Re: Re: about puppet in experimental

On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 09:49:34AM +0100, Patrice Duroux wrote: > Thanks! > My point is more on this fact: > is this a consequence of the fact that both src:puppet (6.16.0-1) and > src:puppetserver (8.4.0-1~exp1) are in experimental? No. Or what do you mean by "this"? > And if this is the case, wh

Re: about puppet in experimental

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 05:47:36PM +0100, Patrice Duroux wrote: > Hi, > > Not sure where to address my point here. > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/puppet shows exp: 6.16.0-1 > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/puppetserver shows exp: 8.4.0-1~exp1 > > And as both puppet and puppetserver provide t

Re: Taking over maintenance of packages

On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 11:29:42PM +0100, Keiran Harcombe wrote: > Hi there, > > Wondered if you could help me. I've recently been appointed by the GNU > Project to take over maintenance of the Freedink package. > > What would the process be for picking up the maintenance of the following > packa

Re: pchar is marked for autoremoval from testing

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 07:55:06AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > The pchar package build depend on "debhelper-compat (= 10), quilt, > libsnmp-dev" and the binary package depend on "libc6 (>= 2.15), libgcc1 > (>= 1:3.0), libstdc++6 (>= 5)". How is this related to > nvidia-graphics-drivers-tes

Re: Can't create Debian bug tracker account

On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 07:20:09PM +, van snyder wrote: > I tried to register a Debian bug tracker account. There is no such thing. > The error I tried to report Please follow https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting Also, the user support mailing list is debian-user@. > is that the newest lib

Re: Debian Trends updated

On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > > - source format 1.0 with direct changes in .diff.gz (no patch system) > > Also dpatch. And also 1.0+quilt (ugh). ! What's left then? Only packages that don't patch the upstream sources at all? -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Desc

Re: Re: Removed packages handling

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 01:49:56PM +0100, benatt...@gezapig.nl benatt...@gezapig.nl wrote: > These are abandoned packages no one cares for. > Also all orphaned packages should go to Debian QA Group. > Seems logic to me. > > What is harder to find are the realy orphaned packages that also exist, t

Re: Removed packages handling

On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 11:57:49AM +0100, benatt...@gezapig.nl benatt...@gezapig.nl wrote: > I wonder if removed packages should go to Debian QA Group. What do you mean? -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Migration of libc++ weirdly blocked by already-fixed bug

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 06:12:02PM +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote: > Excuse for libc++ > > Migration status: BLOCKED: Rejected/introduces a regression (please see > below) > Too young, only 0 of 5 days old > missing build on armel: libc++-dev, libc++-helpers, libc++-test, libc++1, > libc++

Re: Package removed from unstable still in QA overview

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 04:29:25PM -0400, Peter Colberg wrote: > Dear Debian QA team, > > Two months ago I requested the removal of two packages from unstable, > golang-github-square-go-jose (#828201) and golang-github-cheggaaa-pb > (#830747). The former no longer appears on my QA overview, but th

Re: removing xchat

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:15:39AM +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > > Well we could also revert back to my initial plan to just remove it and > > add some notes to the release notes. But that leaves quite some people with > > a dead package around. Is that more userfriendly than a forced migration > > wi

Re: Strange testing migration excuse for xzgv

On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 10:55:32AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Hi, > > For the debian.qa.debian.org page[1], it states: > > excuses: >Too young, only 0 of 5 days old >Ignoring high urgency setting for NEW package >Not considered > > [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/x/xzgv.html >

Re: Huge list of broken Vcs-Svn entries in control files

On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 07:55:44AM -0400, James McCoy wrote: > See also , > so maintainers should be aware of the problem. It's only I: -- WBR, wRAR -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "uns

Bug#640269: JavaScript error on PTS pages in Internet Explorer <= 8

Package: qa.debian.org Severity: minor Pages such as http://packages.qa.debian.org/e/eglibc.html produce a JS error in Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 (but not in 9) on the page load: Object required, line 43, char 9. File http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/pts.js -- System Information: Debian R