On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 at 15:55:54 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Based on the descriptions, I'd be
> happy to defer to your judgement as to which of the two options you'd
> be happiest to support for the future.
Thanks! I'll do some more testing on 1.0.0.68-1~deb10u1 and plan to
upload that one if
Control: tags -1 + confirmed
On Mon, 2021-01-18 at 00:34 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 at 18:14:15 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 23:36 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > > If the release team would accept it, a backport of the .deb from
> > >
On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 at 18:14:15 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 23:36 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > If the release team would accept it, a backport of the .deb from
> > testing/unstable would be a reasonable alternative to this.
>
> Does that include many changes that
Hi,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.
On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 23:36 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Collect selected changes from unstable, in particular:
> * Avoid redirecting stderr by default, which interferes with
> upstream's
> usual support/diagnostic process
> * Add missing
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: buster
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
[ Reason ]
Collect selected changes from unstable, in particular:
* Avoid redirecting stderr by default, which interferes with upstream's
usual support/diagnostic process
* Add
5 matches
Mail list logo
