Bug#718511: transition: mbt
On 09/12/2013 07:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 16:52:54 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: But anyway the big thing that still needs to happen AFAICS is fixing the ucto dependency of frog. This can either be fixed by reuploading ucto similar to the others or changing frog's build dependency. Ping Joost? Packages needing care have been NMUed with maintainer's approval so the migration to testing of all involved packages can happen in a couple of days. Cheers Luk -- 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/5232408a.4050...@debian.org
Bug#706798: transition: Libav 9
On 09/11/2013 06:02 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 05:06:03PM +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Hi, two more testing removals related to the libav9 transition: - libavg 1.7.1-3 fails to build for unrelated boost reasons. Popcon is virtually non-existant. - imageshack-uploader 2.2+hg20100408.d802dea89428-5.1 patch is available for libav9, but FTBFS for weird qmake reasons. Popcon is marginal. Removal hints added. Cheers Luk -- 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/5230a1cb.1010...@debian.org
Bug#722262: Packages removed from testing when taken over by another source in sid
On 09/09/2013 11:39 PM, Jérôme Vouillon wrote: On 09/09/2013 17:03, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 2013-09-09 15:44, Jérôme Vouillon wrote: So, basically, when the binary packages produced by some source package are all taken over by another package, these binaries will usually be automatically removed from testing some time before the new version of the binaries are ready. And I don't really see what the maintainer of the packages should do to avoid that. A way to avoid that is to first start depending on the binary package one will take over, have that migrated to testing, before really taking it over AFAICS. Cheers Luk -- 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/522ea74f.8010...@debian.org
Bug#721582: transition: xbae
On 09/06/2013 06:37 PM, Nicholas Breen wrote: On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 11:42:55PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 20:16:20 -0700, Nicholas Breen wrote: I'd like to launch a very small transition for an ABI bump in src:xbae, which does have a renamed package (libxbae4 - libxbae4m). This is a sub-dependency of the openmotif transition, #708462. It should affect only three leaf packages: * paw and geant321 will need binNMUs [...] That sounds fine. Please ping this bug when xbae is built everywhere and the binNMUs have to be scheduled. xbae is now built and installed on all architectures. binNMUs are scheduled. Cheers Luk -- 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/522ace19.1090...@debian.org
Bug#721356: transition: telepathy-logger
On 09/07/2013 01:04 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote: Hi, Hi I've just uploaded telepathy-logger 0.8.0-2 in unstable. Could you please start the binNMU for the level 1 (empathy, gnome-shell and telepathy-logger-qt). They have been scheduled. Cheers Luk -- 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/522acf7c.6080...@debian.org
Bug#706798: transition: Libav 9
On 09/06/2013 02:37 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: On 2013-09-04 18:57:17, Julien Cristau wrote: On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 17:31:34 +0200, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: I've successfully rebuild acoustid-fingerprinter 0.6-1 against libav9. Can you trigger a binNMU? On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 17:47:29 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: kid3 also builds successfully. Could binNMUs for it be scheduled too? Both scheduled. Thank you. Could you also schedule binNMUs for vdr-plugin-xineliboutput please? Scheduled. Cheers Luk -- 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/522acff6.4020...@debian.org
Bug#706798: transition: Libav 9
On 09/06/2013 04:03 PM, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: The binNMUs for performous failed on ia64, mips(el) and s390(x) due to #721577. Could they be given back please? On mips(el) boost 1.54.0-3 is not yet installed, so a dep-wait is needed there. given back and dep-wait set. Cheers Luk -- 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/522ad1d1.7000...@debian.org
Re: Bug#706798: transition: Libav 9
On 09/06/2013 05:06 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Sebastian Ramacher sramac...@debian.org schrieb: #720814 motion Scheduled for removal from testing. Since libav dropped the (transitional?) ffmpeg package, we have some more packages that need to be ported / fixed: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=3Dffmpeg-removal;users=3Dp= kg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org avbin should be removed from testing as well. Only a single maintainer upload back in 2009 and only driven by NMUs since then. Also no revdeps and marginal popcon. As avbin is in the deferred queue fixing its RC bugs, it can stay for now. Cheers Luk -- 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/522ad380.3060...@debian.org
Bug#706798: transition: Libav 9
On 08/31/2013 02:54 PM, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:48:56AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: A number of packages are involved in both libav and libx264 transitions. Do you want to do both of them at the same time, or serialized? I've successfully rebuild vxl against current sid/libav9. Can you schedule a binNMU for vxl 1.17.0-5 ? The failed binNMUs given back. Cheers Luk -- 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/5221f040.10...@debian.org
Re: Bug#718511: transition: mbt
Hi Joost There are quite some syntax errors in the ben files you provided, like missing 'is_' and missing ';'. Apparently you did not wait for an answer and already uploaded all packages, that's not how it it supposed to work... But anyway the big thing that still needs to happen AFAICS is fixing the ucto dependency of frog. This can either be fixed by reuploading ucto similar to the others or changing frog's build dependency. Cheers Luk -- 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/52220346.2080...@debian.org
Re: Re: tiff 4.x (libtiff5) transition
Hi Jay Your plan looks good except that I think it would be better to have libtiff5-dev provide libtiff-dev and not introduce a proper libtiff-dev. Cheers Luk -- 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/5222053e.2040...@debian.org
Bug#706973: transition: audit
On 08/29/2013 11:52 PM, Laurent Bigonville wrote: Hi, Hi Could you also please rebuild the following package that are currently in experimental: Done. Cheers Luk -- 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/52204049.80...@debian.org
Bug#707018: Status of KDE 4.10 transition
On 08/26/2013 10:14 PM, Pino Toscano wrote: Alle domenica 25 agosto 2013, Adam D. Barratt ha scritto: On 2013-08-25 15:03, Luk Claes wrote: On 08/25/2013 02:25 PM, Pino Toscano wrote: So, given that things are getting stuck because of us, I'm getting prodded in different channels, different new transitions are coming up, and I don't have time/experience to debug the aforementioned issues, I (reluctantly, from my personal POV) ask to unblock kde4libs and let things migrate. (You most probably need to either age or remove from testing tagua.) Ok, unblocked kde4libs and aged tagua. I've also dropped my block hint. Thank you both for the help. With the hints Luk added this morning basically almost everything migrated, except some sources split of kdemultimedia: libkcddb and kio-audiocd; kdemultimedia should be hinted out of testing (will be RMed afterwards) as all the new sources conver its binaries (excluding kdemultimedia-dbg). I think with the above all should be complete; I will be able to confirm when the above bits are done. Ok, I have added an easy hint to migrate libkcddb and kio-audiocd while removing kdemultimedia, hope that helps. Cheers Luk -- 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/521c483b.9000...@debian.org
Bug#707018: Status of KDE 4.10 transition
On 08/27/2013 05:26 PM, Pino Toscano wrote: Alle martedì 27 agosto 2013, Luk Claes ha scritto: With the hints Luk added this morning basically almost everything migrated, except some sources split of kdemultimedia: libkcddb and kio-audiocd; kdemultimedia should be hinted out of testing (will be RMed afterwards) as all the new sources conver its binaries (excluding kdemultimedia-dbg). I think with the above all should be complete; I will be able to confirm when the above bits are done. Ok, I have added an easy hint to migrate libkcddb and kio-audiocd while removing kdemultimedia, hope that helps. Apparently it didn't help (and I specified the wrong source name, should be audiocd-kio and not kio-audiocd, sorry). Unfortunately it seems that kde-full still depends on kdemultimedia. So I have added the removal of meta-kde to the easy hint as it can come back easily when it gets fixed. Cheers Luk -- 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/521ceac6.2090...@debian.org
Bug#707018: Status of KDE 4.10 transition
On 08/25/2013 02:25 PM, Pino Toscano wrote: Hi, Alle lunedì 12 agosto 2013, Adam D. Barratt ha scritto: On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 20:08 +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: Alle domenica 11 agosto 2013, Adam D. Barratt ha scritto: On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 14:10 +0200, Pino Toscano wrote: That said, we are tackling few issues/regressions (mostly in the new pim stack), so could it be possible to hold the kde4libs migration with a block for now? (It should avoid all the rest to migrate too.) What's the current status here? Regarding the rest, I'm sure Sune could give an update of the status. In terms of RC bugs, the only issues I could see are a couple of FTBFS - tagua and kdenetwork. tagua is leaf, so could be removed until it's fixed. kdenetwork appears to be tied up with another transition but AIUI isn't part of the core transition so shouldn't block the majority of packages from migrating. IIRC kdenetwork is tied with kde-workspace. We're now hitting a month since the transition started in unstable. I'm wary that we don't let perfect be the enemy of perfectly reasonable here. It's early in the cycle and if any remaining issues aren't critical then could we get the current set of packages migrated and work on the final polishing afterwards? We had (and still have) regressions (from minor to potentially important as #717040) in kmail. I asked Sune to take a look at bugs, and he did nothing. So, given that things are getting stuck because of us, I'm getting prodded in different channels, different new transitions are coming up, and I don't have time/experience to debug the aforementioned issues, I (reluctantly, from my personal POV) ask to unblock kde4libs and let things migrate. (You most probably need to either age or remove from testing tagua.) Ok, unblocked kde4libs and aged tagua. Cheers Luk -- 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/521a0eae.3040...@zomers.be
Bug#706973: transition: audit
Hi Please start the transition and let this bug know when you uploaded to unstable. Cheers Luk -- 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/521a10a1.5070...@debian.org
Re: nmu: paw_1:2.14.04.dfsg.2-9
On 08/24/2013 06:39 PM, Lifeng Sun wrote: there was a bug in cernlib_20061220+dfsg3-3 that made paw FTBFS on all architectures except amd64, would you please binNMU paw against cernlib_20061220+dfsg3-4? nmu paw_1:2.14.04.dfsg.2-9 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against cernlib' Set a dep-wait on the new cernlib instead. Cheers Luk -- 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/5218e833.2060...@debian.org
Bug#707815: pu: package nfs-utils/1:1.2.6-4
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi Please accept the updated nfs-utils package for the next point release. It fixes some nasty bugs: one security issue (DNS reverse lookup), one segfault, one hang and one major NFSv4 regression (not using default domain). Thanks already! Luk -- 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/20130511125434.9899.52157.report...@station.luk.local
