Followup-For: Bug #671297
Hi,
no longer shipping the duplicate header is onyl half of the fix. One
needs to ensure, too, that libcapi20-dev is not installed along a
isdnutils-base that still ships the file
usr/include/isdn_dwabclib.h
The following relationships should be added for a clean t
Package: calligrawords-data
Version: 1:2.4.3-2
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->wheezy (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their
Package: bbdb
Version: 2.36-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed that your package creates files in
/root. From the attached log (scroll to the bottom):
1m4.7s ERROR: FAIL: Package purging left files on system:
/root/
Package: med-pharmacy
Version: 1.11
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package no longer installs in
sid. It was renamed to med-pharma in 1.12, but there is no transitional
package to ensure smooth upgrades.
Andr
Package: blktap-dkms
Version: 2.0.91-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-polic
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
src:nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-96xx was revived by a new (and final)
upstream release which added support for Xorg Xserver 1.12, and was just
unblocked.
There are still users of this driver for some ancient hardware.
So we will postpone the deprecation
Package: libgvnc-1.0-0-dbg
Version: 0.4.3-2
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->wheezy (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their pa
Package: libldns-dev
Version: 1.6.13-3
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: wheezy->sid (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their package dep
Package: node-backbone
Version: 0.5.3-3
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: wheezy->sid (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their package de
Package: libstrongswan
Version: 4.6.4-1
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->sid (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their package d
On 2012-11-25 23:37, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 23:32:43 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> I've now uploaded the revived 96xx legacy packages to unstable and ask
>> for an unblock.
>>
> OK, I guess...
Thanks!
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, e
On 2012-11-26 12:44, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 at 10:49:19 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> the problem I previously reported for gnome-dbg now also shows up for
>> gnome-core.
>
> Your log from 1st November is for gnome-dbg. Is this reproducible
> for
On 2012-11-26 22:50, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> Thanks for the report, but before filing them can you at least check for
> duplicates?
Oops, must have missed that one ... and even one of my own :-(
Sorry for the noise.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian
Package: python-djblets
Version: 0.7~git20120402+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->sid (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by
Package: nordugrid-arc-hed
Version: 1.0.1-1
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->wheezy (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by their pa
Package: libgfs-mpi-1.3-2
Version: 20091109-dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious
User: trei...@debian.org
Usertags: edos-file-overwrite
Architecture: amd64
Distribution: squeeze->wheezy (partial) upgrade
Hi,
automatic installation tests of packages that share a file and at the
same time do not conflict by
Control: merge 684654 684655
> Kernel: Linux 3.4-trunk-rt-amd64
Please try the 3.2 kernel from wheezy/sid and the non-rt flavor.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Control: severity 684654 important
Hi Beojan,
On 2012-08-12 20:03, Beojan Stanislaus wrote:
> On Sunday 12 August 2012 19:12:04 Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> Please try the 3.2 kernel from wheezy/sid and the non-rt flavor.
> I have, and the bug described persists.
Please report this pr
Package: libphone-utils0-dbg
Version: 0.1+git20110523-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during an experimental test with piuparts I noticed that the copyright
file of your package disappears after a squeeze->wheezy dist-upgrade.
clone 678848 -1
reassign -1 libarpack2 3.1.1-2
retitle -1 libarpack2: please add Breaks: octave3.2
thanks
After digging a bit more into this octave upgrade problem, I found a
workaround: libarpack2 needs to add
Breaks: octave3.2
There is already a similar conflict in libblas3 (#677399).
Having
unmerge 678848
clone 678848 -1
retitle 671711 dpkg: runs trigger processing even if depedencies are not
satisfied
merge 671711 678848
reassign -1 libarpack2 3.1.1-2
retitle -1 libarpack2: please add Breaks: octave3.2
thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
w
Package: nvidia-glx
Version: 195.36.31-6
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
There is another privilege escalation in the Nvidia binary driver.
Nvidia Advisory: http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3140
Initial disclosure of the vulnerability:
http://pe
On 2012-08-13 20:30, Sven Joachim wrote:
> When the nvidia-kernel-common package is removed but not purged, the
> nouveau kernel module remains blacklisted which is probably not what the
> user wants and may create problems.
