point release route. Would you like to
REJECT the uploads and I can upload again with a fixed changelog?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
t; bullseye once it times out, or you dcut it).
>
Great! Thanks for the info, as the single REJECT seemed strange when I
was expecting two of them.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
I removed the top line of the change log (the security team reference),
rebuilt, and re-uploaded. Thanks again for all the help and for your
patience with my mistake.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
I removed the top line of the change log (the security team reference),
rebuilt, and re-uploaded. Thanks again for all the help and for your
patience with my mistake.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
tretch and will be uploaded concurrently with the
> > buster fix. The security team has marked these issues as no-dsa.
> >
>
> Please go ahead.
>
Thanks! (Also thanks for the additional prod). I have just uploaded.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
. However, I am confident that the changes I have in
the attached debdiff are completely ready for upload.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
diff -Nru llvm-toolchain-11-11.0.1/debian/changelog llvm-toolchain-11-11.0.1/debian/changelog
--- llvm-toolchain-11-11.0.1/debian/changelog 2021-01-06
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 09:00:50AM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 09/11/2021 21:00, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 02:20:35PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-11-02 at 13:28 -0400, Roberto C. Sanc
stall hwasan_symbolize as part of clang-tools package on mips
(that particular utility isn't built on mips)
Is there anything else that needs to be addressed, or do I have the OK
to upload?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
ks. Please go ahead as far as I'm concerned.
>
You're welcome and thanks very much for the quick response! I will be
uploading shortly.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
ing the
reply).
I definitely intend to open a new bug for the 1.51 upload I am preparing
now. If it would be better for the old bug to be archived and for no
further discussion to take place in that bug, then I can go ahead and
archive it again, or you can.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
nary packages as either
rust-mozilla-*, or rustc-mozilla-*, or librust-mozilla-*, and so on.
I am assuming that this is also acceptable, but if it is not, please let
me know.
The choice of 1.51 was requested by Adrian Bunk, as rustc 1.51 is the
(minimum?) version required by FireFox and ThunderBird 91.
I will also file a separate bug for the buster-pu companion package.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
> updated in stable series now that Firefox is no longer the sole user.
>
I concur with this as well.
If there are no objections, I will proceed with uploading within the
next 24 hours. I'd like to ensure that the new FF/TB make it into the
next point release if at all possible and that work is currently blocked
by the need for the updated rustc.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
t; every other update to both packages occurs.
>
Quite right. I conflated the fact that LLVM and rustc are not going in
via security update. Apologies for the confusion.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
ozilla packages I prepared in order to support his work. As of
this morning he identified some small additional tweaks, but he was able
to work around the issues in order to get a FF build completed. As soon
as he gives me the thumbs up, then I will make the final tweaks and
upload the rustc-mozilla packages.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
-to-testing/
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 05:49:12PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 09:59:23AM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> >...
> > If that is the case, then I am puzzled how intelrdfpmath would have
> > migrated to testing without being able to bui
wishes
to be able to do, it probably warrants a different filter than "adds a
new binary package to the archive" in order to be effective.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
the upload.
Regards,
-Roberto
P.S. I am not subscribed to either debian-release or debian-apache, so
CCs would be appreciated.
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
diff -Nru apache2-2.4.38/debian/changelog apache2-2.4.38/debian/changelog
--- apache2-2.4.38/debian/changelog 2021-12-21 11:50:43.0
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 09:44:37AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Hi Roberto,
>
> On 20/06/2022 22:30, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Hello Release Managers,
> >
> > I have been working on updating apache2 for stretch. Most of the open
> > CVEs affect bot
sion to upload to stretch-proposed-updates?
>
Here is the patch.
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
diff -Nru php-horde-form-2.0.15/debian/changelog php-horde-form-2.0.15/debian/changelog
--- php-horde-form-2.0.15/debian/changelog 2019-06-16 07:47:48.0 -0400
+++ php-horde-form-2.0.15/debian/changelo
^^^
That should read: buster-proposed updates.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
at
done for each package and then I will follow-up to the bugs once that is
done.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
r, if you
think that a removal request is forthcoming in the very near future, I
will wait and not make those uploads.
