Bug#929214: release.debian.org - Add package constraint for cloud images

Hi Bastian, On 12-06-2019 20:01, Bastian Blank wrote: > The code in the package is not used to actually build the images we > release for Debian. We use the unreleased code from the git repository > to do all the automated stuff. > > I'm also not sure if the Debian autopkgtest infrastructure wou

Bug#929214: release.debian.org - Add package constraint for cloud images

Hi Bastian, [CC adding debian-ci@l.d.o, please drop the bug in the next reply as it starts to become off-topic there.] On 12-06-2019 20:52, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 08:42:27PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: >> On 12-06-2019 20:01, Bastian Blank wrote: >>> I&

Bug#928185: unblock: openjdk-11/11.0.3+7-4

Hi, On 12-06-2019 21:54, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 12/06/2019 à 20:38, Paul Gevers a écrit : > >> Can you explain why, please? > > You mean why not using the +really version in testing? Because that's > ugly and confusing for the end users I guess. I'd still lik

Bug#929908: unblock: tomcat9/9.0.16-4

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed Hi Emmanuel, > unblock tomcat9/9.0.16-4 Please upload the package soon and remove the moreinfo tag when it can be unblocked. Thanks. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#930293: unblock: docker.io/18.09.1+dfsg1-7

Control: retitle -1 unblock: docker.io [pre-approval] Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Arnaud, On 10-06-2019 06:44, Arnaud Rebillout wrote: > I'm about to upload a fix for #929662 "docker.io: CVE-2018-15664", but > before I do that I'd like to ask a question to the release team. > > For now in testin

Bug#930324: unblock: nageru/1.8.4-2

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed On 12-06-2019 16:12, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:06:30PM +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: >>> Please unblock package nageru >> I unblocked it, but noticed it's stuck behind gcc-8. Can you prepare a >> testing-proposed-updates upload? > >

Bug#930467: unblock (pre-approval): mu-editor/1.0.2+dfsg-2.1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Peter, On 13-06-2019 10:34, plugwash wrote: > Recently I became aware of two issues in mu-editor. A tool for beginning > python programmers. > > I was informed that the "debug" button in mu-editors default python mode was > broken in the Debian packaged version of mu

Bug#930238: unblock: zfs-linux/0.7.12-2+deb10u1 [t-p-u]

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Mo, On 09-06-2019 05:41, Mo Zhou wrote: > Following > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#t-p-u > I've not uploaded it yet but asking for permission first. Thanks. > Fix a GRAVE stable RC due to linux's unexporting several > fpu-rela

Bug#930371: unblock: dbus/1.12.16-1

Control: tags -1 confirmed Hi Simon, On 11-06-2019 17:23, Simon McVittie wrote: > Please unblock package dbus to fix CVE-2019-12749. I forgot to set high > urgency, so you might want to adjust its age-days too. You have an autopkgtest that passed, so it is already at two days. > Filtered and fu

Bug#928882: unblock: [pre-approval] ghc/8.4.4+dfsg1-3

Hi Emanuel, On 14-06-2019 18:07, Ilias Tsitsimpis wrote: > I have uploaded both ghc and happy here, in case you need Emanuele to > verify that the current version of happy fails, whereas the new one > works: > > https://www.iliastsi.net/ghc/ghc_8.4.4+dfsg1-2+armel0_armel.deb > sha256:

Bug#930238: unblock: zfs-linux/0.7.12-2+deb10u1 [t-p-u]

Hi Mo, Aron, On 14-06-2019 12:50, Aron Xu wrote: > I have tested the package in a virtual machine on amd64 for > linux/4.19.37-3 (buster) and a locally built updated linux kernel that > breaks zfs-linux/0.7.12-2. The dkms package builds fine with both of > the versions and zpool create/export/impo

Bug#930058: unblock: puppet/5.5.10-3

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Thomas, On 06-06-2019 10:36, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Version 5.5.10-3 adds a tiny cron.daily job which cleans-up the > /var/lib/puppet/reports folder to avoid that a puppet-master > server gets its HDD full, which potentially could be very harmful > for a deployment.

