Hi Chris,
On 09-02-2021 20:19, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> currently, util-linux/2.36.1-7 is blocked from migration because of
> a failed test of systemd/247.3-1 on ppc64el.
It's not.
> I'm told
> "networkd-test.py" is known to be flaky.
Could very well be, didn't check.
> As I can't seem to m
reassign -1 debci
Hi Matthias,
On 12-02-2021 10:54, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
It's not the release team that runs ci.debian.net. Reassigning
appropriately.
> As seen with glibc autopkg tests [1], the Debian CI infrastructure doesn't
> store
> complete build logs, cutt
Control: retitle -1 transition: libxmlb
too late; key package; non targeted fix changes.
On 26-01-2021 03:09, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Reinhard,
On 15-02-2021 15:08, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
I agree with this. The Debian infra allows for use of the internet (if
not used to download programs, that's forbidden by ftp-master [1].)
> I'm writing as a member of the pkg-go team and am mostly concern
Control: Hi,
On 15-02-2021 19:23, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi Reinhard,
>
> On 15-02-2021 15:08, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> Control: severity -1 important
>
> I agree with this. The Debian infra allows for use of the internet (if
> not used to download programs, that'
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Guido,
On 17-02-2021 08:50, Guido Günther wrote:
> #982695 made me aware i totally forgot to update libvirt-python with
> recent libvirt before the freeze, hence the build failure. I've
> prepared 7.0.0-1 in experimental a couple of days ago and it would be
> great to
Hi Bernd,
On 17-02-2021 22:30, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 18:37 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> libvirt-python is a key package.
>
> and it should match libvirt. Having libvirt-python 6.x and libvirt 7.0
> is (imho, ymmv...) much worse than an completely
Hi,
On 31-01-2021 18:43, Shengjing Zhu wrote:
> It might be the time to resume the discussion...
> Dear ftpmaster, will the task that imports all sources to
> security-master be ready for bullseye?
I think this is a fair question. What's the status on the archive side
of things? (A "no" or "depe
Hi Yadd,
On 20-02-2021 08:43, Yadd wrote:
> node-uglifyjs-webpack-plugin is RC-Buggy because upstream is dead since
> July 2019 (#977311). The main problem to remove it is that it requires
> to update webpack which has many reverse dependencies. I tried it in
> experimental branch but it is not si
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi David,
On 21-02-2021 12:53, David Prévot wrote:
> I recently added an autopkgtest to a package, and the autopkgtest failed
> on all suites. I’m surprised to see that failure considered as a
> regression (#983211), so I believe there is a mistake somewhere (maybe
> tha
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Sam
On 23-02-2021 19:17, Sam Hartman wrote:
> This is just a FYI, opened as a bug because you've expressed a
> preference for that communication style.
Ack.
> I hope to have something in experimental or unstable by end of this
> week. Depending on my confidence in
Hi Sam,
On 23-02-2021 20:09, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Ah, I thought essential as well as build-essential was frozen.
> Pam is not technically essential but is pre-depends for several
> essentials.
Aha, I may have missed that in my list when generating the list:
https://release.debian.org/bullseye/ess
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Niko,
On 22-02-2021 17:03, Niko Tyni wrote:
> This is a pre-approval request as perl is part of build-essential and
> currently frozen.
Ack, thanks.
> The debdiff is unfortunately big; I'm only attaching the diffstat.
We'd still like to have it attached to this bu
Hi Willem,
On 20-02-2021 10:18, Willem van den Akker wrote:
> Please unblock jabber-muc 0.8-8.
>
> This upload has the following modifications
>
> * debian/patches
> - fix for ftbfs with GCC10 (Closes: #957384).
> Thanks to Logan Rosen.
> * debian/control
> - bump standards to 4.5.1.
> -
Hi Graham,
On 23-02-2021 22:14, Graham Inggs wrote:
> There's a release team meeting scheduled for tomorrow, 2021-02-24 at 19:00
> UTC.
