On Mon, September 17, 2012 15:58, Philipp Kern wrote:
> ok, given the replies, let's settle on this:
>
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 09:43:03PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> * Sep 29/30: ok from RT side
OK, so we need to update ia32-libs again, now that all changes are in.
The other two ia32-libs-* do
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:17:53AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> OK, so we need to update ia32-libs again, now that all changes are in.
> The other two ia32-libs-* do not require an update in this release.
>
> Attached is the proposed changelog entry. Let me know when I can upload.
ok, ple
Dear Release Team,
any news on my unblock request (pre-approval) of slbackup 0.0.12-4?
Greets,
Mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
mike gabriel, rothenstein 5, 24214 neudorf-bornstein
fon: +49 (1520) 1976 148
GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B31
mail: mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de
fre
Your message dated Wed, 26 Sep 2012 12:22:10 +0200
with message-id <20120926102210.GJ31592@mobee>
and subject line not an issue anymore, upstream will port 1.4.6 to libevent 2.0
(see #687402)
has caused the Debian Bug report #688244,
regarding unblock: beanstalkd/1.7-1
to be marked as done.
This
On Wed, September 26, 2012 11:02, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:17:53AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> OK, so we need to update ia32-libs again, now that all changes are in.
>> The other two ia32-libs-* do not require an update in this release.
>>
>> Attached is the pro
Hi.
[ Cc: debian-release for advice ].
I have received this report which is really two different bugs:
A) The initial one reported by Igor: Building m4 creates a package
linked with libsigsegv or not depending on the environment. This
should never happen in a Debian package and that's why we hav
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please approve the following changes for package libxvmc
As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy (see
#640499) I'm now trying another approach with minimal change
On 26.09.2012 11:53, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On Wed, September 26, 2012 11:02, Philipp Kern wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:17:53AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
OK, so we need to update ia32-libs again, now that all changes are
in.
The other two ia32-libs-* do not require an update in this r
Dear Release Team,
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 01:43:32AM +0200, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 03:36:47PM +0200, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > Source: libpri
> > Version: 1.4.12-2
> > Severity: serious
> > Justification: fails to build from source
> >
> > The upstream Makefile creates a v
Processing changes file: ia32-libs_20120926_amd64.changes
ACCEPT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1tgqy6-0008nt...@franck.debian.org
In case anyone is interested in a .dsc:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/libx/libxvmc/libxvmc_1.0.7-1.1.dsc
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.
Hi,
> As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy (see
> #640499) I'm now trying another approach with minimal changes to the
> libxvmc package:
Related to this, there's also
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687373
Kind regards,
Ralf
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
On 26.09.2012 14:01, Ralf Jung wrote:
As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy
(see
#640499) I'm now trying another approach with minimal changes to the
libxvmc package:
Related to this, there's also
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687373
Not so much
Hi,
FWIW I've prepared a few packages to unblock for d-i beta 3:
# only/mostly l10n:
unblock apt-setup/1:0.72
unblock-udeb apt-setup/1:0.72
unblock arcboot-installer/1.18
unblock-udeb arcboot-installer/1.18
unblock flash-kernel/3.3
unblock-udeb flash-kernel/3.3
unblock network-console/1.39
unbloc
On 2012-09-26 15:20, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Not so much related, as a proposed alternative, afaics? The maintainers
> appear to have made their opinion quite clear in #640499 on the
> originally suggested approach, however...
Therefore I'm now investigating a different approach ...
Andreas
-
Hi,
>>> As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy (see
>>> #640499) I'm now trying another approach with minimal changes to the
>>> libxvmc package:
>> Related to this, there's also
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687373
>
> Not so much related, as a p
On 26.09.2012 14:32, Ralf Jung wrote:
As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy
(see
#640499) I'm now trying another approach with minimal changes to
the
libxvmc package:
Related to this, there's also
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=687373
Not so muc
Hi,
>>> Not so much related, as a proposed alternative, afaics? The
>>> maintainers appear to have made their opinion quite clear in
>>> #640499 on the originally suggested approach, however...
>> You mean http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=640499#66
>> ?
>
> No, I meant
> http://bu
Hi,
since gtk+3.0 again appeared on my testing summary page (packages of
interest as far as unblock{,-udeb}'s are concerned), I'm wondering
whether it shouldn't just get its block-udeb removed?
I haven't heard yet of plans to port d-i to gtk3, and that wouldn't
happen during the wheezy release cy
Hello Marcin,
Marcin Owsiany (22/09/2012):
> I've already NMUed libusb 2:0.1.12-23+nmu1 to sid to fix RC bug
> #668026 there. However I've also discovered the bug is present in the
> version currently in testing (2:0.1.12-20). I suppose the changes in -21
> to -23 are not meant/eligible for inclu
On Friday, August 31, 2012 09:38:25 PM Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Excluding the documentation and renaming the directory back results in
> quite a sane diff. Please feel free to upload to unstable; let's see
> how that goes.
[10:54:07] adsb: re your poke r.e. #681107 - It's made it to ten days
ol
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package nova, it's just a debconf translation update
(that will make Spanish a step closer to be complete on Wheezy).
unblock nova/2012.1.1-10
Thanks in advance, regards.
D
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package mathematica-fonts, it fixes an important issue
via unstable (#686260: allow for translation of all user-visible
messages), with a review of all descriptions, update mo
Processing changes file: ia32-libs_20120926_ia64.changes
ACCEPT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1tgtan-0006om...@franck.debian.org
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package vavoom
package vavoom is a free engine for doom gamedata
it recomends freedom which is a free doom-like gamedata
freedom depends on boom-engine virtual package, which
On 26.09.2012 16:10, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since gtk+3.0 again appeared on my testing summary page (packages of
> interest as far as unblock{,-udeb}'s are concerned), I'm wondering
> whether it shouldn't just get its block-udeb removed?