Bug#928368: Bug#929318: unblock: papi/5.7.0+dfsg-1

Control: tags 929318 moreinfo confirmed Hi Andreas, On 09-06-2019 23:00, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > The attached diff between 5.7.0-1 (buster) and 5.7.0+dfsg-1 > (experimental) is a git diff because this better copes with the > renames. It also excludes all the deletions (-D). > All that is missin

Bug#928882: unblock: [pre-approval] ghc/8.4.4+dfsg1-3

Hi Emanuele, On 16-06-2019 20:25, Emanuele Olivetti wrote: > I've just followed your instructions, downloaded and installed the > current happy (and also ghc and the other packages) in the usual way: > >   dpkg -i   >   apt install -f > > then tested the example files as indicated: > >   drakes

Bug#928111: [pre-approval] unblock: icu/63.2-1

Hi László, On 16-06-2019 11:20, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > The debdiff is larger for the following changes. The backported > security fixes are no longer under debian/patches but inline. The ABI > break, called the 'ICU-20250' issue upstream is reversed with a patch. > Then the s/63.1/63.2/

Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed Hi Sergey, On 17-06-2019 11:01, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: > Please unblock package monit in t-p-u. The version > 1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1 has only targeted fixes for security > issue #927775 (two CVE's). See attached diff. This debdiff looks good. Can you please u

Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

Arg. On 17-06-2019 21:19, Paul Gevers wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed > > Hi Sergey, > > On 17-06-2019 11:01, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: >> Please unblock package monit in t-p-u. The version >> 1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1 has only targeted fixes for security

Bug#928882: unblock: [pre-approval] ghc/8.4.4+dfsg1-3

Control: tags -1 confirmed Dear Ilias, Please go ahead with uploading the reviewed ghc to unstable and remove the moreinfo tag when it is available so we can schedule the binNMU's. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#928111: [pre-approval] unblock: icu/63.2-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Control: retitle -1 unblock: icu/63.2-2 Hi László, On 16-06-2019 11:20, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: >> Unfortunately, the state of chromium at this moment doesn't allow us to >> rebuild and have the package migrate to buster as chromium FTBFS on >> arm64 and the pack

Bug#928227: unblock: golang-golang-x-net-dev/1:0.0+git20181201.351d144+dfsg-3

Hi Drew, On 18-06-2019 16:22, Drew Parsons wrote: > Just want to say, thanks Shengjing, Tobias and Paul for working through > the issues to get golang ready for buster. Thank you for the thanks, but to be fair, it isn't finished. The golang-golang-x-net-dev update isn't available in coyim, rkt an

Bug#928111: [pre-approval] unblock: icu/63.2-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi László, On 17-06-2019 22:05, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 9:50 PM Paul Gevers wrote: >> Do I understand correctly that what we are now getting with this version is: >> >> - Reiwa support >> - fix for the spee

Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

Hi Sergey, On 18-06-2019 12:04, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 21:19:07 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote: >> we don't want packages going though it that don't need to. > > monit package going to be removed from buster. Maybe this > justifies migration from

Bug#930397: [pre-approval] unblock: nano/3.2-3

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Jordi, On 12-06-2019 03:52, Jordi Mallach wrote: > Hi release team, > > Nano's upstream has been focusing on fixing some crashers and hangs lately, > and as nano froze a while back, he was kind enough to backport all the fixes > he deems interesting for the buster re

Bug#930293: unblock: docker.io/18.09.1+dfsg1-7

Hi Arnaud, On 13-06-2019 10:46, Arnaud Rebillout wrote: >>> Or should I just stick to 18.09.1, and only upload a new debian version >>> that only includes the CVE fix? >> You'll get an unblock much easier. > > > I'll go this way then :) > I won't audit the whole 142 commits, even less convince

Bug#929318: unblock: papi/5.7.0+dfsg-1

Hi pcp maintainers, On 16-06-2019 14:59, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 11:00:10PM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: >> The transition from libpapi5 to libpapi5.7 will require only a single >> binNMU: eztrace. > > Scheduled and will monitor. We are trying to do a very late tran

Bug#930632: unblock: libfm-qt/0.14.1-9

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Alf, On 17-06-2019 00:12, Alf Gaida wrote: [...] > +libfm-qt (0.14.1-9) unstable; urgency=medium > + > + * Added upstream patch workaround-missed-file-monitoring.patch > +(Closes: #926803) > + * Added two new symbols - internal use only

