Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: buster
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
X-Debbugs-Cc: raph...@freexian.com csm...@debian.org
Hello,
I would like to update "psmisc" in buster to fix a regression in
"killall". The bug https://bugs.debian.org/912748 was ne
[ Ccing debian-release in case they have some advice / concerns to express ]
Hello LTS team,
it would be nice if we could get an update of debian-archive-keyring
in stretch to add the bullseye key just like it has been done in buster a
while ago:
https://tracker.debian.org/news/1236764/accepted-d
Hello,
On Sat, 04 Sep 2021, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-08-16 at 12:02 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I would like to update "psmisc" in buster to fix a regression in
> > "killall". The bug https://bugs.debian.org/912748 was never fixed in
> >
Hello,
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021, Lee Garrett wrote:
> Unfortunately 2.10 didn't make it into bullseye in time (#984557). I tried
> getting the unit tests from 2.9.16 to work with python 3.9, but I had to give
> up. I don't feel comfortable with maintaining such a large package over the
> lifecycle of b
Hi Utkarsh,
On Tue, 14 Sep 2021, Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:33 AM Utkarsh Gupta wrote:
> > > The missing key creates problems for example with simple-cdd:
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/992966
> >
> > Okay, I'll be happy to do the update. Though I wonder if it'd rather
> > b
On Sat, 30 Jul 2022, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 9:56 PM Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > - Is there a plan to change reverse-dependencies to depend on fuse3, so
> > that such conflicts don't occur?
> Please note I do not maintain the reverse dependent fuse2 packages.
> But
Hello,
we have been bitten by this in Kali too. In our case Arnaud Rebillout
worked around it by adding a hint. Here's what he said:
The issue was a circular dependency between
`libnginx-mod-http-lua/1:0.10.22-2` and `lua-resty-core/0.1.24-2`. It was
solved with the following hints:
# 2022-
(Note: pkg-security@tracker.d.o is not a valid email, dropped)
Hi,
On Thu, 29 Aug 2019, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > In general, we (Debian) don't have a good answer to this problem and
> > virtualbox is clearly a bad precedent. We really need to find a solution
> > to this in concertation with the r
Hi,
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Pirate Praveen wrote:
> Fast Track repo works exactly like current backports except the packages
> are added from unstable (or experimental during transitions and freeze)
> as they cannot go to testing and hence to current backports.
>
> As Paul noted earlier, backports t
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> There were several discussions over the last years. And yes, our vision of
> backports does not match the vision of those fastpace/not ready for
> stable/whatever you call them repos. In our vision debian-backports consists
> of new (tested, as in "is in
Hi,
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> > We're not speaking of crap software, we're just speaking of software that
> > can't be maintained multiple years by backports of security patches, where
> > we get fixes only with new upstream versions (mixed with new features).
> I don't want to
Control: tag -1 + patch
On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Ansgar wrote:
> https://wiki.debian.org/DebianRepository/Format#A.22Release.22_files
> says one of Suite and Codename is required. Codename itself is not required.
Ok.
> I wouldn't be surprised if many tools just use one and assume it always
> exists
Control: severity -1 important
I'm reducing the severity of this bug because this forbids
mailcap and mime-support to migrate to testing and they have to
migrate because the current mime-support is uninstallable in
a freshly installed testing system because media-types
(installed by default due to
Control: retitle -1 ncrack should switch to OpenSSL >= 1.1 at some point
On Thu, 01 Dec 2016, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> reopen 844303
> severity 844303 important
> unblock 827061 with 844303
> thanks
>
> Hi
>
> Rationale: the package would still FTBFS with OpenSSL 1.1. Thus
> (bacause it is
On Sat, 31 Dec 2016, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 13:37:11 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>
> > tl;dr: Has anyone a problem if sslscan embeds openssl 1.0.2 in its
> > source?
> >
> > sslscan [0] as packaged in Debian currently relies on external libssl as
> > provided
Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Please provide a more detailed changelog.
