Bug#896988: RFS: nautilus-hide/0.2.3-3

2018-04-29 Thread Sergio Durigan Junior 
On Saturday, April 28 2018, Carlos Maddela wrote:

> On 29/04/18 07:11, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
>> By the way, if you want to move your packages repositories from your
>> private namespace to the Debian namespace on salsa, just let me know and
>> I can create the proper repos and give you authorization.  This applies
>> to any package that you maintain, of course.
>> 
>
> Thanks for sponsoring and your offer. Yes, I'd appreciate it if you
> created them for me.

No problem.  I created:

  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/nautilus-hide
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/nautilus-admin
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/ncurses-hexedit
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dmalloc
  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rmlint

And added your username as Master on those.  Please let me know if you
need anything else on salsa.

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#895870: marked as done (RFS: deepin-music/3.1.8.1+ds-1)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Mon, 30 Apr 2018 00:56:39 +0200
with message-id <20180429225639.3g3tcfswomwbu...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#895870: closing 895870
has caused the Debian Bug report #895870,
regarding RFS: deepin-music/3.1.8.1+ds-1
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.)


-- 
895870: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=895870
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "deepin-music"

 * Package name: deepin-music
   Version : 3.1.8.1+ds-1
   Upstream Author : Deepin Technology Co., Ltd.
 * URL : https://github.com/linuxdeepin/deepin-music
 * License : GPL-3+
   Section : sound

It builds those binary packages:

  deepin-music - music player with brilliant and tweakful UI

To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/deepin-music

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/deepin-music/deepin-music_3.1.8.1+ds-1.dsc

More information about hello can be obtained from 
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-deepin-team/deepin-music

-- 
Yanhao Mo


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 02:08:13PM +0800, Yanhao Mo wrote:
> Sorry boyuan, seems that you don't have dm privilege on this package, so
> the upload was rejected. I'm still waiting another interested DD to sponsor
> it.

... and re-closing.

喵!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#897197: marked as done (RFS: spacefm/1.0.6-3)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 23:36:24 +0200
with message-id <20180429213624.2f767ely7r7im...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897197: RFS: spacefm/1.0.6-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #897197,
regarding RFS: spacefm/1.0.6-3
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.)


-- 
897197: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897197
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity:

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "spacefm"

 * Package name: spacefm
   Version : 1.0.6-3
   Upstream Author : IgnorantGuru 
 * URL : https://github.com/IgnorantGuru/spacefm
 * License : GPL-3+
   Section : utils

  It builds those binary packages:

spacefm- Multi-panel tabbed file manager - GTK2 version
 spacefm-common - Multi-panel tabbed file manager - common files
 spacefm-gtk3 - Multi-panel tabbed file manager - GTK3 version

  To access further information about this package, please visit the 
following URL:


  https://mentors.debian.net/package/spacefm


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spacefm/spacefm_1.0.6-3.dsc



  Changes since the last upload:

Added all cases to postrm script. (Closes: #893237)

piuparts for this version: http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/8BdpxkTR8x/

  Regards,
   Mateusz Łukasik
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:19:09PM +0200, Mateusz Łukasik wrote:
>  * Package name: spacefm
>Version : 1.0.6-3

>   Changes since the last upload:
> 
> Added all cases to postrm script. (Closes: #893237)
> 
> piuparts for this version: http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/8BdpxkTR8x/

Appears to be good.

Uploaded, let's see what we overlooked this time. :þ


Meow!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#896519: marked as done (RFS: peek/1.3.1-1~bpo9+1)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 23:16:52 +0200
with message-id <20180429211652.w2jjrvuospwra...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#896519: RFS: peek/1.3.1-1~bpo9+1
has caused the Debian Bug report #896519,
regarding RFS: peek/1.3.1-1~bpo9+1
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.)


-- 
896519: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=896519
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-backpo...@lists.debian.org

Dear mentors and debian-backports list,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "peek" into stretch-backports:

 * Package name: peek
   Version : 1.3.1-1~bpo9+1
   Upstream Author : Philipp Wolfer 
 * URL : https://github.com/phw/peek
 * License : GPL-3+
   Section : graphics

  It builds those binary packages:

peek  - Simple animated GIF screen recorder with GUI

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/peek

  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/peek/peek_1.3.1-1~bpo9+1.dsc

  Salsa packaging repository:

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/peek.git

  Changes since the last upload:

peek (1.3.1-1~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium

  * Rebuild for stretch-backports.


