I intend to upload linux version 4.2.5-1 to unstable on Sunday or
Monday.
This will include a huge number of fixes included in stable updates
4.2.4 and 4.2.5, some new drivers enabled, and a few more important
fixes that we're cherry-picked.
There should not be any ABI change.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutc
On 23/10/15 23:51, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Release team, please hint it into testing:
>
> urgent debian-installer/20151023
Done.
Cheers,
Emilio
Your message dated Sat, 24 Oct 2015 02:00:23 +0200
with message-id <562aca17.7070...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#801730: transition: gnome-desktop3
has caused the Debian Bug report #801730,
regarding transition: gnome-desktop3
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the probl
Hi,
FTPmasters, please sync the installer from sid to testing:
dak copy-installer 20151023
Release team, please hint it into testing:
urgent debian-installer/20151023
Thanks for your time.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
And we are also ready to binNMU gammaray, hopefully the last one.
--
Hacer algo siempre te llevará más tiempo del que esperabas, incluso si
tienes en cuenta la ley de Hofstadter.
Douglas Hofstadter
http://mundogeek.net/archivos/2009/09/05/la-ley-de-hofstadter/
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
On 23/10/15 17:19, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> Please binNMU qtcreator. We can push the new upstream release after the
> transition ends.
Scheduled.
Emilio
Please binNMU qtcreator. We can push the new upstream release after the
transition ends.
--
Simulations are like miniskirts, they show a lot and hide the essentials.
Hubert Kirrman
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
signature.asc
De
On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 03:40:55PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> Tags: wheezy
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: pu
>
> Hi,
> I'd like to fix CVE-2015-3206 (missing KDC authenticity verification)
> for wheezy via a point rele
Hi Hadam,
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 08:20:15PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + confirmed
>
> On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 17:41 +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> > I'd like to fix CVE-2015-3206 (a loack (missing KDC authenticity
> > verification) for jessie via a point release. The debdiff i
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> and testing), so the only way to be certain what binNMU number to use is to
> check manually. In practice what actually happens is that people forget about
Maybe wb could do a “dak ls” and whatever the equivalent for dpo mini-dak is.
I’ll have a look
On 2015-10-23 13:28, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
[...]
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
[...]
It's also not quite that simple, even working things out by hand - see
#599128
for example.
Hm, I’m still under the impression that the +bN suffix to the Debian
version of the package in the a
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >> Ah, cool – so we have only to patch this tool to automatically
> >> use the highest number per batch on all affected architectures
> >> (or even to use the highest number if all architectures would
> >> be touched, but that’s probably an unre
On 2015-10-23 12:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the
"wb"
wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on
each
architecture.
Ah, cool – so we have only to patch this to
On 23/10/15 13:21, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 23/10/15 13:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>
>>> wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb"
>>> wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each
>>
On 23/10/15 13:02, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>
>> wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb"
>> wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each
>> architecture.
>
> Ah, cool – so we have only to patc
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> wanna-build does, yes, but at least the Release Team tend to use the "wb"
> wrapper tool which automatically works out the next free number on each
> architecture.
Ah, cool – so we have only to patch this tool to automatically
use the highest number p
On 2015-10-23 11:56, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
I didn't say once per arch. I said once per package, which is worse. I
normally
schedule binNMUs for several dozens packages. Multiply that by several
But you need to look the number up anyway? The
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> I didn't say once per arch. I said once per package, which is worse. I
> normally
> schedule binNMUs for several dozens packages. Multiply that by several
But you need to look the number up anyway? The wanna-build
--binNMU parameter gets the n
On 23/10/15 12:23, Wookey wrote:
> +++ Emilio Pozuelo Monfort [2015-10-23 11:49 +0200]:
>> On 23/10/15 11:20, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
>>> How about, scheduling them all at once, but using the same version
>>> number across arches when doing it (i.e. the largest)?
>>
>> Again, that involves determ
+++ Emilio Pozuelo Monfort [2015-10-23 11:49 +0200]:
> On 23/10/15 11:20, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > How about, scheduling them all at once, but using the same version
> > number across arches when doing it (i.e. the largest)?
>
> Again, that involves determining what that number is for each pack
On 23/10/15 11:20, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
>> I can go back to scheduling binNMUs for release architectures only, or for
>> ANY
>> -x32. But I don't have the time to look at every architecture and determine
>> which one needs a binNMU and whic
On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> I can go back to scheduling binNMUs for release architectures only, or for ANY
> -x32. But I don't have the time to look at every architecture and determine
> which one needs a binNMU and which one has already done it. Anyway if your
OK. In thi
[ Sorry for the cross-post, but I believe the people in -release and -wb-team
should see this ]
On 23/10/15 09:05, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> whoever is scheduling binNMUs now should do so with a little
> bit more care, please.
>
> Case in point, frameworkintegration – x32 already was rebu
23 matches
Mail list logo