>
> Is anyone up for joining a jitsi before or after (or evening during)?
>
> Please reply with your preference.
During, or after, both fine for me.
Paul
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Stefano,
On 25-02-2021 07:17, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> TL;DR: Debian heard of some upstream Python grumpyness about our
> standard library splits, recently.
We have more upstreams being grumpy how we handle things in Debian.
> This is all very badly timed for the
> f
Dear DSA,
As is custom for the Release Team, I'm asking you what your plans are
with respect to testing upgrading DSA maintained machines to bullseye.
If my information is correct, in the past you'd first upgrade a non
critical machine to see if there's anything broken in bullseye that
prevents y
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Stefano,
On 25-02-2021 07:17, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Please unblock package python3-defaults and python3.9
>
> Adding a new binary package, -full, to both source packages. Both are
> currently in binNEW.
We'll unblock with the understanding that the only differenc
Hi Matthias,
On 26-02-2021 07:40, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'm planning to upload the upload as done to experimental, plus the final (no
> changes) 3.9.2 release. Granted, refreshing the patches is not not
> necessary,
> but that's what is now tested in experimental.
Ack.
Paul
OpenPGP_signa
Hi Sebastian,
On 18-02-2021 23:57, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Please unblock package xz-utils.
xz-utils is listed on our (build-)essential list [1]. Because the
package is potentially influencing the build artifacts, we're reluctant
to allow changes at this moment because corner case use
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
Hi Stefano,
On 25-02-2021 07:17, Stefano Rivera wrote:
> Please unblock package python3-defaults and python3.9
The python3-defaults package is currently blocked by autopkgtest
regressions. As usual, I suspect these are transient failures (either
infrastructure or flaky t
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Florian,
On 04-03-2021 08:53, Florian Schlichting wrote:
> Please unblock package xpdf
Sure, but see below.
> As an unrelated issue, I just noticed after uploading -2 that the
> -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 hardening buildflag fails to be correctly injected.
> This can appa
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Sebastian
On 02-03-2021 21:55, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> Unfortunately we haven't made up our mind yet, but to get some (albeit
>> limited) exposure and autopkgtest coverage (via the pseudo-excuses) [2],
>> I think your chances for a go are higher if the pro
tags 984468 confirmed moreinfo
user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertag 984468 unblock
thanks
Hi Aurélien,
On 03-03-2021 23:50, Aurélien COUDERC wrote:
> I’d like to get a pre-aproval for uploading the packages listed below as
> they will not have migrated to testing before the hard fr
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Sandro,
On 06-03-2021 05:42, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> the last upload of tqdm fixes a RC bug
Thanks.
> [ Risks ]
> trivial fix
What matters here is the delta between testing and unstable:
88 files changed, 2803 insertions(+), 1897 deletions(-)
That's not "trivial fix
Hi Sandro,
On 06-03-2021 19:50, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> to properly fix 980680 tqdm/4.56.2-1 is required, which is a newer
> upstream release than bullseye anyway (since it has 4.51.0-1).
>
> i'm open to suggestions on how to address it, but i would prefer to
> avoid frankenstein monsters of x.y.zre
Control: tags -1 confirmed d-i
Hi Samuel,
On 05-03-2021 22:45, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> unblock lowmem/1.49
As this relates to d-i, I've explicitly put kibi in CC to give his ACK.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
ommon (2.0.19) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ [ Simon Hollenbach ]
+ * Fix mysql grant for db names containing hyphens
+
+ -- Paul Gevers Sat, 06 Mar 2021 20:56:28 +0100
+
dbconfig-common (2.0.18) unstable; urgency=medium
[ Chris Halls ]
diff -Nru dbconfig-common-2.0.18/internal/mysql
dbc
Hi,
On 08-03-2021 10:39, maximilian attems wrote:
> Tomorrow once firmware-nonfree has migrated 20210208-4 will be uploaded
> with important small fixes to Raspberry Pi 4B and BananaPi M2 ultra and
> BananaPi M3 supports. As all changes are quite small and current window
> allows important fixes,
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi,
On 04-03-2021 12:32, Paul Gevers wrote:
> What I *think* we're going to do is accept the package in unstable, but
> have it age a bit in unstable before unblocking (which is going to
> happen automatically due to the hard freeze).
