unscribe
-Original Message-
From: Adam D. Barratt [mailto:a...@adam-barratt.org.uk]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 11:14 PM
To: debian-stable-annou...@lists.debian.org
Subject: [SUA 62-1] Upcoming Debian 7 Update (7.7)
-
Processing changes file:
debian-installer-netboot-images_20130613+deb7u2.b3_amd64.changes
REJECT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1xdutp-00026j..
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 764937 + pending
Bug #764937 [release.debian.org] RM: ssdeep -- RoM; undistributable
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
764937: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 761900 + pending
Bug #761900 [release.debian.org] RM: ctn/3.0.6-13 -- non-redistributable source
file present
Added tag(s) pending.
> retitle 761900 RM: ctn -- RoQA; non-redistributable file
Bug #761900 [release.debian.org] RM: ctn/3.0.6-13
On 10/13/2014 03:33 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 21:32 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
Alternatively you might be well advised to verify whether the affected
file is not even needed in ctn 2.30.0. As I said it is not used at all
in 2.32.1 and may be this is even valid in the pre
On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 15:23 -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
> On 10/13/2014 02:41 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 14:16 -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
> > > Will dinifti be removed from the distribution ?
> > From the stable distribution, yes - i.e. version 2.30.0-1. Version
> > 2.
On 10/13/2014 02:41 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 14:16 -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
Will dinifti be removed from the distribution ?
From the stable distribution, yes - i.e. version 2.30.0-1. Version
2.32.1-1 will remain in unstable and the upcoming "jessie" release
(current
On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 21:32 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Alternatively you might be well advised to verify whether the affected
> file is not even needed in ctn 2.30.0. As I said it is not used at all
> in 2.32.1 and may be this is even valid in the previous version. This
> would be the most sim
Hi
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 03:23:26PM -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
> On 10/13/2014 02:41 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 14:16 -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
> >>Will dinifti be removed from the distribution ?
> > From the stable distribution, yes - i.e. version 2.30.0-1. Version
On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 14:16 -0400, Valerio Luccio wrote:
> Will dinifti be removed from the distribution ?
>From the stable distribution, yes - i.e. version 2.30.0-1. Version
2.32.1-1 will remain in unstable and the upcoming "jessie" release
(currently the "testing" distribution).
> Do you need m
On 10/13/2014 02:07 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 19:04 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:46:10PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
# Broken Build-Depends:
ctsim: ctn-dev
dicomnifti: ctn-dev (> 3.0.6-9)
The set of ctn, ctsim and dicomnifti is closed, so we c
On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 19:04 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:46:10PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > # Broken Build-Depends:
> > ctsim: ctn-dev
> > dicomnifti: ctn-dev (> 3.0.6-9)
> >
> > The set of ctn, ctsim and dicomnifti is closed, so we could "just"
> > remove the th
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:48:12 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> >SUCCESS-AFTER-UPDATE:
> >libmojolicious-plugin-basicauth-perl
> >libmojolicious-plugin-cgi-perl
> >libmojolicious-plugin-i18n-perl
> >libtest-www-mechanize-mojo-perl
> I've aged these and libmojolicious-perl, so all being well they shou
Jonathan Wiltshire writes:
> Some personal observations.
>
> On 2014-10-13 03:51, Rob Browning wrote:
>> I've also been told that drgeo no longer uses Guile upstream.
>
> Is there any way to tell for sure?
It looks like the current download available here http://www.drgeo.eu/
may be Smalltalk n
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20130613+deb7u2+b3_amd64.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20130613+deb7u2+b3_armel.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20130613+deb7u2+b3_armhf.changes
ACCEPT
Processing changes file: debian-installer_20130
Processing changes file: base-files_7.1wheezy7_ia64.changes
ACCEPT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1xdfun-0007qf...@franck.debian.org
Your message dated Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:48:12 +0100
with message-id <15f6d92c4f5398258608e9df73856...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#764744: unblock: libmojolicious-perl/5.48+dfsg-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #764744,
regarding unblock: libmojolicious-perl/5.48+dfsg-1
to
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 10:47:31PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 17:49 +0200, Csillag Tamas wrote:
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 04:17:04PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2014-10-10 at 19:45 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > > Yes, this ap
Kudos gregoa for taking care of these! :)
Thanks,
Tamas
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 11:44:09PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 16:17:04 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>
> > - what is the effect of the changes on libmojolicious-perl's several
> > reverse-dependencies? (The upstrea
Processing changes file: base-files_7.1wheezy7_armel.changes
ACCEPT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1xdcse-0003zc...@franck.debian.org
Hi,
(dropping most CCs)
Some personal observations.
On 2014-10-13 03:51, Rob Browning wrote:
Luca Falavigna writes:
These are the reverse dependencies to be fixed before removing this
package:
Right -- I was hoping to try to reach a decision this week with respect
to jessie.
Here's what
Your message dated Mon, 13 Oct 2014 08:35:33 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#765040: unblock: libkexiv2/4:4.14.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #765040,
regarding unblock: libkexiv2/4:4.14.1-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
22 matches
Mail list logo
