Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

anks, Guillem dpkg-1.20.7--1.20.8.debdiff.xz Description: application/xz From 09b0b3ab99ba197a4fc5abf9363de32b472d9b61 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:34:34 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 01/15] Test::Dpkg: Fix test data path fetching on CPAN MIME-Version: 1.0 Cont

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

Hi! On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 15:36:08 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 06:20:10PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > This is a pre-approval unblock request for dpkg. > > > > [ Reason ] > > > > This includes an RC bug fix, and an old regre

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 17:58:08 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 15:36:08 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > > Please go ahead with the upload and remove the moreinfo tag from this bug > > when > > the new version is in unstable. > > Thanks! I'm tar

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

Control: retitle -1 [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.9 Control: tag -1 - moreinfo Hi! On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 20:22:46 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 08:13:10PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 17:58:08 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > &g

Bug#999504: transition: liburing

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hi! The liburing source bumped its SONAME from liburing1 to liburing2, but it should be API compatible. The new upstream has been uploaded to experimental, and I did a rebuild of all rev

Bug#999504: transition: liburing

Hi! On Fri, 2021-11-12 at 18:50:36 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > Control: forwarded -1 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-liburing.html > > On 2021-11-12 04:18:57 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org

Bug#1008184: nmu: unknown packages affected by dpkg-dev bug #1000421

Package: release.debian.org Severity: important User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi! The objdump tool changed its output for copy relocations for versioned symbols (from @@ to @) in binutils 2.26 (uploaded on 2016-01). This has caused dpkg-shlibdeps to ignore some of

Bug#1029585: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.19

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! (Even though I've noticed no blocking hints, given that the package is supposed to be frozen, I'm requesting this p

Bug#1026199: release.debian.org: Is the toolchain list updated for bookworm

Hi! On Sat, 2022-12-17 at 08:42:18 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 16-12-2022 02:40, Sam Hartman wrote: > > I was looking at > > https://release.debian.org/testing/essential-and-build-essential.txt > > > > trying to figure out which packages I'm involved in are covered by the > > toolchain freeze

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.20 upload. [ Reason ] This dpkg release includes the translation updates for the

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Hi! On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 12:43:37 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg > Please pre-app

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 19:18:41 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 12:43:37 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: unblock > > X-Debbugs-Cc: d..

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Hi! On Tue, 2023-02-07 at 09:01:44 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 06/02/2023 12:43, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.20 upload. > Please go ahead. Late translations are also OK to include. Thanks! Uploaded it yesterday. Regards, Guillem

Bug#1031910: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.21

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.21 upload. [ Reason ] The loong64 arch support got reverted as there was a bug f

Bug#1031910: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.21

Hi! On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 13:32:55 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > On 2023-02-25 04:57:58 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > User

Bug#1026199: release.debian.org: Is the toolchain list updated for bookworm

Hi! On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 09:47:59 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Ah, was wondering the same few days before the toolchain freeze, as I > was unsure whether to update some of the packages I maintain (in > particular libmd, for which I was thinking of doing a new upstream > release),

Bug#1033067: unblock: glide/2002.04.10ds1-21

:37:51.0 +0100 @@ -1,6 +1,20 @@ +glide (2002.04.10ds1-21) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Pass --build and --host to configure via chores.3dfx. + + -- Guillem Jover Fri, 10 Mar 2023 02:37:51 +0100 + +glide (2002.04.10ds1-20) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Use autoconf $host_cpu instead of

Bug#1034157: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2023.03.17-1

+0100 +++ pci.ids-0.0~2023.03.17/debian/changelog 2023-03-22 23:56:31.0 +0100 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +pci.ids (0.0~2023.03.17-1) unstable; urgency=medium + + * New upstream release. +- Refresh patch. + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 22 Mar 2023 23:56:31 +0100 + pci.ids (0.0~2023.02

Bug#1014206: bullseye-pu: package dpkg/1.20.11

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi! [ Reason ] This request includes several targeted minimal fixes for issues found in dpkg 1.20.10, including one regression introduced in the security update. I mentioned to

Bug#1018744: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u1

e DoS vulnerability in inetutils-telnetd, caused by a crash by +a NULL pointer dereference when sending the byte sequences «0xff 0xf7» +or «0xff 0xf8». Found by Pierre Kim and Alexandre Torres. Patch +adapted by Erik Auerswald . + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 28 Aug 2022 16:01:41 +0200

