On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 05:35:16PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> Based on discussions on the debian-kernel list[1], I'd like to propose
> that we use 2.4.27 as the 2.4 kernel for all architectures with 2.4 kernels
> in sarge. The strongest arguments for 2.4.27, as opposed to 2.4.26 were noted
> b
At Fri, 27 Aug 2004 02:47:34 +0200,
Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> xshodo: arm ia64 powerpc s390 sparc
I built for ia64, s390 using Debian Project machine.
There is no useful sparc/sid chroot for me in Debian Project.
I built using my friend's machine.
powerpc/sid chroot (on voltaire) hasn't lib
On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 03:39:01AM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> Please hint for removal on ROM.
Hinted.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
> - Forwarded message from "W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
>
> X-Original-To: debian-bugs-rc@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#2
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 02:32:55PM -0400, Mike Furr wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 18:37, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Outdated binaries need to be replaced or removed first, otherwise we
> > would have binaries in testing with no corresponding source.
> Okay, I thought perhaps you could just move in
Please hint for removal on ROM.
- Forwarded message from "W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
X-Original-To: debian-bugs-rc@lists.debian.org
Subject: Bug#244274: ttcn3parser should be removed from sarge
Reply-To: "W. Borgert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Debian-PR-Message: repor
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 01:25:45PM +0200, Stefan Hornburg wrote:
> > i would like to suggest to remove sympa from testing. Looking in
> > sympa-package
> > at the BSP on weekend showed me, that current upstream version is 4.1,
> > current
> > Debian version is 3.4.4. Sympa in Debian has security
Hello,
You are maintaining one or more contrib or non-free packages that are
currently on one or more architectures out of date. As long as that is
the case, the latest version of your package will not proceed to Sarge
automatically.
As contrib/non-free maintainer you're yourself responsable for
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 12:58:37PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> It contains some bug fixes and updated servers data.
Hint added.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 06:31:55PM -0400, Robin wrote:
> Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 02:56:14PM 26/08/04:
> > Yes, given that there are four missing builds in unstable, kvirc in
> > unstable will be held out of testing by kdelibs. Please use t-p-u for
> > these changes.
> Thanks,
Hi,
Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 02:56:14PM 26/08/04:
> Yes, given that there are four missing builds in unstable, kvirc in
> unstable will be held out of testing by kdelibs. Please use t-p-u for
> these changes.
Thanks, Steve.
Sorry for perhaps asking an obvious question, but ho
reopen 264055 =
tag 264055 + sarge
tag 264055 + security
severity 264055 grave
thanks
On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:20:44AM -0700, Robert Woodcock wrote:
> I can reproduce this, although I'm pretty sure that we've already dropped
> privileges by this time. Any thoughts on the patch below?
When the b
Hi Robin,
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 02:40:07PM -0400, Robin wrote:
> I am not subscribed to debian-release so I didn't see the note about the KDE
> 3.3 upload[1] until now. I have a KDE-related package that I would like to
> get into Sarge in time for the release and I'd like to find out if that wi
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 05:14:57PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> I'm attaching a new patch. In addition to the previous, this one does:
> - Print warnings when _LIBTOOL is used without _ACLOCAL, and when _ACLOCAL
> is used without _AUTOCONF. Such combinations are quite evil, since the
>
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 08:13:29PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> Is there any plan to get GIMP 2.0 into Sarge ? It's been trying to
> enter testing for *months* now, and is now blocking quite a few
> packages.
> You may have guessed, I'm concerned about the SANE frontends that
> would really benef
Hi,
Is there any plan to get GIMP 2.0 into Sarge ? It's been trying to
enter testing for *months* now, and is now blocking quite a few
packages.
You may have guessed, I'm concerned about the SANE frontends that
would really benefit from an update now ... both XSane and
sane-frontends depend on GI
Hi,
I am not subscribed to debian-release so I didn't see the note about the KDE
3.3 upload[1] until now. I have a KDE-related package that I would like to
get into Sarge in time for the release and I'd like to find out if that will
still happen automatically or if t-p-u should be used for that.
M
dann frazier wrote:
> Based on discussions on the debian-kernel list[1], I'd like to propose
> that we use 2.4.27 as the 2.4 kernel for all architectures with 2.4 kernels
> in sarge. The strongest arguments for 2.4.27, as opposed to 2.4.26 were noted
> by tbm [3].
One thing to bear in mind when
I'm attaching a new patch. In addition to the previous, this one does:
- Print warnings when _LIBTOOL is used without _ACLOCAL, and when _ACLOCAL
is used without _AUTOCONF. Such combinations are quite evil, since the
maintainer thinks the package is updating libtool but in practice, i
BRIT Consulting E Logistica LTDA
Marketing Division
Avenida Conselheiro Nebias
n 340, group 64 vila Mathias
Santos, Sao Paulo, Brazil
other alternative is to suppose that something has been losta and this shock would have been mortal if Captain Nemo had compartment of Napoleons tent where he
It contains some bug fixes and updated servers data.
--
ciao, |
Marco | [7659 digUdU5J6f6tI]
Hello,
As discussed with Steve on irc, it would be great to have NEW processing of
the 2.6.8 related kernel .uded. Currently at least the powerpc and ia64
packages are already in NEW (not sure about ia64 though), and the packages
name are :
linux-kernel-di-powerpc-2.6
linux-kernel-di-ia64-2.
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:12:59 +0200, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
> > we did some investigations on that bug at the BSP weekend in
> > Darmstadt. what i found in my buildlog, is that it is using pwlib
> > 1.6.6 but expecting 1.6.5
> >
> > | checking for PWLib version... 1.6.6
> > | Sorry but the
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 05:35:16PM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> Based on discussions on the debian-kernel list[1], I'd like to propose
> that we use 2.4.27 as the 2.4 kernel for all architectures with 2.4 kernels
> in sarge. The strongest arguments for 2.4.27, as opposed to 2.4.26 were noted
> b
23 matches
Mail list logo
