On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 06:44:21PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
IMHO, as this is not a security-update releaseing via a DSA is wrong,
but the correct target would be preparing it for bookworm point
release but release the updates with the reasoning above earlier via a
SUA (the release team
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 03:53:05PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Control: affects -1 openssh-server
>
> [TL;DR: I think it may not be possible to properly solve this without a
> bookworm update as well as a change to trixie.]
>
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 01:19:40PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>
Control: affects -1 openssh-server
[TL;DR: I think it may not be possible to properly solve this without a
bookworm update as well as a change to trixie.]
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 01:19:40PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 07:42:07PM +0200, Manfred Stock wrote:
Further Comm
On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 12:54:07 +0300
=?UTF-8?Q?Martin=2D=C3=89ric_Racine?=
wrote:
> la 19.4.2025 klo 12.43 Pascal Hambourg (pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org) kirjoitti:
> >
> > On 19/04/2025 at 10:19, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > >
> > > Will the release team publish Trixie fully knowing that btrtfs hosts
>
Hi Martin-Éric
On 19-04-2025 10:19, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
And what do you expect from the Release Team?
A simple question:
Will the release team publish Trixie fully knowing that btrtfs hosts
will no longer be bootable via UEFI?
I hope you made a joke when you said "simple", because it
la 19.4.2025 klo 12.43 Pascal Hambourg (pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org) kirjoitti:
>
> On 19/04/2025 at 10:19, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> >
> > Will the release team publish Trixie fully knowing that btrtfs hosts
> > will no longer be bootable via UEFI?
>
> Not all btrfs hosts are affected. A fresh UEFI t
On 19/04/2025 at 10:19, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
Will the release team publish Trixie fully knowing that btrtfs hosts
will no longer be bootable via UEFI?
Not all btrfs hosts are affected. A fresh UEFI trixie btrfs virtual
machine boots fine on bookworm QEMU+OVMF. IIUC you wrote that trixie
Hey Paul,
la 19.4.2025 klo 9.45 Paul Gevers (elb...@debian.org) kirjoitti:
> On 18-04-2025 18:10, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> > I would really hope the release team to step in on this one.
>
> And what do you expect from the Release Team?
A simple question:
Will the release team publish Trixie f
Hi Martin-Eric,
On 18-04-2025 18:10, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
I would really hope the release team to step in on this one.
And what do you expect from the Release Team?
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 11:17:06 +0300
=?UTF-8?Q?Martin=2D=C3=89ric_Racine?=
wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2025 10:13:15 +0300
> =?UTF-8?Q?Martin=2D=C3=89ric_Racine?=
> wrote:
> > to 17.4.2025 klo 10.03 Pascal Hambourg (pas...@plouf.fr.eu.org) kirjoitti:
> > >
> > > On 17/04/2025 at 06:01, Martin-Éric Raci
Cyril Brulebois:
> Niels Thykier (2017-06-15):
>> Guillem and I have been talking about this over IRC and have a theory.
>>
>> Basically, jessie's verison of desktop-file-utils and shared-mime-info
>> have "-await" triggers (implicit) which will push other packages into a
>> "TRIGGER_PENDING" stat
Emmanuel Bourg (2017-06-15):
> Is this the only solution?
Probably not, but reverting the single change that triggered the
regression looks like a safe way to unbreak this situation. Especially
when the said change only happened many months after the relevant
package was removed from the archive
Bill Allombert (2017-06-15):
> It would be really nice if we could remove the circular dependency
> between openjdk-8 and ca-certificate before the release, otherwise
> the stretch to buster upgrade will be a nightmare.
> It always much easier to add circular dependency than to remove them.
Bill
Emmanuel Bourg (2017-06-15):
> If you upload a NMU could you please push the changes to the Git
> repository?
I'll look into this when I've slept a bit. Reminders/prods welcome.