My intent was to have them done in the next 24 hours. Please advise if
I should proceed or if I should wait for removal.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
been requested, I'll not prepare new uploads
for unstable. Adam, could you weigh in on whether I may proceed with
the uploads (all six) or whether I need to wait for the removal to take
place?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
. Since this was the first stable update for both, I built
them each with -sa to include the .orig.tar.gz. I guess it will be
evident soon whether that is a problem when I receive the receipt
message from dak, but I thought to bring it up just in case.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
th the
> > maintainers about their plans for unstable.
> >
>
> It looks like that eventually happened, early this year(!).
>
> If this is still something that you're interested in fixing for
> stretch, please go ahead.
>
The work has already been done, so I will go ahead with an upload
shortly.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:55:35PM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Roberto,
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 04:05:15PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 08:28:14PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo + confirmed
&
results in a 5.0.15.2-2 package.
However, if that is not appropriate for some reason, I can resort to a
targeted fix.
How should I proceed?
Regards,
-Roberto
[0] shorewall-init shorewall-core shorewall shorewall6 shorewall-lite
shorewall6-lite
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
diff -Nru shorewall6
bout their plans for unstable.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
ve attached debdiffs for all 6 packages.
>
> It can't be unblocked until it's in unstable; are you asking for
> pre-approval? I didn't read the diffs in detail yet but it sounds like a
> fix we'd want so I suggest you go ahead and remove the moreinfo tag when
nblock the waiting
package), I can upload right away.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Hi Paul,
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 10:35:35AM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed
>
> Hi Roberto,
>
> On 30-03-2019 13:24, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > I removed the moreinfo tag nearly a week ago. Did I misunder
ers about their plans for unstable.
>
> Was there any progress there? The issue is still marked as affecting
> unstable in the tracker.
>
No real progress. I sent a message [0] to the packaging team's mailing
list that same day (1st November). Salvatore responded a few days
late
> +--- sword-1.7.3+dfsg.orig/include/zcom.h 2013-06-29 07:40:28.0
> +0100
> sword-1.7.3+dfsg/include/zcom.h 2015-09-03 07:31:44.063009491 +0100
> +@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> + #define ZCOM_H
> +
> + #include
> ++#include
>
Do you want me to go ahead with uploading -3 as is then?
Regards,
-Roberto
On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 07:48:32AM +0100, Daniel Glassey wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 09:35:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Daniel,
> >
> > I just built this and was going to upload f
Of course. The upload is meant for experimental like -3. Correct?
Regards,
-Roberto
On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 09:33:03AM +0100, Daniel Glassey wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 04:08:25AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Do you want me to go ahead with uploading -3 as is then?
>
nge that before I committed. No, this is for unstable for the
> transition.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
robably debatable.
That, and upstream has committed to fixing the issue (by making it easy
to package a binary release of the package without the actual timezone
data files), but has not committed to a timeline.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
h to the bug. (However, I am sending this
note to the 569875-done as well, so that bug will close). Given that, I
do not think that it needs to be removed.
Regards,
-Roberto
[0] http://packages.qa.debian.org/libi/libi18n-ruby/news/20100319T093718Z.html
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.
I was looking at the status of tbb, and apparently it has not propogated
to testing because of not being build on ia64. One buildd status page
says Build-Attempted, but doesn't provide a link to a build log. Does
anyone know what is going on with it?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sá
On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 08:52:22AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sánchez (robe...@connexer.com) [100608 00:56]:
> > I was looking at the status of tbb, and apparently it has not propogated
> > to testing because of not being build on ia64. One buildd status page
ached) as
I would like to see it in Squeeze. Please note that the new upstream
release closes #578070 and #589306.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
xl2tpd_1.2.6_1.2.7.diff.bz2
Description: Binary data
CHANGES |
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 03:42:02PM -0400, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 13:43:40 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > Greetings RMs,
> >
> > I have been corresponding with upstream for xl2tpd, and they just last
> > night released a new minor
waiting for approval before I upload.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
b/Perl/Shorewall/Actions.pm | 11 +-
b/Perl/Shorewall/Chains.pm |2
b/Perl/Shorewall/Config.pm |3
b/Perl/Shorewall
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:37:09PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 21:30 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > The Shorewall upstream team was caught off guard by the freeze (I know
> > that this is a recurring theme).
