Re: Bug#986565: unusable with current git

Hi, >> On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 10:12:03 + Damyan Ivanov wrote: >>> Sigh. Now git reverted to using /usr/lib again, and git-flow is broken. Why sigh? Directories such as /usr/lib/git-core and /usr/libexec/git-core are internal to git. Other packages should not install to either directory. Thi

Bug#862525: unblock: git/1:2.11.0-3

Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Please unblock package git > > The update fixes CVE-2017-8386, which does not have a bug in the BTS. > The issue was covered with DSA-3848-1 in jessie, so please allow the > fix to go to stretch to avoid a regression. Sorry I didn't request it before, and thanks much

Re: please add a chromium-source binary package

Hi, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: Michael Gilbert wrote: > Major updates to chromium in stable have so far been contingent on it > being a leaf package, where there is no chance for it to break > anything else. Adding CEF as a reverse dependency would change that. ^^ > On 15/1

Re: Proposal: Repository for fast-paced package backports

Hi, Pirate Praveen wrote: > I agree with you, it is the best outcome. But when people with power > (-backports ftp masters) are not willing to consider it, we have to > go with plan B, which is less than ideal, but can move things > forward. Just to avoid this being thought of as an idiosyncrasy

Re: Proposal: Repository for fast-paced package backports

Dominik George wrote: > Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> 2. I am happy with the current charter of backports and I think it's >> possible to move forward with fastpaced without having to change >> that charter. > > Yep. That's exactly why the proposal cha

Bug#871823: unblock: git/1:2.14.1-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package git. This update fixes CVE-2017-1000117 (arbitrary code execution issues via URLs, https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqh8xf482j@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com/T/#u). Th

Workflow for handling security issues in testing

Hi, https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-11235 (https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqy3g2flb6@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com/) reminded me that I don't fully understand the process for handling embargoed security issues in sid and testing. When preparing updates for an embargoed issue

Re: Workflow for handling security issues in testing

Hi Niels, Niels Thykier wrote: > Jonathan Nieder: >> With severity=high, a security fix then takes two more days before it >> hits testing. Is there a way to expedite it? My experience with >> https://bugs.debian.org/871823 was "no". [...] > The 2 days ar

liblzma transition

Hello, liblzma2 is now in unstable and built almost everywhere. ABI changes necessitated changing its SONAME. I don’t think the API change touched any functions used by any package currently in Debian (they are low-level routines for iterating over and examining the records in an archive’s index

Bug#569624: liblzma2 transition

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hi, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > liblzma2 is now in unstable and built almost everywhere. > > ABI changes necessitated changing its SONAME. The updated liblzma-dev and liblzma

Bug#569624: liblzma2 transition

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: >> nmu mupen64plus_1.5+dfsg1-7 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against liblzma2.' >> nmu kde4libs_4:4.3.4-1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against liblzma2.' > > Done. Thanks much. Jonathan

Bug#572961: Please force migration of xz-utils into testing

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Please force migration of xz-utils into testing. The last few uploads have only introduced minor changes, and I had neglected to notice that liblzma2 had not reached testing yet. Sune Vuorela wrote: > Several people in debian has been asked to wait w

Bug#572961: Please force migration of xz-utils into testing

Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Please force migration of xz-utils into testing. Actually, please don’t yet. For what it’s worth: rdeps: shogun: is waiting on octave3.2, xz-utils octave3.2 is only 3 days old. octave3.2 is waiting on hdf5 The hdf transition has

Re: Please force migration of xz-utils into testing

Clint Adams wrote: > So in general you should be aware that the release team needs > a package to be built and uploaded on all architectures before > it can move into testing (either normally or forced). > > You can see this here: > > https://buildd.debian.org/pkg.cgi?pkg=xz-utils > > When you

The 'git' Debian package in squeeze and possible mass bug filing

Hello, Gerrit Pape wrote: > I'm about to provide a new git binary package from the git-core (the > distributed revision control system) source, so that 'apt-get install > git' installs the git content tracker in squeeze. A new version 1.7.0.4-2~exp0 of git has been uploaded to experimental, with

Re: The 'git' Debian package in squeeze and possible mass bug filing

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 23:10:31 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >> Now that there is a package available to test with, I would like to >> file bugs for the affected packages suggesting this change. I suggest >> an RC severity since it would be nice

