Re: Next d-i release

2016-10-19 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 02:05:25AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >Steve McIntyre (2016-10-20): >> >Since linux vs. fat/efi is no longer an issue, I'm tempted to prepare >> >a new d-i release soonish. I'll probably freeze udebs in the upcoming >> >hours or days, and try to figure out what to do wit

Re: Next d-i release

2016-10-19 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Steve McIntyre (2016-10-20): > >Since linux vs. fat/efi is no longer an issue, I'm tempted to prepare > >a new d-i release soonish. I'll probably freeze udebs in the upcoming > >hours or days, and try to figure out what to do with packages sitting > >in unstable for the time being. > > Cool. FWI

Re: Next d-i release

2016-10-19 Thread Steve McIntyre
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:33:03PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: >Hi, > >Since linux vs. fat/efi is no longer an issue, I'm tempted to prepare >a new d-i release soonish. I'll probably freeze udebs in the upcoming >hours or days, and try to figure out what to do with packages sitting >in unstable f

Bug#827061: transition: openssl

2016-10-19 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 08:52:31PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > I'm sorry but I'm going to have to nack this for Stretch, as much as I like to > approve transitions and get new stuff in. I have looked at the opened bugs and > I'm afraid this still is too disruptive. I have noticed that

Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?

2016-10-19 Thread Ian Jackson
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?"): > On 19/10/16 17:37, Ian Jackson wrote: > > There are no changes between 4.7 and 4.8 that would upset any of the > > rdeps. So, great, thanks. > > What about between 4.6 and 4.[78]? As we currently have 4.6 in the archive. The

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-19 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_armhf.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_mipsel.changes ACCEPT

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-19 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_mips.changes ACCEPT

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-19 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_arm64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_ppc64el.changes ACC

Re: Next d-i release

2016-10-19 Thread Christian PERRIER
Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org): > Hi, > > Since linux vs. fat/efi is no longer an issue, I'm tempted to prepare > a new d-i release soonish. I'll probably freeze udebs in the upcoming > hours or days, and try to figure out what to do with packages sitting > in unstable for the time bein

Bug#839907: Minimal diff

2016-10-19 Thread Daniel Lange
I don't mind either way. Attached is a minimal diff that will - of course - not make a current build tool chain happy ("dh_builddeb: This package will soon FTBFS; time to fix it!"). But it fixes the immediate issue of making the program usable again. diff -Nru metar-20061030.1/debian/changelog

Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?

2016-10-19 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 19/10/16 17:37, Ian Jackson wrote: > Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?"): >> On 19/10/16 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: >>> Sorry to hassle you, but I would appreciate an opinion so that I can >>> get started on the integration work etc. >> >> Assuming the rdeps are fi

Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?

2016-10-19 Thread Ian Jackson
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?"): > On 19/10/16 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Sorry to hassle you, but I would appreciate an opinion so that I can > > get started on the integration work etc. > > Assuming the rdeps are fine with Xen 4.8, then I'd be all for movin

Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?

2016-10-19 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 19/10/16 16:54, Ian Jackson wrote: > Ian Jackson writes ("Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?"): >> Hi. I was wanting an initial opinion from the Release Team, about the >> Xen packages. Currently they are in bad shape in stretch and I intend >> to fix them ASAP. >> >> The question is whether I shou

Processed: Re: Bug#836795: jessie-pu: package samba/2:4.1.17+dfsg-2+deb8u2

2016-10-19 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + pending Bug #836795 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package samba/2:4.1.17+dfsg-2+deb8u2 Added tag(s) pending. -- 836795: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=836795 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#836795: jessie-pu: package samba/2:4.1.17+dfsg-2+deb8u2

2016-10-19 Thread Adam D. Barratt
Control: tags -1 + pending On 2016-09-24 20:14, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Control: tags -1 -moreinfo +confirmed On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 20:50 +, Jelmer Vernooij wrote: I'd like to update Samba in jessie to 4.2.14+dfsg. Debdiff is attached. The 4 Samba releases since 4.2.10 (currently in jessie

Re: Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?

2016-10-19 Thread Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson writes ("Xen in stretch - 4.7 or 4.8 ?"): > Hi. I was wanting an initial opinion from the Release Team, about the > Xen packages. Currently they are in bad shape in stretch and I intend > to fix them ASAP. > > The question is whether I should move to Xen 4.7, or Xen 4.8. I just aske

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-19 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Processing changes file: samba_4.2.14+dfsg-0+deb8u1_multi.changes ACCEPT

Next d-i release

2016-10-19 Thread Cyril Brulebois
Hi, Since linux vs. fat/efi is no longer an issue, I'm tempted to prepare a new d-i release soonish. I'll probably freeze udebs in the upcoming hours or days, and try to figure out what to do with packages sitting in unstable for the time being. Feel free to mention packages you want to see in te

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-19 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Processing changes file: quagga_0.99.23.1-1+deb8u3_allonly.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: quagga_0.99.23.1-1+deb8u3_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: quagga_0.99.23.1-1+deb8u3_arm64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: quagga_0.99.23.1-1+deb8u3_armel.changes ACCEPT P

Re: ppc64el porter situation

2016-10-19 Thread Breno Leitao
Hello Adrian, Let me share my view as the only DD listed as ppc64el porter. On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:50:01PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Is a DM enough, if the only DD gets killed by a car [2] the day after > the release of stretch? The other DM is in the process of becoming a DD[1]. This migh

Re: ppc64el porter situation

2016-10-19 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Hi, On 2016-10-17 22:50, Adrian Bunk wrote: > Disclaimer: > I am not a member of the release team, and I am only speaking for myself. > > > The architecture requalification status for stretch [1] lists the > ppc64el porter situation as green, but there are three reasons why > the situation does

Bug#840927: nmu: llvm-toolchain-3.8_1:3.8.1-12

2016-10-19 Thread Andreas Beckmann
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 00:38:00 +0200 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > I > think the problem was that #839033's subject mentioned mips64el, but that > information was outdated, and that confused the ftp team member. The fact that > llvm-toolchain-snapshot builds versioned binaries that later get taken

Bug#840927: marked as done (nmu: llvm-toolchain-3.8_1:3.8.1-12)

2016-10-19 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Wed, 19 Oct 2016 07:07:46 + (UTC) with message-id <1114567532.5943092.1476860866...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#840927: nmu: llvm-toolchain-3.8_1:3.8.1-12 has caused the Debian Bug report #840927, regarding nmu: llvm-toolchain-3.8_1:3.8.1-12 to be marked as done.