On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 15:24 -0800, Rodrigo Gallardo wrote:
lintian is complaining about a package of mine I just converted to 3.0
(quilt) that:
W: rep-gtk source: patch-system-but-no-source-readme
[...]
But, since dpkg-source will extract this package into the preferred
form for
On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 10:20 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Occasionally I notice a package upgrade on a host, but the Debian
changelog for the package has no corresponding changelog entry for the
new release.
The most recent example is ‘mercurial’:
=
$ PACKAGE=mercurial
$ dpkg-query -W
# Cc to -devel for information after the reassign
merge 570980 348864
thanks
Holger Levsen wrote, Monday, February 22, 2010 5:19 PM
clone 570991 -1
reassign -1 lintian
retitle -1 please add a check against commands in /sbin using section 1
manpages
fwiw, there *was* such a lintian check,
On Thursday, October 05, 2006 9:06 AM, Ryan Finnie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ryan Finnie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: grepcidr
Erm... didn't you already submit this as #391168? :)
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Jiri Klouda wrote, Thursday, October 05, 2006 6:57 AM
[...]
I just wanted to ask when xv is going to be updated or what is
holding it up or if someone has some suggestion how I could
upgrade and still get it working (some experimental xv package?)
or do I need to compile from sources?
xv was
reassign 391359 qa.debian.org
thanks
On Friday, October 06, 2006 9:51 AM, Raúl Sánchez Siles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Package: general
Severity: wishlist
With aptitude changelog is quite easy to know the latest modifications
of a package, but it quite often refers to new upstream release.
On Monday, October 09, 2006 6:42 AM, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Aurélien GÉRÔME [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As soon as I send a mail, the deamon restarts... Good news! ;)
Yep. Thanks magic elves!
I've never really pictured aj as an elf... ;-)
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Mon, 2006-10-09 at 12:56 -0600, Oleksandr Moskalenko wrote:
According to the chapter 3.3 of the Dev. reference the GR calls for votes
should've been sent to the debian-devel-announce, but in reality they weren't.
It seems that the only way to get those would be to subscribe to debian-vote
On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 19:51 +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 07:36:27PM +0200, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Doesn't policy violation warrant Critical severity?
No. Please see the top of http://release.debian.org/etch_rc_policy.txt
for which bugs are
On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 10:00 -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
Doesn't policy violation warrant Critical severity?
No, it only warrants the lowest RC severity, serious [0], unless the
bug in addition makes the package or other software (mostly) unusable,
causes
Hendrik Sattler wrote:
Am Mittwoch 17 Januar 2007 12:34 schrieb Luca Capello:
Please the next time use the X-Debbugs-CC: header [1] instead of
[...]
Will b.d.o accept those headers in the first lines of a mail body?
Yes (at least, it should).
See #179340 against debbugs, currently flagged as
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 20:57 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
Hi,
It's been a while since someone mentioned removal of gst0.8 and py2.3
and wonder what's going on.
python2.3 is no more, as of a month ago today:
python2.3 | 2.3.5-3sarge1 |stable | source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386,
On Sun, March 28, 2010 12:54, Josselin Mouette wrote:
3 - totem-pl-parser (libtotem-plparser12 â libtotem-plparser17)
+ evince (libevince1 â libevince2)
As discussed on IRC, please go ahead with these:
Sourceful uploads:
brasero
evince
gnome-python-desktop
On Sat, May 8, 2010 18:06, Frans Pop wrote:
I would have expected a final point release for Etch to have happened by
now (since security support was ended back in February). My personal
interest is of course the D-I updates included for that release.