Bug#1018744: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u1

Hi! Sorry, I'm updating the request as I found missing stuff while preparing the companion update for buster! On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 00:37:03 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Tags: bullseye > User: release.debian@packages.debian.o

Bug#1018800: buster-pu: package inetutils/2:1.9.4-7+deb10u2

+adapted by Erik Auerswald . +Fixes CVE-2022-39028. + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 31 Aug 2022 00:58:35 +0200 + inetutils (2:1.9.4-7+deb10u1) buster; urgency=medium * CVE-2020-10188 (Closes: #956084) diff -Nru inetutils-1.9.4/debian/patches/0001-ftp-check-that-PASV-LSPV-addresses-match.patch

Bug#1018854: buster-pu: package dpkg/1.19.9

1 +1 @@ -1.19.8 +1.19.9 diff -Nru dpkg-1.19.8/ChangeLog dpkg-1.19.9/ChangeLog --- dpkg-1.19.8/ChangeLog 2022-05-24 13:40:09.0 +0200 +++ dpkg-1.19.9/ChangeLog 2022-09-01 03:40:03.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,137 @@ +commit e2254431dca4eccb5125c21cb7299090e6725b3a +Author: Guillem Jove

Bug#1018857: bullseye-pu: package dpkg/1.20.12

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu [ Reason ] This update backports multiple fixes from unstable for RC bugs and fixes broken behavior. It makes the dpkg-fsys-usrunmess script more robust, fixes mishandling of vers

Re: Bug#1019724: warning: stray \ before - causes autopkgtest failure

On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 17:31:16 +0200, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote: > Yeah, sorry. I lately realised not all the packages would autoreconf > during building time. > > So silencing these warnings would make sense. Please consider implementing a way to be able to conditionally re-enable locally thes

[RFC] Enabling bindnow by default in dpkg-buildflags?

Hi! This was discussed relatively recently, but it was not entirely clear to me what was the conclusion, if there was any(?), about enabling bindnow by default. And although this got enabled by default in gcc-6 6.2.0-7 when PIE also got enabled, it seems it got disabled in 6.2.0-10 when I pointed

Bug#845304: transition: libxtables12

Hi! On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 10:49:11 +0100, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote: > On 22 November 2016 at 10:39, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > To the maintainer: Why bump to a snapshot at this point in the cycle? Have > > the > > rdeps been build-tested against the new libxtables? Are you aware we a

Re: [RFC] Enabling bindnow by default in dpkg-buildflags?

On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 14:05:44 +0100, Bálint Réczey wrote: > 2016-12-13 9:29 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey : > > 2016-11-27 23:11 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey : > >> 2016-11-23 2:30 GMT+01:00 Guillem Jover : > >>> My mine concern is and has always been that bindnow chang

Re: Accepted dpkg 1.18.19 (source) into unstable

Hi! On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 16:07:32 +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Hi, Guillem. I'm afraid I find myself writing a critical email. Fair enough. > Guillem Jover writes ("Accepted dpkg 1.18.19 (source) into unstable"): > > Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 05:43:36 +0100 > &

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Reproducible] On making Stretch self-contained IRT to reproducibility

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 10:32:08 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > On 24/02/16 22:16, Niels Thykier wrote: > > >- Possible lack of buildd resources to do the rebuild. Notably, due > > > to Multi-Arch:same we would generally n

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

array size with sizeof(). If NSIG is missing fallback to 32 +items. Prompted by Igor Pashev . + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:23:24 +0100 + dpkg (1.16.17) wheezy-security; urgency=high [ Guillem Jover ] diff --git a/dpkg-deb/build.c b/dpkg-deb/build.c index b798b1f..e83ed51 100644

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,45 @@ +dpkg (1.17.27) jessie; urgency=medium + + [ Guillem Jover ] + * Add more Conflicts for removed packages expecting dpkg to ship +install-info. Namely ada-mode and octave2.1-info. Closes: #783657 +Thanks to Andreas Beckmann . + * Remov

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 22:04:00 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 16:49:35 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > Here's a proposed dpkg 1.17.27, with cherry picked fixes from master > > (already in unstable). These

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Tags: wheezy > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: pu > Here's a proposed dpkg 1.16.18, with cherry picked fixes from master > (a

