Bug#1053565: RFS: openvpn3-client/20+dfsg-1 [ITP] -- virtual private network daemon (version 3)

06.10.2023 16:03, Marc Leeman wrote: * Package name : openvpn3-client BTW, why it is named this way? Is it client-only now, without the server part? Previous package is named just "openvpn", it acts as both client or server (actually the two roles are symmetric, it can be both). If new

Bug#1003063: RFS: su-exec/0.2-1 [ITP] -- switch user and group id, setgroups and exec

03.01.2022 18:05, Matteo Chesi wrote: Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "su-exec":  * Package name    : su-exec    Version : 0.2-1    Upstream Author : Natanael Copa  * URL : https://github.com/ncop

Re: Disabling ccache in Salsa CI Jobs?

27.04.2022 00:03, Hilmar Preuße wrote: Hi, Recently I pushed a new version of proftp to salsa. The configured salsa CI Jobs [1] now fail [2]. The relevant error message is in the job log [3]: This is not an answer to your question, but something else. As far as I can see, ccache failing like

Bug#981705: RFS: proxycheck/0.49a-6 [QA] -- checks existence of open proxy

03.02.2021 03:33, João Paulo wrote: Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "proxycheck": Hello! Maybe we can arrange this small piece of software to be maintained by me, its author? I'm not sure it is of a great use today but it

Re: unstripped-static-library

02.10.2015 22:18, Herbert Parentes Fortes Neto (hpfn) wrote: > Hi mentors, > > I maintain libgphoto2 and lintian now says > that the package has "unstripped-static-library" > (.a files). We (me and my mentor) believe that > this message can be ignored. BTW, why do you include static library to s

Bug#752520: RFS: lilyterm/0.9.9.4-1 [ITP]

24.06.2014 16:41, ChangZhuo Chen (陳昌倬) wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: wishlist > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lilyterm" > > Package name: lilyterm > Version : 0.9.9.4-1 > Upstream Author : Lu, Chao-Ming (Tetralet) > URL

Bug#684679: RFS: nullmailer/1:1.11-2 (security bugfix upload request)

On 21.08.2012 19:51, Bart Martens wrote: > Hi Nick, > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 09:29:28AM +0100, Nick Leverton wrote: >> Thanks also Bart for reminding me of the other approach. > > My pleasure. > >> (sorry I am >> a bit distracted by home things at the moment). > > No problem at all. > >> di

Bug#684679: RFS: nullmailer/1:1.11-2 (security bugfix upload request)

On 13.08.2012 00:18, Nick Leverton wrote: [] > diff -Nru nullmailer-1.11/debian/changelog nullmailer-1.11/debian/changelog > --- nullmailer-1.11/debian/changelog 2012-06-16 16:36:28.0 +0100 > +++ nullmailer-1.11/debian/changelog 2012-08-11 23:55:36.0 +0100 > @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ > +nul

Re: $ sudo apt-get install qemu-system

On 23.05.2012 13:22, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > I am trying to install qemu on my stable + backports system but it > keeps on failing with: > > $ sudo apt-get install qemu-system > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Some packages could no

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 09.05.2012 22:42, Michael Tokarev wrote: [] > I'm checking the package now, it all appears to be quite good (as I > already mentioned initially). > > I'm verifying now whenever the transition works correctly. Did you test > this place? Is it possible to downgrade bac

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 06.05.2012 10:16, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > On Sun, 6 May 2012 15:24:10 Michael Tokarev wrote: >> And note that whole 5.0.6-allow-for-kernel-packet-size-change.patch >> is NOT NEEDED, it should be reverted upstream. *SIGH*, we spent >> a ton of time and emails discussing thi

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 06.05.2012 09:45, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >> ++p = (unsigned int)atoi(strtok(my_utsname.release, ".")); >> ++q = (unsigned int)atoi(strtok(NULL, ".")); >> ++r = (unsigned int)atoi(strtok(NULL, ".")); >> ++return KERNEL_VERSION(p, q, r); >> ++} >> >> This will break

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 06.05.2012 09:21, Michael Tokarev wrote: > On 06.05.2012 09:01, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> On 06.05.2012 07:14, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >>> Package: sponsorship-requests >>> Severity: normal >>> >>> Dear mentors, >>> >>> I am loo