Bug#707815: pu: package nfs-utils/1:1.2.6-4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/11/2013 03:03 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Luk Claes l...@debian.org (11/05/2013): Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi, Please accept the updated nfs-utils package for the next point release. It fixes some nasty bugs: one security issue (DNS reverse lookup), one segfault, one hang and one major NFSv4 regression (not using default domain). where's the debdiff? Wherever reportbug did not put it. Please fix. Cheers Luk -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRjntCAAoJECEnNxubsjBiPoEQAJWsXnny4PElWolu6MrF+x73 LVlix+3tqgwf3HNKshYcp/tLWesYSusgHhdMd8UCMySyf/vOP1G/4c2l2/td5ESp gH/FB1dNCB9yLsCxfaa/OQiAiJVJtI0v33U4Ts6ni5hXpaTCw4F4NZcmACcBK9QT tieNTN1rFfjAVXQh//34md7JIZl5p3gqKX9QKNMyCmXB+LCXMO3fwaQ1ESmUdH1R lq1T0e3GOXMTJhesyDw/XGRw+QbaKxxyoK7DRWQPngnsQClNrf6A2lGXrN7cn0JZ Xsd/cltSxFnRXCoCDdl5CYfIYc0dLAR4DiJSEkeG+QyBSWwcQkFS+fuw7+F33lzX k6TJ9ufKo9jh0uO59e+iNIS5LKJxNOlrIFqBD0tjjHcONkyOQs1qD7FwMSAabi2E 74VE35l2ah29oH5ynwMz6oVxjghy/TSals/rotq4Ci+t7Dc3MmY0rahZZ/iAZL/2 Djz2QXPUy/iw+9Z6wrYYPajHP52cf7fMzgDTWLxe8Td15DO2jEnmNLGVrUelBNcz iB5AZwm3e9sf8LS5UdJ7fROxQFci4dKRvEsSZ35PCofQnBHVMu4l6csHjGqsxTXp rQPAfpVTAexskWbfEsWx//8D2mcpvB/1rqKkVZ4+smrwn2Hf0+zkRCm1LbZxuDmc 4U1fD+ZkZCppaYluBEAC =ZTkw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- 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/518e7b44.7010...@debian.org
Re: please unblock open-vm-tools (rc bugfix)
On 07/28/2012 02:35 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 13:51:31 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: Hi, open-vm-tools/2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-3 was uploaded to fix an RC bug in the package (#679886). It has now aged for 11 days without problems discovered. It must be noted that wheezy now contains -1. -2 was uploaded before the freeze and got an automatic unblock already. Its changes have been in unstable for a month and I'm using -3 on a wheezy machine for weeks to full satisfaction. The changes in -2 are out of scope for the freeze IMO. Can you be more specific please? Cheers Luk -- 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/5013de46.7040...@debian.org
Re: please unblock open-vm-tools (rc bugfix)
On 07/28/2012 02:57 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 14:42:46 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: On 07/28/2012 02:35 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: The changes in -2 are out of scope for the freeze IMO. Can you be more specific please? Specifically I mean the open-vm-tools 2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-2 upload, with this changelog entry: open-vm-tools (2:8.8.0+2012.05.21-724730-2) unstable; urgency=low * Switching to xz compression. * Loading modules through kmod instead of initscript. * Adding sleep during restart in initscript. * Removing old dpkg trigger for update-initramfs. * Updating GPL boilerplate in copyright file. * Calling dh_dkms with version argument (Closes: #677503). -- Daniel Baumann daniel.baum...@progress-technologies.net Sat, 30 Jun 2012 04:55:23 +0200 None of these items seem to be fixing RC or important bugs (at least if as I understood it the last one didn't actually fix the dkms package, so it needed a followup fix from Thijs. Specific enough? The first one became a release goal AFAICS. The second and the last were not enough, but are needed to fix the RC bug AFAICS. The sleep is a workaround as otherwise people need to refrain from using restart. Which is an unfiled RC bug AFAICT. The GPL one is not just the boilerplate, but also fixing the copyright of some files. Which certainly can be seen as RC AFAICT. So the only one I could see you argue about, is the one about the initramfs or am I missing something? Cheers Luk -- 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/5013e2d4.2060...@debian.org
Re: Communication
On 07/15/2012 04:59 PM, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Hi Luk, Hi KiBi I would be very pleased if you could communicate a little about your unblocks. Particularly, tasksel is a /slightly/ delicate package as we're trying to get d-i beta 1 out. Unblocking it without talking to anyone about it really isn't appreciated. I unblocked it as it fixes an RC bug and the diff seems reasonable. Should I comment to unblock for now? Cheers Luk -- 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/50033195.1000...@debian.org
Re: Please unblock acpi-support
Hi, while working on the dreaded dependency on consolekit (#665987) I found a much more severe problem (#680409) and fixed both. I don't think we should release without a fix to #680409 because that bug opens a whole can of worms. We've had a lot of problems with acpi-support and other power managers interfering with each other and I don't want to see those come up again. So please unblock. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4ffb3b55.4040...@debian.org
Re: Please unblock scim-chewing
Hi Ok, so that's basically changing build dependencies and a few minor fixes which I got confirmed got thorough testing, so unblocked. Cheers Luk On 07/07/2012 10:43 PM, Andrew Lee wrote: Dear release team, Sorry, I didn't notice that the scim package has been built with gtk3 when I fixing the FTBFS problem for scim-chewing earlier. Please let me know if I may do another upload to make it build with gtk3. The debdiff attached which make it build against gtk3 and fixing lintien warnings. Best regards, -Andrew 2012/7/6 Luk Claes l...@debian.org: On 07/05/2012 10:06 PM, Andrew Lee wrote: Dear release team, Please unblock scim-chewing 0.3.4-2 which has fixed a FTBFS problem #676009 without other changes. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4ff647fb.7050...@debian.org -- 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/4ff8f0ad.9060...@debian.org
Re: Please unblock scim-chewing
On 07/05/2012 10:06 PM, Andrew Lee wrote: Dear release team, Please unblock scim-chewing 0.3.4-2 which has fixed a FTBFS problem #676009 without other changes. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4ff647fb.7050...@debian.org
Re: The future (or non-future) of ia32-libs
On 06/22/2012 04:31 PM, Roger Leigh wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back Step 2: dpkg --add-architecture i386 apt-get update Step 3: dist-upgrade (ia32-libs, wine, ... is now installable) May I suggest that upon upgrade, we have a debconf message telling about it? We could add this in base-files or any essential package, probably one with some debconf messages already in would be a better pick. Instructions would show, IF ia32-libs old version is currently installed AND the --add-architecture i386 hasn't bee done. I know we have release notes, but some don't know about them or would simply not read them. A debconf message seem really appropriate IMO. Could we not introduce the concept of an upgrade script into apt-get which could be downloaded when you run apt-get update and then run during a dist-upgrade? This could handle automation of any housekeeping during the upgrade which would otherwise require manual work detailed in the release notes. Hmm, I'm not a fan of upgrade scripts at all. Either it's easy enough to automate in maintainerscripts or it should get careful review for the context in which it will be applied IMHO (which means the sysadmin can run the shipped script manually). For example, if the ia32-libs package is installed, this could automatically update dpkg and apt-get, then automatically add the architecture and update prior to continuing with the upgrade. It could also handle any additional work which needs doing before and after the upgrade of the whole distribution, or any particular package. i.e. handling any work which the package maintainer scripts can't safely or sensibly handle. Shipping scripts to do that would be a first step that makes much more sense than having it automated at this stage IMHO. Doesn't the Ubuntu updater tool do something like this already when it does a full upgrade between releases? There were quite some bugs with that tool AFAIR. Does it also cover things that are not supported by Canonical? How does the development and testing of the tool work? Cheers Luk -- 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/4fe4ad46.7000...@debian.org
Re: The status of desktop-base in wheezy
On 06/22/2012 05:44 PM, Joey Hess wrote: Adam D. Barratt wrote: Please don't rush the changes in order to make the freeze date. Getting exceptions for updates introducing the new artwork won't be an issue (well, unless you leave them until the week before release, but don't do that :P). The last time we rushed new artwork into a release with a freeze exception, it introduced a serious bug into d-i's menu system that had to be fixed in a point release (#650979). Why are we encouraging doing this again? Unless I misread it's exactly *not* what is being encouraged? Cheers Luk -- 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/4fe4addd.9000...@debian.org
Bug#678569: transition: openconnect
On 06/22/2012 09:04 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 14:50:44 -0400, Mike Miller wrote: I'd like to upload the latest version of openconnect to unstable. Updating from 3.20 to 4.00 brings a new ABI with a new soname for libopenconnect. Unless the current version is completely broken, I don't think we should do this. Are you seriously almost objecting to uploading 2 closely related packages which would bring needed bug fixes for its users just because the maintainer is so polite to ask? Did you even read further or did you stop at that sentence? Cheers Luk -- 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/4fe4dcea.3040...@debian.org
Re: Bits from the Ruby team: switching to Ruby 1.9 and trasition to new policy
On 06/05/2012 12:48 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Hi, On 04/06/12 22:40, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: It was not known before today (unfortunately the gem2deb test suite did not include any UTF-8 control files). Fixed now in gem2deb 0.2.15 (just uploaded). The fix looked good, thanks. Could someone please trigger a giveback of ruby-cairo with this fixed gem2deb? ruby-cairo and gdal given back. Cheers Luk -- 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/4fcd9cc3.8010...@debian.org
Re: Architecture qualification
On 05/28/2012 08:57 PM, Andreas Barth wrote:
* Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk) [120528 14:22]:
hurd-i386
-
Is there time to add it to testing and get it out of
{break,fucked}_arches? Would it make sense to release if it was still
in break_ and/or fucked_arches?
Depending on the number of issues that pop up, it might still be
technical possible. However, as a non-linux arch, I have my doubts.
Also, as soon as we consider it a full release architecture, any bugs
relevant to only hurd-i386 are considered RC.
I don't think there is any (technical) harm in adding it to testing as
long as it's in both break and fuck archs - however, from the feedback
I got from different people, it might be felt different, so if we add
it, we need to deliver a very clear message.
We can't release if it still is in any of break/fucked arches (at
least that would be my recommendation, due to technical and legal
issues, e.g. we might need to preserve multiple source code versions
if we have different binary versions within a stable release).
All in all, my recommendation for hurd-i386 would be that (as long as
this is agreed by all involved, and communicated clearly to the
developers at large before doing it) we add hurd-i386 to testing with
break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs
for hurd-i386 are not RC. We don't do unblocks for hurd-i386. Etc. But
also I think keeping at as part of proper Debian would be good for the
open source community at large, so we keep it even after the next
stable release in testing and unstable.
I don't think it's good to add an architecture to testing now when it's
not going to be released in wheezy. Technically you not only have to
consider the binary packages that will have to filtered out, but also
some source packages that are hurd only. It would also be very confusing
to users and developers and will give them false hope or possibly
distract them of what matters for the upcoming release. I would rather
recommend adding hurd to testing right after the release.
