Hello,
The last build attempt of sctp-stable_1.0.0-1_mipsel failed because of
bug #217980, which has been resolved.
Could someone requeue sctp-stable_1.0.0-1_mipsel, please?
It's needed for socketapi_1.3.1-4 and rsplib_0.3.2-4.
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar
--
.''`. Debian GNU/Linux | Buildin
reassign 221644 ftp.debian.org
thanks
[aj suggested I cc debian-release. I'm not subscribed to the list so
please cc me on replies.]
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> Package: webmin-raid
> Version: 1.000-1
> Severity: serious
>
> The "old" version of webmin-raid block webmi
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 05:34:53PM +0200, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
> I'm glad to see that at least one person in the whole Debian project
> defends the interests of the end-user,
Guys, this is off-topic for -release. Release isn't a discussion list,
please move this to -devel.
Thanks,
aj
--
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 08:35:42AM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
>...
> > > In that case, if we had libfoo0_1.0-1 in pre-testing, and
> > > libfoo0_1.0-2 in unstable, we'd end up with libfoo0_1.0-2.0.1 in
> > > pre-testing, and libfoo0_1.0-2.0.2 in unstable, whether the latter was
> > > rebuilt or just
On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 05:37:36AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> From the look of it, jack-audio-connection-kit is waiting for
>
> ecasound2.2 -- latex2html problem (uploaded at urgency=HIGH, but python
> seems to be broken)
> removing this from testing will remove ecamegaped
Hi, fellow debian audio developers, and release managers.
> > I think jack-audio-connection-kit and related packages should enter
> > mini-freeze,
> > to get something released to testing.
This is my (3rd?) update on the freeze status.
From the look of it, jack-audio-connection-kit is waiti
Hi,
AFAICT, swfdec hasn't been tried in arm in the last months, probably
because it was waiting for an unfucked mozilla.
The lack of swfdec/arm is blocking gst-plugins, which is blocking some
portions of GNOME from entering testing.
Assumed that mozilla is more or less sane in arm now, can swfde
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 02:47:19PM -, Mike at VirginNet wrote:
> When I try to install a newly built module, I get the following error :-
>
> modulename.o: kernel-module version mismatch
> modulename.o was compiled for kernel version 2.4.18
> while this kernel is version 2.
Hi,I've just installed Debian 3.0 on a PC,
using the option to install the 2.4 kernel 'bf24', and I want to build some
driver modules.When I try to install a newly built module, I get the
following error :-
modulename.o: kernel-module version
mismatch modulename.o was compiled
fo
On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:36:37PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Graham Wilson wrote:
> > I don't know if I agree with the idea of building against testing
> > (though I believe that is not exactly what you said).
>
> I indeed said exactly that: always build against wha
Hi,
Mozilla is only missing on mips and m68k right now, and it's a great
opportunity (the first one in a long time) to get a new version in
testing.
m68k failed due to uninstallable build-deps. A quick round of madison
queries tells me this should be resolved now.
mips failed due to the nut bugs.
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 05:34:53PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > 1) experimental
> >
> > The hacker playground. Dodgy uploads allowed. No guarantees to anyone
> > on the sanity of anything there.
> >
> > 2) unstable
> >
> > * Whatever was tho
Hi,
I would like to make people on this list aware of some of the problems
that I have with the *debian packaged* mozilla 1.5 version as I think,
mozilla is an essential piece of desktop application.
I've been using mozilla for years (since M16) now but mainly used
binaries supplied directly
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 11:19:11PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:41:05AM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> >...
> > That could be done either by a rebuild, or, less costly, by a simple
> > unpack/edit-changelog/repack.
>
> Repacking breaks with every
> Depends: somepackage (=
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 05:34:53PM +0200, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> 1) experimental
>
> The hacker playground. Dodgy uploads allowed. No guarantees to anyone
> on the sanity of anything there.
>
> 2) unstable
>
> * Whatever was thoroughly tested by developpers in experimental and is
> cons
15 matches
Mail list logo