Regrettably, sorting out etch hasn't had
Hi,
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 16:30 +0200, Luca Falavigna wrote:
So, I rebuilt reverse dependencies of SCons to spot some problems, and I
published my results online. Here is a brief summary:
* 58 packages build-depending on SCons
* 53 packages built successfully (2 of them needed sourceful
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 20:55 +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
On 2010-05-11, Reinhard Tartler siret...@debian.org wrote:
Surely not. Chromium ships a *private* copy of ffmpeg, more precisely, a
fork of ffmpeg called ffmpeg-mt. Debian does not include ffmpeg-mt
because of bug #575600 (tagged
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 08:09 +0100, Harald Jenny wrote:
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 04:48:08PM -0700, Richard A Nelson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Harald Jenny wrote:
Could you give us a quick overview what the current state of
packaging sendmail and libmilter is? Do you need any help? Is there
[please drop -devel from further follow-ups; this is drifting further
off-topic there]
On Sun, November 7, 2010 22:05, Harald Jenny wrote:
On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 12:52:06PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 08:09 +0100, Harald Jenny wrote:
On Mon, Nov 01, 2010 at 04:48:08PM
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 18:02:14 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Debian already classifies packages in different priorities, to
be used today when package updates are pushed into testing, for
example.
You appear to have confused package priority and upload urgency.
Testing migration is affected by
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 08:09:45 +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 04:00:15PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
On 7 June 2011 15:56, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
I would recommend asking the stable release manager. He might say
yes.
What email address do I use?
(I always
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:54:45 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Just for the record: Hurd's no longer in unstable and hasn't been for
a
while.
Hurd very much is still in unstable - hppa was the h.{3} architecture
which we dropped.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 19:48 +, Uoti Urpala wrote:
There was a discussion about whether future Debian would be
based on kFreeBSD, and kFreeBSD failed that on its own merits, not due to any
consideration of systemd (or actually there wasn't much of a discussion, but
that was only because
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 22:09 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
I'm about to file a bug, but wanted your opinion first. When installing
the netinst from today and yesterday, and the latest weekly build CD1,
installation of the base system fails due to bzcat missing. Is this
known already?
Yes. It's
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 20:51 +, Uoti Urpala wrote:
Adam D. Barratt adam at adam-barratt.org.uk writes:
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 19:48 +, Uoti Urpala wrote:
There was a discussion about whether future Debian would be
based on kFreeBSD, and kFreeBSD failed that on its own merits, not due
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 16:49 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 10:52:13PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
even init.d has a documented (and what's
more, actually *working*) implementation of not starting daemons at
boot. It's called 'remove the *** symlink'.
If
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 17:14 +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 08:27:04PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
I would be glad if all services (at least network-enabled or especially
insecure for other reasons) didn't start by default.
Maybe everyone would be happy if there
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 18:18:09 +0800, Liang Guo wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Shell Xu shell909...@gmail.com
wrote:
And, I almost finish my job. But which bugnumber should I fill into
changelog? The new one or both?
Thanks for help.
You can close both bug in debian/changelog
You
On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 12:19 +0200, Michael Prokop wrote:
* Cyril Brulebois [Mon Aug 22, 2011 at 12:02:17PM +0200]:
Michael Prokop m...@debian.org (22/08/2011):
1) What's the proper way to address this issue in squeeze?
a) Build a i386 package with broken symlink?
b) Build
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 11:06:05 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
Thus, please, could we get a $(TRIPLET)-pkg-config binary that does
know all
the magic needed? I insist on this name because this is what the
whole rest
of the toolchain does.
Just as well that's the name pkg-config upstream already
On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 21:00 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Julien Cristau wrote:
Just because it's not GPL doesn't mean DFSG can be ignored.
Well, minified or not, my point is that it's code. And DFSG#2 refers to
source code not to preferred form of modification.
It
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 06:34 +0900, Iustin Pop wrote:
Not sure where else to send this… but while checking for a small upload
I did I saw some very old files on incoming. If you check sorted by
date, http://incoming.debian.org/?C=M;O=A, you'll see some very old
things (1997, 2003, 2007, etc…).
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
forcing these two upstream communities into conflict.
I think we should for these
[with apologies for the original broken reply]
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 01:21:17 +0700, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On 11-11-16 at 07:08pm, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 11/15/2011 01:48 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
I personally wonder if we should change our policy instead of
forcing these two upstream
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 21:08 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
Additionally, the new[1] tg3 driver broke compatibility with the tg3
chip built into IBM's HS12.
[...]
[1] Why the heck do we allow changes like this in stable point
releases?