Re: The 'git' Debian package in squeeze and possible mass bug filing

Hi Michael, Michael Biebl wrote: > Hm, making git-core a dummy/transitional package, which pulls the "git" > package > on upgrades sounds like a better idea to me. > Otherwise git won't be updated when going from lenny to squeeze. Gerrit Pape implemented what I think is a nicer method: git-core

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/5.0.0

a +source package with the required build system files. + -- 1.7.2.1.544.ga752d.dirty >From 01aa4869cb220b7fdad6d1acbabb2233045daa8f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lasse Collin Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 11:44:55 +0300 Subject: Language fixes for man pages. Thanks to A. Costa and Jonathan Nieder. --- src/lzmainf

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/5.0.0

Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > This is not a freeze-exception for your package only but rather a request > to start a new transition. Let me recall that there was a transition > freeze announced a while ago. Thus, it's very unlikely that we accept this > transition for Squeeze. Please reread my message.

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/5.0.0

user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 592300 freeze-exception thanks Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > This is not a freeze-exception for your package only but rather a request > to start a new transition. Sorry about my last reply; I am a little sensitive about this because of http://bugs.de

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/5.0.0

Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > My eyes saw: > >> * The soname of liblzma (upstream, at least) will be liblzma.so.5. > > and my disk said "liblzma.so.2". They started to fight each other and I had > to answer quickly. Quite understandable. This must be the least pleasant part of working on the release tea

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1

Hi release team, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Disable the memory usage limiter by default, changing the output > of --info-memory in a backwards incompatible way and introducing > an XZ_DEFAULTS environment variable to turn it back on. This change > has already been m

Git for Squeeze

Hi! I’m writing for advice. The old plan was to release with git 1.7.2.x, but now that Squeeze is frozen I am having mild doubts. 1.7.2 has some regression fixes on top of the 1.7.1 that is in sid, in addition to the countless tiny (lovely) usability enhancements. The only risky bits from “git

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > I see that this has been uploaded already. It would have been appreciated > if you'd pinged us about the lack of response rather than assuming that it > was equivalent to a go-ahead for upload. Ah, sorry. My thought process was that (1) it is better to get more testing

Re: Git for Squeeze

martin f krafft wrote: > Nobody yet knows how long the freeze will last, so it might be worth > now to expend the effort to put in there a version of Git you are > ready to support for 2–3 years. Thanks for the advice. I have put together a rough package, which can be found here: git://repo.or

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1

Hi again, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > In any case, please get back to us once the package has reached its 10 days. The xz-utils package has reached its 10 days. There is one more change planned before the version 5.0.0 release: the details of the compression presets (-1, -2, etc). As Larhzu expla

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1

Luk Claes wrote: > Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> The xz-utils package has reached its 10 days. > > unblocked, not closing bug as you still seem to speak about other changes? Yep. Thank you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject

Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1

Luk Claes wrote: > Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> The xz-utils package has reached its 10 days. > > unblocked, not closing bug as you still seem to speak about other changes? Yep. Thank you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject

git for Squeeze

Hi Gerrit, Gerrit Pape wrote: > I'm afraid I won't be back to Debian work for long. Do you suggest to > upload your proposed package to sid? Is it a candidate for squeeze? Ok, I've fixed the instaweb bug. An updated package is available: git://repo.or.cz/debian-git/jrn.git proposed-u

Re: Bug#595728: git-core: permissions of templates too restrictive

Hi Philipp, Philipp Kern wrote: > Thanks for the bug report. Indeed the git-core package is broken on > lenny/i386 since the last point release on Saturday. Sadly nobody caught > that bug when the package was in proposed-updates. It's only i386, that's > affected, because of oddities on the up

Bug#609947: pu: package git-core/1:1.5.6.5-3+lenny3.3

+ + * Non-maintainer upload. + * debian/diff/0010-CVE-2010-3906.diff: +new; gitweb: do not parrot filenames or other arguments given +in a request without proper quoting (closes: #607248). + + -- Jonathan Nieder Thu, 13 Jan 2011 23:13:05 -0600 + git-core (1:1.5.6.5-3+lenny3.2) stable

Re: libgs8 has no ghostscript dependancy

rsioned dependency Depends: libgs8 (= ${binary:Version}) that was added to ghostscript a couple of years ago to address the same problem (Bug#470253). Yes, after this patch ghostscript would once again have a circular dependency. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder --- Untested (testing with apt and ap

