Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 746741 ftp.debian.org
Bug #746741 [release.debian.org] transition: python-support removal
Bug reassigned from package 'release.debian.org' to 'ftp.debian.org'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #746741 to the same values
pr
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: britney
Please apply the attached patch to remove hard-coding of codenames in
the URLs to the freeze policy.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
From e805bd005c2d8f6d0b89ee760ec8ec1
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: pkg-ime-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Dear release team,
We would like to get a transition slot for libpinyin 1.3.0. Affected
source packages:
1. libpinyin
2. fcitx-libpin
Hi,
Dear release team, I'm copying you to ask if the attached patch would
be OK to upload to stable/oldstable, fixes bug #805549. This error
makes some builds against stk impossible, since there are two headers
missing.
The version in unstable is a different upstream version, so the patch
is not
On 2015-12-15 13:04, Felipe Sateler wrote:
Hi,
Dear release team, I'm copying you to ask if the attached patch would
be OK to upload to stable/oldstable, fixes bug #805549. This error
makes some builds against stk impossible, since there are two headers
missing.
The version in unstable is a dif
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:50:16PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> It looks like the 23rd won't actually be as bad as I feared, so given
> that everyone indicated it would work for them, let's go for that?
23rd is good for me.
Thanks,
Iain. -- Wearing Debian Live hat.
--
signature.asc
Descrip
СРЕДНЕВЕКОВЫЕ МОРТИРЫ И ПУШКИ
настоящий подарок для настоящих мужчин (!)
СРЕДНЕВЕКОВЫЕ АРТИЛЛЕРИЙСКИЕ ОРУДИЯ 14-18 ВВ:
- украсят ландшафт Вашего владения;
- воссоздадут стиль и атмосферу Европы в Средневековье.
Получить больше информации и оформить заказ можно здесь:
http://пушки-на-заказ.рф
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 807089 + pending
Bug #807089 [release.debian.org] transition: poppler 0.38
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
807089: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=807089
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #808036 [release.debian.org] transition: libpinyin
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
808036: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=808036
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 15/12/15 13:50, Aron Xu wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
> X-Debbugs-Cc: pkg-ime-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
>
> Dear release team,
>
> We would like to get a transition s
[dropped explicit CCs to RT and TC members]
On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 20:37 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 01:12:42PM -0500, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > So from what I'm gathering, this looks like a case where there isn't
> > enough eyeballs to adequately review this particularly set
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Severity: normal
The package has been built against old libclamav6.
nmu c-icap-modules_1:0.4.2-1 . amd64 . unstable . -m "rebuild against
libclamav7"
Sebastian
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 08:00:59PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>
> Even a naively filtered diff - excluding documentation and tests -
> between the 1.0.1k tag and HEAD on upstream's stable branch is much
> larger than I'd imagined (1091 files changed, 73609+, 68591-), but
> paging through it the
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 08:00:59PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> [dropped explicit CCs to RT and TC members]
>
> On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 20:37 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 01:12:42PM -0500, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > So from what I'm gathering, this looks like a case where
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 06:26:34PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:15:03 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>
> > >> Dominic Hargreaves writes:
>
> > >>> If not then perhaps that should just be dropped from the
> > >>> redhat-cluster package ASAP [...] -- of course, sinc
On 2015-12-14 18:37 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 13/12/15 22:52, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> hardening-wrapper 1.28+nmu1 is supposed to fix hardening-wrapper, however
>> binNMUs for all packages build-depending on hardening-wrapper, which got
>> built
>> (either uploaded or binNMUed) af
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
glibc 2.21-4 has now been for 5 days in unstable, with no RC bug no
major error reported. It doesn't differ a lot from version 2.21-2 which
has also spent some time in unstable without major
On 2015-10-19 21:07, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> Tags: wheezy
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: pu
>
> Dear oldstable release team,
>
> I would like to update the eglibc package in wheezy to fix the known
> security issues for
Hi,
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (2015-12-13):
> We're getting close to start the Perl transition. I guess there are
> packages in there building udebs, and I guess the transition won't be
> over by the weekend (so the block may be alright, and in any case we
> could wait a couple of days if things hap
Niko Tyni writes:
> So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as
> discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker
> package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker
> would be broken by the libdlm update?
No: the new DLM package
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (2015-12-16):
> On 15/12/15 23:45, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: unblock
> >
> > glibc 2.21-4 has now been for 5 days in unstable, with no RC bug no
> > major error r
On 15/12/15 23:45, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> glibc 2.21-4 has now been for 5 days in unstable, with no RC bug no
> major error reported. It doesn't differ a lot from version 2.21-2 w
Your message dated Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:29:03 +0100
with message-id <5670a23f.3050...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#808079: nmu: c-icap-modules_1:0.4.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #808079,
regarding nmu: c-icap-modules_1:0.4.2-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
On 16/12/15 00:30, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort (2015-12-16):
>> On 15/12/15 23:45, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
>>> Usertags: unblock
>>>
>>> glibc 2.21-4 has now been for 5 days in u
On 16/12/15 00:12, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> Niko Tyni writes:
>
>> So the proper way out seems to be a separate libdlm source package, as
>> discussed in [1]. Ferenc, do I understand right that a new pacemaker
>> package is a blocker for this? Is that because the current pacemaker
>> would be broke
Your message dated Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:49:31 +0100
with message-id <5670a70b.6020...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#796668: marked as done (transition: log4cplus)
has caused the Debian Bug report #796668,
regarding transition: log4cplus
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that th
Control: tags -1 confirmed
On 15/12/15 21:27, Niko Tyni wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 06:26:34PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:15:03 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>
> Dominic Hargreaves writes:
>>
>> If not then perhaps that should just be dropped from
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 confirmed
Bug #796345 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.22
Added tag(s) confirmed.
--
796345: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=796345
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Hi Ferenc
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:12:18AM +0100, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> No: the new DLM package depends on the new Pacemaker package. I'm
> already testing them, there's only some cleanup remaining before they
> can be uploaded.
Can you give an ETA? Otherwise I'm inclined to remove cluster s
29 matches
Mail list logo