Increasing the range of hardware on which a Debian stable
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:41:35 +0100, Steffen Möller wrote:
Gcc 4.6.2-5 on amd64 does not complain at all. I do not know the
version of gcc on the buildds.
The build logs will tell you which version of gcc and other toolchain
packages were used.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Tue, 2011-12-27 at 10:52 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 10:42:07AM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Will 1.46 be around long enough that reverting to 1.46 is an option there?
Absolutely, 1.46 is an option. That's why I suggested it. Debian has
been releasing with at
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 16:25 +0100, Nicolargo wrote:
Glances is a CLI curses based monitoring tool for GNU/Linux or BSD OS.
Glances uses the libstatgrab library to get information from your system.
It is developed in Python and uses the python-statgrab lib.
You can have a look on CPU, LOAD,
On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 22:11 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
There are 19 packages still using /dev/.udev after udev transitioned
to /run/udev. Unless there are any objections, I'd like to raise the
severity of these bugs from important to serious, given that the /run
migration is a release goal.
On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 22:07 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
I was concerned about an issue Charles Plessy reported in a recent
thread on Debian Med when he realised that the directories in the
unpacked tarball are featuring his UID/GID. I simply looked into the
uscan source how it is be done
On 09.02.2012 08:45, Philip Ashmore wrote:
Right now it's difficult/impossible to recreate a snapshot of Debian
as it was (updates included) when the bug was reported.
I think Debian needs a way to be able to pick a point in history and
obtain at least the versions + patches of all the source
On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 17:35 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
I think we have to do something saner with changelog files eventually
regardless, but I'm curious: how did Ubuntu deal with the binNMU problem
that Guillem identified? If you binNMU a library on amd64 but not on
i386, as near as I can
On Sat, 2012-02-11 at 03:34 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi Hans,
Hans-J. Ullrich wrote:
I saw this bug was already closed by you.
I don't know where you got that impression. Bug 658728 is still open,
and there is not a patch available yet.
Also, debian-devel is not the correct
On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 22:28 +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Feb 21, 2012, at 10:12 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
There is a discussion about it here [1].
[1]
http://undacuvabrutha.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/why-ubuntu-should-continue-with-upstart-for-11-10/
Not sure why you
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 00:51 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 15:42 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
[...]
Why not simply implement the early boot event driven parts in init as
proposed earlier, and get rid of these non-portable commercial stuff.
Are you really committed to
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 11:36 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 09:37 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 00:51 +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 15:42 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Are you really committed to Debian? Maybe you should work
On 02.03.2012 10:47, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Freitag, 2. März 2012, Kees Cook wrote:
+ * The new kernel version includes security restrictions on
links,
+These restrictions may cause some legitimate programs to
fail.
+In particular, if the 'at' package is installed, you should
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 11:44 +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
I ask you a question: what are the version of the packeges in debian
unstable and in debian-multimedia.org trying to be factual. I know the
answer, I just would like someone from debian to write it down ;-)
I know the version already
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 18:53 +0100, Davide Prina wrote:
Packages (P) and Translation-en (T) have some differences, I don't
understand that there are correct:
* some packages are in P, but not in T (today I don't found one);
* some packages are in T, but not in P (lib32z1);
Which architecture
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 19:26 +0200, Dennis van Dok wrote:
* Package name: mkgltempdir
Version : 0.0.3
Upstream Author : Nikhef Grid Security Middleware Team
grid-mw-secur...@nikhef.nl
* URL : http://wiki.nikhef.nl/grid/GLExec_TransientPilotJobs
The link to the
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 17:53 +0100, Wookey wrote:
+++ Patrick Ouellette [2012-05-01 23:12 -0400]:
Of course the #! line is not the issue. The issue is two upstream
maintainers
separated by years and miles selected the same generic name for their binary
file. Compounding the issue, some
On Mon, 2012-04-30 at 13:14 +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 07:12:42PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
There's nothing particularly wrong with Exim; it works just fine.
Exim in 2012 not supporting 8BITMIME and thus being the last Major MTA
forcing quoted-printable conversions
On 20.04.2012 17:16, Dmitry Nezhevenko wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 08:50:24AM -0700, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
You can package a modern pylucene and take over as the maintainer.