Bug#610948: unblock: ghostscript/8.71~dfsg2-8

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi, libgs8 in squeeze requires files from /usr/share/ghostscript/8.71 but does not declare a corresponding dependency on ghostscript. Worse, it could make the transition to libgs9 in wheez

Bug#613433: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-0.1

tags 613433 - moreinfo quit Jonathan Nieder wrote: > The git package in stable is currently based against v1.7.2.3. Junio > is conservative about not making risky changes to the maint-1.7.2 > branch, so I would like to update the Debian packaging to v1.7.2.5. > > The release no

Bug#613433: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-0.1

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 14:51:29 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> The git package in stable is currently based against v1.7.2.3. Junio >> is conservative about not making risky changes to the maint-1.7.2 >> branch, so I would like to update th

Re: Processed (with 1 errors): Raise severity for KDE3 / Qt3 removal reminder bugs (squeeze has been released)

Hi! Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > Work on that direction has already started some time ago, when Eckhart sent > those wishlist mails to the maintainers of the related packages. > > Please, see http://wiki.debian.org/kdelibs4c2aRemoval and > http://wiki.debian.org/qt3-x11-freeRemo

Bug#613433: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-1

Hi, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 14:51:29 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> The git package in stable is currently based against v1.7.2.3. Junio >> is conservative about not making risky changes to the maint-1.7.2 >> branch, so I would like to update th

Bug#615129: RM: qt-x11-free/3:3.3.8b-7, kdelibs/4:3.5.10.dfsg.1-5

Package: release.debian.org Severity: wishlist User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Tags: moreinfo Hi, There seems to be some interest in removing kde3 and qt3 before wheezy is released. This bug is meant to track that process and request removal of those packages from testi

Re: Processed (with 1 errors): Raise severity for KDE3 / Qt3 removal reminder bugs (squeeze has been released)

Hi, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 03:11:52 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> 1. lower the severity of these bugs to important or lower > > Yes please. Based on response from #debian-qt-kde that was a bad idea on my part. Not wanting to spam people further, I&#

Re: gcc-4.6: -Wunused-but-set-variable -Werror does not imply -Werror=unused-but-set-variable

Matthias Klose wrote: > yes, explicitly disabled in the package, for a limited time. If you > keep this warning enabled, it will result in too many build > failures. Somebody needs to scan the successful build logs of a > test rebuild for these warnings, file bug reports, user-tag them > with de

Severity for KDE3 / Qt3 removal reminder bugs

Julien Cristau wrote: > Care to elaborate? As I understand it: The Qt 3 part is a red herring. Bugs blocking removal of Qt 3 really should _not_ be release critical as long as there is someone willing to maintain Qt 3 itself. I'm not aware of an RFA, so... As for the KDE 3 part: to avoid user

Re: pu: package apt/0.8.10.3+squeeze1

Hi, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > David submitted another bundle. It adds xz support to the rest of APT, > so that we do not have half-baked support. The diff is very small and it > may be a good idea to include it as well. What do you think? Just a quick nitpick: be sure to add the appropriate

Re: pu: package apt/0.8.10.3+squeeze1

Julian Andres Klode wrote: > APT does not depend on xz. It just happens to support xz when it is > installed, it does not require it. And it always prefers other options, > unless told to do xz files Perhaps I was confused. I just didn't see it in Suggests like the other compressors. If that ha

Bug#623529: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-2

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Tags: squeeze Hi, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > git-daemon-run wants to be removed and purged in steps separated by a sleep > of a second or so. Otherwise userdel fails with "user gitlog is currently

Bug#623529: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-2

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 17:58 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> -sv force-stop git-daemon 2>/dev/null || : >> +sv force-shutdown /etc/sv/git-daemon 2>/dev/null || : > > Is the switch from "git-daemon" to "/etc/sv/git-daemon"

Bug#623529: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-2

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 12:38 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Yes, sv will not control a removed service unless passed the full path >> /etc/sv/git-daemon. > > Okay; thanks for the explanation. Please feel free to go ahead with the > upload. Th