Please see the upstream release notes here for all versions between what's
in jessie and what I want to upload:
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.7/releases/1.7.8/
3 bug fixes:
Hi,
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Guido Günther wrote:
> > >
> > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=prep-wheezy-lts;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org
> >
> > While these two are long-standing enhancement bugs which would make
> > the security team work much easier, they are unrelated
On Mon, 22 Feb 2016, Holger Levsen wrote:
> does that even work? AIUI this would require LTS uploaders
> to have access to security.d.o, which won't happen because
> of embargoed issues…
Access to security.d.o is only needed if you have to approve the uploads.
Here the suite will be reconfigure
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Are you asking about stable or stable-security? Your changelog doesn't say
> either but you appear to have CCed the Security Team whilst following up to
> a release.debian.org bug.
It was mostly meant for the security team for now. They haven't said
wh
Hi,
On Sun, 20 Mar 2016, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > +dolibarr (3.5.5+dfsg1-1+deb8u1) UNRELEASED; urgency=high
> > +
> > + * Fix CVE-2016-1912 (Closes: #812496)
> > + * Fix CVE-2015-8685 (Closes: #812449)
> > + * Fix CVE-2015-3935 (Closes: #787762)
> > +
> > + -- Laurent Destailleur (eldy) Tue
Control: reassign -1 src:gstreamer1.0
Control: affects -1 totem
Control: retitle -1 version mismatch between libgstreamer and plugins break
video playback in totem
Hello,
On Mon, 04 Apr 2016 17:33:51 +0800 Paul Wise wrote:
> I can no longer play anything using totem.
>
> This file cannot be pl
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016, Ludovic Drolez wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm ready to upload a new package without the patch below.
Note that defined(@array) is failing with Perl in stretch... that might be
why the patch got added in the packaging.
(But in any case the test is useless with "@Backups > 0" being equi
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Go ahead.
Uploaded (4.0-1-2).
> The provides is not enough while the old package is still available, as real
> packages are preferred. We'll need to get the old -dev decrufted once ftplib
> is
> built everywhere, so the new one is picked up. T
On Tue, 28 Jun 2016, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Please go ahead.
Thanks, uploaded 1.7.11-1.
Note that I had to merge in the latest security updates and due to
git-dpm usage by the python team and its lack of proper merge support
(#801667), there is some noise in the debdiff due to renamed patches.
Hi,
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> You should file bugs against the build-rdeps so they build-depend on
> libftp-dev instead of ftplib-dev.
Done: #832522 to #832525.
Severity normal since it's not blocking anything. I hope that's correct.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debi
Hi Niels,
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018, Niels Thykier wrote:
> We are considering to deprecate the "legacy package layout" and remove
> the "--control-files" option.
In Kali we are using neither of those features.
http://git.kali.org/gitweb/?p=britney2.git has our britney fork and
configuration.
Configu
Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
Just a ping since Laurent already provided the extra information
in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=861926#19
It's about https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2017-6100
We agreed with the security team to fix it through jessie-pu, cf
https://
Control: retitle -1 stretch-pu: schroot/1.6.10-3+deb9u1
Control: tag -1 + stretch
Control: user release.debian@packages.debian.org
Control: usertags -1 = pu
On Tue, 06 Jun 2017, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > - the completion code is completely broken (#855283)
> > - a member of the DSA team as
Hi Julien,
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Re-purposing the bug to that end. Let me know when you are happy with an
> > upload to stretch.
>
> The d/rules change means I'd like to see a binary debdiff
> (--controlfiles ALL).
Here it is:
[The following lists of changes regard file
Hello Michael,
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I would suggest to simply ship a drop-in snippet for schroot, which sets
> the Type and Timeout.
Thanks for the suggestion but I'll skip it. This is what I would have
expected DSA to do if I had not shipped a systemd service unit. But now
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Given that, I wonder if a stable upload is actually still needed.
The stable upload also fixes the bash completion file and fixes
the dependencies of the service file to not depend on the systemd version
of $network in the LSB dependencies.
Cheers,
--
Hi,
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Personally, I find the systemd part a bit touchy, but I'm happy to ACK
> the bash-completion fix on its own. Maybe we could handle this in two
> steps, until the systemd unit situation settles (#865110)?
