On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 07:41:54PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: britney
>
> Hello,
>
> I have been wondering why hugin 2016.2.0~rc1+dfsg-2 (urgency=low) will
> be considered for testing mi
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 05:38:58PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:16:36 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:28:35PM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> > > Package: ia32-libs-i386
> > > Version: 2
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:28:35PM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Package: ia32-libs-i386
> Version: 20120701
> Severity: normal
>
> Currently, ia32-libs-i386 depends on
> libldap-2.4-2 (>= 2.4.23-7.2)
> libnss-ldap (>= 264-2.2)
> libpam-ldap (>= 184-8.5)
>
> I understand that, on systems whe
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:53:26PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 11:56 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 11:13 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> [...]
> > > - libcurl3 (>= 7.21.0-2), libdb4.8 (>= 4.8.30-2),
&g
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 08:59:38AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2012, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:23:05 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > 2/ we modify dpkg to allow co-installation of M-A: same packages which
> > > share the
> > >same source version re
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> [Dropped pkg-db-devel from Cc because it apparently doesn't accept posts
> from non-subscribers]
>
> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 11:56 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Looking at the package currently in unstable, I do have to ask what
>> happened to:
>>
>> ia32-libs-20120
Sven Joachim writes:
> Package: ia32-libs-i386
> Version: 20120616
> Severity: serious
>
> Your package depends on libdb4.8 which is no longer available in
> unstable.
It is still in wheezy. I assume it is going to be removed there as well?
Dear Release Team,
as per http://release.debian.org/
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 03:57:29PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> > Release notes are meant to be read once, not every time you upgrade a
>> > system. Having a debconf note once might be appropriate. The second
>> > time, you'll go "right, I've seen that before". The thi
Wouter Verhelst writes:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back
>> > Step 2: dpkg --add-architecture i386 &&am
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 06/23/2012 02:18 AM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Problem is that frontends will complain about ia32-libs being not
>> upgradable and might suggest removing it instead of keeping it back way
>> before that. At the time base-file is upgraded ia
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> On 22.06.2012 15:31, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>> > Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine,
Luk Claes writes:
> On 06/22/2012 04:31 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>>> Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back
>&g
Thomas Goirand writes:
> On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back
>> Step 2: dpkg --add-architecture i386 && apt-get update
>> Step 3: dist-upgrade (ia32-libs, wine, ... is now installabl
Hi,
two weeks ago we hit a huge milestone with multiarch and wine:i386
became installable on amd64. Last week we hit another milestone so that
ia32-libs became mostly installable (it might still want to remove some
amd64 packages in the process depending on what you have installed).
As a conseque
Andreas Barth writes:
> * David Kalnischkies (kalnischk...@gmail.com) [120612 18:03]:
>> You need to upgrade to support MultiArch,
>> but you need MultiArch to upgradeâ¦
>> (beside, how would the detection for such a message look like?)
>
> We had discussed to export foreign-arch packages to the
Guillem Jover writes:
> On Sun, 2012-06-10 at 14:40:28 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jun 2012, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> > As I mentioned in the long ref-counting thread, I strongly disagree this
>> > is a correct solution, it just seems like a hack to me. Instead I
>> > think we shou
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> On 11.04.2012 10:30, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same
>> version
>> and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That means
>> binNMU on all architectures
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:15:58 +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
>
>> Discussion in Bug#595139 led to the conclusion that packages which are
>> Multi-arch: same must not be binNMUed (or in fact, binNMUed on all
>> architectures).
>>
> I very much disagree with that "co
Goswin von Brederlow writes:
> Dear ftp-master,
>
> I wonder if the solution below for transitioning ia32-libs to multiarch
> would be OK in regards to DAK and testing transition etc. Any technical
> problems why we couldn't make an exception for the 3 ia32-libs* packages
&g
"Thijs Kinkhorst" writes:
> On Wed, February 15, 2012 13:49, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> On Wed, February 15, 2012 13:42, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>>> On 15.02.2012 12:31, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>>>> Should ia32-libs be updated?
