Hallo Julien,
seems that bogofilter can be fixed soon, it seems that Steven found an
workaround in the sqlite3 library. (See #665363)
So it seems like a few more days and/or NMU'ing sqlite.
(CC'ing the maintainer of sqlite3 to hint him ;-) )
Tobias
Am Montag, den 09.04.2012, 15:20 +0200
Your message dated Wed, 11 Apr 2012 11:26:17 +0200
with message-id 4f854e39.10...@dogguy.org
and subject line Re: Bug#651326: muparser transition is finished, thanks!
has caused the Debian Bug report #651326,
regarding transition: muparser
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:15:58 +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
Discussion in Bug#595139 led to the conclusion that packages which are
Multi-arch: same must not be binNMUed (or in fact, binNMUed on all
architectures).
I very much disagree with
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:30:08 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same version
and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That means
binNMU on all architectures or a sourcefull upload.
Or accept that such packages
On 11.04.2012 10:30, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same
version
and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That means
binNMU on all architectures or a sourcefull upload.
A source upload isn't just a rebuild in Debian. It's
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:47:35AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:30:08 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same version
and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That means
binNMU on all
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2012, 11:01 +0100 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
On 11.04.2012 10:30, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same
version
and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That means
binNMU on all architectures
Hi,
JFTR, the security team proposed an upload of links2 to SPU to fix
some security issues reported by upstream.
(http://bugs.debian.org/668227)
Nico Golde wrote:
Links2 upstream sent patches for security issues which also affect
Debian Stable. [...]
For the stable security update: Do the
On 11.04.2012 11:50, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2012, 11:01 +0100 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
On 11.04.2012 10:30, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
The current state is that M-A: same packages must have the same
version
and identical Changelog files across all architectures. That
Axel Beckert a...@debian.org (11/04/2012):
Nico Golde wrote:
Please upload these fixes to stable-proposed-updates instead.
I guess that's ok with the SRM.
We can't tell until we see a debdiff against the package in stable.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 11.04.2012, 12:05 +0100 schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
A source upload isn't just a rebuild in Debian. It's an NMU and
requires building and testing the package with at least as much care
as
any other NMU would. It doesn't scale, it's a waste of resources
and
I'm
Hi,
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Axel Beckert a...@debian.org (11/04/2012):
Nico Golde wrote:
Please upload these fixes to stable-proposed-updates instead.
I guess that's ok with the SRM.
We can't tell until we see a debdiff against the package in stable.
I'd have sent that anyway, just
Hello again,
Axel Beckert a...@debian.org (11/04/2012):
I'd have sent that anyway, just wanted to ask beforehand. Will let you
know when I have the package ready.
(having look quickly at the bug report now:) please make sure to fix the
package in unstable beforehands.
Mraw,
KiBi.
Hi,
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Axel Beckert a...@debian.org (11/04/2012):
I'd have sent that anyway, just wanted to ask beforehand. Will let you
know when I have the package ready.
(having look quickly at the bug report now:) please make sure to fix the
package in unstable beforehands.
Dear Release Team,
I intend uploading the latest armadillo package to sid. It bumps the
soname from 2 to 3, so I wanted to check with you if I should go
ahead with the upload. Since I haven't dealt with this situation
before, should I:
- try building the rdepends against the latest version, and
Hi Kumar,
Kumar Appaiah a.ku...@alumni.iitm.ac.in (11/04/2012):
- try building the rdepends against the latest version, and hold off
on uploading until they are fixed?
- OR upload, request binNMUs and then file bugs against the rdepends
that don't build?
the former is preferable (at
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu 3depict_0.0.10-1 . amd64 . -m Rebuild against libpng12-0
3depict/amd64 was built against libpng 1.5 from experimental and is
uninstallable in sid:
3depict/amd64 unsatisfiable
Your message dated Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:37:04 +0200
with message-id 20120411193704.gb8...@mraw.org
and subject line Re: Bug#668428: nmu: 3depict_0.0.10-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #668428,
regarding nmu: 3depict_0.0.10-1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
nmu itksnap_2.2.0-1 . ALL . -m Rebuild against libvtk5.8
itksnap currently depends on the no longer available libvtk5.6,
it rebuilds in a clean sid environment without problems
Andreas
Dear release team,
We have prepared an upload of imagemagick that fixes
recently-uncovered security-related problems (#667635). I'm unsure
about what to do currently with the imagemagick ongoing transition
(#652650). Shall I upload right now with urgency=high, knowing that
anyway, it will
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 22:19:13 +0200, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
Dear release team,
We have prepared an upload of imagemagick that fixes
recently-uncovered security-related problems (#667635). I'm unsure
about what to do currently with the imagemagick ongoing transition
(#652650). Shall
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Hello RT,
I'm hereby requesting permission to upload a fix for wicd to p-u, bug #668397
(CCed), CVE-2012-2095. git diff attached.
The patch for stable is slightly different from the one just
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Hello,
request-tracker3.8 represents an old (in deep maintenance
mode by upstream) branch of RT, and it shouldn't be released with
wheezy. There is an RC bug #647126 to hint that it shouldn't
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:13:41AM +0100, Dominic Hargreaves wrote:
request-tracker3.8 represents an old (in deep maintenance
mode by upstream) branch of RT, and it shouldn't be released with
wheezy.
[...]
I see there's the request-tracker4 package in Wheezy so it looks like
the way to move
hi,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov
flatw...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
So my question is: is there some upgrade path the users of
request-tracker3.8 may follow to convert their current installs to the
new package? I'm mostly concerned with the database, the settings
Dear Cyril,
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 06:31:43PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Kumar Appaiah a.ku...@alumni.iitm.ac.in (11/04/2012):
- try building the rdepends against the latest version, and hold off
on uploading until they are fixed?
- OR upload, request binNMUs and then file bugs
26 matches
Mail list logo
