Re: New upstream version 1.6.6 of tuxguitar available on salsa

Hello Gregor, Am Montag, 6. Januar 2025, 02:56:15 CET schrieben Sie: > On Fri, 03 Jan 2025 23:47:15 +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrote: > > > I just uploaded version 1.6.6 to salsa: > > https://salsa.debian.org/helger/tuxguitar > > Maybe you can push this new version into Sid? > > It looks like the mast

Re: New upstream version 1.6.6 of tuxguitar available on salsa

Hello Tony, thanks for your help! I just uploaded the new version 1.6.6 to mentors: https://mentors.debian.net/package/tuxguitar/ Regards, Helmar. Am Montag, 6. Januar 2025, 02:39:10 CET schrieb tony mancill: > Hello Helmar, > > On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 11:47:15PM +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrot

Re: New upstream version 1.6.6 of tuxguitar available on salsa

Hello Helmar, On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 11:47:15PM +0100, Helmar Gerloni wrote: > I just uploaded version 1.6.6 to salsa: > > https://salsa.debian.org/helger/tuxguitar > > Maybe you can push this new version into Sid? I review and sponsor the upload of 1.6.6. > Just let me know if you want me to

New upstream version 1.6.6 of tuxguitar available on salsa

Hello Gregor, thanks for importing version 1.6.4 of tuxguitar into salsa. I just uploaded version 1.6.6 to salsa: https://salsa.debian.org/helger/tuxguitar Maybe you can push this new version into Sid? > What's a bit sad is that tuxguitar doesn't build reproducibly. I did not find the time ye

guacamole-server: New upstream version 1.5.0

Control: retitle -1 guacamole-server: New upstream version 1.5.0 The package on mentors is now at version 1.5.0. Maybe someone wants to have a look at it: https://mentors.debian.net/package/guacamole-server/

Guacamole Server new upstream version 1.4.0 on mentors.debian.net

Dear Maintainer, upstream is currently on version 1.4.0. I uploaded an updated package to https://mentors.debian.net/package/guacamole-server/ Maybe this helps to update the package in Debian. If there is more I can do just let me know. Regards,Helmar.

Bug#985028: Bug#981413: age: New upstream version (1.0.0~beta6)

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:53 AM Filippo Valsorda wrote: > > 2021-03-17 17:33 GMT+01:00 Shengjing Zhu : > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:06 AM Filippo Valsorda > wrote: > > > > 2021-03-17 16:19 GMT+01:00 nicoo : > > > This is currently blocked on golang-filippo-edwards25519 getting into > > > test

Bug#985028: Bug#981413: age: New upstream version (1.0.0~beta6)

2021-03-17 17:33 GMT+01:00 Shengjing Zhu mailto:zhsj%40debian.org>>: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:06 AM Filippo Valsorda > wrote: > > > > 2021-03-17 16:19 GMT+01:00 nicoo > >: > > > This is currently blocked on golang-filippo-edwards25519

Bug#985028: Bug#981413: age: New upstream version (1.0.0~beta6)

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:06 AM Filippo Valsorda wrote: > > 2021-03-17 16:19 GMT+01:00 nicoo : > > This is currently blocked on golang-filippo-edwards25519 getting into > > testing, which didn't happen because of the whole issue with NEW requiring > > binary uploads and transition requiring sourc

Bug#985028: Bug#981413: age: New upstream version (1.0.0~beta6)

2021-03-17 16:19 GMT+01:00 nicoo : > This is currently blocked on golang-filippo-edwards25519 getting into > testing, which didn't happen because of the whole issue with NEW requiring > binary uploads and transition requiring source-only ones. Thank you for packaging age and for picking up this up

Bug#985028: Bug#981413: age: New upstream version (1.0.0~beta6)

Control: retitle 981413 age: New upstream version (1.0.0~rc1) Control: severity 981413 serious Control: block 981413 by 985028 Hi, Apologies for letting this wait so long; it was blocked on clearing NEW for a while, and once it finally did I was too broken to “do the needful.” This is currently

Re: Importing a new upstream version

On 07/07/2019 03:03, pkgoyq@neverbox.com wrote: On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 6:18 PM Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: What git repository are you running it in? It should be run in the packaging repository, not the upstream one. From the next post, it was being run in the right place. (The package'