>>>
>>
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 23:05 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Working on the four-monthly schedule for oldstable, the next lenny point
>> release would be due in early February.
>>
>> As the security team have recently confirmed that security support for
>> lenny will
Ben Hutchings writes:
> I intend to upload linux-2.6 version 3.1.5-1 to unstable this weekend.
> This is another upstream stable update. It also includes a fix for the
> FTBFS on mips/mipsel in 3.1.4-1.
>
> No ABI bump seems to be necessary.
>
> Ben.
Shouldn't that be linux-3 or just plain linu
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> Hi,
>
> I'll try to share some news with the release team.
>
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> What I'll do though, when I get back home tomorrow from my current
>> trip, is to push already reviewed stuff and keep pushing incrementally,
>> instead of my usua
Michael Gilbert writes:
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> What worries me is that there is multi-arch work in dpkg, work that has
>> its origins in Debian. That work is ready enough to be deployed in
>> popular Debian derivatives such as Ubuntu, but is not in Debian
Niels Thykier writes:
> On 2011-11-05 21:22, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to propose the goal of getting archive-wide support for
>> the optional debian/rules targets "build-arch" and "build-indep".
>> The intention is to finally solve issues like #619284 and the goal
>> is
Philipp Kern writes:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 09:57:12AM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> On Wed, February 2, 2011 22:14, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > PS: The sources are on mentors and need a sponsor for the upload. Thijs?
>> > unblock ia32-libs-core/2011
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock packages ia32-libs-core, ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk.
The last upload made by Thijs Kinkhorst to fix security concerns and
to add the security repository to the sources ia32-
Thijs Kinkhorst writes:
> On Tuesday 07 December 2010 18:01:05 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Uploading ia32-libs-core_20101207_source to mentors. Sponsors
>> welcome.
>
> I have uploaded this now. I think this needs unblocking so that ia32-libs can
> also migrate.
>
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 08:37 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> On Thursday 18 November 2010 22:24:01 Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 17 November 2010 14:26:07 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > > ia32-libs-core (2010
Thijs Kinkhorst writes:
> On Wednesday 17 November 2010 14:26:07 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> ia32-libs-core (20101117) unstable; urgency=low
>> ia32-libs (20101117) unstable; urgency=low
>
> I just uploaded these to sid.
>
> I hope they can be unblocked and
Thijs Kinkhorst writes:
> On Wednesday 17 November 2010 14:26:07 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> ia32-libs-core (20101117) unstable; urgency=low
>> ia32-libs (20101117) unstable; urgency=low
>
> I just uploaded these to sid.
Thx.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSC
f no-one beats me to it and if
> the release team approves the change for squeeze.
Hi,
I've just uploaded an updated ia32-libs-core and ia32-libs to mentors:
ia32-libs-core (20101117) unstable; urgency=low
.
[ Goswin von Brederlow ]
* Replace lib32icu42 with lib32icu44.
* Upda
Michael Gilbert writes:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:21:19 +0100 Julien Cristau wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 15:41:56 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>>
>> > As for ia32-libs, I would be willing to sponsor it but I don't think we
>> > should be making uploads for such trivial cleanup operations,
Michael Gilbert writes:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 16:21:19 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 15:41:56 +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>>
>> > As for ia32-libs, I would be willing to sponsor it but I don't think we
>> > should be making uploads for such trivial cleanup operations,
Hi,
I recently did a squeeze install with read-only / and /usr and found a
few minor glitches:
* ifupdown installed without /dev/shm mounted
* /etc/mtab not a link to /proc/mounts
* /etc/fstab lists the device for proc as "proc", system says "none",
mounting local filesystems gives error
* lvm
Philipp Kern writes:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 08:16:41PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> > You can't build 32bit packages for amd64 in a 32bit chroot. That results
>> > in the wrong arch and wrong dependencies.
