Processed: Re: Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.40-1~deb8u1

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> retitle -1 jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.40-1~deb8u1
Bug #821239 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1
Changed Bug title to 'jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.40-1~deb8u1' from 
'jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1'.

-- 
821239: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821239
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.40-1~deb8u1

[Robert James Clay]

Control: retitle -1 jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.40-1~deb8u1

On Sunday, May 15, 2016 09:58:06 AM Julien Cristau wrote:
> The usual sequence is *not* unstable -> testing -> jessie-pu.  The usual
> sequence is to fix the bugs in unstable/testing, and then separately
> cherry-pick the fixes that warrant the stable update to the stable
> version of the package,

  Thank you for clarifying that.  (My mistake; I was going too much by the 
last time I did something like this, which was an upstream issue and not a 
packaging issue...) 


> so in this case that would mean preparing a ledgersmb 1.3.40-1+deb8u1 with
> the fixes you want to see in stable, and not the unrelated upstream bits.

  I'll take care of that and then update the bug again.





RJ Clay
j...@rocasa.us

Re: 8.5 and 7.11 planning

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Sat, 2016-05-14 at 20:20 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> with wheezy EOL, we should get a final point release out.  In order to
> avoid version skew, it'd be good to have a jessie point release around
> the same time, so if that works for everyone let's do them both on the
> same Saturday again.
> 
> Some suggested dates:
> 
> June 4th/5th
> June 11th/12th

Both look fine.

> June 18th/19th

Not sure about the Sunday, but the Saturday should be okay.

> June 25th/26th

Fine for me.

Regards,

Adam

Bug#823609: jessie-pu: package openssl/1.0.1t-1+deb8u1

[Kurt Roeckx]

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 08:09:06PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-05-11 at 23:48 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > control: retitle -1 jessie-pu: package openssl/1.0.1t-1+deb8u2
> > 
> > On 2016-05-06 16:07:15 [+0200], Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > 
> > > So I've prepared an update for jessie with version
> > 
> > I prepared an u2 which updates some certs for the testsuite. The old
> > expired yesterday and so the testsuite fails and the package won't
> > build. New ones are valid till May 26 17:28:31 2023.
> 
> Please go ahead.

1.0.1t-1+deb8u2 has been uploaded.


Kurt

Processed: block 797074 with 824426

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

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

> block 797074 with 824426
Bug #797074 [release.debian.org] transition: libical2
797074 was blocked by: 822572 822565 824092 822569
797074 was blocking: 797003
Added blocking bug(s) of 797074: 824426
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
797074: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=797074
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#821208: marked as done ((mini)transition: perl 5.22.2)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 15 May 2016 22:35:23 +0300
with message-id <20160515193523.GA8400@estella.local.invalid>
and subject line Re: Bug#821208: (mini)transition: perl 5.22.2
has caused the Debian Bug report #821208,
regarding (mini)transition: perl 5.22.2
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.)


-- 
821208: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821208
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Perl 5.22.2 is to be released on Sunday 24th April or so.
A release candidate is currently in experimental. This
is a stable update with just bugfix changes, see
http://perldoc.perl.org/perlpolicy.html#MAINTENANCE-BRANCHES for the
upstream policy.

As usual with a Perl minor release, four packages will need a binNMU:
 libpar-packer-perl
 libdevel-cover-perl
 libclass-xsaccessor-perl
 libcommon-sense-perl

Also, libmodule-corelist-perl and libperl-apireference-perl will need
sourceful uploads. I'll take care of the former unless somebody in
pkg-perl beats me to it. The latter will start to FTBFS until upstream
adds support for 5.22.2, but it can be removed from testing temporarily
if necessary.

As you can see, this is a very small transition. Please let us know if
we can upload to unstable straight away when 5.22.2 is released, or if
we should hold off for some reason.

Ben file (maybe):

title = "perl5.22.2";
is_affected = .depends ~ /perl (<< 5.22/
is_good = .depends ~ "perl (<< 5.22.3~)"
is_bad  = .depends ~ "perl (<< 5.22.2~)"

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

Kernel: Linux 4.5.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fi_FI.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 10:50:35AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 16/04/16 19:36, Niko Tyni wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > 
> > Perl 5.22.2 is to be released on Sunday 24th April or so.

> > As you can see, this is a very small transition. Please let us know if
> > we can upload to unstable straight away when 5.22.2 is released, or if
> > we should hold off for some reason.
> 
> You can just go ahead. Thanks.

As perl_5.22.2-1 has been in testing for a week now, I think this
transition is finished. So I'm taking the liberty of closing this.

Thanks for your work,
-- 
NIko Tyni   nt...@debian.org--- End Message ---

Bug#823609: jessie-pu: package openssl/1.0.1t-1+deb8u1

[Adam D. Barratt]

On Wed, 2016-05-11 at 23:48 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> control: retitle -1 jessie-pu: package openssl/1.0.1t-1+deb8u2
> 
> On 2016-05-06 16:07:15 [+0200], Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> 
> > So I've prepared an update for jessie with version
> 
> I prepared an u2 which updates some certs for the testsuite. The old
> expired yesterday and so the testsuite fails and the package won't
> build. New ones are valid till May 26 17:28:31 2023.

