Bug#432757: Upgrade is impossible. Conflicts with lib32z1 package

reassign 432757 lib32z1 forcemerge 432757 432326 kthxbye -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpkWvhywk9Cw.pgp Description: PGP signature

Processed: Re: Bug#432757: Upgrade is impossible. Conflicts with lib32z1 package

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 432757 lib32z1 Bug#432757: Upgrade is impossible. Conflicts with lib32z1 package Bug reassigned from package `libc6-i386' to `lib32z1'. forcemerge 432757 432326 Bug#432757: Upgrade is impossible. Conflicts with lib32z1 package Bug#432326:

Bug#425610: locales: dpkg-reconfigure fails: unexpected end of file

On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 04:16:15PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:11:02AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: I am unable to reproduce this bug. Could you please add a -x to the first line of /var/lib/dpkg/info/locales.postinst (after #! /bin/sh) and rerun it again? This

Bug#432844: Unable to install libc6-i386 on debian unstable (amd64 arch.)

Package: libc6-i386 Version: 2.6-2 The packages were broken yesterday, but I tried to wait one day ... sems nobody noticed, so I'm reporting this bug. Using debian unstable on amd64 apt-get update;apt-get upgrade followed by apt-get -f install end with this: Preparing to replace libc6-i386

Processed: Re: Bug#432844: Unable to install libc6-i386 on debian unstable (amd64 arch.)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 432844 lib32z1 Bug#432844: Unable to install libc6-i386 on debian unstable (amd64 arch.) Bug reassigned from package `libc6-i386' to `lib32z1'. forcemerge 432844 432326 Bug#432844: Unable to install libc6-i386 on debian unstable (amd64 arch.)

Bug#432844: Unable to install libc6-i386 on debian unstable (amd64 arch.)

reassign 432844 lib32z1 forcemerge 432844 432326 kthxbye I feel tired ... On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:38:50PM +0200, BH wrote: Package: libc6-i386 Version: 2.6-2 The packages were broken yesterday, but I tried to wait one day ... sems nobody noticed, so I'm reporting this bug. Using

Bug#425610: marked as done (locales: dpkg-reconfigure fails: unexpected end of file)

Your message dated Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:30:12 +0200 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#425610: locales: dpkg-reconfigure fails: unexpected end of file has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If

[Bug libc/4364] _XOPEN_VERSION and unistd.h

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 15:10 --- Subject: Bug 4364 CVSROOT:/cvs/glibc Module name:libc Branch: glibc-2_5-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-12 15:09:59 Modified files: . :

[Bug libc/4368] bad documentation in stdlib.h

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 15:10 --- Subject: Bug 4368 CVSROOT:/cvs/glibc Module name:libc Branch: glibc-2_5-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-12 15:10:21 Modified files: . :

[Bug libc/4342] scanf %lg problem with hex numbers

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 15:14 --- Subject: Bug 4342 CVSROOT:/cvs/glibc Module name:libc Branch: glibc-2_5-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-12 15:13:48 Modified files: . :

[Bug libc/4438] vfprintf() segfault with multibyte string and long precision

--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 15:15 --- Subject: Bug 4438 CVSROOT:/cvs/glibc Module name:libc Branch: glibc-2_5-branch Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-12 15:15:03 Modified files: . :

Processed: setting package to glibc glibc-doc libc0.1 libc0.1-dbg libc0.1-dev libc0.1-dev-i386 libc0.1-i386 libc0.1-i686 libc0.1-pic libc0.1-prof libc0.1-udeb libc0.3 libc0.3-dbg libc0.3-dev libc0.3-p

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.6 package glibc glibc-doc libc0.1 libc0.1-dbg libc0.1-dev libc0.1-dev-i386 libc0.1-i386 libc0.1-i686 libc0.1-pic libc0.1-prof libc0.1-udeb libc0.3 libc0.3-dbg libc0.3-dev libc0.3-pic

Processed: severity of 432721 is minor

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.5 severity 432721 minor Bug#432721: libc6: preinst kernel check has wrong version number Severity set to `minor' from `normal' End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact

r2411 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . script.in

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-07-12 20:09:32 + (Thu, 12 Jul 2007) New Revision: 2411 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/script.in/kernelcheck.sh Log: * script.in/kernelcheck.sh: s/kernel_compare_version/linux_compare_versions/ for arm.

r2412 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . script.in

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-07-12 20:12:22 + (Thu, 12 Jul 2007) New Revision: 2412 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/script.in/kernelcheck.sh Log: * script.in/kernelcheck.sh: the minimum kernel version is now 2.6.8 and not 2.6.1. Closes:

linux-kernel-headers REMOVED from testing

FYI: The status of the linux-kernel-headers source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 2.6.18-7 Current version: (not in testing) Hint: Package not in unstable The script that generates this mail tries to extract removal reasons from comments in the

Should libc6-dev conflict against binutils in experimental?

Current conflicts binutils ( 2.17cvs20070426-1) doesn't match version in experimental. Maybe it should be added too? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Should libc6-dev conflict against binutils in experimental?

Touko Korpela a écrit : Current conflicts binutils ( 2.17cvs20070426-1) doesn't match version in experimental. Maybe it should be added too? That's really not possible, the version in experimental is higher (from the debian version point of view) than the version in unstable. If we do that,