>> But you can use i386 packages on amd64 in a 32bit chroot. That results
>> in much
Phillip Susi writes:
> On 10/22/2010 5:35 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> 1) Switch back from sync() to fsync() before rename() (while keeping
>
> Don't you WANT to use sync? If you fsync every file that is going to be
> rather slow since it forces a disk write for every file, rather than
> allowi
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 16:12:13 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> Julien Cristau writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 23:15:48 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> >
>> >> Please unblock package ia32-libs and i
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 23:15:48 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> Please unblock package ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk
>>
> Some more questions now that 20101012 has been uploaded:
> - what's the point of the ia32-libs-dev package? n
Mehdi Dogguy writes:
> On 10/13/2010 11:41 AM, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
>> Mehdi, When 0.2 was built there was a hope of getting it into
>> squeeze. I can understand if the boat was missed on that a long time
>> ago.
>>
>> The issue with #593102 is that the usptream component has an odd
>> layo
FS: Can you check your source tree and remove debian/lib32gcc1* (see
below) and then upload 20100927 from git please?
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 23:15:48 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> Please unblock package ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk
>>
&
Hi,
ia32-libs has been updated again to fix an unreported RC bug
(uninstallable on ia64), a simple bug and to cover package updates in
squeeze:
---
ia32-libs (20100919) unstable; urgency=high
* Make dependency on lib32bz2-
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Hi,
the build of ia32-libs for ia64 on the recent upload was broken and the
dependencies of the package are wrong. This was a problem of the build
environment and it should work fine on the
"Adam D. Barratt" writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 15:42 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> I've prepared an ia32-libs update for lenny and Frederik Schueler will
>> sponsor the upload soon. The upload brings ia32-libs back in sync with
>>
Julien Cristau writes:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 15:42:22 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>>* Add misc depends for debhelper.
>>* Add lots of lintian overrides where nothing can be done about them.
>>* Bump debhelper compat to 5.
>
> These don&
Hi again,
Martin Zobel-Helas mentioned I should have added a full diff for
approval. Well, the full diff would be basically the full 282MiB source
package as it contains all the deb and orig.tar.gz of the packages. You
can download it from mentors.debian.net.
I listed all the packages changed in
oswin
--
--
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:05:22 +0100
Source: ia32-libs
Binary: ia32-libs ia32-libs-dev lib32gcc1
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.7+lenny1
Distribution: stable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian ia32-libs Team
Changed-By: Goswin von Bred
Rogério Brito writes:
> Hi, Luk.
>
> On Nov 05 2009, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Rogério Brito wrote:
>> > So, I would appreciate if you could unblock youtube-dl/2009.09.13-1, as
>>
>> Will it survive interface/protocol changes?
>
> Really, I don't know and I can't give any assurance, but upstream is
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
>> Or is the second step in this release goal of actually using the new source
>> format for all (or at least a lot?) packages?
>
> Yes. I'd like to achieve this by changing dpkg-source to build 3.0 (quilt)
> or 3.0 (native)
Hi,
please coordinate with Mark Hymers, the current ia32-libs and
ia32-libs-gtk maintainer, about security and proposed updates in those
two packages.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listma
Daniel Burrows writes:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 02:41:08PM +0200, Marc Brockschmidt
> was heard to say:
>> Heya,
>>
>> As announced on dda [RT1], we want to get an impression when releasing
>> Squeeze is feasible. We have proposed a (quite ambitious) freeze in December
>> 2009, and some devel
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080415 20:34]:
>> Description: The toolchain should be ready to handle libraries and
>>include files in the multiarch locations.
>> Bug-Url: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-b
Ove Kaaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Barth skrev:
>> * Lennart Sorensen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080415 22:26]:
>>> I suspect by the time a fully working multiarch is done, x86 won't need
>>> it anymore because everything will be fully 64bit. :)
>
> As Wine maintainer, I'd disagree with th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lennart Sorensen) writes:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:03:54PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> * Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080415 20:34]:
>> > Description: The toolchain should be ready to handle libraries and
>> >include files
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080415 20:34]:
>> Description: The toolchain should be ready to handle libraries and
>>include files in the multiarch locations.
>> Bug-Url: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-b
Hi,
I would like to suggest a new release goal and hope that some DDs will
advocate it. This one is actualy quite trivial but some convincing
seems to be neccessary to get it done:
# Multiarch capable toolchain
Description: The toolchain should be ready to handle libraries and
include files
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi, ...
