Happy Birthday! *Александр Лебедев* <*downfal8*@*gmail**.com*>; wer464544-downfal8 *ID*:*C87BD478* *1851 9261 1B9C 3266 CBE8494F EA78 B09E C87B D478* *comment*(*-*)
2017-08-22 2:42 GMT+03:00 <debian-devel-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org>: > Content-Type: text/plain > > debian-devel-digest Digest Volume 2017 : > Issue 417 > > Today's Topics: > Re: Bug#833585: lintian: Check prese [ Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> ] > Packaging WebExtensions compatible w [ Yao Wei <m...@lxde.org> ] > Re: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Packagi [ Ximin Luo <infini...@debian.org> > ] > Bug#872812: exim4-config: Exim confi [ Holger Levsen <hol...@debian.org> > ] > Re: Packaging WebExtensions compatib [ Benjamin Drung > <benjamin.drung@prof ] > Bug#872821: ITP: beginend-el -- rede [ Lev Lamberov <dogs...@debian.org> > ] > Bug#872824: ITP: node-regjsgen -- Ge [ Julien Puydt > <julien.puydt@laposte. ] > Bug#872861: ITP: node-gulp-mocha -- [ Bastien ROUCARIES > <roucaries.bastie ] > Bug#872812: marked as done (exim4-co [ ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian > Bug T ] > Re: Packaging WebExtensions compatib [ Sean Whitton > <spwhitton@spwhitton.n ] > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 06:17:32 -0700 > From: Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> > To: Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bast...@gmail.com>, > Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be> > Cc: 833...@bugs.debian.org, > debian developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org> > Subject: Re: Bug#833585: lintian: Check presence of upstream signature if > signing > key available > Message-Id: <1503321452.3684054.1080012240.3B37DE5A@webmail. > messagingengine.com> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi Bastien, > > > Lack git-buildpackage, gitpkg, git dpm ... > > Support in git-buildpackage is blocked on pristine-tar, but I worked > on that yesterday: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=871809#20 > > > Regards, > > -- > ,''`. > : :' : Chris Lamb > `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk > `- > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 21:36:06 +0800 > From: Yao Wei <m...@lxde.org> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, > pkg-mozext-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Subject: Packaging WebExtensions compatible with multiple browsers > Message-ID: <20170821133606.ia7ula7zdc7z3...@madoka.m-wei.net> > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nnypqubsswrktemd" > Content-Disposition: inline > > --nnypqubsswrktemd > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > > Hi, > > There are some problems for us to package Debian packages for > WebExtensions that can support Firefox and Chromium using the same > codebase. I do come up with my idea, but I still need a conclusion to > prepare a package: > > 1. Should we use different prefix for the WebExtensions packages that > support different browsers? > > I think webext- prefix can be good for this kind of packages. > > 2. Should we split the package for different browsers? > > There's current efforts packaging ublock-origin for both chromium and > xul-ext. However shifting to WebExtensions implies that the codebase > will be the same. To save disk space and lower the security risk not to > split the main package could be good. Some of the browser-dependent > files can be splitted to their dedicated packages. > > Inputs are welcome! > > Best regards, > Yao Wei > > --nnypqubsswrktemd > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE/tVDSEUoffJikxSJz7v84LdPGxQFAlma4cUACgkQz7v84LdP > GxQQ+BAApTm50GtirsSVs6IJrLzgmCY7e6uKN2vcxjLWckDhoclcgHE12LkY2+qP > WIw0eTXtMXap6lAClmNGEB4Jh1BDmlazExWG0NfYqG+Unwl7OcDbglpZ3zb1W8w7 > I3V40RvDzb+EgpNgsX7meBlQNmiDxqzvQXggUbFxig1b6+SUBoKvDR/rf1eZPwgz > 3pv43aTElQLWMnpbcwq/2JD7GYhofU5a1+8cmod/7D3PtaXHvLKDQQSg1IuPneoC > xtPpCxMjgHXB/W/wKydxs2GNVuCIh4euQnjhctiAlQ+DxSEHtuGsOQnrKw9pYzkc > e7WucmS89L1Htdik+CXn3g4ilreCtWdN/nDM9E2tIPIVOuvYEtxIkr1ZsKCdb6kH > W8axyh9blAwPOaOpuieurvPAuBLdc1UgeUOB96QJYV2fwDg365yJsQ7RUT1IadM4 > yBCAXTxL5r/IlHximj7b12bkKjUz5P12jEiVkSBcpp8CrLTRbjofXGaJpFWyr5p4 > qzUTGnyFcGwPpk3bj6qXb17AfcmEYWU0TT4L+hm07D/hnLO/dg3vVzqs9RqUeNef > 2Ct2Ldrb2E7WxesOURPpX9TEmdFf9iBMOLNP0sQRWjv9af3LuwpnxWnK7BQGdzRx > v4Y7JC6828QAbJSZvQI8q6Tuo74crGPDKmWloxkKtt9dzeH1SUY= > =RiId > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --nnypqubsswrktemd-- > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 13:43:00 +0000 > From: Ximin Luo <infini...