Bug#603719: Please update package aspell-sk

://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/aspell/dict/sk/aspell6-sk-2.01-2.tar.bz2 ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/aspell/dict/sk/aspell6-sk-2.01-2.tar.bz2It is possible to update this package to current version? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#633931: RFP: smpq -- StormLib MPQ archiving utility

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: smpq Version : 1.3 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com * URL : https://launchpad.net/smpq * License : GPL v3 Programming Lang: C, C++ Description : StormLib MPQ archiving utility SMPQ

Bug#633931: Add new application to Debian

On Št 21. júl 2011, 16:22:48 CEST, Timo Juhani Lindfors timo.lindf...@iki.fi wrote: Hi, I you might want to keep the bug in the Cc list if you talk about it so that others see what has been done.. Ok, I forgot append CC list. Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com writes: I can maintain my

Bug#702495: netplug: [PATCH] Allow to specify custom script file via param '-s'

which calling ifup/ifdown). Patch is attached, generated by hg diff against repository on: http://hg.serpentine.com/netplug -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com diff -r aaebd52fac19 lib.c --- a/lib.c Sat Jun 26 09:36:45 2010 -0700 +++ b/lib.c Sat Mar 02 02:38:19 2013 +0100 @@ -29,6 +29,7

Bug#657191: kopete: multiple crashes in the wlm protocol code

Patches from Debian bug #657191 was commited to Kopete master git repository and they will part of KDE 4.11 release. So this bug can be closed as fixed in upstream. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#657191: kopete: multiple crashes in the wlm protocol code

Hello Raphael, are these wlm patches on debian bug #657191 still valid? Btw in future, please send kopete patches to kopete-devel mailinglist or to kde reviewboard. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#657191: kopete: multiple crashes in the wlm protocol code

On Friday 31 May 2013 16:56:23 Raphael Geissert wrote: Hi, On 31 May 2013 14:58, Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Raphael, are these wlm patches on debian bug #657191 still valid? Btw in future, please send kopete patches to kopete-devel mailinglist or to kde reviewboard

Bug#726674:

. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#711763: igmpproxy package

Hi, is there any progress on packaging igmpproxy daemon? When will be package in debian apt repository? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#603719: Please update package aspell-sk

In ubuntu is package updated for 3 years. Can you update this package also in Debian? (e.g forward ubuntu patch?) -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#656719: Please provide xvmc and vdpau Gallium3D video acceleration drivers (libg3dvl-mesa package)

2014-03-23 21:19 GMT+01:00 Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org: On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 19:03:52 +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: Hello! It looks like nouveau, r600 and radeonsi vdpau drivers are already in debian repository. But not xvmc libraries. See: Correct, we're probably not going

Bug#656719: Please provide xvmc and vdpau Gallium3D video acceleration drivers (libg3dvl-mesa package)

Right, it does not make sense to have in debian repository free applications with enabled xvmc support and disabled (not included) free xvmc drivers in repository. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact

Bug#695246: grub-efi-amd64 has no linux16, fails to boot memtest86+ (multiboot also fails)

is running in bios mode. In uefi mode grub_platform is set to efi. I think that this change should fix this bug. Memtest86+ menu entries will not be visible in uefi mode anymore... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#661885: network-manager: Should not take IPv6 prefix length from DHCPv6 client

This bug is fixed in upstream version 0.9.6 of network-manager. In Debian Jessie is version 0.9.8, so this bug is already fixed. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#656719: Please provide xvmc and vdpau Gallium3D video acceleration drivers (libg3dvl-mesa package)

Hello! It looks like nouveau, r600 and radeonsi vdpau drivers are already in debian repository. But not xvmc libraries. See: https://packages.debian.org/sid/mesa-vdpau-drivers https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705558#24 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Bug#750789: netplug: FTBFS with clang instead of gcc

Hi Arthur, your patch fix-function-declaration.patch is broken and will not work. That functions must be declarated in functions because they access local function variables. So you cannot move them out. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally

Bug#771422: RFS: netplug/1.2.9.2-2 [ITA]

/init.d: - Turn off ethernet interface autoprobing * Handle ST_DOWNANDOUT state (Closes: #652418) * Allow to specify custom script file via new param '-s' (Closes: #702495) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#772727: unblock: netplug/1.2.9.2-2

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Severity: normal Please unblock package netplug New version of netplug package (1.2.9.2-2) which is on http://mentors.debian.org/package/netplug fix more bugs reported to Debian. Ner version is not from

Bug#773212: unblock: 0xffff/0.6.1-1

version 0.6.1. It is really bugfix version and it does not make sense to do any cherry-picking. You should apply all patches from 0.6 to 0.6.1, so if you generate apply cherry- picked patches on top of 0.6 you will have same tarball as 0.6.1. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc

Bug#559983: lsusb -t stops in an infinite loop

= '\000' repeats 254 times} As you can see struct usbinterface *i has cyclic reference to itself. Aurelien Jarno, can you look at it? Or do you need some other tests/logs? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#791421: RFP: udfclient -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

: cd_disect - Display report of disc cd_sessions - Show sessions on disc mmc_format - Format optical disc newfs_udf - Create UDF filesystem on file or a formatted disc udfclient - FTP-like client for UDF filesystem udfdump - Dump information from UDF filesystem -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#791463: RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP]

release (Closes: #791421) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#786693: RFS: netplug/1.2.9.2-2 [ITA]

* Handle ST_DOWNANDOUT state (Closes: #652418) * Allow to specify custom script file via new param '-s' (Closes: #702495) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#791463: Quick review

Hello, I added dirhash.h and vfs_dirhash.c files to debian/copyright as those were missing. Other BSD files reported by licensecheck are not correctly detected (they are not BSD licensed). -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

kage? > > cheers, > > G. > Hi Gianfranco, I did not updated package because I did not know that some step is needed to do. My last uploaded version worked and I thought that it was OK. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

not need to patch software just for compilation -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

On Monday 14 December 2015 12:37:24 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 14/12/15 12:33, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Friday 11 December 2015 18:04:06 Andrew Shadura wrote: > >> > you just dropping the patch into the right place. > > I know where and how. But I do not like idea

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

ncy and upgrading if original source code which patch modify changes. And also I see using patches as last option. Are not Debian want to reduce patches if they are not really needed? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

On Thursday 17 December 2015 15:51:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 14 December 2015 12:37:24 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > On 14/12/15 12:33, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Friday 11 December 2015 18:04:06 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > >> > you just dropping the patch into th

Bug#825105: RFS: udfclient/0.8.5-1

On Friday 27 May 2016 13:10:26 Andrew Shadura wrote: > I'll have a look. Now it is in sid: https://packages.debian.org/sid/udfclient -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Thursday 28 April 2016 10:13:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-dev (libusb 0.1) package > > > in Debian repository, because

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

PING! On Tuesday 24 May 2016 10:51:59 Pali Rohár wrote: > Hi! Now after month, any news regarding this package? > > On Wednesday 27 April 2016 12:53:06 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > Hi Pali and mentors, > > > > (redirecting the question to -mentors, because I don'

Bug#791463: closing RFS: udfclient/0.8-1 [ITP] -- userland implementation of the UDF filesystem

On Thursday 17 December 2015 15:51:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 14 December 2015 12:37:24 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > On 14/12/15 12:33, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Friday 11 December 2015 18:04:06 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > >> > you just dropping the patch into th

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

here is at least one application which does not work with new libusb 1.0. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:47:23 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-03-15 22:25, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-dev (libusb 0.1) > > > > package in Debian

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

not removing working libusb 0.1 implementation from Debian until we have other working replacement library. Thanks! -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Monday 07 March 2016 17:49:00 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 07 March 2016 14:31:44 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > On 6 March 2016 at 21:16, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > But should not be cleandir part of that --buildsystem=bmake? Or > >

