Albert van der Horst wrote:
Jonathan Nieder schreef:
Do you mind if I forward your message to the bug log? Do you
have dmesg output from that experiment (since it should include a
fuller trace)?
You can do whatever is necessary wih the information I provided.
Thanks much.
I don't
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Hi,
do these have to be pipes? That got me wondering.
Yes, for most use cases I have run into they do need to be pipes and
not tempfiles. I do think =(...) is neat, too, but it is a distinct
feature.
Thanks,
Jonathan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Control: tags -1 - patch
Hi Brian
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 01:46:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
tags 661545 + patch
kthxbye
A patch is included to fix the format string issue, minor as it might
be.
--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 |
Hi,
thanks for the additional information. Please note that I uploaded the
NMUed packages yesterday. In case the just one small issue mentioned
by David below is serious above please reopen the bug report to prevent
migration to testing (I also filed unblock request bugs).
Kind regards
[Jonathan Nieder]
Are you sure? Could you send output from trying to install it?
I used interactive aptitude and it can't install chromium:i386 because
it can't find a candidate for the chromium-inspector dependency.
(I had always thought that in the multi-arch world Arch: all meant
with
Peter Samuelson wrote:
[Jonathan Nieder]
(I had always thought that in the multi-arch world Arch: all meant
with the same architecture as its dependencies.)
That's what they want you to think! No, for dependency resolution
purposes, arch:all is equivalent to arch:{dpkg's primary arch}.
Package: mesa
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
This issue affects mesa:
http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.de/2012/11/stable-update-for-chrome-os_30.html
Proposed patch:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org/msg29015.html
I don't see the
On 6 December 2012 15:26, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
so that dpkg, apt, and aptitude can agree on what to do here?
Do they currently disagree?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock package proofgeneral
the new version fixes RC bug #694285 and corrects some wrong
information in README.Debian.
debdiff
Package: tomcat6
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
More Tomcat security issues have been disclosed:
http://tomcat.apache.org/security-6.html
The page contains links to the upstream fixes.
BTW, is there a specific reason why both tomcat6 and tomcat7 are present in
Package: tomcat7
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
New security issues in Tomcat have been disclosed:
http://tomcat.apache.org/security-7.html
The page contains links to upstream fixes.
Cheers,
Moritz
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Daniel Hartwig wrote:
On 6 December 2012 15:26, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
so that dpkg, apt, and aptitude can agree on what to do here?
Do they currently disagree?
No, I was just confused. Contrary to my expectation, dpkg follows the
spec.
In my mental model, there is no
Package: xchat-gnome
Version: 1:0.30.0~git20110821.e2a400-0.2+b2
Severity: normal
Dear maintainer,
When someone says /me is doing something, my xchat-gnome only displays
* someone
and not
* someone is doing something
The only exception is when the message includes my nick, then I can
-On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 11:26:25PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Peter Samuelson wrote:
[Jonathan Nieder]
(I had always thought that in the multi-arch world Arch: all meant
with the same architecture as its dependencies.)
That's what they want you to think! No, for dependency
201 - 214 of 214 matches
Mail list logo