@debian.org> > To: Yao Wei <m...@lxde.org>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, > pkg-mozext-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Subject: Re: [Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Packaging WebExtensions compatible > with > multiple browsers > Message-ID: <9b266ca1-c441-44bf-26dc-6c1fe0b38...@debian.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > Content-Language: en-US > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Yao Wei: > > Hi, > > > > There are some problems for us to package Debian packages for > > WebExtensions that can support Firefox and Chromium using the same > > codebase. I do come up with my idea, but I still need a conclusion to > > prepare a package: > > > > 1. Should we use different prefix for the WebExtensions packages that > > support different browsers? > > > > I think webext- prefix can be good for this kind of packages. > > > > 2. Should we split the package for different browsers? > > > > There's current efforts packaging ublock-origin for both chromium and > > xul-ext. However shifting to WebExtensions implies that the codebase > > will be the same. To save disk space and lower the security risk not to > > split the main package could be good. Some of the browser-dependent > > files can be splitted to their dedicated packages. > > > > Inputs are welcome! > > > > Hi Yao Wei, thanks for taking this forward! I have not been following the > discussions very closely but this all seems sensible to me. > > Best, > Ximin > > -- > GPG: ed25519/56034877E1F87C35 > GPG: rsa4096/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE > https://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:07 +0200 > From: Holger Levsen <hol...@debian.org> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org> > Subject: Bug#872812: exim4-config: Exim configuration error in line 684 of > /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp > Message-ID: <20170821141107.ga6...@layer-acht.org> > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY" > Content-Disposition: inline > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Package: general > Severity: serious > > Hi, > > I seem to recall that there was a change causing the following (which is > du= > e to > "user mail not found") but I'm unable to remember which package was > that=E2= > =80=A6 > > So I'm seeing this in various jenkins tests testing package installations: > > Setting up exim4-config (4.89-5) ... > Adding system-user for exim (v4) > 2017-08-21 08:40:23 Exim configuration error in line 684 of > /var/lib/exim4/= > config.autogenerated.tmp: > user mail was not found > Invalid new configfile /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp, not > install= > ing=20 > /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp to /var/lib/exim4/config. > autogenera= > ted > dpkg: error processing package exim4-config (--configure): > subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > > Sadly those tests were not run between end of June and early August so I > ca= > nnot exactly+for sure > pin-point that it started with 4.89-4=E2=80=A6 maybe it's some other > packag= > e/upload to blame for this > change in behaviour. Nonetheless it's surely a serious bug, as it > completly= > breaks > package installations. > > Tests that fail are eg: > https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_sid_ > install_design-desk= > top-web > https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_sid_ > install_education-s= > tandalone/ > > But then, no: https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_ > buster_ins= > tall_education-standalone/5/consoleFull=20 > is a failure with exim4-config 4.89-3, while > https:////jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_ > buster_install_educati= > on-standalone/4/consoleFull > also with exim4-config 4.89-3 succeeds=E2=80=A6 > > so sigh, filing against general for now=E2=80=A6 > > > --=20 > cheers, > Holger > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > Content-Description: Digital signature > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iQIVAwUBWZrp+wkauFYGmqocAQpsog/+Ndxk0zIvpU3QKRHGUipyrOheLw27753X > Dt6h8dDo14eRARfTbiKrRjyAHlsoKuXAAIWcmHUb6wPEU9cD1W/3ydN11NlDRwy+ > 1HeWyTl7vGl1HRsHwuS72eFqXmG10cFhCt9l0LRjjSQqw7FhXALRMIZIoWaQnUC9 > 2FclE/TYOFXsq2Kuirvvl/DP50h5HtQMh0wur6lOycq2aPewEYIF3/WRCq+8/Hv9 > uPXvFryXPvH3dEkxbxMi0/6vehXj57D0bAHl9IVhSt4vC4SOnVpAdfpsBU1ulk9f > PQGRYpH4jPXjzZ/mO4E1wvgCl1/joDFDHwiFXX65Ia1SVuC/iFYBIHbNH7EeFaOF > JJ9oAeoVjEBLKUAUDZbeMXNR+mWYq8X5V8jWPq9OsrnhgTARwaJbJi+VeNCK+5Pr > a4uz6r+9fSDbzgE106U7LO9zxccvG0piHGrhZ9YYXfGqjActpIChcoBW1k9M3RIR > xmpsgrAnZPCmNfEdvJyiD4WjAlx51Ukttv6IhuiHfPAb+Y2o5PfJpNjD2Rt3ry5l > DhMeb21OqV2//3bxGLKX1qOVCq/DVaV7GQuE89J+FQZFE9QOafam6pD7Q8b7fazI > qSDXolZQIW3XJHTGj7TWGNC6Mw7jc2CFCkmP/SWYbTXLAGivRhPGZT1bByICIOdW > T3xspfB/Ypc= > =bMRM > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY-- > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:29:52 +0200 > From: Benjamin Drung <benjamin.dr...@profitbricks.com> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, > pkg-mozext-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Subject: Re: Packaging WebExtensions compatible with multiple browsers > Message-ID: <1503325792.3742.4.ca...@profitbricks.com> > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-FEYGY9ZuYy/ > fBZCEogoN" > > --=-FEYGY9ZuYy/fBZCEogoN > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Am Montag, den 21.08.2017, 21:36 +0800 schrieb Yao Wei: > > Hi, > >=20 > > There are some problems for us to package Debian packages for > > WebExtensions that can support Firefox and Chromium using the same > > codebase.=C2=A0=C2=A0I do come up with my idea, but I still need a > conclu= > sion > > to > > prepare a package: > >=20 > > 1. Should we use different prefix for the WebExtensions packages that > > support different browsers? > >=20 > > I think webext- prefix can be good for this kind of packages. > > I am all for option one. The webext- prefix sounds good. > > --=20 > Benjamin Drung > System Developer > Debian & Ubuntu Developer > > ProfitBricks GmbH > Greifswalder Str. 207 > D - 10405 Berlin > > Email: benjamin.dr...@profitbricks.com > Web:=C2=A0https://www.profitbricks.com > > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin. > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 125506B. > Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: Achim Weiss. > > --=-FEYGY9ZuYy/fBZCEogoN > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQIcBAABCAAGBQJZmu5gAAoJEN2M1aXejH56AowP/RkxsF+UD3iKzkd2WFOAAn1M > qcliaHdcAX4V5QWaF6Z7iigWT05MzvoVrp6qzHG5q3EfbMc6LKy+jyJTkV1tr8a3 > 3CfH32RJwQ0sSygfstMDiAlfxMYvFhcQ3Xyxn2qhIsmNYsnGpn2hFmR690NXMcgO > H4BQ2d1MvE8C5l2vbdLOSbMjhpXGMzNttzBKeMg+En+2h+jLCuktThi4/8Y9LL2C > higC19DQ3giN6wHiKyMPZKvjHUz6wrEK1e0kkLFK7dxOfIf7lPn2XLB4PbCEE+HM > A3qKMZownZ2F5YojdVblQEp5n610hd9Z28nLWj6hcP+er0V0aR9gQr/S0GBsRYUp > dDIQn7wh5JQHjClB//gLBlE0dqojWRS6X3ZnL01sMaWRxB+Wq1yOWvSzfayUhqVl > fMS3PAOTA4q/IYzyuh6+vj3VsLI5MpctU4ldhU1RWEFr5a/DdLQzPhAWR3eXfkBV > g7cY5Jj0VYomT5CXZ1nRheTKxQdFwqKg1tOxKYI/lo6Af49jJ3CHfKeLMS/jMxXa > T5OtrNne9+SuN6BUDw8M0hlp39zHDbqc6H8I1SJwp19zdwbRlM233Yxq2aq0FPf8 > BW3uuvj4oGt9w+VSsyjbhWOvdX2id3UYRXTYsSz2oBHAy/CztrZD54vhE6eWXnpz > Ex7JyIqOO3AbFVjWY7DD > =fJJK > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --=-FEYGY9ZuYy/fBZCEogoN-- > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 20:23:35 +0500 > From: Lev Lamberov <dogs...