Hi,
On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
>
> Unless an argument can be made for a package particularly needing
> hardening support adding (e.g. it's on the security team's list) then
> such changes are generally too invasive to be made at this stage via
> unstable. The fact th
Original messages
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:25:07 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:32:04PM +0100, Xavier Guimard wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've prepared the attached-patch for the #696329 security bug. It is
> > ready to be stored in lemonldap-ng
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 09:37:11PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 22:25 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34:13AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +, Adam Barratt wrote:
> > > >partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfi
package: release.debian.org
severity: normal
Please consider tagging #599523 wheezy-ignore. Update-manager has
been unmaintained for a long time now, and the way to fix that is to
remove it in favor of something like packagekit, which looks like the
preferred future plan, but that won't happen ti
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 696116 unblock: systemd/44-7
Bug #696116 [release.debian.org] unblock: systemd/44-6
Changed Bug title to 'unblock: systemd/44-7' from 'unblock: systemd/44-6'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
retitle 696116 unblock: systemd/44-7
thanks
On 16.12.2012 23:13, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Please unblock package systemd
>
> systemd (44-6) unstable; urgency=low
There was another important regression fix which was uploaded in the mean time.
Full changelog:
systemd (44-7) unstable; urgency=low
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 18:13 +0100, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Am 20.12.2012 16:49, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 16:17:06 +0100, Christoph Martin wrote:
> >
> >> I removed the NEWS.Debian change and built a new package. The new
> >> debdiff is attached.
> >>
> >> What do you t
Hi,
Would it be okay to also unblock grub-installer for this? (I hope the
attached debdiff is self-explanatory).
Thanks,
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
diff -Nru --exclude '*.po' grub-installer-1.83/debian/changelog
grub-installer-1.84/debian/changelog
--- grub-installer-1.8
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package vite
unblock vite/1.2+svn1347-3
This is a non-intrusive port of an upstream fix for the paje trace
format (one of the three formats supported by vite).
The Paje too
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package espeakup
unblock espeakup/1:0.71-12
This is a mere translation addition for d-i.
diff -u espeakup-0.71/debian/changelog espeakup-0.71/debian/changelog
--- espeakup-
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package brltty
unblock brltty/4.4-7
There are four changes here:
- The first is for d-i, it fixes the activation of the screen reader in
the installed system. You can see i
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:46:51 +
with message-id <1356040011.24016.5.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#696102: unblock: postgresql-9.1/9.1.7-1
postgresql-8.4/8.4.15-1, 8.4.15 for squeeze-updates
has caused the Debian Bug report #696102,
regarding unbl
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package policykit-1
It contains two, targetted important bug fixes:
1/ Fixes wrong permissions for /etc/polkit-1/localauthority
2/ Fixes starting of graphical applications v
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 22:25 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34:13AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +, Adam Barratt wrote:
> > >partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb
> > >partman-nbd/s390x unsatisfiable De
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:34:13AM +, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +, Adam Barratt wrote:
> >britney says
> >
> >partman-nbd/armhf unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb
> >partman-nbd/s390x unsatisfiable Depends: nbd-client-udeb
> >
> >but I guess that
Hi Laurent,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 08:19:21PM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> > I prepared an NMU that should fix both issues. The debdiff against
> > wheezy and the debdiff -w against sid are attached. I will try to get
> > this NMU uploaded soon.
>
> Looks good but (there is always a but :)
Le Thu, 20 Dec 2012 19:57:19 +0100,
Ivo De Decker a écrit :
> Hi Laurent and Julien,
Hello
>
> I prepared an NMU that should fix both issues. The debdiff against
> wheezy and the debdiff -w against sid are attached. I will try to get
> this NMU uploaded soon.
Looks good but (there is always a
Hi Laurent and Julien,
If I read the bug history correctly, there are only 2 remaining issues for the
unblock (the rest has been dealt with).