Cheers
Luk
--
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/4fc3e76f.4060...@debian.org
Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
On 05/19/2012 05:00 PM, Riku Voipio wrote: Hi, On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 10:57:03AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: As everyone keeps claiming there is no armel buildd location redundancy, I don't have much motivation to keep ancina running. It's ignored anyway. Would you mind packaging ancina and posting it to another hosting location? IIRC Mark Hymers was interested and he already hosts a bunch of armhf buildd's. ancina is a developer's board, so what components should be in the shipping if we go that route? How long would it take to have better machines than ancina so it could just get fased out btw? On another note, the only reason ancina cannot get OOB access is because it's not rack mountable. We can easily provide OOB access for rack mountable things and probably could even provide more rackspace for Debian things (have to get that confimed though if it's something worth considering?). Cheers Luk -- 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/4fb9f635.9050...@ugent.be
Re: armel qualification for Wheezy
Hi As everyone keeps claiming there is no armel buildd location redundancy, I don't have much motivation to keep ancina running. It's ignored anyway. Cheers Luk On 05/19/2012 10:28 AM, Peter Palfrader wrote: On Thu, 17 May 2012, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 06:00:18AM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote: On Thu, 2012-05-17 at 00:59 +0100, peter green wrote: The statement that all but one armel buildd is at the same location disagrees with the debian machines database. [...] Metropolitan Area Network Darmstadt : arcadelt DG-i: argento They may still be physically located there, but: wanna-build= select username, max(last_seen) as last_seen from armel.users group by username having username like '%arcadelt' or username like '%argento' order by 2; username|last_seen ---+ buildd_armel-arcadelt | 2011-04-17 21:14:11.291825 buildd_armel-argento | 2011-10-23 00:12:31.850723 (2 rows) iirc they're only still hosted in case e.g. the ARM hosting falls over for a prolonged period, but I'm happy to be corrected on that. AFAIK it's something like that, yes. Again, we're expecting to add more v7 machines to the cluster in York soon-ish to help with this. We (DSA) have been told by the buildd people to kill argento and arcadelt. We just haven't gotten around to doing it yet. So effectively armel does not have buildd location redundancy. cf. RT#3490, RT#3694, RT#3699. Cheers, -- 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/4fb7605f.7040...@debian.org
Re: openjdk-6 migration to testing
On 03/05/2012 11:08 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2012-03-05 10:49, Cyril Brulebois wrote: peter green plugw...@p10link.net (05/03/2012): Yes. See: http://release.debian.org/britney/update_excuses.html#openjdk-6 (The sparc part will go away, given the build has been accepted a few hours ago.) http://wiki.debian.org/ftpmaster_Removals For the record, I think Doko already filed this bug: 08:39 BTS Opened #662594 in ftp.debian.org by Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com «please remove the openjdk-6-jre-zero binary for powerpc». http://bugs.debian.org/662594 Which does not follow the prescribed syntax mentioned in the wiki page above ... Cheers Luk -- 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/4f55066e.4010...@debian.org
Bug#656816: opu: package cacti/0.8.7b-2.1+lenny5
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: opu
Hi
Version 0.8.7b-2.1+lenny4 interface statistics does not work anymore after the
previous security fix. Below oneliner fixes this.
Cheers
Luk
diff -u cacti-0.8.7b/debian/changelog cacti-0.8.7b/debian/changelog
--- cacti-0.8.7b/debian/changelog
+++ cacti-0.8.7b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+cacti (0.8.7b-2.1+lenny5) oldstable; urgency=low
+
+ * lib/snmp.php: Add $max_oids parameter to snmp_walk
+Closes: #656613
+
+ -- Luk Claes l...@debian.org Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:41:35 +0100
+
cacti (0.8.7b-2.1+lenny4) lenny-security; urgency=high
[ Paul Gevers ]
diff -u cacti-0.8.7b/debian/patches/CVE-2010-1645.patch cacti-0.8.7b/debian/patches/CVE-2010-1645.patch
--- cacti-0.8.7b/debian/patches/CVE-2010-1645.patch
+++ cacti-0.8.7b/debian/patches/CVE-2010-1645.patch
@@ -149,7 +149,16 @@
+ exec(escapeshellcmd(read_config_option(path_snmpgetnext)) . -O fntev $snmp_auth -v $version -t $timeout -r $retries . escapeshellarg($hostname) . :$port . escapeshellarg($oid), $snmp_value);
}
}
-
+
+@@ -222,7 +239,7 @@
+ return $snmp_value;
+ }
+
+-function cacti_snmp_walk($hostname, $community, $oid, $version, $username, $password, $auth_proto, $priv_pass, $priv_proto, $context, $port = 161, $timeout = 500, $retries = 0, $environ = SNMP_POLLER) {
++function cacti_snmp_walk($hostname, $community, $oid, $version, $username, $password, $auth_proto, $priv_pass, $priv_proto, $context, $port = 161, $timeout = 500, $retries = 0, $environ = SNMP_POLLER, $max_oids = 50) {
+ global $config;
+
+ $snmp_auth = '';
@@ -235,6 +252,17 @@
if ($retries == ) $retries = 3;
}
Bug#653757: pu: package nfs-utils/1:1.2.2-4squeeze2
On 01/12/2012 10:13 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: tag 653757 + squeeze confirmed thanks On Fri, 2011-12-30 at 19:10 +0100, Luk Claes wrote: This version fixes a security issue which the Security Team evaluated as not warranting a DSA. Attached the diff of the proposed upload. +nfs-utils (1:1.2.2-4squeeze2) stable; urgency=high + + * Fix CVE-2011-1749: Avoid leaving a corrupt mtab file (Closes: #629420) High urgency security fix + no-DSA is an interesting combination. :-) Please go ahead; thanks. Uploaded. Cheers Luk -- 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/4f0f4efa.6080...@debian.org
Bug#653757: pu: package nfs-utils/1:1.2.2-4squeeze2
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hi
This version fixes a security issue which the Security Team evaluated as not
warranting a DSA. Attached the diff of the proposed upload.
Cheers
Luk
diff -Nru nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/changelog nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/changelog
--- nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/changelog 2011-10-26 09:00:28.0 +0200
+++ nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/changelog 2011-12-30 18:59:58.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+nfs-utils (1:1.2.2-4squeeze2) stable; urgency=high
+
+ * Fix CVE-2011-1749: Avoid leaving a corrupt mtab file (Closes: #629420)
+
+ -- Luk Claes l...@debian.org Fri, 30 Dec 2011 18:58:07 +0100
+
nfs-utils (1:1.2.2-4squeeze1) stable; urgency=low
* Build with patch d6c1b35c6b40243bfd6fba2591c9f8f2653078c0 from upstream
diff -Nru nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/17-fix-CVE-2011-1749.patch nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/17-fix-CVE-2011-1749.patch
--- nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/17-fix-CVE-2011-1749.patch 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/17-fix-CVE-2011-1749.patch 2011-12-30 18:57:28.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+From: NeilBrown ne...@suse.de
+Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 12:19:57 + (-0400)
+Subject: Remove risk of nfs_addmntent corrupting mtab
+X-Git-Tag: nfs-utils-1-2-4-rc9~11
+X-Git-Url: http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=steved%2Fnfs-utils.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=7a802337bfc92d0b30fe94dbd0fa231990a26161
+
+Remove risk of nfs_addmntent corrupting mtab
+
+nfs_addmntent is used to append directly to /etc/mtab.
+If the write partially fail, e.g. due to RLIMIT_FSIZE,
+truncate back to original size and return an error.
+
+See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697975
+(CVE-2011-1749) CVE-2011-1749 nfs-utils: mount.nfs fails to anticipate RLIMIT_FSIZE
+
+Signed-off-by: NeilBrown ne...@suse.de
+Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson ste...@redhat.com
+---
+
+diff --git a/support/nfs/nfs_mntent.c b/support/nfs/nfs_mntent.c
+index a5216fc..a2118a2 100644
+--- a/support/nfs/nfs_mntent.c
b/support/nfs/nfs_mntent.c
+@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
+ #include string.h /* for index */
+ #include ctype.h /* for isdigit */
+ #include sys/stat.h /* for umask */
++#include unistd.h /* for ftruncate */
+
+ #include nfs_mntent.h
+ #include nls.h
+@@ -127,9 +128,11 @@ int
+ nfs_addmntent (mntFILE *mfp, struct mntent *mnt) {
+ char *m1, *m2, *m3, *m4;
+ int res;
++ off_t length;
+
+ if (fseek (mfp-mntent_fp, 0, SEEK_END))
+ return 1; /* failure */
++ length = ftell(mfp-mntent_fp);
+
+ m1 = mangle(mnt-mnt_fsname);
+ m2 = mangle(mnt-mnt_dir);
+@@ -143,6 +146,12 @@ nfs_addmntent (mntFILE *mfp, struct mntent *mnt) {
+ free(m2);
+ free(m3);
+ free(m4);
++ if (res = 0) {
++ res = fflush(mfp-mntent_fp);
++ if (res 0)
++ /* Avoid leaving a corrupt mtab file */
++ ftruncate(fileno(mfp-mntent_fp), length);
++ }
+ return (res 0) ? 1 : 0;
+ }
+
diff -Nru nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/series nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/series
--- nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/series 2011-10-26 08:50:31.0 +0200
+++ nfs-utils-1.2.2/debian/patches/series 2011-12-30 18:57:46.0 +0100
@@ -8,3 +8,4 @@
14-allow-address-without-name.patch
15-mountd-fix-path-comparison-for-v4-crossmnt.patch
16-negotiate-des-only.patch
+17-fix-CVE-2011-1749.patch
Bug#651897: pu: package cifs-utils/2:4.5-2+squeeze1
On 12/14/2011 08:55 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 23:54 +0100, Luk Claes wrote: The security team asked us to consider an upload to pu fixing 2 low severity security issues (which don't warrant a DSA). [...] +cifs-utils (2:4.5-2+squeeze1) stable; urgency=low + + * Stable update to prevent mtab corruption +- CVE-2011-1678 +- CVE-2011-2724 Please go ahead; thanks. Uploaded. Cheers Luk -- 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/4ee9099b.9020...@debian.org
Bug#651897: pu: package cifs-utils/2:4.5-2+squeeze1
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hi
The security team asked us to consider an upload to pu fixing 2 low severity
security issues (which don't warrant a DSA).
Attached a debdiff of the proposed upload.