@debian.org> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org> > Subject: Bug#872821: ITP: beginend-el -- redefine M-< and M-> for some > modes to get to meaningful locations > Message-ID: <871so5ueq0....@riseup.net> > Content-Type: text/plain > > Package: wnpp > Owner: Lev Lamberov <dogs...@debian.org> > Severity: wishlist > > * Package name : beginend-el > Version : 2.0.0 > Upstream Author : Damien Cassou <dam...@cassou.me> > * URL or Web page : https://github.com/DamienCassou/beginend > * License : GPL-3+ > Programming Lang: Emacs Lisp > Description : redefine M-< and M-> for some modes to get to > meaningful locations > > This package redefines M-< and M-> (or any key bound to > beginning-of-buffer or end-of-buffer) for some modes so that point moves > to meaningful locations. The real beginning and end of buffers (i. e., > point-min and point-max) are still accessible by pressing the same key > again. > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 17:58:57 +0200 > From: Julien Puydt <julien.pu...@laposte.net> > To: sub...@bugs.debian.org > Subject: Bug#872824: ITP: node-regjsgen -- Generate regular expression in > Node.js > Message-ID: <5f10940a-3436-5958-750a-5631860c6...@laposte.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Language: fr > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: Julien Puydt <julien.pu...@laposte.net> > X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > * Package name : node-regjsgen > Version : 0.3.0 > Upstream Author : Benjamin Tan (https://demoneaux.github.io/) > * URL : https://github.com/demoneaux/regjsgen > * License : Expat > Programming Lang: JavaScript > Description : Generate regular expression in Node.js > This module can generate regular expressions from the abstract syntax > trees > created by regjsparser for example. > . > Node.js is an event-based server-side JavaScript engine. > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 22:52:39 +0200 > From: Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bast...@gmail.com> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org> > Subject: Bug#872861: ITP: node-gulp-mocha -- Run Mocha tests > Message-ID: <CAE2SPAbtBSELs37u+iL6eNgvmy6=q9pJO+7j90VJE9xMGdSH0w@mail. > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Package: wnpp > Severity: wishlist > Owner: ro...@debian.org > X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > control: block -1 by 855469 > > * Package name : node-gulp-mocha > Version : 4.3.1 > Upstream Author : Sindre Sorhus <sindresor...@gmail.com> ( > sindresorhus.com) > * URL : https://github.com/sindresorhus/gulp-mocha#readme > * License : Expat > Programming Lang: JavaScript > Description : Run Mocha tests > > This module allows one to use gulp toolkit to run mocha test. > .Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running > on Node.js and browser, making asynchronous testing > simple. > .gulp is a toolkit that helps you automate painful or time-consuming > tasks in > your development workflow. > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 21:39:07 +0000 > From: ow...@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System) > To: m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) > Subject: Bug#872812: marked as done (exim4-config: Exim configuration > error in line 684 of /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp) > Message-ID: <handler.872812.D872812.150335127528832.ackdone@bugs. > debian.org> > Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----------=_1503351547-30351-0" > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format... > > ------------=_1503351547-30351-0 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Your message dated Mon, 21 Aug 2017 23:27:12 +0200 > with message-id <20170821212712.hzgfd4f2o5cxm...