Title: AEC Cafe News - September 11, 2007
Tuesday
September 11, 2007
From: AECCafe
AECCafe
Featured Ad
AEC in the News
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 05:19:57PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> (Summary for -release)
>
> A recent security build for Vim in oldstable has broken packages on 3
> archs (alpha, mips, and mipsel) since the Vim packages were still using
> $(PWD) instead of $(CURDIR) in their debian/rules file when Sar
(Summary for -release)
A recent security build for Vim in oldstable has broken packages on 3
archs (alpha, mips, and mipsel) since the Vim packages were still using
$(PWD) instead of $(CURDIR) in their debian/rules file when Sarge was
released.
On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 06:15:20PM +0200, Moritz Mue
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 01:29:48PM +, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On jeu, aoû 30, 2007 at 11:51:36 +, Luk Claes wrote:
> > Pierre Habouzit
> > 393403 Source package contains non-free IETF RFC/I-D's
>
> NMUed.
> > 294520 qtparted: Incorrect handling of extended partitions
The patch is co
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:50:42PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> >> Taking a look at the list, i think that some binNMU are not needed (ulex,
> >> pcre-ocaml, mtasc, extlib...) and some will certainly fails if not
> >> taking care of dependency (e.g. ocamldap which need to be built before
> >> oc
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:45:13AM +, Robert Edmonds wrote:
>
> > > 368226 Quagga does intentionally not upgrade automatically
>
> > Maintainer forgot to close the bug.
>
> Perhaps you should use a versioned close on this bug, so that the status of
> the fix can be tr
Hi,
youtube-dl is completely broken in etch (#439363). The version in
testing/unstable is fixed, and has no issues running on etch. Could
youtuble-dl be considered for a stable point release?
Here's a diff between the youtube-dl version in etch and the one in
testing/unstable:
http://people.de
On 11-09-2007, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
>> On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>
>> >> You mean, I guess, that all that oth
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:09:09PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> >
> >>>I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as
> >>>well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstr
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:24:48AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> I think 1.1.dfsg-3.1 in unstable would have been better; that would allow
> use of 1.1-3+etch1 in stable.
We can still do that.
--
Robert Millan
I know my rights; I want my phone call!
What use is a phone call, if you are un
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as
well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream
version, so how do we avoid collisions?
Maybe I'm missing something
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as
> > well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream
> > version, so how do we avoid collisions?
> Maybe I'm missing something here, but wh
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Tue, September 11, 2007 10:29, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
>
> > I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as
> > well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream
> > version, so how do w
On Tue, September 11, 2007 10:29, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as
> well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream
> version, so how do we avoid collisions?
Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's wrong with
Bastian Blank wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID
mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and megaraid_mbox
drivers. At one point this bug got fixed, but it was reverted later on,
no
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >> You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages are ocaml-related and
> >> can't be installed fo
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID
> mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and megaraid_mbox
> drivers. At one point this bug got fixed, but it was reverted later on,
> no idea why?
No p
dann frazier wrote:
hey,
I think we're nearly ready for a kernel upload to proposed-updates.
Here's the current list of changes queued for a stable upload.
Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID
mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and megaraid_mbo
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:53:18PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 06.09.2007, 09:52 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
> > Please note that there are a couple of important things that should be
> > taken into consideration when backporting GPLv3 packages. Because
> > GPLv3 was onl
I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well,
but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so
how do we avoid collisions?
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 05:39:04PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regardi
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:45:13AM +, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> > 368226 Quagga does intentionally not upgrade automatically
> Maintainer forgot to close the bug.
Perhaps you should use a versioned close on this bug, so that the status of
the fix can be tracked in etch and lenny?
Cheers,
--
21 matches
Mail list logo
