Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 09:48:48 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976782: fixed in python-jpype 1.2.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #976782,
regarding python-jpype FTBFS with Python 3.9 only
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Package: node-postcss-filter-plugins
Version: 2.0.2-3
Severity: serious
autopkgtest fails with stderr output
postcss.plugin was deprecated. Migration guide:
https://evilmartians.com/chronicles/postcss-8-plugin-migration
This was reported on the team mailing list [1] and tracked in postcss 8
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #976782 [src:python-jpype] python-jpype FTBFS with Python 3.9 only
Added tag(s) pending.
--
976782: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976782
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #976782 in python-jpype reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Control: tag -1 patch
On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 11:08:38PM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> You should consider using the packaged library instead of the embedded copy.
>
Hi,
Please see the patch attached.
libcpu-features-dev has another problem which is fixed 0.6.0-2, please build
with the
It looks like the main problem is here [1]:
[1]
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=boost1.74=mipsel=1.74.0-5=1608350424=0
===
/<>/b2 -j4 -q -d2 --disable-long-double --layout=system
--ignore-site-config --user-config=/<>/user-config.jam
debug-symbols=on
Keith Packard writes:
> This package includes a bunch of games using a shared widget library,
> including a raft of solitaire, another (not terribly good) reversi
> implementation and even a version of dominoes. Having this build only
> xmille would be fairly easy. If that seems like a
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> found 978022 4.1.0-1
Bug #978022 [libopenmpi3] libopenmpi3 Runtime failure opal_pmix_base_select
failed
Marked as found in versions openmpi/4.1.0-1.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
978022:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> notfound 978022 3.1.3-11
Bug #978022 [libopenmpi3] libopenmpi3 Runtime failure opal_pmix_base_select
failed
No longer marked as found in versions openmpi/3.1.3-11.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
On Fri, 25 Dec 2020 20:58:20 +0530 Pirate Praveen
wrote:
> Now with updated @rollup/plugin-node-resolve
>
> (debian-sid)pravi@ilvala2:~/forge/js-team/autoprefixer-rails-10.1.0.0/build$
> yarnpkg upgrade @rollup/plugin-node-resolve@^10.0.0
> yarn upgrade v1.22.10
> [1/4] Resolving packages...
>
Package: qemu-system-x86
Version: 1:5.2+dfsg-2
Severity: grave
Tags: upstream
Justification: renders package unusable
X-Debbugs-Cc: malahee...@gmx.fr
Dear Maintainer,
Not sure is it related with qemu itself, but suddenly a launch of a VM through
libvirt fails with a standard error message:
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 12:48:29 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#956774: fixed in kylin-burner 3.0.9-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #956774,
regarding kylin-burner: Depends on deprecated libappindicator
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 15:33:42 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#977921: fixed in boost1.74 1.74.0-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #977921,
regarding boost1.74: context asm files not built on mipsel
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 patch
Bug #978096 [libvolk2-dev] libvolk2-dev: /usr/include/cpu_features/*.h is now
packaged separately as libcpu-features-dev
Added tag(s) patch.
--
978096: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=978096
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 10:48:34 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975800: fixed in libxcb 1.14-2.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975800,
regarding libxcb: FTBFS: ImportError: cannot import name 'gcd' from 'fractions'
(/usr/lib/python3.9/fractions.py)
to be marked as
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 12:07:30 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#977931: fixed in python-jedi 0.18.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #977931,
regarding python3-jedi: Version 0.17.2 of jedi is not compatible with the 0.8
branch of parso.
to be marked as done.
This means
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 14:37:30 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976942: fixed in multiboot 0.6.96+20101113-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #976942,
regarding multiboot: FTBFS on ppc64el (arch:all-only src pkg): boot.S:44:
Error: unrecognized opcode: `jmp'
to be marked
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 14:37:30 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#976502: fixed in multiboot 0.6.96+20101113-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #976502,
regarding multiboot: FTBFS on arm64: gcc: error: unrecognized command-line
option ‘-m32’
to be marked as done.
This
On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 07:36:05 + Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
[...]
>* Add hard dependency on virtual package notification-daemon.
> + Mention in README.Debian that not all notification-daemon
>implementations start up automatically upon user login.