Please upload t
Hi maks,
On 08-03-2021 19:46, maximilian attems wrote:
> non-free packages were never considered key by Debian afair.
https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/key_packages.yaml.cgi disagrees. The
release team uses this list as the canonical source for the
implementation for the automatic blocks.
Paul
O
Hi
On 08-03-2021 20:50, maximilian attems wrote:
> so please unblock firmware-nonfree 20210208-3
Please file a bug, as this message has a high chance to get lost (the
volume of traffic is rising) as it's not actionable right now.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Sébastien,
On 08-03-2021 13:19, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> This is a pre-approval request for unblocking package octave, version 6.2.0-1
>
> Currently, bullseye contains a hand-crafted mercurial snapshot of octave.
> Uploading a snapshot was made necessary because
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Andreas,
On 10-03-2021 11:41, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> If you think this (is ok to upload to unstable and) has a chance to get
> unblocked, I'll get right on it (with the first step being filing the
> bug report on python3-networkmanager with RC severity).
The dif
tags 948477 - moreinfo
tags 948477 confirmed
tags 948774 ftbfs sid bullseye
thanks
Hi Andrius,
On 13-01-2020 10:38, mer...@debian.org wrote:
>>> As I am team-maintaining most of these packages, I will be able to patch
>>> and upload where needed. xdrawchem is not team-maintained.
>> Please file a
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Matthias,
On 17-01-2020 23:28, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Please add a transition tracker to switch the python3 default to 3.8. It's
> not
> yet ready, however it would be good to see affected packages. Please copy it
> from the 3.7 defaults change if possible.
Tracke
Control: reassign -1 ftp.debian.org
Hi kpcyrd,
On 21-01-2020 21:40, kpcyrd wrote:
> The rust-crossbeam-epoch-0.5 package is no longer in use. There are no
> reverse dependencies.
>
> Thank you very much!
This package isn't in testing, so the request doesn't make sense for the
release team. I as
Dear Scott,
On 22-01-2020 19:23, Scott Talbert wrote:
> I've got a package[1] whose migration is blocked by an autopkgtest "Test
> in progress" for weeks. Can someone tell me what might be going on with
> it?
[...]
> [1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/pytest-xdist
The question should have been
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Laurent,
On 02-01-2020 10:20, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> The soname of the gspell library has bumped its soname from
> libgspell-1-1 to libgspell-1-2
>
> I rebuilt all the rdeps and they all build fine with the new library.
> BUT ATM there is an issue with gnome-so
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Bas,
On 17-01-2020 11:22, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> netcdf-fortran bumped its SONAME requiring a transition.
Please go ahead.
Am I correct in saying that it makes a lot of sense to take this
transition together with the netcdf transition? If so, please combine
that t
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Micha,
On 23-01-2020 22:22, Micha Lenk wrote:
> I think we are now ready to start the transition (moreinfo tag removed).
> Let me summarize again the planned transition actions:
> - micha: upload libgwenhywfar/5.1.2-1 (in experimental) to unstable
> - micha: upload l
Hi Andreas,
On 08-01-2020 00:03, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
[...]
> So let's rebuild all rdepends of libboost-python1.67.0 and friends to
> tighten the dependencies and properly document which python support is
> being used. That should help with the python2 removal (and a future
> removal of python
Hi Micha,
On 25-01-2020 22:38, Micha Lenk wrote:
> I did, but I think I am a bit stuck on gnucash (the last package pending
> in this transition).
No, you're not. There is nothing to do for you at this moment.
