On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 01:34:30PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> I built rdkit in the s390 and s390x unstable chroots on zelenka.d.o, and
> I could not reproduce build failures, so please give it back:
Done. The bug was in boost itself, not rdkit.
Bastian
--
I'm a soldier, not a diplomat. I c
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 04:53:39PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> >> > echo "../../g10/gpg2 --homedir . --no-options --no-greeting \
> >> > --no-secmem-warning --batch --dearmor" >>./gpg_dearmor
> >> > chmod 755 ./gpg_dearmor
> >> > ./gpg_dearmor > ./pubring.gpg < ./pubring.asc
> >> >
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:28:49PM -0500, Eric Dorland wrote:
> * Bastian Blank (wa...@debian.org) wrote:
> > - What version of the gnupg2 package is this anyway?
> 2.0.22-1
So this is _not_ confined to squeeze-security.
Hint to self: Don't consider what the security team is s
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 07:30:53PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:28:49PM -0500, Eric Dorland wrote:
> > * Bastian Blank (wa...@debian.org) wrote:
> > > - Does it fail the same way on the developer machine?
> > Nope. And it built on all the other
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 10:33:26PM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
wrote:
> qtwebkit FTBFS on brahms because ld got killed. This is most surely because
> qtwebkit needs ~4GB of (RAM+swap) to be linked.
> gb qtwebkit_2.2.1-7 . i386
And i386 is a 32-bit architecture. So no more than 4Gi
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:59:51PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> +system sprintf('rm -f -- %s', $upload_name);
What is wrong with unlink? Is upload_name _properly_ sanitized?
Bastian
--
You! What PLANET is this!
-- McCoy, "The City on the Edge of Forever", stardate 3134.0
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 03:01:18PM +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Hector Oron pointed out in the Debian RT that the release-team should give
> their okay before the PostgreSQL account can be created. This should be
> done by way of the release team filing the Debian RT ticket on my behalf,
> pr
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:18:25PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Thanks! It didn't occur to me this could be a problem, but it's
> definitely what's going on:
>
> https://packages.debian.org/unstable/e2fslibs
>
> How do I request removal of these cruft arch-specific packages? File
> a bug a
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 09:26:33AM +0200, Mattias Ellert wrote:
> The fix was a simple one-line patch changing the size of the key
> generated for the test.
Why don't you pre-generate the key?
Bastian
--
Only a fool fights in a burning house.
-- Kank the Klingon, "Day of the Dov
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:59:38PM +0100, Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
> Should we also reset the archive to some prior state and rebuilt
> packages like Ubuntu? Do we need to revert to an earlier date as
> vulnerable versions have been uploaded to experimental on 2024-02-01
> (but the earlier version might onl
On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 10:28:04AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> We have a suite with some project management capabilities: salsa. Let's
> just use it instead of ad-hoc tools. I don't think we have something
> better right now?
This is now https://salsa.debian.org/ftp-te
Hi folks
The day before yesterday some change was done to the oldstable, stable
and testing dists in the wanna-build databases for at least s390. A
large amount of packages suddenly got buildable and most of them failed.
Who is responsible for that and how to clean this up?
Bastian
--
The more
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:44:18PM +, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> [Debian bug #572790]
This is incorrect. kvm also works on powerpc and s390.
Bastian
--
Time is fluid ... like a river with currents, eddies, backwash.
-- Spock, "The City on the Edge of Forever", stardate 3134.0
--
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 05:19:14PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:44:18PM +, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > [Debian bug #572790]
> This is incorrect. kvm also works on powerpc and s390.
And according to the kernel ia64, however I have no further knowledg
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 11:25:27AM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> I’m always confused when after a successful binNMU,
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=missingh
> lists the source version as „version“, and not the version of the
> installed binary.
There is no version of the insta
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 10:19:32PM +, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I talked with Joerg at the meeting and we agreed that arch-based admin
> keyrings aren't needed. If you feel so strongly about it, I think you
> should take it up yourself and make [0] support one keyring per arch.
Why do you want on
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:16:00PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:55:39AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Why do you want one keyring per arch? What problem are you trying to
> > solve with this?
> I think it's called principle of least privilege.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 06:41:31PM +0200, Steffen Möller wrote:
> Dear all buildd maintainers, especially those of s390, powerpc and armel,
> please kindly inspect
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ball
> which shows successes or failures for an implicit conversion from the
> constan
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 08:52:45PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I think that's a misconfiguration of the buildds. They're supposed to
> put linux32 into the schroot configuration if the kernel arch differs
> from the userspace arch, to get the right entry into uname.
Negative. The build have to w
19 matches
Mail list logo
