Hi,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 03:02:05PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Sorry, this one fell through on my end. It is ok from my PoV, CC'ing
> > KiBi for a d-i ack (out of principle). Quoting you in full for KiBi's
> > convenience.
>
> ooh, getty-static.service <3
>
> No objections, thanks.
Control: tag -1 confirmed
Niels Thykier (2015-02-23):
> On 2015-02-16 17:16, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: unblock
> >
> > systemd 215-12 hit unstabl
Control: tags -1 = d-i
On 2015-02-16 17:16, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> systemd 215-12 hit unstable three days ago with some RC/important/safe
> So far there ha
;d be
> > interested in your opinion whether for jessie we should (1) ignore the
> > problem, (2) apply the sysv behaviour compatible hwclock.service, or
> > (3) boldly go and enable timesyncd.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > unblock sy
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
systemd 215-12 hit unstable three days ago with some RC/important/safe
So far there have been no regression reports. At the time of this
writing there are now no RC bugs left \o/
I attach
Control: tags -1 moreinfo
On 2015-02-16 17:16, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> systemd 215-12 hit unstable three days ago with some RC/important/safe
> So far there ha
