Jonny Lamb wrote:
> Hello.
>
> farsight2 failed to build on alpha, i386, mips, mipsel, s390 and sparc
> because libnice-dev wasn't available on those archs. Please could you
> give it back?
given back. Note that a dep-wait would have been possible before
libnice-dev was available...
Cheers
Luk
ghc6_6.10.1+dfsg-10 had some 32/64 bit issues, leading to failed
builds on amd64. Those should be fixed in -11.
gb haskell-stm_2.1.1.2-3 . amd64 . -m 'ghc6 (>= 6.10.1+dfsg1-11)'
gb haskell-mtl_1.1.0.2-5 . amd64 . -m 'ghc6 (>= 6.10.1+dfsg1-11)'
gb haskell-time_1.1.2.3-2 . amd64 . -m 'ghc6 (>= 6.10
Luk Claes wrote:
> Nicolas François wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 08:32:16PM +0100, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
>>> Zitat von "Luk Claes" :
r1 is planned to happen at end of March or beginning of April currently.
>>> Thanks for the information. "End of March" is defined as 2009-03-3
Kari Pahula wrote:
> ghc6_6.10.1+dfsg-10 had some 32/64 bit issues, leading to failed
> builds on amd64. Those should be fixed in -11.
>
> gb haskell-stm_2.1.1.2-3 . amd64 . -m 'ghc6 (>= 6.10.1+dfsg1-11)'
> gb haskell-mtl_1.1.0.2-5 . amd64 . -m 'ghc6 (>= 6.10.1+dfsg1-11)'
> gb haskell-time_1.1.2.
Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
>> [ can we upload OCaml 3.11 to unstable? ]
>
> I can see that pcre3 is blocking a lot of packages in unstable from
> migrating to testing (including OCaml-related ones). I think we should
> at least wait for this transition to complete.
>
>
Hi,
Since Backports.org is (semi) official service, I would like to suggest
to make ${stable}-backports available the same day a new stable
distribution is released.
This would be extremely useful for package that are only available
through Debian-Unstable and backport.org service (like
flashplug
Frank Lin PIAT schrieb am Saturday, den 21. February 2009:
> Hi,
>
> Since Backports.org is (semi) official service, I would like to suggest
> to make ${stable}-backports available the same day a new stable
> distribution is released.
>
> This would be extremely useful for package that are only
Hi!
* Frank Lin PIAT [2009-02-21 15:44:03 CET]:
> Since Backports.org is (semi) official service, I would like to suggest
> to make ${stable}-backports available the same day a new stable
> distribution is released.
That is not only depending on the backports.org team, and would only be
Frank Lin PIAT schrieb am Saturday, den 21. February 2009:
*snip*
> > if we need the time do get things for a new release done, then we need
> > the time.
>
> I don't know backports constraints. Actually, thinking of it, I
> understand that you probably need ${stable} to backport stuffs to
> ${s
On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 16:04 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Frank Lin PIAT schrieb am Saturday, den 21. February 2009:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since Backports.org is (semi) official service, I would like to suggest
> > to make ${stable}-backports available the same day a new stable
> > distribution is r
Hi,
please unblock fai for stable-proposed-updates, it fixes an important bug
which prevents perl scripts from working at all, plus two minor also easy to
fix ones.
The upload has been approved by the regular fai maintainer, Thomas and has
been preapproved by Luk for the releaseteam, so I've a
Dear Debian Release managers,
A couple weeks ago I tried to upload a version -3 of my package libsvm
and it was blocked because there was already a version -2 in the NEW
queue. (-2 was put in the new queue because it had one new binary
package, the java one) I tried again to upload the -3 using
Rudi Cilibrasi wrote:
> Dear Debian Release managers,
>
> A couple weeks ago I tried to upload a version -3 of my package libsvm
> and it was blocked because there was already a version -2 in the NEW
> queue. (-2 was put in the new queue because it had one new binary
> package, the java one) I t
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: important
Hi
Please provide an installability check on the packages in
(oldstable-)proposed-updates. Preferably this would be usable on the
(o-)p-u-new queue (directly on a source package, maybe additionaly using a
Packages file).
Cheers
Luk
--
To UN
Martin Godisch wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 17:55:31 -0700, Matt Taggart wrote:
>
>> Package: sleuthkit
>> Version: 2.06-3
>>
>> The fedora people discovered that sleuthkit had a license compatibility
>> issue
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=401101
>>
>> according to that bu
Christoph Haas wrote:
> Fellow earthicans,
>
> I have just updated the libweather-com-perl package [0] because since
> beginning of May it has stopped working due to a protocol change of the
> used internet service. The fix is a one-line patch between 0.5.3-1.1 and
> 0.5.3-2. It addresses this
Hi
Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 10:41:16PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>>> However, there is no equivilant source of information for packages
>>> apt-installed by d-i.