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 03:43:22PM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 19:43:44 +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> > > > > +#
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:20:03 +
with message-id <100a34e33c7c56bd24ea96924aae3...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#696405: unblock: whohas/0.29-0.3
has caused the Debian Bug report #696405,
regarding unblock: whohas/0.29-0.3
to be marked as done.
This means t
Am 20.12.2012 16:49, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 16:17:06 +0100, Christoph Martin wrote:
>
>> I removed the NEWS.Debian change and built a new package. The new
>> debdiff is attached.
>>
>> What do you think? Is this ok now?
>>
> Yes, thanks.
Ok. Should I upload the packag
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:56:26 +0100
with message-id <20121220155626.gf5...@radis.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#693970: tpu: libitext-java/2.1.7-3+deb7u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #693970,
regarding tpu: libitext-java/2.1.7-3+deb7u1
to be marked as done.
This means tha
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:49:14 +0100
with message-id <50d3337a.4030...@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#695265: RM: fs2ram/3.0.10 testing
has caused the Debian Bug report #695265,
regarding RM: fs2ram/3.0.10 testing
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 16:17:06 +0100, Christoph Martin wrote:
> I removed the NEWS.Debian change and built a new package. The new
> debdiff is attached.
>
> What do you think? Is this ok now?
>
Yes, thanks.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:16:48 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please approve the following changes for package
> nvidia-graphics-drivers:
>
> As discussed in #688861 (freeze
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Hi,
I am considering to upload a new version of icedtea-web to unstable to
fix #693623. Currently, icedtea-web with Java7 does not work (at
least not with various national internet banking
Local DNS issues. Resending ...
On 12/20/2012 08:29 AM, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On 12/19/2012 03:38 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Apologies for letting this slip; what's the current status?
>
> To avoid rework, we need to settle on some final changes that themselves
> will cause even more jitter.
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 16:24:21 +0100
with message-id <20121220152421.gc5...@radis.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#686369: unblock: grub/0.97-66.1 (pre-approval)
has caused the Debian Bug report #686369,
regarding unblock: grub/0.97-66.1
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Hi Julien,
Am 19.12.2012 19:52, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 15:43:15 +0100, Christoph Martin wrote:
>
>> Attached is a debdiff for a 2.71-3 version which includes the fix for
>> 688196, a debconf translation a lintian cleanup like in 2.73-2.
>>
>> Please let me know, if I ca
Le 20/12/2012 15:27, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
Hi,
over the last few months, release managers (d-i + “regular” release
team) have been quite open to various improvements in d-i components,
but it looks like we really should concentrate on finalizing things
for wheezy.
Things like improved consi
I replied on IRC before I saw this, I suppose I should reply here too
for the record.
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 15:23 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Adam D. Barratt (20/12/2012):
> > Is there any merit to checking the result there (i.e. actually
> > looking at err)?
> >
> > In any case, it looks lik
Le Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:33:09 +0100,
Julien Cristau a écrit :
> Control: tags -1 moreinfo
>
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 19:43:44 +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > > > +# make sure that conffiles are secured and have the correct
> > > > ownerships
> > > > +if [ -d /etc/nut/ ]
Hi,
over the last few months, release managers (d-i + “regular” release
team) have been quite open to various improvements in d-i components,
but it looks like we really should concentrate on finalizing things
for wheezy.
Things like improved consistency, or buildflags-related changes are
example
Adam D. Barratt (20/12/2012):
> Is there any merit to checking the result there (i.e. actually
> looking at err)?
>
> In any case, it looks like that's the style already used for the
> other options. Please go ahead; thanks. Adding the obligatory CC for
> a d-i ack.
Looking at it briefly, two po
Control: tags -1 + confirmed d-i
On 24.11.2012 21:37, Ian Campbell wrote:
+qcontrol (0.4.2-7+wheezy1) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low
+
+ * Disable firmware watchdog on TS-219p II. (Closes: #693263)
[...]
+@@ -348,6 +363,11 @@
+ "Control the automatic power
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + confirmed d-i
Bug #694267 [release.debian.org] unblock: tpu:
(pre-approval)qcontrol/0.4.2-7+wheezy1
Added tag(s) d-i and confirmed.