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 23:08:26 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-03-15 22:50, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:47:23 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > On 2016-03-15 22:25, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote:

Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP]

Hello, I'm still looking for a sponsor for package "smpq" and its dependences. Please look at bug 819396. Thanks! -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819380: RFP: stormlib -- Library for accessing the MPQ archives

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: stormlib Version : 9.20 Upstream Author : Ladislav Zezula * URL : http://www.zezula.net/en/mpq/stormlib.html * License : MIT Programming Lang: C++ Description : Library for accessing

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

ezula.net/en/mpq/stormlib.html. Changes since the last upload: * Initial release (Closes: #819380) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

ttp://zezula.net/en/mpq/namebreak.html. Changes since the last upload: * Initial release (Closes: #819380) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP]

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "smpq" * Package name: smpq Version : 1.5-1 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://launchpad.net/smpq * License

Bug#633931: smpq and stormlib packages are ready

Hi! Packages are now ready at mentors.debian.net: https://mentors.debian.net/package/smpq https://mentors.debian.net/package/stormlib https://mentors.debian.net/package/stormlib-listfiles Can somebody review them? Note that stormlib upstream changed license to MIT. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Friday 04 March 2016 22:48:59 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 04/03/16 22:47, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Friday 04 March 2016 22:40:35 Andrew Shadura wrote: > >> > On 4 March 2016 at 22:29, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >>>>

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Friday 04 March 2016 22:40:35 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 4 March 2016 at 22:29, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I just wanted to note that with the latest bmake (20150606-1), it > >> is enough to have this in your debian/rules: &g

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Sunday 06 March 2016 08:59:53 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 6 March 2016 at 01:20, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > First dpkg-buildpackage call works, but calling it secondary fails > > with: > > > > dpkg-source: info: local changes detected, the m

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Sunday 06 March 2016 10:28:31 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Sunday 06 March 2016 10:24:05 Andrew Shadura wrote: > > On 6 March 2016 at 09:50, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > It is because "debian/rules clean" calls only "bmake clean"

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Sunday 06 March 2016 10:24:05 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 6 March 2016 at 09:50, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > It is because "debian/rules clean" calls only "bmake clean" > >> > which does not delete autogenerated file Make

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Friday 04 March 2016 22:59:10 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 4 March 2016 at 22:57, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > Well, I did test it and it worked, otherwise I wouldn't have > >> >> > proposed it. > >> > > >>

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Sunday 06 March 2016 10:24:05 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 6 March 2016 at 09:50, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > It is because "debian/rules clean" calls only "bmake clean" > >> > which does not delete autogenerated file Make

Bug#791463: Quick review

On Monday 07 March 2016 14:31:44 Andrew Shadura wrote: > On 6 March 2016 at 21:16, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > But should not be cleandir part of that --buildsystem=bmake? Or > >> > why not? > >> > >> You're actually very ri

Bug#711763: igmpproxy: changing from ITP to RFP

to this email, and/or contact the > debian-ment...@lists.debian.org mailing list. > > Thank you for your interest in Debian, > -- > Lucas, for the QA team <debian...@lists.debian.org> > > Hi Lucas! If there is no progress on packaging igmpproxy to Debian archive, I can look at it... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#825105: RFS: udfclient/0.8.5-1

upload: * New upstream release * Remove upstream patch Makefile.patch * Fix formatting of package description Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

even when they are not used and needed? > > > you have to list *every* copyright and license on copyright file, regardless > of it being used or not. > This is a showstopper for ftpmasters. Done, now all embedded libraries have entry in copyright file. Package is now updated on men

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

jected by ftpmasters! > > So, this point is really a showstopper for the inclusion in Debian of the tool > (BTW if you want to ask ftpmasters about their opinion let me know their > answer). > > I would like to avoid uploading and get a reject, but I would consider an > upload

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

olate trademarks... But if you are interested for details, then read: http://zezula.net/en/mpq/namebreak.html -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

sk, but I do not expect any change... > otherwise, how could them notify users about new releases? Package content (or hash) was changed. There is not other way. Has debian/watch support for checking hash or Last-Modified header? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