> I filed https://bugs.debian.org/949806 to get a
> binNMU scheduled.
When there is a
Hi Andrius,
On 16-01-2020 11:48, mer...@debian.org wrote:
> Thanks a lot, I will wait a week before working on the transition.
I see you went ahead *and* you added an autopkgtest to openbabel.
Obviously I love autopkgtests, however, the test fails and times out on
arm64.
In case you don't know h
Control: tags -1 pending
On 28-01-2020 05:31, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> vtk7 is done too, lammps can be scheduled.
Scheduled.
Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Control: tags -1 patch
Control: forwarded -1
https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/britney2/compare/31e32782...c9e8751c
Hi all
On 28-11-2019 10:28, Paul Gevers wrote:
> With the addition of arm64 as a CI architecture, the situation got
> worse. E.g. https://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?pack
Hi Steve,
On 24-11-2019 20:46, Paul Gevers wrote:
> On 09-11-2019 05:50, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> New upstream, new soversion.
>>
>> Ben file:
>>
>> title = "exiv2";
>> is_affected = .depends ~ "libexiv2-14" | .depends ~ "libexiv2-
Hi kpcyrd,
On 30-01-2020 17:06, kpcyrd wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: rm
>
> The rust-pcap package is no longer in use and seems unmaintained
> upstream. There are no reverse dependencies.
>
> Thank you very much
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Jochen,
On 30-01-2020 07:11, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> I would like to transition pcl to the new ABI version. I tested and
> updated it's build-rdeps, so I don't expect any problems. Note that the
> new version doesn't build on armel anymore due to virtual memory
>
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Jochen,
On 30-01-2020 22:25, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
>> Is the autotracker [1] correct? Then, let this bug know but you can go
>> ahead.
>>
>> [1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-pcl.html
>
> Good point, a rebuild of ros-pcl-conversions is needed
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi Mo,
On 11-01-2020 05:40, Mo Zhou wrote:
> We need to handle the opencv SOVERSION bump along with new upstream
> release. Unlike the 3.2->4.1 transition we've done a couple of weeks
> ago, this 4.1->4.2 transition is expected to be much easier.
>
> The automatically
Hi yadd,
On 29-01-2020 20:23, Xavier wrote:
>> SELECT distinct package.name FROM package JOIN content ON content.pid =
>> package.id WHERE architecture = 'i386' AND filename LIKE
>> './usr/lib/i686-linux-gnu/%';
>>
>> dolphin-owncloud
>> fswatch
>> libhmsbeagle-dev
>> likwid
>> node-iconv
>> nod
Control: reopen -1
Hi Georges,
On 01-02-2020 20:29, Georges Khaznadar wrote:
> ... But I forgot to close the bugreport in debian/changes.
Which is good, because that's not how these bugs work. These bugs are
managed by us and are only closed when the transition is finished. As
openbabel3 could s
Hi Stéphane,
On 03-02-2020 10:30, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
> Currently, ocaml-dune/2.1.3-1 is blocked in unstable because of
> autopkgtest failure of ocaml-sedlex/2.1-3. However, this test failure
> has been fixed in ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4. Likewise, ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4 is
> bloked in unstable because of
Oops.
On 04-02-2020 22:22, Paul Gevers wrote:
> The autopkgtest of wcc with the newly build openssh from
> proposed-updates fails due to a segfault. I re-triggered the test and it
> failed in the same way:
Forgot the links:
[Overview]
https://ci.debian.net/user/britney/jobs?package=wc
Hi Colin,
On 02-02-2020 20:11, Adam D Barratt wrote:
> package release.debian.org
> tags 948695 = buster pending
> thanks
>
> Hi,
>
> The upload referenced by this bug report has been flagged for acceptance into
> the proposed-updates queue for Debian buster.
>
> Thanks for your contribution!
