Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 23:22:46 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2057
Added:
tzdata/trunk/debian/config
tzdata/trunk/debian/po/
tzdata/trunk/debian/po/POTFILES.in
tzdata/trunk/debian/po/en.po
tzdata/trunk/debian/po/templates.pot
tzdata/trunk/debian/templates
Log:
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 23:02:47 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2056
Removed:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/local/manpages/tzconfig.8
glibc-package/trunk/debian/local/usr_sbin/tzconfig
Modified:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/TODO
glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
glibc
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 22:40:14 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2055
Added:
tzdata/tags/2007e-2/
Log:
Tagging 2007e-2
Copied: tzdata/tags/2007e-2 (from rev 2054, tzdata/trunk)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [
Your message dated Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:47:14 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391529: fixed in tzdata 2007e-2
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now you
Accepted:
tzdata_2007e-2.diff.gz
to pool/main/t/tzdata/tzdata_2007e-2.diff.gz
tzdata_2007e-2.dsc
to pool/main/t/tzdata/tzdata_2007e-2.dsc
tzdata_2007e-2_all.deb
to pool/main/t/tzdata/tzdata_2007e-2_all.deb
Override entries for your package:
tzdata_2007e-2.dsc - source libs
tzdata_2007e-2_a
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 22:21:16 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2054
Modified:
tzdata/trunk/debian/changelog
tzdata/trunk/debian/control
tzdata/trunk/debian/postinst
tzdata/trunk/debian/rules
Log:
Switch to debconf (closes: bug#391529).
Modified: tzdata/trunk/debian
tzdata_2007e-2_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
tzdata_2007e-2.dsc
tzdata_2007e-2.diff.gz
tzdata_2007e-2_all.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
* Aurelien Jarno ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070412 22:59]:
> Basically it looks ok. What about the freeze period for the toolchain? I
> think we usually suffer for a too early freeze of the glibc (it has been
> frozen in July for Etch, even if it has been unblocked a lot of time
> after). In my opinion,
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:09:23PM +0400, balodja wrote:
> > char *libname = "librt.so", *errmsg;
> >
> > hdl = dlopen(libname, RTLD_NOW);
Never do that. If you want to dlopen librt, pick a SONAME to request
in the source code or at compile time: dlopen ("librt.so.1",
RTLD_NOW). Then yo
Your message dated Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:47:03 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#419103: version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in libc.so.6,
while loading librt.so
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been d
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26
> severity 419103 normal
Bug#419103: version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in libc.so.6, while loading
librt.so
Severity set to `normal' from `important'
>
End of message, stopping proces
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.6.ds1-13
Severity: important
Here is an example that demonstrates the bug:
> % cat > test.c
> #include
> #include
> #include
>
> int main() {
> void *hdl;
> char *libname = "librt.so", *errmsg;
>
> hdl = dlopen(libname, RTLD_NOW);
> if(hdl == NULL)
That could be the case. When I tried to add the patch to the source package,
it told me that all hunks failed because it was already applied. Now I
changed the "series" file in debian/patches to revert the patch and build
the package again...
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Breme
John Morrissey a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 11:45:13AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> Could you please try this patch instead:
>> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/sysdeps/unix/alpha/sysdep.h.diff?r1=1.26&r2=1.26.2.1&cvsroot=glibc
>>
>> It looks a lot better, and it's always
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 11:45:13AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Could you please try this patch instead:
> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/libc/sysdeps/unix/alpha/sysdep.h.diff?r1=1.26&r2=1.26.2.1&cvsroot=glibc
>
> It looks a lot better, and it's always easier to convince the releas
It might be - maybe that change is what broke it?
I'll know later today / this weekend.
...tom
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 11:32:57 -0400, John Morrissey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 11:45:13AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> Could you please try this patch instead:
>>
> http://
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26
> severity 415961 normal
Bug#415961: locales: Sorting with pt_BR ignoring spaces - it shouldn't
Severity set to `normal' from `important'
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
P
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 03:30:59PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Tom Evans a écrit :
> > The patch that you didn't know existed was included with the bug report..
>
> It was not clearly marked as a patch, moreover it looks more like a bad
> workaround than a fix. I still have some resistance to a
Tom Evans a écrit :
> The patch that you didn't know existed was included with the bug report.
It was not clearly marked as a patch, moreover it looks more like a bad
workaround than a fix. I still have some resistance to apply it for etch r1.
And remember we are humans, we already have problems
The patch that you didn't know existed was included with the bug report.
I am trying the patch that Aurelien suggested - it does look like a
better solution - I was going to try to decode the inline assembler in
that area this weekend to see if there was a mistake.
