On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 22:56:15 -0430
Muammar El Khatib wrote:
> Dear Release team,
>
> I'd like to know if you could unlock makehuman. The last changes introduced
> in revisions -4, and -5 where minimal. You can take a look at them at:
>
That won't work. Please read the freeze policy, especially
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package aptitude
Includes non-intrusive changes for multi-arch support. Without the
first of these aptitude is effectively broken on multi-arch systems
due to #672340. Chan
Dear Release team,
I'd like to know if you could unlock makehuman. The last changes introduced
in revisions -4, and -5 where minimal. You can take a look at them at:
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/m/makehuman/current/changelog
Regards,
--
Muammar El Khatib.
Linux user: 403107
(please direct replies to debian-devel only)
Ever since dpkg started using liblzma directly (dpkg 1.16.4), the xz
command is no longer needed in a minimal Debian system. Based on its
list of reverse-dependencies, it would presumably even be safe to
lower its priority to optional.
I think "standa
Package: apt
Version: 0.9.4
Severity: grave
Control: affects -1 aptitude
X-Debbugs-CC: m...@debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org
Hi,
Michael Prokop noticed that in some cases an aptitude update would fail with
a "E: Method gave invalid 200 URI Start message" when using http.debian.net.
A
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 09:49:07AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please unblock package iceape, as per
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/07/msg01652.html
> and https://
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 09:49:41AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please unblock package iceweasel as per
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2012/07/msg01620.html
>
> unblock
Processing changes file: rssh_2.3.2-13squeeze1_i386.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: rssh_2.3.2-13squeeze1_armel.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: rssh_2.3.2-13squeeze1_ia64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: rssh_2.3.2-13squeeze1_kfreebsd-amd64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing c
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #683292 [release.debian.org] unblock: nipy/0.2.0-1
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
683292: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683292
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Mon, 2012-07-30 at 11:22 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> Please unblock package nipy
[...]
> Before the freeze point, 0.2.0~rc2+git27-g7b9b5a5-1 was uploaded in June
> targetting wheezy, but it has not propagated to wheezy due to FTBFS on mips
> [1]. By the time
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #683714 [release.debian.org] Unblock: svn-workbench/1.6.6-2
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
683714: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683714
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 15:36 +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Please unblock svn-workbench package.
> As I already said(*), it is needed to introduce subversion1.7 to Wheezy.
Some of it is needed, sure. There's an annoying amount of noise from
unrelated changes of this
On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 13:02 +0200, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:45:14PM +, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> > If you think your package should be targeted Wheezy, please let Release Team
> > know and discuss with them about the best way to handle the transition. If
> > that
> > is
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 21:01:40 +0100
with message-id <1345233700.31960.22.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683591: unblock: winetricks/0.0+20120606+svn831-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #683591,
regarding unblock: winetricks/0.0+20120606+svn831-3
to b
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 684047 with 684044
Bug #684047 [release.debian.org] unblock: less.js/1.3.0~20120310-3
684047 was not blocked by any bugs.
684047 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 684047: 684044
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please co
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 22:52 +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> Please unblock ns3 as it was uploaded before freeze but blocked by an
> already-fixed RC bug. Out-dated binaries were removed by ftp team, and
> the false RC-bug has been marked as fixed manually and I think it is a
> good candidate to be included
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #684768 [release.debian.org] unblock: pegasus-wms/4.0.1+dfsg-7
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
684768: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=684768
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #683720 [release.debian.org] unblock: rrdtool/1.4.7-2
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
683720: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683720
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Sat, 2012-08-04 at 16:48 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> This change appears not to be documented in the changelog:
>
> --- rrdtool-1.4.7/debian/control
> +++ rrdtool-1.4.7/debian/control
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> [...]
> - tcl-dev (>= 8.5), tcl (>= 8.5),
> + tcl-dev (>=
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Mon, 2012-08-13 at 09:24 -0700, Mats Rynge wrote:
> Please unblock package pegasus-wms
>
> This version contains two fixes, one for a FTBFS problem with the newer
> versions of Subversion (discussed on release-team mailing list) and an
> important bug for some of th
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:46:37 +0100
with message-id <1345232797.31960.15.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#684975: unblock: dokuwiki/dokuwiki_0.0.20120125b-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #684975,
regarding unblock: dokuwiki/dokuwiki_0.0.20120125b-1
to
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:43:08 +0100
with message-id <1345232588.31960.13.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683738: unblock: joblib/0.6.4-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #683738,
regarding unblock: joblib/0.6.4-3
to be marked as done.
This means that y
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:38:42 +0100
with message-id <1345232322.31960.12.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683869: unblock: telepathy-glib/0.18.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #683869,
regarding unblock: telepathy-glib/0.18.2-1
to be marked as done.
17 серпня 2012 о 20:02 +0100 Adam D. Barratt написав(-ла):
>
> There's also the changes from -4 which hadn't migrated.
Well, they did not migrade, because I forgot to upload them...
