Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Hi! JFYI, I released dupload 2.11.0 with support for the mentioned transitions check hook. Have not received any complaints (yet? :). On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 22:06:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 19:35:40 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Perfect, thanks. I've for

Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Hi! On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 19:35:40 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Perfect, thanks. I've force pushed the new changes to the previous > branch. How about then the following output? > > ,--- > Warning: Source package barnowl is part of ongoing transitions: > >

Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Hi! On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 19:12:03 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 14-01-2024 18:46, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I think that would be great, I guess the message from the hook could > > give some very basic and generic guidance, and point to this page for > > more in-depth expl

Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Hi! On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 18:22:16 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 14-01-2024 17:43, Guillem Jover wrote: > >https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ReleaseTeam/Transitions > > > > but it looks like that one is targeted more to maintainers that start > > or drive the tra

Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Hi! On Sun, 2024-01-14 at 10:22:21 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 10-01-2024 02:23, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I've had for a while a new hook for dupload that adds a transitions > > check for Debian hosts, for sourceful uploads targeting unstable (to > > avoid disrupting bui

Bug#1060367: release.debian.org: RFC: Transitions check for dupload?

Package: release.debian.org Severity: wishlist Hi! I've had for a while a new hook for dupload that adds a transitions check for Debian hosts, for sourceful uploads targeting unstable (to avoid disrupting buildd or porter uploads, or uninteresting suites). I've just finished polishing it, and

Re: Bug#1059395: libacl1, debhelper: changelog handling with --no-trim seems to be not binNMU-safe

Control: reassign -1 debhelper Control: found -1 debhelper/13.11.4 On Sun, 2023-12-24 at 14:27:22 +, Simon McVittie wrote: > Package: libacl1,debhelper > Control: found -1 libacl1/2.3.1-3 > Control: found -1 debhelper/13.11.9 > Severity: important > X-Debbugs-Cc:

Bug#1051902: bullseye-pu: package dpkg/1.20.13

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! [ Reason ] This update backports the loong64 arch support as requested in #1051763 because some of the

Bug#1050332: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u2

-2.0/debian/changelog 2023-08-23 12:05:48.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +inetutils (2:2.0-1+deb11u2) bullseye; urgency=medium + + * Add patch from upstream to check return values for set*id() functions. +Fixes CVE-2023-40303. (Closes: #1049365) + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 23 Aug 2023 12

Bug#1050331: bookworm-pu: package inetutils/2:2.4-2+deb12u1

-2.4/debian/changelog 2023-08-23 12:01:39.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +inetutils (2:2.4-2+deb12u1) bookworm; urgency=medium + + * Add patch from upstream to check return values for set*id() functions. +Fixes CVE-2023-40303. (Closes: #1049365) + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 23 Aug 2023 12

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Hi! On Wed, 2023-05-17 at 04:24:06 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo Oops, missed the «-», but then that seems fine :), as earlier today I noticed that a triggered autopkgtest for another package had failed, so retriggered it as it looked l

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi! On Tue, 2023-05-16 at 23:44:29 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo confirmed > > On 2023-05-11 04:45:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.deb

Bug#1035911: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.22

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.22 upload. [ Reason ] I got a report for a segfault privately (as the reporter

Bug#1035709: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2023.04.11-1

+ + * New upstream release. +- Remove patch, fixed upstream. + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 07 May 2023 02:10:00 +0200 + pci.ids (0.0~2023.03.17-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream release. diff -Nru pci.ids-0.0~2023.03.17/debian/patches/0001-Fix-encoding-issues.patch pci.ids-0.0

Bug#1035683: bullseye-pu: package libbsd/0.11.3-1+deb11u1

1.3/debian/changelog 2023-05-07 19:13:23.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +libbsd (0.11.3-1+deb11u1) bullseye; urgency=medium + + * Fix infinite loop when using MD5File() symbol due to missing symbol +redirection. Thanks to Guillaume Morin . +Closes: #1033671 + + -- Guillem Jover Sun,