>
> As you may know, or not, we are waiting for the abi-breaking 2.6.18-6 to be
> uploaded for pushing the 2.6.18 kernel into etch.
>
> It seems 2.6.18.3 is announced for saturday, so this would mean a natural
> tentative schedule of let's say mond
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> there are some bug reports with "known issues" for etch, like e.g.
> kernel >= 2.6.17 uses TCP window scaling. I think that warrants a new
> part in the release notes like "Known issues", "Troubleshooting" (or a
> better title - in this case, tha
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There have been some (expected) delays in getting all needed udebs into
> testing, but they are finally there. No reports of blocking issues, so
> I've just uploaded the build of debian-installer that should become RC1.
Will that include m68k? I looked fo
Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The situation right now is different: there is a very large user base
> for Christian's packages, and I feel debian should offer'em an upgrade
> path, because that would just be fair.
And many of them would be surprised or even angry if the 'castrat
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 12:26:10AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> The FTBFS is that it fails to build in etch (patches generated files
>> and they differ there).
>
> No, the sid version *also* patches generated files,
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please add the following hint:
>
> # Important fix for inputbox breakage under non-ASCII locales
> unblock newt/0.52.2-8
>
> Please also force hint cryptsetup. It seems to be blocked by an FTBFS, but
> I don't think that should block migration.
The FTBFS i
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061031 15:01]:
>> Frederik Schueler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I asked this before and haven't yet recieved an answere:
>>
>> What does w-b do when the amd64 b
Frederik Schueler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 01:30:59AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Can someone from the kernel team comment on whether there are problems with
>> this particular patch that have not yet been noted in the bug report? If
>> there aren't any
Package: cryptsetup
Version: 1.0.4~rc2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: no longer builds from source
Hi,
cryptsetup contains a patch for po/Makefile, which is generated from
Makefile.in during build. The problem now is that the resulting
Makefile differs between a build on etch and a build on s
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 09:11:58PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>> Hi Jeroen,
>>
>> Here's the list of udeb-only packages to be synced to testing:
>>
>> [...]
>
> all done, except:
>
>> debian-installer-utils
>
> Out of date on arm,
>
> di-utils
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello.
>
> While trying to package the just released gettext 0.16, I discovered
> that neither gettext in testing or the current version in unstable
> build from source anymore, as pnet does not exist in testing, and it
> depends (indirectly) on libgnutl
Anthony Towns writes:
> Okay, so the idea is:
>
> (a) move m68k from etch to testing-m68k
>
> (b) automatically promote m68k packages from unstable to testing-m68k
> when the same version gets promoted into etch.
Which, since no special britney run is done, makes it absolutely and
exac
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 02:13:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> Um, I think I've missed something. What'd be the functional difference
>> between the two?
>
> testing-m68k == having something that updates from unstable at its own
> pace for m68k only. That might mean
Anthony Towns writes:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 12:47:19PM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > Personally, I think m68k would be better served by having a testing-m68k
>> > and taking occassional snapshots which serve as the supported stable-m68k
>> > rele
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 06:58:21AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> So, from the other thread, seems like the idea for m68k is:
>>
>>(a) keep building unstable as per usual
A per architecture tracking of arch:all package would be ni
Roman Zippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 06:11:38PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> > Assumed m68k would be able to kill (most of) the backlog in time, what
>> > would
>> > prevent m68k from becoming releasable?
Hi,
just a small reminder that etch still has no 64bit kernels for
i386. This is a regression from sarge which has them. The bug
(#379090) has a simple patch to reintroduce those kernel images (+5/-1
lines code change and the rest is config) for nearly 100 days without
a comment so far.