There have been offers on t
Ali Servet Donmez a écrit :
> Package: libc6-i686
> Version: 2.5-1
>
> First of all i'm terribly sorry that i can't give you too much info.
> because i can't boot my system anymore due this problem.
>
> I tried to upgrade my unstable system today, i had errors and my
> system frozen, so i tried t
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 419012 normal
Bug#419012: /lib/ld-2.5.so: Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised
value(s)
Severity set to `normal' from `critical'
> tags 419012 - security
Bug#419012: /lib/ld-2.5.so: Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialis
severity 419012 normal
tags 419012 - security
reassign 419012 valgrind
thanks
* Tobias Schlemmer:
> valgrind reports jumps depending on uninitialized valuse in
> /lib/ld-2.5.so. I found this bug using some gfortran 4.2, but I get it
> also using the standard gcc package (version 4:4.1.1-15).
Th
Package: libc6-i686
Version: 2.5-1
First of all i'm terribly sorry that i can't give you too much info.
because i can't boot my system anymore due this problem.
I tried to upgrade my unstable system today, i had errors and my
system frozen, so i tried to reboot it, now i'm having these error
mess
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 10:52:31 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2053
Modified:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/local-notls.diff
glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/m68k/cvs-m68k-update.diff
Log:
* patches/any/local-notls.diff:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.5-1
Severity: critical
Tags: security
Justification: root security hole
Hi,
valgrind reports jumps depending on uninitialized valuse in
/lib/ld-2.5.so. I found this bug using some gfortran 4.2, but I get it
also using the standard gcc package (version 4:4.1.1-15).
I'm
Pierre Habouzit a écrit :
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:26:09AM +0200, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>>> Tom Evans a écrit :
When will this version be moved into stable/Etch?
>>> This version (or a later one) will move to stable for Lenny, but will
>>> never move to Etch, as it is now a released version
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 09:22:27 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2052
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch/debian/patches/any/cvs-nss_nis_setnetgrent.diff
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-et
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 09:19:17 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2051
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch/debian/changelog
Log:
Change the version number
Modified: glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch/debian/changelog
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-04-13 09:17:34 + (Fri, 13 Apr 2007)
New Revision: 2050
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch/
Log:
Create an Etch branch from revision 2039
Copied: glibc-package/branches/glibc-branch-etch (from rev 2039,
glibc-package/trunk)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
Your message dated Fri, 13 Apr 2007 11:08:12 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#369536: _nss_nis_setnetgrent: Assertion `len > 0' failed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is n
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:26:09AM +0200, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> > Tom Evans a écrit :
> > > When will this version be moved into stable/Etch?
> >
> > This version (or a later one) will move to stable for Lenny, but will
> > never move to Etch, as it is now a released version.
>
> Somewhere in th
Your message dated Fri, 13 Apr 2007 11:03:07 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#369536: _nss_nis_setnetgrent: Assertion `len > 0' failed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is n
Your message dated Fri, 13 Apr 2007 11:03:20 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#406619: libc6 [2.5-0exp3] dies on upgrade
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> unmerge 369536
Bug#369536: netgroup: nis in nsswitch.conf causes libc6 to fail and programs
like sudo or rpc.mountd to crash
Bug#226515: getgrouplist() segfaults for NIS groups; breaks sshd's AllowGroups
feature in some situations
Bug#246288: getgroup
> Tom Evans a écrit :
> > When will this version be moved into stable/Etch?
>
> This version (or a later one) will move to stable for Lenny, but will
> never move to Etch, as it is now a released version.
Somewhere in the past there was a very simple patch (look for "not_cancel")
that worked for
unmerge 369536
retitle 369536 _nss_nis_setnetgrent: Assertion `len > 0' failed
found 369536 2.3.6.ds1-13
tags 369536 + fixed-upstream
thanks
This bug is about the NIS netgroup map, the others are about the
group map. Unmerging.
This particular bug is a duplicate of
http://bugs.gentoo.org/
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 09:55 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> No those file should not be removed as they are useful. It's the
> optimized version of the libc6 for i686. This should be handled by the
> packaging system and the user should not have to take such a decision.
>
> libc6 is supposed to di
Tom Evans a écrit :
> When will this version be moved into stable/Etch?
This version (or a later one) will move to stable for Lenny, but will
never move to Etch, as it is now a released version.
--
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian developer | E
Soeren Sonnenburg a écrit :
> reopen 406619
> severity 406619 grave
> thanks
>
> I am now seeing this on the libc update to unstable (version 2.5-1) now
> on kernel version 2.6.21-rc6. This time I managed to copy the output I
> received on upgrade:
>
> Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
> dpkg: warn
40 matches
Mail list logo
