On 05/11/16 01:00, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Bug#842919: transition: xen"):
>> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> ...
>> Sounds good to me. Please go ahead.
>
> Thanks. For the avoidance of doubt, was that an instruction to upload
> the new version of xen to unstable ?
I
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Bug#842919: transition: xen"):
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
...
> Sounds good to me. Please go ahead.
Thanks. For the avoidance of doubt, was that an instruction to upload
the new version of xen to unstable ?
Ian.
--
Ian JacksonThese opinions are my own.
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 04/11/16 01:25, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort writes ("Re: Bug#842919: transition: xen"):
>> On 02/11/16 11:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
> ...
>>> All that is needed from the build-rdeps is a rebuild. That is, of:
>>> libvirt qemu xenwatch python-pyxenstore
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #842919 [release.debian.org] transition: xen
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
842919: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=842919
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: reopen -1
On 04/11/16 23:51, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:24:52PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> And this is finally finished.
>
> Umh, though there is still the old version libicu55 on s390x, due to
> xerces-c - #833754
Oh, I knew about that, but thought
Processing control commands:
> reopen -1
Bug #819530 {Done: Emilio Pozuelo Monfort }
[release.debian.org] transition: icu
Bug reopened
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions of bug #819530 to the same values
previously set
--
819530: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819530
De
On 31/10/16 08:28, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 31/10/16 07:57, Pino Toscano wrote:
>> In data giovedì 20 ottobre 2016 13:49:55 CET, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort ha
>> scritto:
>>> Control: tags -1 confirmed
>>>
>>> On 18/10/16 23:30, Pino Toscano wrote:
In data lunedì 17 ottobre 2016 21:11:0
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 23:53:04 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#842288: transition: gdal
has caused the Debian Bug report #842288,
regarding transition: gdal
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:24:52PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> And this is finally finished.
Umh, though there is still the old version libicu55 on s390x, due to
xerces-c - #833754
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B9
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
britney has learned about the powerpc removal from testing [1]. Please
complete the removal on the archive side.
Thanks,
1: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2016/10/msg8.html
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:12:55 +
with message-id <20161104221255.5zjuv7sesi6bo...@lupin.home.powdarrmonkey.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#842506: transition: geos
has caused the Debian Bug report #842506,
regarding transition: geos
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim th
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 842846 transition: ros-vision-opencv
Bug #842846 [release.debian.org] New ros-vision-opencv transition
Changed Bug title to 'transition: ros-vision-opencv' from 'New
ros-vision-opencv transition'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Pleas
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:31:57 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#843140: nmu: dovecot-antispam_2.0+20150222-1+b5
has caused the Debian Bug report #843140,
regarding nmu: dovecot-antispam_2.0+20150222-1+b5
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem h
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:28:02 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#842277: transition: qtkeychain
has caused the Debian Bug report #842277,
regarding transition: qtkeychain
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:27:01 +0100
with message-id <6c23b268-cff9-e0ff-5ca8-d45969eef...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#840851: transition: fplll
has caused the Debian Bug report #840851,
regarding transition: fplll
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the prob
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:27:28 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#842262: transition: ros-geometric-shapes
has caused the Debian Bug report #842262,
regarding transition: ros-geometric-shapes
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 838242 + pending
Bug #838242 [release.debian.org] transition: imagemagick
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
838242: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=838242
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:28:36 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#841504: transition: gammu
has caused the Debian Bug report #841504,
regarding transition: gammu
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:26:21 +0100
with message-id <209c23b6-bb27-6699-4bf4-0bb2679fb...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#841087: transition: libqtxdg
has caused the Debian Bug report #841087,
regarding transition: libqtxdg
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that th
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:24:52 +0100
with message-id <6a931d28-ca9f-0ec7-b41a-ca3f154b9...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#819530: transition: icu
has caused the Debian Bug report #819530,
regarding transition: icu
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Fri, 4 Nov 2016 22:25:15 +0100
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#838532: transition: cgal
has caused the Debian Bug report #838532,
regarding transition: cgal
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #843133 [release.debian.org] transition: poco
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
843133: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=843133
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 04/11/16 11:26, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> * Emilio Pozuelo Monfort [2016-11-04 09:24]:
>> Do the rdeps build fine with the new version? Particularly note the recent
>> boost
>> 1.62 change, which affects a bunch of the rdeps.
