Ben Hutchings writes:
> The code signing service logs every file it signs, along with a hash of
> the detached signature, but I don't know where the logs are so I can't
> comapre with that.
I checked the audit log, but I don't think it will help much. It
currently records that:
- 2019-10-21 07:
Control: reassign -1 src:linux 4.19.9-1
On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 16:26:55 +0100 Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> After an upgrade of linux-image-amd64, which now depends on
> linux-image-4.19.0-1-amd64, on one machine I got:
>
> linux-image-4.19.0-1-amd64 4.19.9-1
>
> but on another machine I got:
>
> l
Jessie LTs no longer updated on ftp-master
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
Ben Hutchings writes:
> On Sat, 2018-08-18 at 15:00 +0000, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> Jessie no longer maintained on ftp-master
>
> This was uploaded to security-master so I don't know why you're seeing
> it on ftp-master as well.
The security-master -> ftp-mast
Jessie no longer maintained on ftp-master
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
Jessie no longer maintained on ftp-master
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
Hi,
On Sat, 2018-06-23 at 17:30 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 12:44 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> [...]
> > Given all of the above, I think the sanest option is to concentrate
> > on getting 8.11 done and jessie off our radar and then get 9.5
> > sorted.
> >
> > For sugg
On Fri, 2018-06-08 at 18:51 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> We can either accept the packages and put up with the situation for a
> short while, or do 9.5 before 8.11. In practical terms, that would
> likely mean both 9.5 and 8.11 on June 23rd, freezing both next
> weekend.
Should be fine with me;
Ben Hutchings writes:
> On Mon, 2017-10-09 at 17:38 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:01:15PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> [...]
>> > It also appears to mean that buildds can get anything signed on demand
>> > with no human intervention at all, without all the checks that
Bastian Blank writes:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 05:47:25PM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> If I've diagnosed this correctly, I see several possible options to fix
>> this:
>>
>> a. dpkg excludes packages with Package-Type: debug from the Binary
>>field
>> b. dak ignores packages ending -dbgsym i
As requested on IRC.
===
Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
concerns.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: retitle -2 xen-linux-system-*-amd64 should not be built on i386
Control: reassign -2 src:linux 3.10.11-1
Control: block -1 with -2
Julien Cristau writes:
> xen 4.3.0-1's changelog says "Drop all i386 hypervisor packages". Which
> I guess means xen-system-amd64:i386
Ben Hutchings writes:
>> On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:11:58AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> > The longstanding link restriction patches were recently accepted by
>> > Andrew Morton and are likely to end up in Linux 3.4. I've applied
>> > these to src:linux-2.6 in svn and they should end up in the
Package: src:linux-latest-2.6
Version: 2.6.32+28
Severity: wishlist
linux-2.6 provides a (versioned) linux-headers-2.6.32-5-all package. It
would be nice if the current version of this package was available as
linux-headers-2.6-all as well, similar to the other linux-headers-2.6-*
packages.
Rega
14 matches
Mail list logo