Nothing
would make me happier.
Thanks a lot! I'll try to do this
Any news on that? I'm looking at old FTBFS
On 17.05.2012 07:54, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2012 04:36:40 +0200
Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 02:47:54PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
wrote:
Can someone set the default to xz and recompile all of Debian or
at
least base and create a repository
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 15:40 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
Also, limitations in the existing testing migration tools are making
wine not considered for wheezy, since those tools don't check whether
dependencies for 'Multi-Arch: allowed' packages are satisfied by
packages on other architectures.
Hi,
I realise everyone's waiting for news of the freeze (we're working on
it...) but please bear in mind that this is not an appropriate use of
the Urgency field:
* Urgency high to beat the freeze.
As mentioned in the last mail we sent to d-d-a (and several at various
points before that)
On 22.06.2012 15:31, Roger Leigh wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:32:15PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 06/22/2012 05:34 PM, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Step 1: upgrade/dist-upgrade with ia32-libs (wine, ...) held back
Step 2: dpkg --add-architecture i386 apt-get update
Step 3:
On 26.06.2012 06:13, Raphael Geissert wrote:
For some reason, there no longer are pdiffs for stable, so it has
to
download the whole files on every update.
Were there ever pdiffs for stable? They seem a little redundant, given
that the packages files only change every couple of months or
On 28.06.2012 06:15, Frank Habermann wrote:
i have uploaded a package with dput to ftp-master yesterday.
I did some mistackes in the package and want to upload it again with
dput.
But second time it does not work. I got a message to that i must
delete old files with dcut.
So i do a dcut:
dcut
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 20:09 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Steve McIntyre st...@einval.com wrote:
Both armel and armhf are doing well, covering ~96% of the archive. We
[...]
(*1) and if someone _really_ wants a debug build of that particular
On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 15:42 -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
bug - reportbug release.debian.org and selecting the unblock option
will set the correct usertags for you.
what is the difference between those two user tags and if there is any should
On 10.09.2012 12:47, Ian Jackson wrote:
Juhapekka Tolvanen writes ([juht...@iki.fi: Are you MIA?]):
I sent that E-Mail 2012-08-10 and I still haven't got any answer.
Hence, it is obvious and evident that Debian-developer is MIA.
Please,
follow your own protocols to handle the situation. I
On 19.09.2012 08:44, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
If noone objects, I'll go ahead with filing these bugs with Severity:
serious since this is a violation of a must directive.
Do we have an idea of how many such bugs there are affecting wheezy
currently? Apologies if that was answered earlier in
On 12.10.2012 01:30, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
I further looked around:
e.g. the Release file seems to only use MD5 not so good :(
You didn't look very far / well.
$ wget -O- -q http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/squeeze/Release | grep
-v ^
Origin: Debian
Label: Debian
Suite:
On 12.10.2012 12:49, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 10:09 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
I further looked around:
e.g. the Release file seems to only use MD5 not so good :(
Wrong, the Release file has had all 3 since sarge. woody had MD5
SHA-1.
Then what's this:
On 26.10.2012 01:13, Peter Miller wrote:
It may be possible to address both concerns in a different way.
1. Implement PPAs. The code is open source, get it working first,
and
enhance it later.
2. DDs and DMs upload source-only to their individual PPA(s). The
PPA
build farm builds the
On 28.10.2012 07:17, Osamu Aoki wrote:
Policy states In addition, the packages in main must not require or
recommend a package outside of main for compilation or execution
(thus,
the package must not declare a Pre-Depends, Depends,
Recommends,
Build-Depends, or Build-Depends-Indep
On 28.10.2012 13:06, Arno Töll wrote:
On 28.10.2012 13:57, Florian Weimer wrote:
Does it prevent uploading security updates to the main archive by
default?
Adam, with his Release Team hat on, suggested us to prevent this for
t-p-u likewise.
I think it was p-u, but more as a grumble about an
On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 11:20 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Niels Thykier wrote:
We are considering removing the following packages from testing as
they have unfixed RC bugs filed against them. The packages can be
found in the attached dd-list.
