On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 08:43:09AM -0500, Paul Elliott wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2014 at 10:19:53PM +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
> > wrote:
> > > With guayadeque gone from testing because upstream is switching to qt,
> > > what'
On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 14:58 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Sounds to me like what's needed is source changes to apertium
Also, I'm not sure how apertium could eliminate the need for binNMUs.
They could embed a pcre3 version number plus original regexes in the
language packages so that they still
On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 14:58 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Sounds to me like what's needed is source changes to apertium
I'll forward the suggestion upstream.
> not binNMUs.
I don't think a proper fix is going to happen before the freeze so can
we have the binNMUs so that apertium works in jess
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:41:57 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 08/12/2014 11:26 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > On 02/08/14 20:41, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> >> Updating GDAL from 1.10.1 to 1.11.0 involves a SONAME bump from
> >> libgdal.so.1.17.1 to libgdal.so.1.18.0.
> >>
> >> Beca
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 12/08/14 03:11, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think the transition is not quite over; there is still #756422, which
> > blocks #755212. We need a sourceful upload of collectd in order to
> > rebuild (or possibly remove) the .pb-c.[ch] files in the coll
Processing changes file: acpi-support_0.140-5+deb7u2_amd64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: acpi-support_0.140-5+deb7u2_i386.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: acpi-support_0.140-5+deb7u2_ia64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: drupal7_7.14-2+deb7u6_amd64.changes
ACCEPT
Pro
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Dear release team,
During the discussion about bug #747858, we realized that Ruby binary
extensions needed a more specific dependency on ruby besides the one
they already get on libruby* to
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:17:04AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
of course this was posted to the wrong recipient, I will report a proper
bug report.
signature.asc
Description: Dig
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Dear release team,
During the discussion about bug #747858, we realized that Ruby binary
extensions needed a more specific dependency on ruby besides the one
they already get on libruby* to
Hi Emilio,
I did the change in SVN but a different problem popped up (failed test
suite) when building the package. We are working on it and will let you
know.
Thanks for your work on the Debian release
Andreas.
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:21:44PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 1
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 01:33:37AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>Hi people,
>
>two parts in this mail: information for everyone, and action for
>debian-cd@ at the end.
>Bits of action:
>---
>
>Steve, feel free to start a build whenever it's convenient for you
>(after the 1:52 dinsta
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hi,
I would like to upload libav11 to unstable, which requires the
recompilation of any package that links against it. A prerelease for
Libav11 that passes upstream's extensive test suit
Your message dated Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:11:30 +0200
with message-id <53e9e852.7080...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#757854: RM: ufraw/0.19.2-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #757854,
regarding RM: ufraw/0.19.2-2
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been deal
Your message dated Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:11:16 +0200
with message-id <53e9e844.4090...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#757853: RM: haskell-hsmagick/0.5-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #757853,
regarding RM: haskell-hsmagick/0.5-4
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the probl
On 08/12/2014 11:26 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 02/08/14 20:41, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>> Updating GDAL from 1.10.1 to 1.11.0 involves a SONAME bump from
>> libgdal.so.1.17.1 to libgdal.so.1.18.0.
>>
>> Because the binary package name doesn't change, I don't know how to
>> format a Ben fi
On 02/08/14 20:41, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> Updating GDAL from 1.10.1 to 1.11.0 involves a SONAME bump from
> libgdal.so.1.17.1 to libgdal.so.1.18.0.
>
> Because the binary package name doesn't change, I don't know how to
> format a Ben file to track this.
Err. What? Are you bumping the SONAME wit
On 12/08/14 03:11, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the transition is not quite over; there is still #756422, which
> blocks #755212. We need a sourceful upload of collectd in order to
> rebuild (or possibly remove) the .pb-c.[ch] files in the collectd-dev
> package, which is an "Architect
17 matches
Mail list logo