Re: Importing a new upstream version

On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 9:55 PM Tong Sun wrote: > I only knew to use this previously: > > gbp import-orig --uscan > > Today I tried `gbp import-orig --uscan --pristine-tar`, after having > done the above `gbp import-orig --uscan` > > > If so, it might > > have failed after creating the 4.0.3 tag

Re: Importing a new upstream version

On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 6:18 PM Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > What git repository are you running it in? It should be run in the > packaging repository, not the upstream one. (The package's Vcs-Git > field currently points to upstream, which is itself a bug.) Please elaborate what you mean, Rebecca

Re: Importing a new upstream version

On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 6:18 PM Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > gbp import-orig --uscan --pristine-tar is the same command as I normally > use. > > Did it fail with something different the first time? I only knew to use this previously: gbp import-orig --uscan Today I tried `gbp import-orig --uscan

Re: Importing a new upstream version

gbp import-orig --uscan --pristine-tar is the same command as I normally use. Did it fail with something different the first time? If so, it might have failed after creating the 4.0.3 tag, leaving it in the way of future attempts. What git repository are you running it in? It should be run

Importing a new upstream version

Hi, I had been following these two articles for importing a new upstream version http://marquiz.github.io/git-buildpackage-rpm/gbp.import.html https://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.import.new.upstream.html by doing gbp import-orig --uscan But today, I learnt

Bug#849754: RFS: guerillabackup - new upstream version

Version v0.0.0 as indicated in initial RFS is obsolete. As discussed on #debian-mentors IRC, the related ITP bug can be reused for v0.0.1. What about the RFS? Close it or retitle it? Debian packaging data was moved to salsa, hopefully integrating all review recommendations from above. gbp seems

Re: Help needed for different gcc-8 bug in new upstream version (Was: spades: ftbfs with GCC-8)

Andreas Tille kirjoitti 18.07.2018 klo 09:52: > Control: tags -1 help > > Hi, > > upstream seems to have dealt with the original issue in the logs of this > bug report in the new upstream version which I commited to Salsa[1]. > Unfortunately there is a new issue where

Help needed for different gcc-8 bug in new upstream version (Was: spades: ftbfs with GCC-8)

Control: tags -1 help Hi, upstream seems to have dealt with the original issue in the logs of this bug report in the new upstream version which I commited to Salsa[1]. Unfortunately there is a new issue where I need help from a C++ programmer: ... [ 69%] Building CXX object common/utils

Bug#876859: marked as done (RFS: install-mimic/0.3.0-1 (new upstream version, packaging updates))

Your message dated Wed, 27 Sep 2017 03:17:03 +0200 with message-id <20170927011702.hbib7slb67q33...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#876859: RFS: install-mimic/0.3.0-1 (new upstream version, packaging updates) has caused the Debian Bug report #876859, regarding RFS: install-mimic/0.3.0-

Bug#876859: RFS: install-mimic/0.3.0-1 (new upstream version, packaging updates)

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "install-mimic" * Package name: install-mimic Version : 0.3.0-1 Upstream Author : Peter Pentchev * URL : https://devel.ringlet.net/misc/install-mimic/ * License

Bug#869345: marked as done (RFS: 4pane (new upstream version))

Your message dated Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:25:00 + (UTC) with message-id <1038787676.4487759.1500834300...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#869345: RFS: 4pane (new upstream version) has caused the Debian Bug report #869345, regarding RFS: 4pane (new upstream version) to be marked a

Bug#869345: RFS: 4pane (new upstream version)

review and upload of that update. The amended package builds and works, and is lintian-clean apart from: I: 4pane source: testsuite-autopkgtest-missing Changes since the last upload: 4pane (5.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream version. All the previous patches are now redundant

Bug#840739: New upstream version with revamped packaging

Upstream has since released a new version of GUDHI (2.0.0). The RFS bug #861649 [1], which has been merged with this one, details my package for it. I believe it addresses most of the problems helpfully pointed out here. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=861649 Best, Gard Sp

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 09:08:51AM +0100, Olivier Sallou wrote: > >> As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the > >> published repo. > >> The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* > >> tags are not its descendants. This will not work properl

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On 12/01/2016 04:36 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:21:32PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: >> As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the >> published repo. >> The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* >> tags are no

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 04:36:09PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > I tried to apply your hint to ncbi-tools6[1] but this does not change > anything: > > ncbi-tools6(master) $ LC_ALL=C git merge upstream/6.1.20120620 > Already up-to-date. > > Did I missinterpreted your hint? No, but you could check

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 04:35:01PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > > As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the > > published repo. > > The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* > > tags are not its descendants. This will not work properly.