This is a no-change rebuild for stretch-backports.


  Regards,
   Boyuan Yang
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 09:54:52AM +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote:
>   I am looking for a sponsor for my package "peek" into stretch-backports:
> 
>  * Package name: peek
>Version : 1.3.1-1~bpo9+1

> peek (1.3.1-1~bpo9+1) stretch-backports; urgency=medium
> 
>   * Rebuild for stretch-backports.

✓

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#897197: RFS: spacefm/1.0.6-3

2018-04-29 Thread Mateusz Łukasik 

Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity:

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "spacefm"

 * Package name: spacefm
   Version : 1.0.6-3
   Upstream Author : IgnorantGuru 
 * URL : https://github.com/IgnorantGuru/spacefm
 * License : GPL-3+
   Section : utils

  It builds those binary packages:

spacefm- Multi-panel tabbed file manager - GTK2 version
 spacefm-common - Multi-panel tabbed file manager - common files
 spacefm-gtk3 - Multi-panel tabbed file manager - GTK3 version

  To access further information about this package, please visit the 
following URL:


  https://mentors.debian.net/package/spacefm


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/spacefm/spacefm_1.0.6-3.dsc



  Changes since the last upload:

Added all cases to postrm script. (Closes: #893237)

piuparts for this version: http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/8BdpxkTR8x/

  Regards,
   Mateusz Łukasik

Bug#897193: marked as done (RFS: ddccontrol-db/20171217-2)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 22:57:54 +0200
with message-id <20180429205754.mquysdv424sip...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897193: RFS: ddccontrol-db/20171217-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #897193,
regarding RFS: ddccontrol-db/20171217-2
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.)


-- 
897193: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897193
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ddccontrol-db"

 * Package name: ddccontrol-db
   Version : 20171217-2
   Upstream Author : Miroslav Kravec 
 * URL : https://github.com/ddccontrol/ddccontrol-db
 * License : GNU General Public License v2.0
   Section : utils

It builds those binary packages:

ddccontrol-db - monitor database for ddccontrol

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/ddccontrol-db


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/ddccontrol-db/ddccontrol-db_20171217-2.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

* debian/changelog: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace
* debian/compat, debian/control: bump debhelper to 11
* debian/control: update standards to 4.1.4
* debian/copyright: fix copyright-refers-to-symlink-license
* debian/rules: fix debian-rules-is-dh_make-template

Kind regards,
Miroslav Kravec
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 10:07:40PM +0200, Miroslav Kravec wrote:
>  * Package name: ddccontrol-db
>Version : 20171217-2

> Changes since the last upload:
> 
> * debian/changelog: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace
> * debian/compat, debian/control: bump debhelper to 11
> * debian/control: update standards to 4.1.4
> * debian/copyright: fix copyright-refers-to-symlink-license
> * debian/rules: fix debian-rules-is-dh_make-template

These issues are pretty much of nitpick level, not really worth your time to
make an upload on their own.  

✓

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#897194: marked as done (RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-4)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 22:50:22 +0200
with message-id <20180429205022.ph5eawexjpfvj...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897194: RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #897194,
regarding RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-4
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.)


-- 
897194: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897194
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gnustep-back".

 * Package name: gnustep-back
   Version : 0.26.2-4
   Upstream Author : Fred Kiefer ,
 Adam Fedor ,
 Alexander Malmberg ,
 Banlu Kemiyatorn  et al
 * URL : http://gnustep.org
 * License : LGPL-2+ (bundles), GPL-3+ (tools)
   Section : gnustep

It builds these binary packages:

gnustep-back-common - GNUstep GUI Backend - common files
gnustep-back0.26 - GNUstep GUI Backend
gnustep-back0.26-art - GNUstep GUI Backend (art)
gnustep-back0.26-cairo - GNUstep GUI Backend (cairo)
gnustep-back0.26-xlib - GNUstep GUI Backend (xlib)

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/gnustep-back

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnustep-back/gnustep-back_0.26.2-4.dsc

Git repository:

  https://salsa.debian.org/gnustep-team/gnustep-back

Changes since the last upload:

  * debian/templates/control.m4: Let gnustep-backN provide gnustep-back so
that a backend can always be installed without specifying the version
(Closes: #892241).  Thanks Josh Freeman for the report.
(Standards-Version): Bump to 4.1.4 (no changes required).
  * debian/control: Regenerate.
  * debian/tests/file-tests: Replace dumb file tests with a minimalistic
test program which dynamically loads all backends (Closes: #896838).
Thanks to Paul Gevers for the report and the idea.
  * debian/tests/control (Restrictions): Define to allow-stderr.
(Depends): Remove shunit2 and file; add libgnustep-base-dev.
  * debian/tests/load_backends.m:
  * debian/tests/GNUmakefile: New files.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:10:25PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
>  * Package name: gnustep-back
>Version : 0.26.2-4

> Changes since the last upload:
> 
>   * debian/templates/control.m4: Let gnustep-backN provide gnustep-back so
> that a backend can always be installed without specifying the version
> (Closes: #892241).  Thanks Josh Freeman for the report.
> (Standards-Version): Bump to 4.1.4 (no changes required).
>   * debian/control: Regenerate.
>   * debian/tests/file-tests: Replace dumb file tests with a minimalistic
> test program which dynamically loads all backends (Closes: #896838).
> Thanks to Paul Gevers for the report and the idea.
>   * debian/tests/control (Restrictions): Define to allow-stderr.
> (Depends): Remove shunit2 and file; add libgnustep-base-dev.
>   * debian/tests/load_backends.m:
>   * debian/tests/GNUmakefile: New files.

✓

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#897194: RFS: gnustep-back/0.26.2-4

2018-04-29 Thread Yavor Doganov 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gnustep-back".

 * Package name: gnustep-back
   Version : 0.26.2-4
   Upstream Author : Fred Kiefer ,
 Adam Fedor ,
 Alexander Malmberg ,
 Banlu Kemiyatorn  et al
 * URL : http://gnustep.org
 * License : LGPL-2+ (bundles), GPL-3+ (tools)
   Section : gnustep

It builds these binary packages:

gnustep-back-common - GNUstep GUI Backend - common files
gnustep-back0.26 - GNUstep GUI Backend
gnustep-back0.26-art - GNUstep GUI Backend (art)
gnustep-back0.26-cairo - GNUstep GUI Backend (cairo)
gnustep-back0.26-xlib - GNUstep GUI Backend (xlib)

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/gnustep-back

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

  dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnustep-back/gnustep-back_0.26.2-4.dsc

Git repository:

  https://salsa.debian.org/gnustep-team/gnustep-back

Changes since the last upload:

  * debian/templates/control.m4: Let gnustep-backN provide gnustep-back so
that a backend can always be installed without specifying the version
(Closes: #892241).  Thanks Josh Freeman for the report.
(Standards-Version): Bump to 4.1.4 (no changes required).
  * debian/control: Regenerate.
  * debian/tests/file-tests: Replace dumb file tests with a minimalistic
test program which dynamically loads all backends (Closes: #896838).
Thanks to Paul Gevers for the report and the idea.
  * debian/tests/control (Restrictions): Define to allow-stderr.
(Depends): Remove shunit2 and file; add libgnustep-base-dev.
  * debian/tests/load_backends.m:
  * debian/tests/GNUmakefile: New files.

Bug#897193: RFS: ddccontrol-db/20171217-2

2018-04-29 Thread Miroslav Kravec 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal [important for RC bugs, wishlist for new packages]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ddccontrol-db"

 * Package name: ddccontrol-db
   Version : 20171217-2
   Upstream Author : Miroslav Kravec 
 * URL : https://github.com/ddccontrol/ddccontrol-db
 * License : GNU General Public License v2.0
   Section : utils

It builds those binary packages:

ddccontrol-db - monitor database for ddccontrol

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/ddccontrol-db


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/ddccontrol-db/ddccontrol-db_20171217-2.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

* debian/changelog: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace
* debian/compat, debian/control: bump debhelper to 11
* debian/control: update standards to 4.1.4
* debian/copyright: fix copyright-refers-to-symlink-license
* debian/rules: fix debian-rules-is-dh_make-template

Kind regards,
Miroslav Kravec

Bug#897055: marked as done (RFS: xml2/0.5-2 [QA])

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:00:10 +0200
with message-id <20180429190010.ki4cowo7wyuby...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897055: RFS: xml2/0.5-2 [QA]
has caused the Debian Bug report #897055,
regarding RFS: xml2/0.5-2 [QA]
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.)


