Your message dated Thu, 07 Feb 2013 06:12:59 +
with message-id <1360217579.4494.24.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#699944: RM: slapos.core/0.25-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #699944,
regarding RM: slapos.core/0.25-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Severity: normal
Hello,
slapos.core currently available in testing is too outdated and the
changes introduced in later releases are too significant, thus upstream
would prefer not having the package relea
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:51:21PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 01:17:44PM +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > (Using the new bug number)
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:14:59PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > > Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 15
Cyril Brulebois writes:
> Bdale Garbee (06/02/2013):
>> I personally consider this a regrettable situation, and hope that for
>> jessie and beyond we can work out how to do this better. It is
>> unacceptable to me to "freeze" anything in sid for more than a week or
>> two at a time. Holding d-
Bdale Garbee (06/02/2013):
> I personally consider this a regrettable situation, and hope that for
> jessie and beyond we can work out how to do this better. It is
> unacceptable to me to "freeze" anything in sid for more than a week or
> two at a time. Holding d-i's build dependencies static in
On 06.02.2013 23:22, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Don Armstrong writes:
>>
>>> Assuming that the patch for #699742[0] fixes this issue with DI RC
>>> releases being installed, is there still an outstanding issue for the
>>> CTTE?
>>
>> Earlier in this thread,
On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 22:28 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> "Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> > What's the status of getting this fixed in unstable, as already
> > requested by Julien in #693208?
> Why is it necessary to fix this in unstable? This’d require introducing
> an epoch. Let me know if you
Bdale Garbee writes:
> I personally consider this a regrettable situation, and hope that for
> jessie and beyond we can work out how to do this better. It is
> unacceptable to me to "freeze" anything in sid for more than a week or
> two at a time. Holding d-i's build dependencies static in unst
On 02/06/2013 04:48 PM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> "Adam D. Barratt" writes:
>> Ideas welcome...
> At this point I’d vote to disable the testsuite entirely for getting
> this into wheezy.
>
> Daniel, what do you say?
I recently learned from upstream that some of these tests (in pa
Russ Allbery writes:
> In practice, at least for the last couple of release cycles, we freeze
> unstable for non-leaf packages during the release freeze because otherwise
> it's too difficult with our current infrastructure to finish the
> release.
I personally consider this a regrettable situat
On Wed, 06 Feb 2013, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes:
>
> > Assuming that the patch for #699742[0] fixes this issue with DI RC
> > releases being installed, is there still an outstanding issue for the
> > CTTE?
>
> Earlier in this thread, there had been a couple of reports that fix di
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 22:09 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[-7 mono upload dropping armhf]
> Thanks; I've unblocked that as an aid to showing us what's still broken.
>
> virtuoso-opensource has been uploaded and unblocked and #699542 filed
> for the tidy-up. I've just filed #699568-72 for the binar
Hi Adam,
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> Ideas welcome...
At this point I’d vote to disable the testsuite entirely for getting
this into wheezy.
Daniel, what do you say?
--
Best regards,
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
Hi Adam,
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> What's the status of getting this fixed in unstable, as already
> requested by Julien in #693208?
Why is it necessary to fix this in unstable? This’d require introducing
an epoch. Let me know if you insist on it, but I don’t understand why
this is important.
Don Armstrong writes:
> Assuming that the patch for #699742[0] fixes this issue with DI RC
> releases being installed, is there still an outstanding issue for the
> CTTE?
Earlier in this thread, there had been a couple of reports that fix didn't
work. I haven't looked further, though.
> [I can
On Fri, 2013-01-18 at 22:32 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-02 at 22:31 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Unfortunately, it fails everywhere anyway. :-( There are several
> > failures of the form
[...]
> Ping?
Ideas welcome...
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-r
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + moreinfo
Bug #699899 [release.debian.org] tpu: clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
699899: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699899
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 14:27 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> I would like to upload clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0 to testing-proposed-updates
> to fix #693208 in wheezy. At the moment, 3.0-6 is in testing, 3.1-8 is
> in unstable.
