[stable] kernel upload to p-u

2007-09-11 Thread dann frazier
hey, I think we're nearly ready for a kernel upload to proposed-updates. Here's the current list of changes queued for a stable upload. I've reverted the forcedeth changes for #439219 until we get some testers for them. The last thing I'm waiting for is some final feedback about a backported

Re: TS for Release Assistents

2007-09-11 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:45:13AM +, Robert Edmonds wrote: 368226 Quagga does intentionally not upgrade automatically Maintainer forgot to close the bug. Perhaps you should use a versioned close on this bug, so that the status of the fix can be tracked in etch and lenny? Cheers, --

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Millan
I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so how do we avoid collisions? On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 05:39:04PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: This is an automatic notification

Re: backporting GPLv3 packages

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Millan
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 02:53:18PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 06.09.2007, 09:52 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan: Please note that there are a couple of important things that should be taken into consideration when backporting GPLv3 packages. Because GPLv3 was only

Re: [stable] kernel upload to p-u

2007-09-11 Thread Luk Claes
dann frazier wrote: hey, I think we're nearly ready for a kernel upload to proposed-updates. Here's the current list of changes queued for a stable upload. Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and

Re: [stable] kernel upload to p-u

2007-09-11 Thread Bastian Blank
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and megaraid_mbox drivers. At one point this bug got fixed, but it was reverted later on, no idea why? No part

Re: [binNMU] facile

2007-09-11 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages are ocaml-related and can't be installed for the same

Re: [stable] kernel upload to p-u

2007-09-11 Thread Luk Claes
Bastian Blank wrote: On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Can you please consider fixing #317258 again? It's only about PCI ID mappings that got lost while splitting the megaraid and megaraid_mbox drivers. At one point this bug got fixed, but it was reverted later on, no

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Thijs Kinkhorst
On Tue, September 11, 2007 10:29, Robert Millan wrote: I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so how do we avoid collisions? Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's wrong with the

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Millan
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: On Tue, September 11, 2007 10:29, Robert Millan wrote: I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so how do we avoid

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so how do we avoid collisions? Maybe I'm missing something here, but what's

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Luk Claes
Steve Langasek wrote: On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream version, so how do we avoid collisions? Maybe I'm missing

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Millan
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 04:24:48AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: I think 1.1.dfsg-3.1 in unstable would have been better; that would allow use of 1.1-3+etch1 in stable. We can still do that. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call, if you

Re: Bug#440638 closed by Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#440638: fixed in bos 1.1.dfsg-0.1)

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Millan
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:09:09PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Steve Langasek wrote: On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:43:51PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: I suppose this will have to be uploaded to stable-proposed-uploads as well, but what version number? etch and sid have the same upstream

Re: [binNMU] facile

2007-09-11 Thread Sylvain Le Gall
On 11-09-2007, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:59:28PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: On 10-09-2007, Julien Cristau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 13:40:27 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: You mean, I guess, that all that other 50 packages

[SRM] youtube-dl

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Edmonds
Hi, youtube-dl is completely broken in etch (#439363). The version in testing/unstable is fixed, and has no issues running on etch. Could youtuble-dl be considered for a stable point release? Here's a diff between the youtube-dl version in etch and the one in testing/unstable:

Re: TS for Release Assistents

2007-09-11 Thread Robert Edmonds
Steve Langasek wrote: On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 04:45:13AM +, Robert Edmonds wrote: 368226 Quagga does intentionally not upgrade automatically Maintainer forgot to close the bug. Perhaps you should use a versioned close on this bug, so that the status of the fix can be tracked in

Re: [binNMU] facile

2007-09-11 Thread Steve Langasek
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:50:42PM +, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: Taking a look at the list, i think that some binNMU are not needed (ulex, pcre-ocaml, mtasc, extlib...) and some will certainly fails if not taking care of dependency (e.g. ocamldap which need to be built before ocamlnet and

Re: TS for Release Assistents

2007-09-11 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 01:29:48PM +, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On jeu, aoĆ» 30, 2007 at 11:51:36 +, Luk Claes wrote: Pierre Habouzit 393403 Source package contains non-free IETF RFC/I-D's NMUed. 294520 qtparted: Incorrect handling of extended partitions The patch is commited

Re: Bug#440704: Package vim completely broken on alpha

2007-09-11 Thread James Vega
(Summary for -release) A recent security build for Vim in oldstable has broken packages on 3 archs (alpha, mips, and mipsel) since the Vim packages were still using $(PWD) instead of $(CURDIR) in their debian/rules file when Sarge was released. On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 06:15:20PM +0200, Moritz

Re: Bug#440704: Package vim completely broken on alpha

2007-09-11 Thread Luk Claes
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 05:19:57PM -0400, James Vega wrote: (Summary for -release) A recent security build for Vim in oldstable has broken packages on 3 archs (alpha, mips, and mipsel) since the Vim packages were still using $(PWD) instead of $(CURDIR) in their debian/rules file when Sarge

AEC Cafe News : September 11, 2007

2007-09-11 Thread AECCafe Newsletter
Title: AEC Cafe News - September 11, 2007 Tuesday September 11, 2007 From: AECCafe AECCafe Featured Ad AEC in the News