Bug#928185: unblock: openjdk-11/11.0.3+7-4

Hi Tony, On 18-06-2019 22:14, tony mancill wrote: > Things are looking good so far with 11.0.4+4+really11.0.3+7 in unstable, > and so I would like to prepare the t-p-u upload. At the moment, the > version I have is 11.0.3+7-5, since that would have been the "next" > 11.0.3+7 Debian revision for u

Bug#930749: unblock: samba/2:4.9.9+dfsg-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo On 19-06-2019 22:14, Mathieu Parent wrote: > Without an ack from you, I will only add the patch for CVE-2019-12435 (and > maybe #929217?) and delay the other fixes for buster-proposed-updates. > > What is you opinion? Please do the targeted fix (for both issues). We are

Bug#930717: unblock: pysynphot/0.9.12+dfsg-3

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed Hi Ole, On 19-06-2019 10:10, Ole Streicher wrote: > * Remove synphot-data package (Closes: #930056, LP: #1775965) This package needs manual decrufting (due to arch/all). Please have the ftp-master remove the package and remove the moreinfo tag once that has

Bug#930727: unblock: gatb-core/1.4.1+git20181225.44d5a44+dfsg-3

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Control: tags 930368 ftbfs Hi Andreas, On 19-06-2019 13:40, Andreas Tille wrote: > - > _ZNSt6vectorISt5tupleIJjN4gatb4core5tools4math8LargeIntILi2EEEjjjEESaIS7_EE12emplace_backIJS7_EEEvDpOT_@Base > 1.4.1+git20181225.44d5a44+dfsg [...] > - _ZNSt6vectorIbSaIbEE13_M_ini

Bug#930739: unblock: debichem/0.0.8

Hi Andreas, On 19-06-2019 17:16, Andreas Tille wrote: > unblock debichem/0.0.8 Unblocked, thanks. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#930670: unblock: rabbitmq-server/3.7.8-5

Hi Thomas, On 19-06-2019 16:46, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Maybe it will be accepted as a buster-proposed-update for > the first point release, then? I am not (yet) contributing to the stable release management. I suggest you file a buster-pu bug and discuss your case there (or reopen this bug, reti

Bug#930776: unblock: ionit/0.3.2-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Benjamin On 20-06-2019 12:52, Benjamin Drung wrote: > ionit runs too late for /etc/network/interfaces (RC bug #919690). This > is fixed in 0.3.2-1. The debdiff is attached. Please, pretty please. At this moment of the release only targeted fixes [1]. Revert the other

Bug#926780: unblock gcc-8/8.3.0-7 and updated cross builds

Control: tags -1 wontfix Control: close -1 Hi Matthias, On 06-06-2019 12:01, Paul Gevers wrote:> doko, I know you are maintaining quite some key packages, so extra work> is probably not what you are looking for, but neither are we and on top> of that, we don't like turning down u

Bug#930776: unblock: ionit/0.3.2-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed Hi Benjamin, On 20-06-2019 14:05, Benjamin Drung wrote: > Okay. I prepared a version with just the fixes for the ionit.service > (debdiff attached). Why not going through testing-proposed-updates? If > not, the version number will be 0.3.2+really0.2.1-2 instead

Bug#930687: unblock: rdesktop/1.8.6-2

Hi László, On 18-06-2019 18:19, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > The debdiff is a bit large, but hopefully can be accepted for Buster. Unblocked because of the security team position. Thanks. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#928882: unblock: [pre-approval] ghc/8.4.4+dfsg1-3

Control: retitle -1 unblock: ghc/8.4.4+dfsg1-3 Hi Ilias, On 20-06-2019 04:20, Ilias Tsitsimpis wrote: > Attached is the updated file. Scheduling as we speak. Can you please keep an eye on it and ping this bug if you spot something not going well or when everything is finished? It's unclear to me

Bug#928185: unblock: openjdk-11/11.0.3+7-4

Hi tony, On 20-06-2019 15:44, tony mancill wrote: > I interpret this exchange to mean that 11.0.3+7-5 is still the version > preferred by the OpenJDK Team and so have uploaded that, built against > buster and with distribution set the buster. > > Let me know if I misinterpreted and should upload

Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Samuel On 20-06-2019 20:38, Samuel Henrique wrote: > I'm asking for the unblock of ruby-airbrussh > because a critical bug was solved in the last upload. > > The bug is related to the package throwing an exception when dealing > with non UTF-8 characters coming from

Bug#930797: unblock: xen/4.11.1+92-g6c33308a8d-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Hans, On 20-06-2019 21:14, Hans van Kranenburg wrote: > * Note that the fixes for XSA-297 will only have effect when also loading > updated cpu microcode with MD_CLEAR functionality. When using the > intel-microcode package to include microcode in the dom0 i

Bug#928185: unblock: openjdk-11/11.0.3+7-4

Hi Tony, On 22-06-2019 01:40, tony mancill wrote: > As of 2019-06-21 23:34:12 UTC, the buildd status page [1] indicates > "BD-Uninstallable": > >> Dependency installability problem for openjdk-11 on arm64: >> >> Installability of build dependencies not tested yet > > I'm not sure what that means

Bug#930882: unblock: schleuder/3.4.0-2

Hi Georg, On 21-06-2019 22:54, Georg Faerber wrote: > I've just uploaded it to unstable, it ships a fix to allow Schleuder > handle mails produced by Mutt 1.12.0, which was recently released, with > protected headers. Without this fix, Schleuder is unable to handle these > messages, and crashes. T

Bug#930801: unblock: rdma-core/22.3-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Benjamin, On 20-06-2019 23:31, Benjamin Drung wrote: > rdma-core is maintained by the Linux RDMA group. It follows the Linux > kernel release schedule and concepts. Upstream backports fixes to their > stable branches. We have currently rdma-core 22.1-1 in Debian > uns

Bug#930812: unblock: cargo/0.35.0-2

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Ximin, On 21-06-2019 07:38, Ximin Luo wrote: > rustc 1.34.2 was unblocked in bug #930661 but the bug requestor forgot to file > the corresponding unblock request for cargo version 0.35.0-1. This is the > recommended version of cargo that goes with that rust version.

Bug#930771: unblock: partman-auto/149

user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 930771 unblock tags 930771 d-i moreinfo thanks Hi Holger, On 20-06-2019 10:35, Holger Wansing wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Usertags: unblock You missed to change the user above for the unblock usertag. So we nearly missed your reques

Bug#930757: unblock: grub2/2.02+dfsg1-19

Control: tags -1 confirmed d-i Control: reopen -1 On 21-06-2019 23:10, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 20-06-2019 01:37, Colin Watson wrote: >> unblock grub2/2.02+dfsg1-19 >> unblock grub-efi-amd64-signed/1+2.02+dfsg1+19 >> unblock grub-efi-arm64-signed/1+2.02+dfsg1+19 >> unb

Bug#930812: unblock: cargo/0.35.0-2

Hi Ximin, On 22-06-2019 11:57, Ximin Luo wrote: > Paul Gevers: >> On 21-06-2019 07:38, Ximin Luo wrote: >>> rustc 1.34.2 was unblocked in bug #930661 but the bug requestor forgot to >>> file >>> the corresponding unblock request for cargo version 0.35.0-1. Th

Bug#930797: unblock: xen/4.11.1+92-g6c33308a8d-1

Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo Hi Hans, On 22-06-2019 11:55, Hans van Kranenburg wrote: > What do you think about the following (also added as attachment): Looks good. Please go ahead with that upload and remove the moreinfo tag once there is a package to unblock. Paul signature.asc Des

Bug#930921: unblock: galera-3/25.3.26-1

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Otto On 22-06-2019 17:00, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > This is a new upstream bug fix release that is better compatible with > the MariaDB version currently in Buster. It has already been for 60 > days in unstable without any reported issues. Packaging process uses > Sals

Bug#930293: unblock: docker.io/18.09.1+dfsg1-7

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Shengjing, Arnaud, On 22-06-2019 22:14, Shengjing Zhu wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:18:47PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: >> I don't like to rush you, but be aware that the time slot to fix this is >> closing. The package needs