Cheers
Luk
diff -Nru cifs-utils-4.5/debian/changelog cifs-utils-4.5/debian/changelog
--- cifs-utils-4.5/debian/changelog 2010-06-04 22:33:37.0 +0200
+++ cifs-utils-4.5/debian/changelog 2011-12-12 23:28:04.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+cifs-utils (2:4.5-2+squeeze1) stable; urgency=low
+
+ * Stable update to prevent mtab corruption
+- CVE-2011-1678
+- CVE-2011-2724
+
+ -- Luk Claes l...@debian.org Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:21:58 +0100
+
cifs-utils (2:4.5-2) unstable; urgency=low
* Lintian override for the suid-root binary.
diff -Nru cifs-utils-4.5/debian/patches/CVE-2011-1678.patch cifs-utils-4.5/debian/patches/CVE-2011-1678.patch
--- cifs-utils-4.5/debian/patches/CVE-2011-1678.patch 1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ cifs-utils-4.5/debian/patches/CVE-2011-1678.patch 2011-12-12 23:41:59.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+From: Jeff Layton jlay...@samba.org
+Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:19:33 + (-0400)
+Subject: mtab: handle ENOSPC/EFBIG condition properly when altering mtab
+X-Git-Tag: cifs-utils-5.1~19
+X-Git-Url: https://git.samba.org/?p=cifs-utils.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=f6eae44a3d05b6515a59651e6bed8b6dde689aec
+
+mtab: handle ENOSPC/EFBIG condition properly when altering mtab
+
+It's possible that when mount.cifs goes to append the mtab that there
+won't be enough space to do so, and the mntent won't be appended to the
+file in its entirety.
+
+Add a my_endmntent routine that will fflush and then fsync the FILE if
+that succeeds. If either fails then it will truncate the file back to
+its provided size. It will then call endmntent unconditionally.
+
+Have add_mtab call fstat on the opened mtab file in order to get the
+size of the file before it has been appended. Assuming that that
+succeeds, use my_endmntent to ensure that the file is not corrupted
+before closing it. It's possible that we'll have a small race window
+where the mtab is incorrect, but it should be quickly corrected.
+
+This was reported some time ago as CVE-2011-1678:
+
+http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/03/04/9
+
+...and it seems to fix the reproducer that I was able to come up with.
+
+Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton jlay...@samba.org
+Reviewed-by: Suresh Jayaraman sjayara...@suse.de
+---
+
+diff --git a/mount.cifs.c b/mount.cifs.c
+index 9d7e107..107a5a5 100644
+--- a/mount.cifs.c
b/mount.cifs.c
+@@ -1428,10 +1428,11 @@ static int check_mtab(const char *progname, const char *devname,
+ static int
+ add_mtab(char *devname, char *mountpoint, unsigned long flags, const char *fstype)
+ {
+- int rc = 0;
++ int rc = 0, tmprc, fd;
+ uid_t uid;
+ char *mount_user = NULL;
+ struct mntent mountent;
++ struct stat statbuf;
+ FILE *pmntfile;
+ sigset_t mask, oldmask;
+
+@@ -1483,6 +1484,23 @@ add_mtab(char *devname, char *mountpoint, unsigned long flags, const char *fstyp
+ goto add_mtab_exit;
+ }
+
++ fd = fileno(pmntfile);
++ if (fd 0) {
++ fprintf(stderr, mntent does not appear to be valid\n);
++ unlock_mtab();
++ rc = EX_FILEIO;
++ goto add_mtab_exit;
++ }
++
++ rc = fstat(fd, statbuf);
++ if (rc != 0) {
++ fprintf(stderr, unable to fstat open mtab\n);
++ endmntent(pmntfile);
++ unlock_mtab();
++ rc = EX_FILEIO;
++ goto add_mtab_exit;
++ }
++
+ mountent.mnt_fsname = devname;
+ mountent.mnt_dir = mountpoint;
+ mountent.mnt_type = (char *)(void *)fstype;
+@@ -1514,5 +1532,14 @@ add_mtab(char *devname, char *mountpoint, unsigned long flags, const char *fstyp
+ rc = addmntent(pmntfile, mountent);
++ if (rc) {
++ fprintf(stderr, unable to add mount entry to mtab\n);
++ ftruncate(fd, statbuf.st_size);
++ rc = EX_FILEIO;
++ }
++ tmprc = my_endmntent(pmntfile, statbuf.st_size);
++ if (tmprc) {
++ fprintf(stderr, error %d detected on close of mtab\n, tmprc);
++ rc = EX_FILEIO;
++ }
+- endmntent(pmntfile);
+ unlock_mtab();
+ SAFE_FREE(mountent.mnt_opts);
+ add_mtab_exit:
+diff --git a/mount.h b/mount.h
+index d49c2ea..80bdbe7 100644
+--- a/mount.h
b/mount.h
+@@ -35,4 +35,5 @@
+ extern int lock_mtab(void);
+ extern void unlock_mtab(void);
++extern int my_endmntent(FILE *stream, off_t size);
+
+ #endif /* ! _MOUNT_H_ */
+diff --git a/mtab.c b/mtab.c
+index 9cd50d8..de545b7 100644
+--- a/mtab.c
b/mtab.c
+@@ -251,3 +251,30 @@ lock_mtab (void) {
+ return 0;
+ }
+
++/*
++ * Call fflush and fsync on the mtab, and then endmntent. If either fflush
++ * or fsync fails, then truncate the file back to size. endmntent is called
++ * unconditionally, and the errno (if any) from fflush and fsync are returned.
++ */
++int
++my_endmntent(FILE *stream, off_t size)
++{
++ int rc, fd;
++
++ fd = fileno(stream);
++ if (fd 0)
++ return -EBADF;
++
++ rc = fflush(stream);
++ if (!rc)
++ rc = fsync(fd
Perl transition blockers: candidates for testing removal
Hi The following packages block the perl transition and will become testing removal candidates soon unless the bugs get fixed: * ifeffit (#648839) * uwsgi (#640347) * libdbd-interbase-perl (#648857) * libcrypt-gcrypt-perl (#634598) * prima (#628500) * nginx (#649061) * libsignatures-perl (#636132) * libpgplot-perl (#648842) * libtokyocabinet-perl (#649060): maybe mipsel binary should be removed? * genders (#646286): patch ready, maybe NMU? * openscap (#649063): maintainer said he would upload today * libdbd-sybase-perl (#629255): maintainer, this is your ping * openldap (#649062): won't be removed, please help fixing it!!! Progress can be seen on the transition tracker page [1]. Currently it looks worse than the above as some builds (mainly powerpc) are not uploaded yet. Cheers Luk [1] http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/perl5.14.html -- 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/4ec694fc.9010...@debian.org
Re: Perl transition blockers: candidates for testing removal
On 11/18/2011 08:56 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 20:52:48 +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: * genders (#646286): patch ready, maybe NMU? Uploaded in the meantime. Uploaded, but still broken. Maybe the patch was applied without running the autotools? Cheers Luk -- 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/4ec6dade.60...@debian.org
Re: Bug#622146: nfs-common: compatibility between squeeze and sid broken
On 09/12/2011 08:24 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 12:46 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: Adam == Adam D Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: Adam The krb5 package was uploaded and I've (somewhat belatedly) Adam marked it for acceptance at the next dinstall. What's the Adam status of the nfs-utils upload? My guess is they were waiting for krb5. Remember they have to increase build-depends for the krb5 you just accepted. If it requires a versioned build-dependency, then both packages could just have been uploaded at the same time. Even if we accepted them both from p-u-NEW together, the buildds would have put nfs-common in to the build-deps uninstallable state until the necessary version of krb5 was available. Anyway, uploaded now. Cheers Luk -- 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/4ea7b134.60...@debian.org
Re: Bug#622146: nfs-common: compatibility between squeeze and sid broken
On 10/03/2011 07:20 PM, Philipp Kern wrote: On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 12:46:13PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: Adam == Adam D Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: Adam The krb5 package was uploaded and I've (somewhat belatedly) Adam marked it for acceptance at the next dinstall. What's the Adam status of the nfs-utils upload? My guess is they were waiting for krb5. Remember they have to increase build-depends for the krb5 you just accepted. AFAICS this now missed the 6.0.3 point release. Upstream did some changes related to this which should fix it in unstable for the squeeze - 2.6.35 kernel range. Kernels afterwards should not have the problem. It would be good if someone could confirm that it is really fixed in unstable now. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e8a1530.9060...@debian.org
Bug#642390: pu: package ipmitool/1.8.11-2+squeeze1
On 09/22/2011 07:55 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: tag 642390 + squeeze confirmed thanks On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 07:37 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Ok if I upload an updated ipmitool with the following patch? diff -u ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/pa tches/series --- ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series +++ ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series @@ -2,0 +3 @@ +fix_sdr_segfault I'd have preferred a full debdiff but yes, please go ahead; thanks. Ok, I'll remember for next time :-) Uploaded and through unchecked into p-u-new. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e7ba0a6.4040...@debian.org
Bug#642390: pu: package ipmitool/1.8.11-2+squeeze1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi Ok if I upload an updated ipmitool with the following patch? diff -u ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/pa tches/series --- ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series +++ ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/series @@ -2,0 +3 @@ +fix_sdr_segfault only in patch2: unchanged: --- ipmitool-1.8.11.orig/debian/patches/fix_sdr_segfault +++ ipmitool-1.8.11/debian/patches/fix_sdr_segfault @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +diff -Nur ipmitool-1.8.11/lib/ipmi_sdr.c ipmitool-1.8.11.fix/lib/ipmi_sdr.c +--- ipmitool-1.8.11/lib/ipmi_sdr.c 2009-02-25 21:38:52.0 +0100 ipmitool-1.8.11.fix/lib/ipmi_sdr.c 2011-08-10 18:21:26.0 +0200 +@@ -1828,7 +1828,7 @@ + printf(ns | %2d.%1d | , + sensor-entity.id, + sensor-entity.instance); +- if (IS_SCANNING_DISABLED(rsp-data[1])) ++ if (rsp IS_SCANNING_DISABLED(rsp-data[1])) + printf(Disabled); + else + printf(No Reading); + Cheers Luk -- 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/20110922053724.14111.9760.report...@station.luk.local
Re: Changes in release goals for Wheezy
Hi Scott On 08/02/2011 05:39 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: As the drafter of the proposed release goal for Python [1], I will confess some surprise when I read on d-d-a [2] that this had been dropped for Wheezy without being involved any discussion or at least notification. Regardless, it's the release team's call, so it's gone. It was marked not suitable as a release goal. I understood that to mean that transitions are tracked anyway, without the need to be a release goal. I'm somewhat unsure how to proceed. Why would it being named a release goal or not need to change expectations? There is a fair bit of work to get python2.7 as the default and only python for Wheezy. There is both a transition bug [3] and a usertag [4] (yes, I know some consolidation is needed) and additional testing needed. Without a release goal, which would permit developers interested in Python in Debian treat these bugs as if they were RC and to NMU to work towards this goal, the only options I see are: Hmm, I thought there would also be a python3? Anyway there are about 25 packages blocking the transition. As it is clear that python2.7 will become the default and only python2 (unless anyone is questioning this??!), it would make sense to promote these bugs to RC already even if python2.6 is currently still the default. a. Wait until maintainers address these issues Never a good idea to wait for others to do the work. We are all volunteers, though if one has time and energy it's way better to try to help (binNMUs, patches, contacting upstream...) instead of just waiting. b. Upload python-defaults making python2.7 default so these become true RC bugs. I would first have a look at what would be the real impact if none of the blocking bugs would get resolved: What would it mean to remove all of the ones that are not fixed and their reverse dependencies from testing? I'm also anticipating that developers (all of whom have limited time available) will reasonably read this decision as meaning fixing these bugs is a lower priority (in fact, I think that instead of Important, they should probably be Wishlist now). I fail to see why it would be demoted as a transition as well? So I don't see any reason why the bugs should have a lower priority than important. I would appreciate knowing how the release team expects this to work? I asked about this on Niels Thykier suggested I write an email instead. Above I've given my understanding of how it should work. It would be good if someone could confirm or comment. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e379981.5090...@debian.org
Re: binNMUs?