-- 
897055: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897055
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for package "xml2" as a QA upload. The
main point is the migration of Vcs fields from Alioth to Salsa:

 * Package name: xml2
   Version : 0.5-2
 * URL : [defunct]
 * License : GPLv2
   Section : utils


  It builds those binary packages:

xml2  - Convert between XML, HTML, CSV and a line-oriented format


  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/xml2


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xml2/xml2_0.5-2.dsc


  Salsa packaging repository:

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/xml2.git


  Changes since the last upload:

   xml2 (0.5-2) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * QA upload.
   * d/control: Use Salsa repo for Vcs fields.
   * d/rules: Use "dh_missing --fail-missing".
   * Bump Standards-Version to 4.1.4 (no changes needed).
   * Bump debhelper compat to v11.


  Regards,
   Boyuan Yang
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 01:05:51AM +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote:
>  * Package name: xml2
>Version : 0.5-2

>xml2 (0.5-2) unstable; urgency=medium
>  .
>* QA upload.
>* d/control: Use Salsa repo for Vcs fields.
>* d/rules: Use "dh_missing --fail-missing".
>* Bump Standards-Version to 4.1.4 (no changes needed).
>* Bump debhelper compat to v11.

✓

> Besides, it would be great if someone could help to delete the git repository 
> on
> Alioth platform ( scm.alioth.debian.org:/git/collab-maint/xml2.git )
> together with this upload.

✓


喵!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#896995: marked as done (RFS: ddccontrol/0.4.4-1)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:50:33 +0200
with message-id <20180429185033.3bybtnhsmhd4k...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#896995: RFS: ddccontrol/0.4.4-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #896995,
regarding RFS: ddccontrol/0.4.4-1
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.)


-- 
896995: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=896995
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ddccontrol"

 * Package name: ddccontrol
   Version : 0.4.4-1
   Upstream Author : Miroslav Kravec 
 * URL : https://github.com/ddccontrol/ddccontrol
 * License : GPL-2.0
   Section : utils

It builds those binary packages:

 ddccontrol - program to control monitor parameters
 gddccontrol - program to control monitor parameters (graphical interface)
 libddccontrol-dev - development files for ddccontrol
 libddccontrol0 - shared library for ddccontrol

To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/ddccontrol

Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/d/ddccontrol/ddccontrol_0.4.4-1.dsc

Changes since the last upload:

  * New upstream release (Closes: #888015)
  * debian/ddccontrol.install, debian/libddccontrol0.install:
update location of ddcpci binary (fixes binary-without-manpage),
install with library (ddcpci is used by the library)
  * debian/gddccontrol.lintian-overrides: add override for
desktop-command-not-in-package
  * debian/changelog, debian/control: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace
  * debian/control: bump standards version to 4.1.4
  * debian/rules: enable bindnow hardening, fixes lintian hardening-no-bindnow

Kind regards,
Miroslav Kravec
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 08:36:29PM +0200, Miroslav Kravec wrote:
>  * Package name: ddccontrol
>Version : 0.4.4-1

> Changes since the last upload:
> 
>   * New upstream release (Closes: #888015)
>   * debian/ddccontrol.install, debian/libddccontrol0.install:
> update location of ddcpci binary (fixes binary-without-manpage),
> install with library (ddcpci is used by the library)
>   * debian/gddccontrol.lintian-overrides: add override for
> desktop-command-not-in-package
>   * debian/changelog, debian/control: fix file-contains-trailing-whitespace
>   * debian/control: bump standards version to 4.1.4
>   * debian/rules: enable bindnow hardening, fixes lintian hardening-no-bindnow

✓

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Bug#897016: marked as done (RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-4)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:31:47 +0200
with message-id <20180429183146.iipoej2sclw3e...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897016: RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #897016,
regarding RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-4
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.)