I consider #865110 to be a minor cleanup th
Hi,
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Anyway, no objection on the patch itself, except for the lack of
> documentation in the changelog. I'm attaching a new debdiff which is a
> bit more descriptive.
Thanks, I updated the changelog in git and I uploaded.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈
Hello Michael, can you reply since Cyril requested your input and this
stable update seems to be blocked on this. Thank you !
(leaving the whole message below for reference)
On Sat, 01 Jul 2017, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois (2017-06-30):
> > Raphael Hertzog (2017-06-29):
Hi,
On Fri, 08 Sep 2017, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
>
> nmu gnuradio_3.7.11-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild for codecs2 transition"
Here it seems to be last and only update needed of t
Hello,
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > So let me know what I should upload:
> > - only the bash-completion fix
> > - or the whole update that I wanted to push
>
> Michael, any comments on the proposed systemd change for jessie, please?
Michael said that he had nothing to add. Can
Hi,
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > We already missed the first point release and the change has now been
> > in unstable for a long time already.
>
> Mostly on the basis that the changes have persisted "as is" in
> unstable, I guess doing so is probably better than nothing. Pleas
Hello Michael,
I think this mail went through the cracks as we haven't received a reply
from you so far. Can you let us know the status and whether we can help to
get the wheezy update out ?
Cheers,
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> On 2017-07-19 11:35:56, Michael Shuler wrote:
> > O
Hi,
On Tue, 09 Jan 2018, Brian May wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog writes:
>
> > I think this mail went through the cracks as we haven't received a reply
> > from you so far. Can you let us know the status and whether we can help to
> > get the wheezy update out ?
>
Hello Paul,
On Sun, 01 Apr 2018, Paul Gevers wrote:
> (including nthykier) to prepare the integration of britney with
> autopkgtest results. We believe the work has reached a state where full
> deployment can be considered. Let me describe how it is designed to work
> and what I request from you.
Hi,
On Fri, 06 Apr 2018, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Also I see the age-requirement bumped to 15 but it would be nice to
> > also have somewhere the details of why we got 15 instead of the usual
> > value.
>
> Can you explain what you find unclear in the excuses text (check the
> html version please)?
Hi,
On Fri, 04 Dec 2015, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
> there seems to be a recent regression in the handling of news, causing
> duplicates.
> Packages migrating to testing now produce three news entries like e.g. [1-4]:
> "[2015-12-04] ffmpeg 7:2.8.3-1 MIGRATED to testing (Debian testing watch)"
>
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: jessie
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hello,
I would like to update python-django in jessie to the latest upstream bug
fix release in the 1.7.x branch, aka 1.7.11. It should also be the last
upstream release in that bra
On Fri, 01 Jan 2016, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-12-09 at 23:40 +0100, Raphaël Hertzog wrote:
> > I would like to update the Debian Administrator's Handbook in jessie
> > so that it documents jessie instead of wheezy. We finished the update
> > about a month ago and basicly I'd like to up
Hi,
On Wed, 08 May 2013, Julien Cristau wrote:
> britney doesn't currently check that required+important+standard
> packages are all co-installable. It might be a good idea to add a
> faux-package to check that?
This check would probably have avoided #810785 where ifupdown 0.8.6
entered testing
Hi,
On Tue, 12 Jan 2016, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I don't think there is any new open RC bug which would prevent the
> testing migration. Or am I missing your point?
No, I was just misled by the testing migration data on the tracker
that still showed one open... but it went away now as the bug has
Hello dear release team,
On Fri, 11 Dec 2015, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> I would like to update python-django in jessie to the latest upstream bug
> fix release in the 1.7.x branch, aka 1.7.11. It should also be the last
> upstream release in that branch since it's now unsupported u
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > Greg's new policy is to pick the first Linus release in each year for
> > longterm maintenance. The longterm branch for 2016 is based on Linux
> > 4.4, released at the end of week 1 (10th January). By the time stretch
> > is released, 4.4 will be quit
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > It was never documented to be a patch list, but just a way to know if
> > patches were applied at extraction time or not. I don't know of any tool
> > that relies on this file in unstable and in stable it's even less likely.