Re: youtube-dl in a stable release

Hi Jonathan, [Sorry, dropping most addressees]. On 23-06-2019 20:23, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > I am concerned about releasing buster with youtube-dl as an included > package. Me too. > The RC bug currently affecting buster (#930462) makes youtube-dl unable to > download videos from YouTube. I

Bug#930293: unblock: docker.io/18.09.1+dfsg1-7

Hi Shengjing, On 23-06-2019 13:59, Shengjing Zhu wrote: > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 12:09:13PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: >> Technically, you're already too late, the package will only be 2 of 5 >> days old on Tuesday 13:00 UTC. But I have much worse concerns, see below. >&g

Bug#930293: unblock: docker.io/18.09.1+dfsg1-7

Hi Shengjing, On 24-06-2019 00:28, Shengjing Zhu wrote: > Now, with good reason... > > It tooks me enough hours today to figure out why the tests crash the host(as > described in #929662, running out of pids). > > The bug is not from upstream. Previously a file was removed from > upstream tarbal

Bug#930717: unblock: pysynphot/0.9.12+dfsg-3

Hi Ole, On 19-06-2019 10:10, Ole Streicher wrote: > unblock pysynphot/0.9.12+dfsg-3 Unblocked, thanks. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#930669: unblock: qtbase-opensource-src/5.11.3+dfsg1-2

Hi Dmitry, On 19-06-2019 06:10, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > On 18-06-2019 09:41, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: >> Please see #911844 for details. > > Interesting bug report :) > >> unblock qtbase-opensource-src/5.11.3+dfsg1-2 > > Unblocked, thanks. Your

Bug#931001: unblock: xkeycaps/2.47-7

Control: tags -1 wontfix Control: close -1 Hi Christoph, On 24-06-2019 13:34, Christoph Berg wrote: > Please consider unblocking package xkeycaps. The new version properly > cross-builds, and also passes LDFLAGS to the final linker command > (previously, "-Wl,-z,relro" was missing). It's too lat

Bug#931052: unblock: webkit2gtk/2.24.2-2

reassign 931052 release-notes retitle 931052 webkit2gtk not supported on non-sse2 i386 hardware user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 931052 - unblock thanks Hi Alberto, On 25-06-2019 10:04, Alberto Garcia wrote: > Please unblock package webkit2gtk > > Upstream WebKitGTK has recen

Bug#931096: unblock: mariadb-10.3/1:10.3.16-1

Control: tags -1 wontfix Control: close -1 Hi Otto, On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 10:32:53 +0300 =?UTF-8?B?T3R0byBLZWvDpGzDpGluZW4=?= wrote: > Please unblock package mariadb-10.3 > > - New upstream release (which would get into Buster via stable-updates > eventually anyway) At this stage of the release

Bug#930994: marked as done (unblock: piuparts/1.0.1)

Hi, On 27-06-2019 13:31, Holger Levsen wrote: > anyhow, i guess for an t-p-u upload it is too late now (???), so that sensible > default release names will only be in buster with 10.1, right? Correct. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

Control: tags -1 wontfix Control: close -1 Hi Sergey, We're sorry, but we'll be removing monit from buster shortly. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#931282: unblock: s-nail/14.9.11-3

retitle 931282 buster-pu: package s-nail/14.9.11-2+deb10u1 user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 931282 - unblock usertags 931282 pu tags 931282 buster thanks Hi Paride, On 30-06-2019 14:55, Paride Legovini wrote: > Please unblock package s-nail. Version 14.9.11-3 contains a target

Bug#931126: unblock: enigmail/2:2.0.11+ds1-2

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Daniel, On 26-06-2019 19:13, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Please unblock package enigmail > > enigmail 2:2.0.11+ds1-2 includes several usability and security fixes > from upstream, including a fix for CVE-2019-12269 (debian bug #929363). > > The debdiff is attached.