-- 
897016: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897016
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

  Dear mentors,

  I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ncurses-hexedit"

 * Package name: ncurses-hexedit
   Version : 0.9.7+orig-4
   Upstream Author : Adam Rogoyski 
 * URL : http://www.rogoyski.com/adam/programs/hexedit/
 * License : GPL-2.0+
   Section : editors

  It builds this binary package:

ncurses-hexedit - Edit files/disks in hex, ASCII and EBCDIC

  To access further information about this package, please visit the following 
URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/ncurses-hexedit


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/ncurses-hexedit/ncurses-hexedit_0.9.7+orig-4.dsc

  Changes since the last upload:

  * Update build dependency to libncurses-dev [ncurses6].
  * Add machine-readable upstream metadata.
  * Indicate compliance with Debian Policy 4.1.4.


  Regards,
   Carlos Maddela
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:21:02PM +1000, Carlos Maddela wrote:
>  * Package name: ncurses-hexedit
>Version : 0.9.7+orig-4

>   Changes since the last upload:
> 
>   * Update build dependency to libncurses-dev [ncurses6].
>   * Add machine-readable upstream metadata.
>   * Indicate compliance with Debian Policy 4.1.4.

✓

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ 
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Certified airhead; got the CT scan to prove that!
⠈⠳⣄ --- End Message ---

Re: i386 and AMD architectures in debian/control

2018-04-29 Thread Geert Stappers 
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 07:58:59PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 02:46:52PM +0200, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> > 
> > It will run on an AMD architecture too (as is confirmed by a test.)
> The architecture is called amd64. It's not about the CPU vendor.
> 
> > and I want the package to be installable on an AMD architecture.
> > 
> > Can/Should I add the architecture AMD in debian/control to achieve this?

Yes.

> > Is this maybe unnecessary?

No.


> If the package contains i386 binaries its architecture should be i386.
> i386 packages are installable on amd64 if dpkg is configured to do soo.

Having
 Architecture: i386 amd64
will build only on those two architectures.

Having 
 Architecture: i386
wouldn't build on amd64


Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Leven en laten leven

Bug#897078: marked as done (RFS: fcitx-qt5/1.2.2-2)

2018-04-29 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Sun, 29 Apr 2018 18:56:25 +0200
with message-id <20180429165625.ho6ne4zoncj6p...@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#897078: RFS: fcitx-qt5/1.2.2-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #897078,
regarding RFS: fcitx-qt5/1.2.2-2
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.)


-- 
897078: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=897078
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-input-met...@lists.debian.org a...@debian.org
czc...@debian.org

  Dear mentors and debian-input-method team members,

  I am looking for a sponsor for team package "fcitx-qt5". This upload fixes the
"break" relationship of new fcitx5-module-quickphrase-editor package against the
old fcitx-module-quickphrase-editor together with other minor fixes.

  Besides, I am looking for a DD to grant me the Master Role on Salsa packaging
repository (https://salsa.debian.org/debian/fcitx-qt5) so that I could push the
commits onto Salsa. After that, it would be great if someone could
help to delete
the old packaging repository
(https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-ime/fcitx-qt5.git).

 * Package name: fcitx-qt5
   Version : 1.2.2-2
   Upstream Author : Weng Xuetian 
 * URL : https://github.com/fcitx/fcitx-qt5
 * License : GPL-2+
   Section : libs

  It builds those binary packages:

fcitx-frontend-qt5 - Free Chinese Input Toy of X - Qt5 IM Module frontend
 fcitx5-module-quickphrase-editor - Flexible Input Method Framework -
Quick Phrase editor module
 libfcitx-qt5-1 - Free Chinese Input Toy of X - D-Bus client libraries for Qt5
 libfcitx-qt5-data - Free Chinese Input Toy of X - data files for Qt5
integration
 libfcitx-qt5-dev - Free Chinese Input Toy of X - Devel files for libfcitx-qt5

  To access further information about this package, please visit the
following URL:

  https://mentors.debian.net/package/fcitx-qt5


  Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:

dget -x 
https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fcitx-qt5/fcitx-qt5_1.2.2-2.dsc

  The new git packaging repo on Salsa (not updated for now):

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/fcitx-qt5

  The old git packaging repo on Alioth (updated for 1.2.2-2):

https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-ime/fcitx-qt5.git

  Changes since the last upload:

fcitx-qt5 (1.2.2-2) unstable; urgency=medium--- End Message ---

Re: i386 and AMD architectures in debian/control was Re: Building a prospective 32 bit package on 64 bits.

