Re: binNMU request for libgnome

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 06:36:24PM +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote: > Hi, due to libgnome being built with a wrong gnome-vfs2, it seems we > need to get it binNMUed for i386. Can someone schedule this? > After that, libbonoboui should be retried, as it failed due to the bad > libgnome being in the arch

Re: Please hint vdr and vdr-plugin-* into testing

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 02:46:59PM +0200, Thomas Schmidt wrote: > please hint vdr and vdr-plugin-* into testing, these packages do not > go into testing automatically because the plugins depends on a certain > upstream version of vdr and britney thinks that updating one of these > packages alone

Re: bin-NMU of nagios 1.x packages in unstable?

On 2006-03-28 sean finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i got a grave bug reported against nagios recently (#359637), because > nagios is no longer installable in unstable. it looks like > someone's bin-NMU'd it on 2006/03/20, along with the other > arch:any packages. > my best guess is that this

binNMU request for libgnome

Hi, due to libgnome being built with a wrong gnome-vfs2, it seems we need to get it binNMUed for i386. Can someone schedule this? After that, libbonoboui should be retried, as it failed due to the bad libgnome being in the archive. Thanks, Jordi -- Jordi Mallach Pérez -- Debian developer h

Please hint vdr and vdr-plugin-* into testing

Hi please hint vdr and vdr-plugin-* into testing, these packages do not go into testing automatically because the plugins depends on a certain upstream version of vdr and britney thinks that updating one of these packages alone would make the other ones uninstallable (which is more or less corre

Re: Bug#359234: binNMU request: subversion on i386 only

[Peter Samuelson] > Could somebody kick a buildd to binNMU subversion 1.3.0-4 on i386 only? Cancel that, fixed in 1.3.0-5, kindly sponsored by Martin Pitt. Peter signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Bug#359234: binNMU request: subversion on i386 only

On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:31:08PM -0600, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > Could somebody kick a buildd to binNMU subversion 1.3.0-4 on i386 only? > A well-known bug where we don't cleanse quite all the rpaths suddenly > became a security issue because the last version uploaded on i386 was > built in /t

bin-NMU of nagios 1.x packages in unstable?

hey release-peeps, i got a grave bug reported against nagios recently (#359637), because nagios is no longer installable in unstable. it looks like someone's bin-NMU'd it on 2006/03/20, along with the other arch:any packages. my best guess is that this has to do with the recent mysql versioning

Re: removing xdelta?

severity 147187 important thanks On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 01:02:03AM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Currently the packages depending on xdelta (which has a long-standing grave > bug > which nobody has managed to track down, #147187) are > gibraltar-bootsupport (not in testing) > ttf-arphic-u