" helps? And how to do that? Or better, how to ignore all symbols expect those which are whitelisted specified in debian/libstorm9.symbols file? > dh_makeshlibs > dpkg-gensymbols: warning: some new symbols appeared in the symbols > file: see diff output below dpkg-gensymbols: warning: > debian/libstorm9/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match completely > debian/libstorm9.symbols > > making makeshlibs sad is a build failure here! > > HTH, > > Gianfranco -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

an-revision before. File debian/libstorm9.symbols already contains *all* public functions which can be used by other libraries. And all those functions do not have any debian suffix. So I do not understand why it show error message and even how to fix it. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

version. Is that OK, or is there other convention? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

Now I updated stormlib package on mentors.debian.net. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

On Monday 18 April 2016 19:09:49 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi > > >> 0.0.0~20150420 > > > >Ok, I change it to that string. > > as said by Jakub, 0~20150420 is already fine I did not get any email from Jakub. Anyway, now I updated stormlib-listfiles package

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

w :-( > >not sure here, I'm not a symbols-savvy man :( > >please ask on -mentors and come back if you have fixes for them... > > man dpkg-gensymbols should help there... Did not helped. Anyway, symbols file supports regex, so I added: (regex|optional).* -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

ins also static linked .a library. So stormlib build it too... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

ision on symbol AsciiToLowerTable@Base and 215 others ==> What does this mean and how to fix it? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

you sure there isn't any trademark violations there? I'm not lawyer. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

to paragraph then?? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

opyright file. That is all what I know and cannot do more. If there are or there are not law problems it is probably question for other people... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-dev (libusb 0.1) package in > > Debian repository, because it is stable and is working, not like new > > libusb-1.0-0-dev which

Bug#832786: RFS: udfclient/0.8.6-1

upload: * New upstream release. * Update Standards-Version. * Change priority to optional. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819396: closed by Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> (Re: Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP])

Package is fixed and reupload on mentors... I hope now correctly. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

On Tuesday 05 July 2016 01:17:39 Jakub Wilk wrote: > Control: owner -1 ! > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > * Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com>, 2016-07-04, 18:13: > >dget -x > >https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aspell-sk/aspell-sk_2 > >.02-0-0

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

Hi! Now I updated package on mentors.debian.net. Look if it is better now or needs something else... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

* Add Homepage and update Standards-Version. * Fix Coding-System in aspell-sk.info-aspell. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

Ok, I added description about generation of files in README.source file. New package is uploaded on mentors.debian.net -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829012: RFS: udftools/1.2-0.1 [NMU] [RC]

I updated udftools package, new version is on mentors.debian.net. Let me know if it is OK now. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819396: closed by Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> (Re: Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP])

istfiles from Depends: to Recommends: as smpq can work without listfiles package, just is unable to unpack old archives. Also I added pgp check to watch... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#817360: aspell-sk: Removal of debhelper compat 4

On Wednesday 29 June 2016 21:17:38 Pali Rohár wrote: > Hi! Is somebody already migrating package aspell-sk to new debhleper? > If not, I can look at it. No answer for 4 days, so I uploaded nmu update to mentors.debian.net. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Descr

Bug#853991: bts: Patches for smtp+starttls:// & Net::SMTP::TLS

Package: devscripts Hi! I'm sending two patches for bts to bugs as Mattia Rizzolo wanted. Originally I sent those patches to devscripts-devel mailing list. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com From 3178362c639d35c95682b822618d7d1361b9c8e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Pali=20Roh=C3

Bug#852370: override: udftools:otherosfs/optional

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Package udftools does not conflicts with others, so optional priority level fits better then extra.