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 20:52:04 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 16:49:35 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > diff --git a/man/dpkg.1 b/man/dpkg.1 > > index 4e9f7a3..fb6c43e 100644 > > --- a/man/dpkg.1 > > +++ b/man/dpkg.1 > > @@ -694,8 +694,9

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 18:07:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > Tags: wheezy > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: pu >

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 20:34:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Apologies for the delays in getting back to you. Please go ahead. No problem! Uploaded now too. Thanks, Guillem

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 20:36:32 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo +confirmed > > On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 12:07 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 18:07:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0

Bug#826568: Bug#826161: Bug#826568: jessie-pu: package sendmail/8.14.4-8+deb8u1

Hi! On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 14:41:26 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 2016-07-05 11:51, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On a related note, which has been mentioned before (on dda at least) - > > please don't name your .changes file _amd64.changes if the package > > builds amd64 binaries and they're no

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

Hi! On Sun, 2016-08-21 at 08:22:09 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > Kurt Roeckx: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:05:06PM +0200, ni...@thykier.net wrote: > >> * If we were to enable -fPIE/-pie by default in GCC-6, should that change > >>also apply to this port? [0] > > > > If -fPIE is the default

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

Hi! On Sun, 2016-08-21 at 10:24:42 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote: > I'm testing a set of patches [2] for gcc and dpkg which enable bindnow for all > arches and PIE for amd64, ppc64el and s390x in sync with Ubuntu. > > My assumption was that this set of architectures need the least amount of > additio

Bug#920993: nmu: influxdb_1.6.4-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu influxdb_1.6.4-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against fixed golang-github-influxdata-influxql-dev (see #917041)." Thanks, Guillem

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

changelog b/debian/changelog index 26a8b14cd..64d09cb40 100644 --- a/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,44 @@ +dpkg (1.18.25) stretch; urgency=medium + + [ Guillem Jover ] + * Parse start-stop-daemon usernames and groupnames starting with digits in +-u and -c correctly. Repor

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

Hi! On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 18:45:49 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 16:05 +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > > 2018-02-18 22:26 Guillem Jover: > > > I'd like to update dpkg in stretch. This includes several fixes for > > > documen

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

Hi! On Sun, 2018-06-24 at 16:34:53 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 = stretch confirmed > > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 22:26 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'd like to update dpkg in stretch. This includes several fixes for > > documentation, regressions, m

Bug#799681: release.debian.org: testing.pl does not understand build-profiles

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: tools Hi! The migration/testing.pl script does not understand build-profiles, such as the ones used in the dpkg source package. The page has this output

Freeze exception for inetutils 2:1.8-1

Hi! I've also expected the freeze to come later in August, and sadly didn't prioritize uploading the new inetutils upstream release. So I'd like to request approval to do so now, given the (previous and) following arguments. We currently have 1.6 in the archive and the biggest difference between

New dpkg upload targetting squeeze?

Hi! As requested on IRC, there's been a bug filed about a segfault in update-alternatives (#611545), which is fixed now in the squeeze git branch: Would it be possible to do yet another upload fixing this? If yes, I can prepare a

Re: New dpkg upload targetting squeeze?

Hi! On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 19:22:58 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 19:34 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > As requested on IRC, there's been a bug filed about a segfault in > > update-alternatives (#611545), which is fixed now in the squeeze git > >

[SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

ugh. Here's the changelog: dpkg (1.15.8.11) stable; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not segfault on “dpkg -i --no-act”. * Add missing semicolon to the vsnprintf() compat declaration. Thanks to Robert Millan. Closes: #612203 * Fix typo in «dpkg-name --overwrite» argumen

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

Hi! On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 07:38:44 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > We've fixed several regressions on the 1.15.x series, and I'd like to > upload a new 1.15.8.11 release targetting squeeze. Forgot to mention, that for these two there's functional test cases: > [ Guil

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.11 for squeeze

Hi! On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 16:24:28 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 07:38 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > [ Guillem Jover ] > > * Do not segfault on “dpkg -i --no-act”. > > * Add missing semicolon to the vsnprintf() compat declaration. > >

Re: binNMUs?