On 08/02/2011 10:50 AM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: On Mon, 01 Aug 2011, Luk Claes wrote: Why could wb not handle the case where one tries to binNMU on one arch where it should be done on all archs without changing binNMU formats? Maybe they try to tackle the binNMU arch: all packages problem at the same time? Well, that's a different problem AFAICS. Though the solution might indeed work for both scenarios. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e37c319.6010...@debian.org
Re: binNMUs?
On 08/01/2011 08:22 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 15:37:43 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: e.g. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiarchSpec#Binary_NMUs for ubuntus way to handle it. Well. Ubuntu doesn't have binNMUs, so they don't have to handle it at all. Why could wb not handle the case where one tries to binNMU on one arch where it should be done on all archs without changing binNMU formats? Or am I missing something? Cheers Luk -- 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/4e37190b.7060...@debian.org
Re: [RFC] Use of Built-Using in debian-installer
On 07/30/2011 06:23 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: Hello, Hi Otavio During this night I got some nice progress on the stuff planned to debian-installer. I am adding the generated control file for review and comments. Basically it gather all udebs included on the initrd and puts this information in the Built-Using field of the binary package. Comments, welcome :-) Great start, though Built-Using expects source packages instead of binary (or udeb) packages. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e3416ec.3060...@debian.org
Re: Changes to Debian Installer release process
On 07/28/2011 01:18 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: I used some of Debcamp and Debconf time this year to discuss the Debian Installer release process with some people and after talking with many people it seems we agreed on the following changes on Debian Installer release process and it would be interesting to receive feedback on those to see if anyone see a problem we didn't notice yet. Great, lets make d-i as easy to handle as general packages (or at least almost ;-))! * Official uploads to be built against unstable Sounds good. * Linux kernel udebs to be built from linux source package Also looks good. * Debian Installer daily builds to be done from source uploads The daily builds will use the archive source for building so every time we do a change in unstable in a module that is included in initrd it will trigger a binNMU in all architectures replicating what we have in daily builds. When source changes in debian-installer source package are done, a new source upload will be required. Do the daily builds only uncover issues from building the initrd? A.k.a. will changes in packages other than the one in the initrd only have an effect on the install via genuine downloading from the archive at the time of the install? * Debian Installer experimental builds With Linux kernel udebs built from linux source we have the possibility to get the installer built against the development kernel that will be available on experimental and this is quite important to us to be able to test all this before it is available in unstable to avoid bad surprises for us and users. This will also be a handy tool for us to play with not well tested or finished stuff without breaking installer to end users. Sounds good! * Use of britney to handle package and installer migration This is the end of the process and some details are yet unknown how this is going to happen however but our goal is to make it happen since it will alleviate a lot the amount of work to make Debian Installer release to happen. Super! It is important to notice that it is not a single-man effort but a coordinate and shared effort of Debian Kernel, Debian Release and Debian Installer teams to get all this done. Those changes are not going to happen at once but in a progressive process and at the end this is going to make the installer release process easier to understand and handle. Right, lets go for it! Cheers Luk -- 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/4e341d9a.1040...@debian.org
Re: security support for lenny / upgrades from lenny to wheezy
On 07/05/2011 03:45 PM, Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 03 Jul 2011 12:30:03 +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: [Please Cc me, I am not subscribed.] Hi, I am forwarding a discussion from debian-user. I'd love to hear an official statement about this. AFAICS, this issue hasn't been explicitly addressed yet and at least one person from debian-user expects to be able to skip squeeze. (...) That one person must be me. Yes, I was the one who recently sent the announcement notice to d-u mailing list (it seemed to me that nobody was aware of it...) and would be nice to know what's the official possition on this matter. As I didn't read any other notice about this, I expected the statatement made on 2009 still applies. If no, an additional notice stating the new plans would be more than desiderable so people can smoothly deploy their install strategies. I expected that Lenny (now oldtstable) is still getting security fixes until Wheezy is released, and once out, it gets dropped. The rule is that a release is supported up to the next release + 1 year unless the release after the next one comes earlier. So for Lenny that would mean until release date of Squeeze + 1 year (February 6th 2012) unless Wheezy would be released earlier. Obviously Wheezy won't be released before, so Lenny is supported until Febrary next year. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e134cf3.3060...@debian.org
Re: SAT based britney - formalisation of the problem
On 07/01/2011 10:25 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote: Hi, On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Ralf Treinen wrote: In fact, from out point of view the DIMACS format or MAX-SAT input format are already a specific encoding technique, and we think that one should first find a logical specification of what exactly one tries to achieve, before thinking about a specific encoding into MAX-SAT or whatever other solver technology. But we're looking into having some concrete prototype in the short term and I don't think that this kind of formalization will help us in that regard. And I don't really see the expected benefits of this approach either... Another element of the precise specification would be: one wants to have a maximal solution. What precisely is the sense of maximality here? Maximal number of binary packages? Maximal number of source packages? Should there be a way to give more weight to more important packages? It would be nice to take the popularity into account indeed and give them priority in terms of migration. But really this is just a cherry on the top. If we already get something working that gives a coherent set of package that can move without manual hints, it would be great. That's already an option in britney2. This SAT based design seems overcomplex due to all the special casing AFAICT. I also don't buy that a Conflicts relationship should be special instead of a plain one like now. I won't stop anyone from experimenting with a SAT based solution, though from a release point of view, I think it would be better to start using britney2 and kill its bugs (which unfortunately will take some time AFAICS) before diving into a SAT based adventure. Cheers Luk -- 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/4e0e42b6.2070...@debian.org
Re: Uploading linux-2.6 (2.6.39-2)
On 06/05/2011 06:01 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote: I intend to upload linux-2.6 to unstable early this week. This will include stable update 2.6.39.1 and restoration of aufs support for use in Debian Live. Stable update 2.6.39.1 includes an ABI change, so we will probably have to change the binary package names. Ok, looks fine. Go ahead with the upload. Cheers Luk -- 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/4deb33ec.2020...@debian.org
Bug#568141: release.debian.org: Latest point release hard to follow / confusing
On 05/14/2011 10:44 AM, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: Hello Julien, On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:33:21AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: This is still about the fact that you're expecting all debian.org resources to be in sync at point release time. I don't think that's reasonable, the release process is complicated enough as it is. Please don't reopen. I'm not saying it is easy, I'm not saying that this is a must fix, I'm not saying someone is to blame, etc. But you are saying: This is a problem (bug) but I don't want to see a report about it? I belived that Debian is not hiding problems. And, the bts has a tag called wontfix to indicate a problem a fix cannot be found. I hope you can enlighten me why this problem should not be documented in the bts. There currently are mails to inform people of upcoming point releases and mails to announce point releases when everything is available on the mirror network. What is it that you are still missing and what exactly can be done to get that fixed? Cheers Luk -- 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/4dce5ceb.7020...@debian.org
Bug#568141: release.debian.org: Latest point release hard to follow / confusing
On 05/14/2011 05:13 PM, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: Hello Luk, On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 12:43:55PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: On 05/14/2011 10:44 AM, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:33:21AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: This is still about the fact that you're expecting all debian.org resources to be in sync at point release time. I don't think that's reasonable, the release process is complicated enough as it is. Please don't reopen. I'm not saying it is easy, I'm not saying that this is a must fix, I'm not saying someone is to blame, etc. But you are saying: This is a problem (bug) but I don't want to see a report about it? I belived that Debian is not hiding problems. And, the bts has a tag called wontfix to indicate a problem a fix cannot be found. I hope you can enlighten me why this problem should not be documented in the bts. There currently are mails to inform people of upcoming point releases and mails to announce point releases when everything is available on the mirror network. What is it that you are still missing and what exactly can be done to get that fixed? It is currently not clear which pages are current and which pages are out of date regarding version numbers after point updates. A fix could be some note on e.g. http://packages.debian.org/ that the version numbers after point releases might be (slightly) out of date and that in case of doubt http://packages.qa.debian.org/ should be used. This has nothing to do with release.debian.org, but with syncs the website and QA teams are responsible of AFAICT. Another fix was proposed in my initial bug report (why is nobody reading this?) already: My suggestion: First update www.debian.org (*with* version numbers) and then push the update out to the mirrors. And secondly unify the versions given in http://packages.debian.org/XXX and http://packages.qa.debian.org/XXX (and in the latter also where the latest one is printed). The website update should only happen once the mirrors are populated according to the mirror team which makes perfectly sense to me. Hope this clarifies. Do you agree to reopen this bug now? (After having explained the initial report again and having proposed two possible solutions) I'm afraid you'll get nowhere by reopening the bug. The sync scripts for packages.debian.org and packages.qa.debian.org are suboptimal in that they show out-of-date information also when there is no point release. So that might be something to look at by the website and/or QA teams. P.S. And of course, adding version numbers in the NEWS on www.debian.org, e.g. News/2010/20100130.wml, would also solve the immediate problem ... That might be possible, though would need some better integration of the tools (patches are probably welcome) and coordination with the press team that they are fine with the changes. Cheers Luk -- 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/4dcea2df.6070...@debian.org
Re: Number of berkeley db packages reduction