Bug#1034157: unblock: pci.ids/0.0~2023.03.17-1

+++ pci.ids-0.0~2023.03.17/debian/changelog 2023-03-22 23:56:31.0 +0100 @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@ +pci.ids (0.0~2023.03.17-1) unstable; urgency=medium + + * New upstream release. +- Refresh patch. + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 22 Mar 2023 23:56:31 +0100 + pci.ids (0.0~2023.02.23-1) unstable

Bug#1033067: unblock: glide/2002.04.10ds1-21

:37:51.0 +0100 @@ -1,6 +1,20 @@ +glide (2002.04.10ds1-21) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Pass --build and --host to configure via chores.3dfx. + + -- Guillem Jover Fri, 10 Mar 2023 02:37:51 +0100 + +glide (2002.04.10ds1-20) unstable; urgency=medium + + * Use autoconf $host_cpu instead

Bug#1026199: release.debian.org: Is the toolchain list updated for bookworm

Hi! On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 09:47:59 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Ah, was wondering the same few days before the toolchain freeze, as I > was unsure whether to update some of the packages I maintain (in > particular libmd, for which I was thinking of doing a new upstream > release),

Bug#1031910: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.21

Hi! On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 13:32:55 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > On 2023-02-25 04:57:58 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > User

Bug#1031910: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.21

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.21 upload. [ Reason ] The loong64 arch support got reverted as there was a bug

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Hi! On Tue, 2023-02-07 at 09:01:44 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 06/02/2023 12:43, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.20 upload. > Please go ahead. Late translations are also OK to include. Thanks! Uploaded it yesterday. Regards, Guillem

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 19:18:41 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 12:43:37 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: unblock > > X-Debbugs-Cc: d..

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Hi! On Mon, 2023-02-06 at 12:43:37 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org > Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg > Please pre-app

Bug#1030672: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.20

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! Please pre-approve the dpkg 1.21.20 upload. [ Reason ] This dpkg release includes the translation updates for

Bug#1026199: release.debian.org: Is the toolchain list updated for bookworm

Hi! On Sat, 2022-12-17 at 08:42:18 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 16-12-2022 02:40, Sam Hartman wrote: > > I was looking at > > https://release.debian.org/testing/essential-and-build-essential.txt > > > > trying to figure out which packages I'm involved in are covered by the > > toolchain

Bug#1029585: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.21.19

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: d...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:dpkg Hi! (Even though I've noticed no blocking hints, given that the package is supposed to be frozen, I'm requesting this

Re: Bug#1019724: warning: stray \ before - causes autopkgtest failure

On Wed, 2022-09-14 at 17:31:16 +0200, Santiago Ruano Rincón wrote: > Yeah, sorry. I lately realised not all the packages would autoreconf > during building time. > > So silencing these warnings would make sense. Please consider implementing a way to be able to conditionally re-enable locally

Bug#1018857: bullseye-pu: package dpkg/1.20.12

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu [ Reason ] This update backports multiple fixes from unstable for RC bugs and fixes broken behavior. It makes the dpkg-fsys-usrunmess script more robust, fixes mishandling of

Bug#1018854: buster-pu: package dpkg/1.19.9

+1.19.9 diff -Nru dpkg-1.19.8/ChangeLog dpkg-1.19.9/ChangeLog --- dpkg-1.19.8/ChangeLog 2022-05-24 13:40:09.0 +0200 +++ dpkg-1.19.9/ChangeLog 2022-09-01 03:40:03.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,137 @@ +commit e2254431dca4eccb5125c21cb7299090e6725b3a +Author: Guillem Jover +Date: Thu

Bug#1018800: buster-pu: package inetutils/2:1.9.4-7+deb10u2

+adapted by Erik Auerswald . +Fixes CVE-2022-39028. + + -- Guillem Jover Wed, 31 Aug 2022 00:58:35 +0200 + inetutils (2:1.9.4-7+deb10u1) buster; urgency=medium * CVE-2020-10188 (Closes: #956084) diff -Nru inetutils-1.9.4/debian/patches/0001-ftp-check-that-PASV-LSPV-addresses-match.patch

Bug#1018744: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u1

Hi! Sorry, I'm updating the request as I found missing stuff while preparing the companion update for buster! On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 00:37:03 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Tags: bullseye > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org &g