Hi! On Mon, 2011-09-12 at 21:19:29 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > * Steve Langasek (vor...@debian.org) [110912 20:44]: > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 08:19:09PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 15:31:56 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > > Also, I think we still have a reason

[SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.12 for squeeze

release, sorry about that!). I'm attaching the interesting git commits (with translations omitted). Here's the changelog: dpkg (1.15.8.12) stable; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not fail to unpack shared directories missing on the file system from packages being replaced

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.12 for squeeze

On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 10:45:51 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 03:57 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > There's some (old) regressions affecting the dpkg 1.15.x series, and > > I'd like to upload a new 1.15.8.12 release targetting squeeze. Those > >

Re: Multiarch support in dpkg — really in time for wheezy?

On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 11:23:27 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Philipp Kern wrote: > > We would like to see a dpkg with multiarch support in experimental now > > and dpkg in sid in about two weeks time. Otherwise we might not be able to > > pursue this goal for wheezy. > > Gi

Re: binNMUs?

n in debian/changelog. This would even allow to use > something else than +bX for bin-nmu which is desirable for many > other usages (backports, PPA, etc.). These look like hacks to me. > On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, Guillem Jover wrote: > > What comes to mind, even if slightly radical, is tha

Re: [SRM] dpkg 1.15.8.12 for squeeze

On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 15:50:13 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 07:24 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 10:45:51 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 03:57 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > > There's s

New dpkg version for etch?

Hi, There's been an RC bug reported recently against dpkg (not filed as RC back then, though), which had already been fixed some time ago, but not for etch. So was wondering if the stable release team would be fine with an upload fixing at least #506258 [0] and the trivial #311843 [1], targetting

Re: New dpkg version for etch?

[ Adding now debian-dpkg@ to CC, as I forgot initially, sorry! ] Hi, On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 20:13:35 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:04:30AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > There's been an RC bug reported recently against dpkg (not filed as RC > > back

Unblock request for inetutils/2:1.5.dfsg.1-9

Hi, This was uploaded 12 days ago or so, with no regressions reported. The annotated changelog follows: * Install ping6 suid root by using “cp -a”. (Closes: #501910) Makes ping6 unusable for non-root users. * Improve package desriptions: - Remove wrong acronym for ping. (Closes: #49644

Re: Bug#291194: Raising severity

clone 291194 -1 retitle -1 dpkg-deb: should force generating gnu tar archives severity 291194 wishlist tag 291194 - lenny-ignore thanks Hi! On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 11:23:43 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > I just ran into this bug when using a modified tar

Clarification about oportunistic l10n updates for stable

Hi! During a discussion about future translation work for dpkg [0], we wondered what was the actual policy regarding oportunistic translation updates if a stable update would have to be prepared anyway for an RC or security bug. I've digged a bit but cannot find a definitive answer [1], from the

Broken (looser) dependencies due to dpkg-dev bug

Hi! Due to an unfortunate copy-and-paste typo, dpkg-gensymbols has been generating broken symbol files since dpkg 1.15.3 (2009-06-27), which makes the dependencies of packages using those shared libraries looser than they should. The bug in question is #536034. I've just uploaded a fixed dpkg (1.

Re: Broken (looser) dependencies due to dpkg-dev bug

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:06:01 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Ordered by rounds (next round cannot be started until the previous one > has been built everywhere): Actually, only the ones with wildcards produce broken symbols files, the updates list (by checking now the source packages):

Next upload 2009-09-03 (dpkg 1.15.4)

[ CCing debian-release for the install-info transition part. ] Hi! Ok, long time since last upload, and lots of changes have piled up since, time for an upload. There's the normal assortment of refactoring, bug fixes, some new features including the first changes needed for multiarch, and our sid

Re: dpkg plans for the squeeze cycle

Hi! Sorry for the massive delay. On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 14:41:15 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote: > Do you have any big changes planned? How much time would they take, and > what consequences are there for the rest of the project? There's a thread [0] on debian-dpkg with more detailed changes of w

Re: Bug#426832: Please recompile haskell-filepath for ghc 6.6.1

On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 05:49:32 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 06:40:00PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > > If only a rebuild is needed for a package that is not Arch: all, one > > doesn't file a bug, but asks for binNMUs... As you said a simple > > re-compilation is enough. > >

[SRM] unace_1.2b-4etch1

ebian/changelog +++ unace-1.2b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +unace (1.2b-4etch1) stable; urgency=low + + * Make the program 64 bit clean, by using to typedef the data +types independently of the target system. (Closes: #431380) +- debian/patches/004_64_bit_clean.patch: New file. + + -- Gu