Re: linux-2.6: Aufs apparently silently dropped, breaking debian-live

severity 627837 serious quit Daniel Baumann wrote: > oh.. and before you ask.. 'way before' means 'at least 2011-04-18, but > possibly even earlier' (yes, that really is a month before .39 was > released). I don't see the value of this discussion --- it's water under the bridge, anyway. I'm set

Re: linux-2.6: Aufs apparently silently dropped, breaking debian-live

severity 627837 important quit Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 15:28:18 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> I'm setting the severity to serious, even though I am neither part of >> the release team nor a maintainer for the package. Either should of >>

Bug#630201: transition: liblzma 5

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hi, I would like to upload liblzma5 to unstable, so liblzma in wheezy can match the upstream ABI. Relative to what's currently in sid, this involves a soname bump (2 → 5), introduction of versioned symb

Bug#637840: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Tags: squeeze Hi, A few updates have collected on git's debian-stable branch. 1. Upstream's maint-1.7.2 branch gets very few changes, but there have been a few since 1.7.2.5 was released: - fix off-by-one bug

Bug#637840: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3

Jonathan Nieder wrote: > debdiff attached, or see Erm. (Here it is. Sorry for the noise.) diff -u git-1.7.2.5/debian/changelog git-1.7.2.5/debian/changelog --- git-1.7.2.5/debian/changelog +++ git-1.7.2.5/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,24 @@ +git (1:1.7.2.5-3) stable; urgency=low + + * deb

Bug#630251: patch for proposed updates / rdesktop sometimes fails to transfer files from win2k8

clone 630251 -1 retitle -1 rdesktop: value for CallerAvailableAllocationUnits from FileFsFullSizeInformation is too high reassign -1 rdesktop 1.7.0-1 tags -1 = upstream quit Hi Laszlo, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: > On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 20:48 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> This is nearly, but n

Bug#636630: pu: package clive/2.2.13-5+squeeze3

tags 636630 + pending quit Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Uploaded. Thanks :) And accepted, according to . -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@list

Bug#637114: pu: package grub2/1.98+20100804-15

reopen 610184 quit Hi, Robert Millan wrote: > I had a look at those two bugs: > > #601974 is indeed fixed in unstable, it wasn't closed in changelog > because the fix was applied directly to upstream (and included with > 1.99-1 upload). I've closed that bug and put everyone involved on CC. > >

Re: Processed: Re: pu: package tzdata/2011h-0lenny1

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > tags 638891 - pending > thanks > > On Fri, 2011-08-26 at 23:51 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: >> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: >> >>> # http://release.debian.org/proposed-updates/oldstable.html >>> tags 638891 + lenny pending > > That page does

Bug#637840: pu: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 19:33 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> - fast-import: accept no-op "feature notes" command for frontends >>use to declare they require an importer able to write notes. [...] > I did think "hmmm" at thi

Bug#637840: proposed upload: package git/1:1.7.2.5-3

Hi Gerrit et al, I'd therefore like to propose git://repo.or.cz/git/debian/jrn.git debian-stable aka git://git.debian.org/~jrnieder-guest/git.git debian-stable (commit 011ee3d5) for upload to stable. It fixes a few bugs: - off-by-one in commit message parsing (not filed in BTS) - Bug#6

Bug#630201: [sponsoring] xz-utils update

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 22:15:09 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >> I think this should be ok at this point, feel free to upload to sid. >> Thanks for bearing with us for this long... > > Ping, Jonathan? Sorry for the slow response. Mohammed, I'd like to propose xz-utils 5.1

Bug#630201: RFS: xz-utils (updated package)

Hi, I am looking to upload the new version 5.1.1alpha+20110809-3 of my package "xz-utils" to unstable. It builds these binary packages: xz-utils- high compression-ratio compressor xz-lzma - LZMA Utils compatibility commands xzdec - tiny decompressors liblzma-dev - d

Bug#630201: [kfreebsd-*] please rebuild elfutils/sid, ignoring the 2 known testsuite failures (Re: transition: liblzma 5)

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:01:41 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: >>> libdw1 (DWARF parser for elfutils) >> >> FTBFS on kfreebsd, needs a bug filed. > > Apparently that's #570805 (thanks, Jakub). That's a pair of testsuite failures due to a kernel bug and not a regression in

Please binNMU xz-utils rdeps for ABI change

Hi, Upstream made some interface changes to liblzma. I don’t think any of the packages currently in Debian are affected by the API change, but the ABI change is real and necessitated a soname bump. Could you schedule binNMUs to rebuild against the new version? nmu lsb-rpm_4.7.1-11 . ALL . -m 'R