Bug#931198: unblock: warzone2100/3.2.1-4

retitle 931198 buster-pu: package warzone2100/3.2.1-3+deb10u1 user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 931198 - unblock usertags 931198 pu tags 931198 buster thanks Hi Marcus, On 28-06-2019 01:37, Markus Koschany wrote: > A segmentation fault was discovered in warzone2100 when someone

Bug#931118: unblock: debian-keyring/2019.06.25

retitle 931118 buster-pu: package debian-keyring/2019.06.25~deb10u1 user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 931118 - unblock usertags 931118 pu tags 931118 buster thanks Hi Mattia, On 26-06-2019 16:10, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > The last upload of debian-keyring done yesterday updates t

Bug#883346: release.debian.org: improve reportbug templates for pu and unblock bugs

Hi, On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 19:14:01 +0100 Julien Cristau wrote: > I brought this up in Cambridge, filing here so we can discuss specifics. > > At Mozilla we're using a template in bugzilla [1] for requests to > cherry-pick changes from trunk to a release branch, to help release > management assess r

Bug#930795: unblock: ruby-airbrussh/1.3.2-1

retitle 930795 buster-pu: package ruby-airbrussh user release.debian@packages.debian.org usertags 930795 - unblock usertags 930795 pu tags 930795 buster thanks On 02-07-2019 01:14, Samuel Henrique wrote: > I can see you have lots of work to do, so if you feel like this should > not be fixed fo

Bug#931375: unblock: calamares-settings-debian/10.0.24-1

Control: tags -1 wontfix Hi Jonathan, On 03-07-2019 15:41, Jonathan Carter wrote: > I realise it's 3 days before release weekend, this upload fixes a problem > that we can't really fix in a security update. Can you elaborate why not? I suggest you talk to the security team to get it uploaded to

Bug#930637: unblock: monit/1:5.25.2-3+deb10u1

Hi Bas, On 04-07-2019 10:31, Bas Couwenberg wrote: > Since the upload to t-p-u is unlikely to accepted, a buster-pu may be a > reasonable alternative. We normally don't add packages in via pu. As monit isn't in buster, a buster-pu isn't really appropriate. > If the stable update is also not acce

Re: Revert some Go packages in unstable to align with testing/buster

Hi security-team, On 08-06-2019 23:45, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > Hi everybody, > > On Wed, 5 Jun 2019, Paul Gevers wrote: >> One other problem is that tools are lacking to schedule binNMUs on the >> right packages in an efficient manner and in the right order. > > I

Re: Bits from the Release Team: ride like the wind, Bullseye!

Hi Lisandro, On 07-07-2019 16:16, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: >> All autopkgtest failures considered RC for bullseye >> === >> >> From now on, all autopkgtest failures will be considered release-critical for >> bullseye. So if your pac

Re: Remove package from testing even if it has reverse dependencies?

Hi Kenneth, On 20-07-2019 22:10, Kenneth Pronovici wrote: > I have filed bugs with ftp.debian.org to remove > pychecker and epydoc from the archive.  These packages are obsolete - > they rely on Python 2 and can't be converted to Python 3.  I filed bugs > with all of the re

Bug#932417: nmu: ocamlnet_4.1.2-3

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Kyle, On 19-07-2019 02:12, Kyle Robbertze wrote: > Please rebuild ocamlnet to use camlzip 1.08-1, uploaded to unstable > yesterday. Without this, ocamlnet fails to install as it depends on an > old build of camlzip. > > nmu ocamlnet_4.1.2-3 . ANY . unstable . -m "reb

Bug#932417: nmu: ocamlnet_4.1.2-3

Hi, On 22-07-2019 20:54, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 08:41:09PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: >> I'm relatively new on the team so give me some slack. There is a >> permanent transition tracker for ocaml, so I *guess* this is handled >> differently than v

Bug#932790: buster-pu: package cacti/1.2.2+ds1-2+deb10u1

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Tags: buster Severity: normal After the release of buster, an upgrade issue was reported against cacti, bug #931702, which has been fixed upstream. I decided to fix two additional reported issues at the same time

Bug#932790: buster-pu: package cacti/1.2.2+ds1-2+deb10u1

Now with debdiff. On 23-07-2019 11:38, Paul Gevers wrote: > After the release of buster, an upgrade issue was reported against > cacti, bug #931702, which has been fixed upstream. I decided to fix two > additional reported issues at the same time, which can cause loss of > functi

Bug#932884: release.debian.org: What is the good way to update rollup ?

