Whoops. Sorry, I missed this problem. I'll try to fix it shortly.
Can the person working the NMU please send me patches directly first?
--
...Adam Di Carlo...<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...http://www.onshored.com/>
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 12:04:30AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:19:22 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > The upgrade-only kernels would be intended solely as an intermediate step
> > during the upgrade process; users should be encouraged to install kernels
> > from the main a
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:19:22 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> The upgrade-only kernels would be intended solely as an intermediate step
> during the upgrade process; users should be encouraged to install kernels
> from the main archive as well as part of the upgrade process. As such, we
> can pro
Hi guys (sigh, I had written bugs instead of guys...),
In the last few days I've NMU'ed the following packages that should be
nursed into testing so the RC bug fixes go in. Not all are tiff related.
devil
gimageview
goats
sndconfig
jadetex
gnobog
(working on grass, ready tomorrow)
Thanks.
Jordi
Executive summary: Packages that had DSAs in 2003 and are still not
fixed yet in sarge include tomcat4 and gtksee. Grep for "!" for details.
I was unable to reach a conclusion for three packages, ssh-krb5, gnotocan,
and mysql. Grep for HELP.
Packages that need to be updated in sarge, or removed,
> Tag it 'fixed'. You indicate the bug is fixed, to your knowledge, and
> all related scripts treat it like that. But the bug will remain in the
> BTS until the maintainer verified it and really closes the bug.
Makes perfect sense -- then the two cloned bugs will be in the same
state since
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:53:50PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>
> I think this is a question suitable for debian-release this time. ;-)
>
> Now that the jadetex NMU has been done, I'd like to close tetex bug
> 264043. Someone cloned 253098 (the jadetex bug) and assigned it to
> tetex, probably
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Martin Zobel-Helas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > question about a removal from testing:
> >
> > openmosix
> >
> > It has longstanding RC bug (#232810). No direct reaction from maintainer.
>
> Actually, I was working on that already (well, that issue was fixed, I
> was t
* Martin Zobel-Helas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> question about a removal from testing:
>
> openmosix
>
> It has longstanding RC bug (#232810). No direct reaction from maintainer.
Actually, I was working on that already (well, that issue was fixed, I
was trying to fix the *other* bugs against i
I think this is a question suitable for debian-release this time. ;-)
Now that the jadetex NMU has been done, I'd like to close tetex bug
264043. Someone cloned 253098 (the jadetex bug) and assigned it to
tetex, probably because jadetex's installation script failure message
indicated that it was
Hi release-team,
question about a removal from testing:
openmosix
It has longstanding RC bug (#232810). No direct reaction from maintainer.
its rdepends:
openmosixview
libmos (provided by openmosix)
kernel-patch-openmosix (provided by openmosix)
openmosix-dev (provided by openmosix)
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 12:57:56PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> > RC bug 253098 reported against jadetex is 64 days old. I believe that
> > this bug is making some packages (packages that build-depend upon
> > docbook-utils) FTBFS. This would include at least two packages
> > invol
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 12:57:56PM -0400, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> RC bug 253098 reported against jadetex is 64 days old. I believe that
> this bug is making some packages (packages that build-depend upon
> docbook-utils) FTBFS. This would include at least two packages
> involved in the tiff trans
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 11:37:00AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:56:45 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> > Reminder: the directory
> > dists/sarge/main/upgrade-i386
> > still has not been created, let alone populated.
> Oh, yuck. This is the first I've heard of this proble
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 07:09:37PM +0200, Noèl Köthe wrote:
> should removal requests from ftp.debian.org repeated here to be sure
> they will be removed from sarge or will the list on ftp.debian.org
> worked on in the near future/before the freeze?
As noted on IRC, if it's important that a packag
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 07:09:37PM +0200, Noèl Köthe wrote:
> should removal requests from ftp.debian.org repeated here to be sure
> they will be removed from sarge or will the list on ftp.debian.org
> worked on in the near future/before the freeze?
Please make sure that the ftp.debian.org bugs ar
Hello,
should removal requests from ftp.debian.org repeated here to be sure
they will be removed from sarge or will the list on ftp.debian.org
worked on in the near future/before the freeze?
thx.
--
Noèl Köthe
Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital s
Generic PhÅrmcy,upto 80% off!
XÀnax, Välium, Hydrocodone, and Norco..
3 of the best paIn kIllers out
and other popular product.
http://message.hgztyas.com/py/
no m_ore email
http://postmark.poauizbba.com/f.html
indescribable psych lynn devisee olivetti india apparent orchid gastronome
sleepy a
RC bug 253098 reported against jadetex is 64 days old. I believe that
this bug is making some packages (packages that build-depend upon
docbook-utils) FTBFS. This would include at least two packages
involved in the tiff transition. I would like to request an immediate
NMU because of the impact o
On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:56:45 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Reminder: the directory
> dists/sarge/main/upgrade-i386
> still has not been created, let alone populated.
Oh, yuck. This is the first I've heard of this problem.
>
> I would expect this to be a hard requirement before sarge can be
Hi,
Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 03:55:59PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >
> > UARGH. That time is suboptimal. I am trying to get an OOo with *two* RC
> > bug fixes (one unreported, removal of unnedded builddep on libtiff3g-dev)
> > and the removal of the unneeded -crashre
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 03:55:59PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> UARGH. That time is suboptimal. I am trying to get an OOo with *two* RC
> bug fixes (one unreported, removal of unnedded builddep on libtiff3g-dev)
> and the removal of the unneeded -crashrep package into sarge. As I "fixed"
> you
[ CC'ing -openoffice and -release ]
Hi,
Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> Changes:
> curl (7.12.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
> .
>* New upstream release:
> - workaround for ASN1_STRING_to_UTF8 failing if input is already
>UTF-8 encoded (closes: #264711).
>* Bumped up shlibs version
shadowhost self-diagnostic rmmer n2 sdcsvax shappir
If you need X)[EMAIL PROTECTED], Parac-odin, Suhttp://i.net.thepillswebsite.com?f4=T11k26
Don't be impudent, Eureka, admonished Dorothy
It is you who are impudent, said Eureka, for accusing me of such a crime
when you can't pro
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 01:47:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Because of Bugs #264770 and #264773, it is doubtful that the code is
> mature enough for production use, and even if it's fixed by upstream
> today, it will not be tested enough by the time sarge is released.
> Therefore, I request th
Because of Bugs #264770 and #264773, it is doubtful that the code is
mature enough for production use, and even if it's fixed by upstream
today, it will not be tested enough by the time sarge is released.
Therefore, I request that this package is removed from sarge
(it should be ok that it remains
Reminder: the directory
dists/sarge/main/upgrade-i386
still has not been created, let alone populated.
I would expect this to be a hard requirement before sarge can be
released; otherwise upgrades from woody for real i386 machines will not
be possible.
It will need to contain a kernel for i38
Everytime I try to burn an ISO image it gives me an error. I do exactly as the instruction say to do for burning an ISO image with Nero, and it does not work. None of the things I try work on any program. Could it be the disc I'm using? I'm using a CD-R All Purpose CD that can hold up to 700 MB. Do
28 matches
Mail list logo