> + Closes:
On Saturday, December 26, 2020 12:50:58 A.M. CST Keith Packard wrote:
> I've tagged version '1.0' of this repository and created some (not
> finished) debian packaging for it. This version has imported the mille
> sources from 'upstream' which include copyright information for the
> BSD-sourced
Hello,
You need to apply
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/c8fc4f2db9dc636939d98c455ac64e7d275130a3
which I did in
https://salsa.debian.org/mimi8/chromium/-/commit/271bf462595b7300037a77f6816a0e4801435286
. I will let you finish work on the stable release. Please let me know
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 11:49:06 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#974097: fixed in qpid-proton 0.22.0-5.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #974097,
regarding qpid-proton: autopkgtest regression: python-qpid-proton was removed
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 + moreinfo
Bug #978131 [qemu-system-x86] qemu-system-x86: Segfault when starting a VM
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
> severity -1 normal
Bug #978131 [qemu-system-x86] qemu-system-x86: Segfault when starting a VM
Severity set to 'normal' from 'grave'
--
978131:
Control: tag -1 + moreinfo
Control: severity -1 normal
26.12.2020 15:10, Charles Malaheenee wrote:
Package: qemu-system-x86
Version: 1:5.2+dfsg-2
Severity: grave
Tags: upstream
Justification: renders package unusable
X-Debbugs-Cc: malahee...@gmx.fr
Dear Maintainer,
Not sure is it related with
I have rewritten auto-tests, so they do not longer require non-default
versions of compilers. Since the tests with GCC rely on the same version
of the compiler that built Google Test framework, I think preconditions
of Bug#972944 lose its relevance, and there is no need to rebuild the
googletest
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 978071 serious
Bug #978071 [src:entropybroker] entropybroker FTBFS with Crypto++ 8.3.0
Severity set to 'serious' from 'normal'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
978071:
Control: severity -1 serious
On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 2:39 PM László Böszörményi (GCS)
wrote:
> Crypto++ 8.3.0 transition will happen (hopefully) soon. Your package
> fails to build with this version. Your upstream has the fix [1],
> please be prepared to apply it to the packaging.
Transition
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 serious
Bug #978071 [src:entropybroker] entropybroker FTBFS with Crypto++ 8.3.0
Ignoring request to change severity of Bug 978071 to the same value.
--
978071: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=978071
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Hello Nicholas,
if you want to test newer compilers, you are free to do it, but maybe you can
mark tests as flaky and
exit 77 if they fail, so at least you can see failures by manually looking at
logs...
This way you won't block migration to testing, you won't be RC buggy, but you
will have
Package: geary
Version: 3.38.1-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Dear Maintainer,
*** Reporter, please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
* What led up to the situation?
Upgrade on bullseye from 3.36 to 3.38 with apt
* What exactly did
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #976037 in ms-gsl reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #976037 [src:ms-gsl] ms-gsl's autopkg tests are broken by design
Added tag(s) pending.
--
976037: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=976037
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 16:05:34 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#977405: fixed in libgtkdatabox 1:0.9.3.1-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #977405,
regarding libgtkdatabox-dev,libgtkdatabox-doc: both ship
/usr/share/doc/libgtkdatabox-dev/{AUTHORS,README}
to be marked as
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 929531 important
Bug #929531 [src:grub2] grub-pc: grub2 fat_test fails with 4.19.0-5-amd64
kernel if one ensure it does not gets auto-skipped
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact
Control: severity -1 important
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 06:33:58PM +0100, Mattia Monga wrote:
> Package: snapd
> Version: 2.42.1-1
> Severity: grave
> Tags: security
> Justification: user security hole
You didn't really explain how this is a security hole. You just asked for the
default
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #947325 [snapd] snapd: strict confinement is not enabled
Severity set to 'important' from 'grave'
--
947325: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=947325
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Package: go-dep
Version: 0.5.4-3
Severity: serious
X-Debbugs-Cc: z...@debian.org, ben...@debian.org, f...@debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
dep is deprecated by upstream. The upstream repo is now read-only.
Users should have migrated to Go modules.
I was thinking just to request RM, but let's try
Source: librarian-puppet
Version: 3.0.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: vala-panel-appmenu
Version: 0.7.6+dfsg1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: perl6-zef
Version: 0.9.1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: itksnap
Version: 3.6.0-5
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: r10k
Version: 3.4.1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: osmo-hlr
Version: 1.2.0+dfsg1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: openbsc
Version: 1.3.2+dfsg1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: elastix
Version: 4.9.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: pymia
Version: 0.1.9-2.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: camitk
Version: 4.1.2-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: orage
Version: 4.12.1-7
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: otb
Version: 7.2.0+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: xfce4-equake-plugin
Version: 1.3.8.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: sight
Version: 20.0.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: osmo-sgsn
Version: 1.6.2+dfsg1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: ginkgocadx
Version: 3.8.8-5
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: miaviewit
Version: 1.0.5-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: osmo-msc
Version: 1.6.3+dfsg1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: nifti2dicom
Version: 0.4.11-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: plastimatch
Version: 1.9.0+dfsg.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: vagrant-librarian-puppet
Version: 0.9.2-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: osmo-bsc
Version: 1.6.1+dfsg1-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: osmo-bts
Version: 1.2.2+dfsg1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: pynwb
Version: 1.2.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules build
> dh
Source: taskw
Version: 1.2.0-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules build
> dh
Source: python-testing.mysqld
Version: 1.4.0-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules bu
Source: glymur
Version: 0.9.2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: pyaff4
Version: 0.27+really0.26.post6-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules bu
Source: swiglpk
Version: 4.65.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules build
> dh
Source: open-vm-tools
Version: 2:11.2.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> check
Hi Lucas,
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
> on amd64.