>
> one of two ways, i.e. th
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 19:21 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I'd like to update dpkg in stable another time to include more
> > fixes/improvements made to new source formats in sid since the last time.
>
> Please g
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> There is also the issue of the release notes. This was a problem for
> lenny, and it doesn't look like it will get any better for
> squeeze. The release notes need to be updated for squeeze and upgrade
> and installation tests on different config
(Some comments with my external POV)
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Clint Adams wrote:
> If you don't care about Debian 6.0 (codename "squeeze"),
> please skip this release update.
Duh... everybody should care. Skip this.
> Andreas Barth would like to sy that we have recently
> discussed the situation of
[ Bcc debian-release for info, discussion welcome on -devel ]
Hello,
one of our biggest problems is dealing with transitions because they tend
to get interdependant and it's thus very difficult to move packages from
sid to testing. Also many transitions are badly managed by the maintainers
who ar
[ Not quite sure why you sent it to debian-release when I tried to have the
discussion on -devel only, anyway ]
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Philipp Kern wrote:
> [ Just a few quick thoughts. ]
>
> On 2010-03-26, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Multiple transitions will still end up mixe
Hi,
On Mon, 17 May 2010, Sam Bisbee wrote:
> > If there are stability or security fixes that apply to the version in
> > stable then backporting those that are "important enough" to stable is
> > worth investigating. Functionality updates are unlikely to be
> > appropriate for a stable update.
>
On Tue, 18 May 2010, Sam Bisbee wrote:
> > That's not okay. The promise we make when we release a stable version of
> > any of our packages is not the same than any promise upstream can make.
>
> Sorry, I'm confused as to the point you're making here. Could you please
> rephrase?
When a maintain
Hi,
as announced in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/05/msg00010.html
the dpkg team no longer has any plan to switch the default source format
to "3.0 (quilt)" and as such this release goal is meaningless.
Instead maintainers have to be explicit about the source format chosen
b
Hello,
the unblock hint for dpkg needs to be updated as we uploaded
1.15.8.4 to fix several bugs (including RC bugs).
unblock dpkg/1.15.8.4
You can check the changes between both versions here:
http://git.debian.org/?p=dpkg/dpkg.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sid
Thanks.
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debi
Hi,
On Sun, 15 Aug 2010, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 08/15/2010 09:48 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> >unblock dpkg/1.15.8.4
> >
> >You can check the changes between both versions here:
> >http://git.debian.org/?p=dpkg/dpkg.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/sid
>
> We are c
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > Please unblock the package pacemaker-mgmt. Right now, it is not present
> > in Squeeze at all. The tool included in this package, which is called
> > "hb_gui",
> > used to live in the heartbeat-gui package in Lenny. Due to numerous
> > changes in t
Hi,
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011, Kai Wasserbäch wrote:
> Julien Cristau schrieb am 11.01.2011 00:45:
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 21:56:42 +0100, Kai Wasserbäch wrote:
> >> Can you consider to make this a "blocker" bug for Squeeze?
> >
> > No. (Which doesn't mean that it can't be fixed, just that the rel
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: rm
>
> Please remove this debiandoc2dbxml package from wheezy. New
> debiandoc-sgm comes with very functional dbk converter by me. Since
> upstream a
Hi,
On Wed, 23 Feb 2011, Steve Langasek wrote:
> A virtual package is a good idea, though - in fact, it's such a good idea
> that I remember now we discussed this back at DebConf and I'd subsequently
> forgotten about it. Thanks for jogging my memory! :) Yes, whether or not
> we add support in a
Hello,
I have written a patch for the developers-reference where I update the
chapter about debian developer's duties. Most notably I have added
that a maintainer ought to support the (stable) release process
by collaborating with the release team.
Charles Plessy is worried that my text would not
Hi,
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> - For Britney, I do not find the equivalent on ries.d.o for the following:
>merkel:/org/&ftp-debian-org;/testing/update_out/
>merkel:~aba/testing/update_out Was it moved somewhere else ?
It's now part of release.debian.org and thus not mi
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Hi Raphaël,
>
> it seems that things changed overnight:
Yes, see 20110329215524.ga21...@thrall.0x539.de by Phil Kern.
