On September 17, 2023 9:48:38 PM UTC, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>Scott & everyone,
>
>On 9/16/23 19:04, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>> It's pretty relevant to your question. If you had instead updated the
>> existing packages from the new upstream, no transition would be needed.
>
>I'm not entirely
Scott & everyone,
On 9/16/23 19:04, Scott Kitterman wrote:
It's pretty relevant to your question. If you had instead updated the existing
packages from the new upstream, no transition would be needed.
I'm not entirely sure that no transition is needed, no. The major
version was bumped to
Hello,
"normal" users - like me - should use stable - like I do - neither
testing nor unstable.
So some days delay are ok for me, because it takes much more time until
a new upstreanḿ version will reach stable (via backports) - if all.
Kind regards
Michael, who is also not a native
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 06:56:58AM +, c.bu...@posteo.jp wrote:
> I assume I'm not the first one encountered it. Is there a bug tracker I
> can check or report that Issue?
The footer of every tracker page says "Report problems to the
tracker.debian.org pseudo-package in the Debian BTS."
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 11:32:31AM +, c.bu...@posteo.jp wrote:
> > i get your point that you want the information fast, but it seems you
> > are just using some arbitrary constraint that fits your personal need.
> > it appears that for "most" Debian maintainers a lag of "1 or 2 days"
>
> I'm
Dear IOhannes,
thanks for your reply and your thoughts.
On 2023-09-17 11:11 IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU)
wrote:
> i get your point that you want the information fast, but it seems you
> are just using some arbitrary constraint that fits your personal need.
> it appears that for "most"
Dear Étienne,
On 2023-09-17 10:53 Étienne Mollier wrote:
> $ reportbug tracker.debian.org
thanks for pointing this out.
Sometimes it is to easy. I am not new to Debian but always forget about
"pseudo packages".
On 9/17/23 10:41, c.bu...@posteo.jp wrote:
Hello,
maybe it depends on my non-nativ English that I'm not able to make
myself clear.
On 2023-09-17 09:56 Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
What do you expect?
As I told. Information just in time. Within in a delay of 1 or 2 hours
the tracker/dashboard
Hello,
c.bu...@posteo.jp, on 2023-09-17:
> Why do we have to increase the volume of the list with that topic? Can
> we just discuss this on an issue tracker about the tracker? ;)
> Isn't this what a tracker is for?
Bugs against the package tracker system can be reported against
the pseudo
Hello,
maybe it depends on my non-nativ English that I'm not able to make
myself clear.
On 2023-09-17 09:56 Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
> What do you expect?
As I told. Information just in time. Within in a delay of 1 or 2 hours
the tracker/dashboard should inform about the new release.
If this
Hello Christian
Am 17.09.23 um 09:46 schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
Dear Felix,
thanks for the reply.
On 2023-09-17 09:13 Felix Zielcke wrote:
Tracker needs a bit of time to
update all the infos shown. 1-2 days aren't unusual and not directly a
bug in it.
Is there a bug tracker for the
Hello Christian
Am 17.09.23 um 09:46 schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
Dear Felix,
thanks for the reply.
On 2023-09-17 09:13 Felix Zielcke wrote:
Tracker needs a bit of time to
update all the infos shown. 1-2 days aren't unusual and not directly a
bug in it.
Is there a bug tracker for the
Dear Felix,
thanks for the reply.
On 2023-09-17 09:13 Felix Zielcke wrote:
> Tracker needs a bit of time to
> update all the infos shown. 1-2 days aren't unusual and not directly a
> bug in it.
Is there a bug tracker for the tracker?
The term "tracker" indicates just in time and not two days.
Am Sonntag, dem 17.09.2023 um 06:56 + schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
>
> OK, than what is about tracker.debian.org ? Then there must be a BUG?
> I assume I'm not the first one encountered it. Is there a bug tracker
> I
> can check or report that Issue?
>
> It is really frustrating when simple
Dear Metchilde,
thanks for reply.
On 2023-09-17 08:51 Mechtilde Stehmann wrote:
> Am 17.09.23 um 08:35 schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
> > Might it just be that "uscan" doesn't run every day on the Debian
> > servers? :)
> >
> > I tried to reproduce it on my local machine. But there the new
> >
Hello Christian,
Am 17.09.23 um 08:35 schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
Might it just be that "uscan" doesn't run every day on the Debian
servers? :)
I tried to reproduce it on my local machine. But there the new version
is recognized without problems.
You can find the right result under
Hello Christian,
Am 17.09.23 um 08:35 schrieb c.bu...@posteo.jp:
Might it just be that "uscan" doesn't run every day on the Debian
servers? :)
I tried to reproduce it on my local machine. But there the new version
is recognized without problems.
You can find the right result under
Might it just be that "uscan" doesn't run every day on the Debian
servers? :)
I tried to reproduce it on my local machine. But there the new version
is recognized without problems.
$ uscan --verbose
uscan info: uscan (version 2.21.3+deb11u1) See uscan(1) for help
uscan info: Scan watch files in
Hello together,
do I get it right that the syntax of the debain/watch file do use regex?
https://repo .*/v?(\d.*)@ARCHIVE_EXT@
When an application do use version tages like "v1.4.0" and based on my
knowledge and experiments on regex101.com this won't work. Am I right?
There is also a
19 matches
Mail list logo