...
Alexander
On 15.11.2012 20:52, RalfGesellensetter wrote:
Last message speaks of wheezy (rhyming to squeeze, confusingly)
They don't rhyme, at least in English; the final sound of squeeze is
closer to z. (As opposed to squeezy, which would indeed rhyme, but
isn't a Debian release... :-) )
Regards,
On 20.11.2012 22:27, Russ Allbery wrote:
Michael Schmitt tcwardr...@gmail.com writes:
That may be common thinking, agreed. But I am that extremely worried
about the current upgrade solution in wheezy, sorry... I think
Debian
should try to get it in.
We are way, way too late in the release
On 23.11.2012 08:47, Russell Coker wrote:
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:26:55 +1100
Really?
Source: bonnie++
Binary: bonnie++
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.97
Distribution: wheezy
[...]
bonnie++ (1.97) wheezy; urgency=medium
I'm afraid I've removed that upload from
On 30.11.2012 13:03, Simon McVittie wrote:
Suggested options include:
A) Consider the new ABI to be right. Recompile every package that
mentions the affected structs (including everything that
subclasses GstElement), unless it has already been compiled
against GLib 2.32 on every
On 30.11.2012 18:43, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 11/30/2012 11:57 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
I never meant to start any redundant discussion about which init
system
is best. And, as Russ already pointed out, we're not going to make
that decision this time. So please, just leave it for
On 25.12.2012 15:55, Stephen Powell wrote:
(1) Official Debian version numbers are not normally assigned until
the
release becomes the stable release.
I haven't checked when previous release numbers were announced, but
wheezy's assigned version was public information some time ago - see
On 27.12.2012 07:27, piruthiviraj natarajan wrote:
I recently moved from Arch Linux to Debian Wheezy.
Is there any way to clean the apt cache for the packages that I am
not
currently using?
[...]
Is there anything obvious that I am missing here?
Yes - that debian-devel isn't a support
On 12.01.2013 16:11, Svante Signell wrote:
Or to say it differently:
experimental being really for new stuff
unstable unfrozen always:
- stable+1 if no freeze
- stable+2 if in freeze
- and stable+1=unstable at the freeze time.
This is similar to what used to happen before the testing suite
[quoting the message you're replying to is often helpful...]
On 08.03.2013 22:08, Nick Daly wrote:
Why is http://anonscm.debian.org/hg [1] 404ing? It's linked from the
main page.
[...]
[1] http://anonscm.debian.org/hg
Missing default document or redirect? Adding a trailing slash works
On 20.03.2013 12:21, Peter Pentchev wrote:
* Package name: re2
Version : 20130115
Upstream Author : Stefano Rivera stefano.riv...@gmail.com
This appears to have been in the archive for a couple of years already
- http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/re2.html
Regards,
Adam
--
On 20.03.2013 13:59, Andrew Shadura wrote:
On 20 March 2013 13:38, Adam D. Barratt a...@adam-barratt.org.uk
wrote:
This appears to have been in the archive for a couple of years
already -
http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/re2.html
I wonder why is it still in experimental. Maybe it's worth
re
CC list trimmed and -release added
On 31.03.2013 17:45, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
A new major release R 3.0.0 will come out on Wednesday April 3rd, as
usual
according the the release plan and announcements [1].
It contains major internal changes [2] and requires rebuilds of all R
packages.
On 02.04.2013 08:24, Andreas Tille wrote:
The only thing I'm wondering about is: Will all unblock requests be
handled before the release (either by an unblock or a refusal)?
That's the plan, yes. As Neil said, we've unfortunately not been as
good as we should have been at saying no (we don't
On 02.04.2013 13:52, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
I suspect that the
length of the freeze is due to the fact that the freeze occurred
while too many RC bugs were already open.
If so, there was a good reason for that (i.e. pre-announced time-based
freeze). As others have said (although ymmv) I don't
On 02.04.2013 16:35, Svante Signell wrote:
The best solution would be having unstable _never_ frozen, at the
cost
of another repository during the freeze period. This was proposed
some
time ago, see
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/01/msg00273.html
repeated here for convenience:
On 05.04.2013 12:45, Johannes Schauer wrote:
(Thomas: I cant find the package debian-java you were talking about)
That's because it's a group of people, not a package...