On 04/05/2011 02:55 PM, Ondřej Surý wrote: Hi, I would like to coordinate reduction of BDB packages since I took the unhappy job (as I could expect) to maintain BDB in Debian after Clint have orphaned them. The main issue which I have encountered (in cyrus-imapd) is that the change from 4.x to 5.x introduces code changes, because the packages check for 4 + something version number. The fix is easy (I can help with that if needed), but it still some work which needs to be done. In principal the reduction of bdb packages is a very good idea! Though care should be taken to better choose which versions are shipped: openldap for instance really needs a fast one. Best would probably be to have one of each major user (like cyrus-imapd and openldap, but maybe also some others) of bdb involved in testing new packages before they get uploaded to unstable? So both the build and usage can be tested before random packages start to use it. Cheers Luk -- 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/4d9b4dc0.7070...@debian.org
Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
Hi Below an update of the release goals I advocated and some thoughts on others. Release Goals - As a first step towards establishing release goals for wheezy, we will be reviewing each of the goals which we had for squeeze [RDO:SGoals] to see which have been achieved and which may no longer be relevant for other reasons. If you are listed as the proponent for a goal in the above list, please feel free to provide a status update on progress towards completing it and whether you believe it is relevant for the wheezy cycle. You can also e-mail us to propose a new goal, including a description of the goal and an indication of how progress on the issues may be tracked (e.g. a pointer to a set of appropriate user-tagged bugs). # bootperformance Advocate: Petter Reinholdsen and Luk Claes State: confirmed Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/BootPerformance The main part of this goal was achieved, though there are some possible improvements both regarding boot reliability and boot performance that could still be aimed for. Regarding reliability I'm doing some work regarding NFS, though one of the main outstanding issues is the race between availability of the network devices and the end of the network init script AFAICS. It would also not be a bad idea to have a discussion on whether the default init system should change to one that is more suitable to guarantee the reliability of the boot like upstart or systemd. Regarding boot performance there is quite some work done by Ubuntu in different packages, so maybe it would not be bad to have a look at how Ubuntu and Debian could get more in sync on that. # package quality Advocate: Holger Levsen and Luk Claes State: confirmed Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/PackagesQuality This is a never ending goal of sustaining our packages quality by improving our tests and following up closely... so needless to say that I would still advocate this one. # remove obsolete libraries Advocate: Barry deFreese and Luk Claes State: confirmed Wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/RemoveOldLibs This worked quite well and should continue so we can get rid of obsolete libraries IMHO. One of the main candidates are the old db libraries, though there are also still some old gnome libraries and without doubt others. We're also after new goals! I know that expressions of interest in multiarch and tdebs have already been indicated, but if you have something you would want to see happen for Wheezy, please let us know. The release team itself will be suggesting some as part of the review above. I'm definitely in favour of having multiarch finally happen! For the IPv6 and LFS legacy release goals I think it would be best if we would welcome massive (automatic?) tests to find all of the outstanding issues and get them fixed finally! I would welcome a review of essential, required and standard though I don't know if many would welcome such an initiative which could potentially have quite some impact without much visible gain. Anyway it's something which should happen in the beginning of the cycle (after a discussion with both the involved maintainers as well as the developers body at large) or not at all IMHO. Cheers Luk -- 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/4d936684.2050...@debian.org
Re: Debian Installer required unblocks
On 11/24/2010 04:27 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: Hello, Please unblock and age following packages: user-setup hw-detect os-prober unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4ced5700.80...@debian.org
Re: Bug#603568: RM: fcitx/oldstable -- ROM; not dfsg free
On 11/15/2010 02:48 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 21:14:47 +0800, LI Daobing wrote: Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Hello, fcitx ships data/pyPhrase.org which is not dfsg free, the document in doc/pinyin.txt describe (in Chinese and in GBK encodinga) that this file can only be used in fcitx, which is not DFSG free. oldstable is archived. there's non-free stuff in it isn't a sufficient reason to change anything there imho (that's always going to be true). AFAIK only when something is undistributable will it be removed from archive.debian.org Cheers Luk -- 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/4ce1512a.3070...@debian.org
Bug#596899: Please unblock ia32-libs/20101012
On 11/09/2010 06:35 PM, Michael Gilbert wrote: On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 09:05:16 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Michael Gilbert michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com writes: Well, it's more like one hundred packages, but nevertheless, a very large number. Obviously its a trade off, just like everything else in this world. Either take the easy road and continue to provide this messy monolithic package that doesn't get any security updates, or take the hard road to get something more supportable but forces additional work on 100 maintainers. I personally think the latter is more appropriate/ideal even though its more work. Obviously opinions will vary. The long-term solution is multiarch and allowing people to install 32-bit packages directly on 64-bit systems, which is why people haven't been willing to much effort into making the current system work better. We keep expecting multiarch to be in the next Debian release. I just did some reading up on multiarch. It looks like its been in development since around 2004 (i.e. before sarge was released). With such an oft-delayed process (4 releases including squeeze), I wonder what the probability of it being ready for wheezy is? Is it time to work toward a less hackish solution for ia32-libs since multiarch may be unlikely for wheezy based on past performance? Definitely not! ia32-libs should die after squeeze. multiarch is taking long, very long indeed. Though most of it's progress was made during the squeeze cycle, the main missing bit to really start using multiarch is dpkg AFAICS. I still think it's very unfortunate that dpkg maintainers find time to work on all sorts of new features when multiarch support is not finalised yet, but maybe that's just my perception on it. Cheers Luk -- 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/4cd99127.9030...@debian.org
Re: Advice for an otrs2 2.4.9-1 upload
On 10/26/2010 06:41 PM, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Hello, Hi I have prepared the otrs2 2.4.9-1 upload now. I have attached the diff (cleaned up by unnecessary changes again, like copyright year updates and cvs file versions) and here is the debdiff: Kernel/Modules/AdminNotificationEvent.pm | 24 +- Kernel/Modules/AdminUserGroup.pm | 20 - Kernel/Modules/AgentTicketAttachment.pm | 253 -- Kernel/Modules/AgentTicketMove.pm |6 Kernel/Modules/CustomerTicketAttachment.pm| 253 -- Kernel/Output/HTML/DashboardTicketGeneric.pm |2 Kernel/Output/HTML/DashboardUserOnline.pm |2 Kernel/Output/HTML/Layout.pm | 13 - Kernel/Output/HTML/Standard/AttachmentBlocker.dtl | 22 + Kernel/System/EmailParser.pm |8 Kernel/System/HTMLUtils.pm|6 Kernel/System/Ticket.pm |7 Kernel/System/Ticket/Event/NotificationEvent.pm | 22 + debian/changelog |8 14 files changed, 400 insertions(+), 246 deletions(-) Please notify me, if I could go ahead with my upload for Squeeze. Thanks. Please upload. Frankly I'm quite shocked by the general quality of the code, but at least it improves with this changeset :-) Cheers Luk -- 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/4cc91341.7070...@debian.org
Re: Advice for an otrs2 2.4.9-1 upload
On 10/28/2010 06:14 PM, Patrick Matthäi wrote: Am 28.10.2010 08:08, schrieb Luk Claes: Please notify me, if I could go ahead with my upload for Squeeze. Thanks. Please upload. Frankly I'm quite shocked by the general quality of the code, but at least it improves with this changeset :-) :-) Much thanks, uploaded! unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4cc9e491.2030...@debian.org
Re: please unblock package: open-iscsi
On 10/25/2010 04:31 PM, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 10/25/2010 10:02 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: Hello Release Team, I have just uploaded open-iscsi to unstable. It adds the feature of iSCSI Boot support for NICs that have native iSCSI support. Please allow this upload to propogate to Squeeze. Debdiff attached. Can you me please tell how this change matches the freeze criteria we described in our last mail [1] to debian-devel-announce? [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/10/msg2.html I guess this is a request for a freeze exception and not a simple unblock request. IMHO it would be better to make a clear distinction so simple unblock requests that should comply with the freeze guidelines could be prioritised and freeze exception requests could be investigated on a case by case basis with a lower priority and a higher chance of getting denied. This particular case I would be tempted to unblock though. Cheers Luk -- 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/4cc59aaa.2020...@debian.org
Re: please unblock package: open-iscsi
On 10/25/2010 05:06 PM, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 10/25/2010 04:56 PM, Luk Claes wrote: [...] This particular case I would be tempted to unblock though. Then, go ahead :) unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4cc59f8b.8070...@debian.org
Re: Re: Please unblock virtualbox-ose
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 09:30:50AM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: Give it more time for testing in unstable then. That's one of the things that's being considered, if you'd carefully read the thread. Set to age-days 15. I find some of the things mentioned in this thread quite low... though when looking more closely to the package itself I decided to unblock anyway. Cheers Luk -- 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/4cc5dab9.70...@debian.org
Re: [MBF proposal] Empty packages in the archive
On 10/17/2010 04:47 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: Luca Falavigna, le Sun 17 Oct 2010 16:41:31 +0200, a écrit : Julien Danjou a...@debian.org XCB Developers x...@lists.freedesktop.org Jamey Sharp sharp...@debian.org Josh Triplett j...@freedesktop.org libpthread-stubs0 (U) That's expected on linux ports. Why an empty package instead of no binary package on linux ports? Cheers Luk -- 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/4cbb2972.4080...@debian.org
Bug#600062: unblock: openvpn/2.1.3-1
On 10/13/2010 12:24 PM, Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta wrote: Hi! Please consider unblocking openvpn. It fixes and RC bug, a bug in one of Debian's patches (IPv6) and some other fixes in the upstream release. Thanks, Alberto openvpn (2.1.3-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release (Closes: #595684) * Fixed multiple building in a row (Closes: #592086) * Added handling of newer DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS. Thanks Lionel Elie Mamane for the patch. (Closes: #592098) * Updated IPv6 patch from JuanJo Ciarlante. Fixes --multihome option. (Closes: #562099) -- Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta a...@inittab.org Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:07:37 +0200 unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb5f009.6060...@debian.org
Re: Advice on what changes to include in krb5 upload
On 10/13/2010 04:59 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: Hi. I need to do an upload for a krb5 security issue. However there are a couple of other changes I could include. I'd recommend all, but it's late enough I want explicit OK before everything besides the security fix. I've pushed the actual diffs to the release-review branch on the debian krb5 git. Hi Sam Ok, please upload including all of them and let us now when you uploaded. Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb5f2a3.1050...@debian.org
unblocked pdsh
Hi I unblocked pdsh as it fixes an RC bug: +pdsh (2.18-8) unstable; urgency=low + + * Drop broken runtime check for the genders library (closes: #598393) + + -- Brian Pellin bpel...@debian.org Fri, 01 Oct 2010 19:49:13 -0500 Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb5f52b.8040...@debian.org
unblocked sks