Transition to directfb 1.0.1

[ CCed maintainers for delicate rev-depends ] Hi, Some weeks ago I uploaded directfb 1.0.1-2 to experimental. I've successfully built the following packages, which are the only ones really Build-Depending on libdirectfb-dev: In unstable --- directvnc_0.7.5-8 freesci_0.3.5-5 gst

Please let gnumach into testing

Hi, I've just closed #280987, which was preventing mig from entering testing. Once mig is in, it will FTBFS as it Build-Depends on gnumach-dev. gnumach produces an udeb, to it's currently blocked. If the d-i team does not have any concerns, I'd like to see gnumach move to testing, as it's quite u

Re: Transition to directfb 1.0.1

On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 06:02:02 +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: > Some weeks ago I uploaded directfb 1.0.1-2 to experimental. I've > successfully built the following packages, which are the only ones > really Build-Depending on libdirectfb-dev: > > In unstable > --

binNMUs for libdirectfb-1.0-0

Hi, libsdl1.2_1.2.12-1, recompile against new libdirectfb-1.0-0, 1, alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc directvnc_0.7.5-8, recompile against new libdirectfb-1.0-0, 2, alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc directvnc_0.7.5-8, recompile a

Please unblock directfb/1.0.1-6

Hi, Please unblock directfb/1.0.1-6. The sparc binaries are still missing, though. thanks, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Upcoming libgpm transition

Hi, I've just uploaded a new upstream gpm version to experimental, it bumps the SONAME, and this is needed to fix an RC bug(s). From the changelog: [...] * Debian broke ABI compatibility with upstream long time ago, the patch got merged upstream recently but the new field was added in a d

Re: Upcoming libgpm transition

Hi, On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 10:00:48 +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: > I've just uploaded a new upstream gpm version to experimental, it > bumps the SONAME, and this is needed to fix an RC bug(s). From the > changelog: > > [...] > * Debian broke ABI compatibility with upst

Re: Upcoming libgpm transition

Hi, On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 16:33:49 +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Guillem Jover [Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:00:48 +0300]: > > I've just uploaded a new upstream gpm version to experimental, it > > bumps the SONAME, and this is needed to fix an RC bug(s). From the > > change

Re: Adding lzma to dpkg's Pre-Depends

e lzma compression, which are not relevant to this particular decision. So, I'd like to ask the Release Team, if it would be fine with you to add such Pre-Depends for the next dpkg upload targetting lenny. On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 06:18:36 +0300, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 14:01:16

Upload of dpkg 1.14.21 to unstable

with the Debian policy ruling established in #430649). * Fix dpkg-source to not use -i and -I by default with "1.0" source packages. Closes: #495138 [ Guillem Jover ] * When loading the status file fix up any inconsistent package in state triggers-awaited w/o the

Re: Upload of dpkg 1.14.21 to unstable

On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 17:47:11 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > Guillem Jover wrote: > > So, the next upload is ready, there might be still some translation > > updates meanwhile, but no other changes for now, if something else comes > > up we'll probably queue it for the

Re: Assignments II (2003/04/03)

Hi, On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 03:06:49AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 12:23:08AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > 151461 [ ] device3dfx-source: fails to build > > Guillem Jover downgraded this to important (correctly, I think), and > observed th

Re: Removal of qttudo

On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 07:15:31PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Tobias Toedter wrote: > > Package: qttudo > > Testing: 0.2.1-1.2 > > Unstable: 0.2.1-1.2 > > Bugs: 206763 (RC), 189837 (RC), 195005 (RC), 108779 (merged with 108818 and > > 130941), 118015, 125297, 138503 (RC, fixed in NMU), 114608

Re: More Assignments

On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 02:06:29PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > All bugs have been chosschecked against the NMU claims page which > is why mindi and mondo are not on this list -- yet. [ package list to be removed from testing with RC bugs ] About mindi bugs, I sent patches (Ok one with both fixes) t

Re: More Assignments

On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 09:38:16PM -0400, Joe Nahmias wrote: > Please pardon me if I duplicated anyone's work, I can't see > ftp-master:~ajt/release-assistants/claims/ to check... ;-) You can check the web interface: > Let me know if this is useful, Y

proposed gpm uploads to testing-proposed-updates

Hi, There is an RC bug on sarge's gpm package, it has some other FTBFS bugs. We have prepared two alternative uploads, one with the minimal required changes and another one with low-risk stuff that would be very nice to have in sarge and that's the one we would prefer. The prefered patch is accum

