pvm_3.4.6-5_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Thank you for your contribution to Debian. Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 22:19:03 +0800 Source: pvm Architecture: source Version: 3.4.6-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian QA Group Changed-By: Bo YU

Processing of pvm_3.4.6-5_source.changes

pvm_3.4.6-5_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: pvm_3.4.6-5.dsc pvm_3.4.6-5.debian.tar.xz pvm_3.4.6-5_source.buildinfo Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)

Bug#1015924: marked as done (pvm: ftbfs on riscv64("Unknown architecture!"))

Your message dated Sun, 15 Jan 2023 04:04:31 + with message-id and subject line Bug#1015924: fixed in pvm 3.4.6-5 has caused the Debian Bug report #1015924, regarding pvm: ftbfs on riscv64("Unknown architecture!") to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been

Processing of pvm_3.4.6-5_source.changes

pvm_3.4.6-5.dsc has incorrect md5 checksum; deleting it Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)

Processed: fixed 1018191 in 2.13-7~deb10u2, fixed 1018191 in 2.13-7~deb9u2

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > fixed 1018191 2.13-7~deb10u2 Bug #1018191 {Done: Tobias Frost } [src:libapreq2] libapreq2: CVE-2022-22728: multipart form parse memory corruption The source 'libapreq2' and version '2.13-7~deb10u2' do not appear to match any binary packages

autoconf_2.71-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Thank you for your contribution to Debian. Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 18:42:30 +0100 Source: autoconf Architecture: source Version: 2.71-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian QA Group Changed-By: Matthias

Bug#1016728: marked as done (autoconf: _AC_PROG_CXX_STDCXX_EDITION_TRY test is broken due to typo)

Your message dated Sat, 14 Jan 2023 18:19:22 + with message-id and subject line Bug#1016728: fixed in autoconf 2.71-3 has caused the Debian Bug report #1016728, regarding autoconf: _AC_PROG_CXX_STDCXX_EDITION_TRY test is broken due to typo to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Processing of autoconf_2.71-3_source.changes

autoconf_2.71-3_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: autoconf_2.71-3.dsc autoconf_2.71-3.debian.tar.xz autoconf_2.71-3_source.buildinfo Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)

Bug#1028503: UDD: Unknown "yes" value for Forwarded field in patch metadata

On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:05:51PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > The problem I have is that the 'Bug' header is often misused, and used > for the Debian bug instead of the upstream bug. But I could special-case > that. I wonder if we should have lintian flag this. Something like warn if Bug

Bug#1028503: UDD: Unknown "yes" value for Forwarded field in patch metadata

On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 12:05:51 +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 12/01/23 at 01:57 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I just noticed though that it does > > not recognize a "yes" value for the Forwarded field, while the > > "Patch Tagging Guidelines" has this to say about it: > > > > * Forwarded

Bug#1028610: tracker.debian.org: shows the short description of the binary package, which is meaningless for the source package

On Sat, Jan 14, 2023 at 01:52:11AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2023-01-13 19:21:58 -0500, Boyuan Yang wrote: > Otherwise, if there is a rule about the description in the case where > there is a binary package with the same name as the source package, > some filtering could be done based on

Bug#1028762: pylint-plugin-utils: FTBFS: ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'tomli'

Source: pylint-plugin-utils Version: 0.7-3 Severity: serious Justification: FTBFS Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs User: lu...@debian.org Usertags: ftbfs-20230113 ftbfs-bookworm Hi, During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build on amd64. Relevant part (hopefully): >