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Le 15/06/2017 à 18:09, Cyril Brulebois a écrit :
> If all succeed, I intend to NMU ca-certificates-java with the attached
> changes. I could have reintroduced the old package, but I chose to retain
> the svn to git changes, and to drop the version for the openjdk-7 case,
> since even jessie had a
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 03:16:17PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Julien Cristau (2017-06-15):
> > It sounds like openjdk-8 added two Breaks recently, one or both of
> > which are causing trouble, and none of which fix anything as bad as
> > this. So I think we should remove the Breaks on tzdata
Cyril Brulebois (2017-06-15):
> I was just saying this on IRC:
>
> “should I try to reinstate ca-certificates-java's old dependencies and
> compare? from my initial bug report, that's the change in the archive
> that led to the regression.”
>
> and mentioned earlier that given the ol
Andreas Beckmann (2017-06-15):
> On 2017-06-15 15:16, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Julien Cristau (2017-06-15):
> >> It sounds like openjdk-8 added two Breaks recently, one or both of
> >> which are causing trouble, and none of which fix anything as bad as
> >> this. So I think we should remove th
On 2017-06-15 10:02, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 12.06.2017 um 20:33 schrieb Andreas Beckmann:
>> Switching desktop-file-utils or/and shared-mime-info to -noawait
>> triggers does not solve the problem.
>
> So afaics there is nothing that can be done from the Debian GNOME team
> side, right?
You co
On 2017-06-15 15:16, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Julien Cristau (2017-06-15):
>> It sounds like openjdk-8 added two Breaks recently, one or both of
>> which are causing trouble, and none of which fix anything as bad as
>> this. So I think we should remove the Breaks on tzdata-java from
>> openjdk-8-
Julien Cristau (2017-06-15):
> It sounds like openjdk-8 added two Breaks recently, one or both of
> which are causing trouble, and none of which fix anything as bad as
> this. So I think we should remove the Breaks on tzdata-java from
> openjdk-8-jdk-headless, and remove the Breaks on ca-certific
On 06/15/2017 10:02 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 12.06.2017 um 20:33 schrieb Andreas Beckmann:
>> Switching desktop-file-utils or/and shared-mime-info to -noawait
>> triggers does not solve the problem.
>
> So afaics there is nothing that can be done from the Debian GNOME team
> side, rig
Hi
Am 12.06.2017 um 20:33 schrieb Andreas Beckmann:
> Switching desktop-file-utils or/and shared-mime-info to -noawait
> triggers does not solve the problem.
So afaics there is nothing that can be done from the Debian GNOME team
side, right?
> I can confirm that the ca-certificates-java change t
Package: upgrade-reports
Severity: critical
Justification: makes upgrade from stable abort
[ X-D-Cc:
debian-release@lists.debian.org
pkg-java-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
pkg-gnome-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org ]
Hi,
Regression spotted by Pere in some debian-edu job, but also
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 08:27:23PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 06:31:08PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Am 09.05.2013 17:56, schrieb Roger Leigh:
> >
> > > The transitional package does need a version higher than the initscripts
> > > Breaks: sysklogd (<< 1.5-6.2)
> > > s
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 10:37:14AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [Roger Leigh]
> > sysklogd is dead upstream and unmaintained in Debian for over 2½
> > years.
>
> It has been practically abandoned for a lot longer than that. The lack
> of maintenance of sysklogd is part of the reason rsy
[Roger Leigh]
> sysklogd is dead upstream and unmaintained in Debian for over 2½
> years.
It has been practically abandoned for a lot longer than that. The lack
of maintenance of sysklogd is part of the reason rsyslog took over in
Debian, many years ago.
--
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 06:31:08PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 09.05.2013 17:56, schrieb Roger Leigh:
>
> > The transitional package does need a version higher than the initscripts
> > Breaks: sysklogd (<< 1.5-6.2)
> > so a 1.5-7 would be OK. This could be done as a separate sysklogd
> > pac
On Tue, 2011-01-18 at 19:30 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:28:24PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:06:49PM +0200, r...@rene-engelhard.de wrote:
> > > trying a lenny->squeeze dist-upgrade on my server (data see below):
> > >
> > > $ apt-get -s
Hi -release,
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 07:28:24PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:06:49PM +0200, r...@rene-engelhard.de wrote:
> > trying a lenny->squeeze dist-upgrade on my server (data see below):
> >
> > $ apt-get -s dist-upgrade
> > [...]