>
> It seems to me that this could be solved by shipping
> nvidia-kernel-
Control: notforwarded 684123
Control: tag 684123 moreinfo
On 2012-08-13 10:16, Christian Marillat wrote:
> Bug related to nvidia driver (even with the latest 304.30) :
experimental now has 304.32
> http://www.freelists.org/post/argyllcms/dispwin-fail-to-load-ICC-profile
Please report this probl
On 2012-08-13 21:29, Ralf Jung wrote:
> currently, doing "sudo aptitude install libgl1-nvidia-glx" on a new system
> pulls in loads of unwanted stuff: Namely, the rt flavour of the linux kernel
> is
the -rt- prebuilt modules will go away as the ABI is not considered
stable (and would require a re
On 2012-08-10 03:20, Gustavo Pinto wrote:
> Weirdly enough, 1:12-6+point-1+exp1 (from experimental) has completely
> fixed the problem.
I don't really see a change that should have an influence on this.
I assume changing the version included a reboot? There is a small
possibility w.r.t the radeon
Package: udev
Version: 175-6
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge.
According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the depends being available
during purge, only the essential packages are availab
Package: l2tp-ipsec-vpn
Version: 1.0.7-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package removes files that
were installed by another package.
The removed files were already present before the package was installed,
they
Package: citadel-server
Version: 7.83-2squeeze2
Severity: important
Tags: security
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during an experimental test with piuparts I noticed that your package
creates a world writable config file:
-rw-rw-rw- 1 citadel root 11 Aug 8 09:45 /et
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On 2012-08-15 09:48, David L. Craig wrote:
> I updated all the nvidia packages when I saw the new versions
> but the problem persists. I am including the most recent kern.log
> Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-3-rt-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Please try the non-rt kernel.
Pl
On 2012-08-10 06:28, Joel wrote:
> In file included from t.cc:1:0:
> /usr/include/CL/cl.hpp: In function ‘cl_int cl::UnloadCompiler()’:
> /usr/include/CL/cl.hpp:1606:12: error: ‘::clUnloadCompiler’ has not
> been declared
See workaround in
http://www.khronos.org/message_boards/viewtopic.php?f=28&t
Control: found -1 304.37-1
Control: tag -1 moreinfo
On 2012-08-14 22:04, Daniel Anderberg wrote:
> Linux mona 3.2.0-1-amd64 #1 SMP Fri Feb 17 05:17:36 UTC 2012 x86_64
GNU/Linux
That's not a current kernel
On 2012-08-15 20:05, Daniel Anderberg wrote:
> Tested the new 304.37-1 that entered unstabl
Control: severity -1 important
Control: found -1 304.37-1
On 2012-08-15 21:22, David L. Craig wrote:
> On 12Aug15:1037+0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> Please try the non-rt kernel.
> That is working, albeit differently than under Linux Mint XFCE 13.
which used: nvidia driver 295
+library on amd64.
+ * libvdpau1: Add Replaces/Conflicts: lib32vdpau1 to ensure the old biarch
+package gets removed properly.
+ * Update lintian overrides for duplicate files generated by doxygen.
+
+ -- Andreas Beckmann Thu, 16 Aug 2012 02:05:59 +0200
+
libvdpau (0.4.1-6) unstable; urgency
On 2012-08-16 09:30, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> The newest nvidia driver suit breaks opengl support in wine completely.
You are missing Nvidia 32bit libs?
install libgl1-nvidia-glx:ia32
(read the long description of libgl1-nvidia-glx-ia32 for detailed
instructions).
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package nvidia-settings-legacy-173xx
I know this is a new package (actually a fork of an older version of
nvidia-settings) and therefore would not qualify for adding it to wh
Package: corosync
Version: 1.4.4-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>From the at
Package: gfs2-utils
Version: 3.1.3-1
Severity: serious
User: initscripts-ng-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Usertags: incorrect-dependency
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install due
to incorrect dependencies in the init.d LSB header. Some Debian notes
are available
Package: msktutil
Version: 0.4.1-3
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch
On 2012-08-16 11:33, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> Am Do den 16. Aug 2012 um 10:15 schrieb Andreas Beckmann:
>>> There is a note about the multiarch-stuff.
>
>> the old monolithic ia32-libs needs to go away as it ships
>> lib32/libGL.so.1 and nvidia driver no longer diverts thi
On 2012-08-16 12:43, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
>> Did you report a bug?
>
> Yes. It is a upstream bug which is clearly pointing to the commit that
> has introduced the bug. Unfortunately the wine people refuse to revert
And a Debian bug? Maybe the Debian maintainers have a different position
on this ..