Bug#1018744: bullseye-pu: package inetutils/2:2.0-1+deb11u1

erability in inetutils-telnetd, caused by a crash by +a NULL pointer dereference when sending the byte sequences «0xff 0xf7» +or «0xff 0xf8». Found by Pierre Kim and Alexandre Torres. Patch +adapted by Erik Auerswald . + + -- Guillem Jover Sun, 28 Aug 2022 16:01:41 +0200 + inetut

Bug#1014206: bullseye-pu: package dpkg/1.20.11

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi! [ Reason ] This request includes several targeted minimal fixes for issues found in dpkg 1.20.10, including one regression introduced in the security update. I mentioned to

Bug#1008184: nmu: unknown packages affected by dpkg-dev bug #1000421

Package: release.debian.org Severity: important User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi! The objdump tool changed its output for copy relocations for versioned symbols (from @@ to @) in binutils 2.26 (uploaded on 2016-01). This has caused dpkg-shlibdeps to ignore some of

Bug#999504: transition: liburing

Hi! On Fri, 2021-11-12 at 18:50:36 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > Control: forwarded -1 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-liburing.html > > On 2021-11-12 04:18:57 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org

Bug#999504: transition: liburing

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hi! The liburing source bumped its SONAME from liburing1 to liburing2, but it should be API compatible. The new upstream has been uploaded to experimental, and I did a rebuild of all

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

Control: retitle -1 [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.9 Control: tag -1 - moreinfo Hi! On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 20:22:46 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 08:13:10PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 17:58:08 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > &g

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 17:58:08 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 15:36:08 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > > Please go ahead with the upload and remove the moreinfo tag from this bug > > when > > the new version is in unstable. > > Thanks! I'm targetin

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

Hi! On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 15:36:08 +0200, Ivo De Decker wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 06:20:10PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > This is a pre-approval unblock request for dpkg. > > > > [ Reason ] > > > > This includes an RC bug fix, and an old regre

Bug#986835: [pre-approval] unblock: dpkg/1.20.8

.debdiff.xz Description: application/xz From 09b0b3ab99ba197a4fc5abf9363de32b472d9b61 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 13:34:34 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 01/15] Test::Dpkg: Fix test data path fetching on CPAN MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Bug#920993: nmu: influxdb_1.6.4-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu influxdb_1.6.4-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against fixed golang-github-influxdata-influxql-dev (see #917041)." Thanks, Guillem

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

Hi! On Sun, 2018-06-24 at 16:34:53 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 = stretch confirmed > > On Sun, 2018-02-18 at 22:26 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > I'd like to update dpkg in stretch. This includes several fixes for > > documentation, regressions, misbhe

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

Hi! On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 18:45:49 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 16:05 +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > > 2018-02-18 22:26 Guillem Jover: > > > I'd like to update dpkg in stretch. This includes several fixes for > > > documentatio

Bug#890791: stretch-pu: package dpkg/1.18.25

elog b/debian/changelog index 26a8b14cd..64d09cb40 100644 --- a/debian/changelog +++ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,44 @@ +dpkg (1.18.25) stretch; urgency=medium + + [ Guillem Jover ] + * Parse start-stop-daemon usernames and groupnames starting with digits in +-u and -c correctly. Reported b

Re: Accepted dpkg 1.18.19 (source) into unstable

Hi! On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 16:07:32 +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Hi, Guillem. I'm afraid I find myself writing a critical email. Fair enough. > Guillem Jover writes ("Accepted dpkg 1.18.19 (source) into unstable"): > > Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 05:43:36 +0100 > > S

Re: [RFC] Enabling bindnow by default in dpkg-buildflags?

On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 14:05:44 +0100, Bálint Réczey wrote: > 2016-12-13 9:29 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey <bal...@balintreczey.hu>: > > 2016-11-27 23:11 GMT+01:00 Bálint Réczey <bal...@balintreczey.hu>: > >> 2016-11-23 2:30 GMT+01:00 Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org&g

Bug#845304: transition: libxtables12

Hi! On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 10:49:11 +0100, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote: > On 22 November 2016 at 10:39, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > To the maintainer: Why bump to a snapshot at this point in the cycle? Have > > the > > rdeps been build-tested against the new libxtables?

[RFC] Enabling bindnow by default in dpkg-buildflags?