> The links to the Git repositories would be an interesting addition. But I
> even
> found a third one:
>
> http://git.debian.or
(Moving to -devel, since -release is not a discussion list, and keeping
lots of context because of this)
Hi,
On Sun, 10 Apr 2011, sean finney wrote:
> I think the quality of our releases has always been stellar, but the
> freezes cause quite a bit of slowdown and even demotivation for those
> who
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> Those are leafy gnome apps. I wonder if there is any real harm in
> holding them back for a while?
Yes.
Please stop this.
You're on the wrong track if you want to have a more secure testing by
blocking new versions from entering. For me CUT is about
On Sun, 08 May 2011, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am working on a package that has recently been binNMUed for the Perl 5.12
> transition, libbio-samtools-perl. Do I have to refrain to upload any update
> until the transition is over ?
AFAIK you must just ensure that whatever yo
Hi,
Disclaimer: I'm not a member of the release team.
On Wed, 11 May 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> * Do you get it? (i.e., did I explain it well enough or are there
> questions left)
I think so.
> * Do you think it can handle all current and anticipatable
> requirements? (I’m not involved i
Hi,
On Sun, 15 May 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> No, that should be no problem. Versioned constraints are resolved
> precisely to the list of existing concrete packages which fulfill the
> requirement before the resulting constraint being passed to the
> SAT-solver, so no irregularities there. A
er()
>>> s.run(dimacs)
(True, {'a': False, 'c': True, 'b': True})
>>> dimacs.init_variable("c", False)
>>> s.run(dimacs)
(False, None)
I shared it to Joachim earlier and he asked me to continue the discussion
here. So that's wha
On Thu, 26 May 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 26.05.2011, 11:58 +0200 schrieb Raphael Hertzog:
> > We could instead include it as a "post-process filter". We'd run
> > edos-distcheck on the result to identify what new packages
> > are unins
Hi,
On Tue, 31 May 2011, Aron Xu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to propose the following change for gwrite (as attached debdiff).
The patch doesn't look right:
man dh_pythonsupport
[...]
Appropriate dependencies on python-support, python and pythonX.Y are put
in
${python:Depends}. Th
Hi,
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> The package installation problem (as routinely solved by the SAT-based
> edos-distcheck monitor [1]) is: find a subset of the repository that is
> coherent (satisfies all dependencies and conflicts) and contains the
> wanted package. This is a t
Hi,
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> arch:all are, besides Conflicts, another flaw in my proposal that I
> recently discovered: First, the semantics is not clear to me (should it
> be installable on all arches? one any arch? on one particular, as it is
> now?).
FWIW the current brit
Hi,
On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> Yes, but zack's answer confirms that (at least for me) we won't have any
> better solutions because testing migration problem isn't a trivial
> problem. So, personally, I remain not convinced that a new SAT solver
> would make things easier or better
Hi,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> > 2/ conflicts for files that have moved between binary packages of
> >different sources, policy requires the conflicts/breaks to be
> >versionned, and the problem can be solved prior to the definition of
> >the SAT problem by adding a sup
Hi,
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> In fact, from out point of view the DIMACS format or MAX-SAT input
> format are already a specific encoding technique, and we think that
> one should first find a logical specification of what exactly one
> tries to achieve, before thinking about a sp
On Fri, 01 Jul 2011, Luk Claes wrote:
> That's already an option in britney2.
>From what I understood the auto-hinter is limited to a few simple cases.
> This SAT based design seems overcomplex due to all the special casing
> AFAICT.
What special casing?
> I also don't buy that a Conflicts rela
On Thu, 28 Jul 2011, Niels Thykier wrote:
> I already mentioned this on IRC, but for good measure. I have put up a
> draft for Release Goal documentation[1]. While I was writing it, I
> realised that we encourage the usage of usertags and require that the
> advocate to keep track of process...
>
On Mon, 01 Aug 2011, Luk Claes wrote:
> Why could wb not handle the case where one tries to binNMU on one arch
> where it should be done on all archs without changing binNMU formats?
Maybe they try to tackle the "binNMU arch: all packages" problem at the
same time?