What's the status of getting this fixed in uns
On Tue, 05 Feb 2013, Julien Cristau wrote:
> - the latest of these uploads breaks the installer, making it
> impossible to build and upload the planned wheezy release
> candidate, since build-dependencies are fetched from unstable
> - when asked to revert this change, the syslinux maintainer r
Your message dated Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:17:38 +0100
with message-id <51129032.1040...@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#699857: unblock: dynalogin - fixes RC issue with
oath_callback / strcmp semantics
has caused the Debian Bug report #699857,
regarding unblock: dynalogin - fixes RC issue with
Your message dated Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:43:19 +0100
with message-id <20130206164319.ga15...@inutil.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#690075: unblock: dnsmasq/2.63-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #690075,
regarding unblock: dnsmasq/2.63-4
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
Ansgar,
am Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 05:34:48PM +0100 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> The lost binary-only uploads are
>
> * pygtk_2.24.0-3+b1_i386.changes
> * bitcoin_0.7.2-2_kfreebsd-amd64.changes
> * partman-efi_34_i386.changes
> * iceape_2.7.12-1_s390.changes
> * iceape_2.7.12-1_powerpc.chan
retitle 698976 unblock: libssh/0.5.4-1
thanks
Hello,
I've uploaded the package into unstable.
Cheers
Laurent Bigonville
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 698976 unblock: libssh/0.5.4-1
Bug #698976 [release.debian.org] unblock: libssh/0.5.4-1 (Fix CVE, not uploaded
yet)
Changed Bug title to 'unblock: libssh/0.5.4-1' from 'unblock: libssh/0.5.4-1
(Fix CVE, not uploaded yet)'
> thanks
Stoppi
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: tpu
Hello,
I would like to upload clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0 to testing-proposed-updates
to fix #693208 in wheezy. At the moment, 3.0-6 is in testing, 3.1-8 is
in unstable.
#693208 is about clang failin
Your message dated Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:10:03 +
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#699465: t-p-u: gdcm 2.2.0-14
has caused the Debian Bug report #699465,
regarding t-p-u: gdcm 2.2.0-14
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not th
Your message dated Wed, 06 Feb 2013 12:59:22 +
with message-id <627509345c68543383fc9fddda46e...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#699891: unblock: gnutls26/2.12.20-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #699891,
regarding unblock: gnutls26/2.12.20-4
to be marked as done.
This m
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package gnutls26. It contains a bunch of fixes from
upstream's 2.12.22 and 2.12.23 bugfix releases.
+35_TLS-CBC_timing-attack.diff (GNUTLS-SA-2013-1) TLS CBC padding timing
Your message dated Wed, 6 Feb 2013 11:13:43 +
with message-id <20130206111343.ga19...@lupin.home.powdarrmonkey.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#692506: unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but please
see inside!)
has caused the Debian Bug report #692506,
regarding unblock: chocolate-doom/1.7.0-2 (but
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 10:24:03PM +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Yes, I'll take those too.
Thanks Jonathan, upload made.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.d
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 699235 RM: elmerfem/stable -- ROM; license problems
Bug #699235 [release.debian.org] RM: elmerfem/stable -- RoQA; license problems
Changed Bug title to 'RM: elmerfem/stable -- ROM; license problems' from 'RM:
elmerfem/stable -- RoQA; lice
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Dear release team,
I request permission to upload elmerfem 6.1.0.svn.5396.dfsg2-2 into unstable,
targeted at wheezy. Diff is quite big (see attachment), but there is only one
way to fix RC
On 05.02.2013 23:55, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 06 Feb 2013, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Daniel Baumann
(05/02/2013):
> or:
>
> * apply the following tested and working patch from #699742 in
> debian-installer, […]
Except that this “tested and working patch” doesn't fix anything.
Same
is
33 matches
Mail list logo