> >
> > While the Shorewa
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:24:32PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 17:13 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 08:37:09PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 21:30 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > &g
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:30:49PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 17:26 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 10:24:32PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > > shorewall{,6} unblocked.
> > >
> > Please note, the uploaded
of these
issues. Having both of these issues persist through the life of Squeeze
would, IMHO, be a Bad Thing(TM).
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
cyrus-sasl2_consolidation.diff.gz
Description: Binary data
README.Debian-NMU
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 11:59:06AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 00:21:39 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > Release Team,
> >
> > I would like to request pre-approval to upload cyrus-sasl2
> > (2.1.23.dfsg1-6) to sid, with the goal o
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 02:28:37PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> Assuming that my explanations are satisfactory, did you want to see a
> new diff for placing the configure options into a variable?
>
I went ahead and finished making the changes just now. The updated diff
various source files and then things like dates
in the generated man pages.
Please allow these packages to migrate to squeeze.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
With attachments this time.
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 09:45:15PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> I have uploaded version 4.4.11.3-1 of shorewall, shorewall-lite,
> shorewall6, shorewall6-lite and shorewall-init. This is a new upstream
> version with three very small targeted fixes.
gt; Probably same with the $(MAKE) invocation.
>
Ah, yes. Thanks very much for catching that. I have made the
recommended change for both instances of the ../configure invocation.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Ping.
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 09:48:24PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> With attachments this time.
>
> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 09:45:15PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > I have uploaded version 4.4.11.3-1 of shorewall, shorewall-lite,
> > shorewall6, shorewall6-li
Ping.
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 06:27:43PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:06:56AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >
> > is going to succeed even if configure doesn't. Should probably use
> > something like
> >
> >
I have uploaded cyrus-sasl2 and received the ACCEPTED email. Please
unblock at your leisure.
Regards,
-Roberto
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 03:47:05PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 06:27:43PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 24
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 08/26/2010 09:46 PM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Ping.
> >
>
> Pong…
>
> What's confusing is that upstream's changelog appears in all of those
> packages but the changes are only in th
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:37:47AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 16:44:06 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > I have uploaded cyrus-sasl2 and received the ACCEPTED email. Please
> > unblock at your leisure.
> >
> Unblocked. There'
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:06:32AM +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
> On 08/26/2010 09:46 PM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > Ping.
> >
>
> Pong…
>
> What's confusing is that upstream's changelog appears in all of those
> packages but the changes are only in t
ys releases all the packages as a group, and anyone
who uses Shorewall outside of Debian will always get them together as a
group with the same version number. And it is has also been that way
with the official Debian packages for quite some time.
I encourage you to reconsider and permit the re
some of the scripts), and would help to avert a potential
source of confusion among users.
Regards,
-Roberto
On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 03:46:25PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> reopen 594144
> thanks
>
> On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 05:04:52PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On
vering=
+g_logread=
finished=0
As with the first fix, this would have to be applied once to each of
shorewall-lite and shorewall6-lite. As I will be updating to correct
the two RC bugs, I'd also like permission to include this additional
fix.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:35:49AM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Release Team,
>
> It has just recently been reported that the shorewall-lite package in
> testing (and likewise, the shorewall6-lite package in testing) contains
> a bug which renders the package largely
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 02:31:46PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> Please disregard the second diff, as it is already part of the package
> in squeeze (just a bit of forgetfulness on my part, not remembering it
> was already there). So, I only require approval for the init script
problem but the problem had not yet
been reported, there was no reason to expect it to be mentioned in the
changelog.
Do I need to mention it in a future changelog (4.4.18 should be released
in a few weeks), or does get solved by manual hinting or some other way?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 08:36:23PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 14:09:33 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > I think that this is because the bug was fixed in sid in version
> > 4.4.16-1 (uploaded on January 15), but the bug was reported against
&
It seems that shorewall and shorewall6 (4.4.18.1-1) are in need of same
manual hinting to propogate to testing.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 06:59:28PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, April 2, 2011 17:43, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > It seems that shorewall and shorewall6 (4.4.18.1-1) are in need of same
> > manual hinting to propogate to testing.
