Paul Wise writes:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> That makes me kind of nervous. Which packages are those?
> Potential packages from the security team's embedded-code-copies file:
> tiff
> - wxwindows2.4 2.2.1 (embed)
> - gamera 3.2.3-1 (embed)
>
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu cgal_3.9-1 . ALL . -m "rebuild against new libipe7.1.1"
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Archite
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> That makes me kind of nervous. Which packages are those?
Potential packages from the security team's embedded-code-copies file:
tiff
- wxwindows2.4 2.2.1 (embed)
- gamera 3.2.3-1 (embed)
- freeimage (embed)
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 14:34:21 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 07:46:24PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> > Which means
> > libcgal-ipelets needs to be built against the new version.
>
> The libcgal-ipelets package is non-free. I would not have expected
> non-free to
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 07:33:14PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Steve M. Robbins (29/12/2011):
> > Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made
> > it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual
> > intervention from the release team?
> >
>
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 07:46:24PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:21:04 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made
> > it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual
> > inte
* Jay Berkenbilt [111229 17:26]:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
> > FWIW, I think it should be required for such a library to use versioned
> > symbols if it doesn't care to keep its ABI stable.
>
> While I agree in principle, this is the first ABI change in the over 10
> years since I've been using the
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:02:17 -0500, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> I'm planning on uploading the new version to unstable but not having it
> provide libtiff-dev until I hear from the release time how the
> transition should be handled. That way at least those packages that are
> already including th
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:21:04 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made
> it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual
> intervention from the release team?
>
No, libipe7.1.0 needs to stop having revers
Hi,
Steve M. Robbins (29/12/2011):
> Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made
> it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual
> intervention from the release team?
>
>
> Excuse for ipe
>
> 17 days old (needed 10 days)
> out of date on i
Hi,
Ipe 7.1.1-1 was uploaded 17 days ago with no RC bugs but has not made
it into testing. The excuse is below. Does this need some manual
intervention from the release team?
Excuse for ipe
17 days old (needed 10 days)
out of date on i386: libipe7.1.0 (from 7.1.0-1)
out of date on
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:02:50 -0500, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>
>> So, what is the recommendation of the release team? If you agree that
>> we should do a transition as soon as possible after the final 4.0.0 is
>> released (so that wheezy can have 4.x), do you have any gu
On Thu, December 29, 2011 13:18, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:51:23PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> > Given that this will be the final point release for lenny, might it be
>> > worth making an exception this time and also including packages from
>> > o-p-u?
>> We could also
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:51:23PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> > Given that this will be the final point release for lenny, might it be
> > worth making an exception this time and also including packages from
> > o-p-u?
> We could also consider to make it not the exception but the rule. The
> p
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:50:00PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> This problem seems to occur with regular intervals. Wouldn't it be
> possible to change dak so that uploads are queued in a way that makes it
> less of a problem should they not be accepted lateron? Also makes it
> easier for the up
Thijs Kinkhorst schrieb:
> On Thu, December 29, 2011 09:10, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> On 28.12.2011 23:45, John Wright wrote:
>>> Attached is a patch to the python-debian package which I intend to
>>> upload to stable.
>>
>> Apparently you already _have_ uploaded it.
>>
>> Eight hours is really no
On Wed, December 28, 2011 21:04, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 18:04 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> As for lenny, only an update to ia32-libs is needed:
>>
>> ia32-libs (2.7+lenny3) oldstable; urgency=low
>>
>> * Update packages to their current versions in oldstable:
>> -
On Thu, December 29, 2011 09:10, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 28.12.2011 23:45, John Wright wrote:
>> Attached is a patch to the python-debian package which I intend to
>> upload to stable.
>
> Apparently you already _have_ uploaded it.
>
> Eight hours is really not a long enough time to have waited
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:02:50 -0500, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
> So, what is the recommendation of the release team? If you agree that
> we should do a transition as soon as possible after the final 4.0.0 is
> released (so that wheezy can have 4.x), do you have any guesses as to
> when you would b
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 01:04:48AM -0800, John Wright wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 08:10:11AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On 28.12.2011 23:45, John Wright wrote:
> > >Attached is a patch to the python-debian package which I intend to
> > >upload to stable.
> >
> > Apparently you already
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 08:10:11AM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 28.12.2011 23:45, John Wright wrote:
> >Attached is a patch to the python-debian package which I intend to
> >upload to stable.
>
> Apparently you already _have_ uploaded it.
>
> Eight hours is really not a long enough time to
On 28.12.2011 23:45, John Wright wrote:
Attached is a patch to the python-debian package which I intend to
upload to stable.
Apparently you already _have_ uploaded it.
Eight hours is really not a long enough time to have waited for a
response, particularly when practically all of the release
22 matches
Mail list logo