Hi Sebastian,
On 05-02-2020 20:35, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> libstk bumped its SOAME. So please schedule rebuilds for its reverse
> dependencies:
>
> nmu csound_1:6.13.0~dfsg-3 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against
> libstk-4.6.1"
> dw csound_1:6.13.0~dfsg-3 . ANY . -m "libstk0-dev (>= 4.6.1)
Control: reassign -1 ftp.debian.org
Hi kpcyrd,
On 30-01-2020 17:24, Paul Gevers wrote:
> I assume you actually want the removal from unstable? Than the bug
> should be reassigned to ftp.debian.org.
I went ahead and reassigned. Please reassign back if you really only
want it removed from t
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
Hi Sandro,
On 31-01-2020 16:02, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> Please remove volatility from testing; volatility is the last reverse
> dependency of python-openpyxl, which can then be dropped.
>
> I've already filed an RC bug against src:volatility to keep it out of testing.
Bu
Hi Paul,
On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 01:17:51 +0800 Paul Wise wrote:
> In order to implement the request below (hide some suggestions from
> tracker.d.o during the freeze (and possibly other things)), we need a
> machine-readable information source about the current stage of the
> freeze and what that me
Hi,
On 06-02-2020 12:25, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 12:02 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>
>> We already have a maintained agenda for the team [1]. Would it make
>> sense to use that somehow?
>
> That doesn't appear to have enough info right now, it contain
Hi Otto, kodi maintainers,
On 02-02-2020 11:56, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> Ok, I will amend the changelog and re-upload today 1:10.3.22-0... to
> buster updates.
The autopkgtest of kodi fails on ppc64el (twice) with the p-u version of
MariaDB, while it passes with the old MariaDB version. I'll retr
Hi Otto,
On 06-02-2020 14:10, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
>> tail: cannot open '/home/debci/.kodi/temp/kodi.log' for reading: No such
>> file or directory
>> tail: no files remaining
>
> This is the only output in the test log, otherwise it is installing
> packages and everything else seemed to go fi
Hi all,
On 06-02-2020 15:11, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Yes, and I am worried about that. If the MariaDB upgrade causes kodi to
> not run, that's a bad regression, don't you think?
>
> kodi has a pretty good history in Ubuntu on ppc64el, so I don't expect
> it to be flak
Control: tags -1 confirmed
Hi IOhannes,
On 10-02-2020 14:15, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> The new upstream of libmysofa comes with a soname bump from libmysofa.so.0 to
> libmysofa.so.1
> consequently the binary package in Debian has to be renamed from libmysofa0 to
> libmysofa1.
[...]
> Thanks
Hi Laurent,
On 15-02-2020 10:32, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Bas Couwenberg wrote:
>
>> On 2020-02-10 09:58, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
>>
>> Could someone have a look at why pyfribidi and fribidi are not
>> transitioning to unstable (I'm not sure how the regression tests are
>> impact
Hi Sebastian
Tonight, you contributed to our IRC meeting, saying that you'd be
willing to help out. Awesome.
Before bluntly accepting you as a trainee, we would like to get an idea
of what, why and how you would want to contribute to the team. Which
part(s) of the Release Teams work would you'd l
Hi Laurent,
On 10-01-2020 21:09, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Slightly different from a regular transition: all involved
> packages need a source-full upload to switch and this can happen over a
> longer period.
How is this faring. I haven't seen progress in a month to this
transition. A
Hi Paul,
On 07-02-2020 03:01, Paul Wise wrote:
>> Let me try to come back to this bug when we have communicated the dates
>> and provide a prototype so we can see if it works.
>
> Great, no rush. There isn't much activity on tracker.d.o features anyway.
I assume you have read the current freeze_
Hi Graham,
On 15-03-2020 10:14, Graham Inggs wrote:
> galpy's autopkgtests passed [1] after a binNMU.
> I don't know why it wasn't picked up by the tracker.