Hi Xavier, On 24-07-2019 09:07, Xavier Guimard wrote: > For the next release, we (pkg-js team) would like to update rollup. Like You're talking about bullseye here, or the first point release of buster. I assume you mean the former. > many compilers, it build-depends on its

Re: what's the plan with llvm-toolchain-*

Hi, On 25-03-2022 22:36, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: I think you under estimate the complexity of the problem. That may very well be. In that case it's even more important we have this discussion, because I believe it's important that the Release Team understands. llvm defaults is probably goi

Bug#1008164: RM: obfs4proxy/0.0.8-1

Control: tag -1 bullseye Hi Ana, On 23-03-2022 13:13, Ana Custura wrote: Opening this bug after a recomendation from debian-security. Version 0.0.8 of obfs4proxy has a security bug, which has only been fixed in a later version (0.0.13, see bug number #1004374), and also suffers from incompatib

Bug#1008518: nmu: libxxf86vm_1:1.1.4-1+b2

Hi Jordan, On 28-03-2022 10:20, Jordan Justen wrote: nmu libxxf86vm_1:1.1.4-1+b2 . ANY . unstable . -m "riscv64 arch is at 1:1.1.4-1 while others are at 1:1.1.4-1+b2" It may be obvious to you, but, so what? Why is that a problem and how does rebuilding on all architectures solve that? Paul

Bug#1009829: release.debian.org: please add hint: 'allow-uninst cacti-spine/armel' to enable migration of cacti

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Dear colleagues, Several days ago, I uploaded a new version of cacti to unstable which has one arch:all binary. One of it's reverse dependencies is cacti-spine, which builds an arch:any binary. In my upload I changed the dependency of libjs-d3 to node-

Re: security updates of Golang packages

Hi Thorsten, [I'm not one of the acting Stable Release Managers, but nevertheless] On 24-04-2022 13:46, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: I would like to improve the situation of security support for Golang packages (as already criticised long time ago[1]). Great. Uploads to Unstable should be no pro

Re: Apparently uncoordinated libnetpbm transition.

Hi Andreas, On 07-04-2022 09:21, Andreas Tille wrote: Sorry, that's my fault. I'm preparing an upload to fix #1007984 targeting new. Looking at https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/netpbm-free_2:10.98.00-1.html, is there any reason why you didn't add "Provides: libnetpbm9-dev, libnetpbm10-dev

Re: security updates of Golang packages

Hi Thorsten, On 25-04-2022 23:47, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: On Sun, 24 Apr 2022, Paul Gevers wrote: If I understand correctly, if this is only about rebuilds, just request an binNMU with the usual process (reportbug recommended). from my point of view binNMUs are not the right way here. Due

Bug#1010290: nmu: libtsm_4.0.2-0.1

Hi, On 28-04-2022 00:32, Victor Westerhuis wrote: libtsm cannot migrate unless it's rebuilt on buildd. There are no arch:all packages, so this should give no problems. I'm surprised when I checked on this package and I assume this to be a (very bad) mistake. It seems that with the NMU, the p

Re: security updates of Golang packages

Hi Thorsten, On 27-04-2022 00:08, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: On Tue, 26 Apr 2022, Paul Gevers wrote: But if you have the tooling to create such versioned dependencies (and you'd need those to get everything right), than we could use the same tools to add Depwait on the binNMUs and the

Re: Software RAID is not activated at boot time

Hi kibi, On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:28:53 +0100 Paul Gevers wrote: Hi fellow Release team member, and Cyril specifically, On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 19:18:43 +0100 Ivo De Decker wrote: > Removing it for buster is > not realistic because d-i depends on it. If we want to remove this from bullsey

Re: testing migration of mir-core and stdx-allocator binnmus

Hi, On 05-05-2022 19:06, Peter Green wrote: Can you add a hint to try these packages together? hint added. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#1010754: unblock: spyder/5.3.0+dfsg1-7 and unblock: spyder-unittest/0.5.0-3

Hi Julian, On 10-05-2022 08:43, Julian Gilbey wrote: Will I need to send such a request from now on every time I upload a new version of spyder, or will it remember the current state and not register an autopkgtest regression? As the test now fails on those architectures *in* testing, it will