@bongo.bofh.it> > and subject line Re: Bug#872812: exim4-config: Exim configuration error in > = > line 684 of /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp > has caused the Debian Bug report #872812, > regarding exim4-config: Exim configuration error in line 684 of > /var/lib/ex= > im4/config.autogenerated.tmp > to be marked as done. > > This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. > If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the > Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. > > (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this > message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system > misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org > immediately.) > > > --=20 > 872812: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D872812 > Debian Bug Tracking System > Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems > > ------------=_1503351547-30351-0 > Content-Type: message/rfc822 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Aug 2017 14:11:14 +0000 > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 > (2015-04-28) on buxtehude.debian.org > X-Spam-Level: > X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.0 required=4.0 tests=FROMDEVELOPER,HAS_ > PACKAGE, > PGPSIGNATURE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=unavailable > autolearn_force=no > version=3.4.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 > X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 spammytokens: hammytokens: > Return-path: <hol...@debian.org> > Received: from mail.holgerlevsen.de ([62.201.164.66] helo= > alpha.holgerlevsen.de) > by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) > (envelope-from <hol...@debian.org>) > id 1djnQA-0000xk-Bc > for sub...@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:11:14 +0000 > Received: from localhost (alpha.holgerlevsen.de [62.201.164.66]) > by alpha.holgerlevsen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 554063D807C; > Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:13 +0200 (CEST) > X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.holgerlevsen.de > Received: from alpha.holgerlevsen.de ([62.201.164.66]) > by localhost (mail.holgerlevsen.de [62.201.164.66]) (amavisd-new, > port 10024) > with ESMTP id g5XbzFNFGLGQ; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:09 +0200 (CEST) > Received: from layer-acht.org (epsilon.holgerlevsen.de [62.201.164.82]) > (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 > bits)) > (No client certificate requested) > by alpha.holgerlevsen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 232343D804A; > Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:09 +0200 (CEST) > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:07 +0200 > From: Holger Levsen <hol...@debian.org> > To: Debian Bug Tracking System <sub...@bugs.debian.org> > Subject: exim4-config: Exim configuration error in line 684 of > /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp > Message-ID: <20170821141107.ga6...@layer-acht.org> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY" > Content-Disposition: inline > X-Reportbug-Version: 6.6.3 > Delivered-To: sub...@bugs.debian.org > > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Package: general > Severity: serious > > Hi, > > I seem to recall that there was a change causing the following (which is > du= > e to > "user mail not found") but I'm unable to remember which package was > that=E2= > =80=A6 > > So I'm seeing this in various jenkins tests testing package installations: > > Setting up exim4-config (4.89-5) ... > Adding system-user for exim (v4) > 2017-08-21 08:40:23 Exim configuration error in line 684 of > /var/lib/exim4/= > config.autogenerated.tmp: > user mail was not found > Invalid new configfile /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp, not > install= > ing=20 > /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp to /var/lib/exim4/config. > autogenera= > ted > dpkg: error processing package exim4-config (--configure): > subprocess installed post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > > Sadly