2018-04-29 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin 
On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 02:46:52PM +0200, Albert van der Horst wrote:
> > > Running a AMD architecture Debian I run programs built for i386
> > > without
> > > giving it much thought.
> > > 
> > > Is it sufficient if an i386 package builds and tests properly on an
> > > AMD
> > > buster, or is it mandatory to
> > > install a i386 buster for testing?
> > Most our packages work on all architectures.
> 
> Sure but this question is about a package that is for one architecture only.
> 
> Let me phrase it more bluntly.
> I've a package for i386. 1) The reason is clear and unadvoidable.
> Its source is i386 assembler.
> 
> The question is:
> 
> It will run on an AMD architecture too (as is confirmed by a test.)
The architecture is called amd64. It's not about the CPU vendor.

> and I want the package to be installable on an AMD architecture.
> 
> Can/Should I add the architecture AMD in debian/control to achieve
> this? Is this maybe unnecessary?
If the package contains i386 binaries its architecture should be i386.
i386 packages are installable on amd64 if dpkg is configured to do soo.

-- 
WBR, wRAR


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#897102: libexif-gtk/0.4.0-2

2018-04-29 Thread Andreas Metzler 
On 2018-04-29 Hugh McMaster  wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 April 2018 10:11 PM, Andreas Metzler wrote:
[...]
> > 0.4.0-1 says "Switch to LGPL-2.1+ for libexif-gtk 0.4.0.". Is this
> > correct? While COPYING contains a copy of LGPL-2.1 only a single c/h
> > file (gtk-exif-util.h) has this license in its copyright header.

> The po files and tests/test-libexif-gtk.c are also licensed under
> LGPL-2.1.  I see your point, though. The other files are LGPL-2.
> However, all of those files have "either version 2 of the License, or
> (at your option) any later version" written in them, which would be
> okay.

> Having said that, it may be better to fix d/copyright to account for the
> mixed LGPL-2/2.1 files. What do you think? It's no problem for me to do.

That would be great. TIA.

cu Andreas
-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'

i386 and AMD architectures in debian/control was Re: Building a prospective 32 bit package on 64 bits.

2018-04-29 Thread Albert van der Horst 

Andrey Rahmatullin schreef op 2018-04-26 17:47:

Please don't start a new thread by replying to some existing email.


I hit "send" on a concept inadvertantly.
I also see some irritation about the poor phrasing of the concept
that steers you away from the actual question. My apologies.



Running a AMD architecture Debian I run programs built for i386 
without

giving it much thought.

Is it sufficient if an i386 package builds and tests properly on an 
AMD

buster, or is it mandatory to
install a i386 buster for testing?

Most our packages work on all architectures.


Sure but this question is about a package that is for one architecture 
only.


Let me phrase it more bluntly.
I've a package for i386. 1) The reason is clear and unadvoidable.
Its source is i386 assembler.

The question is:

It will run on an AMD architecture too (as is confirmed by a test.)
and I want the package to be installable on an AMD architecture.

Can/Should I add the architecture AMD in debian/control to achieve
this? Is this maybe unnecessary?

Groetjes Albert
--
Suffering is the prerogative of the strong, the weak -- perish.
Albert van der Horst

1) Not hypothetical: lina.

Bug#897102: libexif-gtk/0.4.0-2

2018-04-29 Thread Andreas Metzler 
On 2018-04-29 Hugh McMaster  wrote:
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal

> Dear mentors and Debian PhotoTools Team,

> I am looking for a sponsor for a Team Upload of the package "libexif-gtk".

> Version 0.4.0-1 is is currently in Experimental and is ready to move into 
> Unstable.
[...]
> Changes since the last upload:
[...]
>   * Depend on libpango-1.0-0 instead of the transitional package
> libpango1.0-0 (Closes: #865170).
[...]

Nitpick (nice to have, no reason for a new upload on its own):
This changelog entry threw me, I was searching in vain for a related
source change.  "Rebuild against newer newer pango fixes dependency on
transitional package  (Closes: #865170)." would be a better.

0.4.0-1 says "Switch to LGPL-2.1+ for libexif-gtk 0.4.0.". Is this
correct? While COPYING contains a copy of LGPL-2.1 only a single c/h
file (gtk-exif-util.h) has this license in its copyright header.

cu Andreas
-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'