>> Could there be one? Well, if you're interested in having the same
>> safeguard mechanism in place for these p
Marcus Better wrote:
> Hi,
>
> please unblock this package which fixes an RC bug (#494408). This version
> provides a patch for kernel 2.6.26.
>
> Unfortunately there have been two uploads to sid that didn't transition to
> testing, and there are some minor non-RC changes cluttering the previous
Thibaut VARÈNE wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It just came to my attention that the pidgin-otr package completely
> failed to
> ship translation files along with the software. The fix is trivial (see
> interdiff
> below), I just uploaded to unstable a new package which solves this issue.
>
> I believe it's alr
* Paul Menzel [Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:21:27 +0100]:
> Dear Release-Team,
> s/by by/by/
> on [1].
> [1] http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/
Thanks, fixed by Luk.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeoda
* Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 14:39:51 +0100]:
> * Julien Cristau [2009-02-15 14:09]:
> > On Sun, 2009-02-15 at 12:43 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> > > If it's only a shlibs bump, and no package is *dropped* (only
> > > additions), please go ahead, and thanks for contacting us.
> > Jud
* Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 14:22:54 +0100]:
Hello, Rafael.
> I hereby request the authorization to upload libmtp 0.3.6 to unstable.
> Since version 0.3.0-1 of the package, uploaded to experimental on June 30,
> 2008, the SOVERSION was bumped to libmtp8. The current version in unstabl
* Adeodato Simó [2009-02-21 21:47]:
> Thanks for your patience, please upload suitesparse 3.2.0 to unstable at
> your convenience, and notify us when you've done so.
Done. The package will go into NEW because there is the new component
libcolamd-3.2.0.
> If no source changes are needed in depe
* Adeodato Simó [2009-02-21 21:56]:
> * Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 14:22:54 +0100]:
>
> > The version currently in experimental (2.0.1.1-1) depends already on
> > libmtp8. Nothing to do here.
>
> Such version of Amarok depends on KDE4, and I don't think it'll be
> uploaded to uns
* Adeodato Simó [2009-02-21 21:56]:
> * Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 14:22:54 +0100]:
> > * mtpfs
>
> > Version 0.9 currently in experimental builds fine without changes against
> > libmtp-dev 0.3.6.
>
> Good. Chris, is mtpfs 0.9 ready to be uploaded to unstable, or else, is
> the u
* Jonny Lamb [Fri, 20 Feb 2009 21:21:44 +]:
> Hello.
> Please could you schedule a binNMU for libiec61883 so it builds against
> libraw1394-11 instead of -8.
Will be scheduled together with the rest of binNMUs needed for this
transition, which are due soon. (Not right now, because the buildd
* Rafael Laboissiere [Sun, 22 Feb 2009 01:26:24 +0100]:
Hello again.
> > > * mtpfs
> Version 0.8+svn11-1 builds file with the debdiff patch attached below. Not
> tested.
> amarok 1.4.10-2 compiles fine with the debdiff patch attached below. I did
> not test it, though.
Okay, thanks for invest
* Reinhard Tartler [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 17:06:22 +0100]:
> Hi Release Team,
Hello, Reinhard.
> as per the recent announcement on d-d-a, I'd like to announce that we,
> the pkg-multimedia team would like to update ffmpeg in squeeze at the
> earliest convenience. libavcodec has seen an SONAME bump (5
Hello everyone,
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Hi Release Team,
>
> as per the recent announcement on d-d-a, I'd like to announce that we,
> the pkg-multimedia team would like to update ffmpeg in squeeze at the
> earliest convenience. libavcodec has seen an SONAME bump (51->52)
> including some minor
Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > Good. Chris, is mtpfs 0.9 ready to be uploaded to unstable, or else, is
> > the unstable version buildable against libmtp8? Thanks.
>
> Version 0.8+svn11-1 builds file with the debdiff patch attached below
> Not tested.
I've tested your patch and it works on my devi
Chris Lamb wrote:
> please advise on your preferred course of action.
(Resending after mail breakage) Have seen dato's previous mail and will
prepare for libmtp8 in unstable soon. Many thanks.
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` la...@debian.org
`-
si
* Chris Lamb [Sun, 22 Feb 2009 02:37:09 +]:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
> > please advise on your preferred course of action.
> (Resending after mail breakage) Have seen dato's previous mail and will
> prepare for libmtp8 in unstable soon. Many thanks.
(In case it needed clearing up, uploading 0.9
32 matches
Mail list logo