Which tracker do you mean here?
tracker.d.o
ddpo.d.o
release.debian.org/transitions (don't think you mean this one)
britney itself
Paul
Hi Scott,
On 15-03-2020 18:17, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Currently postfix 2.4.10-1 is showing two autopkgtest failures in
> related packages. Neither of them are postfix related.
Which two, I only see one? Can you please elaborate why you think it is
not postfix related? I tend to say that resou
Hi Scott,
On 16-03-2020 00:24, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Thanks whoever marked resource-agents as not a regression. I don't see any
> other blockers, so I suppose this can be closed now.
I don't think anybody did anything. It was resolved by the automatic retry.
Paul
signature.asc
Descriptio
Hi Scott,
On 16-03-2020 21:51, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification. I guess I need a better understanding of when
> manual intervention is required. Is there something I can read that would
> explain that?
Unfortunately it's not totally up-to-date, but this wiki probably has
Hi Scott,
On 16-03-2020 22:15, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Thanks. It would be useful to have some guidance on how long to wait before
> contacting the release team for regressions that aren't and how you prefer to
> be contacted (I only knew to file a bug because I asked you previously).
For stu
Hi Pabs,
On 14-03-2020 00:33, Paul Wise wrote:
> Since the release team are going to be able to tell which packages are
> at which stage of the freeze, you could export the information
> (migrations: manual or x days) alongside the excuses for each package
> and the tracker could list that informa
Hi Paul,
On 29-03-2020 01:29, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-03-28 at 22:21 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
>
>> I have stripped some more from template in the other bug;
>
> Looks good, but the quiet_period URL points at a buster mail.
Ack.
>> the first version should
Hi,
On 29-03-2020 08:45, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I would suggest putting it at a per-release URL:
>>
>> https://release.debian.org/bullseye/freeze-and-release-dates.yaml
>
> But wouldn't that be harder to find for tracker and other consumers?
> After all, the relea
Hi Paul,
On 29-03-2020 10:26, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 08:45 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>
>> But wouldn't that be harder to find for tracker and other consumers?
>
> There is a symlink testing -> bullseye so this works:
>
> https://release.debia
Hi Christian,
On 04-04-2020 23:42, Christian Kastner wrote:
> Can and will do so with a patch (as I'm already handled the very same
> issue with src:scikit-learn). However, I have two questions before I do so:
>
> * Severity is "wishlist", right? The autopkgtest docs say "In general,
> test
Hi Christian,
On 06-04-2020 23:40, Christian Kastner wrote:
> I just filed #956069 with normal severity, and excluding the tests on
> all platforms (not just arm64).
Thanks.
>> We also have workers outside of China, so the result depends on
>> which worker the test ran.
>
> Unless I'm misunders
Hi,
On 11-04-2020 17:59, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> there are plans
> (I don't know at which point they are) to *also* consider failing
> autopkgtest in testing as RC.
This already happened last year, see
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2019/07/msg2.html
[All autopkgtest failures
Hi Adrian,
Recently I have started filing RC bugs for packages that are out of sync
between unstable and testing. Most packages are not key packages and
without the package migrating to testing, get autoremoved. We noticed
that you have updated meta information on several of those bugs (thank
you
Dear Adrian,
I'm glad I sent my previous message...
On 11-04-2020 21:52, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 07:46:22PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I assume good faith
because of this. :)
>> , but there
>> are so many bugs updated this way that it doe
Hi peter,
On 21-04-2020 15:42, peter green wrote:
> While investigating self-contained buildability issues in testing I
> noticed that the gtk-d and tilix binnmus were not migrating to testing.
>
> I'm not an expert on reading britney output but I think they may be
> being blocked by dependencies
Hi Peter,
On 22-04-2020 17:08, peter green wrote:
> Rust-grep is currently blocked from testing migration because of an
> autopkgtest failure on arm64, it appears that the test failed due to a
> version mismatch issue. The test was run over three weeks ago and the
> offending version is no longer
block 953881 by 954866
thanks
Dear all,
It seems the ruby2.5 removal transition [1] is stalled by subversion
[2]. Can the fix for 954866 please be uploaded to unstable such that
subversion can migrate and we can finish the removal of ruby2.5 in testing?