Re: Question about (lately) bumping libudfread version

Hi, On 15-05-2022 17:04, Vasyl Gello wrote: Can we avoid starting a full-fledged transition for only 2 rdeps? I wonder what makes you scared of a transition? It would have cost both you and me less time if you would have just filed a request than writing your previous mail and me responding

Bug#1011210: RM: android-platform-system-core/1:10.0.0+r36-10 -- ROM; NVIU

Hi Roger, On 18-05-2022 18:22, Roger Shimizu wrote: This ticket is a follow-up to #100 - https://bugs.debian.org/100 I marked this ticket with ROM and NVIU, because: - ROM: I'm member of android tools team - NVIU: src:android-platform-tools is actually new version of this src:android-pl

Bug#1011265: Britney fails to pin complete set in "Provides" api transitions [Was: Bug#1010422: transition: r-api-bioc-3.15]

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertag: britney Hi, On 11-05-2022 12:34, Graham Inggs wrote: Yes, please go ahead. Tracker is at: https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/r-api-bioc-3.15.html There's three package still waiting for an upload, r-bi

Bug#1010422: Britney fails to pin complete set in "Provides" api transitions [Was: Bug#1010422: transition: r-api-bioc-3.15]

Hi, On 19-05-2022 10:55, Andreas Tille wrote: Am Thu, May 19, 2022 at 01:41:12PM +0530 schrieb Nilesh Patra: I think we can workaround these anyway by editing the DESCRIPTION file -- maybe I'll do so and upload either late in the night today or early morning Tom. I do not think that editing

Bug#1011210: RM: android-platform-system-core/1:10.0.0+r36-10 -- ROM; NVIU

Control: reassign -1 ftp.debian.org Hi, On 19-05-2022 11:10, Roger Shimizu wrote: I guess we should choose "testing follows removal automatically". reassigned. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#1011268: release.debian.org: proposes autoremoving every package(?) when nvidia-graphics-drivers-tesla-470 is RC-buggy

Control: reassign -1 qa.debian.org On 19-05-2022 12:37, Simon McVittie wrote: Package: release.debian.org dkms and nvidia-graphics-drivers-tesla-470 currently have RC bug #1010884 triggering autoremovals (it was closed today, so maybe it will cease to be relevant soon). I would expect the only

Bug#1010383: node-ejs 2.5.7-3+deb11u1 flagged for acceptance

Hi Yadd, On Sun, 29 May 2022 18:18:56 + Adam D Barratt wrote: Upload details == Package: node-ejs Version: 2.5.7-3+deb11u1 Explanation: fix server-side template injection issue [CVE-2022-29078] The upload triggered a regression in node-nodeunit on ppc64el (already tried th

Re: kind of special transition for luajit{,2}?

Hi Mo, On 03-06-2022 07:09, M. Zhou wrote: Long story short, src:luajit does not work on ppc64el because the upstream is completely not interested in supporing IBM archs https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1011297 Ack. So I uploaded luajit2, which at least passed hello world sm

Re: kind of special transition for luajit{,2}?

Hi Mo, On 05-06-2022 05:28, M. Zhou wrote: Please see deb-symbols(5), the symbols control file contains a part supporting advanced usage that not all Debian developers know: That was indeed a missing piece. Then I rebuild it against with the above luajit commit pending to upload: sbuild --no

Re: kind of special transition for luajit{,2}?

Hi, On 05-06-2022 19:35, M. Zhou wrote: But if this is really the result of the rebuild. I think we just discovered a serious flaw. The alternative dependency on libluajit-5.1-2 just lost its version constraint, as it's only added to libluajit2-5.1-2. U... Yes, that's a good catch. I fixe

Bug#1012362: transition: luajit

Control: tag -1 confirmed Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libluajit2-support.html Hi Mo, On 05-06-2022 19:30, M. Zhou wrote: So, currently I have a pending commit[2] modifying the dependency template[1], so that src:luajit reverse dependencies can be rebuilt w

Bug#1012362: transition: luajit

Hi Mo, On 07-06-2022 17:36, M. Zhou wrote: This should be achievable by patching debian/control during build once detected IBM architectures. This is not allowed. I currently fail to find where that's written down, but I'm fairly sure that the relevant parties agree that debian/control must

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >