Re: debian and lilypond 2.12
I don't object to a suitable Debian developer who wants to take over maintenance of lilypond. They should contact me directly. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Accepted gnucash 2.2.6-3 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:59:08 -0700 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.6-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG t...@debian.org Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG t...@debian.org Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 519148 Changes: gnucash (2.2.6-3) unstable; urgency=low . * Patch from upstream: * src/register/register-gnome/gnucash-sheet.c (gnucash_sheet_init, gnucash_sheet_new): Use g_hash_table_new_full to request g_free on de-allocated items. * src/register/register-gnome/gnucash-style.c (style_create_key): New function. (gnucash_style_dimensions_init): Allocate new key when inserting into hash table. (Closes: #519148) Checksums-Sha1: ed614042ea1a1637f40d54328568d8390b11c88c 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-3.dsc 53f2c78b9dbe7cfc390aa4c925c8301a1383a775 19674 gnucash_2.2.6-3.diff.gz 48a824b0169e06816884ba99bdf349ef130d9246 4611800 gnucash-common_2.2.6-3_all.deb 720e4f4f009b773f3f5e07c0ca201a232f48c9c4 1823172 gnucash_2.2.6-3_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: d8f152a8355c1d33c284a7c1014511e7e976c50d0598bb3c7dfb2a96429c6e6b 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-3.dsc df6a520a8f54141bebdf344d4632f75cbc66e4aa9e030690d042827933999202 19674 gnucash_2.2.6-3.diff.gz 16028ce59606faf98cba455dbff9bcc3e0fb552b9493b979ee30017a17604885 4611800 gnucash-common_2.2.6-3_all.deb 7cd8fe433a4c4f5315ef7fd484da385ec7d17cd6fba7f6a29adcfc4c289a346b 1823172 gnucash_2.2.6-3_i386.deb Files: 1f5be27feda1518f36edba929f9b5757 1495 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-3.dsc 04e7e0799546e73662eeb27f6f234499 19674 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-3.diff.gz 40d287acee93c638f6950f54a7dee7bc 4611800 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.6-3_all.deb 0a4a6f2695529f18f5717df36ca872a7 1823172 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkm/GiEACgkQqMsB9b6fcOoxvQCgx5oJLNj5RQhg47wm+vF9oSrW RwkAoM1EjlXV1o0vjZau6PnWB1MYlcyw =epOz -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.6-3_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.6-3_all.deb gnucash_2.2.6-3.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-3.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.6-3.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-3.dsc gnucash_2.2.6-3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-3_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-changes-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Results for General Resolution: Lenny and resolving DFSG violations
On Sun, 2008-12-28 at 20:45 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 12:48:24AM +, Simon Huggins wrote: I wonder how many DDs were ashamed to vote the titled Reaffirm the social contract lower than the choices that chose to release. I'm not ashamed at all; I joined before the 1.1 revision to the Debian Social Contract, which I objected to them, and I still object to now. If there was a GR which chainged the Debian Social contract which relaxed the first clause to only include __software__ running on the Host CPU, I would enthusiastically vote for such a measure. Can you please define host CPU for us? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Results for General Resolution: Lenny and resolving DFSG violations
On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 15:02 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: For example, having non-free in the archive and the BTS (and potentially buildds and elsewhere) is implied by point (3) (ie, supporting Debian users who choose to use non-free software to the best of our ability), and potentially using non-free software ourselves (such as qmail or pgp in the past) may be implied by point (2) (using the best available tools and techniques to do the best job we can). I would personally prefer for the project to have the freedom to decide those sorts of things on a day-to-day basis through regular decision making (maintainers, list debate, DPL, ftpmaster, RM, tech-ctte, simple majority vote), but I don't know if the rest of the project will buy that these days. I'm fairly sure some people won't, at any rate. I would prefer this. But I am afraid of it, and so I would vote against it. I am afraid that there are folks in the project who really don't care if Debian is 100% free--even as a goal. I think that Ted Tso is even one of them. My fear is that if we say, It is a goal that Debian be 100% free, and leave it up to the ordinary process of people doing their work, then people who oppose that goal, who think it is a foolish goal, or an unworthy one, will simply obstruct it. It is this which bothered me about the release team's methodology vis-a-vis this issue this time around. Not that I thought they were deliberately obstructing our goals--I have no reason to think they were doing anything but making a pragmatic decision as best as they could at the time--but because I can't know for sure. And, then when the controversy erupted, there were people expressing views that I *do* think are simply contrary to our goals, lauding the release team for ostensibly obstructing the social contract's absolutism. I wish we could have in the world of GNU/Linux one, just one, please--just one--distribution which really took free software as of cardinal importance. Debian has promised to be that, while living up to the promise only in fits and starts. That's ok with me. But I'm afraid that if we stopped the promise, and simply decided it would be our goal, the folks who are against the promise will be against the goal, and will see this as permission to simply *never* work toward the goal, and to obstruct others who do. Since it's worded as a pledge, it might make sense that if it (or something like it) is ever adopted, that existing developers membership being dependent on them agreeing to the pledge. That didn't happen with the previous SC change, but it seems strange to claim to have a social contract when a significant number of members don't actually support it 100%. In my opinion, developers who are unwilling to abide by the Social Contract in their Debian work should resign. But they don't, and this is what has me afraid. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: DFSG violations in Lenny: Summarizing the choices
On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 06:55 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: Because according to you, Debian isn't allowed to ship any non-free bits, right? No, not right. Please pay attention. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DFSG violations in Lenny: Summarizing the choices
On Sat, 2008-11-08 at 14:11 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: There are corporate lawyers who are very much afraid that the FCC could, if they were alerted to the fact that someone had figured out how to reverse engineer the HAL and/or the firmware to cause their WiFi unit to become a super radio that could transmit on any frequency, that the FCC could prohibit the *hardware* from being sold anywhere in the US. I've heard this claim before. Can you substantiate it in some way? It seems to me that, if this is really true, then the hardware manufacturers have been lying to the FCC for years, claiming that the user cannot reprogram the card, without explaining that, in fact, it's just that users may not know how to, but that they can do so without any hardware mucking. Regardless, the DFSG doesn't say anything about unless the FCC has an annoying rule. We don't distribute non-free software in Debian. And that's not some sort of choice we might make--it's a a choice we have already made. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DFSG violations in Lenny: Summarizing the choices
On Sat, 2008-11-08 at 18:55 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: The FCC understands that you can't make it *impossible*. Even before software radios, it was understood that someone posessing the skills, say, of an amateur radio operator might be able to add a resistor or capacitor in parallel with an RC/LC tuning circuit, and modify the length of the antenna, etc., thus making a radio transmit outside of the band which it was type-certified to operate on. That's right. The FCC says that modifications of hardware make you, the modifier, the one responsible for the transgressing equipment. But now we have this claim that the FCC's well-understood rule about hardware does not apply to software: that software modifications *are* traceable back to the manufacturer, even though hardware modifications are not. Oddly, however, in all these conversations, we've never seen any indication that this is really the FCC's policy. And none of this is really relevent: the DFSG and the Social Contract do not contain an exception for dishonest or scared hardware manufacturers, or stupid FCC policies. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DFSG violations in Lenny: Summarizing the choices
On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 00:39 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: And none of this is really relevent: the DFSG and the Social Contract do not contain an exception for dishonest or scared hardware manufacturers, or stupid FCC policies. Neither does it (currently) contain an exception for debian.org machines, or very popular Dell machines with Broadcom ethernet firmware. Great! Cut them off!! Let's see how quickly we can get users moving to non-official kernels and installers when the official ones don't work for them. Then we can stop fighting about it. The DFSG hard liners can go on using the DFSG free kernels, and everyone else can either move to another distribution or use an unofficially forked kernel package and installer. Why not just support it in non-free exactly the way we do other things? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DFSG violations: non-free but no contrib
On Wed, 2008-11-05 at 18:06 +, David Given wrote: So having the source doesn't actually gain you anything --- you would neither be able nor allowed to do anything with it, apart from printing it on T-shirts. You can learn about it. Remember the educational purpose of free software? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 01:48 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 22:52 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: But regardless, Debian has promised that Debian is only free software. Then why does Debian have non-free? Is that not part of Debian? No, it's not part of Debian. Non-free is distributed by Debian, but it does not form a part of the Debian system. If non-free is meant to be an opt-in part of Debian, then put the distributable firmware there and be done with it. Of course, what I would be happy to see is the firmware moved to the non-free respository. That's exactly what we're talking about. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 17:34 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote: So now as a Manufacturer I have the choice between 1) Use a huge NV/FLASH/EEPROM Memory which make the Hardware maybe 10-20 Euro more expensive and I will lost customers. 2) Use huge external SRAM (makes the Hardware expensive too) to let users load there own non tested and non-optimised blob and become sued if something goes wrong. Um, no. See, what you don't seem to understand is that users can load their own non-tested and non-optimized blob whether you release source or not. In fact, by not releasing source, you *increase* the risk that users' modifications will damage the hardware. The point here is that loadable firmware exposes you to a risk. The refusal to provide source has nothing to do with whether the risk is exposed; but providing source would *reduce* it. So, the Open-Source System does not realy work on Hardware... Of course, we're not talking about Hardware, we're talking about firmware, which is, of course, a kind of software. I do not know HOW OpenMoko do this, but the certification for GSM software/firmware IS expensive and it IS required by law. If I understand correctly, then you (and perhaps many others), are not being honest in attaining GSM certification. You seem to be saying that the certification is contigent upon it being impossible for the user to change the behavior of the device in a non-compliant way. But the mere fact that you are using loadable firmware means that the user can make such a change. It has nothing to do with the license for the firmware, or whether there is source, or even whether your or Debian or anyone else distribute the firmware. The device, in fact, *cannot* be guaranteed to meet the certification, because it provides the capacity for users to load non-compliant firmware. Now whether that's a serious problem or not, I don't know, but it is entirely distinct from the license terms on the firmware blob. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 13:23 -0400, Michael Casadevall wrote: I have some experience with radios. The FCC requires all radios to be certified before they can be sold, and there is a requirement that you must not make a device that is easily modifiable to operate outside the limits put forth by the FCC. In this case, it would be illegal to release the firmware's source code since it would violate the FCC rules, violate and void the radio's certification (and this also applies to Wifi/Bluetooth devices). The mere fact that the firmware can be loadable--with or without source code--means that it can be easily modified. The ease of modification is not about the obfuscation of the blob, but about the mere fact that it can be loaded. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: DFSG violations: non-free but no contrib
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 16:33 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: So if any of the hardware that requires non-free firmware to operate and currently works in etch was to not work with Lenny, then that's completely unacceptable? If that's the case, then there is no way EVER to make Debian comply with the DFSG since you aren't going to get free firmware for all those devices. Um, yes there is. We could do the same thing we do with codecs, file formats, and all the rest--in the absence of support with free software, we don't support it in Debian. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 18:13 +0100, Neil McGovern wrote: Perhaps I'm mis-reading the above. Which bit of the foundation documents do you think would need overriding for the tech-ctte to rule on which fix to take? One might think that this is the situation: two alternative fixes for the DFSG problem, and a dispute about which one is better. But actually, that's not the situation. We have instead an easy trivial fix, all but complete. (Really, just disabling the hardware, or the accelerations, depending on the case.) And maintainers saying that this is an unacceptable fix--and no actual alternative fix sitting around. I think everyone would regard the fix preferred by the maintainers as superior--there is no technical dispute. The dispute is *not* between the two fixes. It is between these two approaches: 1) Install easy fix now; install fancy fix when it's ready, thus complying with the DFSG at all times; 2) Install no fix now; install fancy fix when it's ready, thus violating the DFSG in the meanwhile. This is not a dispute about technical means or which is the best solution to a technical problem; it is a dispute about whether we are actually supposed to be doing our best to comply with the DFSG at all times. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged 'lenny-ignore'?
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 21:13 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote: Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 11:38 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: The iwl4965 firmware changed 2 times incompatible since the driver exists. That makes me wonder just how separate the driver and firmware are. If they are tightly coupled then the firmware may become subject to the GPL as well. Firmware and driver do not run on the same CPU. There is no 'linkage' between them. With a client/server application, a GPL client does not enforce the server to be GPL, even if client and server are tightly coupled. That is not true. It simply depends on whether they are one program or not, which is a human-level concept, and not a technical one. There is no magic boundary at which the GPL would neve cross. For example, if you were to split GCC into two executables, one which parsed and generated intermediate code, and another which did optimization and codegen, the result would still be the one GCC, covered by the GPL. And this is true even if you then write your own version of the first part, implementing your seekrit proprietary language: the GPL on the back end would require that the *whole program* be distributed under the GPL, any separation into different executables notwithstanding. There is nothing in the GPL about running on the same CPU or client/server exceptions. If you use GPLd code, then the *whole program* (whatever that is, it is a human-level concept requiring understanding and not rote following of rigid rules) must be distributable under terms no more restrictive than the GPL itself. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged 'lenny-ignore'?
On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 22:08 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: The FSF seems to disagree on this[1]: Can I release a non-free program that's designed to load a GPL-covered plug-in? It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. For instance, if the program uses only simple fork and exec to invoke and communicate with plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license of the plug-in makes no requirements about the main program. The general idea seems to be that (at least the FSF) only linked modules are considered as a single program and only in this case all parts have to be GPL-compatible (not necessarily released under the GPL itself). This is (or when the text was originally written), about programs *as released by the FSF*, but not about the GPL in general. It may be that the older text is now getting used in a broader context. I do not know if this represents a change in the FSF's position. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 08:29 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:49:40 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:26 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: No, really. The kernel team are volunteers. Ordering them to do things doesn't help at all; one could equally well send the same message to everyone working on Debian (or, indeed, the wider community) since they could also step up to the plate and help fix this issue. Of course. These are RC bugs. I would be happy to upload an NMU that fixed the RC issue by removing support for the relevant hardware, and dropping blobs from the source. I don't think it's a very challenging task, but I'm happy to do so. Will that be ok? You're not seriously thinking that a release without E100 support does make any sense and is any good for Debian, right? Yes, I am thinking exactly that. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 15:22 +, Anthony Towns wrote: Thomas: your continued inaction and unwillingness to code an acceptable solution to this issue, in spite of being aware of the problem since at least 2004 -- over four years ago! -- means we will continue to do releases with non-free software. I am *happy* to code an acceptable solution, but I regard not support the hardware for installation as acceptable. I ask simply that the project's standards be *applied*, or that at the very least, we have a resolution as we did before. And yes, I would likely vote against it, as I did before. But in a democratic system, people generally are well advised to accept the result of past votes gracefully and work towards the next one. That's what I did; my vote did not carry the day last time, and I have not objected about that decision since. But I *do* object to the apparent new rule that the ftpmasters and release engineers are now empowered to ignore DFSG violations without any review by anyone else. And now we have people saying, hey, let's exempt firmware from the DFSG! again, even though we have a GR on topic which decided that, no, firmware counts. Hey, you've had four years; we're just going to keep releasing until you fix the bug. Hint: you're not being held hostage by anyone, seriously. You know how you can tell? Two words: Stockholm syndrome. So I can upload an NMU right now that fixes the problem? That will be ok? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DRAFT] resolving DFSG violations
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 20:24 +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:52:28PM +, Manoj Srivastava wrote: This is the part I am not comfortable with. I do not think the delegates have the powers to decide when enough progress has been made to violate a foundation document in our release. Just like an individual developer does not have a right to decide to violate the DFSG in their work, I think the release team, which prepares the release, can do so unilaterally either (I did not vote for Bush). And you're comfortable with ftp-master ruling DFSG-iness through NEW then ? I don't really see the difference. I can't speak for Manoj, but for my own part, I have not seen any evidence that ftp-master is letting things through NEW which are in clear violation of the DFSG, so it doesn't come up. FWIW you can query all the lenny-ignore bugs on the BTS, there arent a lot, and check if you agree. Unlike Bush (and the reference is quite offensive, really) we don't hide such matters, and we never said we're not open to discussion. BUt yeah, tagging bugs lenny-ignore is part of the RM tasks, and we're delegated for that (among other things). So far, the release team has shown no awareness in this thread that ignoring a technical RC bug is entirely different from ignoring a violation of the core documents of the project. Nobody is talking about technical bugs, and it would be helpful if y'all stopped bringing them up. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 21:21 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: I am *happy* to code an acceptable solution, but I regard not support the hardware for installation as acceptable. I'm very glad that history has shown most developers disagree with you. So I can upload an NMU right now that fixes the problem? No, it's not OK. See [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a good description of an approach that would be welcome. I see. So the previous statement that nobody is standing in the way of a fix is simply not so. People certainly are standing in the way. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:59 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: If we waited for a release to be 100% perfect, it will likely take several more years. The good news is that the amount of inline firmware in the kernel is decreasing. So, eventually, all non-DFSG redistributable firmware can belong in firmware-nonfree. Do we have an ironclad commitment to not add any additional non-DFSG firmware, period, no matter what? I would accept a compromise which guaranteed an increasing slope. But not a back-and-forth thing. Your reply focuses on regression issues, so is that really sufficient? We guarantee that, say, there will always be *less* non-DFSG firmware in each release, and we guarantee that there will never be *new* non-DFSG firmware. If the NMU involves removing support for hardware, then no, the NMU's solution would be in my opinion unacceptable, and hopefully enough people agree that it would be rejected. Thought so. So the claim that nobody is standing in the way was simply false. People are standing in the way of a simple fix for a simple bug, and insisting on a more complex fix. I agree completely that the more complex fix is better, but it is simply not true that nobody is standing in the way of a fix. Rather, they have declared that only one sort of fix is tolerable, and mostly refused to discuss the question. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 22:47 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: On Tuesday 21 October 2008, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: I see. So the previous statement that nobody is standing in the way of a fix is simply not so. People certainly are standing in the way. That's nonsense. Uncoordinated NMUs are never acceptable for packages that are in general actively maintained (which the kernel is), especially not when it concerns controversial or technically complex changes [1]. Doing so would be a violation of basic NMU policy. The claim was, hey, nobody is stopping anyone from fixing it, if it's not fixed, it's lame for people to complain, they should have fixed it. But, in fact, fixes are not welcome from the team. They have raised a major roadblock, allowing only one kind of fix which requires a lot of work, and rejecting anything simpler. Yes, certainly the team has the right to make such roadblocks if they think it best, in principle. But then that's what's happening: they are standing in the way of implementing a quicker simpler fix. You can either blame people for not uploading their own fix or prohibit them from doing so, but you can't do both at the same time. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 16:00 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: Unfortunately, those who contribute to Debian must be dedicated to ensuring future releases of Debian support the latest available hardware at time of release. No matter what our principles are? Wow. Why are we not equally committed to supporting the latest proprietary codecs? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 23:28 +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote: Would it be a good compromise between SCs #1, #3 and #4 if we made an exhaustive list of non-free bits in main, and make it our goal that the list gets smaller between each release and not to add anything to that list? I would be entirely happy with that. But I have just been told by William Pitcock that apparently we are required somehow to support new hardware with non-free software too. So it's not a decreasing list, it's an accordion list with no real commitment to the DFSG at all. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 23:23 +0200, Frans Pop wrote: On Tuesday 21 October 2008, you wrote: But, in fact, fixes are not welcome from the team. They have raised a major roadblock, allowing only one kind of fix which requires a lot of work, and rejecting anything simpler. Ever hear of the Technical Committee? This is a technical dispute? Whether your packages need to comply with the DFSG? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 16:27 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 14:20 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 23:28 +0300, Kalle Kivimaa wrote: Would it be a good compromise between SCs #1, #3 and #4 if we made an exhaustive list of non-free bits in main, and make it our goal that the list gets smaller between each release and not to add anything to that list? I would be entirely happy with that. But I have just been told by William Pitcock that apparently we are required somehow to support new hardware with non-free software too. So it's not a decreasing list, it's an accordion list with no real commitment to the DFSG at all. Do not put words into my mouth. I simply stated that user experience is an important factor, and that if free drivers (*FREE*) which depend on non-free firmware are available, and the firmware is inline, then it should not block Lenny's release. Huh? So you would be willing to agree to a rule that we never add anything new to the list of non-free bits? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 17:06 -0500, William Pitcock wrote: I worded that rather badly. You should imply within acceptable terms of the DFSG here... in this case, putting stuff in the nonfree firmware package in non-free is an acceptable solution. Of course; that's an excellent solution. Right now, the failure to have that solution implemented is being used as an excuse for violating SC#1. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 18:45 -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote: I guess the question is, staying in the arena of 100% Free, what if DRM technologies become pervasive in the United States and Europe and it literally becomes illegal to have a computer without some proprietary software in it? What if it becomes impossible to develop on a computer, legally, without compromising? Would it still be better to have a computer that is 99.9% free? Keep in mind that I'm asking this in the scenario where providing the last 0.01% as Free Software would be illegal. If that happens, we will have to make some difficult choices. But we are nowhere near that now. For example, I vote, as a matter of principle. But if I lived in various extreme situations, I would not vote, for example, if I were in a one-party state with no real elections. And then *that* principle might well be one I would compromise on if the state in question enforced serious criminal penalties on non-voters. And so it goes. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ‘lenny-ignore’?
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 16:08 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 08:41:16AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Has the current release team lowered the bar on Debian actually trying to follow the social contract? Yes, they have. Furthermore, the FTP team (which is supposed to be in charge of DFSG enforcement) has decided to look the other way: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=497823 I had understood that we had passed a GR to allow--ONCE--a past release with these bugs not fixed, with the understanding they would be fixed the next time. Have I missed something? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ‘lenny-ignore’?
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 11:43 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Actually, I think we need a GR on the lines of , | http://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_007 | General Resolution: Handling source-less firmware in the Linux kernel ` To get a special dispensation for lenny. I think this would be insane. It smacks of the nonsense of the US Congress extending copyright over and over again, always for a limited term, but such that the terms just never actually expire. I object to a second round of this. I was ok with it once, as a compromise, but the understanding I had then was that it was a one-time thing, to give time to actually *fix* the problem. The kernel team should *fix the bug* and not just sit on their hands. We should not release until it's fixed. But the continued dishonesty of holding out one set of principles and guarantees, while granting ourselves exceptions on every release, is not tolerable to me. I do not think that willfully violating the social contract is a decision for a few delegates to make -- we, as a project, should acknowledge the need for and make a special exception to release Debian with known non-free bits in it. We did that once. With the understanding that we wouldn't do it again--or at least, that was my understanding--it was proffered as a special case, a one-time thing, because of the urgency of the case. Moreover, at the time, there was an amendment proposed to make it as long as required and it got fewer votes than the one-time thing. Pretty clearly, we *already decided* this issue, and we need no vote. We need the relevant maintainers to be told your unwillingness to fix this means we will not be able to release. I object very strongly to the feeling that I am being held hostage by developers who will not fix the bug, and then protest emergency! we must release! no delay! we'll do it next time! and then sit on their hands again for another go-round. The solution is to refuse to play along, and to say, hey, you had two years; we're just going to wait until you fix the bug. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 19:11 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:55:00AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: I object to a second round of this. I was ok with it once, as a compromise, but the understanding I had then was that it was a one-time thing, to give time to actually *fix* the problem. Note that there is currently active upstream work to allow us to address these issues - some of the patches are present in 2.6.27, others are still in flight. This is a vast step forward on where we were with etch if we do decide to go down the route of releasing with exceptions again. I think we have no need to go down that route. We do not have to support the hardware at all. That is an option. The fact that the kernel maintainers would prefer a fancier thing is not the point. We can simply not ship support for that hardware *at all*. That's perfectly acceptable to me--even as a user of such hardware. A patch to fix the bug--which is the inclusion of non-free things in main--can be quickly and easily implemented. I'm oh-so-sorry if a fancier fix is not available--but there has been plenty of time. I'm not willing to see another release with non-free blobs in the kernel, especially since it is really quite trivial to remove them. We need the relevant maintainers to be told your unwillingness to fix this means we will not be able to release. I don't think that's a particularly constructive approach to take, especially not in a volunteer project. I think that it is singularly non-constructive to see the maintainers of packages regard compliance with our foundational documents as wishlist items, and the release team regard such things as anything other than show-stoppers. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ‘lenny-ignore’?
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 20:18 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: Apparently, our control structures are not reliable enough to _enforce_ what we have decided. It seems we relied primarily on the release team, which has betrayed the goals of the project, and only count on the FTP team as a fallback, which so far has done nothing about it. Looks clear that we need to change something don't it? Yes, we need a rule that we never release with non-free software. I thought we already had such a rule, but if the release team needs us to vote on the social contract again, we can do so. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug reports of DFSG violations are tagged ???lenny-ignore????
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 22:26 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: No, really. The kernel team are volunteers. Ordering them to do things doesn't help at all; one could equally well send the same message to everyone working on Debian (or, indeed, the wider community) since they could also step up to the plate and help fix this issue. Of course. These are RC bugs. I would be happy to upload an NMU that fixed the RC issue by removing support for the relevant hardware, and dropping blobs from the source. I don't think it's a very challenging task, but I'm happy to do so. Will that be ok? If they were actively stopping people working on these issues then that would be different but I have not seen them doing this. Great, so since there won't be any active attempts to stop, I can just go ahead with the work, right? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted mmorph 2.3.4.2-12 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:05:22 -0700 Source: mmorph Binary: mmorph Architecture: source i386 Version: 2.3.4.2-12 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: mmorph - A two-level morphology tool for natural language processing Changes: mmorph (2.3.4.2-12) unstable; urgency=medium . * debian/control (Build-Depends): Omit libdb3-dev option since libdb-dev is now a real package instead of a virtual package. Closes: (#500615) Thanks to Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the bug report. Checksums-Sha1: ced61bcd8e2534c3d7bd50a61fe7bcaa332dea4d 978 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.dsc 29c0038886a53cdcb34990a7c212fe1b23f2af01 7344 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.diff.gz 964ee8e1cad47ce7659dae87f083f98b1517f25f 170410 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 3c057ea7c4ee8853b230a44f804b08c47b3af99c64331c0f832660615a46d704 978 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.dsc a3a1c6198e21f92d23a0f557d7e44d427966a33b0ee3a9e1a475338008da1fcc 7344 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.diff.gz 14607ea2f0b006cfd82ea7827eb5415c37008b8798ce093dd2645cd6d5dd89aa 170410 mmorph_2.3.4.2-12_i386.deb Files: ba8d14f046c3be1a3a47ec21076a5c2c 978 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.dsc f2f1749540fdf709055969434b7cc997 7344 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.diff.gz aa74b8c756812d7a4ffe4c5364e14115 170410 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-12_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkjpPGsACgkQqMsB9b6fcOrn3wCgy/fz0YVPvUbLvLqhNCCgGXi4 fboAoLmBqCXB3Y3JrMIOnUCInwngCgBG =A+YX -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.diff.gz to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.diff.gz mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.dsc to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-12.dsc mmorph_2.3.4.2-12_i386.deb to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-12_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ssh.upload.debian.org
On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 07:59 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: Also, is it really interesting to the average DD where this queue is? People should be able to upload and expect their packages to end up in the archive. It really *absolutely* does not matter if that upload goes straight to ftp-master or to a different host first?! You're missing the point. It doesn't matter to me at all that the queue is on ries; I didn't know that until I looked it up. It is ries.debian.org which is the host name. You are continuing to scold people for using machine names, when that's not the issue. You are asking people to switch from one symbolic name to using a different symbolic name. Nobody is using the machine name, I'll venture to say. Moreover, I use ftp-master.debian.org because that's what I was told to do when we switched to the current upload procedure via anonymous-ftp. I don't object to you deciding that we should switch names again. But please just say, you used to use symbolic name X, but that is tied with several other services. we want to split those services into different symbolic names. so for uploads, please use the new name Y. Instead, you seem to be saying, how could anyone be so stupid as to use a non-symbolic name? when nobody is actually being that stupid. We're just using the symbolic name we were told to use the last time the names were changed. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ssh.upload.debian.org
On Sun, 2008-09-28 at 21:51 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 04:59:58PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: Please always only use the symbolic names for the places to upload to (ie ftp.upload.debian.org and ssh.upload.debian.org), do not use any machine name directly. Queues may move at any time, without further notice and the symbolic names will be updated. What conceivable reason is there for ever moving the ftp queue off of ftp-master? It doesn't make sense to force everyone to switch their configs from ftp-master.debian.org to ftp.upload.debian.org unless there was an expectation that the queue would be moved, and I can't see any way that this would ever be desirable. What byzantine model for uploads is being proposed, and why? The best part is that I thought ftp-master.debian.org *IS* a symbolic name, as opposed to ries.debian.org which seems like the actual machine name. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ssh.upload.debian.org
On Sun, 2008-09-28 at 21:51 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 04:59:58PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: Please always only use the symbolic names for the places to upload to (ie ftp.upload.debian.org and ssh.upload.debian.org), do not use any machine name directly. Queues may move at any time, without further notice and the symbolic names will be updated. What conceivable reason is there for ever moving the ftp queue off of ftp-master? It doesn't make sense to force everyone to switch their configs from ftp-master.debian.org to ftp.upload.debian.org unless there was an expectation that the queue would be moved, and I can't see any way that this would ever be desirable. What byzantine model for uploads is being proposed, and why? The best part is that I thought ftp-master.debian.org *IS* a symbolic name, as opposed to ries.debian.org which seems like the actual machine name. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.6-2 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:28:32 -0700 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.6-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 496807 Changes: gnucash (2.2.6-2) unstable; urgency=medium . * src/backend/file/gnc-backend-file.c (gnc_int_link_or_make_backup): Fail gracefully in case link returns ENOSYS (which it has no business doing, but sshfs does that instead of the proper error code.) Thanks to Bas Wijnen for the bug report and Micha Lenk for the fix. (Closes: #496807). Checksums-Sha1: 1ffc88da887a78e551a45290f5e0ed43cd3bbc7b 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-2.dsc 9c19854319628bc06e13cfb4eabac6290ea7cbb7 19061 gnucash_2.2.6-2.diff.gz 0e45bb314dc6db2558de46960e2448b1e8d0d5a1 4611466 gnucash-common_2.2.6-2_all.deb bb1e15da74c9337ac994b70dfc98b6b03fc69375 1841636 gnucash_2.2.6-2_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 1d29559ec962b34b82c05ac4f1b222c1133e35e955a14f631389d9335a7e5d50 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-2.dsc 80ec938797f4f881be8ba9d3c50c99b51884936f6350071965d3b304b71bc742 19061 gnucash_2.2.6-2.diff.gz 4d9e8b6919f261db51068b0a43e3bccc6274d107987d6c0ba45dfd22bfe5bd8e 4611466 gnucash-common_2.2.6-2_all.deb b247c1939b08ad0274d6d443d1d17fdf9bedfbc48f478b0d4342f03ac0c14727 1841636 gnucash_2.2.6-2_i386.deb Files: 8ed5f4be97764a5079f085070bf7834d 1495 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-2.dsc 2bed1a1e3ddfe1598db4ad75f41b6215 19061 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-2.diff.gz e4d69cb703bf5988beb3638fa401de34 4611466 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.6-2_all.deb c6d267add3c77da4a9ad45bacb084d6a 1841636 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAki3B08ACgkQqMsB9b6fcOpn5gCgrj+VPaWbzCit/BepsxN3GuLC QooAoLKw0kS0ZQ04tm3LZYaKurCrw4mP =ujA/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.6-2_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.6-2_all.deb gnucash_2.2.6-2.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-2.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.6-2.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-2.dsc gnucash_2.2.6-2_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted libofx 1:0.9.0-3 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:16:30 -0700 Source: libofx Binary: libofx4 libofx-dev ofx Architecture: source i386 Version: 1:0.9.0-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libofx-dev - development package for libofx2c2a libofx4- library to support Open Financial Exchange ofx- Open Financial Exchange programs Closes: 417361 474860 493597 Changes: libofx (1:0.9.0-3) unstable; urgency=low . * lib/ofx_preproc.c (ofx_proc_file): Make iconv buffer twice as big in case input files include non-ASCII UTF-8 characters. Patch thanks to Jerome Vouillon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). (Closes: 493597) . * Acknowledge NMU from Andreas Barth. (Thanks Andreas!) (Closes: #417361) * Acknowledge NMU from Chris Lamb. (Thanks Chris!) (Closes: #474860) Checksums-Sha1: 28e964cb84c1103eae28b6f862674d7adeb6f5d4 1036 libofx_0.9.0-3.dsc 63819ca61d364c8d88f57acae008cc8ea9adda57 7845 libofx_0.9.0-3.diff.gz 28be0cfb374e6da89d924cf2e5a43b0761e73075 165996 libofx4_0.9.0-3_i386.deb 68691403f9cc0ba246983644b11f698914b5c4ea 848500 libofx-dev_0.9.0-3_i386.deb 01cc2e81b5132a14a81093ae48b01216a11bf212 65798 ofx_0.9.0-3_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 89d4a88942598c595d9e0fe096e03f8fbf5671911e88717b1ff791715e8dbdf9 1036 libofx_0.9.0-3.dsc 2b9e979c5d817050454fb7ef7ad1108ac5b7c182d8ce8df1ef926f30d484a139 7845 libofx_0.9.0-3.diff.gz 439201dfaf9eb1b51dd62216e7058e72536b2138e313e45f393c246090f0d8d0 165996 libofx4_0.9.0-3_i386.deb bf9556b75b619f2a2ed4cc8635384957dfa7ae0951a5d5ec04fb318f8e46c409 848500 libofx-dev_0.9.0-3_i386.deb b5e6681b10662c794d9dfb8a4dc19b24be436c384348af59a7f0e88330dbdf6d 65798 ofx_0.9.0-3_i386.deb Files: e9a33e43766e575b86d3a05ec64e4c13 1036 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-3.dsc 6357bec61d6de5bc13422fa58f7a 7845 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-3.diff.gz 27b2739fc3d536bf5f31a13a6b6249dd 165996 libs optional libofx4_0.9.0-3_i386.deb 6f6ed131b4d8d1b7fdeb25f69e8b97af 848500 libdevel optional libofx-dev_0.9.0-3_i386.deb 43b3e02bb7bae2eb0ae6a1befde489b1 65798 libs optional ofx_0.9.0-3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkiX8mEACgkQqMsB9b6fcOql9QCgvk76d2VJObRXxWaouuAZrGgk RjEAn3b/09FLRN6duuTAtavraVl2Qcny =DsHy -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libofx-dev_0.9.0-3_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx-dev_0.9.0-3_i386.deb libofx4_0.9.0-3_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx4_0.9.0-3_i386.deb libofx_0.9.0-3.diff.gz to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-3.diff.gz libofx_0.9.0-3.dsc to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-3.dsc ofx_0.9.0-3_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/ofx_0.9.0-3_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.6-1 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 11:04:24 -0700 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.6-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 473657 481290 491843 492705 492706 492707 492708 492711 492799 Changes: gnucash (2.2.6-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. (Closes: #492706, #492711, #492705, #492707, #492708, #491843, #473657, #481290). * debian/rules (configure): Add --enable-python-bindings and --enable-locale-specific-tax. * debian/control (Build-Depends): Remove build dependencies no longer needed (libltd3-dev, liborbit-dev, libungif4-dev), or which are indirect (libjpeg62-dev, libbonobo2-dev, libgnomevfs2-dev, libgnomevfs2-extra, imagemagick, libart-2.0-dev). . * src/import-export/aqbanking/gnc-ab-utils.c (gnc_ab_get_remote_name): Actually get remote name, not purpose. Patch thanks to Micha Lenk. (Closes: #492799). Checksums-Sha1: 5e55e515fad29391bacc6c8b7df63da301d2fc0f 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-1.dsc fca2d450af63dfc151b042850ac5dbad1cbbddcb 10103311 gnucash_2.2.6.orig.tar.gz 63b6943e881366c2b8b55cf874f5cf53efe69bfd 18573 gnucash_2.2.6-1.diff.gz 317e62094af4f249a7e8d5bfe8ca6f2a8337daa0 4611422 gnucash-common_2.2.6-1_all.deb 57268eaebcb1b09ca9912a89208310319d92e51f 1841480 gnucash_2.2.6-1_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 3d3ae578c2d350660a9e68a9eac0f67425f8f23652b00436bfa5247c3201e6a8 1495 gnucash_2.2.6-1.dsc 27ad68a3ecbb08df70610ed7b09ecbb4d088b03d31ff0fe7a4da9c437806b758 10103311 gnucash_2.2.6.orig.tar.gz 17c431df8e23ab16324aacbdec47f98732eaef2b059ecddfd2ed2cd851292221 18573 gnucash_2.2.6-1.diff.gz f47e12b3776dbedd515bf4c353dcf77eeff7cbb2b1045aed011e8046be1ba136 4611422 gnucash-common_2.2.6-1_all.deb c0f4733cfb83c714783601679366628af202deb38b9f3216df1e799bd80e88be 1841480 gnucash_2.2.6-1_i386.deb Files: f8bf0cc41a0b24a9f5574fe29b51bce1 1495 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-1.dsc 7ac08c5e2076c9b4d44c785d21bc1a2f 10103311 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6.orig.tar.gz 80e3b742d4c771163abb72ec8edd6f83 18573 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-1.diff.gz 2710d579a043b1d4f7c22637951b28b6 4611422 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.6-1_all.deb 85ce17f262274e912e59cd21e3d720c2 1841480 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.6-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkiUqFEACgkQqMsB9b6fcOr09QCdHPtCoo/AXkGjVnkYcm0eqxwV nmMAn3n5NHvLMwfc2vTuUiYVZgMDNcVU =1of0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.6-1_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.6-1_all.deb gnucash_2.2.6-1.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-1.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.6-1.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-1.dsc gnucash_2.2.6-1_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6-1_i386.deb gnucash_2.2.6.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.6.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e5-3 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 12:08:17 -0700 Source: scm Binary: scm libscm-dev Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e5-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter scm- A Scheme language interpreter Closes: 483273 Changes: scm (5e5-3) unstable; urgency=low . * build.scm (build-continue-ia64): New function, to encapsulate the method for building continue-ia64.o. (link-c-program/linux-ia64): Use build-continue-ia64. (make-archive/linux-ia64): New command, to use build-continue-ia64. (Closes: #483273). Checksums-Sha1: b7cb2a784a285ff30169a826c5af592517226763 1081 scm_5e5-3.dsc dc2039c590175c5b41f7db388507fb1d41c51d2b 10245 scm_5e5-3.diff.gz fc5ebf22b8bbc0e4f0d0a2898e03c4675e59fdc5 696398 scm_5e5-3_i386.deb 7dd90c52546f9c4e85604a05b1894f3c46a7f84a 326030 libscm-dev_5e5-3_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 7a45f780da62a6ffa91e38032c24b0347ebdae826d78e1411e7f17cdcab4 1081 scm_5e5-3.dsc 4eff4dc317e7e7facb0069e041c666ec977af6cc26a23ef72accbfa4869dff15 10245 scm_5e5-3.diff.gz 37429c3dc8758a4a85d67061b0e24662129e56ca6f1ec5c908681a7d66652488 696398 scm_5e5-3_i386.deb ba5757e1b4541fb3ffb8fcfa07d19f399dfb1385a5f697b9c587df67a2dad69c 326030 libscm-dev_5e5-3_i386.deb Files: 2a493d627dd1359a493f749cdf7c43f2 1081 interpreters optional scm_5e5-3.dsc 447d9430d15af49e646299497b05d555 10245 interpreters optional scm_5e5-3.diff.gz 61bcd31fc0f510700cffbfe5a7d992d8 696398 interpreters optional scm_5e5-3_i386.deb 65dc3c43c47d97b5db7f0c87d255a4d1 326030 libdevel optional libscm-dev_5e5-3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkiLeKgACgkQqMsB9b6fcOpFKwCgj6Xxz/NcgGhE2KUlQ2KcxV0J tEoAn2PhOf8Lc7T35bqbaqBqF44pyTxS =LT6/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libscm-dev_5e5-3_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e5-3_i386.deb scm_5e5-3.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-3.diff.gz scm_5e5-3.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-3.dsc scm_5e5-3_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-3_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.4-2 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:07:31 -0700 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.4-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 303234 Changes: gnucash (2.2.4-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Apply Micha Lenk patch to turn on aqbanking. (Closes: 303234) * debian/rules (configure): Specify --enable-aqbanking and --enable-hbci. * debian/control (gnucash): Mention HBCI support. (Build-Depends): Require libaqbanking20-dev. * debian/README.debian: Drop apology for HBCI non-support. . * debian/rules (configure): Don't print out config.log on failure anymore. Checksums-Sha1: 41a361008fa6e2fed7c39cd39349d662128eb710 1678 gnucash_2.2.4-2.dsc fc9725fe5c79b0a8dc069a1576b052708d5d59d6 88922 gnucash_2.2.4-2.diff.gz dbc4365638fd95c73340dd6b779a4c3857158a75 4534920 gnucash-common_2.2.4-2_all.deb 7d5667fd19f7d36bcbcf86da8a81cb4bb4e6cc88 1800556 gnucash_2.2.4-2_i386.deb Checksums-Sha256: 809d1a33105f3558f939df4ae84ebcc1125399e005019b8809dc5f652b7259bb 1678 gnucash_2.2.4-2.dsc 7adfd0136fbb600d51f975cef310badc2419bc41472b240540faf5d644ade69a 88922 gnucash_2.2.4-2.diff.gz 607a9bb42195041fbf3491af895ef78276861f85dd53af4349cbb36dea291ef3 4534920 gnucash-common_2.2.4-2_all.deb cc581131479161719581cfbb5fd63d0d673b46d575127c3d3f8c8106e5e5a23c 1800556 gnucash_2.2.4-2_i386.deb Files: b6ef6a4c31d5ac44475323a65374546d 1678 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-2.dsc f178addd5619eee5042cd402efe034d9 88922 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-2.diff.gz 0f526c25276a6de5907fee6314318185 4534920 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.4-2_all.deb 6023446ec224e0637431d7b71c4ecd92 1800556 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkiCsuEACgkQqMsB9b6fcOoEIQCeOSXiWqQvDwqDSIntpHi4d+Mp 39UAoM0ZFgtia8uMfBwof4P4Snwcosu3 =Ob4c -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.4-2_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.4-2_all.deb gnucash_2.2.4-2.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-2.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.4-2.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-2.dsc gnucash_2.2.4-2_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.4-1 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2008 22:16:52 -0500 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.4-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 286243 360025 Changes: gnucash (2.2.4-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. (Closes: #286243, #360025) Files: 293f56c8ab5fb1a9714e9578517eb90c 1270 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-1.dsc 27e660297dc5b8ce574515779d05a5a5 9915970 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4.orig.tar.gz 263c792f3227456e9b14706a0baa89fa 18253 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-1.diff.gz fcd49e784274f4b427bdf0584ca94d49 4530514 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.4-1_all.deb 230d06b05acfb07ad061d4dd33d2916e 1734654 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.4-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH0187qMsB9b6fcOoRAgL5AKCl1WgKe7bDrTZo4HvQSnGLB/mlxACdH8um 9hmhvwGVN2hXjNhrE6jzKds= =5x7y -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.4-1_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.4-1_all.deb gnucash_2.2.4-1.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-1.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.4-1.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-1.dsc gnucash_2.2.4-1_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4-1_i386.deb gnucash_2.2.4.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.4.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted jacal 1b9-2 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:25:38 -0500 Source: jacal Binary: jacal Architecture: source all Version: 1b9-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: jacal - Interactive symbolic math system Closes: 467314 Changes: jacal (1b9-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (MAKEVARS): Set man1dir. (Closes: #467314) . * debian/control (Build-Depends): Move texi2html and texinfo to... (Build-Depends-Indep): ...here. . * jacal.1: Put title *before* section in TH directive. Files: 22f1057952794e74e8ec0f2a3965e96e 586 math optional jacal_1b9-2.dsc 677b83570742e7bc5e415eacabbaee36 3968 math optional jacal_1b9-2.diff.gz ad29e3f04b9c649b28f2e7af9a778609 160754 math optional jacal_1b9-2_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwf/hqMsB9b6fcOoRApT7AJ4j7JKJddUVtYcDzzHwl/r0iFlv4QCgtaNc v2fa9ARlRc7psicU4gfjHlo= =mMJP -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: jacal_1b9-2.diff.gz to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-2.diff.gz jacal_1b9-2.dsc to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-2.dsc jacal_1b9-2_all.deb to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-2_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted mmake 2.3-5 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:55:32 -0500 Source: mmake Binary: mmake Architecture: source all Version: 2.3-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: mmake - Makefile generator for Java programs Changes: mmake (2.3-5) unstable; urgency=low . * mmake.1: Properly escape - characters in invocation synopsis since they should be minus signs, not hyphens. . * debian/copyright: Give proper copyright notice. Files: 13cb6b1508214cfe987995ab9490362c 565 devel extra mmake_2.3-5.dsc 168a4567420d794fe3656006dc779336 4351 devel extra mmake_2.3-5.diff.gz 094086ff8ebb3bb1fed94caf59aa03f6 28392 devel extra mmake_2.3-5_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwgT5qMsB9b6fcOoRAms1AJwMjpiwZJ6FNavi5abmpTUOtbWWNwCgi0FK XvkOr/8JvrwiFWsO+X+xfyA= =xCNq -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: mmake_2.3-5.diff.gz to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-5.diff.gz mmake_2.3-5.dsc to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-5.dsc mmake_2.3-5_all.deb to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-5_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted mmorph 2.3.4.2-11 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:04:42 -0500 Source: mmorph Binary: mmorph Architecture: source i386 Version: 2.3.4.2-11 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: mmorph - A two-level morphology tool for natural language processing Changes: mmorph (2.3.4.2-11) unstable; urgency=low . * mmorph.1: Properly escape all the - characters that should be minus signs. . * debian/control: (Build-Depends): Require at least version 5 of debhelper to match debian/compat. Files: ed92ece275b5d8caba97f5a849c4577e 603 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.dsc 38db08af3baa965a51505ce75703cf32 7242 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.diff.gz 801dbbc0ea1da025a7d593525f9eee20 170078 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-11_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwga2qMsB9b6fcOoRAhv4AJ9R9e6XcDFQk4Naz4s8iz/K1KQzUwCgw4L+ WaH965jqWWHMfOGTq9+9muU= =VsoF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.diff.gz to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.diff.gz mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.dsc to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-11.dsc mmorph_2.3.4.2-11_i386.deb to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-11_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted miscfiles 1.4.2.dfsg.1-9 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:40:51 -0500 Source: miscfiles Binary: miscfiles Architecture: source all Version: 1.4.2.dfsg.1-9 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: miscfiles - Dictionaries and other interesting files Closes: 467257 Changes: miscfiles (1.4.2.dfsg.1-9) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (stamp-configure): Quote $(CFLAGS) properly. (Closes: #467257) Thanks to Steve Langasek for the patch. . * debian/source.lintian-overrides: Remove file since not-using-po-debconf is no longer a lintian tag. . * debian/rules (stamp-binary): Call dh_md5sums toward the end. * debian/control (Build-Depends): New variable to require debhelper. * debian/compat: New file (level 6). Files: 27414f6cb17f90b0cac162b6ee046640 584 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.dsc 370e6a4ff6f2bf72aca16d253e2da5db 27646 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.diff.gz e3b84adc277c7196cd470d529b1da710 1331140 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwgNLqMsB9b6fcOoRAholAJ43+zEhaw1VWdJcR/id+TlgnJtyMACfTUBA 4VvLmcFciFxiYT+ksYohfHc= =Imp2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.diff.gz to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.diff.gz miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.dsc to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9.dsc miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9_all.deb to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-9_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted psrip 1.3-7 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:12:08 -0500 Source: psrip Binary: psrip Architecture: source all Version: 1.3-7 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: psrip - Extract images from PostScript files Changes: psrip (1.3-7) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Build-Depends): Require version 5 of debhelper to match debian/compat. . * debian/copyright: Provide proper copyright information. Files: a99a2700ed44a9fd6a564085a8998ca1 482 text optional psrip_1.3-7.dsc b28556fe52136d198da352301c879063 5536 text optional psrip_1.3-7.tar.gz 91fa28c2cf91f9b3bc0dbd6373a4dcaf 6498 text optional psrip_1.3-7_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwgjaqMsB9b6fcOoRAkZ2AKCKKcpL9/nSEYq8HlTepdpDZ64x3QCgyls5 e6GsZPfVnBnjnmsMcloIklg= =4MCH -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: psrip_1.3-7.dsc to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-7.dsc psrip_1.3-7.tar.gz to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-7.tar.gz psrip_1.3-7_all.deb to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-7_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted slib 3b1-3 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:19:32 -0500 Source: slib Binary: slib Architecture: source all Version: 3b1-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: slib - Portable Scheme library Closes: 465359 Changes: slib (3b1-3) unstable; urgency=low . * slib.sh: Specify #!/bin/bash. (Closes: #465359) . * slib.1: Put title *before* section in TH directive. . * debian/rules (binary-indep): Call dh_md5sums toward the end. * debian/control (Build-Depends-Indep): Require debhelper version 5. * debian/compat: New file (level 5). Files: 765c4efa7b206d504982e603f6ea3f01 574 devel optional slib_3b1-3.dsc d8f51fac20136e8028580df49e20ba10 12968 devel optional slib_3b1-3.diff.gz 702a96e77ec0837367783edcb0f3bce1 947108 devel optional slib_3b1-3_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHwgreqMsB9b6fcOoRAqC+AKCFU6qBU63He6JQ79BK3RrUxNBqIACfW873 M6H4kLcE8ZVMdGS62fnT5T0= =8unm -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: slib_3b1-3.diff.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-3.diff.gz slib_3b1-3.dsc to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-3.dsc slib_3b1-3_all.deb to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-3_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e5-2 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:37:29 -0500 Source: scm Binary: scm libscm-dev Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e5-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter scm- A Scheme language interpreter Changes: scm (5e5-2) unstable; urgency=low . * continue.h: actually make the change mentioned in 5e5-1. * Makefile: Likewise. * xgen.scm: Likewise. * scm.1: Likewise. * build.scm: Likewise. Files: a1615b4e32a839860d89d8006c68da51 718 interpreters optional scm_5e5-2.dsc 29b3406fe95aef33fbdd10290dff2637 9796 interpreters optional scm_5e5-2.diff.gz 590539d20fd33eaac1a982bdd0e8b770 697066 interpreters optional scm_5e5-2_i386.deb 91439ffc95b8f1300bc192f777d80504 326948 libdevel optional libscm-dev_5e5-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHue2XqMsB9b6fcOoRArgNAJ9zDe2J+4gRIIjk8qKksEHM/zZIvwCdGKCT O9D9KU3Nuq0dqnRIIEBoz4o= =Qjpl -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libscm-dev_5e5-2_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e5-2_i386.deb scm_5e5-2.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-2.diff.gz scm_5e5-2.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-2.dsc scm_5e5-2_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 11:20 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: On 11/02/2008, Mike Bird wrote: Debian should ensure that millions of Debian users around the world who have written and tested millions of tiny shell scripts with no thought to the possibility that /bin/sh may one day become not-bash will not suffer millions of hours of down time (or worse - bad data) due to a Debian change. If those users are running unstable or testing, that's their job to track such changes. If they are running stable, that's where Release Notes can be used. Release Notes do not magically fix millions of tiny shell scripts. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 01:54 -0600, William Pitcock wrote: It's possible for programs to completely change between versions. There really is no difference in reality between switching from program A to program B and switching from program A 1.1 to 1.2. The risk of problems is exactly the same. That's ludicrous. Most developers try to help users with backward compatibility. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dash bug which is affecting release goal
Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief. The problem is that it overrides the system's test command (in Debian, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[) and does so in a way which is inconsistent with the Debian versions. Nothing in Posix permits this behavior, but it is tolerated by the standard *provided* the shell does not change the syntax of the command. Alas, dash does change the syntax of the command. Now bug reports are being filed claiming that failure to conform to dash's non-Posixism is a bug. Programs which expect the behavior of Debian's test command are not buggy. What is buggy is a shell which overrides the test command in an inconsistent way. There is nothing bash-specific about expecting the test command to be implemented in the normal way that Debian's test program is implemented. There is no reliance on a non-Posix *shell* feature when one expects *other programs* to work normally. Shells can override commands, but only if they don't play games with the syntax. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 10:57 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief. The problem is that it overrides the system's test command (in Debian, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[) and does so in a way which is inconsistent with the Debian versions. Onlookers should see http://bugs.debian.org/267142 for the long history of the previous discussions of this. Thank you for adding that Russ; I looked and couldn't find it right away. I think we need to address this before we change /bin/sh as default. Merely papering it over is not suitable, because it means we must deal with a changing target; every new Posix shell that implements slightly different builtins will cause yet more problems. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 19:58 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 06:16:44PM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief. [ strip whining ] Alas, dash does change the syntax of the command. [ whine whine whine ] What is that change please ? Last time I checked dash supported the proper POSIX required options, so I'm surprised. Instead of whining, actually giving a bug's reference and an example of package that is hindert by this issue would've helped. Dash does not implement the features of Debian /bin/test. It is not sufficient to implement only the features of Posix /bin/test. The policy requires that I adapt to other Posix shells, not other Posix implementations of test, ls, and other things. Or are you saying that it's ok for dash to override random Debian commands in incompatible ways? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 10:57 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief. The problem is that it overrides the system's test command (in Debian, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[) and does so in a way which is inconsistent with the Debian versions. Onlookers should see http://bugs.debian.org/267142 for the long history of the previous discussions of this. Indeed, I had forgotten that we had actually reached consensus and then stalled at the point of getting the list of allowed-to-deviate builtins settled. Colin had proposed the winning solution, IIRC. The only builtin which we identified needed to be on that list was test itself, and the problem here was that the deviations in posh's implementation of test would pose serious problems. That could be solved by saying something like test may be builtin in inconsistent ways, provided that X, Y, and Z features still are supported. That could be written (by careful choice of X, Y, and Z) to enable bash and dash to pass muster and still avoid the problems that supposedly are raised with posh. The other solution--which may be an acceptible short-term one, is to specify explicitly that shell scripts must work with Debian bash and Debian dash. I have no objection to that, and continue to think it is the simplest approach. As always, I am happy with just about any of these solutions, but the charge-blindly-ahead method is not good. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 20:34 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 07:17:58PM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Or are you saying that it's ok for dash to override random Debian commands in incompatible ways? Well, let's drop bash right away then ! $ bash -c 'type test'; zsh -c 'type test'; posh -c 'type test'; dash -c 'type test' test is a shell builtin test is a shell builtin posh: type: not found test is a shell builtin Right. The problem is that Debian policy on the question is incoherent. It was wrong of me to describe it as a dash bug. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 22:11 +, brian m. carlson wrote: On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 02:34:37PM -0500, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 10:57 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief. The problem is that it overrides the system's test command (in Debian, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[) and does so in a way which is inconsistent with the Debian versions. As far as I can tell, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[ are completely useless, because none of bash, dash, posh, or zsh use them. Maybe pdksh does, but that's pretty much the list of shells that could be coerced into being /bin/sh. I propose we remove those executables from coreutils if it turns out that they are never executed. There are many cases where one may well want the test program. We need them regardless. The only builtin which we identified needed to be on that list was test itself, and the problem here was that the deviations in posh's implementation of test would pose serious problems. The standard posh follows is Debian Policy. If you change Policy, I am pretty sure that posh will follow[0]. Policy currently specifies a set of features that are required above and beyond minimal POSIX standards (echo -n). I don't know what the particular issue is with posh. It was brought up as an example in the policy discussion a while ago. I don't see what your problem is with posh. It serves a legitimate purpose: providing the bare minimum required by Policy. It's useful as a test of Policy-compliance, and not much more, which is fine. I don't have a problem with posh. It was brought up in the policy discussion the last time. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 11:26 -0800, Mike Bird wrote: On Sun February 10 2008 10:16:44 Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Shells can override commands, but only if they don't play games with the syntax. Agreed. Within the Debian world, dash has redefined test rather than building in test. Therefore, within the Debian world, dash is not Posix compliant. Within the Debian world, this is a dash bug. Possible solutions include Debian-specific patches to either make dash's test compatible or to disable dash's incompatible test. Or to follow Colin's suggestion from the policy discussion a few years ago, and grant a special exception, carefully crafted, for particular shell builtins. I have no objection to that solution. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 01:54 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Well, policy describes usage, and usage (I think) is to assume that
/bin/sh gives you a decently recent POSIX environment (I said POSIX not
GNU) and that if you rely on GNU extensions of tools (like echo -e) you
should call those commands using their full path wich can be done using
really simple tricks like:
echo() { /bin/echo $@ }
I believe Policy prohibits the use of full paths to specify programs in
the standard PATH.
Policy has absolutely no valid reasons to dictate to shells how they
are implemented, and it's a perfectly sane thing for an efficient enough
shell to implement echo, test, [, true, false and probably which as
shell builtins given their pervasive use in shell idioms.
Policy requires that programs which provide the same names as each other
provide equivalent functionality. No exception (currently) is made for
test. I am not at all opposed a carefully written exception for test;
that is the substance of Colin's proposal.
Thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 18:12 -0800, Mike Bird wrote: On Sun February 10 2008 15:54:36 Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Or to follow Colin's suggestion from the policy discussion a few years ago, and grant a special exception, carefully crafted, for particular shell builtins. I have no objection to that solution. As a Debian user rather than a DD I hope that Debian will ensure that this solution has absolutely no effect on non-Debian scripts which use #!/bin/sh and (perhaps unconsciously) expect test to work as in bash. I'm afraid, that the problem here is just that. Debian doesn't promise that /bin/sh is bash. Scripts which need bash are supposed to specify bash. At least, that's the theory. This applies to everything from tarballs of packages which are not yet in Debian to the dozens of tiny custom scripts that everyone has for backups or nagios extensions or adding users or emptying cameras etc etc. Yes, that's right. I think the idea of making dash the default /bin/sh is sure to be a disaster. But I have no power in that regard. I can only hope I'm wrong. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 21:10 -0600, Raphael Geissert wrote: On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 18:12 -0800, Mike Bird wrote: This applies to everything from tarballs of packages which are not yet in Debian to the dozens of tiny custom scripts that everyone has for backups or nagios extensions or adding users or emptying cameras etc etc. Yes, that's right. I think the idea of making dash the default /bin/sh is sure to be a disaster. But I have no power in that regard. I can only hope I'm wrong. FYI Ubuntu already made the switch some time ago and they have all of the packages from unstable + some more. By filling bug reports I try to reduce the impact of making the move that in theory should be more than safe (except for two or three known bugs on dash). I think you're ignoring Mike Bird's concern. What about custom scripts, non-Debian things, user-written scripts, etc.? Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 20:39 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: So we should also never upgrade /usr/bin/python, /usr/bin/perl, or /usr/bin/gcc to point at a new upstream version because users may have local programs that assume particular non-standard behavior from these programs, right? I think that's a different case. There is a big difference between a newer version of the same program and a totally different program with fewer features. Still, I understand the motivation for the change and I am in support of it. I'm just worried also. Perhaps I'm a needless worrywort. But all the attention does seem to have been focused on one specific case--Debian packages--and not the others. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal
On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 19:36 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I just replied to Thomas on the bug report including some information that demonstrates that his arguments on dash not implementing some (at least the one mentioned on the report) /usr/bin/test features is not valid. For further reference please see #464995, which is the bug report Thomas is talking about. So, to sum up the results of that bug, Thomas was specifically using a bash feature and this entire business of the behavior of /usr/bin/test is a red herring for the problem that started this whole discussion. Actually, it's upstream's script, a genuine shell program, not just a Debian maintainer script (the more usual case), so the right fix was to specify /bin/bash since that is obviously what upstream was expecting all along. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted jacal 1b9-1 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:12:17 -0500 Source: jacal Binary: jacal Architecture: source all Version: 1b9-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: jacal - Interactive symbolic math system Closes: 464995 Changes: jacal (1b9-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. * jacal.1: Repeat change from 1b7-1. * jacal.sh: Repeat second change from 1b7-2. . * jacal.sh: Specify #!/bin/bash. (Closes: #464995) Files: b919a4f7c23d956d0e8cf434ba9d88af 566 math optional jacal_1b9-1.dsc 8a629563b13fd52d738d06e6f917b7f2 250006 math optional jacal_1b9.orig.tar.gz d6b3fe12df1241f94fcdda7b4d4af1e9 3851 math optional jacal_1b9-1.diff.gz 2d8badebc554cd7540fbf1c2cc83e82d 160610 math optional jacal_1b9-1_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHr5RoqMsB9b6fcOoRApd1AJ42SFvvIvo9h7KHT5o0knHItZyk7wCeMwRi 8sbsBFKD8HJO7x8eUmKXFkQ= =U1+I -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: jacal_1b9-1.diff.gz to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-1.diff.gz jacal_1b9-1.dsc to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-1.dsc jacal_1b9-1_all.deb to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9-1_all.deb jacal_1b9.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b9.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e5-1 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:53:13 -0500 Source: scm Binary: scm libscm-dev Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e5-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter scm- A Scheme language interpreter Changes: scm (5e5-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. * continue.h: Repeat change from 5e1-2. * xgen.scm: Repeat change from 5e2-4. * scm.1: Repeat change from 5e2-4. * build.scm: Repeat change from 5e3-5. * Makefile: Repeat change from 5e3-2. * debian/control (Build-Depends): Require at least version 3b1 of slib. (scm Depends): Likewise. (libscm-dev Depends): Likewise. . * Makefile (scm.info): Add explicit dependency on features.txi and platform.txi. For some reason the one through $(texifiles) is failing mysteriously. Perhaps this is a make bug. Files: 6a010621b0e4f85ae763196b04d2abd4 718 interpreters optional scm_5e5-1.dsc a28c1408c6a739d090b676c0506c7d65 875009 interpreters optional scm_5e5.orig.tar.gz 5992d639409aa995c6e666fcabe4a014 8980 interpreters optional scm_5e5-1.diff.gz 4495bfef485f49a7f971963fca5e30aa 696988 interpreters optional scm_5e5-1_i386.deb e514511ae0c666f8d1620dd32080f99d 326908 libdevel optional libscm-dev_5e5-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHrlJOqMsB9b6fcOoRAiBbAKCgmiRSE2yWTc+mLNataH9lvQAFIgCgwgTu xieynC4NhkJKTfn9zVJj2yA= =nnW5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libscm-dev_5e5-1_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e5-1_i386.deb scm_5e5-1.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-1.diff.gz scm_5e5-1.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-1.dsc scm_5e5-1_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5-1_i386.deb scm_5e5.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e5.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted slib 3b1-2 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 13:19:02 -0500 Source: slib Binary: slib Architecture: source all Version: 3b1-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: slib - Portable Scheme library Closes: 464143 Changes: slib (3b1-2) unstable; urgency=low . * guile.init (implementation-vicinity): Repeat change from 3a5-2. (Closes: #464143) Files: d9f0e9b5269ff85b5f7c368cf8b5c748 556 devel optional slib_3b1-2.dsc 532b168ebb7e82c0c57b23d772562a77 12815 devel optional slib_3b1-2.diff.gz 453381ef7950e0571efa077e57baf663 946970 devel optional slib_3b1-2_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHq0zKqMsB9b6fcOoRAiCbAJ91g72lKBovA+undOKmPEsllY0C0QCeJ2SD 3HsX01n4LGgV5CmpicXpaq8= =y4la -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: slib_3b1-2.diff.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-2.diff.gz slib_3b1-2.dsc to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-2.dsc slib_3b1-2_all.deb to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-2_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted libofx 1:0.9.0-2 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:35:39 -0500 Source: libofx Binary: libofx4 libofx-dev ofx Architecture: source i386 Version: 1:0.9.0-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libofx-dev - development package for libofx2c2a libofx4- library to support Open Financial Exchange ofx- Open Financial Exchange programs Closes: 463854 Changes: libofx (1:0.9.0-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (libofx4): Don't Conflict, Provide, or Replace the libofx2 packages. That job is for the old libofx3 only. (Closes: #463854) Files: 02f7d1bde4ec17b3afb4f2aa8011f551 656 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-2.dsc 9084c9633b0ea5733cb2d7c418c3ed9c 6762 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-2.diff.gz da16891be05d7c570bd8336aadcb61c1 176646 libs optional libofx4_0.9.0-2_i386.deb cca51412bacd7a84b733fc7b7990116e 868736 libdevel optional libofx-dev_0.9.0-2_i386.deb 582025e33bb63f387c8938f0945ec78f 63650 libs optional ofx_0.9.0-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHp7JQqMsB9b6fcOoRAoV6AJ448koCPSXIgGPCgvlocss7LT1IbwCgr7MP rRV3z6cahfjtyAA0tk33p20= =lvvu -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libofx-dev_0.9.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx-dev_0.9.0-2_i386.deb libofx4_0.9.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx4_0.9.0-2_i386.deb libofx_0.9.0-2.diff.gz to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-2.diff.gz libofx_0.9.0-2.dsc to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-2.dsc ofx_0.9.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/ofx_0.9.0-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.3-2 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:53:04 -0500 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash gnucash-common Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.3-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Closes: 462559 Changes: gnucash (2.2.3-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Build-Depends): Add libofx-dev and ofx back, now that the license concerns are settled. (Build-Conflicts): Don't conflict with libofx-dev. (gnucash/Description, gnucash-common/Description): Add back that we support OFX. * debian/rules (configure): Add --enable-ofx to configure invocation. (Closes: #462559) . * debian/README.debian: Drop OFX explanation. Files: 3e3277c952a524e11790cacf072a2fec 1270 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-2.dsc f8bdf99bab3be568b082130d2a795561 18224 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-2.diff.gz 901090710c097335a019191ec2b40265 4235918 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.3-2_all.deb 2520c225b55c5873371dc06c36564460 1712672 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHp7ipqMsB9b6fcOoRAkL9AJ0XpgXA3YVHg7TK0JSXJeXs1UZEWwCfVgWP awl67PDli+0SxgJ630EgtxU= =cwtS -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.3-2_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.3-2_all.deb gnucash_2.2.3-2.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-2.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.3-2.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-2.dsc gnucash_2.2.3-2_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted slib 3b1-1 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:29:13 -0500 Source: slib Binary: slib Architecture: source all Version: 3b1-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: slib - Portable Scheme library Changes: slib (3b1-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. * guile.init (library-vicinity): Repeat change from 3a4-2. * slib.texi (Library Catalogs): Repeat change from 3a3-3. * slib.sh: Repeat change from 3a5-3. * slib.1: Repeat change from 3a5-4. * Makefile: Repeat change from 3a2-1. Files: efbf0cf068910b2486f05469820d62c4 556 devel optional slib_3b1-1.dsc 0663bbbce159b565afabe55e2c14ca96 913557 devel optional slib_3b1.orig.tar.gz 3c1da5d1872e932a23cf1da5a56b37c6 12480 devel optional slib_3b1-1.diff.gz f64ecc9efde8c81f0d2bed41e5715574 946940 devel optional slib_3b1-1_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHp79JqMsB9b6fcOoRAmUBAKCEcDQV8M056whgNZLTmjPvo3OLcACcDHbt ji7IiZ/ek2tbnk2UJ4xSATE= =KTB1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: slib_3b1-1.diff.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-1.diff.gz slib_3b1-1.dsc to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-1.dsc slib_3b1-1_all.deb to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1-1_all.deb slib_3b1.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3b1.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted libofx 1:0.9.0-1 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 21:24:51 -0800 Source: libofx Binary: libofx4 libofx-dev ofx Architecture: source i386 Version: 1:0.9.0-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libofx-dev - development package for libofx2c2a libofx4- library to support Open Financial Exchange ofx- Open Financial Exchange programs Closes: 460407 Changes: libofx (1:0.9.0-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. * Regenerate autotools using Debian libtool by: libtoolize --copy --force; aclocal-1.9; autoconf. * debian/control (libofx4): Renamed package from libofx3. (libofx-dev): Depend on libofx4 instead of libofx3. * debian/rules (PACKNAME): Update to libofx4. (version): Update to 0.9.0. * libofx4.docs: Renamed from libofx3.docs. . * debian/rules (major): Delete unused variable, and commented idle code that mentioned it. . * debian/copyright: Add proper authorship and copyright information, and the license information for the OFX dtd's. (Closes: #460407) . * debian/rules (binary-arch): Don't put /usr/include in the $(PACKNAME) package. Files: 0007a947287c77b0a2af652bef8a472b 656 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-1.dsc 6e2172f0117f90805590bf755190b79e 1260933 libs optional libofx_0.9.0.orig.tar.gz b9b3ee98c0faa386fa3a88fac70a5de7 6714 libs optional libofx_0.9.0-1.diff.gz c85f90a1ceedad579dbdee29592893cd 176638 libs optional libofx4_0.9.0-1_i386.deb 6286ea674dfec05885ba0b33329ecd48 868728 libdevel optional libofx-dev_0.9.0-1_i386.deb de9a2c378779a29d06fcc4a7d1402874 63582 libs optional ofx_0.9.0-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHoqC+qMsB9b6fcOoRAtKtAJ4qaJn2dCT3wD+e5xiHjF1+ti/MLwCguQq/ nxtZqoL65Y/NM6QR6kW/TuA= =37qA -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libofx-dev_0.9.0-1_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx-dev_0.9.0-1_i386.deb libofx4_0.9.0-1_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx4_0.9.0-1_i386.deb libofx_0.9.0-1.diff.gz to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-1.diff.gz libofx_0.9.0-1.dsc to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0-1.dsc libofx_0.9.0.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/libo/libofx/libofx_0.9.0.orig.tar.gz ofx_0.9.0-1_i386.deb to pool/main/libo/libofx/ofx_0.9.0-1_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Introducing security hardening features for Lenny
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 23:31 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Pierre Habouzit wrote: There are certainly performance trade-offs involved and the final selection of features will depend on the testing of the respective maintainers (testing should be eased by hardening-wrapper). What bothers me is that this kind of analysis should have preceded your announcement. I think that hardening is extremely important, but it is not the only important thing. It would be very helpful if your team would consider thinking about the tradeoffs, describing them so people can make some judgments. But that's not what you did: you instead posted a note, designed to sound as official as possible, asking every maintainer to add these flags. That's not right! We should instead discuss it. We're mostly trying to bootstrap a discussion here, the details on how to put this into effect archive-wide will depend heavily on the toolchain configuration proposal by Matthias Klose. Maybe classes of security-sensitivity of applications can be defined, which specify a set of selected options. For my money, you blew it. You don't bootstrap a discussion by presenting a pseudo-official email like the one you posted. But we can get back to that discussion: cancel the email by saying whoops, we're not ready yet and then having the discussion first. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Introducing security hardening features for Lenny
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 00:21 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: For my money, you blew it. You don't bootstrap a discussion by presenting a pseudo-official email like the one you posted. But we can get back to that discussion: cancel the email by saying whoops, we're not ready yet and then having the discussion first. Of course we've discussed this in depth internally before before proposing it and there was no intention to make it sound official. There is no need to become aggressive. I'm sorry for my tone. I know that it was discussed internally; but what I mean is that it needs to be discussed externally as the next step, long before it becomes the expected practice. If there were not important trade-offs, then it wouldn't matter, but the problem is that some of these options do impose significant costs. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted ifhp 3.5.20-12 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:56:31 -0500 Source: ifhp Binary: ifhp Architecture: source i386 Version: 3.5.20-12 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: ifhp - Printer filter for HP LaserJet printers Changes: ifhp (3.5.20-12) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/changelog (3.5.20-11): Wrap over-long line. Files: d96696b8148f04db1fa260fac5ccf3de 643 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-12.dsc fad29598f43f2404fd7bc3dd6da4d802 23229 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-12.diff.gz 0aecbc1008dbc73bd650c7fefb20b52a 726732 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-12_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHlPmbqMsB9b6fcOoRAtZ6AJ9zrMzLY42+0Zgam5HYTV8Dnmh1SACfXgm1 6WuCuO4iVnqeijtfB/yoPtI= =U27e -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: ifhp_3.5.20-12.diff.gz to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-12.diff.gz ifhp_3.5.20-12.dsc to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-12.dsc ifhp_3.5.20-12_i386.deb to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-12_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted jacal 1b8-3 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:51:24 -0500 Source: jacal Binary: jacal Architecture: source all Version: 1b8-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: jacal - Interactive symbolic math system Changes: jacal (1b8-3) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/jacal.doc-base: Really get rid of all the extraneous whitespace. Files: cface5f3bff8fda2efe10ed433048476 566 math optional jacal_1b8-3.dsc ddf1f25ffc7753c18c288022ca23fec7 3715 math optional jacal_1b8-3.diff.gz a5db0e3d6fede7578b9664e089f2ad50 159990 math optional jacal_1b8-3_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHlPinqMsB9b6fcOoRAr2VAJ4vdoGIef+DqbAAaQYoYhFCLfVwYQCfQEnh H/q/wPhcpOLiwrMotQlr6Xk= =NR8P -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: jacal_1b8-3.diff.gz to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-3.diff.gz jacal_1b8-3.dsc to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-3.dsc jacal_1b8-3_all.deb to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-3_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted slib 3a5-4 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:02:11 -0500 Source: slib Binary: slib Architecture: source all Version: 3a5-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: slib - Portable Scheme library Changes: slib (3a5-4) unstable; urgency=low . * slib.1 (.TH): Put in section number. * debian/rules (binary-indep): Install slib.1 documentation. Files: bf30cdbd9c81dedcdb8ba2da479922a5 556 devel optional slib_3a5-4.dsc 21915cd78bb209c99666921f214d39ee 12627 devel optional slib_3a5-4.diff.gz 068cfadb3fb1c9bb6697ce4433e5d59d 939528 devel optional slib_3a5-4_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHlPvZqMsB9b6fcOoRAlPpAJ4lJScmub3rxuOWySsX2PK8Y9B2EwCfSm2k yhow3RXFS2jbJSUE1YZn4qo= =pAdp -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: slib_3a5-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-4.diff.gz slib_3a5-4.dsc to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-4.dsc slib_3a5-4_all.deb to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-4_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted lilypond 2.10.33-2 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:24:27 -0800 Source: lilypond Binary: lilypond-data lilypond-doc lilypond Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.10.33-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lilypond - A program for typesetting sheet music lilypond-data - LilyPond music typesetter (data files) lilypond-doc - LilyPond Documentation in HTML, PS and DVI formats Closes: 461271 Changes: lilypond (2.10.33-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Build-Depends-Indep): Use ttf-dejavu instead of ttf-bitstream-vera. (Closes: #461271) . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. (No changes needed.) . * debian/rules (clean): Don't ignore all errors on recursive make invocations. . * debian/rules (binary-indep): Use $(CURDIR) instead of $(PWD). . * debian/copyright: Update FSF address to Franklin St. . * debian/changelog: Fix syntax for trailer line for 2.8.7-3.1 record. Files: fd624810556322711042a8587c5ce056 1538 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-2.dsc 7610cb4b17bfa3f5edd1531d0ae29a01 27049 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-2.diff.gz 8eddc907fa72a785f6b7d0452b7c1847 3626410 tex optional lilypond-data_2.10.33-2_all.deb 45d91432609840d18284cc4ae1e9de4d 35355044 doc optional lilypond-doc_2.10.33-2_all.deb 6ab5a92e6262ce90d042d440d8ab39ad 1296878 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHj7VPqMsB9b6fcOoRAgZRAKCc/CYIrKk5VgTeJTXRO4Kr4u+mugCglljh gziABN6LznpUcGJI7lGXVvk= =hANd -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: lilypond-data_2.10.33-2_all.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond-data_2.10.33-2_all.deb lilypond-doc_2.10.33-2_all.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond-doc_2.10.33-2_all.deb lilypond_2.10.33-2.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-2.diff.gz lilypond_2.10.33-2.dsc to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-2.dsc lilypond_2.10.33-2_i386.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash-docs 2.2.0-3 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:37:56 -0500 Source: gnucash-docs Binary: gnucash-docs Architecture: source all Version: 2.2.0-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash-docs - Documentation for gnucash, a personal finance tracking program Changes: gnucash-docs (2.2.0-3) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Standards-Versions): Update to 3.7.3. (No changes needed.) . * debian/gnucash-docs.lintian-overrides: New file. Override copyright-should-refer-to-common-license-file-for-gfdl because the common version of that file is GFDL version 1.2, and this package is covered by GFDL 1.1. * debian/rules: Install gnucash-docs.lintian-overrides as /usr/share/lintian/overrides/gnucash-docs. Files: 4a5ed89a4c109d821fc51ed7231e2c3f 619 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.dsc 3bcc7b0e3f24bebb88a0ca7c11c0bd95 9966 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.diff.gz b9a06b4155a05b065e358370ebcd891c 9721034 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjm1tqMsB9b6fcOoRAka1AJ44aU4uOZ/Zm/N+Hv69adwER9iFdACeLrNF 8CFB84b0m88T1e0ZyKyUw80= =X4GM -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.diff.gz gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3.dsc gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-3_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e4-5 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:08:07 -0500
Source: scm
Binary: libscm-dev scm
Architecture: source i386
Version: 5e4-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter
scm- A Scheme language interpreter
Changes:
scm (5e4-5) unstable; urgency=low
.
* debian/control (libscm-dev/Description): Drop mistaken extra spaces
in description.
.
* debian/control (libscm-dev/Depends): Use $(binary:Version} for the
dependency rather than ${source:Version}.
.
* debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. (No changes needed.)
Files:
80f2160dd64193304c3fee7f299aa5c8 718 interpreters optional scm_5e4-5.dsc
9b804db41f1130007c325010f93867ed 9420 interpreters optional scm_5e4-5.diff.gz
c72de523c42e310bc3a0ab2535b03756 686624 interpreters optional
scm_5e4-5_i386.deb
9fb01ca9527aadf2200c54f74009eb44 326376 libdevel optional
libscm-dev_5e4-5_i386.deb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHjnLJqMsB9b6fcOoRAkgaAJ0Z17BdMvbOtHlRwV8Gss3rbsKw1ACgy0Xg
CBHvRMxt+K2G6jeFhX+7+ps=
=O4G/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Accepted:
libscm-dev_5e4-5_i386.deb
to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e4-5_i386.deb
scm_5e4-5.diff.gz
to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-5.diff.gz
scm_5e4-5.dsc
to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-5.dsc
scm_5e4-5_i386.deb
to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-5_i386.deb
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted ifhp 3.5.20-11 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:00:48 -0500 Source: ifhp Binary: ifhp Architecture: source i386 Version: 3.5.20-11 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: ifhp - Printer filter for HP LaserJet printers Changes: ifhp (3.5.20-11) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (clean): Don't ignore all errors on recursive make invocation. . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. (No changes needed.) . * debian/ifhp.lintian-overrides: New file. Don't pay attention to no-debconf-templates. Our debian/config file manages an upgrade issue but does not actually prompt the user. * debian/rules (install): And install it as /usr/share/lintian/overrides/ifhp. . * debian/rules (install): Remove (empty) usr/bin directory. Files: a587547df0c489f24abfa802dc236047 643 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-11.dsc acbc597653cced5844812946b9813a1a 23187 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-11.diff.gz 6797e3109836b143e99c4d3b27a04ca0 726714 net extra ifhp_3.5.20-11_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjnE/qMsB9b6fcOoRAhQpAJ9BezXpUBy8g7ezVKZFg0VsfpkyqACfSW2t FqNPf5ayrJHTEjxOHWdNo5g= =Ei47 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: ifhp_3.5.20-11.diff.gz to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-11.diff.gz ifhp_3.5.20-11.dsc to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-11.dsc ifhp_3.5.20-11_i386.deb to pool/main/i/ifhp/ifhp_3.5.20-11_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 10:34 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:10:26AM +, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that depend on the libraries you want to remove, post RFAs instead of remove requests, and only post remove requests after people have had a goodly chance to take over maintenance themselves. Please, gnome 1.x is discontinued for years now, and the number of packages that depends upon gnome-libs is fairly limited now, it's a bearable task. FWIW the current list of package is: This is what people said before, and gnucash nearly vanished from Debian because the gnome team hadn't bothered to alert me or arrange an orderly transition. So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining gnome 1.x is worth it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the maintenance. Most of those package either have far better alternatives (gabber, gtoaster, …), are libs (lib*, gnomemm, …) or will probably easily drop the dependency (xemacs21, nethack, …). Most of the upstreams of those applications are dead, and the applications don't budge, and there is little point in having them in lenny when you can use the version in etch on your lenny without a problem. Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them? Thomas
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:56 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining gnome 1.x is worth it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the maintenance. Now explain me why _you_ who aren't concerned by the transition are from far the most vocal about it ? Because the last time you all did this it got all the way to deleting the packages and I had to run around and clean that up. I'm asking you to give the maintainers a chance. That's all. Is it really that hard to do? I opened bugs on the packages so that people can discuss it, and I'll monitor them closely I said it. The fact that you don't seem to trust my word that it's exactly what I'll do is insulting. I didn't say I didn't trust your word. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 13:39 +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As long as there's interest the software will stay alive is one of the main tenets of Free Software. Consequently, IMHO, as long as there's people willing to maintain it, it shouldn't be removed regardless of how old it is. GNOME 1.x is neither maintained in Debian nor upstream. Noone has stepped forward to keep it alive. The main reason that it's still in Debian is that we don't clean up often enough. This is what was said the last time. But nobody asked the maintainers of gnome 1.x packages whether they would maintain it; the team just decreed that nobody would step forward, and started deleting packages. It caused a major headache. I'm asking for a more orderly process this time. Instead of saying we're deleting this, you will all have to adapt, say, we aren't maintaining this anymore; if you want it, you'll have to start taking it over. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:02 +, Neil McGovern wrote: On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:35:54AM -0500, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: So please, let these maintainers choose, rather than ordering them about. It is *they* who are in a position to decide whether maintaining gnome 1.x is worth it. Of course, it will also be up to them to do the maintenance. gnome-libs has now been orphaned for more than a year. I would have expected it to have been picked up by now. I wouldn't. I don't keep tabs on every package that my packages depend on. One of them could be orphaned and I would never know. Most? Really? Wow, I'm impressed. Are you sure? People said this the last time around, and they forgot gnucash. How about we let these maintainers make that determination rather than you making it for them? Do you know of any specific examples that would cause a problem? No; I haven't investigated it. That's why I am asking to let those maintainers decide. Thinking up yet one more way to make the decision without involving them seems like a poor strategy. There is no need for me to figure out whether there is a specific example or not. Instead, just tell the maintainers, and give them the option. Thomas - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 19:56 +0100, Luk Claes wrote: We can surely keep all old cruft in the archive and never release again (or not with these packages anyway), though I don't think that is preferred from a quality assurance, security nor release point of view... Of course, this isn't what I suggested. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:07 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Then I'll do some more runs of the same principle on other gnome 1.x related libs until we got rid of them al. If you know your package depends on gnome 1.x one way or the other, now is the time to fix that, package a new upstream, or ask for its removal, so that it eases our work. This happened once before when the issue was gnucash. I was the gnucash maintainer, and the gnome maintainers had decreed that Debian must not have gnome 1.x in it! And all the libraries were about to vanish. This is not the right process for something like this. Instead, I believe you should find out specifically which packages depend on gnome 1.x, and offer those maintainers the option of taking over maintenance. It is not a trivial task to port many programs to gnome 2; it took gnucash a long time. Don't screw over other maintainers; make it easy for them. Don't start filing remove requests until other maintainers have a chance. Take the step of contacting those who maintain packages that depend on the libraries you want to remove, post RFAs instead of remove requests, and only post remove requests after people have had a goodly chance to take over maintenance themselves. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: gnome 1.x removal
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 02:20 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: (Dropping -release, which is not a discussion list, and Pierre, who is obviously subscribed to both.) On 15/01/2008, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: This is not the right process for something like this. Instead, I believe you should find out specifically which packages depend on gnome 1.x, and offer those maintainers the option of taking over maintenance. Although getting recursive rdepends is interesting, are you suggesting that the release team is supposed to take over the maintenance of one-could-say obsolete software? No, I said just what I meant: the maintainers of packages dependent on gnome 1.x should be offered the option of taking over maintenance. The release team certainly should not bear that task, unless individuals within it for their own reasons choose to. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted jacal 1b8-2 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:52:21 -0500 Source: jacal Binary: jacal Architecture: source all Version: 1b8-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: jacal - Interactive symbolic math system Changes: jacal (1b8-2) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (clean): Don't ignore all errors on Make clean invocation. Fixes lintian warning debian-rules-ignores-make-clean-error. . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes necessary. . * debian/jacal.doc-base: Remove extraneouse whitespace. Fixes lintian warning doc-base-file-separator-extra-whitespace. . * debian/dirs: Delete usr/sbin. Fixes lintian warning package-contains-empty-directory. Files: f386e3a27942b8d41092ed9fcff335c2 566 math optional jacal_1b8-2.dsc 8f284701d01f297658cfee2e52d0a82c 3675 math optional jacal_1b8-2.diff.gz 4d2068052060d47960f379d6b31da1cb 159978 math optional jacal_1b8-2_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi8v9qMsB9b6fcOoRAhugAJ9CwA696qwToOprLQsIptyLh50cUQCfRsf7 I63rEDMGVuBJLI6Ua5Nr0Ao= =otTr -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: jacal_1b8-2.diff.gz to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-2.diff.gz jacal_1b8-2.dsc to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-2.dsc jacal_1b8-2_all.deb to pool/main/j/jacal/jacal_1b8-2_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash-docs 2.2.0-2 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:11:52 -0500 Source: gnucash-docs Binary: gnucash-docs Architecture: source all Version: 2.2.0-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash-docs - Documentation for gnucash, a personal finance tracking program Closes: 347623 459654 Changes: gnucash-docs (2.2.0-2) unstable; urgency=low . * guide/C/ch_txns.xml (txns-sxn-editor2): Fix typo eay - easy. (Closes: #459654) . * help/C/Help_ch_Customize.xml (prefs-date-time): Fix mistaken filename for figure Help_Pref_date-time.png - Help_Pref_DateTime.png. This is the only missing figure; the ones mentioned in the bug report are fixed as of 2.2.0-1. (Closes: #347623) . * debian/rules (binary-arch): Do nothing here. (binary-indep): Put all the code to build the package (was in binary-arch) into this rule where it belongs. Also change TAB-# into #-TAB. Fixes lintian warning binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep. . * debian/rules (clean): Don't ignore all errors on Make clean invocation. Fixes lintian warning debian-rules-ignores-make-clean-error. Files: 320101e88828c25cb4e73f895845e77f 619 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.dsc cf8eb656ab32f842ec33259b06fab7ad 9770 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.diff.gz 01944a6cd6095bceb01fcdefcb362d1a 9720664 doc optional gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi8cJqMsB9b6fcOoRArPRAJ96TzWQ8elW5exhQX0n+Z7rFpaU7gCeIrm0 rDyd2nWv0nIBsVTZ2xnXyK8= =ybF1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.diff.gz gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2.dsc gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash-docs/gnucash-docs_2.2.0-2_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted mmake 2.3-4 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:11:11 -0500 Source: mmake Binary: mmake Architecture: source all Version: 2.3-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: mmake - Makefile generator for Java programs Changes: mmake (2.3-4) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes needed. . * debian/rules (clean): Don't ignore all errors on Make clean invocation. Fixes lintian warning debian-rules-ignores-make-clean-error. Files: cd96f01482d65d5928938dd270b56336 565 devel extra mmake_2.3-4.dsc 5a58a807b7fc3fb239b7cdcf60498718 4145 devel extra mmake_2.3-4.diff.gz a8064d352c74335c6750f7fb356a333b 28264 devel extra mmake_2.3-4_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi9FhqMsB9b6fcOoRAjV6AJ96xGZG1OXTB76PSIQUVMIMGtoqCQCgt6+w CZ3CyOAvu9OpoiB1KNA4AwU= =TeE4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: mmake_2.3-4.diff.gz to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-4.diff.gz mmake_2.3-4.dsc to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-4.dsc mmake_2.3-4_all.deb to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.3-4_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted miscfiles 1.4.2.dfsg.1-8 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:56:16 -0500 Source: miscfiles Binary: miscfiles Architecture: source all Version: 1.4.2.dfsg.1-8 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: miscfiles - Dictionaries and other interesting files Changes: miscfiles (1.4.2.dfsg.1-8) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes necessary. . * debian/copyright: Include the unicode license here. * debian/rules (stamp-binary): Don't install unicode license here. Files: 18fb28b309370c23341477477158cd12 559 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.dsc 