On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 05:46:39AM -0500, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019, at 14:06, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
But you’re not in a situation to command either, considering
hmh is the ONLY maintainer of rng-tools so we WILL need his
input on this (or do an NMU).
Anything th
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019, at 14:06, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> But you’re not in a situation to command either, considering
> hmh is the ONLY maintainer of rng-tools so we WILL need his
> input on this (or do an NMU).
Anything that does not break things for people in stretch when updating to
buster wou
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 04:05:09PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Michael Stone dixit:
So use the epoch. They're invented for fixing collosal errors like
this. Except this time, have the appropriate discussion on -devel
instead of just uploading something without coordination.
Sounds like an ap
Michael Stone dixit:
> So use the epoch. They're invented for fixing collosal errors like
> this. Except this time, have the appropriate discussion on -devel
> instead of just uploading something without coordination.
Sounds like an approach, but please see in #919893 my message
first for
an alt
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 03:41:22PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Michael Stone dixit:
Please upload a fixed version of rng-tools instead, reverting the erroneous
change.
That is impossible because the version changed.
In the tool I’m using, I have a hard version requirement on
rng-tools (<<
Michael Stone dixit:
> Please upload a fixed version of rng-tools instead, reverting the erroneous
> change.
That is impossible because the version changed.
In the tool I’m using, I have a hard version requirement on
rng-tools (<< 3) | rng-tools-debian (<< 3).
At best we could do with an epoch
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 03:25:12PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Michael Stone dixit:
No, that's something else that shouldn't have happened
It’s important to me because the upload of rng-tools (>> 2)
broke things on unstable.
So that should be fixed--the problem should not be made worse.
Michael Stone dixit:
> No, that's something else that shouldn't have happened
It’s important to me because the upload of rng-tools (>> 2)
broke things on unstable.
Perhaps letting it migrate to testing wasn’t ideal, but it
will work for people there, and it won’t affect existing
users or those w
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 03:01:18PM +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 14:51:05 -0500 Michael Stone wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 01:57:28PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
>There never should have been an NMU simply replacing rng-tools with
>rng-tools5. I did not notice that this h
On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 14:51:05 -0500 Michael Stone wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 01:57:28PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> >There never should have been an NMU simply replacing rng-tools with
> >rng-tools5. I did not notice that this had happened.
>
> Also, the correct fix for buster is an uploa
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 01:57:28PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
There never should have been an NMU simply replacing rng-tools with
rng-tools5. I did not notice that this had happened.
Also, the correct fix for buster is an upload to put things back the way
they were, which is going to be ugly.
There never should have been an NMU simply replacing rng-tools with
rng-tools5. I did not notice that this had happened.
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 07:21:49PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
That has apparently failed to materialize well in time for buster.
Looking at the contents of the binary p
Hello Aron Xu and everyone else,
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 01:25:03PM +0800, Aron Xu wrote:
> Package: rng-tools
> Version: 5-1
> Severity: serious
> Tags: sid
>
> We need to prevent this version of rng-tools from migrating to testing
> before finding a solution of coordinating with the rng-tools5
Package: rng-tools
Version: 5-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid
We need to prevent this version of rng-tools from migrating to testing
before finding a solution of coordinating with the rng-tools5 package.
Aron
14 matches
Mail list logo