those tests were not run between end of June and early August so I > ca= > nnot exactly+for sure > pin-point that it started with 4.89-4=E2=80=A6 maybe it's some other > packag= > e/upload to blame for this > change in behaviour. Nonetheless it's surely a serious bug, as it > completly= > breaks > package installations. > > Tests that fail are eg: > https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_sid_ > install_design-desk= > top-web > https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_sid_ > install_education-s= > tandalone/ > > But then, no: https://jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_ > buster_ins= > tall_education-standalone/5/consoleFull=20 > is a failure with exim4-config 4.89-3, while > https:////jenkins.debian.net/job/chroot-installation_ > buster_install_educati= > on-standalone/4/consoleFull > also with exim4-config 4.89-3 succeeds=E2=80=A6 > > so sigh, filing against general for now=E2=80=A6 > > > --=20 > cheers, > Holger > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > Content-Description: Digital signature > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1 > > iQIVAwUBWZrp+wkauFYGmqocAQpsog/+Ndxk0zIvpU3QKRHGUipyrOheLw27753X > Dt6h8dDo14eRARfTbiKrRjyAHlsoKuXAAIWcmHUb6wPEU9cD1W/3ydN11NlDRwy+ > 1HeWyTl7vGl1HRsHwuS72eFqXmG10cFhCt9l0LRjjSQqw7FhXALRMIZIoWaQnUC9 > 2FclE/TYOFXsq2Kuirvvl/DP50h5HtQMh0wur6lOycq2aPewEYIF3/WRCq+8/Hv9 > uPXvFryXPvH3dEkxbxMi0/6vehXj57D0bAHl9IVhSt4vC4SOnVpAdfpsBU1ulk9f > PQGRYpH4jPXjzZ/mO4E1wvgCl1/joDFDHwiFXX65Ia1SVuC/iFYBIHbNH7EeFaOF > JJ9oAeoVjEBLKUAUDZbeMXNR+mWYq8X5V8jWPq9OsrnhgTARwaJbJi+VeNCK+5Pr > a4uz6r+9fSDbzgE106U7LO9zxccvG0piHGrhZ9YYXfGqjActpIChcoBW1k9M3RIR > xmpsgrAnZPCmNfEdvJyiD4WjAlx51Ukttv6IhuiHfPAb+Y2o5PfJpNjD2Rt3ry5l > DhMeb21OqV2//3bxGLKX1qOVCq/DVaV7GQuE89J+FQZFE9QOafam6pD7Q8b7fazI > qSDXolZQIW3XJHTGj7TWGNC6Mw7jc2CFCkmP/SWYbTXLAGivRhPGZT1bByICIOdW > T3xspfB/Ypc= > =bMRM > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --4Ckj6UjgE2iN1+kY-- > > ------------=_1503351547-30351-0 > Content-Type: message/rfc822 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Received: (at 872812-done) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Aug 2017 21:34:35 +0000 > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 > (2015-04-28) on buxtehude.debian.org > X-Spam-Level: > X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_BUG_NUMBER, > PGPSIGNATURE, > RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no > version=3.4.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 > X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.5 spammytokens: hammytokens: > Return-path: <m...@linux.it> > Received: from attila.bofh.it ([85.94.204.146]) > by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_ > SHA384:256) > (Exim 4.89) > (envelope-from <m...@linux.it>) > id 1djuLC-0007Un-UL > for 872812-d...@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 21:34:35 +0000 > Received: by attila.bofh.it (Postfix, from userid 10) > id 49835120039; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 23:28:17 +0200 (CEST) > Received: by bongo.bofh.it (Postfix, from userid 1000) > id 1B95C840511; Mon, 21 Aug 2017 23:27:12 +0200 (CEST) > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 23:27:12 +0200 > To: Holger Levsen <hol...@debian.org>, 872812-d...@bugs.debian.org > Subject: Re: Bug#872812: exim4-config: Exim configuration error in line 684 > of /var/lib/exim4/config.autogenerated.tmp > Message-ID: <20170821212712.hzgfd4f2o5cxm...@bongo.bofh.it> > References: <20170821141107.ga6...@layer-acht.org> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; > protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="t6tekscetric65ni" > Content-Disposition: inline > In-Reply-To: <20170821141107.ga6...@layer-acht.org> > User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) > From: m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) > X-Greylist: delayed 372 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at buxtehude; Mon, 21 Aug > 2017 21:34:34 UTC > > > --t6tekscetric65ni > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Disposition: inline > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > On Aug 21, Holger Levsen <hol...