Hi I unblocked sks as it fixes an RC bug and some other nasty bugs: +sks (1.1.1+dpkgv3-5) unstable; urgency=high + + * add nostrip to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS on architectures with ocaml +bytecode. (closes: 599029) + * don't depend on mta etc., as mailsync is now mostly obsolete (closes: +559280) + + -- Christoph Martin christoph.mar...@uni-mainz.de Thu, 07 Oct 2010 20:49:13 +0200 + +sks (1.1.1+dpkgv3-4) unstable; urgency=low + + * remove pramberger.at from README.Debian, because it is no longer +availlable (closes: #597818) + + -- Christoph Martin christoph.mar...@uni-mainz.de Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:09:03 +0200 Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb5f619.9080...@debian.org
Re: Bug#599704: unblock: gnat-4.4/4.4.5-1
On 10/11/2010 02:26 PM, Ludovic Brenta wrote: Dear release managers, Because gcc-4.4 (=4.4.5) is now in Squeeze, gnat-4.4 (=4.4.4-5) no longer builds from source. An updated gnat-4.4 package (merging all the packaging changes from gcc-4.4) is available in unstable. Please unblock it so it migrates to testing after its normal 10-day period in unstable. The changes between 4.4.4-5 and 4.4.5-1 are a bit too large for my taste (upstream version change + packaging changes) but all of these changes have been tested and approved as part of gcc-4.4 already. I have also personally verified that the Ada Library Information files are unchanged, thus preserving compatibility with all the existing -dev packages that depend on gnat-4.4. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb34a58.6000...@debian.org
unblocked acct
Hi I unblocked acct as it fixes an RC bug: +acct (6.5.4-2.1) unstable; urgency=low + + * NMU with maintainer's blessing. + * Call autoreconf in debian/rules, add autoconf and automake to +build-dependencies. +Thanks to Mats Erik Andersson for the hint to how to solve this. +(closes: #579483). + + -- Ralf Treinen trei...@debian.org Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:06:24 +0200 Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb0a370.9040...@debian.org
udisks unblocked
Hi I unblocked udisks as it fixes an RC bug and some nasty bugs: +udisks (1.0.1+git20100614-3) unstable; urgency=low + + * Add 00git-fix-luks-forced-removal.patch: In the event of the forced +removal of a crypto device, use the luks_holder property since it is still +available to figure out which underlying cleartext LUKS device to +teardown, instead of scanning through all available devices (because the +cleartext device already has had its properties cleaned up). Many thanks +to Mathieu Trudel for the patch! Patch cherrypicked from upstream git +trunk. (LP: #484429) + + -- Martin Pitt mp...@debian.org Mon, 27 Sep 2010 18:56:00 +0200 + +udisks (1.0.1+git20100614-2) unstable; urgency=low + + * debian/udisks.postinst +- Query D-Bus to find out the correct pid of the process claiming + org.freedesktop.UDisks. This way we do not accidentally kill the + wrong process when being installed in a chroot. (Closes: #593195) + * debian/udisks.prerm +- Stop udisks-daemon on remove. (Closes: #590013) + * debian/control +- Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.1. No further changes. +- Update Build-Depends according to configure.ac. + + -- Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org Tue, 21 Sep 2010 21:05:40 +0200 Cheers Luk -- 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/4cb0a547.3000...@debian.org
Re: pre-approval for perl/5.10.1-15
On 10/06/2010 12:47 PM, Niko Tyni wrote: Hi release team, Hi Niko would you be OK with some or all of these changes for squeeze? perl (5.10.1-15) UNRELEASED; urgency=low . * Include the Text::Tabs license in debian/copyright. Thanks to v.nix.is. (Closes: #596844) * Downgrade the 'make' recommendation to a suggestion to avoid pulling it in by default after all. (Closes: #596734) (Reopens: #293908) * Put the libfile-spec-perl conflict version in line with the separate package, which uses four digits. (Closes: #595121) * Squelch useless locale warnings during package maintainer scripts. (Closes: #508764) Yes, please upload and ping us again when uploaded. Cheers Luk -- 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/4cacaa60.8020...@debian.org
Re: Processing binary-NEW packages? (Was: List of binary-NEW packages)
On 09/30/2010 12:09 PM, Luca Falavigna wrote: Il 10/08/2010 12.10, Luca Falavigna ha scritto: For your convenience, I've set up a slightly modified NEW page which only displays binary-NEW packages, you can find it at [1]. If that turns useful, I'll have a look how to properly differentiate these information in the default NEW.html page [2]. binary-NEW packages can now be displayed from http://ftp-master.debian.org/NEW.html Backlog is getting quite big, could we process binary-NEW packages targeted to experimental and those targeted unstable which do not trigger new transitions (i.e. NEW -doc package)? That should be no problem, though it would be great if experimental also does not get new transitions to avoid mistakes on later uploads. Cheers Luk -- 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/4ca4c14f.30...@debian.org
unblocked libcss-perl
Hi I unblocked libcss-perl which fixes an RC bug: +libcss-perl (1.08-1+nmu1) unstable; urgency=low + + * Non maintainer Upload + * Fix test failures by recompiling the grammar using a new version of +Parse::RecDescent (Closes: #53948) + + -- Don Armstrong d...@debian.org Tue, 14 Sep 2010 04:27:12 -0400 Cheers Luk -- 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/4ca424a5.1060...@debian.org
unblocked pdns
Hi I unblocked pdns which fixes an RC bug: +pdns (2.9.22-8) unstable; urgency=high + + * Update init.d scripts and remove mysql and postgresql from the +dependencies. The loop between mysql and pdns causes apt to fail hence +the urgency high. (Closes: #595018) + + -- Matthijs Mohlmann matth...@cacholong.nl Fri, 24 Sep 2010 16:24:04 +0200 Cheers Luk -- 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/4ca424fa.8040...@debian.org
unblocked varnish
Hi I unblocked varnish which fixes an RC bug: +varnish (2.1.3-8) unstable; urgency=high + + * Fix random secret creation on non-Linux kernels (Closes: #596373) + * Urgency high due to FTBFS RC bug during squeeze freeze + + -- Stig Sandbeck Mathisen s...@debian.org Fri, 24 Sep 2010 17:51:20 +0200 Cheers Luk -- 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/4ca42531.2030...@debian.org
unblocked ddd
Hi I unblocked ddd as it fixes an RC bug and did not migrate due to a bug in another package which got worked around now. The changes look extensive, though it's mostly related to a license change (from GPL2 to GPL3) and documentation. The main code change is the added support of bash and makefile. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c9f5965.2000...@debian.org
unblocked encfs
Hi I unblocked encfs as it fixes a bunch of security issues. The biggest changes are translation updates. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c9f64f3.9040...@debian.org
lazarus unblocked
Hi I unblocked lazarus as it fixes an RC bug and the diff looks fine. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c95a95b.30...@debian.org
Re: samba_3.4.9~dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED
On 09/19/2010 09:02 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Luca Falavigna (dktrkr...@debian.org): Ftpmasters, is there something that can be done on your side? This is #584909. I'll try to see if I can provide a fix. I know you're attending the ftpmaster meeting right now, if I properly read Ganneff's annoucements. Is there a chance that this bug is fixed so that we can reupload samba? Or should we go another way, which seems to be enforcing samba 3.5.5 in squeeze? I'm worried about samba still being vulnerable in squeeze. Do you think samba 3.5.5 is not ready to migrate yet, otherwise I would just unblock it? Cheers Luk -- 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/4c95b7be.3040...@debian.org
Re: [britney] RFC: Behaviour change for approve hints
On 09/19/2010 12:33 AM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: As a consequence of all of the above, I'd like to propose modifying the semantics of approve so that the hint can be added straight away and the t-p-u package only becomes a valid candidate once it's available on all the architectures on which it exists in testing; the attached patch does so. Finally that missing feature will be implemented! :-) Cheers Luk -- 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/4c95a4ae.1090...@debian.org
Re: ublocks for security fix uploads
On 09/13/2010 05:55 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote: Hi, Hi Please unblock the following packages that fix security issues: unblock cacti/0.8.7g-1 unblock drupal6/6.18-1 unblock iceape/2.0.7-1 unblock iceweasel/3.5.12-2 all unblocked unblock libgdiplus/2.6.7-3 unblocked and aged to 5 days unblock phpmyadmin/4:3.3.7-1 unblocked 2 days ago by Adam unblock python2.6/2.6.6-3 unblocked unblock python3.1/3.1.2+20100829-1 unblocked and aged to 20 days unblock ruby1.9.1/1.9.2.0-1 unblocked and aged to 20 days due to massive changes unblock sssd/1.2.1-4 unblocked unblock strongswan/4.4.1-3 unblocked yesterday unblock sudo/1.7.4p4-2 (this should be hinted in faster since it was mistakenly uploaded with low priority) No, I changed the aging, because there are a lot more changes than fixing the security issue. unblock webkit/1.2.4-1 unblocked 7 days ago by Julien unblock kdegraphics/4:4.4.5-2 (note this also needs djvulibre hinted at a higher urgency) unblock djvulibre/3.5.23-3 unblocked, djvulibre aged to 5 days Cheers Luk -- 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/4c8dbe97.60...@debian.org
Re: Re: strongswan update to 4.4.x
On Thursday 26 August 2010 22:18:23 Mehdi Dogguy wrote: Trying to see how it looks like, I ended up with a big diff. 489 files changed, 27220 insertions(+), 11439 deletions(-) Is there any sane way to review this? Maybe the best way would be to contact upstream. In my experience, Martin Willi and Andreas Steffen are very willing to actively interact with us. They might be able to provide a detailed info on what has changed from 4.3.x to 4.4.1 and which impact this might have on stability. In general, it certainly seems to me that 4.4.x is more stable in practice than 4.3.x. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4c8d2df4.7040...@debian.org
Re: Unfreezing pdl_2.4.7+dfsg-1
Moin, just finished an upload of a new (minor) upstream PDL version, package built fine on all architectures. This release fixes many bugs (most tracked on upstream's sf.net tracker), brings big improvements on the documentation side, and has a more reliable test suite. Could you unfreeze pdl_2.4.7+dfsg-1 to get it into the squeeze release? unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4c83a039.6030...@debian.org
Re: redmine 1.0.1-1 : stable release for 1.0 version
i just uploaded redmine 1.0.1-1 to debian/unstable, which is a very significant release : * Upstream update, fixes many 1.0.0 RC bugs, see : http://www.redmine.org/versions/show/21 * Patch for libi18n-ruby 0.4.1 support. (Closes: #592672) * Postinst note should be an error. (Closes: #591220) * Update translations. (Closes: #591072, #591219, #591235, #591268, #591308, #591689, #591716, #592371) * Fix /usr/share/doc/redmine/examples/apache2-* to work with libapache2-mod-fcgid = 2.3.5 (LP: #620392) * Rephrase web server configuration section in README.Debian (LP: #620412) unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4c83cd63.5090...@debian.org
Re: Re: Freeze exception for gdc-4.3
On Sun, 2010-08-22 at 17:54 +0100, Iain Buclaw wrote: On 22 August 2010 16:20, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote: [...] The diffstat between the testing and unstable packages is 824 files changed, 133190 insertions(+), 141498 deletions(-) which is practically unreviewable. Ignoring whitespace changes in the diff reduces it to 767 files changed, 82109 insertions(+), 90417 deletions(-) which is still very high. The source tarball also houses the GDC D2 project too. And the diff will have shown all the major updates to that frontend and it's accompanying libraries, which includes the dmd2, phobos2 and druntime directory. To my count, this accounts for 560 of those files. None of which are used in the building of D1. That certainly reduces the diff substantially; thanks. It leaves us with [1] 209 files changed, 13659 insertions(+), 22012 deletions(-) which is still a significant quantity of changes. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4c83dacb.8090...@debian.org
Bug#594873: RM: picprog/testing-proposed-updates -- ROP; not suitable for s90
Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Hi Please remove picprog from testing-proposed-updates, it's up-to-date in testing apart from the binary on s390 which the porter/buildd admin marked as Not-For-Us. Cheers Luk -- 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/20100830102247.20492.12632.report...@station.luk.local