5d4066f85eb6c044d930a40c910e8462 27533 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.diff.gz b88daca5448a8e1da81cd35b7d65ac5d 1330930 text optional miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi8+fqMsB9b6fcOoRAoKRAJ4+oni4GOqQPrf0ts2INldy4sHuHQCgvnjl 6DkV6fiIdf/rW+wCn7IpnBo= =a4H9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.diff.gz to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.diff.gz miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.dsc to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8.dsc miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8_all.deb to pool/main/m/miscfiles/miscfiles_1.4.2.dfsg.1-8_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted mmorph 2.3.4.2-10 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:18:41 -0500 Source: mmorph Binary: mmorph Architecture: source i386 Version: 2.3.4.2-10 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: mmorph - A two-level morphology tool for natural language processing Changes: mmorph (2.3.4.2-10) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes needed. Files: 71b17d3b41b17b90d1fcfaee9b199734 603 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.dsc 5b5358edda1e7f7b62d79c9d864db5c5 5652 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.diff.gz e6e924d22ccc522a2d8c9d46d65bce6e 169804 misc extra mmorph_2.3.4.2-10_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi9KHqMsB9b6fcOoRAprdAJ9h/9PFBGAwNXonuIdzhENnFHVTVQCeOBLX F1703vvHeYYhmvwkP+vDaUI= =Fg/M -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.diff.gz to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.diff.gz mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.dsc to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-10.dsc mmorph_2.3.4.2-10_i386.deb to pool/main/m/mmorph/mmorph_2.3.4.2-10_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted psrip 1.3-6 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:25:10 -0500 Source: psrip Binary: psrip Architecture: source all Version: 1.3-6 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: psrip - Extract images from PostScript files Changes: psrip (1.3-6) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (binary-arch): Do nothing here. (binary-indep): Do everything here that was in binary-arch. Fixes lintian warning binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep. . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes needed. . * debian/source.lintian-overrides: Override native-package-with-dash-version. Files: 686094972497eb06cc257b411c4f407c 487 text optional psrip_1.3-6.dsc 227c34935230f4c2f28fecfdde1c479f 5399 text optional psrip_1.3-6.tar.gz 59d49a368e4f44624ec48cc68e0010ab 6362 text optional psrip_1.3-6_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi9RfqMsB9b6fcOoRAga3AKCmSd9xwZelEX6JhBYfEajZ0tXqXACgx7UM KKRIG+86SeDj79YpK/ACgWY= =haL+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: psrip_1.3-6.dsc to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-6.dsc psrip_1.3-6.tar.gz to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-6.tar.gz psrip_1.3-6_all.deb to pool/main/p/psrip/psrip_1.3-6_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted slib 3a5-3 (source all)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:41:39 -0500 Source: slib Binary: slib Architecture: source all Version: 3a5-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: slib - Portable Scheme library Changes: slib (3a5-3) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (binary-arch): Don't do anything here. Fixes lintian warning binary-arch-rules-but-pkg-is-arch-indep. . * debian/control (Standards-Version): Update to 3.7.3. No changes needed. . * slib.sh: Specify #!/bin/sh. . * debian/slib.lintian-overrides: New file. Don't complain about the usr/share/slib/init symlink. * debian/rules (binary-indep): Install slib.lintian-overrides as usr/share/lintian/overrides/slib in the final package. Files: ca4e558cf192e960052d81d0c0f495df 556 devel optional slib_3a5-3.dsc 524a405ac7c0dd3dd629f74fbb0b35bd 12497 devel optional slib_3a5-3.diff.gz 35cd69611d5e475b46c491d972ed2ba5 938678 devel optional slib_3a5-3_all.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHi9mCqMsB9b6fcOoRAs2eAKDA0ONeqf2NSRUPsbf/CmTyTbyMkACbBR5E cDY/n86UI0RKwiDIor7TiGo= =mPJR -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: slib_3a5-3.diff.gz to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-3.diff.gz slib_3a5-3.dsc to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-3.dsc slib_3a5-3_all.deb to pool/main/s/slib/slib_3a5-3_all.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e4-3 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:08:12 -0500 Source: scm Binary: libscm-dev scm Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e4-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter scm- A Scheme language interpreter Closes: 459828 Changes: scm (5e4-3) unstable; urgency=low . * debian/rules (SCM_OPTIONS): Add -F differ. . * debian/control (libscm-dev): New package. We don't make a shared library because there is no standardization of SCM options, and no way to indicate in a non-brittle fashion what SCM options are available in any particular build, nor any standardization of sonames. * debian/rules (build): Build libscm.a too. (install): Install libscm.a, scm.h, scmfig.h, and scmflags.h into libscm-dev. Don't install header files in scm package. (Closes: #459828) . * debian/copyright: Add proper authorship and copyright information; make mention of the special library linking exception since we are now packaging the library. Files: 0ea1ad3bb4dfa27261714f26c6d089fa 718 interpreters optional scm_5e4-3.dsc 4ca7b567c95ebc451e8fecab63b885a2 9076 interpreters optional scm_5e4-3.diff.gz d40bea44eed82bf0927bb98d06276c6a 686480 interpreters optional scm_5e4-3_i386.deb ce401b29f6387e7478a10de0bdc61cbd 326238 libdevel optional libscm-dev_5e4-3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFHiP+cqMsB9b6fcOoRAiNcAJiSd94h4q9okYfZ8YGuZ6WLn+IkAJ45gjam dDFxFR1Wcn6ESE5o8s2wGw== =owYX -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libscm-dev_5e4-3_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e4-3_i386.deb scm_5e4-3.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-3.diff.gz scm_5e4-3.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-3.dsc scm_5e4-3_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-3_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e4-4 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:15:05 -0500 Source: scm Binary: libscm-dev scm Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e4-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: libscm-dev - Embeddable library for SCM Scheme language interpreter scm- A Scheme language interpreter Changes: scm (5e4-4) unstable; urgency=low . * continue.h: Fix spelling of STACK_GROWS_UP in change from 5e4-1. . * Makefile: Repeat change from 5e3-2. Files: 03fdfc66423ee230fa85589fe784e741 718 interpreters optional scm_5e4-4.dsc c801877bc945a4035aabc7585ed014a7 9320 interpreters optional scm_5e4-4.diff.gz b6d57546a17417dbb976319213f888a7 686538 interpreters optional scm_5e4-4_i386.deb 4fb3ceeccac196735a83751da6534798 326274 libdevel optional libscm-dev_5e4-4_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHitXuqMsB9b6fcOoRAjEGAJ9hJ8ZwqzAFU96XeB+kFjHiaarElgCfSRaV 8yEpZ8HMOXfCcjgM6UvLvrQ= =J+sY -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: libscm-dev_5e4-4_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/libscm-dev_5e4-4_i386.deb scm_5e4-4.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-4.diff.gz scm_5e4-4.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-4.dsc scm_5e4-4_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-4_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.3-1 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:34:58 -0500 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash-common gnucash Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.3-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Changes: gnucash (2.2.3-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. . * debian/control (Build-Depends): Remove libofx-dev and ofx, in anticipation of the likely removal of libofx from Debian, at least for the short term. See http://bugs.debian.org/460407 for details. (Build-Conflicts): Add libofx-dev to avoid accidents. (gnucash/Description, gnucash-common/Description): Remove mention of importation of OFX files. * debian/rules (configure): Remove --enable-ofx from configure invocation. . * debian/README.debian: Update HBCI information; add OFX information. Files: 2046625b65746472cb5d06d866626371 1265 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-1.dsc 5d043f0f453f43394be305afd2ba7dc9 9706360 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3.orig.tar.gz ddfa98bb032c6aeb64a34d5aba9ab953 18231 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-1.diff.gz 5a656e0436788145294b44a923c9e199 4235776 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.3-1_all.deb a5a99fa870fb4115aec6846fa4f17c04 1706306 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.3-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHiRDbqMsB9b6fcOoRAlkQAKDDCGrXZxuIVV+Kn0hStz0AvosvgQCgjIaM tc4FLYhMSmFpl0UjHKiEopc= =tB88 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.3-1_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.3-1_all.deb gnucash_2.2.3-1.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-1.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.3-1.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-1.dsc gnucash_2.2.3-1_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3-1_i386.deb gnucash_2.2.3.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.3.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted gnucash 2.2.2-2 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:15:21 -0700 Source: gnucash Binary: gnucash-common gnucash Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.2.2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: gnucash- A personal finance tracking program gnucash-common - A personal finance tracking program Changes: gnucash (2.2.2-2) unstable; urgency=medium . * src/app-utils/gnc-sx-instance-module.c (gnc_sx_get_template_transaction_account): Size SX_GUID_STR as GUID_ENCODING_LENGTH + 1. (__get_template_split_account): Likewise for GUID_STR. (Upstream changeset 16766). Files: df412ca5ce778ebd4b4ac8bf73125857 1300 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.2-2.dsc 1898e0a8f144f86e352a4105833f8c37 18299 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.2-2.diff.gz 50099510de96a9d19a9ee87de4e5c495 4163022 gnome optional gnucash-common_2.2.2-2_all.deb 87e203d0a9f1b53e836a0183d86dee7a 1782848 gnome optional gnucash_2.2.2-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHfqBpqMsB9b6fcOoRAjcLAJ4gsUDdN4Kdzy+EJ1ksfVIyPyiZGgCfRYL6 jEeXHzuB3bnHSto92hlJeg8= =eb9D -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: gnucash-common_2.2.2-2_all.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash-common_2.2.2-2_all.deb gnucash_2.2.2-2.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.2-2.diff.gz gnucash_2.2.2-2.dsc to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.2-2.dsc gnucash_2.2.2-2_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gnucash/gnucash_2.2.2-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted lilypond 2.10.33-1 (source all i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:11:04 -0700 Source: lilypond Binary: lilypond-data lilypond-doc lilypond Architecture: source all i386 Version: 2.10.33-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: lilypond - A program for typesetting sheet music lilypond-data - LilyPond music typesetter (data files) lilypond-doc - LilyPond Documentation in HTML, PS and DVI formats Closes: 380071 Changes: lilypond (2.10.33-1) unstable; urgency=low . * New upstream release. . * debian/control (lilypond Depends): Use source:Version instead of Source-Version. (lilypond-doc Suggests): Likewise. (lilypond-data Recommends): Likewise, but with = in place of = as well. (Closes: #380071). Thanks to Lior Kaplan for the patch. Files: a6e50b1fa5d2758a28fea415c4d43c97 1546 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-1.dsc 28d4852ad3d8a4e9f8330d0ce2d41262 2679901 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33.orig.tar.gz c0961ccae305b47035e3e73d28206904 26872 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-1.diff.gz 5174be927548b199ed37779aec93c942 3626322 tex optional lilypond-data_2.10.33-1_all.deb 4bd61ff5775a8f4ba7fec5d95405bb1b 33429428 doc optional lilypond-doc_2.10.33-1_all.deb fd989a33f13e29969ecf631e78b25ec4 1296722 tex optional lilypond_2.10.33-1_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHe9ZZqMsB9b6fcOoRAkWSAKC353o0qAc/6arAyZrRMr4WA+Aj1wCbBwpn 8zvFnORUzQfOeB5NammxKsQ= =z9/S -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: lilypond-data_2.10.33-1_all.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond-data_2.10.33-1_all.deb lilypond-doc_2.10.33-1_all.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond-doc_2.10.33-1_all.deb lilypond_2.10.33-1.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-1.diff.gz lilypond_2.10.33-1.dsc to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-1.dsc lilypond_2.10.33-1_i386.deb to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33-1_i386.deb lilypond_2.10.33.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/l/lilypond/lilypond_2.10.33.orig.tar.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Accepted scm 5e4-2 (source i386)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 17:10:06 -0800 Source: scm Binary: scm Architecture: source i386 Version: 5e4-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: scm- A Scheme language interpreter Closes: 369576 458284 Changes: scm (5e4-2) unstable; urgency=low . * Properly acknowledge NMU 5e3-6.1. (Closes: #369576, #458284). Files: 99f8755491a9955b636ea1c6a6201bbc 706 interpreters optional scm_5e4-2.dsc 43a9075e0ea21cc7d27e451bffca8254 8134 interpreters optional scm_5e4-2.diff.gz a91ea85d6e3c98a82ffda72cc89af2db 710188 interpreters optional scm_5e4-2_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHeEIUqMsB9b6fcOoRAu+0AJ94FnF7V8L1VpxZbMQDjb3G0726bQCgmPV2 UwWiXjwo0Exd+JOYwWsnpjE= =csus -END PGP SIGNATURE- Accepted: scm_5e4-2.diff.gz to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-2.diff.gz scm_5e4-2.dsc to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-2.dsc scm_5e4-2_i386.deb to pool/main/s/scm/scm_5e4-2_i386.deb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
