Processed: Re: Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> severity 813938 normal
Bug #813938 [kwin-common] kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect 
dependency name libkwinglutil7
Severity set to 'normal' from 'important'
> merge 813938 813701
Bug #813938 [kwin-common] kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect 
dependency name libkwinglutil7
Bug #813938 [kwin-common] kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect 
dependency name libkwinglutil7
Added tag(s) pending.
Bug #813701 [kwin-common] kwin-common: dependency error(s?) libkwinglutil7 >= 
4:5.4.0
Merged 813701 813938
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
813701: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813701
813938: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813938
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Diederik de Haas]

severity 813938 normal
merge 813938 813701
thanks

On Sunday 07 February 2016 09:50:59 Arthur Marsh wrote:
> Sorry, all I read in that reply was:
> "even with the fixed libkwinglutils7 package"
> 
> and the references didn't mention the libkwinglutil7 / libkwinglutils7
> issue in kwin-common.
> 
> If the dependency issue in kwin-common already has a fix committed,
> that's good, but I didn't read that in the reply to bug #813701.

I even linked the exact commit which fixed that issue in 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813701#10

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Diederik de Haas]

On Sunday 07 February 2016 08:15:35 Arthur Marsh wrote:
> Checking the depencies needed to install kwin-x11 from experimental, there
> is both a dependency on an unavailable libkinglutil7 package and an existing
> libkwinglutils7 package.

And how is this different from bug #813701 ?
Where I also responded that the fix was already committed?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#810436: libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0

[Diederik de Haas]

On Saturday 06 February 2016 14:35:56 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >Maybe the 'issue' is that libindi is the source package name?
> >Another explanation could be that there is a version 0.9.7-1 for
> >libindi0b and libindi-dev on hurd-i386.
> 
> That would do it.  You might want to file a architecture specific RM bug to
> clear it up.

I don't even have a remote clue how to go about that and against which 
package, so I'll leave that up to others who do understand that.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Arthur Marsh]

Diederik de Haas wrote on 07/02/16 08:33:

On Sunday 07 February 2016 08:15:35 Arthur Marsh wrote:

Checking the depencies needed to install kwin-x11 from experimental, there
is both a dependency on an unavailable libkinglutil7 package and an existing
libkwinglutils7 package.


And how is this different from bug #813701 ?
Where I also responded that the fix was already committed?



Sorry, all I read in that reply was:

"even with the fixed libkwinglutils7 package"

and the references didn't mention the libkwinglutil7 / libkwinglutils7 
issue in kwin-common.


If the dependency issue in kwin-common already has a fix committed, 
that's good, but I didn't read that in the reply to bug #813701.


What I took from your response to bug #813701 was that kscreenlocker was 
still in new.


When I made the report that became bug #813938, kscreenlocker was in 
experimental but the dependency issue of libkwinglutil7 / 
libkwinglutils7 in kwin-common still existed and no bug reports were 
found by reportbug for kwin-common.


Arthur.

Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Arthur Marsh]

Package: kwin-common
Version: 4:5.5.4-1
Severity: important

Dear Maintainer,

*** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***

   * What led up to the situation?

Checking the depencies needed to install kwin-x11 from experimental, there
is both a dependency on an unavailable libkinglutil7 package and an existing
libkwinglutils7 package.

So it appears that either the dependency was listed with an incorrect name.

   * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
 ineffective)?
   * What was the outcome of this action?
   * What outcome did you expect instead?

*** End of the template - remove these template lines ***


-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.5.0-rc2+ (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_AU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)

Bug#813938: kwin-common: package in experimental has an incorrect dependency name libkwinglutil7

[Arthur Marsh]

Diederik de Haas wrote on 07/02/16 10:09:

severity 813938 normal
merge 813938 813701
thanks

On Sunday 07 February 2016 09:50:59 Arthur Marsh wrote:

Sorry, all I read in that reply was:
"even with the fixed libkwinglutils7 package"

and the references didn't mention the libkwinglutil7 / libkwinglutils7
issue in kwin-common.

If the dependency issue in kwin-common already has a fix committed,
that's good, but I didn't read that in the reply to bug #813701.


I even linked the exact commit which fixed that issue in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813701#10



OK, https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=813701#10 wasn't 
sent to my email address, only to:


 813...@bugs.debian.org, cont...@bugs.debian.org

Anyway, it's good that the fix had already been committed.

Thanks for your patience.

Arthur.

Bug#803813: ffmpegthumbs: FTBFS with FFmpeg 2.9

[Andreas Cadhalpun]

Control: forwarded -1 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126992/

Hi Maximiliano,

On 05.02.2016 11:20, Maximiliano Curia wrote:
> On 07/01/16 23:42, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> I'm wondering what the status of this bug is:
> 
>>  * Are you aware of the patch I provided?
> Sorry, I'm still trying to catch up from the holidays vacations.

I see.