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:21:32 +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > > forwarding issue to debian-mentors > As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the > published repo. > The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* > tags are not its descendants.

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 07:21:32PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the > published repo. > The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* > tags are not its descendants. This will not work properly. > Try

Re: Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 03:15:00PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > forwarding issue to debian-mentors As there is not enough data in the message, I'm assuming it's about the published repo. The upstream/2.4.0 tag is not merged into master so the debian/2.4.0-* tags are not its descendants. T

Problems to import origtar with gbp import-orig (Was: ncbi-blast+ new upstream version git import merge error)

Hi, forwarding issue to debian-mentors On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 01:37:04PM +, olivier sallou wrote: > HI, > I have updated (locally) patches for the new release of ncbi-blast+. > However I face an error during import of new sources in git: > > gbp import-orig --pristine-tar ../ncbi-blast+_2.5

Bug#843684: marked as done (RFS: hexer/1.0.3-1 -- new upstream version, refresh the packaging)

Your message dated Wed, 9 Nov 2016 13:39:57 + with message-id <20161109133955.hlograpqbr4pi...@chase.mapreri.org> and subject line Re: Bug#843684: RFS: hexer/1.0.3-1 -- new upstream version, refresh the packaging has caused the Debian Bug report #843684, regarding RFS: hexer/1.0.3-1

Bug#843684: RFS: hexer/1.0.3-1 -- new upstream version, refresh the packaging

control: tag -1 -moreinfo On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 09:15:39AM +, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > control: tag -1 moreinfo > control: owner -1 ! > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 08:52:05PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "hexer": > > o/ Hi again! :) Thanks for l

Bug#843684: RFS: hexer/1.0.3-1 -- new upstream version, refresh the packaging

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "hexer": * Package name: hexer Version : 1.0.3-1 Upstream Author : Peter Pentchev * URL : https://devel.ringlet.net/editors/hexer/ * License : BSD-3-cl

Bug#839831: marked as done (RFS: bucklespring/1.4.0-1 -- upload new upstream version ☺)

Your message dated Wed, 5 Oct 2016 16:53:51 +0200 with message-id <20161005145351.ga10...@angband.pl> and subject line Re: Bug#839831: RFS: bucklespring/1.4.0-1 -- upload new upstream version ☺ has caused the Debian Bug report #839831, regarding RFS: bucklespring/1.4.0-1 -- upload new up

Bug#839831: RFS: bucklespring/1.4.0-1 -- upload new upstream version ☺

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version of my package "bucklespring" * Package name: bucklespring Version : 1.4.0-1 Section : games It builds those bin

Re: Packaging new upstream version of scid

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:56:03 + (UTC) Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > I did *two* NMU of stockfish for this maintainer, both were new upstream > release, and upstream was making pressure > about updating it. > > So, even if the maintainer is not officially MIA, I guess you can already > o

Re: Packaging new upstream version of scid

Hi, >I have been working on packaging a new version of scid (4.6.2); the version in >Debian is outdated (from 2014). >I tried to contact Oliver, the actual mantainer, a month ago and haven't >received response yet. I tried it twice. The maintainer has an ongoing MIA process, and he didn't answ

Packaging new upstream version of scid

Hello! I have been working on packaging a new version of scid (4.6.2); the version in Debian is outdated (from 2014). I tried to contact Oliver, the actual mantainer, a month ago and haven't received response yet. I tried it twice. I did a NMU and the work can be reviewed on [0]. What should

Bug#822127: marked as done (RFS: pslist/1.3.1-1 - new upstream version, packaging updates)

Your message dated Thu, 21 Apr 2016 13:13:10 + (UTC) with message-id <1376943100.7441045.1461244390189.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#822127: RFS: pslist/1.3.1-1 - new upstream version, packaging updates has caused the Debian Bug report #822127, regarding RFS:

Bug#822127: RFS: pslist/1.3.1-1 - new upstream version, packaging updates

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pslist". This is a new upstream version and some refreshing of the Debian packaging. * Package name: pslist Version : 1.3.1-1 Upstream Author : Peter Pentc

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 05:32:12PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi, built, signed and uploaded. > > thanks for following all the nitpicks/changes we requested. Thanks! > http://debomatic-amd64.debian.net/distribution#unstable/dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1/piuparts > the build was fine, the tests t

Bug#820196: marked as done (RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates)

Your message dated Sat, 9 Apr 2016 17:32:12 + (UTC) with message-id <469040050.3491785.1460223132215.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates has caused the Debian Bug report #820196, regardi

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:59:16PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > control: tags -1 -moreinfo > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 03:46:24PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:33:28PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:39:07PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

control: tags -1 -moreinfo On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 03:46:24PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:33:28PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:39:07PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > > control: owner -1 ! > > > control: tags -1 moreinfo > > > >

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:33:28PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:39:07PM +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > control: owner -1 ! > > control: tags -1 moreinfo > > > > Hi Peter, > > changes are huge! > > Yes, they are... I've put off updating dante from 1.2.x to 1.

Re: Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

On 04/06/2016 11:47 PM, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 08:43:23PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote: >> And if I read your multiarch-find-lib right, it doesn't >> appear to even handle shebang-interpreters at the moment? > > Actually it handles shebang-interpreters [...] Ok, sorry, I

Re: Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 08:43:23PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote: > Peter Pentchev wrote: > > So, the thing is, now it's in an arch:all package; it examines the program > > that the user asked it to run, then chooses the > > /usr/lib/*/dante-client/libdsocksd.so > > file for the correct architectu

Re: Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

Peter Pentchev wrote: > So, the thing is, now it's in an arch:all package; it examines the program > that the user asked it to run, then chooses the > /usr/lib/*/dante-client/libdsocksd.so > file for the correct architecture (thus the multiarch-find-lib tool), puts it > into LD_PRELOAD, then runs

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

* Peter Pentchev , 2016-04-06, 17:33: I prefer autoreconf instead of autotools-dev Yep, that's part of the reason I updated to debhelper 10; please see the changelog of debhelper-9.20160402 and 9.20160403 :) Still, there are some packages and weird architectures that need autotools-dev *in ad

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

look at it! I'll fix the copyright and>license >stuff, add back the NMU, and switch dante-client to arch-all, and then >I'll get back to you. thanks, I already trust your work on other packages I sponsored to you, so feel free to drop what you don't agree. >Thank

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

bove > points, and I'll sponsor it Thanks for taking the time to look at it! I'll fix the copyright and license stuff, add back the NMU, and switch dante-client to arch-all, and then I'll get back to you. > please also consider merging the Ubuntu delta > https://launchpad.net/

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

control: owner -1 ! control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Peter, changes are huge! lets see: some copyrights are missing # Copyright (C) 1994 X Consortium Radical Eye Software Internet Software Consortium. licensecheck * -r reports lots of missing licenses (BSD-4 as example) while your "other" lice

Bug#820196: RFS: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-1 -- new upstream version, packaging updates

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: minor Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "dante". This is both a new upstream version with many bugfixes and new features and also almost a full overhaul of the Debian packaging under the guise of using new features of the b

Re: Package tracker complaint: Problems while searching for a new upstream version

* Thomas Schmitt , 2016-03-24, 13:39: since a while the package tracker pages of my packages warn "Problems while searching for a new upstream version [high]" Sounds like #818382. -- Jakub Wilk

Package tracker complaint: Problems while searching for a new upstream version

Hi, since a while the package tracker pages of my packages warn "Problems while searching for a new upstream version [high]" See for an example the "action needed" part of: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/libburn The debian/watch file has this content: version=3 o

Bug#815039: marked as done (RFS: normaliz 3.1.0+ds-1 [New Upstream Version] -- math computing tools)

Your message dated Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:34:10 +0100 with message-id <56c8cdc2.1010...@rezozer.net> and subject line RFS: normaliz 3.1.0+ds-1 [New Upstream Version] -- math computing tools has caused the Debian Bug report #815039, regarding RFS: normaliz 3.1.0+ds-1 [New Upstream Version] -