@debian.org> wrote: > > > I seem to recall that there was a change causing the following (which is > = > due to > > "user mail not found") but I'm unable to remember which package was that= > =E2=80=A6 > Not a bug: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D844220#65 > > --=20 > ciao, > Marco > > --t6tekscetric65ni > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQGzBAABCAAdFiEEGBsIcS5ipP0URKfyK/WlwSLE96QFAlmbUDAACgkQK/WlwSLE > 96SiSAv7BaTn5vjmuRG17T2MjbzpnZnva5qYiLwb+MAkL7xCTb96nrtaTkdbeA7L > FJXQnCTVrN8ZG+Lxu624m8hfUKx78mp70fxhFo/aOlbkc+YdKG1XJIgtKxftroYA > NdJrpErk7Z548ONpDDIFHr0y3l5lgoLtkgZKf37a+rB42h2MBXwpprMDcrzyCbWp > r5InEaWSHlt4WwzrCe6e6T2/UHAGk7aUdUFJ5eCRXknjAlkB7oNyMfShCc308Xzg > f+c3st9gI1vUjFtWSK5ROfe2CiCFr172M+9XdcUK501tGa3DzHrK9Wfiad1qvH4T > pUw9XsUeML+dpyjz5A8NDMxDRiG+S+Cp4lwo1hyYMdpDeAwYG6ZbUS1cSQlDRHdf > sk6j46Y5M0rkDzISAclAFqoi8l5pCiFnHCTlge6mSSVnAm/KQ3cCKr9ONJ43sHRN > 6OqUunJA+1woBHWiiGAas2pLLpXps7EmxZwmV7pCpnAt2wpWTzw2RKoZ602/SJuJ > 1Wm0NYs7 > =K16x > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --t6tekscetric65ni-- > ------------=_1503351547-30351-0-- > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 15:02:15 -0700 > From: Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> > To: Yao Wei <m...@lxde.org>, debian-devel@lists.debian.org, > pkg-mozext-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Subject: Re: Packaging WebExtensions compatible with multiple browsers > Message-ID: <87d17oeg0o....@iris.silentflame.com> > Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; > micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" > > --=-=-= > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Hello Yao Wei, > > Thank you for working on this. > > On Mon, Aug 21 2017, Yao Wei wrote: > > > 1. Should we use different prefix for the WebExtensions packages that > > support different browsers? > > > > I think webext- prefix can be good for this kind of packages. > > > > 2. Should we split the package for different browsers? > > > > There's current efforts packaging ublock-origin for both chromium and > > xul-ext. However shifting to WebExtensions implies that the codebase > > will be the same. To save disk space and lower the security risk not > > to split the main package could be good. Some of the > > browser-dependent files can be splitted to their dedicated packages. > > David Pr=C3=A9vot and I looked into this during DebCamp. You can find our > attempt on the webext branch of ublock-origin's alioth repository. > > We thought it would be better just to have all packages use the prefix > webext-, installing to something like /usr/share/webext/foo, and then > create a symlink into /usr/share/firefox if the extension works in > Firefox, and into /usr/share/chromium if the extension works with > Chromium. > > Do you think this would work? > > =2D-=20 > Sean Whitton > > --=-=-= > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEm5FwB64DDjbk/CSLaVt65L8GYkAFAlmbWGcACgkQaVt65L8G > YkDfuhAAl5WHQTsx82xG0ciRxlvBmyp3SvRxHXTkBIifmGoOLAUVAsmLx7yZ3tsX > +aUjlHV3X3oxREKqcUgfiF8HW4WYQPh0y50yCu+/o/u4yLaS9Vj+rh3sg6SGrp3j > Z/dRhzFDn63IZlhDTxIsD4HrvN3Hz5RsVSa43ksUCb7FfxEWniihB4ixY353A7QO > q89n2Sw3ftMjo/W6BerTDeTAu1oThpmDrtktA9GNQKoW9FyUSL7MD76xmu7FwkRQ > wqaIDSRqZEJ0ALbm/ENwlOueTBoEvc71ieJ2u5uyFDMQT/vkvUpxlasOksmaMtiW > JGmqSVvzE/qEdfWNiRaQINbUZDVgPRHu3BBtgb/epIeqBQmFXz900HTbnPB0q60l > t6MGrUjebRAWKE0S90veDgSpCjjUEUrxexvQOv/VhvzjDyP2wivaI2Jd1ZuRd/jf > OGbdBZJrNUlFKFlkybqOPyCpzU/Z/xLBe5HrurVxxMWCf20q88gPxTJGQEUIeGGD > ioCyBZuImY6ellaYhN1irwjOdr+sLd91Ba240cE1zrMgGNu0o9xti0L4x1LNGi93 > sxRkeAdfXhyxQFxv3VKfv4ZjsszTHiG8RzVxkQOmMiDnZq7iyQBEjjjrPQzeI/cO > CEWgyZABHcsyMSnu/AJ2FgoalBZPBjiEjZTJfW26icdLpHu1qBw= > =BNWP > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > --=-=-=-- > >