>
> I haven't heard yet of plans to port d-i to g
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
I've prepared a tpu security upload for openjpeg (attached).
Ok to upload?
Cheers,
Moritz
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (5
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
This is the follow up improvement of the fix intended for RC bug
#684245. This patch avoids all situations that may be encountered to
trigger the bug in gnumeric, fix for that bug has been s
Cyril Brulebois (26/09/2012):
> FWIW I've prepared a few packages to unblock for d-i beta 3:
> […]
Here's another round. I uploaded some of them, merging somebody else's
work (hello Steve). grub2 could welcome another pair of eyes. All of
them are on my hints file.
## mostly l10n
unblock partman
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 13:47:21 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 09/26/2012 02:59 AM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >Normally the config script doesn't touch configuration files, it reads
> >the current configuration if it exists, updates the values in debconf,
> >then asks the user if necessary. The
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 14:06:33 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Can we add a new package
>
> Package: libxvmc1-i386
> Section: libs
> Priority: extra
> Architecture: i386
> Multi-arch: same
> Pre-Depends: ${misc:Pre-Depends}
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 15:57:09 +0200, Ralf Jung wrote:
> Essentially, this is the case here, too: Getting git of
> libgl1-nvidia-glx-ia32, as it depended on ia32-libs (and, as reported by
> Andreas [1], can't be built with the multiarchified ia32-libs). So
> removing ia32-libs is the cause for t
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 19:11 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> # XXX: second look appreciated
> # xz compression + 4 RC bug fixes
> unblock grub2/1.99-23
> unblock-udeb grub2/1.99-23
Looks sane enough to me.
> # single bugfix for pf crash, no-op for d-i:
> unblock kfreebsd-9/9.0-6
> unblock-udeb kfr
On Wed, 2012-09-26 at 16:10 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> since gtk+3.0 again appeared on my testing summary page (packages of
> interest as far as unblock{,-udeb}'s are concerned), I'm wondering
> whether it shouldn't just get its block-udeb removed?
For the record; done.
Regards,
Adm
--
T
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 17:43:54 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> Severity: normal
>
> Please unblock package openjpeg
>
> The unstable version enables multiarch and fixes a security issue.
>
Is ther
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 01:27:15 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 5:18 AM, Jon Severinsson wrote:
> > Release note that this bug blocks sound from working in wine and other i386
> > applications on amd64 in wheezy for many configurations (including mine).
> >
> > That is bec
On 2012-09-26 20:13, Julien Cristau wrote:
> If libgl1-nvidia-glx-ia32 used to not need libxvmc, why can't
> libgl1-nvidia-glx:i386 also be made to not need libxvmc?
Good question ...
nvidia-graphics-drivers (256.53-1) experimental; urgency=low
[ Andreas Beckmann ]
* Add libxvmc1 to Build-Dep
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 20:46:08 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 17:43:54 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: unblock
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Please unblock package openjpeg
> >
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 14:06:33 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy (see
> #640499)
To be clear, I'm not doing multiarch libxvmc myself, but if you or
somebody else want to do that in a NMU I won't stop you.
Cheers,
Julien
signat
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 18:11:46 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> I've prepared a tpu security upload for openjpeg (attached).
>
> Ok to upload?
>
I followed up to the unblock
On 2012-09-26 21:08, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 14:06:33 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>
>> As we are not going to get libxvmc turned to multi-arch for wheezy (see
>> #640499)
>
> To be clear, I'm not doing multiarch libxvmc myself, but if you or
> somebody else want to do t
Adam D. Barratt (26/09/2012):
> > # xz compression + 4 RC bug fixes
> > unblock grub2/1.99-23
> > unblock-udeb grub2/1.99-23
>
> Looks sane enough to me.
Great.
Thanks for checking, I've urgented all packages I've mentioned
accordingly.
Steve, if britney runs fine tonight, we should be on good
Processing changes file: tiff_3.9.4-5+squeeze5_amd64.changes
REJECT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1tgxl2-gn...@franck.debian.org
Processing control commands:
> retitle -1 unblock: autofs/5.0.7-1
Bug #684355 [release.debian.org] unblock: autofs/5.0.6-3
Changed Bug title to 'unblock: autofs/5.0.7-1' from 'unblock: autofs/5.0.6-3'
--
684355: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=684355
Debian Bug Tracking System
C
Control: retitle -1 unblock: autofs/5.0.7-1
>> Please unblock package autofs
>>
>> There are a few relatively small changes fixing some bugs
>> and making the package more accurate. Also, per request
>> from the previous maintainer, debian/control is changed
>> to list new maintainer address - th
On 26.09.2012 23:49, Michael Tokarev wrote:
[]
> Debdiff between wheezy and sid version will be sent in a separate
> email, since it is large. The same but without upstream changes
> (which are easily visible in the git tree referenced above) and
> the removal of half-5.0.7 upstream diff from debi
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package rsyslog
The changelog reads:
* Disable omstdout module again. Upstream doesn't consider it viable for
production use but mainly for the internal testbench.
The patch debian/patches/03-fix_relp_dns_resolution.patch has been
reviewed by upstream and applied to the Git repository [1], fwiw.
Cheers,
Michael
[1]
http://git.adiscon.com/?p=rsyslog.git;a=commit;h=136f6e097800742ec232c968b2bdd03bfab687f4
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking inte
48 matches
Mail list logo