>
> Julien added a hint earlier
r the next point release? If so, can I proceed wth an upload to
s-p-u?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 04:35:49PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> I have
> attached the two helpers files that would need to be included in the
> update. The first file would be included in shorewall and
> shorewall-lite and the second file in shorewall6 and shorewall6-lite
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 03:12:06PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-10-22 at 16:35 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > As a result of #646112, it has come to my attention that I made a
> > packaging error in the shorewall{,6,-lite,6-lite} packages that released
&
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:16:00PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to see debdiffs before a final ACK, but I'd be inclined to say
> > yes based on the information provided so far.
> >
> OK. I will prepare the uploads and send the d
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 09:35:36PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 20:48 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:16:00PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to see debdiffs before a
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 02:06:42PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 08:35 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:16:00PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > Please see attached
Looks like build failure was caused by version skew.
gb libwx-perl . alpha arm armel hppa i386 mips mipsel powerpc s390
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 07:25:58PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > I am preparing a new upstream release (4.0.15) of Shorewall (affected Debian
> > packages: shorewall-{perl,shell,common,lite,doc}). Nearly all of the
> > changes
> > have alre
gards,
-Roberto
[0] http://packages.qa.debian.org/libw/libwx-perl/news/20090105T163916Z.html
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 04:18:56PM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Roberto C. Sánchez [Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:54:31 -0500]:
>
> > I just saw [0] that libwx-perl was removed from Lenny. Why? The bug
> > referenced in the removal hint (#499740) didn't even affect the version
n of the package in testing (0.84-2) built
fine on ARM. Though that last successful build was on Jul 20, 2008.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
It appears that shorewall-{common,perl,shell} are in need of hinting in
order to propogate. I'd appreciate if someone could hint them.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
It apears that the following shorewall* packages require manual hinting:
shorewall-common
shorewall-perl
shorewall-shell
shorewall6
Please allow them to propogate to testing.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
It appears that shorewall6 and shorewall-{common,perl,shell} are all
stuck and cannot migrate. Please manually hint into testing.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
It apears that the following shorewall* packages require manual hinting:
shorewall-common
shorewall-perl
shorewall-shell
shorewall6
Please allow them to propogate to testing.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
#include http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/05/msg00223.html
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 07:10:44PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 21:03 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > #include http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2009/05/msg00223.html
>
> I added a hint for the packages a couple of days ago and they've now
-4_all.deb
/x/org/chroots/buildd/sid/var/cache/apt/archives/texlive-latex-base_2007.dfsg.2-4_all.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
apt-get failed.
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Did my request get lost in the noise?
Regards,
-Roberto
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 02:47:36PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> It looks like tbb failed on ia64 because of a problem in a texlive
> package [0]. This, I'd like to request a give-back for tbb on ia64.
>
> Regar
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:56:00AM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez writes:
> > Did my request get lost in the noise?
>
> Seems so. Given back now. In the future you might want to file a bug
> instead of simply mailing us, as the BTS
the flam3 package, which is
new in Squeeze/Sid, probably making a stable update nearly impossible
2. I have limited time to work on the package and I would rather devote
that time to fixing bugs
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ith the
release of Sarge. Or was that only for interactive (where it replaced
dselect) situations?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ich had me
confused. Thanks for the clarification.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
'm not sure if that's the best possible way, but it will get the
questions that people certainly will have.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
> no-op for users without OOo installed would be better.
I can see your point. Agreed.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
kages, since we have
the documentation as optional, but it shows up as important because of
the overrides.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
package? Didn't someone
just recently complain that the -doc package's important priority caused
to be included on the netinst image? Perhaps I am remembering
incorrectly.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
berto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
a bit tougher. For example, it would be
nice to be able to have piuparts be able to build a lenny chroot
straight off.
Though, I think the D-I issue is more important than the above.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
[I am not subscribed to -release, so please CC if necessary]
I have filed #426240 requesting the removal of ltsp-utils. In the meam
time, the package should probably be hinted for removal from testing.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 03:18:51PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > [I am not subscribed to -release, so please CC if necessary]
> >
> > I have filed #426240 requesting the removal of ltsp-utils. In the meam
> > time, the package should probably
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