Hi! This was discussed relatively recently, but it was not entirely clear to me what was the conclusion, if there was any(?), about enabling bindnow by default. And although this got enabled by default in gcc-6 6.2.0-7 when PIE also got enabled, it seems it got disabled in 6.2.0-10 when I

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

Hi! On Sun, 2016-08-21 at 10:24:42 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote: > I'm testing a set of patches [2] for gcc and dpkg which enable bindnow for all > arches and PIE for amd64, ppc64el and s390x in sync with Ubuntu. > > My assumption was that this set of architectures need the least amount of >

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

Hi! On Sun, 2016-08-21 at 08:22:09 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > Kurt Roeckx: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:05:06PM +0200, ni...@thykier.net wrote: > >> * If we were to enable -fPIE/-pie by default in GCC-6, should that change > >>also apply to this port? [0] > > > > If -fPIE is the

Bug#826568: Bug#826161: Bug#826568: jessie-pu: package sendmail/8.14.4-8+deb8u1

Hi! On Tue, 2016-07-05 at 14:41:26 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > On 2016-07-05 11:51, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On a related note, which has been mentioned before (on dda at least) - > > please don't name your .changes file _amd64.changes if the package > > builds amd64 binaries and they're

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 20:34:19 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Apologies for the delays in getting back to you. Please go ahead. No problem! Uploaded now too. Thanks, Guillem

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 20:36:32 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 -moreinfo +confirmed > > On Sun, 2016-03-27 at 12:07 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 18:07:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 18:07:46 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > Tags: wheezy > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: pu >

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 20:52:04 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 16:49:35 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > diff --git a/man/dpkg.1 b/man/dpkg.1 > > index 4e9f7a3..fb6c43e 100644 > > --- a/man/dpkg.1 > > +++ b/man/dpkg.1 > > @@ -694,8 +694,9

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

Hi! On Mon, 2016-03-21 at 16:36:16 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Tags: wheezy > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: pu > Here's a proposed dpkg 1.16.18, with cherry picked fixes from master >

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

Hi! On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 22:04:00 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 16:49:35 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > Here's a proposed dpkg 1.17.27, with cherry picked fixes from master > > (already in unstable). These inclu

Bug#818908: jessie-pu: package dpkg/1.17.27

+ b/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,45 @@ +dpkg (1.17.27) jessie; urgency=medium + + [ Guillem Jover ] + * Add more Conflicts for removed packages expecting dpkg to ship +install-info. Namely ada-mode and octave2.1-info. Closes: #783657 +Thanks to Andreas Beckmann <a...@debian.org>. +

Bug#818906: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.18

st is defined in the system, try to use NSIG as we cannot +compute the array size with sizeof(). If NSIG is missing fallback to 32 +items. Prompted by Igor Pashev <pashev.i...@gmail.com>. + + -- Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> Sun, 20 Mar 2016 10:23:24 +0100 + dpkg

Re: [Reproducible-builds] [Reproducible] On making Stretch self-contained IRT to reproducibility

Hi! On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 10:32:08 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Mittwoch, 24. Februar 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > > On 24/02/16 22:16, Niels Thykier wrote: > > >- Possible lack of buildd resources to do the rebuild. Notably, due > > > to Multi-Arch:same we would generally

Bug#799681: release.debian.org: testing.pl does not understand build-profiles

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: tools Hi! The migration/testing.pl script does not understand build-profiles, such as the ones used in the dpkg source package. The page has this output

Bug#781829: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.16

fd8934117860821c3a5ddb11c51eb86b25ad97c0. Signed-off-by: Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org --- cputable | 1 + debian/changelog | 1 + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/cputable b/cputable index 506083e..1f299f9 100644 --- a/cputable +++ b/cputable @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ mips64 mips64 mips64 64 big

Bug#781829: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.16

into a single commit, to keep them as independent fixes. Thanks, Guillem From 07434a794527d37f1bec62aee3b69bd4cb671d6f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:37:04 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] libdpkg: Do not match partial field names in control files Cherry

Bug#781829: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.16

Hi! On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 17:26:01 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Control: tags -1 + moreinfo On Fri, 2015-04-03 at 16:18 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: There's some pending changes for dpkg targetting wheezy I'd like to include as part of a security upload (as agreed with the security team