Would it
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 10:29:37AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 02:50:35AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>&g
Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 02:50:35AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> But running Debian binaries on other distributions remains a
>> problem. For example static binaries that use libnss* plugins will
>> fail to
Dear release team and DDs,
I submitted a trivial patch for glibc in bug#387446 to increase the
compatibility between debian amd64 and other distributions. The
maintainer has reassign this to 'general' saying:
Aurelien Jarno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually there is nothing wrong with the gl
Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Goswin von Brederlow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060906 13:52]:
>> Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Andreas Barth wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I try to summarize t
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Barth wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I try to summarize the results of the discussion from start of August,
>> in hope that we can finish this off, and test-run this first for the
>> next stable point release. From the security team, some input on their
>
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:07:31AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> > Probably best to just ask the release team (cc'd) for their preferred
>> > approach.
>>
>> Could we quantify that
dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:58:04PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
>> I'm trying to follow debian-devel and giving advice where possible.
>> Unfortunately most people just don't care; e.g. I strongly recommended
>> to dump mantis completely. Still someon
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> An important question for the design of a solution is how acceptable it
> would be to have source and udebs out of sync in testing between d-i
> releases. Of course, for a stable release everything must be in sync, but
> IMO we can easily manage that.
I
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, now that we agreed that those modules need to go into non-free, but that
> provided their licence is clear enough, like in the tg3 case, they are indeed
> distriutable in non-free, let's go back to the initial point.
>
> This is upstream work, and work
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 11:03:29PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Compare it to including a hexdump of an image or sound in a header
>> file and including that in the binary. And compare it with having that
>> same imag
Daniel Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 23:52:01 +0200
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> They have always been a problem and have always violated the license
>> of the rest of the kernel. It is just that nobody notic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Aug 07, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > No, because those are not linked together with the GPLed code, but are a
>> > mere
>> > aggregation of works inside the same media, i.e. the bi
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 06:14:08PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> Where people buy their hardware or how free their hardware is has
>> >> little to do wi
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 04:32:52PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > I am not familiar enough with how library are run, but there is some very
>> > differ
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:48:08PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And even for an aggregation of works the DFSG holds and you are still
>> in trouble.
>
> Sure, the
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 01:21:32PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
>>
>> > On Aug 04, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >&g
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In linux.debian.kernel Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>The real issue here is one of freedom and DFSG and not one of legality anyway.
>>Those firmware are not DFSG-free and have nothing to do in main, and this is
>>the real problem.
> They were n
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Aug 04, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >>think not? Prove it by proposing a GR. More importantly, the release team
>> > I had such a plan, but no time to implement it currently.
>
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In linux.debian.kernel Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
What can be done about this?
>>>Accept that most people do not consider this a problem?
>>First of all, this is false. Most Debian developers agree with me. You
> This is unproven.
Anthony Towns writes:
> Joey: Thanks for the Bcc.
>
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 12:56:26PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
>> 5. http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/07/msg00202.html
>> Rapha?l Hertzog suggested[2] to use two signatures, one from a yearly
>> key and one from a stable release k
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Martin Schulze:
>>
>> > I'd really love to see this feature properly implemented.
>>
>> The only approach which is known to work is static keys for stable
>> releases and stable security updates. The k
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Florian Weimer wrote:
>> From a release engineering view, the last possible date at which APT
>> key material can be included in d-i would be interesting, I guess.
>
> Last chance for that is the final build of d-i initrds.
>
> --
> see shy jo
And the plan
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.26.1601 +0100]:
>> If you can get ftp-master to put the key in that place then I'm
>> willing to patch apt to use it for key updates with enough checking
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to the last release update the key management issue for
> Secure APT is not yet resolved.
>
> Are there chances to get key management settled down before the
> release? It would really be a shame if we couldn't get this done and
> provide the
Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>
>> How about creating a sparc64 package (probably part of dpkg's internal
>> type-handling support) and depending on that?
>>
>> That would at least make the
Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Recently I've been investigating the xine-lib build failure on
> sparc. It turned out that failure occured due to libavcodec, shipped
> as a part of xine-lib, using the sparc64-specific assembler
> instructions in some routines (without providing
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted the release team now about the plans to update ia32-libs
to know
> in sarge. The updates will just bring the ia64/amd64 packages back in
> sync with the actual i386 sarge
1 - 100 of 178 matches
Mail list logo