Re: Please binNMU xz-utils rdeps for ABI change

Hi again, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > nmu lsb-rpm_4.7.1-11 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against liblzma1.' > nmu mupen64plus_1.5+dfsg1-7 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against liblzma1.' > dw lsb-rpm_4.7.1-11 mupen64plus_1.5+dfsg1-7 . kfreebsd-i386 . -m 'liblzma1' Erm, there wa

Bug#557930: binNMU for liblzma ABI change

Package: release.debian.org User: debian-release@lists.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi, liblzma0 (built from the xz-utils package) has been replaced by liblzma1. Since I asked about this last week, the rpm package has had a few sourceful uploads, so there is only one package left that needs rebui

hint: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20091116-1, rpm/4.7.2-1, mupen64plus/1.5+dfsg1-7

Luk Claes wrote: > Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: >> I understand both obsolete another package (libzma0/libshogun5) but they >> could peacefully coexist with the old package. So I don't understand why >> they don't migrate to testing and are even listed not yet build on all >> archs ... >> >> Or shoul

Re: hint: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20091116-1, rpm/4.7.2-1, mupen64plus/1.5+dfsg1-7

Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Luk Claes wrote: >> The semi-automatic cruft removal seems to not have happened yet. > > I had guessed a different reason: I assumed (wrongly?) that testing > only contains one version for each source package. Agh, of course I misunderstood. The

Bug#692011: taxbird: version in testing (0.16.x) is completely useless

Toni Mueller wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 07:49:55PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >> Potentially, yes. tzdata's debdiff tends not to end up as >> >> 83 files changed, 13318 insertions(+), 16724 deletions(-) >> >> though. :-( > > ok, so what do you suggest? > > I reckon that all tax calculati

Bug#682906: unblock: python-defaults/2.7.3-2

unblock 682906 by 683053 tags 682906 + moreinfo quit Piotr Ozarowski wrote: > [Jonathan Nieder, 2012-12-09] >> * pyversions, dh_python2, pycompile: allow to override system's list of >> supported Python versions via DEBPYTHON_SUPPORTED and default Pytho

Bug#696665: unblock: libdrm/2.4.40-1~deb7u1 (pre-approval, hw support)

Hi, Julien Cristau wrote: > I'm considering an update to libdrm for wheezy, to get newer hw support > on radeon and intel. Upstream changed the libdrm_nouveau API/ABI in the > mean time, so this update would revert nouveau to the current state in > wheezy (2.4.33-3). FWIW I think this would be

Bug#696665: unblock: libdrm/2.4.40-1~deb7u1 (pre-approval, hw support)

Julien Cristau wrote: > This would go in from sid, not tpu. Oh, sid libdrm matches wheezy. Sorry, I confused myself through the version number. I still think this would be a useful update. :) I've been using libdrm 2.4.40-1 from experimental since it was uploaded, and it works fine here. In a

Bug#685237: unblock: makehuman/1.0.0~alpha6-5

tags 685237 + moreinfo quit Hi, Muammar El Khatib wrote: > I'm writing this report for your consideration. makehuman was removed on > 2012-06-19 (revision 1.0.0~alpha6-3). Then, I uploaded two new revisions being > the last one on 2012-07-11. I've attached the debdiff files that reflect > change

Bug#685248: unblock boinc/7.0.34+dfsg-2

tags 685248 + moreinfo quit Hi, Guo Yixuan wrote: > we > still hope to have an update for boinc. Could you describe what such an update would look like (and attach a debdiff)? The current diff between testing and experimenta

Bug#683142: unblock: bdii/5.2.5-2+wheezy3

tags 683142 + moreinfo quit Hi Matthias, In November, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > I have accepted bdii/5.2.5-2+wheezy3 from NEW, however there are still > some things that maybe should be improved: > > There is an empty /etc/sysconfig directory. > > The postinst uses chown on files in non-root-own

Bug#685663: unblock nordugrid-arc/2.0.0-3

tags 685663 + moreinfo quit Hi Mattias, Mattias Ellert wrote: > Since there was an RC bug reported against version 2.0.0-3 (some missing > Replaces/Breaks), allowing this version back in to testing again would > not be a good idea. I created a 2.0.0-3+wheezy1 version with the same > fix that is