>
> -clean binary binary-arch binary-indep:
> +clean binary binary-arch binary-indep build install:
>
> Is there
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:13:07 +0100
with message-id <1345230787.31960.9.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#684319: unblock: jmock2/2.5.1+dfsg-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #684319,
regarding unblock: jmock2/2.5.1+dfsg-2
to be marked as done.
This mea
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:08:20 +0100
with message-id <1345230500.31960.8.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#682192: unblock: php5/5.4.4-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #682192,
regarding unblock: php5/5.4.4-4
to be marked as done.
This means that you cl
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:02:19 +0100
with message-id <1345230139.31960.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683699: unblock: xfoil/6.97.dfsg-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #683699,
regarding unblock: xfoil/6.97.dfsg-5
to be marked as done.
This means t
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 19:50:50 +0100
with message-id <1345229450.31960.1.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#682506: unblock: linux/3.2.23-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #682506,
regarding unblock: linux/3.2.23-1
to be marked as done.
This means that yo
Hi,
Please unblock abe 1.1+dfsg-1. The changes :
| abe (1.1+dfsg-1) unstable; urgency=low
|
|* Repackaged upstream tarball to remove libraries for Win32 in binary
form
| without source code. Closes: #685150.
|
| -- Bart Martens Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:28:04 +
Deb
This is a resend of an earlier message that really didn't want to make
it through to the Debian servers. I've uploaded the debdiffs and
changelog here instead of attaching them:
http://www.stdout.nl/static/tmp/openttd-debdiffs/
Original message follows
---
Hi folks,
I've attached debdiffs for bo
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package 'mc'
mc/3:4.8.3-5 fixes two regressions from previous versions as per quote from
Changelog:
* new backported patches:
+ to fix "Garbage directory listing in f
Hi,
> Weird. It's really in my sent box, but it never ended up at bugs.d.o
> apparently. I'll resend the mail in a minute.
Apparently that didn't work either. My STMP logs show that bugs-master
accepted the resent message this morning, but then it got lost. I'll
contact the postmaster about that.
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
A new version of netdisco-mibs-installer was uploaded to fix bug
#684006. The old version tries to download from a non existent URL. The
only fix to the package is the change of the URL.
Please make a freeze exception to get the package into the upcomi
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
X-Debbugs-Cc: de...@lists.debian.org
Please unblock package apt
The diff between 0.9.7.2 and 0.9.7.4 is
(minus translation updates and manually-run testcases):
apt-pkg/cacheset.cc
Hi Ansgar,
thanks for checking. When looking into the packaging I noticed that
this package can easily be moved from contrib to main because the only
dependency (Recommends: clustalw) now can be fullfilled in main Debian.
I would just set
Recommends: clustalw (>= 2.1+lgpl)
Would you (with yo
[Cc:ing to the DOG mailing list.]
* Adam D. Barratt [2012-08-16 22:13]:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> [snip]
>
> +--- a/src/mkoctfile.in
> b/src/mkoctfile.in
> +@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
> [...]
> +-: ${XTRA_CXXFLAGS=%OCTAVE_CONF_XTRA_CXXFLAGS%}
> ++: ${XTRA_CXXFLAGS=-I/usr/include/mpi %OCTAVE
Your message dated Fri, 17 Aug 2012 12:39:05 +0100
with message-id <514d05d1df9a7f22a819976131e98...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#681563: unblock: eglibc/2.13-34
has caused the Debian Bug report #681563,
regarding unblock: eglibc/2.13-35
to be marked as done.
This means tha
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:29:21PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 23:02 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Aurelien Jarno (23/07/2012):
> > > Once d-i beta1 is released, would it be possible to unblock it? Thanks
> > > in advance.
> >
> > No objection from the d-i side: we'r
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 09:45:14PM +, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> If you think your package should be targeted Wheezy, please let Release Team
> know and discuss with them about the best way to handle the transition. If
> that
> is not the case, your package will be processed after Wheezy release.
Hi Raphael,
> FWIW, I saw no debdiff on the list and there's no debdiff in
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683376 either.
>
> Are you sure you sent it to 683...@bugs.debian.org ?
Weird. It's really in my sent box, but it never ended up at bugs.d.o
apparently. I'll resend the ma
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 08:44:28AM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > Otherwise, looks good to me, please go ahead and tell us once it's
> > uploaded.
>
> I will fix the Debian changelog, upload the package and let you know
> once it's uploaded. I'm currently abroad until this evenin
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> > I've attached debdiffs for both of the proposed options for review.
> I hate to nag, but upstream has released version 1.2.2 yesterday and I'd
> like to start packaging either option.
>
> Could someone have another look at this?
Hi folks,
> I've attached debdiffs for both of the proposed options for review.
I hate to nag, but upstream has released version 1.2.2 yesterday and I'd
like to start packaging either option.
Could someone have another look at this? Upstream has made no further
changes to 1.2.2 relative to 1.2.2-
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Gergely Nagy (17/07/2012):
>> (The debdiff also has a bit of noise, as 0.30-1 had two patches
>> cherry-picked from upstream, which have been integrated in the new
>> version.)
>
> That's fairly annoying, especially since there's no mention of it in the
> changelog…
So
44 matches
Mail list logo