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 06.05.2012 09:01, Michael Tokarev wrote: > On 06.05.2012 07:14, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >> Package: sponsorship-requests >> Severity: normal >> >> Dear mentors, >> >> I am looking for a sponsor for package "autofs" >> >> * Package n

Bug#671701: RFS: autofs/5.0.6-1 [ITA] -- kernel-based automounter for Linux

On 06.05.2012 07:14, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for package "autofs" > > * Package name: autofs >Version : 5.0.6-1 Hello Dmitry. I'm very much interested in this package myself, an

Re: NMU and delayed

On 13.04.2012 10:00, Tobias Frost wrote: > Hallo Michael, > > You do not need to wait for the NMU. > If you upload a newer version before the DELAY expires, the NMU is > automatically cancelled. I know this perfectly well, and did not actually said anyone need to wait. I only pointed out to the

Re: NMU and delayed

On 13.04.2012 01:08, Tomasz Muras wrote: > Hello, > > A Debian developer has uploaded a NMU (moodle 1.9.9.dfsg2-5.1) to > DELAYED/7-DAY [1]. I have incorporated his changes, and added a new release > (moodle 1.9.9.dfsg2-6) - the changelog now looks like [2]. > Is there any reason I should wait f

Re: RFS: rudeconfig

On 05.02.2012 16:31, Medhamsh wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rudeconfig". > > * Package name: rudeconfig >Version : 5.0.5-1 >Upstream Author : Matthew Flood > * URL : http://rudeserver.com/config/index.html > * License

Re: RFS: dwm (Adapted package)

On 10.11.2011 20:52, Vasudev Kamath wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I'm looking for a sponsor for package dwm. This package was orphaned > by its previous maintainer. This upload will close #647088. Hm. So I become curious and looked into its homepage -- http://dwm.suckless.org/ . And there, there's

Re: RFS: mdadm

On 09.09.2011 01:16, Tim Gokcen wrote: > I have uploaded a new version of mdadm which, on top of the previous fixes, > also fixes the FTBS bug 625392 and bug 63380. I am therefore still/again > seeking a sponsor for my NMU of package "mdadm". > > This upload is a fix for two trivial bugs opened

Re: RFS: spice

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 06.03.2011 19:02, liang wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "spice". > > * Package name: spice > Version : 0.8.0-1 > Upstream Author : Red Hat, Inc. > * URL : http://www.spice-space.org/ > *

Re: How to test a manpage? ‘nroff -man | less’ does not display like ‘man’.

14.07.2010 13:14, Roger Leigh wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 08:57:12AM +0200, Luca Falavigna wrote: >> Il 14/07/2010 6.50, Charles Plessy ha scritto: >>> Does anybody know how a more convenient to display a >>> manpage the same way as users will get it by using ‘man’ ? >> >> groff -T ascii -man

Re: How to test a manpage? ‘nroff -man | less’ does not display like ‘man’.

14.07.2010 09:01, Russ Allbery wrote: [] > You can just run man directly on the *roff file, but if you want to stick > with the zcat pipeline, just add the -t flag to nroff to say to run the > output through the tbl preprocessor first. This is the most close of all suggestions. But even closer is

Re: RFS: qemu-kvm (kvm)

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: [] So now I'm requesting a sponsor to upload my packages into debian. If you are wanting to do a sponsored NMU (which is kind of odd), be sure you are very familiar with the NMU procedure and

Re: RFS: qemu-kvm (kvm)

Mike Hommey wrote: On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:15:46PM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: Giuseppe Iuculano wrote: Michael Tokarev ha scritto: I wrote to debian kvm package maintainer several times, I submitted a bugreport against kvm long time ago, but never heard back. So now I'm request

Re: RFS: qemu-kvm (kvm)

Giuseppe Iuculano wrote: Michael Tokarev ha scritto: I wrote to debian kvm package maintainer several times, I submitted a bugreport against kvm long time ago, but never heard back. So now I'm requesting a sponsor to upload my packages into debian. You are trying to hijack kvm, this i

RFS: qemu-kvm (kvm)

There's a kvm package in debian, which is basically a modified qemu (system emulator) that supports virtualization extensions of modern CPUs. In lenny it's kvm-72, in sid it's kvm-85 NMU. Kvm itself is (or was) a fast-moving target, and too many things changed and fixed since -72 and even -85. U