Bug#815039: RFS: normaliz 3.1.0+ds-1 [New Upstream Version] -- math computing tools

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear Mentors: I am looking for a sponsor for the normaliz package [1], a mathematical package used by Singular. This package brings to Debian the latest version of normaliz. Thanks in advance, Jerome [1] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-scien

Bug#809731: RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-1 (New upstream version)

Hi, Il Domenica 3 Gennaio 2016 16:45, Geoff ha scritto: >Done wonderful >Actually I don't have preferences nor opinion over a solution or the >other. I would align the package with the policy if needed. > >The piuparts problems was triggered by a small issue in the code >(directory creati

Bug#809731: RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-1 (New upstream version)

Hi, Le 03/01/2016 15:47, Gianfranco Costamagna a écrit : > Hi, I Signed&Uploaded the package with a little fix > -Copyright: Copyright 2009-2015 Jack Kaliko > > +Copyright: Copyright 2009-2016 Jack Kaliko > Please update the VCS Done > (I'm not completely happy with this changesu -s /bin/sh -

Bug#809731: marked as done (RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-1 (New upstream version))

Your message dated Sun, 3 Jan 2016 14:47:16 + (UTC) with message-id <2010719561.9524304.1451832436600.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#809731: RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-1 (New upstream version) has caused the Debian Bug report #809731, regarding RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-

Bug#809731: RFS: mpd-sima/0.14.1-1 (New upstream version)

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "mpd-sima" (already in debian). * Package name: mpd-sima Version : 0.14.1-1 Upstream Author : Jack Kaliko * URL : http://kaliko.me/code/mpd-sima/ * License

Re: Splitting a source package with a new upstream version

On 2015-09-23 11:56, Jakub Wilk wrote: > * Christian Kastner , 2015-09-22, 11:08: >> 1. upload a 2.2.0 version of the library, with the Python bindings >> dropped. python-pyfann currently has a versioned dependency on a >> specific version of the library, libfann2 (=2.1.0~beta+dfsg-1). >> Therefore

Re: Splitting a source package with a new upstream version

* Christian Kastner , 2015-09-22, 11:08: 1. upload a 2.2.0 version of the library, with the Python bindings dropped. python-pyfann currently has a versioned dependency on a specific version of the library, libfann2 (=2.1.0~beta+dfsg-1). Therefore, The library itself will not be upgradeable with

Splitting a source package with a new upstream version

Hi, libfann 2.1.0~beta+dfsg-1 in Debian currently builds a library as binary package libfann2, and Python bindings for it as binary package python-pyfann. The new upstream version 2.2.0 of libfann no longer provides the Python bindings; they are now provided by an external contributor instead

Re: uscan not downloading new upstream version of bowtie2

On 10/26/2014 12:54 PM, Paul Wise wrote: On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Alex Mestiashvili wrote: I am facing a strange issue with uscan. ... Any hint ? Looks like a bug, please file one. Done: #766878 Best, Alex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org wit

Re: uscan not downloading new upstream version of bowtie2

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Alex Mestiashvili wrote: > I am facing a strange issue with uscan. ... > Any hint ? Looks like a bug, please file one. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubs

uscan not downloading new upstream version of bowtie2

Hi All, I am facing a strange issue with uscan. here is the output: ~/debian-med/bowtie2$ uscan --verbose -- Scanning for watchfiles in . -- Found watchfile in ./debian -- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line: opts=filenamemangle=s/(.*)(-source)(\..*$)/$1$3/ http://sf.net/bowtie-bio/bo

Bug#760065: marked as done (RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian])

Your message dated Sat, 6 Sep 2014 11:36:59 -0300 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian] has caused the Debian Bug report #760065, regarding RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

Uploaded. Thanks for your work. Cheers, Eriberto 2014-09-06 8:12 GMT-03:00 Eduardo M KALINOWSKI : > tags 760065 - moreinfo > thanks > > On 08/31/2014 11:02 PM, Eriberto Mota wrote: >> 1. d/changelog: add ACK for NMU. See details here[1]. >> >> 2. d/rules: please, update to new (reduced) format.