Bug#852371: RFS: udftools/1.3-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udftools" * Package name: udftools Version : 1.3-1 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://github.com/pali/udf

Bug#852504: RFS: udfclient/0.8.7-1

the last upload: * New upstream release. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#852636: RFS: llmnrd/0.3-1

ot change CFLAGS in debian/ruls (upstream fixed *FLAGS support) * Update debian/watch (upstream does not provide PGP signed tarballs) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#856250: libdbd-mysql-perl: Regression for zerofill columns

://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=118977 Patch which fixes zerofill attribute will be part of DBD::mysql 4.042 release and is there: https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/pull/75 It contains also automated test for verification that zerofill is working correctly. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro

Bug#842599: RFS: igmpproxy/0.1-1 [ITP]

On Sunday 30 October 2016 18:31:39 Pali Rohár wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "igmpproxy" > > * Package name: igmpproxy >Version : 0.1-1 >

Bug#842599: RFS: igmpproxy/0.1-1 [ITP]

(Closes: #711763) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#711763: igmpproxy: changing from ITP to RFP

I prepared igmpproxy package, see: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=842599 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#847685: RFS: udftools/1.2-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udftools" * Package name: udftools Version : 1.2-2 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár * URL : https://github.com/pali/udftools * License : GPL-2+

Bug#847721: RFS: netplug/1.2.9.2-3

dard version * Use debhelper 9 * Use hardening=+all * Fix spelling in changelog * Build only on linux-any Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848340: RFS: smpq/1.6-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "smpq" * Package name: smpq Version : 1.6-1 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://launchpad.net/smpq * License

Bug#848035: RFS: stormlib/9.21-1

ezula.net/en/mpq/stormlib.html. Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release 9.21 * Remove static linked library from libstorm-dev * Compile without pie hardening (shared library is already pic) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848036: libtomcrypt: Change package priority to optional

ere any specific rationale for making it > priority: optional, though? > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Package: libtomcrypt > > Version: 1.17-3.2 > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > &g

Bug#848036: libtomcrypt: Change package priority to optional

Package: libtomcrypt Version: 1.17-3.2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, priority of the package libtomcrypt is set to extra. According to policy [1], extra priority is for packages which conflicts with others. But package libtomcrypt0 does not conflict with other packages, see [2]. So can you

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Wednesday 01 June 2016 23:25:56 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 28 April 2016 10:13:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-de

Bug#810392: fixed in 0xffff/0.6.1+git20160627-1

On Wednesday 07 December 2016 02:21:51 Sebastian Reichel wrote: > Maybe just report a bug on github? It looks like the issues are > actively checked there: https://github.com/libusb/libusb/issues https://github.com/libusb/libusb/issues/237 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signatu

Bug#848726: shebang preseed

become the default for DHCP preseeding, but > > otherwise I doubt it's useful enough to render all existing preseed > > files broken.) > > I support Philipp Kern point "avoid breaking existing preseed files". > > With magic can a preseedfile be identified. Result of the ID check > can (and should) be used in further program flow. Used wisely. > > > > > Cheers, Phil. > > > > P.S. I don't think that using #! as part of the magic string is a great > > idea -- it will make people incorrectly assume that there is an > > interpreter being invoked somewhere. > > New proposed magic string: '#_preseed_V1' Hi! Any progress on this particular problem? I fully agree that pressed file should be identifiable by either some magic line or header. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#849957: llmnrd: tidy up and improve init script

On Saturday 07 January 2017 19:19:06 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 01:47:17PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > [...] > > > [ ok ] Stopping llmnrd (via systemctl): llmnrd.service. > > > > You should fill same bug to systemd to fix their 40-systemd s

Bug#848036: closed by Michael Stapelberg <stapelb...@debian.org> (Bug#848036: fixed in libtomcrypt 1.17-9)

g> by replying to this email. It is still not fixed. wRAR on #debian-mentors wrote: [15:03:27] but the override wasn't changed [15:08:36] the maintainer should file a bug about changing the override as described on https://wiki.debian.org/FtpMaster/Override -- Pali Rohár pal

Bug#849957: llmnrd: tidy up and improve init script

other cleanup as you wrote I can do... [1] - http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic.pdf page 852 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

  1   2   3   >