Bug#638067: transition: evolution
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 23:54:14 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: I think you can schedule the binNMUs for totem, with dep-wait on libgdata-dev = 0.8. (As discussed on IRC, opensync is not necessary since the version in testing doesn’t have evolution support.) Scheduled. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110820083827.gc2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr
Re: Bug#637384: pu: package lintian/2.4.3+squeeze1
On 2011-08-18 01:09, Raphael Geissert wrote: Adam D. Barratt wrote: As discussed on IRC, there's a few oddities in the final diff due to dpkg-source's default ignore regex for files in tarballs; specifically: Last time I checked it was still debclean's fault and not dpkg. So, repeating what AFAIR I've already said more than once: don't use debclean to build lintian. Cheers, I did not use debclean, so that is not to blame for this issue. :) dpkg-source by default (in Squeeze) includes these files in its tar ignore pattern; I suspect dpkg-source got that upgrade sometime after the 2.4.3 lintian release, but I have not researched it. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e4f7400.9080...@thykier.net
Bug#638567: marked as done (RM: motion/3.2.12-2)
Your message dated Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:44:58 +0200 with message-id 20110820084458.gd2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr and subject line Re: Bug#638567: RM: motion/3.2.12-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #638567, regarding RM: motion/3.2.12-2 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.) -- 638567: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638567 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm FTBFS since four months w/o maintainer followup. -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 22:10:42 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm FTBFS since four months w/o maintainer followup. Hint added. Cheers, Julien ---End Message---
Bug#638568: marked as done (RM: jugglemaster/0.4-5)
Your message dated Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:45:14 +0200 with message-id 20110820084514.ge2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr and subject line Re: Bug#638568: RM: jugglemaster/0.4-5 has caused the Debian Bug report #638568, regarding RM: jugglemaster/0.4-5 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.) -- 638568: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638568 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm FTBFS since two months w/o maintainer followup. -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 22:13:09 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm FTBFS since two months w/o maintainer followup. Hint added. Cheers, Julien ---End Message---
Bug#638463: marked as done (RM: tulip/3.1.2-2.3)
Your message dated Sat, 20 Aug 2011 11:04:46 +0200 with message-id 20110820090446.gf2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr and subject line Re: Bug#638463: RM: tulip/3.1.2-2.3 has caused the Debian Bug report #638463, regarding RM: tulip/3.1.2-2.3 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.) -- 638463: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638463 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Please remove tulip from testing. Around a half year, different RC bugs (FTBFS; #556508, #615687, #616282, #638169) are open and nothing seems to be happen there. It is also heavily outdated. It currently breaks the transition of glew. The only dependency is on the binary package tulip by the package libdeps-renderer-tulip-perl (source package deps). The removal of the deps package is handled in another removal request. ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 15:24:25 +0200, Clara Gnos wrote: Please remove tulip from testing. Around a half year, different RC bugs (FTBFS; #556508, #615687, #616282, #638169) are open and nothing seems to be happen there. It is also heavily outdated. On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 15:24:27 +0200, Clara Gnos wrote: Please remove deps from testing. It is the only package (libdeps-renderer- tulip-perl) which has a dependency on tulip and therefore also prevents the transition of glew. Removal hint added. Cheers, Julien ---End Message---
Bug#638464: marked as done (RM: deps/0.13-1.1)
Your message dated Sat, 20 Aug 2011 11:04:46 +0200 with message-id 20110820090446.gf2...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr and subject line Re: Bug#638463: RM: tulip/3.1.2-2.3 has caused the Debian Bug report #638464, regarding RM: deps/0.13-1.1 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.) -- 638464: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=638464 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Please remove deps from testing. It is the only package (libdeps-renderer- tulip-perl) which has a dependency on tulip and therefore also prevents the transition of glew. It has a low popcount (~60) and no rdeps. This was also the reason why it was removed in 2008 from testing http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/deps/news/20080904T163917Z.html It seems that it is a possible solution because it was suggested by Phillipp Kern. ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 15:24:25 +0200, Clara Gnos wrote: Please remove tulip from testing. Around a half year, different RC bugs (FTBFS; #556508, #615687, #616282, #638169) are open and nothing seems to be happen there. It is also heavily outdated. On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 15:24:27 +0200, Clara Gnos wrote: Please remove deps from testing. It is the only package (libdeps-renderer- tulip-perl) which has a dependency on tulip and therefore also prevents the transition of glew. Removal hint added. Cheers, Julien ---End Message---
Bug#624807: libav 0.7 transition