>>  * Do you plan an upload soon?
> ffmpegthumbs 15.12.1 was uploaded to experimental together with all the rest
> of the kde applications, but it can be uploaded to unstable at any time.
> The patch is now commited in the git repository.
> 
>>  * Is upstream aware of the problem?
> I've just forwarded your patch as a new review request here:
> https://marc.info/?l=kde-multimedia=145466658009944=2

Thanks for committing the patch and forwarding upstream.
Have you done any runtime-testing?
I'm asking since I don't know how to do that and the patch isn't trivial.

Best regards,
Andreas

Processed: Re: Bug#803813: ffmpegthumbs: FTBFS with FFmpeg 2.9

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> forwarded -1 https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126992/
Bug #803813 [ffmpegthumbs] ffmpegthumbs: FTBFS with FFmpeg 2.9
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126992/'.

-- 
803813: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=803813
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#810436: libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0

[Diederik de Haas]

On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:23:27 +0100 Maximiliano Curia  
wrote:
> Version: 0.9.8-4
> 
> On 08/01/16 19:37, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Package: libindi
> > Version: 0.9.7-1
> > Severity: wishlist
> >
> > libindi has a build-depends on libusb-dev. A few years ago upstream
> > has released a new major version libusb 1.0 with a different API which
> > aims to fix design deficiencies with USB 2.0 and 3.0 in mind.
> This was changed some time ago, the 0.9.8.1-4  version was uploaded in
> 2014-07-18, is there any remaining part of libindi 0.9.7 hidden somewhere?

Maybe the 'issue' is that libindi is the source package name?
Another explanation could be that there is a version 0.9.7-1 for libindi0b and 
libindi-dev on hurd-i386.

HTH,
  Diederik

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#810436: libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0

[Scott Kitterman]

On February 6, 2016 2:31:02 PM EST, Diederik de Haas  
wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:23:27 +0100 Maximiliano Curia
> 
>wrote:
>> Version: 0.9.8-4
>> 
>> On 08/01/16 19:37, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > Package: libindi
>> > Version: 0.9.7-1
>> > Severity: wishlist
>> >
>> > libindi has a build-depends on libusb-dev. A few years ago upstream
>> > has released a new major version libusb 1.0 with a different API
>which
>> > aims to fix design deficiencies with USB 2.0 and 3.0 in mind.
>> This was changed some time ago, the 0.9.8.1-4  version was uploaded
>in
>> 2014-07-18, is there any remaining part of libindi 0.9.7 hidden
>somewhere?
>
>Maybe the 'issue' is that libindi is the source package name?
>Another explanation could be that there is a version 0.9.7-1 for
>libindi0b and 
>libindi-dev on hurd-i386.

That would do it.  You might want to file a architecture specific RM bug to 
clear it up.

Scott K

Bug#810436: marked as done (libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sat, 06 Feb 2016 23:27:27 -0300
with message-id <3780750.IMxBPOt63T@luna>
and subject line Reclosing with proper version
has caused the Debian Bug report #810436,
regarding libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0
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.)


-- 
810436: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=810436
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libindi
Version: 0.9.7-1
Severity: wishlist

Dear Maintainer,

libindi has a build-depends on libusb-dev. A few years ago upstream
has released a new major version libusb 1.0 with a different API which
aims to fix design deficiencies with USB 2.0 and 3.0 in mind.

The old libusb 0.1 package is not supported upstream anymore and should
be considered deprecated.

If libindi supports the new libusb 1.0 library, please consider
switching the build-depends from libusb-dev to libusb-1.0-0-dev. If not
please inform upstream that porting the software to the new API is
recommended.

Thanks,
Aurelien

-- 
Aurelien Jarno  GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 0.9.8.1-4

The version Maxy used had a typo.

Diederik is going to file a bug to remove the old binary from hurd-i386.

-- 
La ciencia sin la religión es renga, la religión sin la ciencia es ciega.
 Albert Einstein

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
--- End Message ---

Bug#810436: libindi: please switch to libusb 1.0

[Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer]

On Saturday 06 February 2016 21:03:05 Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Saturday 06 February 2016 14:35:56 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > >Maybe the 'issue' is that libindi is the source package name?
> > >Another explanation could be that there is a version 0.9.7-1 for
> > >libindi0b and libindi-dev on hurd-i386.
> > 
> > That would do it.  You might want to file a architecture specific RM bug
> > to
> > clear it up.
> 
> I don't even have a remote clue how to go about that and against which
> package, so I'll leave that up to others who do understand that.

Take a look at  and then use 
reportbug against ftp.debian.org, as version 0.9.7-1 is in unstable as 
rmadison outputs:

$ rmadison libindi
libindi| 0.9.1-2   | oldstable   | source
libindi| 0.9.7-1   | unstable| source
libindi| 0.9.8.1-5.1   | stable  | source
libindi| 0.9.8.1-5.1   | stable-kfreebsd | source
libindi| 1.0.0-4   | unstable| source
libindi| 1.1.0-1   | testing | source
libindi| 1.1.0-1   | unstable| source

Feel free to send me a copy of the bug so I can track it (reportbug will ask 
you if you want to send copies).

Happy hacking!

-- 
I am two fools, I know, for loving, and for saying so.
  John Donne

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.