Bug#918856: RFS: rmlint/2.8.0-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "rmlint" * Package name: rmlint Version : 2.8.0-2 Upstream Author : Christopher Pahl * URL : https://rmlint.readthedocs.io/ * License : GPL-3+

Re: ITP: sexpect -- Expect for Shells

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:43:08PM +0800, Clark Wang wrote: > I filed an ITP bug for my own project (https://github.com/clarkwang/sexpect) > at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=91 . I'm not quite > sure what I can do next. Can someone help me out?

ITP: sexpect -- Expect for Shells

Hi, I filed an ITP bug for my own project (https://github.com/clarkwang/sexpect) at https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=91 . I'm not quite sure what I can do next. Can someone help me out? -clark

Help for SIGSEGV in test suite needed when built with gcc 8.2 what works nicely with gcc 6.3

Hi, as reported in bug #907624 ffindex autopkgtest fails with SIGSEGV in sid and buster. I've tested in stretch (gcc 6.3) and the code works fine. I've reported upstream[1] the results of my gdb session where I was able to find the exact code line[2] where the SIGSEGV is thrown. It turns out

Re: Help for SIGSEGV in test suite needed when built with gcc 8.2 what works nicely with gcc 6.3

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:42:43PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > to find the exact code line[2] where the SIGSEGV is thrown. It turns out > that the elements of a structure are not accessible: > >(gdb) print entry->offset >Cannot access memory at address 0x7 It's because entry is 0x7. >

Re: Help for SIGSEGV in test suite needed when built with gcc 8.2 what works nicely with gcc 6.3

Hi Andreas, one thing I usually do in such cases is to rebuild the package adding "-fsanitize=address -O0" flags (optimization just to understand better what happens in the source). This switches the address sanitizer on . This can test

Bug#917570: marked as done (RFS: nautilus-hide/0.2.3-6)

Your message dated Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:19:53 -0500 with message-id and subject line Re: RFS: nautilus-hide/0.2.3-6 has caused the Debian Bug report #917570, regarding RFS: nautilus-hide/0.2.3-6 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not

Re: Help for SIGSEGV in test suite needed when built with gcc 8.2 what works nicely with gcc 6.3

Hi, On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 02:14:14AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 09:42:43PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > to find the exact code line[2] where the SIGSEGV is thrown. It turns out > > that the elements of a structure are not accessible: > > > >(gdb) print

Re: Help for SIGSEGV in test suite needed when built with gcc 8.2 what works nicely with gcc 6.3

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 10:49:48PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > to find the exact code line[2] where the SIGSEGV is thrown. It turns out > > > that the elements of a structure are not accessible: > > > > > >(gdb) print entry->offset > > >Cannot access memory at address 0x7 > > It's