On 2012-05-13 01:59, Lorenzo Paulatto wrote:
> Here is the full backtrace for smartdimmer, in case you need it:
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
I finally found some time to debug this and found two problems:
* insufficient matching of PCI IDs (there was a mask of 0xff0 bein
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
The *-ia32 packages built from nvidia-kernel-source have been converted
into empty transitional packages.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.d
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Fixing another security issue:
* CVE-2012-4225. (Closes: #684781)
Add upstream patch nvidia-blacklist-vga-pmu-registers-195.diff:
Fix exploitable local privilege escalation through VG
Package: libpam-abl
Version: 0.4.3-1
Severity: normal
While deliberately testing failed logins to test pam_abl
$ ssh falsch@somehost
falsch@somehost's password:
Permission denied, please try again.
falsch@somehost's password:
Permission denied, please try again.
falsch@somehost's password:
Permis
On Tuesday, 14. August 2012 11:35:21 Ralf Jung wrote:
> As it turned out, the conffile issue is actually a bug in dpkg [1]. In
> theory (and once dpkg is fixed), it is perfectly fine to have a conffile in
> an MA: same package, as long as the content is the same for all
> architectures.
Have the u
Package: miniupnpd
Version: 1.7-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>From the att
table; urgency=low
+
+ * Rebuild against linux 3.2.23-1. (Closes: #683365)
+
+ -- Andreas Beckmann Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:10:33 +0200
+
nvidia-graphics-modules (302.17+1) unstable; urgency=low
[ Andreas Beckmann ]
diff --git a/debian/control.md5sum b/debian/control.md5sum
index a4a5d10..e1
Package: bugs.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
is there a reason the Control: pseudoheader does not work on
nn-done@b.d.o messages?
Setting/clearing flags may be an action someone wants to do while
closing a bug, e.g. - moreinfo + unreproducible
I tried this in
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin
Package: bugs.debian.org
Severity: important
Hi,
I've been hit by this a few times recently: newly submitted bugs don't
have a found version set even if there was a Version: pseudoheader
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=685191
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=68506
Package: psgml
Version: 1.3.2-13
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due
to a command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the
depends being available during purge, only the
Package: autofs
Version: 5.0.6-2
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to purge due
to a command not found. According to policy 7.2 you cannot rely on the
depends being available during purge, only the
Package: ekg2
Version: 1:0.3.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed that your package does not contain
a copyright file.
# ls -la /usr/share/doc/ekg2
total 0
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 140 Aug
Package: xmess-x,xmess-sdl
Version: 0.146-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during an experimental test with piuparts I noticed that the copyright
file of your package sis missing after an upgrade from squeeze to
wheezy.
Cheer
[resending, forgot to Cc: the bug]
On 2012-08-21 08:38, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
>> # ls -la /usr/share/doc/ekg2
>> total 0
>> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 140 Aug 21 02:42 .
>> drwxr-xr-x 154 root root 3580 Aug 21 02:42 ..
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 Nov 14 2011 commands-pl.txt ->
>> ../../ekg2/
On 2012-08-21 07:06, Christian PERRIER wrote:
> This is not really hight priority (*unless the package is wished for
> wheezy, in such case, it IS high priority), but could you consider to
> upload a new package version with the French and Portuguese
> translations completed?
I'm currently waiting
Version: 6.4.3
Hi,
I just tried to provide extra information for an unblock request (attach
a forgotten debdiff), but reportbug starts again by asking me what type
of request I want to send.
This looks like a general problem - the special report scripts that are
used for some pseudopackages (rel
Hmm, reportbug didn't manage to get this into the bug report, again, so
retrying manually ... with explicit Cc: -release@
Andreas
Original Message
Subject: Re: pu: package nvidia-graphics-drivers/195.36.31-6squeeze2
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:14:13 +0200
From: Andreas Bec
On 2012-08-22 17:51, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
> If you want to use the full range of nvidia proprietry drivers on live
> systems the kernel dkms packages must both be installed at the same time
> and the correct module to use selected at runtime. While co-installation
> is possible for the GLX and x
On 2012-08-22 11:20, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Hm. autofs-ldap does not have postinst/postrm scripts.
> How this bug affects autofs-ldap?
The piuparts test (in my experimental piuparts instance) of autofs-ldap
fails due to autofs failing ... setting the affects to allow
piuparts-analyze to mark th
Package: mlterm,mlterm-tiny
Version: 3.1.2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during an exerimental piuparts test I noticed your package is missing
the copyright file after a squeeze->wheezy upgrade.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
On 2012-08-23 00:18, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
> Andreas Beckmann writes:
>> Switching between current and legacy is done by reconfiguring the nvidia
>> alternative (/usr/lib/nvidia/nvidia) - can't that be used by the module
>> load script to select the "right"
On 2012-08-23 09:58, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> The doc dir of both packages is linked to the doc dir of
> mlterm-common, and both packages depend on mlterm-common
/u/s/d/mlterm{,-tiny} are empty directories after the upgrade from
squeeze - dpkg does not replace directories by symlinks or vice ve
.
+
+ -- Andreas Beckmann Fri, 17 Aug 2012 00:43:36 +0200
+
nvidia-graphics-drivers (195.36.31-6squeeze1) stable-proposed-updates; urgency=medium
* Security fix (backported from 195.36.31-7). (Closes: #609338)
diff -Nru nvidia-graphics-drivers-195.36.31/debian/module/debian/patches/nvidia
Package: afterstep-data
Version: 2.2.11-5
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
because it tries to ove
Source: haskell-edison-api
Version: 1.2.1-15
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
because it tries to
Package: libuim7
Version: 1:1.7.1-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
because it tries to overwrite
Package: fonts-komatuna
Version: 20101113-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
because it tries to o
Source: libxqdbm-dev
Version: 1.8.78-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts piuparts.d.o
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
squeeze. It installed fine in squeeze, then the upgrade to wheezy fails
because it tries to overwr
Hi,
an updated version of nvidia-settings that should be compatible with the
legacy drivers is available in squeeze-backports.
Please try this and report back.
Visit http://backports.debian.org for instructions how to enable and use
backports.
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs
Source: printer-driver-splix
Version: 2.0.0+svn300-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
testing. It installed fine in testing, then the upgrade to unstable fails
because it tries to ove
Package: distributed-net
Version: 2.9107.516-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install.
Piuparts runs the installation with DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive set
in the environment and stdin redire
Package: trac-bitten-slave
Version: 0.6+final-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'testing'. It installed fine in 'testing', then the upgrade to 'sid'
fails
because it tries to overwri
Package: arb
Version: 5.3-2
Severity: normal
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintaine
Package: mobyle
Version: 1.0.4~dfsg-2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 9.3.3.2
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
the mobyle postinst script needs to use invoke-rc.d to restart apache,
see
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s-writing-init
It curre
Package: sysvinit-utils
Version: 2.88dsf-18
Severity: important
File: /usr/sbin/service
Hi,
I just analyzed a piuparts failure in the mobyle package that was caused
by abusing the 'service' command to restart apache (a violation of
Policy 9.3.3.2 which says 'maintainer scripts must use invoke-rc.
Package: libcf-dev
Version: 1:4.1.3-1~exp1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install
because it tries to overwrite other packages files without declaring a
replaces relation.
See policy 7.6 at
ht
Package: xul-ext-personasplus
Version: 1.6.2-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the s
Package: wims
Version: 4.02-5
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>From the attache
Package: stterm
Version: 0.0~20110920+hg212-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>
Package: epoptes
Version: 0.3.2-1
Severity: normal
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed a "command not found" during
postinst, the relevant lines from the attached logfile (scroll down
to the end) are:
Selecting previously unselected pac
Package: uhd-host
Version: 3.3.2-2
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed a "command not found" during
postinst, the relevant lines from the attached logfile (scroll down to the
end) are:
Selecting previously unselected package uhd-host.
Package: torrus-common
Version: 2.01-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>From th
Package: qthid-fcd-controller
Version: 3.1-3
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>F
Package: ipppd
Version: 1:3.9.20060704+dfsg.3-2
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to remove.
>From the attached log (scroll to the bottom...):
Removing ipppd ...
dpkg: error processing ipppd (--
Package: jspwiki
Version: 2.8.0-4
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package failed to install. As
per definition of the release team this makes the package too buggy for
a release, thus the severity.
>From the att
Package: susv3
Version: 6.1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-mainta
Package: firmware-b43legacy-installer
Version: 1:015-11
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org
Package: motif-clients
Version: 2.3.3-5
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-poli
Package: xml2rfc
Version: 1.36-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-m
Package: zekr
Version: 1.0.0+repack-6
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintain
Package: zoph
Version: 0.8.0.1-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-m
Package: zemberek-server
Version: 0.7.1-12
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-p
Package: yhsm-yubikey-ksm
Version: 1.0.3c-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-ma
Package: xtell
Version: 2.10.7
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-mai
Package: xrdp
Version: 0.5.0-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-mai
Package: xine-ui
Version: 0.99.6-1.1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maintaine
Package: xen-utils-common
Version: 4.1.2-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-p
Package: vnc4server
Version: 4.1.1+X4.3.0-37
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian
Package: vm
Version: 8.1.0-1
Severity: important
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package left unowned files on
the system after purge, which is a violation of policy 6.8 (or 10.8):
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-maint
1201 - 1300 of 15482 matches
Mail list logo