--
694267: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694267
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.or
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package whohas
Per Adam's suggestions (see #692135) wording in the patch description was
adjusted. See debdiff below
unblock whohas/0.29-0.3
Jonathan, I have pushed all my
On 19.12.2012 20:38, Toni Mueller wrote:
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 08:21:41PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Do we have similar software for other jurisdictions in the archive?
taxbird's the only one I've heard of needing updates, but that might
just be an issue of timing. ("apt-cache search tax" m
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >if above change is ok with you (if not -- feel free to elaborate
> >or provide
> >your wording) -- I could upload adjusted -0.3 to sid
> That looks fine; thanks. (Well, s/version/&s/ to be picky.)
& -- I learned something new, thanks ;)
I will uplo
On 19.12.2012 20:43, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
--- whohas-0.29/debian/patches/10-debian-versions 2012-01-15
18:21:29.0 +
+++ whohas-0.29/debian/patches/10-debian-versions 2012-09-27
14:12:02.0 +
@@ -1,16 +1,26 @@
+
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:38:43 +
with message-id <6b18094b85c7cb27a7b6f0a843cc6...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#696346: unblock: kdeadmin/4:4.8.4-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #696346,
regarding unblock: kdeadmin/4:4.8.4-3
to be marked as done.
This m
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:37:05 +
with message-id <3e4e6c693d3f564911943a995b8ee...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#696357: unblock: metacity/1:2.34.3-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #696357,
regarding unblock: metacity/1:2.34.3-4
to be marked as done.
This
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:33:31 +
with message-id <0ca0ff40e9969a55a11372f3ac344...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#692495: unblock: sysprof/1.1.8-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #692495,
regarding unblock: sysprof/1.1.8-1
to be marked as done.
This means t
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 19:43:44 +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> [...]
> > > +# make sure that conffiles are secured and have the correct
> > > ownerships
> > > +if [ -d /etc/nut/ ] ; then
> > > + chown root:nut /etc/nut/
> > > +fi
> > > +for file
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #684732 [release.debian.org] unblock: nut/2.6.4-2.1
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #684732 to the same tags previously set
--
684732: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=684732
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.d
Your message dated Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:12:12 +0100
with message-id <20121220131212.gz5...@radis.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#662513: RM: emboss/6.3.1-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #662513,
regarding RM: emboss/6.3.1-6
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem h
On 2012-12-19 19:10, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 13:45:57 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, it turns out that libitext-java declares no
>> dependnecies relations (except libitext-java-gcj) in testing at all,
>> which is obvously wrong.
>> In sid, I have taken th
On 20.12.2012 11:36, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Prathibha B (13/12/2012):
Package: choose-mirror
Version: 2.37
When compiling the package, it throws the following error:
Modification of non-creatable array value attempted, subscript -1 at
./mirrorlist line 52, line 8.
[...]
SRM, ACK on princip
Hi,
Prathibha B (13/12/2012):
> Package: choose-mirror
> Version: 2.37
>
> When compiling the package, it throws the following error:
>
> Modification of non-creatable array value attempted, subscript -1 at
> ./mirrorlist line 52, line 8.
>
> How to resolve this?
thanks for your report.
cho
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 06:26:06AM +, Adam Barratt wrote:
>On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 05:00 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> time for another round of unblocks/unblock-udebs! Here's a first list,
>> basically things I thought I could review way past bedtime. Some more
>> packages need review, at lea
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Adam D. Barratt
wrote:
> I'm not sure why that was necessary for such a small diff for a bug that
> met (and still meets) the freeze criteria. In any case, please go ahead;
> apologies for the delay.
>
Package uploaded. Thank you for the follow-up.
--
Ritesh R
On Sat, 2012-11-24 at 21:37 +, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> Please unblock package qcontrol
I'm not sure what the procedure here is, is there something else I'm
supposed to have done
51 matches
Mail list logo