Bug#594877: RM: usbview/testing-proposed-updates -- ROP; NFU on s390
Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Hi Please remove usbview from tpu, it's binaries are deemed unusable by the porter/buildd admin. Cheers Luk -- 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/20100830102638.20847.47623.report...@station.luk.local
Re: Request for approval of FAI 3.4.1
* Michael Prokop m...@debian.org wrote: Ok, 3.4.0 went through NEW (thanks) and I just uploaded 3.4.1 with the mentioned bugfix to unstable. Please approve fai 3.4.1 for squeeze. unblocked Cheers Luk -- 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/4c7bbd0f.8070...@debian.org
Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/4.999.9beta+20100810-1
Adam D. Barratt wrote: In any case, please get back to us once the package has reached its 10 days. The xz-utils package has reached its 10 days. unblocked, not closing bug as you still seem to speak about other changes? Cheers Luk -- 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/4c7bc6f2.6050...@debian.org
Re: Please unblock istanbul 0.2.2-8
On 08/24/2010 03:16 PM, Luca Bruno wrote: Hi, istanbul/0.2.2-8 fixes two RC bugs and had already aged in sid without further reports, please unblock it. debdiff attached. It has already migrated due to my unblock earlier today :-) Cheers Luk -- 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/4c73c68b.6040...@debian.org
udeb unblock: partman-base [Re: udeb unblocks: netcfg, libdebian-installer]
On 08/21/2010 05:41 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: busybox recently migrated to testing; this new version apparently has an incompatibility with the netcfg version currently in testing, so we were asked by Aurelien whether it would be possible to migrate netcfg as well. netcfg is on the cannot automatically migrate without approval udeb list and, in order to migrate it, the new version of libdebian-installer (which is also on the needs approval list) would also have to migrate at the same time. ack for netcfg and libdebian-installer. What about partman-base (and rescue which Christian kind of acked)? Cheers Luk -- 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/4c7039bc.30...@debian.org
Re: udeb unblock: partman-base [Re: udeb unblocks: netcfg, libdebian-installer]
On 08/21/2010 10:40 PM, Luk Claes wrote: On 08/21/2010 05:41 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk writes: busybox recently migrated to testing; this new version apparently has an incompatibility with the netcfg version currently in testing, so we were asked by Aurelien whether it would be possible to migrate netcfg as well. netcfg is on the cannot automatically migrate without approval udeb list and, in order to migrate it, the new version of libdebian-installer (which is also on the needs approval list) would also have to migrate at the same time. ack for netcfg and libdebian-installer. What about partman-base (and rescue which Christian kind of acked)? Got an ack from otavio on IRC. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c704331.4010...@debian.org
Re: bugs in the unofficial RC bug tracker @ turmzimmer
On 08/15/2010 04:46 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: Hi, Hi I investigated some differences between http://bts.turmzimmer.net/details.php and what UDD sees, and found out that the unofficial RC bug tracker seems to be missing quite a lot of bugs. The main problem seems to be that it doesn't know about the 'src:' syntax (examples: #577321, #577364). It also seems wrong about other bugs, though it's harder to understand what it does wrong in those cases. I guess some of them can be explained by the seemingly missing support for multiple source versions in unstable (aka it seems to take the first one it encounters). If someone is interested in rewriting the unofficial RC bug tracker using UDD, I could provide some help with the SQL part. aba: what do you think? Maybe it's also time to make it an official service? Cheers Luk -- 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/4c68011f.50...@debian.org
Re: Seeking for advice regarding keepalived
On 08/14/2010 09:04 AM, Alexander Wirt wrote: Hi folks, Hi Alexander some time ago I uploaded keepalived 1.2.0 to debian because it was the first (development) version with ipv6 support for ipvs. I thought/hoped development would be faster so that we have a working/stable version with ipv6 for squeeze. Unfortunatly that wasn't the case. I don't think 1.2.0 should be released with squeeze, but I also don't want to release without keepalived since several people rely on it. So I see two options here: - Upload 1:1.1.17 to unstable/testing (that was the latest version in squeeze before 1.2.0) - Upload 1:1.1.19 to unstable/testing (that is a bugfix release which contains some wanted bugfixes.) The second option would be my preferred one. What do you think? At my work place we are using 1.1.19 as we really needed some bugfixes which were not in 1.1.15 nor 1.1.17. It works stable and we did not have any issues up to now. So personally I would go for 1.1.19, so unless there are objections please do upload that one. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c6648cb.7050...@debian.org
Re: User-testing of testing?
On 08/10/2010 03:43 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:40:29AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: So I was wondering if we shouldn't have a list of user-centered stable release goals, such as open a PDF attachment in icedove, open an OpenDocument attachment in icedove, watch youtube videos, copy a file to a USB key, which people trying a fresh testing install could test. snip I however do not see an obvious way of collecting feedback for such user tasks, or for having fights over which user tasks are the most significant, without having people submit tasks to the release managers and the release managers deciding which ones are worth making official, which would be quite a burden to them. Are there ways to set up such a thing so that it mostly manages itself? I don't know a specific answer on your questions, but I do have some lateral thinking/discussion to report. At DebConf10, I've spoken with Philipp Kern about how to invite our users to test Squeeze before we release it. We have agreed on the fact that we can do better than past releases on that and the rough idea was to send out a press release inviting willing users to do upgrades from Lenny to frozen Squeeze and report the issues they find. We discussed how the best moment to do that would have been post-freeze and it turns out that this is exactly *that* moment. The TODO list to go forward with this is: - Decide where user feedback will have to go; the obvious answer is the BTS, but we need to decide whether reuse some existing (pseudo) package or create a new one for the occasion. IMHO it should be something quite obvious for the users such as squeeze or squeeze-upgrades or something like that. There is upgrade-reports just for that reason... - Draft a text to send out as press release, the title should probably be something like User testing sought to improve the quality of the forthcoming Debian Squeeze. The debian-public...@lists.d.o is wonderful for reviewing this kind of stuff, but we need first to decide the content of the press release. I propose the following main points: - please test upgrades from lenny to (frozen) squeeze - please test ISOs/d-i This is especially a good idea once d-i beta is released... Some of the issues that will be found for upgrading or for installing will just have to be fixed, others probably need to be documented in the Release Notes. I believe that what you are looking for can later on be extracted from user reports ... but of course we will need to find out a group of Debian volunteers to do that triaging. The latter can probably be found easily if the release team agrees on sending (later on) a specific call for help via d-d-a (I'm kind of reluctant to add such duty to the release team, given that they will be super-busy in the near future with unblock requests and in getting the RC bug count down). This is mainly the difficult part from previous experiences, though I hope it will be easier to find volunteers this time! :-) Cheers Luk -- 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/4c61bff0.6070...@debian.org
Re: User-testing of testing?
On 08/10/2010 11:55 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:09:04PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: - Decide where user feedback will have to go; the obvious answer is the BTS, but we need to decide whether reuse some existing (pseudo) package or create a new one for the occasion. IMHO it should be something quite obvious for the users such as squeeze or squeeze-upgrades or something like that. There is upgrade-reports just for that reason... Oh, right, I apologize for my ignorance of that package. What is the appropriate way to tag upgrade reports so that we can easily filter on lenny-squeeze upgrades or alternatively filter out past unrelated reports? I guess it would be best if they get a tag lenny or get closed when they are not about upgrades to squeeze. Cheers Luk -- 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/4c61cba7.6070...@debian.org
Re: Releasability of the HPPA port
On 08/07/2010 12:28 PM, Thibaut VARÈNE wrote: Le 7 août 2010 à 06:43, Philipp Kern a écrit : On 08/06/2010 10:48 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: Finally, a silly question: looking at the bottom line of this chart, it seems that Debian is at risk of becoming a x86/64(+ia64?)-only release[2]. Is it actually the case? I don't mean to start a heated discussion here, but if I missed the memo, maybe others did too. The point is, if that's what Debian is moving towards, then the current discussion is pretty moot, isn't it? It looks that many ports have trouble to either have new affordable hardware (so buildds can cope easily and porters have easy means to test things) or have trouble to have upstream and/or Debian porters. So in that regard Debian will be moving to supporting less ports unless that changes AFAICS. Note though that armel is a noticable exception were both new hardware and new porters are easily found both upstream as well as within Debian. In that regard I'm at least still hopeful for the mips ports. hppa seems to be very borderline for the future due to a stand still for hardware and a decrease in porters (upstream seems to work best when it's similar to ia64 and already more difficult otherwise). The kfreebsd ports seem to not have enough porting effort to have a clear progress atm, though still look promising. powerpc and sparc seem to loose linux users/porters due to only having expensive new hardware, Oracle is probably not going to help in that respect. sparc seems to also miss Debian porters to be able to move to sparc64 userland in a clean way. s390 has always been special and would gain a lot of having some real porters next to the current contributing users AFAICS. Personally I'd love if Debian would be able to attract more porters so we could keep supporting many architectures also in the future! Cheers Luk PS: Feel free to correct me if my observation seems wrong or incomplete for some port. -- 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/4c5d60bd.7000...@debian.org
Re: libmikmod/stable on hppa version problem
On 07/15/2010 10:04 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Hi, On Thu, 2010-07-15 at 21:04 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: We have run into a problem with libmikmod on stable-security in the most recent DSA. That was released with the version number 3.1.11-a-6+lenny1, following the usual scheme. However, as it seems hppa had a version that used the old binNMU numbering scheme: 3.1.11-a-6.0.1, which is considered newer: http://packages.debian.org/lenny/libmikmod2 [also visible on http://release.debian.org/proposed-updates/stable.html fwiw] Is there a way that we can solve this for hppa, or is the only way out a new DSA update for all 12 archs with only change a new version number? I've been trying to think of an answer that doesn't necessitate a complete rebuild, but haven't come up with one thus far. Any solution that involves a sourceful upload will need to be rebuilt on all architectures. I'm not sure if the security archive / buildd setup makes it possible to only attempt to build a package on a restricted set of architectures; even if it does, as soon as the package is accepted in to proposed-updates the remaining architectures will then be auto-built for stable. I guess that only a manual build of a binNMU old scheme on hppa will save you from having a sourceful upload and rebuilds on all architectures. Probably the hppa buildd admins (in Cc) can help here? Cheers Luk -- 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/4c3f831c.70...@debian.org