Please go ahead.

Regards,

Adam

Re: 8.5 and 7.11 planning

[Ana Guerrero Lopez]

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 08:20:28PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> with wheezy EOL, we should get a final point release out.  In order to
> avoid version skew, it'd be good to have a jessie point release around
> the same time, so if that works for everyone let's do them both on the
> same Saturday again.
> 
> Some suggested dates:
> 
> June 4th/5th
> June 11th/12th
> June 18th/19th
> June 25th/26th

Any of these weekends is OK for the publicity team.

Re: 8.5 and 7.11 planning

[Cyril Brulebois]

Julien Cristau  (2016-05-14):
> with wheezy EOL, we should get a final point release out.  In order to
> avoid version skew, it'd be good to have a jessie point release around
> the same time, so if that works for everyone let's do them both on the
> same Saturday again.
> 
> Some suggested dates:
> 
> June 4th/5th
> June 11th/12th
> June 18th/19th
> June 25th/26th

No preferences here (probably busy all of June, but will try to make
room for this).


KiBi.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#824366: marked as done (nmu: gnome-todo_3.20.2-1)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 15 May 2016 16:01:55 +0200
with message-id <20160515140155.gf2...@betterave.cristau.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#824366: nmu: gnome-todo_3.20.2-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #824366,
regarding nmu: gnome-todo_3.20.2-1
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.)


-- 
824366: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=824366
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

Hi,

gnome-todo had a sourceful upload while the libical transition is
ongoing and the amd64 build was done in an outdated build environment,
so it picked up a dependency on the old libical1a lib.
Please schedule a new binNMU on amd64

Thanks,
Michael

nmu gnome-todo_3.20.2-1 . amd64 . unstable . -m "rebuild against libical2"

-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (200, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.5.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 03:19:23 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:

> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
> 
> Hi,
> 
> gnome-todo had a sourceful upload while the libical transition is
> ongoing and the amd64 build was done in an outdated build environment,
> so it picked up a dependency on the old libical1a lib.
> Please schedule a new binNMU on amd64
> 
> Thanks,
> Michael
> 
> nmu gnome-todo_3.20.2-1 . amd64 . unstable . -m "rebuild against libical2"
> 
Scheduled.

Cheers,
Julien--- End Message ---

Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1

[Julien Cristau]

Control: tag -1 + moreinfo

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:10:44 -0400, Robert James Clay wrote:

> On Friday, April 22, 2016 06:32:15 PM Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> > Control: tag -1 moreinfo
> > 
> > On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 06:52:45PM -0400, Robert James Clay wrote:
> > > Please accept ledgersmb_1.3.47-1~deb8u1 for the next Jessie point release.
> > > It resolves the issues with the current version of ledgersmb in 'jessie'
> > > (1.3.40-1) of the package failing to complete an install without errors.
> > Could you expand on the details please? The proposed patch is 139K and:
> > 
> >  97 files changed, 1286 insertions(+), 623 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Quite a lot, and the changelog includes words like "New upstream release"
> > which immediately rings alarm bells.
> 
> Admittedly, the upstream changes come to about 70% of the diff but all of 
> those changes between LedgerSMB v1.3.40 and v1.3.47 were bug fixes, not 
> feature 
> changes (which didn't happen until the now released but not yet uploaded to 
> Debian v1.4.x series), and were unrelated to the issues with the package 
> installation errors. And of the upstream versions between those two, only 
> v1.3.46-1 was uploaded to Debian and that also turned out to have an package 
> installation error, albeit not one as serious as with the 1.3.40-1 package.  
> The only way I can see to avoid all that is by creating a 1.3.40-2 package 
> for 
> jessie-pu, and backporting the packaging changes as necessary but newer 
> upstream versions have already been uploaded so such a package version would 
> not be able to go through the usual sequence of unstable -> testing -> jessie-
> pu. 
> 
The usual sequence is *not* unstable -> testing -> jessie-pu.  The usual
sequence is to fix the bugs in unstable/testing, and then separately
cherry-pick the fixes that warrant the stable update to the stable
version of the package, so in this case that would mean preparing a
ledgersmb 1.3.40-1+deb8u1 with the fixes you want to see in stable, and
not the unrelated upstream bits.

Cheers,
Julien

Processed: Re: Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tag -1 + moreinfo
Bug #821239 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1
Added tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
821239: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821239
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> tag -1 - moreinfo
Bug #821239 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
821239: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821239
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#821239: jessie-pu: package ledgersmb/1.3.47-1~deb8u1

[Robert James Clay]

Control: tag -1 - moreinfo

Almost three weeks without a follow-up to my response to Jonathan, so I'm 
assuming that the 'moreinfo' tag needs to be removed so that my response will 
be reviewed.


Regards,
   Robert James Clay
   j...@rocasa.us



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