Bug#685248: unblock boinc/7.0.34+dfsg-2

Hi Steffen, Steffen Möller wrote: > I have mentally given up on Wheezy and BOINC. That's unfortunate to hear. What is your advice for the release team? Is the version currently in wheezy appropriate for release, should it be removed, or are there some fixes missing that would make it appropriat

Bug#692011: taxbird: version in testing (0.16.x) is completely useless

retitle 692011 RM: taxbird/0.16-0.2 user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 692011 = rm quit Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 08:46:50PM +, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >> Then aim to make the version in sid, or any later revisions, available >> through wheezy-bac

Bug#683683: unblock: openswan/1:2.6.38-1

René Mayrhofer wrote: > I agree with going for the backports option so as not to delay the freeze > period any more than necessary. Thus closing. > However, the typical issue with openswan > will remain in this case: security updates will be more difficult to > ba

Bug#685248: unblock boinc/7.0.34+dfsg-2

(resending to BTS with Steffen's permission) Steffen Möller wrote > 7.0.27 does the job. [... lots of interesting details snipped ...] > Since the package does something good to the world at large, I do > not want any such removal again, [...] > On http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php you see th

Re: connman: Connman won't run due to missing libxtables.so.7

found 691180 connman/1.0-1.1+wheezy1 fixed 691180 connman/1.0-1.2 quit Hi Adrian, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > close 691180 > thanks > > Hi, > > there have been new uploads of connman both into testing and unstable, > the issue has been resolved as the package has been rebuilt in both > ca

Re: connman: Connman won't run due to missing libxtables.so.7

Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On 24.01.2013 09:22, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Fixing this properly would presumably require an iptables update in >> testing (either bumping shlibs or, better, backporting the >> introduction of a separate libxtables9 package from sid) fo

Re: connman: Connman won't run due to missing libxtables.so.7

reassign 691180 iptables 1.4.14-3 affects 691180 + connman quit Hi Julien, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 01:22:21 -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> In wheezy, there is instead an unversioned dependency on iptables, >> which is not enough to ensure the correct sh

Re: connman: Connman won't run due to missing libxtables.so.7

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 07:04:16 -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Julien Cristau wrote: >>> NAK. iptables in sid needs to add Breaks on the packages in wheezy that >>> want libxtables.so.7. And 691180 should be reassigned to iptables. [..

Bug#664793: pu: package libcap2/1:2.19-3

retitle 664793 pu: package libcap2/1:2.19-3+squeeze1 quit Hi Torsten, In May, Torsten Werner wrote: > --- libcap2-2.19/debian/changelog 2010-08-16 23:16:35.0 +0200 > +++ libcap2-2.19/debian/changelog 2012-03-20 22:22:39.0 +0100 > @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ > +libcap2 (1:2.19-3+squee

Bug#678624: pu: package xz-utils/5.0.0-3

Hi again, In June, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > debian/changelog | 50 + > debian/rules | 4 +- > debian/source/include-binaries | 2 + > debian/symbols | 8 +-- > te

Bug#678624: pu: package xz-utils/5.0.0-3

Hi, In June, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > +xz-utils (5.0.0-3) stable; urgency=low > + > + * Fixes from upstream: Ping. A number of these are important to me: > +* liblzma: > + - lzma_easy_buffer_encode() and lzma_stream_buffer_encode() > +avoid writing

Bug#668008: unblock: uw-imap

Hi Magnus, Magnus Holmgren wrote: > The SONAME *shouldn't* have had to be changed as 2007f is merely a bugfix > release, except for an attempt to also support AIX 5.2, but that's nothing > that affects us. There are no ABI or API changes. See attached diff. > > At this point we have to either

Re: [squeeze] Re: ecm: file conflict with gmp-ecm

Philipp Kern wrote: > Interestingly gmp-ecm does conflict with ecm in wheezy, even though the file > conflict is solved. Oh, excellent. The Conflicts is even present in squeeze. Would you mind tagging 580548 squeeze-ignore to get it off the radar? Then I'll file a bug for gmp-ecm to make the co

