Bug#407208: marked as done (imagemagick: convert hangs on hurd-i386)

Your message dated Sun, 10 Jun 2007 16:47:03 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#407208: fixed in hurd 20070606-1 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now yo

hurd override disparity

There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): hurd_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb: package says section is base, override says admin. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct and the packa

hurd_20070606-1.changes ACCEPTED

Accepted: hurd-dbg_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb to pool/main/h/hurd/hurd-dbg_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb hurd-dev_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb to pool/main/h/hurd/hurd-dev_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb hurd-udeb_20070606-1_hurd-i386.udeb to pool/main/h/hurd/hurd-udeb_20070606-1_hurd-i386.udeb hurd_20070606-

Processing of hurd_20070606-1.changes

hurd_20070606-1.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: hurd_20070606.orig.tar.gz hurd_20070606-1.diff.gz hurd-udeb_20070606-1_hurd-i386.udeb hurd_20070606-1.dsc hurd-dev_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb hurd_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb hurd-dbg_20070606-1_hurd-i386.deb

[Administrativa] Problem forwarding debian-ports to debian-$arch

Hi. Maybe you wondered where the mail 'gnat-4.1/gcj-4.1 manual builds needed on [...]' has been for more than a month. It was catched by one of our spamfilters, the one that should stop excessive cross-posting. So i hope i fixed this now, Cord, Debian Listmaster of the day -- http://

gnat-4.1/gcj-4.1 manual builds needed on alpha, arm, m68k, mips, mipsel, s390, sparc

While having built and uploaded things correctly for experimental, I didn't do the same for unstable, which now needs some manual intervention building gnat-4.1 and gcj-4.1. gnat-4.1 (mips mipsel s390 sparc): - work in a sid chroot - install gnat-4.1-base libgnat-4.1 libgnatprj4.1 libgnatvsn4.1

Re: Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

At Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:15:20 +0200, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Neal H. Walfield, le Sat 09 Jun 2007 00:29:38 +0200, a écrit : > > The theory is that we don't trust the server to honor the timeout: it > > may be malicious and trick the client into waiting forever. > > Or it may

Re: Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

Neal H. Walfield, le Sun 10 Jun 2007 15:30:15 +0200, a écrit : > > > However, there are enough ways in which we rely on the server for > > > correct operation that using the Mach timeout mechanism to preempt > > > the server doesn't bring any additional safety. > > > > Mmm, maybe, but is it really

Re: Bug#79358: is select still broken on hurd ?

Neal H. Walfield, le Sat 09 Jun 2007 00:29:38 +0200, a écrit : > The theory is that we don't trust the server to honor the timeout: it > may be malicious and trick the client into waiting forever. Or it may be buggued and hung. > However, there are enough ways in which we rely on the server for >