> > 444 upgraded, 175 newly in
On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 18:48 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 23:25:08 +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
>
> > Dear splashy maintainers, could you upload a 0.3.13-3+lenny1 in
> > stable-proposed-updates based on 0.3.13-3 patched with
> > 02_lsb-base-logging.sh_bug512951.diff ?
> >
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 23:25:08 +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> Dear splashy maintainers, could you upload a 0.3.13-3+lenny1 in
> stable-proposed-updates based on 0.3.13-3 patched with
> 02_lsb-base-logging.sh_bug512951.diff ?
> http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#upload-stab
Hi,
Though splashy has been removed from testing, lenny users with this package
will see their upgrade severely affected.
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 10:52:59AM +0100, Christian Meyer wrote:
> Package: upgrade-reports
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks the whole system
>
Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> (resurrecting this thread...)
>
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 06:33:14PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>>>>> A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
>>>>> [0] that is out of date since it is a t
(resurrecting this thread...)
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 06:33:14PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> >>> A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
> >>> [0] that is out of date since it is a template for a woody -> sarge
> >
> &
Chuan-kai Lin wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:20:22AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> Since this sev: important bug has a significant impact on sarge->etch
>> upgrades for desktop users, I've prepared an NMU of fam that drops the
>> Conflicts: as proposed here. The patch is attached, and the N
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:20:22AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Since this sev: important bug has a significant impact on sarge->etch
> upgrades for desktop users, I've prepared an NMU of fam that drops the
> Conflicts: as proposed here. The patch is attached, and the NMU has
> been uploaded to
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 10:48:52AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
>> * Roberto C. Sanchez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061224 02:10]:
>>> A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
>>> [0] that is out
On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 04:49:50PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> That being said, attached is a patch to the current upgrade-report.html page
> to add additional information (and do not make it depend on a specific Debian
> release). I think it's worthwhile mentioning that the user
tags 405165 patch
thanks
Hi Chuan-kai,
On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 01:28:11AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 25, 2006 at 11:46:32PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > I did an upgrade from sarge to etch recently, and had some comments
> > about it.
> > I followed the draft release notes as a
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 10:48:52AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sanchez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061224 02:10]:
> > A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
> > [0] that is out of date since it is a template for a woody -
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 10:48:52AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sanchez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061224 02:10]:
> > A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
> > [0] that is out of date since it is a template for a woody -> sarg
* Roberto C. Sanchez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061224 02:10]:
> A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
> [0] that is out of date since it is a template for a woody -> sarge
> upgrade. I would like to recommend that it either be updated or
> re
A Google search for "debian upgrade reports" (no quotes) returns a page
[0] that is out of date since it is a template for a woody -> sarge
upgrade. I would like to recommend that it either be updated or
replaced with a redirection to a more current page (if one such page
does exi
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 02:51:26PM -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:25AM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> > > Installing the new kernel first means the old kernels will be removed,
> > > udev will be installed, only a few necessary packag
On Wednesday 01 November 2006 02:54, Ryan Finnie wrote:
> So, should the release notes not encourage people to install an
> updated aptitude before dist-upgrading? As a workaround, I did find
> that if you "aptitude -f install initrd-tools", it just updates
> initrd-tools and no other packages. S
On 10/31/06, Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/31/06, Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The etch libc6 Conflicts: initrd-tools (<< 0.1.84.1), however the etch
> initrd-tools *IS* 0.1.84.1. So yeah, there is a problem (supposedly
> fixed in sid) with conflict resolution. As it
On 10/31/06, Ryan Finnie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The etch libc6 Conflicts: initrd-tools (<< 0.1.84.1), however the etch
initrd-tools *IS* 0.1.84.1. So yeah, there is a problem (supposedly
fixed in sid) with conflict resolution. As it turns out, you can
continue to use 2.6.8 on an etch machin
On 10/31/06, Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:25AM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>> This problem (automatic removal of old kernel packages) is apparently
>> fixed in the version of aptitude in Sid, 0.4.4-1. If this version was
>>
.8-3-k7 lapack-dev lesstif2-dev
^^^
[...]
> Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] n
> Abort.
> benjo[4]:/home/kmccarty# uname -a
> Linux benjo 2.6.8-3-k7 #1 Thu Sep 7 05:09:40 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux
^^
So that's not going to
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 03:04:49PM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> Sorry, maybe I didn't make myself understood well, or else I didn't
> understand the bug report. If I read correctly, the submitter is
> complaining that his dist-upgrade wanted to remove the package
> containing the **currently r
Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:25AM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>> This problem (automatic removal of old kernel packages) is apparently
>> fixed in the version of aptitude in Sid, 0.4.4-1. If this version was
>> allowed to pass into Etch (currently aptitude in Etch is o
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:57:25AM -0800, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> > Upgrade went well, except for one rather big problem. If I do a
> > straight "aptitude -f dist-upgrade", it removes kernel-image-* (IE,
> > kernel-image-2.6.8-3-686; I didn't try a 2.4 installation->upgrade).
> > Now, I unde
Argh. Sorry, this was of course supposed to go to
debian-release@LISTS.debian.org ...
Original Message
Subject: Re: Bug#396331: upgrade-reports: sarge to etch removes kernels
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:57:25 -0800
From: Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PRO
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 04:46:30PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > - All packages failed to upgrade (pre-depends problem)
> > - Upgrade failed.
> > Further Comments/Problems:
> > Output from /usr/bin/script:
> > E: Internal Error, Couldn't configure a pre-depend
> > Ack! Something bad
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 10:27:50PM +, Kevin O. Morris wrote:
> Package: upgrade-reports
>
> Archive date: Sun May 22 20:00:01 UTC 2005
> Upgrade date: Mon May 23 00:18:59 UTC 2005
> uname -a: Linux montypython.tingfod.org 2.4.16-686 #1 Wed Nov 28
> 09:27:17 EST 2001 i68
Hi Clemens,
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 09:58:40AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I just read the mail by Steve Langasek on Debian devel-announce.
> His remark concerning the processing of upgrade reports drew my attention.
> I would be happy to spend a little of my spare-time to help ou
Hi Debian developpers,
I just read the mail by Steve Langasek on Debian devel-announce.
His remark concerning the processing of upgrade reports drew my attention.
I would be happy to spend a little of my spare-time to help out in this matter.
I have been using Debian SID for over 3.5 years and
Hi folks,
Thank you all for volunteering to help with upgrade report processing. If
you haven't yet done so, please make sure you're subscribed to the
debian-testing mailing list, as that's where all bug reports against the
upgrade-reports package will be sent.
For those of
ahead and close upgrade reports that include only bugs
that have been fixed.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Should we archive/close old/fixed upgrade and install reports or not?
There are reports over a year old and some that refer to closed bugs.
There are quite a few to close and archive.
Andrew Donnellan
volunteer report processor
--
Heritage Linux Group
http://www.heritagelinux.tk
also sprach Clive Menzies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.16.1251 +0200]:
> Strengths: I can write and can usually work through problems to a
> successful solution
Great!
http://bts.turmzimmer.net/details.php
Pick a problem and go.
> Weakness: No formal computer background (self-taught) and have
Hi
In response to Steve's message, I am happy to help where I can but
whether I'm of the 'right stuff', I can't say:
Experience (in brief):
Been running debian since spring 2003 (never run any other linux distro)
initially ppc (woody) and then i386 (on servers) as well. Started using
sid on my
Hi,
I'll volunteer to process upgrade reports for sarge. I'm not a DD, though.
Andrew Donnellan
64 matches
Mail list logo
