On 10 August 2024 at 14:51, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| On 2024-08-03 14:54:29 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > On 3 August 2024 at 21:07, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| > | On 2024-08-03 20:12:12 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
| > | > On 8/3/24 7:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| > |
On 3 August 2024 at 21:07, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| On 2024-08-03 20:12:12 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
| > On 8/3/24 7:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| > > On 2024-07-31 09:50:40 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
| > > > On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
| > > > > No
On 2024-08-03 20:12:12 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 8/3/24 7:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > On 2024-07-31 09:50:40 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> > > On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> > > > Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of t
On 8/3/24 7:56 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
On 2024-07-31 09:50:40 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of the
autopkgtest regressions got fixed. The remaining autopkgtest regressions
On 2024-07-31 09:50:40 +0200, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> > Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of the
> > autopkgtest regressions got fixed. The remaining autopkgtest regressions
> > for packages that could not be reb
On 7/30/24 5:17 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of the
autopkgtest regressions got fixed. The remaining autopkgtest regressions
for packages that could not be rebuilt during the transition will need a
little help to unblock the tes
Now that the s390x builds found their way to the mirrors, most of the
autopkgtest regressions got fixed. The remaining autopkgtest regressions
for packages that could not be rebuilt during the transition will need a
little help to unblock the testing migration of gsl and its rdeps.
Kind Regard
On 25 July 2024 at 13:41, Paul Gevers wrote:
| On 25-07-2024 13:22, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > I have built it, but in haste and error left the source-only flag from a
| > recent upload to NEW on so I have to wait for the queue to purge before I
can
| > re-upload the corrected source-only batc
Hi,
On 25-07-2024 13:22, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
I have built it, but in haste and error left the source-only flag from a
recent upload to NEW on so I have to wait for the queue to purge before I can
re-upload the corrected source-only batch. Worst case I make a -3.
-2 is in the archive now,
On 25 July 2024 at 12:56, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
| On 25/07/2024 12:48, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > Anything we/I need to do or will this work as an auto-transition? I presume
| > we need a basic ben file this?
| >
| >
On 25/07/2024 12:48, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 25 July 2024 at 10:50, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
| Control: tags -1 confirmed
|
| On 21/07/2024 11:09, Yavor Doganov wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:58:25 +0300,
| > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| >> If it ends up that you cannot do it, let me know
On 25 July 2024 at 10:50, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
| Control: tags -1 confirmed
|
| On 21/07/2024 11:09, Yavor Doganov wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:58:25 +0300,
| > Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| >> If it ends up that you cannot do it, let me know and I can do it.
| >
| > Fortunately this wa
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #1072036 [release.debian.org] release.debian.org: Transition for gsl-2.8 /
libgsl28
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
1072036: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072036
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with pr
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 21/07/2024 11:09, Yavor Doganov wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:58:25 +0300,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
If it ends up that you cannot do it, let me know and I can do it.
Fortunately this was not necessary.
Here are the results of my attempt (apologies that it took me s
On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 22:58:25 +0300,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> If it ends up that you cannot do it, let me know and I can do it.
Fortunately this was not necessary.
Here are the results of my attempt (apologies that it took me so long).
These packages have issues with the new GSL version:
cpl-plugi
On 11/07/24 at 12:06 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 11 July 2024 at 19:44, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> | Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > On 11 July 2024 at 17:37, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> | > | Since we are only talking about approximately 294 source packages to
> | > | rebuild, isn't that someth
On 11 July 2024 at 19:44, Yavor Doganov wrote:
| Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 11 July 2024 at 17:37, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| > | Since we are only talking about approximately 294 source packages to
| > | rebuild, isn't that something that you could do on your own machine?
| >
| > I think I pa
Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> On 11 July 2024 at 17:37, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> | Since we are only talking about approximately 294 source packages to
> | rebuild, isn't that something that you could do on your own machine?
>
> I think I pass on that.
I volunteer to do test rebuilds of the rdeps (bu
On 11 July 2024 at 17:37, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
| On 11/07/24 at 07:00 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > Salut Lucas,
| >
| > On 23 June 2024 at 13:09, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| > | On 2024-06-21 09:51:39 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > | >
| > | > On 21 June 2024 at 05:34, Dirk Ed
On 11/07/24 at 07:00 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> Salut Lucas,
>
> On 23 June 2024 at 13:09, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> | On 2024-06-21 09:51:39 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | >
> | > On 21 June 2024 at 05:34, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | > |
> | > | On 21 June 2024 at 10:43, Sebas
Salut Lucas,
On 23 June 2024 at 13:09, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| On 2024-06-21 09:51:39 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > On 21 June 2024 at 05:34, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > |
| > | On 21 June 2024 at 10:43, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| > | | Control: tags -1 moreinfo
| > | |
| > |
On 2024-06-21 09:51:39 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> On 21 June 2024 at 05:34, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> |
> | On 21 June 2024 at 10:43, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> | | Control: tags -1 moreinfo
> | |
> | | On 2024-05-27 12:01:45 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
> | | >
> | | > Package: r
On 21 June 2024 at 05:34, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
|
| On 21 June 2024 at 10:43, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| | Control: tags -1 moreinfo
| |
| | On 2024-05-27 12:01:45 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| | >
| | > Package: release.debian.org
| | > Severity: normal
| | > User: release.debian@
On 21 June 2024 at 10:43, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
| Control: tags -1 moreinfo
|
| On 2024-05-27 12:01:45 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| >
| > Package: release.debian.org
| > Severity: normal
| > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
| > Usertags: transition
| >
| > GNU GSL 2.8 was
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 moreinfo
Bug #1072036 [release.debian.org] release.debian.org: Transition for gsl-2.8 /
libgsl28
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
1072036: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1072036
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with prob
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On 2024-05-27 12:01:45 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> GNU GSL 2.8 was released a few days ago, and I uploaded a new version to
> experimental wa
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
GNU GSL 2.8 was released a few days ago, and I uploaded a new version to
experimental was has now cleared NEW.
I checked my email folder, and the last time this happened (gsl 2.7, earl
27 matches
Mail list logo
