Re: gnome-screensaver testing status.

2006-07-03 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 11:43:15AM -0300, Gustavo Franco wrote: > I think gnome-screensaver[0] (28 days old, no RC bugs), is a valid > candidate to enter testing but isn't building on arm yet (unmet deps). > Is it just a matter of reschedule the build on arm or we've a gnome > lib broken there (i

LSB 3.1 status for etch?

2006-07-03 Thread Martin Zobel-Helas
Hi guys, as LSB 3.1 compatibility is one of the pet release goals for etch, it would be nice to have some overview of what still needs to be fixed in etch for LSB 3.1 compatibility. Could you please rerun the test-suite on current etch or give me a hint how to do it on my own? Greetings Martin

Re: r-base, rpy hint needed

2006-07-03 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
On 3 July 2006 at 21:20, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > Both r-base and r-py are ready for testing, but happen to block each other. | > Could a hint be added to allow/force them into testing? | | rpy needed to be rescheduled for a build on [!s3

Re: r-base, rpy hint needed

2006-07-03 Thread Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt
Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Both r-base and r-py are ready for testing, but happen to block each other. > Could a hint be added to allow/force them into testing? rpy needed to be rescheduled for a build on [!s390 !amd64], which has happened now. The first try failed when inst

r-base, rpy hint needed

2006-07-03 Thread Dirk Eddelbuettel
Hi, Both r-base and r-py are ready for testing, but happen to block each other. Could a hint be added to allow/force them into testing? Also, is it possibly to make such a hint 'permanent' as I seem to recall that I needed one at the last r-base release ? Thanks, Dirk -- Hell, there are no

Re: timezone variable not set correctly, bug blocking LSB Conformance

2006-07-03 Thread Martin Zobel-Helas
Hi Aurelien, On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 06:44:16AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi SRM team! > > Would such a fix to the glibc be accepted for a stable release? i would be first interested, which LSB versions are effected by this. I don't see any need for fixing newer LSB is

Re: AW: Re: Bug#376387: loopback interface not loaded

2006-07-03 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Jul 03, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > reopen 376387 > retitle 376387 netbase is essential > severity serious > thanks - (hopefully you agree with that) No, I still think you stupidly broke your system, but I am waiting for a comment from the release manager about this bug. (