> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:27:02 +0100
> From: Muri Nicanor
> To: Adam Borowski , 887665-d...@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#887665: RFS: usbguard/0.7.1+ds-1
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
> Thunderbird/52.4.0
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks Adam for the review an
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:58:00AM +, Hugh McMaster wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> On Monday, 22 January 2018 7:49 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > IMO this is nothing that warrants a NMU, or an upload on its own.
>
> Sure, perhaps not in the current RFS form. That said, I'm
Juhani Numminen kirjoitti 22.01.2018 klo 23:24:
> Nicholas D Steeves kirjoitti 22.01.2018 klo 21:10:
>
>> I use this package every day and have updated the package several
>> times in the last year. It's currently at Policy 4.1.3 and dh/compat
>> level 11. Please consider sponsoring :-)
>
> The
Your message dated Tue, 23 Jan 2018 03:02:24 +0100
with message-id <20180123020224.2papzno5nhhaa...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#888005: RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-1 [ITA]
has caused the Debian Bug report #888005,
regarding RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-1 [ITA]
to be marked as done.
Your message dated Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:30:19 +0100
with message-id <20180123003019.4ip6ujm3o4jbx...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#887907: RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #887907,
regarding RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Hello Michael,
Thanks for you detailed review.
Michael Lustfield wrote:
> I reviewed this packaging and came up with some issues:
>
> - The description does nothing to explain what makes this solution unique.
> + Why is this special?
> + How does it even work?
> + This should be easily gle
Nicholas D Steeves kirjoitti 22.01.2018 klo 21:10:
> I use this package every day and have updated the package several
> times in the last year. It's currently at Policy 4.1.3 and dh/compat
> level 11. Please consider sponsoring :-)
The current git repository is hosted on Alioth, which will be
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:43:41 +0200
with message-id
and subject line Closing RFS: parsington/1.0.1-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #868435,
regarding RFS: parsington/1.0.1-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:38:31 +0200
with message-id
and subject line Closing RFS: imglib2/4.3.0-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #868430,
regarding RFS: imglib2/4.3.0-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is no
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 21:23:03 +0200
with message-id <28eaae46-71c7-62c4-52ef-4b4f791e6...@gmail.com>
and subject line Closing RFS: cohomcalg/0.31b+ds-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #850648,
regarding RFS: cohomcalg/0.31b+ds-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Hi,
I use this package every day and have updated the package several
times in the last year. It's currently at Policy 4.1.3 and dh/compat
level 11. Please consider sponsoring :-)
Cheers,
Nicholas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:43:01AM +, Hugh McMaster wrote:
> Changes since the last upload:
> * Non-maintainer upload.
> * debian/control:
> - Mark libxft-dev Multi-Arch: same (Closes: #884176).
So, in #884176 you attacted a debdiff also fixing #843837 - where
Yangfl,
Maybe you didn't see the recent comments Tobias posted on
https://bugs.debian.org/873094
Thanks,
Jeremy Bicha
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:27:02 +0100
with message-id <9a949305-eb64-d90a-4c6d-76c190a43...@immerda.ch>
and subject line Re: Bug#887665: RFS: usbguard/0.7.1+ds-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #887665,
regarding RFS: usbguard/0.7.1+ds-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you clai
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:20:23 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: streamlink/0.9.0+dfsg.2-3 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #878268,
regarding RFS: streamlink/0.9.0+dfsg.2-3 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 16:20:24 +
with message-id
and subject line closing RFS: deepin-qt5dxcb-plugin/1.1.6+ds+git20180111-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #884456,
regarding RFS: deepin-qt5dxcb-plugin/1.1.6+ds+git20180111-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ncurses-hexedit"
* Package name: ncurses-hexedit
Version : 0.9.7+orig-1
Upstream Author : Adam Rogoyski
* URL : http://www.rogoyski.com/adam/programs/hexed
Your message dated Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:19:08 +0100
with message-id <81fd4784-ff66-4843-29f5-79acb1870...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: RFS: network-manager-fortisslvpn/1.2.6-1 [ITP] --
NetworkManager Fortinet SSLVPN plugin
has caused the Debian Bug report #883627,
regarding RFS: network-manager
Hi,
upstream of rear software installs /etc/rear/ /etc/rear/cert/ and
/etc/rear/local.conf with no permissions to group and others, because
those may contain sensitive information (I guess encryption key for
example) ; details here : https://github.com/rear/rear/issues/1666
I'm wondering about this
Hi Julien,
On Monday, 22 January 2018 7:49 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> IMO this is nothing that warrants a NMU, or an upload on its own.
Sure, perhaps not in the current RFS form. That said, I'm hoping we can
reach some agreement on releasing a new version of xft. Here are some
reasons why.
1.
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 01:59:39 +0100 Michael Biebl wrote:
> Would be great if you apply the attached patch and re-upload 1.2.8-1.
> I'm happy to sponsor the package then.
Thanks, applied:
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/network-manager-fortisslvpn/network-manager-fortisslvpn_1.2.8-1
21 matches
Mail list logo
