub,guess}.
>> If you don't build depend on autotools-de
Paul Wise wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 2:51 PM, David Paleino wrote:
Also, seems like lists.alioth.debian.org doesn't have the same functionality.
Is there any plan for this?
Due to the way pipermail works, removing messages from the archives
would break all the URLs. Options for working ar
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 05:06:26PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Carsten Hey [2009.05.05.1645 +0200]:
>> FWIW, Ubuntu did what I consider the right thing:
>
>> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21235281/mdadm_2.6.7.1-1ubuntu4_2.6.7.1-1ubuntu5.diff.gz
>
> Well,
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mercredi 06 mai 2009 à 23:29 +0200, Luk Claes a écrit :
>> Maybe we should also consider changing the default MTA to postfix?
>
> Given that the default configuration is extremely simplistic and doesn’t
> use a percent of either exim or postfix
Malte Forkel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently noticed that when I'm packaging software sometimes a
> i386.changes file gets created, and sometimes a source.changes file gets
> created.
>
> I couldn't find an explanation in the New Maintainer's Guide or in the
> Policy Manual. I guess its something to
Frank Küster wrote:
> [a failed build was wrongly assigned as a RC bug of texlive-base, and
> since the reason was a problem on the buildd, I assigned it to
> buildd.debian.org]
>
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> buildd.d.o is not the place to reassign bugs for particular bui
Frank Küster wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>>> And what should one do with a bug like this? At the moment it's quite
>>> irrelevant whether one of our packages has a bogus RC bug. But what if
>>> that happens when I'm hoping for a transition to testin
Frank Küster wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>>> That doesn't solve my problem: Should I
>>> - make sure that the porters, buildd admins etc. are aware of the
>>> problem and simply close the bug?
>> You might want to downgrade the bug and only close
Frank Küster wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Fine, though taking the trouble to talk to the porters might still be
>> worthwile.
>
> Yes, but definitely not after I've spend hours of my little Debian
> arguing about non-bugs with people who don't read what
Frank Küster wrote:
> Frank Küster wrote:
>
>> Luk Claes wrote:
>>
>>> Fine, though taking the trouble to talk to the porters might still be
>>> worthwile.
>> Yes, but definitely not
Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Do, 04 Jun 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Except for arguing, mixing (non?) bugs and resisting to upload an easy
>> workaround might have made things worse btw...
>
> And that easy workaround would be???
To only conditionaly use a command that s
Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jun 2009, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> If it is not a bug in the package (in other words, no change made
>> in the package would fix the issue), I see no point in keeping it
>> open. It would be nice, however, is a psuedo-package were created
>> for the buildds (
Frank Küster wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Norbert Preining wrote:
>>> On Do, 04 Jun 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>>>> Except for arguing, mixing (non?) bugs and resisting to upload an easy
>>>> workaround might have made things worse btw...
>&g
Frank Küster wrote:
> retitle 530832 maintainer scripts created by tex-common may not assume
> tex-common to be present in "postrm remove"
> thanks
>
> ia64, I assume that you have moved the broken remains of texlive-base
> away manually?
He's called Lamont btw... oh right, that's the bugsubmitt
Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 06:47:07AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
>> Am Donnerstag 25 Juni 2009 05:21:45 schrieb Raphael Geissert:
>>> I just noticed I forgot to say something:
What won't change:
* Bash will still be used as the default interactive shells for users
>>>
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:10:46AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>>> And so that all users that upgrade do not benefit from the goal of this
>>> change? Even better.
>> This is to avoid causing undesirable effects when upgrading. People have
>> always been concerned abo
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
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
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
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
> 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
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
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 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 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 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 11/03/2011 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 11/16/2011 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
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 11/27/2011 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
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 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 01/27/2012 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 01/31/2012 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 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 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
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
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
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
>
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 04/05/2011 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 04/06/2011 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,
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 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! :-)
&
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
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 05/28/2011 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
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 05/29/2011 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 05/29/2011 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 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 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
201 - 300 of 305 matches
Mail list logo