Paul
[1] https://release.debian.org/trans
Hi James,
On 23-04-2020 13:38, James McCoy wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:13:15AM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> It seems the ruby2.5 removal transition [1] is stalled by subversion
>> [2]. Can the fix for 954866 please be uploaded to unstable such that
>> subversion c
Hi Xavier,
On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 08:23:25 +0100 Xavier wrote:
> Le 07/02/2020 à 20:16, Adam D. Barratt a écrit :
> > On Sat, 2020-01-25 at 20:40 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > This apparently causes regressions in the autopkgtests of node-
> > markdown-it-html5-embed, which you also most recently
Hi Lucas,
On 26-04-2020 15:14, James McCoy wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 02:09:35PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I
>> suggest you apply the same fix you already did here [2] and stop
>> building the python package for now if that works.
>
> Done and uploaded, howev
Dear all,
I don't think anybody likes to do it, but we have to discuss the
architectures that will be part of bullseye. In the before last IRC
meeting I promised I would send this mail, so here we go. Let's see what
items we consider a must. Anybody else that wants to step in, feel free
to take an
Hi Mattia, Sergei,
On 03-05-2020 11:11, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> The autoremoval is quite confusing (perhaps actually buggy?) when bugs
> are assigned against multiple packages.
Our autoremoval script queries UDD [1], so UDD got it wrong. I didn't
check yet, but I suspect that UDD, like britney, o
Hi,
tl;dr I'll remove elixir-lang from testing in 15 days if the elixir-lang
issue isn't by then.
On 03-05-2020 12:07, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> It's not a desirable output here. This means that without some changes
>> in elixir-lang
>> new erlang packages will never reach testing.
Well, that exa
Dear Adrian,
On 07-05-2020 10:07, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This is a toolchain problem affecting many packages:
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25051
Do you have any rough estimate how many? Is there any way to predict
which packages are effected, or to detect which packages are eff
Hi Rebecca,
On 07-05-2020 15:06, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:
> Given the above, this is probably not useful: can it be turned off?
That warning is generated by tracker.d.o, not by the release team. The
release team manages transitions and for that job, the auto transitions
are an enormous help and a
Hi
On 02-05-2020 21:53, Paul Gevers wrote:
> I don't think anybody likes to do it, but we have to discuss the
> architectures that will be part of bullseye. In the before last IRC
> meeting I promised I would send this mail, so here we go. Let's see what
> items we conside
Hi Adrian,
On 07-05-2020 12:16, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:28:33AM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
>> If we can detect this failure
>> mode (and similar ones in the future) we can of course generate hints
>> based on this heuristics and have the failu
Hi Adrian,
On 10-05-2020 15:25, Paul Gevers wrote:
> I'm running another check on "cannot allocate memory in static TLS
> block" now, will take a while.
Also for this one, only vtkplotter showed up.
Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi,
On 19-05-2020 20:25, Joachim Reichel wrote:
> Looks like tinyxml2 is ready to migrate except for autopkgtest regressions in
> ignition-fuel-tools and ignition-msgs:
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/tinyxml2
>
> These "regressions" seem to be caused by testing both packages in isolation
> and
Hi Julian, security team,
This is a warning that the autopkgtest of apt in stable regressed [1]
with the upload of 1.8.2.1. Looking at the error message, it seems
related with the latest change.
Paul
[1] https://release.debian.org/proposed-updates/stable.html
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgt
Hi Julian,
On 01-06-2020 19:23, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> This is an artifact of us doing in-tree testing vs autopkgtest
> doing as-installed testing. I'm somewhat in the process of migrating
> things to use autopkgtest.
Aha, I didn't spot it that it was only checking the error message and
the
901 - 1000 of 1715 matches
Mail list logo