>
> I tested all without problems (us
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 841265 + pending
Bug #841265 [release.debian.org] transition: cfitsio
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
841265: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=841265
Debi
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 841911 with 843192
Bug #841911 [release.debian.org] transition: pari
841911 was not blocked by any bugs.
841911 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 841911: 843192
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you n
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 843051 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/boost1.62.html
Bug #843051 [release.debian.org] release.debian.org: boost1.62 transition
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/boost1.62.html'.
>
On 04/11/16 10:20, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:50:33AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>
>>> Neither sspace nor metaphlan2-data were in testing at all. These are new
>>> packages that never have made it into testing at all. So it seems that my
>>> assumption that once
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: jessie
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I've prepared an update for libdatetime-timezone-perl to incorporate
the changes of the Olson db release 2016i, as usual with a quilt
> Please would you schedule a binNMU on at least armhf
FYI I did a manual rebuild of lua5.1 locally and can confirm that
qcontrol builds with the updated version.
Thanks,
Ian.
Gilles Filippini a écrit le 02/11/2016 à 19:05 :
> Hi,
>
> Good news: every hdf5 reverse dependency but 8 is now 'binnmu OK'. The
> remainder is:
> * shogun FTBFS unrelated to hdf5 - not in testing - #809290
> * tessa FTBFS unrelated to hdf5 - not in testing - #817690
>
* Emilio Pozuelo Monfort [2016-11-04 09:24]:
> Do the rdeps build fine with the new version? Particularly note the recent
> boost
> 1.62 change, which affects a bunch of the rdeps.
I tested all without problems (using Boost 1.62), except gpsshogi which
FTBFS with gcc6 (#811689) and is flagged fo
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Dear Release Team,
Could you please schedule a BinNMU for dovecot-antispam to rebuild
against latest dovecot?
Regards,
Apollon
nmu dovecot-antispam_2.0+20150222-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "R
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:50:33AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >
> > Neither sspace nor metaphlan2-data were in testing at all. These are new
> > packages that never have made it into testing at all. So it seems that my
> > assumption that once the package is in testing (and I fully a
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> block 843051 by 843132
Bug #843051 [release.debian.org] release.debian.org: boost1.62 transition
843051 was not blocked by any bugs.
843051 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 843051: 843132
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Plea
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Hi,
My package (qcontrol) fails to build because lua5.1 has not yet been rebuilt
with -fPIC on armhf. Please would you schedule a binNMU on at least armhf
(although it might be worth doing t
On 04/11/16 09:39, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Emilio,
>
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:21:56AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmmm, I'm afraid I do not understand what you mean. What exactly is the
>>> big hammer and how can I prevent asking you to use it?
>>
>> The big hammer is a for
Hi Emilio,
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 09:21:56AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm, I'm afraid I do not understand what you mean. What exactly is the
> > big hammer and how can I prevent asking you to use it?
>
> The big hammer is a force-hint type hint, which basically tells britn
On 04/11/16 09:03, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to transition poco as it's tagged autorm and a number of my
> packages depend on it.
Do the rdeps build fin
On 04/11/16 08:43, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Emilio,
>
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:31:41AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> On 02/11/16 16:49, Andreas Tille wrote:
>>> Hi release team,
>>>
>>> meanwhile the revision of the package metaphlan2-data has increased
>>> so please add the force-h
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hi,
I would like to transition poco as it's tagged autorm and a number of my
packages depend on it.
Ben file:
title = "poco";
is_affected = .depends ~ "libpoco*9v5" | .depends ~ "libpo
Hi Emilio,
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 12:31:41AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 02/11/16 16:49, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Hi release team,
> >
> > meanwhile the revision of the package metaphlan2-data has increased
> > so please add the force-hint to this package:
> >
> > metaphlan2-
41 matches
Mail list logo
