Bug#847792: marked as done (RFS: usbguard/0.6.2+ds1-1)

Your message dated Thu, 15 Dec 2016 04:29:20 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: usbguard/0.6.2+ds1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #847792, regarding RFS: usbguard/0.6.2+ds1-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#848199: RFS: evil-el/1.2.12-2

control: severity -1 important control: tag -1 +moreinfo On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 05:12:31AM +0300, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > Changes since last upload: > > [ Sean Whitton ] > * Team upload. > * Fix Vcs-* URIs. You should delete the "Team upload" line since the person who signed off the

Bug#848199: RFS: evil-el/1.2.12-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "evil-el" * Package name: evil-el Version : 1.2.12-2 Upstream Author : Vegard Øye * Url : https://bitbucket.org/lyro/evil/wiki/Home *

Bug#848200: RFS: eoconv/1.4-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "eoconv" * Package name: eoconv Version : 1.4-2 Upstream Author : Tristan Miller * Url : http://en.nothingisreal.com/wiki/Eoconv *

Bug#847792: RFS: usbguard/0.6.2+ds1-1

Control: tag -1 + pending Hi, Muri Nicanor wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "usbguard" […] > https://mentors.debian.net/package/usbguard Looks fine to me. Will upload soon. Thanks for maintaining usbguard in Debian! Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel

Bug#847458: RFS: clues-emacs/0~2014.09.23.69d873c-1 ITP

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 05:06:39AM +0300, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > I received reply from upstream, so now version is oficially 1.0.0. One > more review, please. You need `dch -r`. Otherwise, cab58bc0530e73165bf01d66a37966d08ca26280 LGTM. > About d/watch -- seems I used old version of

Re: Possible workaround

On 14 December 2016 at 16:44, Christian Seiler wrote: | Hi, | | On 12/14/2016 04:16 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > One quick thought: does it die in _compilation_ which we have seen with other | > (C++-heavy) packages? | | No, g++ works fine here. (The C++ file itself is trivial if you |

Bug#847709: marked as done (RFS: kildclient/3.1.0-1 [update of package already in Debian])

Your message dated Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:15:08 +0500 with message-id <20161214191508.5zjrcpdlnf7nx...@belkar.wrar.name> and subject line Re: Bug#847709: RFS: kildclient/3.1.0-1 [update of package already in Debian] has caused the Debian Bug report #847709, regarding RFS: kildclient/3.1.0-1 [update

Bug#848074: marked as done (RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-2 [RC])

Your message dated Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:09:04 +0500 with message-id <20161214190904.khdu5h6xjibd7...@belkar.wrar.name> and subject line Re: Bug#848074: RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-1.1 [RC, NMU] has caused the Debian Bug report #848074, regarding RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-2 [RC] to be marked as done. This

Bug#848074: RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-1.1 [RC, NMU]

Uploaded, thanks. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#847709: RFS: kildclient/3.1.0-1 [update of package already in Debian]

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo On 14-12-2016 14:34, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 05:35:19PM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: >> * control: kildclient-doc is marked as Multi-Arch: foreign since it >> consists only of static documentation. > Actually kildclient is

Bug#848074: RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-1.1 [RC, NMU]

Andrey Rahmatullin wrote... > If you are a team member then you should do a team upload, not a NMU. Um, rright. Updated debdiff attached. Christoph signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#848074: RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-1.1 [RC, NMU]

Christoph Biedl wrote... > Updated debdiff attached. Now really attached. Christoph diff -Nru inspircd-2.0.23/debian/changelog inspircd-2.0.23/debian/changelog --- inspircd-2.0.23/debian/changelog2016-09-06 00:04:38.0 +0200 +++ inspircd-2.0.23/debian/changelog2016-12-12

Re: Non-understandable piuparts

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 06:48:24PM +0100, Andreas Moog wrote: > It doesn't in unstable currently: FWIW, after the upload of python-requests version 2.12.3-1, python-pyvo is installable again. -- PGP-encrypted mails preferred PGP Fingerprint: 74CD D9FE 5BCB FE0D 13EE 8EEA 61F3 4426 74DE 6624

Bug#848151: RFS: nfft/3.3.2-2

Tested on partch, uploaded. Thanks! -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#848151: marked as done (RFS: nfft/3.3.2-2)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Dec 2016 22:20:01 +0500 with message-id <20161214172001.djcybh5cbdulh...@belkar.wrar.name> and subject line Re: Bug#848151: RFS: nfft/3.3.2-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #848151, regarding RFS: nfft/3.3.2-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the

Bug#847969: RFS: libpam-ldap/186-2

On 14-12-2016 13:36, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > Please remove extra empty lines from the changelog entry. > Why did you enable DH_VERBOSE=1? > Already fixed. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#847969: RFS: libpam-ldap/186-2

