Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> fixed 709490 1.2.9-8+deb7u1
Bug #709490 {Done: Aleksey Kravchenko }
[release.debian.org] Two disastrous bugs in RHash in Wheezy
There is no source info for the package 'release.debian.org' at version
'1.2.9-8+deb7u1' with architecture ''
Unable
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 02:00:12PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> However, in this case, that's somewhat complicated by the fact that
> libunwind in unstable doesn't actually build libunwind7 any more, which
> makes updating it somewhat tricky. If the maintainers do agree that
> Peter's solution i
Your message dated Sat, 15 Jun 2013 22:49:59 +0200
with message-id <20130615204959.gd2...@beskar.mdcc.cx>
and subject line Re: release.debian.org: RM: ticcutils/0.3-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #712420,
regarding release.debian.org: RM: ticcutils/0.3-1
to be marked as done.
This means that y
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Severity: normal
Please:
RM: ticcutils/0.3-1
since ticcutils 0.3-1 builds binary packages libticcutils1 and
libticcutils1-dev, while ticcutils 0.4-3 builds binary packages libticcutils2
and libticcutils2-dev.
On 2013-06-15 15:55, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
There was an uw-imap (libc-client) transition started over a year
ago, but in the end it wasn't needed (the SONAME is Debian-specific).
Can you please
cancel it completely and make
http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/uw-
imap.html go away?
D
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 09:11:11PM +0200, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote:
> Dear SRM, I have just received this [1] bug report. I'm AFK this
> weekend, don't know if I would be able to test tomorrow (hope so),
> please consider holding (if possible) this upgrade to (old)stable just
> in case the re
[Mail-Followup-To overridden, as iirc you're not reading -release]
On 2013-06-15 20:11, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote:
Dear SRM, I have just received this [1] bug report. I'm AFK this
weekend, don't know if I would be able to test tomorrow (hope so),
please consider holding (if possible) this u
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # Not actually included in the point release, due to armel build failures
> reopen 706329
Bug #706329 {Done: Adam D. Barratt }
[release.debian.org] pu: atlas/3.8.4-9+deb7u1
'reopen' may be inappropriate when a bug has been closed with a version;
Dear SRM, I have just received this [1] bug report. I'm AFK this
weekend, don't know if I would be able to test tomorrow (hope so),
please consider holding (if possible) this upgrade to (old)stable just
in case the report is right. The bug solution could wait till next
release(s).
Thanks and sorry
Hi,
There was an uw-imap (libc-client) transition started over a year ago, but in
the end it wasn't needed (the SONAME is Debian-specific). Can you please
cancel it completely and make http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/uw-
imap.html go away?
See http://bugs.debian.org/668008 for detail
The git version was 8 commits behind, I did push the remaining changes few
hours ago.
Ondřej Surý
> On 15. 6. 2013, at 13:33, "Bernhard R. Link" wrote:
>
> * Ondřej Surý [130611 08:27]:
>> the information from Matthias was correct, and Berkeley DB 6.0 has been
>> released today, + packaged an
On 2013-06-13 22:22:18, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> On 2013-06-13 20:11:21, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 confirmed
> >
> > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 14:03:28 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> >
> > > Package: release.debian.org
> > > Severity: normal
> > > User: release.debian@pa
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> # The updates referenced by these bugs were included in the 7.1 point release
> limit package release.debian.org
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of
'release.debian.org'
Limit currently set to 'package':'release.debia
* Ondřej Surý [130611 08:27]:
> the information from Matthias was correct, and Berkeley DB 6.0 has been
> released today, + packaged and uploaded to unstable.
>
> db-defaults has been updated to 6.0 dependencies and uploaded to
> experimental.
Are those package also available somewhere while it i
Your message dated Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:50:36 +0100
with message-id <20130615105036.ga12...@riva.ucam.org>
and subject line Re: nmu: haskell-doctest_0.9.6-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #712291,
regarding nmu: haskell-doctest_0.9.6-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the prob
Control: fixed -1 7.1
On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 17:21 +0700, Aleksey Kravchenko wrote:
> Fixed in the RHash version 1.2.9-8+deb7u1 :)
The bug in rhash, yes. Not the release.d.o bug.
For future reference, the release.d.o bug should stay open until the
point release has happened, at which point we clo
Processing control commands:
> fixed -1 7.1
Bug #709490 {Done: Aleksey Kravchenko }
[release.debian.org] Two disastrous bugs in RHash in Wheezy
There is no source info for the package 'release.debian.org' at version '7.1'
with architecture ''
Unable to make a source version for version '7.1'
Mar
Your message dated Sat, 15 Jun 2013 17:21:41 +0700
with message-id <51bc4035.20...@gmail.com>
and subject line The bug is fixed
has caused the Debian Bug report #709490,
regarding Two disastrous bugs in RHash in Wheezy
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Hi,
On 15/06/13 09:30, f...@rolf.leggewie.biz wrote:
> On Friday, 14 June, 2013 03:26 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 14/06/13 09:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>> ISTR recommending a package not in the archive was a bug, but I can't find a
>>> reference. So if you would like to keep t
19 matches
Mail list logo