Re: proposed gpm uploads to testing-proposed-updates

Hi again, On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 08:36:51PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > The prefered patch is accumulative to the required one. > > Find them on: > > <http://people.debian.org/~guillem/gpm/> Peter reverted some change that was a bit risky to introduce in the &

Re: proposed gpm uploads to testing-proposed-updates

Hi, On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 12:41:22AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > Feedback on the combined patch: > > debian/rules -- > > Setting -D_REENTRANT here is odd, you normally want this in the > upstream Makefiles (particularly since not everything built by this > package is a library). Not ne

Bug#692911: ca-certificates: Unneeded and confusing usage of interest-noawait

Hi! As discussed in 537051 the NMU introduced an unneeded and confusing usage of interest-noawait, and the accompanying Pre-Depends on dpkg. The attached patch removes these. Thanks, Guillem From 3593dbf704952575294b44dbd97d3026ed7429f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sat, 19

Bug#702209: unblock (pre-approval): dpkg/1.16.10

Hi! There appears to be something in my dpkg unblock requests that seems to make the list setup unhappy (previously in #690920), just sending this so that it (hopefully) appears on the list. For the real details please see: Thanks, Gui

Bug#702921: unblock: inetutils/2:1.9-2

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package inetutils. This version contains a security fix cherry picked from upstream, which was fixed long time ago for other packages with a shared ancestry (iputils). The pa

Bug#702921: unblock: inetutils/2:1.9-2

On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 00:58:10 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > > Please unblock package inetutils. This version contains a security fix > cherry picked from upst

Bug#702209: unblock (pre-approval): dpkg/1.16.10

On Sun, 2013-03-17 at 16:55:22 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: > On 2013-03-06 03:26, Guillem Jover wrote: > > There appears to be something in my dpkg unblock requests that seems > > to make the list setup unhappy (previously in #690920), just sending > > this so that it (hope

Bug#691510: nmu: openmsx_0.9.1-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi! openmsx on i386 was built against an unavailable libglew1.6 package, which makes it currently uninstallable. nmu openmsx_0.9.1-1 . i386 . -m "Build against libglew-dev 1.7" thanks, gui

Bug#1035683: bullseye-pu: package libbsd/0.11.3-1+deb11u1

libbsd-0.11.3/debian/changelog 2023-05-07 19:13:23.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +libbsd (0.11.3-1+deb11u1) bullseye; urgency=medium + + * Fix infinite loop when using MD5File() symbol due to missing symbol +redirection. Thanks to Guillaume Morin . +Closes: #1033671 + + -- Guillem Jov

Bug#1035709: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2023.04.11-1

ncy=medium + + * New upstream release. +- Remove patch, fixed upstream. + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 07 May 2023 02:10:00 +0200 + pci.ids (0.0~2023.03.17-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream release. diff -Nru pci.ids-0.0~2023.03.17/debian/patches/0001-Fix-encoding-issues.patch p

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.22 upload. [ Reason ] I got a report for a segfault privately (as the reporter w

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi! On Tue, 2023-05-16 at 23:44:29 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed > > On 2023-05-11 04:45:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.deb

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Hi! On Wed, 2023-05-17 at 04:24:06 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo Oops, missed the «-», but then that seems fine :), as earlier today I noticed that a triggered autopkgtest for another package had failed, so retriggered it as it looked lik

Bug#1050331: bookworm-pu: package inetutils/2:2.4-2+deb12u1

-2.4/debian/changelog 2023-08-23 12:01:39.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +inetutils (2:2.4-2+deb12u1) bookworm; urgency=medium + + * Add patch from upstream to check return values for set*id() functions. +Fixes CVE-2023-40303. (Closes: #1049365) + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 23 Aug 2023 12

Bug#1050332: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u2

-2.0/debian/changelog 2023-08-23 12:05:48.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +inetutils (2:2.0-1+deb11u2) bullseye; urgency=medium + + * Add patch from upstream to check return values for set*id() functions. +Fixes CVE-2023-40303. (Closes: #1049365) + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 23 Aug 2023 12

  1   2   3   >