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ D
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 11 août 2011 à 20:31 +0200, Michael Biebl a écrit :
> > > The alternative is to backport the necessary changes in g-s-d (which
> > > sounds insane) or to re-add the necessary support in nautilus (which is
> > > far from trivial).
> >
> > I'd
Hi,
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Michael Biebl wrote:
> I would consider non-functioning automount for a (short) period of time as
> acceptable compromise, but ymmv.
The "short" only holds if the rest of GNOME 3 is ready as well, which you
seem to question yourself later on.
> > With everything more or
Hi,
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow. Do you mean this file would only contain the
> binNMU revision changelog entry, or that it would append it to the
> source changelog and move it to that new path, or both would be
> installed alongside (or maybe something else)
Hello everybody,
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.
Given this, and if Guillem hasn't responded with a review
Hi Guillem,
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 11:23:27 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Given this, and if Guillem hasn't responded with a review requiring
> > further work on the branch by sunday, I will upload dpkg 1.16.2 to
> > exper
Hi,
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Here is a first round of removal requests from testing for packages involved
> in the libpanel-applets transition:
>
> gnome-main-menu #638094
> orca #638112 (will be updated in GNOME 3.2 to work without libgail-module)
> accerciser #638112 (will be
Hi,
I can't let this without answer.
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> You could also make a case from a terminological perspective as well.
> Unstable is where development in Debian is supposed to happen, so it's
> perfectly acceptable to upload unfinished/unstable changes.
No, sorr
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-09-15 at 14:29:00 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > I have suggested that the binnmu changelog (which is a single line, or
> > could easily be constrained to a single line) should just become a new
> > control header
Hi,
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Inspired by #647258 I am proposing that YAMLize our current goals.txt[1]
> and extend it a bit. I have attached a sample file of how the revised
> file would look, the "API" of the file and a little prototype python
> script that can extract the BTS
Hi,
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > > I will also ensure that this second upload happens.
> >
> > so are we on track for the upload of dpkg to sid by the end of the week?
>
> Ping?
Guillem, can you please share some tentative schedule?
For the release team: while multiarch is not
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: qa.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pts
It would be nice if the PTS informed the maintainers that a package is
currently involved in some ongoing transition (to testing) so that
they can refrain from doing unnecessary uploads.
The release te
Hi,
I'll try to share some news with the release team.
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011, Guillem Jover wrote:
> What I'll do though, when I get back home tomorrow from my current
> trip, is to push already reviewed stuff and keep pushing incrementally,
> instead of my usual big pushes, so that the progress is
Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Raphael Hertzog
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 10:38:49 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] dpkg-deb: produce GNU tar archive inside .deb
* dpkg-deb/build.c: Ensure that data.tar and control.tar
archives created inside a .deb use the GNU format that is compatible
with dpkg itself. And
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009, Michael Meskes wrote:
> severity 514132 grave
> thanks
>
> I beg to disagree. This bug will break a lot (my personal guess is about 80%)
> of postgresql clusters as the setup Bernd describes is a de facto standard.
Do you mean that it is a regression compared to etch ? If yes
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> What we need to do is:
> 1) improve our ways to detect 'crap', to remove those packages from the
>archive (it doesn't make sense to keep them in unstable). We need
> safeguards to make mistakes less frequent.
> 2) improve awareness of orphaned packag
Hello,
the dpkg team and the texinfo maintainer have laid out a plan to
get rid of dpkg /usr/sbin/install-info and start relying on
GNU's install-info when needed. This will involve some work to
transition properly. We have described our plan here:
http://wiki.debian.org/Transitions/DpkgToGnuInst
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
> How do we proceed now with that? As said in a different email some weeks
> ago, only ~50 of around 580 total info files fail when called with
> ginstall-info.
We should file those bugs now with an explanation of the problem.
You should also upload te
On Sat, 30 May 2009, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> + Manuel Prinz (Thu, 28 May 2009 14:07:57 +0200):
>
> Okay, thanks. I went ahead and scheduled the required Bin-NMUs.
> Unfortunately, most of them failed, seemingly due to an error in
> alternatives handling:
>
> Could you check what's wrong with the p
1 - 100 of 281 matches
Mail list logo