Standards-Version = 3.6.8? (debian/changelog) 2016-12-14 14:36 GMT-02:00 Andrey Rahmatullin : > Please remove extra empty lines from the changelog entry. > Why did you enable DH_VERBOSE=1? > > -- > WBR, wRAR

Bug#848151: RFS: nfft/3.3.2-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "nfft" * Package name: nfft   Version : 3.3.2-2   Upstream Author : Prof. Dr. Daniel Potts  * URL :

Bug#838495: RFS: python-cartopy/0.14.2+dfsg1-1 [ITP]

control: reopen -1 I have pushed a new version on mentors: https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/python-cartopy/python-c artopy_0.14.2+dfsg1-1.dsc Would you be happy to sponsor it Gianfranco? Cheers, Ghis

Bug#847709: RFS: kildclient/3.1.0-1 [update of package already in Debian]

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Control: owner -1 ! On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 05:35:19PM -0200, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote: > * control: kildclient-doc is marked as Multi-Arch: foreign since it > consists only of static documentation. Actually kildclient is marked, not kildclient-doc. -- WBR,

Bug#847969: RFS: libpam-ldap/186-2

Please remove extra empty lines from the changelog entry. Why did you enable DH_VERBOSE=1? -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#848074: RFS: inspircd/2.0.23-1.1 [RC, NMU]

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 08:35:41PM +0100, Christoph Biedl wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for a NMU of the "inspircd" package, as I > happen to be a member of the Debian IRC team but (still) lack upload > permission to handle the RC bug it is currently affected with on my own. If you are a

Bug#847948: RFS: xserver-xorg-video-sisusb/1:0.9.6-2.1 [RC]

I don't see the nmudiff at #846698. -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#848148: RFS: restic/0.3.1-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "restic". Note that it needs golang-github-minio-minio-go/2.0.2-1 to build (#847350: RFS: golang-github-minio-minio-go/2.0.2-1). restic - backup program with multiple revisions,

Bug#842166: renewed sponsorship-request

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 04:44:18PM +0100, Willem Vermin wrote: > Package is native, because the Debian package source is identical to the > pristine source. This is bad. Imagine someone else becomes the Debian maintainer. Also, with native packages you need to make another upstream release with

Bug#837167: RFS: aiscm/0.6.2-2

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:48:32PM +, Jan Wedekind wrote: > > Other problems: > > - the package doesn't build in a clean sid chroot: > > not ok 19 - Check a pixel in the first video frame of the video (ERROR: In > > procedure #f: Wrong type (expecting ffmpeg): #) > > FAIL: test_ffmpeg.scm 19

Re: Possible workaround

Hi, On 12/14/2016 04:16 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > One quick thought: does it die in _compilation_ which we have seen with other > (C++-heavy) packages? No, g++ works fine here. (The C++ file itself is trivial if you look at it.) Current package in Debian:

Re: Possible workaround (was: Re: Help: r-cran-treescape does not build on i386, armel and armhf any more)

On 14 December 2016 at 15:59, Andreas Tille wrote: | Hi Christian, | | thanks a lot for your extensive analysis about of the stack problem. I | admit I have no idea why this large stack is needed on those | architectures with stable kernel. I also have no idea why everything | went fine with

Re: Possible workaround

Hi Andreas, On 12/14/2016 03:59 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > thanks a lot for your extensive analysis about of the stack problem. I > admit I have no idea why this large stack is needed on those > architectures with stable kernel. I also have no idea why everything > went fine with treescape

Bug#847350: RFS: golang-github-minio-minio-go/2.0.2+dfsg-1

Dmitry, Gianfranco, Are you OK with the package in the current form? Could you sponsor it? The sooner it hits sid, the sooner I can submit a RFS for restic. Thanks! signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Possible workaround (was: Re: Help: r-cran-treescape does not build on i386, armel and armhf any more)

Hi Christian, thanks a lot for your extensive analysis about of the stack problem. I admit I have no idea why this large stack is needed on those architectures with stable kernel. I also have no idea why everything went fine with treescape version 1.10.17. Since I personally fell totally

Bug#842166: renewed sponsorship-request

Control: tags -1 + moreinfo Why is the package native? Policy (5.6.12) says it's for the cases when "a piece of software was written specifically to be a Debian package, where the Debian package source must always be identical to the pristine source and therefore no revision indication is

Possible workaround (was: Re: Help: r-cran-treescape does not build on i386, armel and armhf any more)

Hi again, On 12/14/2016 03:00 PM, Christian Seiler wrote: > If I had to guess what was going on in the backtrace, I'd suspect > an infinite recursion in R code, which translates to infinite > recursion of the underlying C code. But I'm really not sure here. Interestingly enough, my initial guess

Bug#842166: renewed sponsorship-request

Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "findent": * Package name: findent Version : 2.7.3 Upstream Author : Willem Vermin wver...@gmail.com * URL : findent.sourceforge.net * Licence : BSD-3 Section : development

Re: Help: r-cran-treescape does not build on i386, armel and armhf any more

Hi Andreas, On 12/14/2016 11:47 AM, Christian Seiler wrote: > On 12/14/2016 08:50 AM, Christian Seiler wrote: >> I'm going to try an i386 build in a VM running a stable kernel >> and see if that does indeed change things and if I can reproduce >> the problem. Should that not be the issue though

Bug#848093: marked as done (RFS: manpages-zh/1.5.4.1-1)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Dec 2016 13:30:35 + (UTC) with message-id <1994898952.4680419.1481722235...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#848093: RFS: manpages-zh/1.5.4.1-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #848093, regarding RFS: manpages-zh/1.5.4.1-1 to be marked as done. This means

Bug#848133: RFS: rdup/1.1.15-1.0

On 2016-12-14 18:06+0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:00:30PM +0100, Félix Sipma wrote: >> Version: 1.1.15-1.0 > ITYM 1.1.15-0.1 OK, package updated. dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/rdup/rdup_1.1.15-0.1.dsc signature.asc Description: PGP

Bug#848133: RFS: rdup/1.1.15-1.0

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:00:30PM +0100, Félix Sipma wrote: > Version: 1.1.15-1.0 ITYM 1.1.15-0.1 -- WBR, wRAR signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Bug#848133: RFS: rdup/1.1.15-1.0

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for a NMU of "rdup". I contacted the maintainer (js...@debian.org) two weeks ago about this NMU, but he did not answered me. rdup - utility to create a file list suitable for making backups Package:

Bug#848093: RFS: manpages-zh/1.5.4.1-1

2016-12-14 19:20 GMT+08:00 Gianfranco Costamagna : > d/compat <-- still "9" > > this is why you didn't drop "--with autoreconf" from rules file, right? > (please drop it) Yes. Problem solved. > > > debian/copyright.old seems useless, right? Initially I wanted to keep

Bug#848128: RFS: rear/1.19-1 ITP: rear -- Bare metal disaster recovery and system migration framework

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rear". Previous RFS was sponsored but got rejected by ftpmasters because one file was not DFSG compliant (this documentation file was removed in current packaging and source code was repacked

Bug#848093: RFS: manpages-zh/1.5.4.1-1

control: owner -1 ! control: tags -1 moreinfo >manpages-zh - Chinese manual pages lets see, even if I don't speak such language, changes seems about packaging: d/compat <-- still "9" this is why you didn't drop "--with autoreconf" from rules file, right? (please drop it)

Bug#847426: marked as done (RFS: fortune-zh/2.0)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:09:11 + (UTC) with message-id <433760594.4505948.1481713751...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#847426: RFS: fortune-zh/2.0 has caused the Debian Bug report #847426, regarding RFS: fortune-zh/2.0 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#847426: RFS: fortune-zh/2.0

Hi, Uploaded updated fortune-zh package to mentors: https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fortune-zh/fortune-zh_2.0.dsc The changes I've made can be viewed here: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/chinese/fortune-zh.git/log/ (the latest 3 commits) Buildlog is good although DoM-amd64 seems

Re: Help: r-cran-treescape does not build on i386, armel and armhf any more

Hi Andreas, On 12/14/2016 08:50 AM, Christian Seiler wrote: > I'm going to try an i386 build in a VM running a stable kernel > and see if that does indeed change things and if I can reproduce > the problem. Should that not be the issue though then I really > can't reproduce the problem - and

Bug#847350: RFS: golang-github-minio-minio-go/2.0.2+dfsg-1

On 2016-12-13 07:59+1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: > On Monday, 12 December 2016 11:09:56 AM AEDT Félix Sipma wrote: >> From gbp-dch(1): >> >> --id-length=N >> Include N digits of the commit id in the >> changelog entry. Default is to not include >>

Bug#838495: marked as done (RFS: python-cartopy/0.14.2+dfsg1-1 [ITP])

On 14/12/16 08:36, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: control: reopen -1 Package python-cartopy has been removed from mentors. lets wait a little more G. Yes, there is a new upstream version available to I'll have to refresh the current packaging with it. I'll ping you when done. Cheers,

Bug#847978: marked as done (RFS: patat/0.4.5.0-1)

Your message dated Wed, 14 Dec 2016 08:34:09 + (UTC) with message-id <1450281808.4278429.1481704449...@mail.yahoo.com> and subject line Re: Bug#847978: RFS: patat/0.4.5.0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #847978, regarding RFS: patat/0.4.5.0-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim

Bug#838495: marked as done (RFS: python-cartopy/0.14.2+dfsg1-1 [ITP])

control: reopen -1 >Package python-cartopy has been removed from mentors. lets wait a little more G.