Bug#687220: proposed upload: xz-utils/5.1.1alpha+20120614-2

Hi Mohammed, Thorsten, et al, I am looking to upload version 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2 of xz-utils to unstable. The package can be found on alioth.debian.org: - http://alioth.debian.org/~jrnieder-guest/temp/xz-utils/xz-utils_5.1.1alpha+20120614-2.dsc - git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/xz.git maste

Bug#692010: unblock: raptor2/2.0.8-2

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi, Please unblock raptor2/2.0.8-2, which adds a Breaks against raptor1 versions without symbol versioning, fixing the important bug#656928: | raptor_sequence.c:385: (raptor_sequence_get_at) assertion fail

Bug#692074: unblock: procps/1:3.3.5-1

Craig Small wrote: > Please unblock package procps If I understand correctly this involves a small transition: $ cupt rdepends libprocps0 Reverse-Depends: libprocps0-dev 1:3.3.4-1: libprocps0 (= 1:3.3.4-1) Reverse-Depends: open-vm-tools 2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-1+nmu1: libprocps0 (>= 1:3.

Bug#692074: unblock: procps/1:3.3.5-1

Craig Small wrote: > Tell me how to do it (not the API change, but more around the what > version etc) and I will. > > I assume its making a 3.3.4-2 with a debian patch to reverse the API > and then do.. something. I think the steps are: 1. prepare 3.3.4-2 backing out the ABI change, ask ft

Bug#692011: taxbird: version in testing (0.16.x) is completely useless, need the latest version for 2012 tax declaration

(cc-ing the bug, hoping that's ok) Hi Toni, Toni Mueller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 07:32:18AM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> You can track progress at <http://bugs.debian.org/692011>. Also if you > > I suggest that taxbird goes into volatile. Volatile doe

Bug#692298: unblock: git/1:1.7.10.4-2

Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Please unblock git/1:1.7.10.4-2 to get fixes to > > #678137 -- incompatibility with SVN 1.7 > > and > > #587650 -- "Byte order is not compatible at ../../lib/Storable.pm" > errors when accessing git-svn repositorie

Bug#692298: unblock: git/1:1.7.10.4-2

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 11:30:04 -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Please unblock git/1:1.7.10.4-2 to get fixes to >> >> #678137 -- incompatibility with SVN 1.7 >> >> and >> >> #587650 -- "Byte order is not compatibl

Bug#687220: proposed upload: xz-utils/5.1.1alpha+20120614-2

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 18:00:36 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Hi Mohammed, Thorsten, et al, >> >> I am looking to upload version 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2 of xz-utils >> to unstable. The package can be found on alioth.debian.org: >>

Bug#692298: unblock: git/1:1.7.10.4-2

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 11:30:04 -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Please unblock git/1:1.7.10.4-2 to get fixes to >> >> #678137 -- incompatibility with SVN 1.7 >> >> and >> >> #587650 -- "Byte order is not compatibl

Bug#687220: unblock: xz-utils/5.1.1alpha+20120614-2

On 11 October, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 16:26:27 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Unfortunately there has not been a stable release on the 5.1.y branch >> of XZ Utils. This update is an attempt to make the best of what we >> have, by: >>

Bug#692298: tpu: git/1:1.7.10.4-1+wheezy1 (Re: unblock: git/1:1.7.10.4-2)

Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:16:05 -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> In light of [1], I'm happy to skip >> >> b8c78e2a git svn: work around SVN 1.7 mishandling of svn:special changes >> >> in a tpu upload. Proposed upload attached. [..

Bug#682906: unblock: python-defaults/2.7.3-2

Hi Scott, First, a disclaimer: I'm not a python expert or a member of the release team, so please take anything I say with a grain of salt. This review is mostly meant to help get this unstuck. Scott Kitterman wrote: > - Match the version number for python and python2.7.3. Although this is >

Re: libraptor2-0: please add a Breaks against libraptor1 versions without symbol versioning

In January, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Adrian Knoth wrote: >> The situation is as follows: >> >>- ardour depends on liblrdf (mind the l after lib) >> - liblrdf depends on libraptor1 >> >>- ardour depends on libslv2 >>

Re: coreutils: please update translations

Hi, In May, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > As a test that I have locales set up correctly, I tried "ls --help": > > | $ LANG=de_DE.UTF-8 ls --help > | Aufruf: ls [OPTION]... [DATEI]... > | List information about the FILEs (the current directory by default). > | Sort entri

  1   2   >