Thanks for the bug report!
> > /usr/include/apt-pkg/pkgcachegen.h:32:10: fatal error: xxhash.h: No such
> > file or directory
> >32 | #include
> > |
Source: xmds2
Version: 3.0.0+dfsg-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: node-d3-queue
Version: 3.0.7-10
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules build
&
Source: ruby-mysql2
Version: 0.5.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> + cleanup
> + /u
Source: bugwarrior
Version: 1.7.0-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 06:31:31 +0100
Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:15PM +0300, Alexander Gerasiov wrote:
> > On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 11:50:42 +0200
> > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > this is a regression in 1.2.1+dfsg-2 that is currently in both
> > >
Source: golang-github-datadog-zstd
Severity: serious
Justification: ftbfs
X-Debbugs-Cc: z...@debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
During rebuild your package, I notice it FTBFS.
dh_auto_build -O--buildsystem=golang
cd obj-x86_64-linux-gnu && go install -trimpath -v -p 4
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:44:39 +0100
with message-id <20201226204439.ga4...@xanadu.blop.info>
and subject line Re: Bug#973228: websploit: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: pybuild
--test -i python{version} -p "3.9 3.8" returned exit code 13
has caused the Debian Bug report #973228,
Your message dated Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:34:20 +0100
with message-id <20201226203420.ga1...@xanadu.blop.info>
and subject line Re: Bug#975195: cupt: FTBFS: dh_auto_test: error: cd b && make
-j4 test ARGS\+=-j4 returned exit code 2
has caused the Debian Bug report #975195,
regarding cupt: FTBFS:
Control: tags -1 patch
On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 09:37:53PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> Subject: pangox-compat: FTBFS: pangox.c:282:13: error: ‘PangoFontClass’
> {aka ‘struct _PangoFontClass’} has no member named ‘find_shaper’
> During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 patch
Bug #955663 [src:pangox-compat] pangox-compat: FTBFS: pangox.c:282:13: error:
‘PangoFontClass’ {aka ‘struct _PangoFontClass’} has no member named
‘find_shaper’
Added tag(s) patch.
--
955663: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=955663
Source: dune-functions
Version: 2.7.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[5]: Entering direct
Source: pavucontrol-qt
Version: 0.14.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> cd /<>/obj-x86_64-
Source: xfce4-smartbookmark-plugin
Version: 0.5.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /bin/b
Source: lximage-qt
Version: 0.14.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> cd /<>/obj-x86_64-linu
Source: golang-github-shopify-sarama
Version: 1.22.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/ru
Source: sfcgal
Version: 1.3.9-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> cd /<>/obj-x86_64-linu
Source: aptitude
Version: 0.8.13-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> g++ -DLOCALEDIR=\"/u
Source: pcmanfm-qt
Version: 0.14.1-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> cd /<>/obj-x86_64-
Source: evolution-data-server
Version: 3.38.2-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /usr/bin
Source: petsc4py
Version: 3.14.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: gimp
Version: 2.10.22-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[1]: Entering direct
Source: obconf-qt
Version: 0.14.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> cd /<>/obj-x86_64-linu
Source: xfce4-fsguard-plugin
Version: 1.1.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /usr/bin/ld: .l
Source: gdb-avr
Version: 7.7-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> debian/rules build
> tar xjf /u
Source: libosmo-netif
Version: 1.0.0-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully
Source: python-tasklib
Version: 1.3.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
Source: orthanc-dicomweb
Version: 1.4+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> make[3]: Enter
Source: ruby-mpi
Version: 0.3.2-3
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /usr/bin/ruby2.7 /usr/bin/gem2
Source: openvswitch
Version: 2.13.0+dfsg1-13
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> checking whet
Source: aide
Version: 0.16.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> checking libaudit.h usability...
Source: inputplug
Version: 0.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> fakeroot debian/rules clean
&
Source: pytest-xdist
Version: 1.32.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201226 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> dpkg-buildpack
1 - 100 of 388 matches
Mail list logo