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 01:45 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
a few Multi-Arch: same packages have all their dependencies satisfied,
but are not co-installable because they got binNMUs. A sourceful
no-change upload to rebuild them should restore co-installability.
I've identified 8 source
On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 09:21 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 01:45 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
a few Multi-Arch: same packages have all their dependencies satisfied,
but are not co-installable because they got binNMUs. A sourceful
no-change upload to rebuild them
On 2013-04-29 10:57, Michael Prokop wrote:
according to UDD we've 4451 new source packages in Debian/wheezy[1].
Plenty of them are worth noting and a good way to present the
interesting new packages to our users could be if package
maintainers/teams just write about them.
Would be nice if we
On 2013-05-20 17:09, Russ Allbery wrote:
Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at writes:
On Mo, 20 Mai 2013, Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
The build deps that I have are:
libgd2-xpm-dev | libgd2-noxpm-dev = libtiff5-dev
libgs-dev = libtiff4-dev
How should this work out?
The
On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 19:02 +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Adam D. Barratt
a...@adam-barratt.org.uk wrote:
Or that gd needs to not tie its own transition to libtiff, and should go
back to using libtiff4 until we're ready to do the tiff transition.
JFTR I have
On 2013-05-21 20:45, Dmitry Papchenkov wrote:
* Package name: meta-suckless-tools
Version : 39
Upstream Author : The Suckless Team
* URL : http://www.suckless.org/
* License : MIT/X
Programming Lang: C
Description : meta-package installs simple
On 2013-06-17 17:51, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
Call it undocumented if you will, it is one of the prominent
identifiers
of a Debian release and doesn't explain to me why this change
couldn't
have been announced on d-d-a beforehand so people could adapt. The
change
was also omitted from the point
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 12:46 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I notice one of my package fails on hurd-i386, kfreebsd-* and sparc due
to various dependencies:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=resiprocatesuite=sid
and it appears these dependencies have been unavailable for a long
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 22:59 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 18/07/13 22:44, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 12:46 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I notice one of my package fails on hurd-i386, kfreebsd-* and sparc due
to various dependencies:
https://buildd.debian.org/status
On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 20:42 -0700, Carl Johnson wrote:
Does anybody know what is going on with grub in testing? I have been
waiting for 2.00, but it seems to be stuck at 1.99. Grub-common at
http://packages.debian.org/jessie/grub-common shows that it is at
1.99-27+deb7u1, but the source
On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 10:53 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
And compiling kernel modules is off-topic for debian-user. It should,
however, be on-topic here.
Not really, although I realise the longer description on
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/ could lead you to that
conclusion. As the
On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 14:19 -0700, Shawn Landden wrote:
* Package name: pdfjs
Version : master
Upstream Author : Mozilla
* URL : http://mozilla.github.io/pdf.js/
This has been in the archive for a few months already -
http://packages.qa.debian.org/p/pdf.js.html
On Sun, 2013-09-22 at 21:33 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 08:11:10PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
The next point release for wheezy (7.2) is scheduled for Saturday
October 12th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend.
Can you please clarify what
On Sun, 2013-09-29 at 19:55 +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote:
I can see that update-menus is run during the dpkg install and I tried
running it again manually.
I can even find the .desktop file for Gnome after update-menus has run,
it looks OK
However, the item just doesn't appear in the menu,
On 2013-10-15 12:33, YunQiang Su wrote:
http://192.168.252.248/attempted/0_attempted.txt
is the list of packages which have tried to build while failed,
which is so called attempted in sbuild.
That's a private IP address, so not that helpful to others. :-) There
is a file named
On 2013-10-15 11:54, Dominik George wrote:
[Jarkko Palviainen; attribution lost in quoted mail]
http://ftp.fi.debian.org/[...]
If you suspect an issue with the Debian archive, please test against
ftp.debian.org.
That's not particularly great advice. ftp.debian.org is just another
101 - 200 of 405 matches
Mail list logo
