reopen 407384
quit
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 11:24:57PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Missed again; this was fixed by swt-gtk 3.2.1-5's transition to testing.
> This request can now be ignored.
No, it can't. Conflicts are supposed to be declared bidirectionally; that's
why I downgraded this bug
Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
In my opinion this is only a minor change that will avoid a manual
move of the couriergraph.cgi script to the correct location.
>>> Yes, I'm pretty sure this would be acceptable -- couriergraph is
Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> It has just come to my attention that there will be no upgrade path
> from the version of Mailman in etch at this time (2.1.9) to the
> version lenny will most probably have (2.2.x), but there will be an
> upgrade path from the yet-unreleased 2.1.y, y>9, to 2.2.x, and an
Greetings,
Please get these fixes into Etch:
http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/sisu/sisu_0.48.8-10.dsc
incoming:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/sisu/news/20070123T083204Z.html
included below:
(a) changelog (Closes: #407937, #407932, #407943, #407938, #407941) *
(b) debdiff
(c) breakd
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 07:14:14PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I see there is a fix in the bug report now. Do you want to
create a -6 package, or do you want me to try -5.3 NMU?
Right now, I don't care. I personally feel that the manual build should
have been sufficient to get -5.2
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 00:01 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 11:21:40PM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> >> Well, .la needs to die, but I have to admit that breaking the .la
> >> interface this late in the release cy
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 06:22, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> hello again. ltsp 0.99debian11 is in sid, and contains fixes for RC and
> important bugs that should enter etch, as well as some translation and
> documentation updates. please consider allowing it to progress to etch.
ltsp has a udeb; n
Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I made an upload of webalizer (2.01.10-32) to adopt the
> package and do not let it orphan for etch. I also ack an NMU. No
> other changes to the package.
Unblocked.
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D
Bart Martens wrote:
> Hi Debian-Release,
>
> The package "flashplugin-nonfree" version 9.0.31.0.1 is in unstable
> (contrib). I suggest to allow that version to go to stable when etch is
> released.
Unblocked
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
F
Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 22 January 2007 12:20, you wrote:
>> The Marc reation was indeed right to ask why Leandro has change that
>> part of code and then Leandro has explained why he did. There's
>> nothing wrong here at least to me.
>
> Looks like I read the mail from Leandro wrong. Sorry.
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Hi,
>
> glibc 2.3.6.ds1-10 is in Etch for 12 days and is only missing the alpha
> build.
>
> The diff is attached below, the changes are either translation updates
> or bugfixes that I would like to see for Etch. Not that I have stripped
> hunk that only changes files fro
Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please, unblock the following packages:
>
> -kdeadmin 4:3.5.5-3
> -kdepim 4:3.5.5.dfsg.1-6
> -meta-kde-extras 5:52
> -qt-x11-free 3:3.3.7-3
All unblocked.
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
Fingerprint: D5AF
Frans Pop wrote:
> Please allow the Installation Guide to migrate to testing (just uploaded).
> HUGE diff, but documentation/translation only.
Thanks for the good work.
Unblocked
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53B
Christian Perrier wrote:
> Dear RM team,
>
> What is your opinion about the following? Would you accept the
> following change for etch?
Yes, that's fine.
Cheers
Luk
> - Forwarded message from Petr Salinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
>
> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:06:11 +0100 (CET)
> From:
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Please allow discover-data version 2.2007.01.21 to propagate into
> etch. It corrects X detection for a bunch of cards, as well as some
> minor kernel module updates and minor updates on busclass and
> recognized device names.
Unblocked.
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes -
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I just ran into bug #398185, which makes the svn-upgrade program in
> svn-buildpackage unusable. It is not marked as RC but it seems to me
> that it might as well be. It was fixed in unstable after the freeze
> (along with many other bugs). Please consider allowing the new
José Luis Tallón wrote:
> Christian Perrier wrote:
>> Quoting Christian Perrier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>>
> In my opinion this is only a minor change that will avoid a manual
> move of the couriergraph.cgi script to the correct location.
>
Yes, I'm pretty sure this would
Luk Claes wrote:
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> I just ran into bug #398185, which makes the svn-upgrade program in
>> svn-buildpackage unusable. It is not marked as RC but it seems to me
>> that it might as well be. It was fixed in unstable after the freeze
>> (along with many other bugs). Please co
Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> hello again. ltsp 0.99debian11 is in sid, and contains fixes for RC and
> important bugs that should enter etch, as well as some translation and
> documentation updates. please consider allowing it to progress to etch.
Unblocked.
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes - http://peop
Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Could you unblock qsf 1.2.5-2, please?
> Version 1.2.5-1 is a new upstream version, bugfix only release (no new code).
> 1.2.5-2 revision just adds a build-depends on bsdmainutils and man-db to
> get a text file (a quickref guide) generated from the manpage.
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 23:07 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Luk Claes wrote:
> > Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >> I just ran into bug #398185, which makes the svn-upgrade program in
> >> svn-buildpackage unusable. It is not marked as RC but it seems to me
> >> that it might as well be. It was fixed in unstabl
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:09:16AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 23:07 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> > Luk Claes wrote:
> > > Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >> I just ran into bug #398185, which makes the svn-upgrade program in
> > >> svn-buildpackage unusable. It is not marked as RC b
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Personally, I'm not sure this is warranted; svn-upgrade is an optional
> feature of svn-buildpackage, which I don't think is used by terribly
> many maintainers.
Hm, really? I certainly use it for all of my packages.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTE
Steve Langasek a écrit :
reopen 407384
quit
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 11:24:57PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Missed again; this was fixed by swt-gtk 3.2.1-5's transition to testing.
This request can now be ignored.
No, it can't. Conflicts are supposed to be declared bidirectionally
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 17:56, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Personally, I'm not sure this is warranted; svn-upgrade is an optional
> feature of svn-buildpackage, which I don't think is used by terribly many
> maintainers. And indeed, the changes related to svn_load_dirs alone are
> fairly intrusive
[Summary for -release: Is removing liferea-gtkhtml too disruptive for etch?]
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 03:04:29PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 04:36:20PM -0600, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> > Upstream's response to #361376 is to recommend the dropping of
> > liferea-
Hi Luis,
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 06:15:15PM -0600, Luis Rodrigo Gallardo Cruz wrote:
> Yes, Lars has stated his intention to completely remove this rendering
> engine.
> To do so, I'd assume the right way to go would be to turn -gtkhtml
> into a dummy package that pulls -xulrunner in.
> In that
27 matches
Mail list logo