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

tags 760065 - moreinfo thanks On 08/31/2014 11:02 PM, Eriberto Mota wrote: > 1. d/changelog: add ACK for NMU. See details here[1]. > > 2. d/rules: please, update to new (reduced) format. Ask me if you have > doubts. An example is here[2]. For details, see the 'dh' manpage. > > 3. d/rules: add 'e

Re: Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

[removing the RFS bug from the CC list and putting d-mentors@ldo] On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Eriberto wrote: > 2014-09-02 15:16 GMT-03:00 Eduardo M KALINOWSKI : >> On Seg, 01 Set 2014, Eriberto Mota wrote: >>> 1. d/changelog: add ACK for NMU. See details here[1]. >> I included the NMU change

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

2014-09-02 15:16 GMT-03:00 Eduardo M KALINOWSKI : > On Seg, 01 Set 2014, Eriberto Mota wrote: >> >> 1. d/changelog: add ACK for NMU. See details here[1]. > > > I included the NMU changelog entry in debian/changelog (after my changes), > is something else necessary? See an example here: http://met

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

On Seg, 01 Set 2014, Eriberto Mota wrote: 1. d/changelog: add ACK for NMU. See details here[1]. I included the NMU changelog entry in debian/changelog (after my changes), is something else necessary? 2. d/rules: please, update to new (reduced) format. Ask me if you have doubts. An example

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

rs.debian.net/package/kildclient > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > dget -x > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kildclient/kildclient_3.0.0-1.dsc > > Changes since the last upload: > > * New upstream versi

Bug#760065: RFS: kildclient/3.0.0-1 [new upstream version of package already in Debian]

lowing URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/kildclient Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/k/kildclient/kildclient_3.0.0-1.dsc Changes since the last upload: * New upstream version: 3.0.0. * control: U

Bug#702946: marked as done (RFS: firehol/1.296-1 [ITA] -- easy to use but powerful iptables stateful firewall [new upstream version])

Your message dated Sun, 21 Apr 2013 04:22:37 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: firehol/1.296-1 [ITA] -- easy to use but powerful iptables stateful firewall [new upstream version] has caused the Debian Bug report #702946, regarding RFS: firehol/1.296-1 [ITA] -- easy to use but

Bug#702946: RFS: firehol/1.296-1 [ITA] -- easy to use but powerful iptables stateful firewall [new upstream version]

ively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/firehol/firehol_1.296-1.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from http://firehol.sourceforge.net/ . Changes since the last upload: New upstre

Bug#666561: marked as done (RFS: dbacl/1.14-1 (New upstream version))

Your message dated Sun, 19 Aug 2012 16:27:18 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: dbacl/1.14-1 (New upstream version) has caused the Debian Bug report #666561, regarding RFS: dbacl/1.14-1 (New upstream version) to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has

Processed: Retitle for new upstream version

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 665354 RFS: viennacl/1.3.1+dfsg-1 (for experimental) Bug #665354 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: viennacl/1.3.0+dfsg-1 (for experimental) Changed Bug title to 'RFS: viennacl/1.3.1+dfsg-1 (for experimental)' from 'RFS: viennacl/1.3.0+dfsg-1 (f

RFS: New upstream version of jampal

Gentle reminder of this request. I am looking for a sponsor for a new version of Jampal. The previous sponsor of Jampal was Kilian Krause * Package name: jampal Version : 02.01.06+dfsg1-1 Upstream Author : Peter Bennett * URL : http://jampal.sf.net * License

Bug#677379: New upstream version.

Grzegorz Kolorz writes: > * Imported Upstream version 0.1.2 > * Cleaned file licenses Just curious: 1) What software uses this library? I don't see any reverse dependencies. 2) Is the upstream planning to have a public version control system? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors

Bug#677379: New upstream version.