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 08:07:00AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 05:10:38 (CEST), Andres Mejia wrote: Has there been any work on transitioning to libav-0.7? The package itself is ready since *May*, and in the meantime the transition has already started in Ubuntu oneiric. In this course, a number of build fixes in form of patches has been forwarded to debian for inclusion in unstable. In that sense, yes, there has been work done on the transition. However, I'm still waiting for the green light to upload the current package from experimental to unstable. As requested by Julien I'll rebuilt all reverse deps against libav 0.7.1 from experimental: The following packages FTBFS when built against libav/0.7.1. The bugs have been usertagged with the user j...@debian.org and the tag libav07: k9copy (638248) vxl (638251) moc (638250) gnash (638249) ffmpeg2theora (638245) paraview (638246) picard (638244) kdemultimedia (638241) libphash (638243) smilutils (638242) sox (638206) avbin (632133) guvcview (638323) xine-lib (628197) lynkeos.app (638535) k3b (638546) miro (638550) xmms2 (638552) kino (634214) gmerlin-encoders (638556) imageshack-uploader (633904) vtk (638559) electricsheep (638560) aqualung (632128) performous (637105) kradio4 (638563) gmerlin-avdecoder (638564) avifile (638566) idjc (638569) I've set patch tags if a patch already exists. The following packages have been fixed in experimental: dvbcut mplayer gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg ffms2 The following packages have successfully compiled against libav from experimental: libvalhalla mpd zoneminder amide qutecom minidlna qmmp linphone chromaprint spek cherokee netgen wxsvg renpy alsa-plugins unicap gmic dvswitch vlc amarok lebiniou cmus mlt opencv lives xjadeo libomxil-bellagio freecad x264 forked-daapd audacious-plugins audacity libquicktime taoframework blender ffmpegthumbnailer gimp-gap kdenlive The following packages are not in testing (usually kept out due to other FTBFS bugs). I couldn't test them. In some cases a patch for libav07 compatibility exists. freej (4 RC bugs, unmaintained, probably best to be removed) ffmpeg-php (patch available at #586550) gdcm libavg gnusound (FTBFS: #622013) ktoon (FTBFS: #625121) moon (multiple FTBFS, filed archive RM bug) mediatomb (multiple FTBFS) motion (FTBFS: #621962) (removal pending) jugglemaster (FTBFS) (removal pending) igstk The following packages FTBFS, but are still in testing. Likewise I couldn't test their libav compatibility. Maybe they should be removed from testing as well to have a clean status? elmerfem (FTBFS: #638214) acoustid-fingerprinter (FTBFS: #634564) openscenegraph (#638210, #638294) Cheers, Moritz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110820093903.GA24485@pisco.westfalen.local
NEW changes in oldproposedupdates
Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_amd64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_alpha.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_arm.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_armel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_hppa.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_i386.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_ia64.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_mips.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_mipsel.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_powerpc.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_s390.changes ACCEPT Processing changes file: xulrunner_1.9.0.19-13_sparc.changes ACCEPT -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1qum13-0004ja...@franck.debian.org
Processed: unblock 637809 with 634141
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: unblock 637809 with 634141 Bug #637809 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.14 Was blocked by: 631045 637602 628507 634531 628503 628499 636656 634397 636132 628501 636762 634141 629255 636651 628500 628505 Removed blocking bug(s) of 637809: 634141 thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637809: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637809 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.13138662473135.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: block 637809 with 634141
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: block 637809 with 634141 Bug #637809 [release.debian.org] transition: perl 5.14 Was blocked by: 628507 637602 631045 628499 628503 634531 636656 634397 636132 628501 636762 629255 636651 628500 628505 Added blocking bug(s) of 637809: 634141 thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 637809: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=637809 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.13138663013506.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#634052: Re: Bug#634052: Please binNMU libglew1.5 using packages against libglew1.6
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:34:14PM +0200, Clara Gnos wrote: On Wednesday 17 August 2011 08:49:59 Julien Cristau wrote: A couple failures so far that will need a sourceful upload or removal... On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 21:33:51 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: nmu sofa-framework_1.0~beta4-5.1 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against libglew1.6' Obsolete build-dep on libqwt5-qt4-dev The patch already entered the repository nmu tulip_3.1.2-2.3 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against libglew1.6' Conflicting build-dependencies. I think this one will be hard. It has many RC bugs (#556508, #615687, #616282, #638169) since ~a half year and cannot be removed easily from testing due to the reverse dependency of tulip - libdeps-renderer-tulip-perl (source package deps). Unfortunately, both packages are maintained by the same guy and are in a rather suboptimal shape. At least the second one has no reverse dependencies. I have started working on packaging version 3.6.0, but it takes more time than expected. Upstream switched to cmake with no apparent switch to replace 3rd-party libs it ships a copy of with system ones. 3.1.2 was dropped from testing already, so this should not block the transition. Best regards, -- Yann -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110820234210.gc3...@home.lan