Changes since the last upload: * Imported Upstream version 0.1.2 * Cleaned file licenses -- Grzegorz Kolorz 'kAjKo' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debia

RFS: New upstream version of jampal

I am looking for a sponsor for a new version of Jampal. The previous sponsor of Jampal was Kilian Krause * Package name: jampal Version : 02.01.06+dfsg1-1 Upstream Author : Peter Bennett * URL : http://jampal.sf.net * License : GPL-3+, GPL-2+ Section

Re: Question about submitting a package for a new upstream version of Jampal

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 11:03:54AM -0400, Peter Bennett wrote: > I originally packaged jampal a year ago. My upload was sponsored by > Kilian Krause and uploaded into Debian. To package a new upstream > version should I log a bug against Jampal for a new upstream > version? No nee

Question about submitting a package for a new upstream version of Jampal

I originally packaged jampal a year ago. My upload was sponsored by Kilian Krause and uploaded into Debian. To package a new upstream version should I log a bug against Jampal for a new upstream version? What is the process? Is it similar to uploading a new package? Peter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Bug#659822: marked as done (RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version))

Your message dated Sun, 20 May 2012 05:39:27 + with message-id <20120520053927.ga22...@master.debian.org> and subject line closing sponsorship-requests for uploaded packages has caused the Debian Bug report #659822, regarding RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) to be marked a

Re: RFS: freefilesync - folder comparison and synchronization tool (new upstream version)

Dear mentors, Here is a new upstream version of FreeFileSync package with many improvements. So I am still looking for a sponsor for my package "freefilesync". FreeFileSync is a folder comparison and synchronization tool. It is optimized for highest performance and usability without

Bug#666561: RFS: dbacl/1.14-1 (New upstream version)

ebian/pool/main/d/d/dbacl/dbacl_1.14-1.dsc Changes since last upload: * New upstream version * Acknowledge NMU * Update to dpkg-source 3.0 Regards, zakame -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Bug#659894: marked as done (RFS: minidlna/1.0.24+dfsg-1 -- lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server (new upstream version))

Your message dated Thu, 01 Mar 2012 19:51:37 +0100 with message-id <87fwdsm9xi@deep-thought.43-1.org> and subject line Re: Bug#659894: RFS: minidlna/1.0.24+dfsg-1 -- lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server (new upstream version) has caused the Debian Bug report #659894, regarding RFS: minidlna/

Bug#659894: RFS: minidlna/1.0.24+dfsg-1 -- lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server (new upstream version)

> > you upload it again? > > Right, I had not realized, thanks. I just re-uploaded it (same URL), > taking this opportunity to bump the standards version to 3.9.3 and using > debhelper 9. > > [...] I just made one further small correction (still the same URL); the

Bug#659894: RFS: minidlna/1.0.24+dfsg-1 -- lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server (new upstream version)

not realized, thanks. I just re-uploaded it (same URL), taking this opportunity to bump the standards version to 3.9.3 and using debhelper 9. Here's the latest changelog entry: * New upstream version: - Fix playlist browsing with no SortOrder specified - Fix inotify dete

Processed: retitle 659822 to RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version)

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 659822 RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) Bug #659822 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) tags it +moreinfo Changed Bug title to 'RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version)' fr

Processed: retitle 659822 to RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) tags it +moreinfo

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > retitle 659822 RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) tags it +moreinfo Bug #659822 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.1-1 (New upstream version) Changed Bug title to 'RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.2-1 (New upstream version) tags it +

Bug#659894: RFS: minidlna/1.0.24+dfsg-1 -- lightweight DLNA/UPnP-AV server (new upstream version)

Benoît Knecht writes: > dget -x > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/minidlna/minidlna_1.0.24+dfsg-1.dsc The package was removed due to a bug in the new debexpo version. Could you upload it again? Regards, Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.or

Processed: tagging 659822, retitle 659822 to RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.1-1 (New upstream version)

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 659822 + confirmed - moreinfo Bug #659822 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.0-1 (New upstream version) Added tag(s) confirmed. Bug #659822 [sponsorship-requests] RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.0-1 (New upstream version) Ignoring request to al

Bug#659822: RFS: mpd-sima/0.9.0-1 (New upstream version)

/git.debian.org/git/pkg-multimedia/mpd-sima.git > dget -x > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mpd-sima/mpd-sima_0.9.0-1.dsc A new upstream version have been tagged. Please delay the sponsored upload. Cheers, Geoff -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists

Re: RFS: lebiniou (already in Debian, new upstream version 3.15)

Hi Olivier, On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 12:40:32AM +0100, Olivier Girondel wrote: > http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/lebiniou/lebiniou_3.15-1.dsc reviewed, built, signed, uploaded. Thanks for your work! -- Best regards, Kilian signature.asc Description: Digital signature

  1   2   3   4   >