Bug#781829: wheezy-pu: package dpkg/1.16.16

of unstable/jessie for a while. I requested additional testing from my last d-d-a mail but didn't get any positive or negative results back (yet?). The prospective changelog would be something like this: ,--- dpkg (1.16.16) wheezy-security; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Do not leak long

Bug#777646: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.24

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo Hi! On Sun, 2015-02-22 at 09:29:33 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo On 2015-02-21 08:35, Guillem Jover wrote: I'm attaching the two other patches targetted for 1.17.x. The revert passes the functional test suite (although I've

Re: More trigger cycles

Hi! On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 19:00:23 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Based on #778695, it seems like we still have trigger cycles. At this point in the freeze, I am afraid it is too late to fix the remaining cycles. I have asked Johannes if this kind of trigger cycles can be found via his

Bug#777646: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.24

00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:20:04 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] dpkg: Disable dependency checks on trigger processing There are still trigger showing up this close to the Debian release, which are hard to detect automatically as they are caused

Bug#777646: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.24

package, except Vietnamese and Thai for which I had doubts or no translation at all, but the translators were very swift. Here's the full changelog: ,--- dpkg (1.17.24) unstable; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Add missing versioned Breaks on packages creating trigger cycles. Namely

Re: new pre-dependency: perl{,-base,-modules} - dpkg (= 1.17.17)

[ CCing debian-release. ] Hi! On Sun, 2015-01-18 at 20:12:55 +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: In order to fix trigger related wheezy-jessie upgrade failures in xfonts-traditional (#774844, cc'd), I intend to make the main perl binary packages (perl, perl-base, and perl-modules) Pre-Depend on dpkg (=

Bug#773256: dbus + triggers + apt issue (was: Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23)

Hi! On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 15:08:01 +0100, Michael Vogt wrote: On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 02:47:05AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: [ Re dbus issue ] Noted. Do we (still?) have a (reliable) way of reproducing the dbus trigger issue? We didn't up to now (AFAIK), but there's now very

Bug#773256: dbus + triggers + apt issue (was: Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23)

[ @deity: please check out the dbus issue below. ] Hi! On Sat, 2014-12-27 at 18:45:38 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: I hope you are feeling better now. :) Yes, much better, thanks. :) TL;DR: Please upload dpkg/1.17.23 with the proposed fix for #771730 at your earliest convenience - by the

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

Hi! On Tue, 2014-12-23 at 02:52:01 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 21:38:31 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: I do not recall (all of?) these trigger cycles being known. @Guiliem, can you have a look at them and file bugs as necessary for these? These smell like instances

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

On Wed, 2014-12-24 at 02:26:24 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: On Tue, 2014-12-23 at 02:52:01 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 21:38:31 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: I do not recall (all of?) these trigger cycles being known. @Guiliem, can you have a look at them and file bugs

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

Hi! On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 21:38:31 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Thanks. We noticed the following results with the dpkg/1.17.22: 19:49 h01ger

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

Hi! On Sun, 2014-12-21 at 09:57:51 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: It possibly still is since the version that introduced the trigger checks. I hope we can have it resolved shortly. Yeah, I'm planning to upload tomorrow, sorry about the delay, was not feeling quite well the past couple of days.

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

Hi! On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 22:18:12 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-12-16 06:22, Guillem Jover wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Control: block -1 by 770627 I'd prefer if 1.17.22 could be unblocked

Bug#773256: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.23

up again, which should give us more information (due to the new apt not eating dpkg's output). Here's the full tentative changelog (with the translation changes already in master): ,--- dpkg (1.17.23) UNRELEASED; urgency=low [ Guillem Jover ] * Use a matching group instead of ${^MATCH} in s

Re: understanding dpkg trigger cycles

[ CCed d-release. TL;DR: josch has created a list of packages that can generate trigger cycles (13), I'm filing bug reports. ] Hi! On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 13:51:16 +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: thanks a lot for your further explanations and clarifications! Well, thanks a lot for doing the

Bug#770627: dbus: Please (consider) switch(ing) to no-await triggers

Hi! On Sun, 2014-12-07 at 14:01:51 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-12-05 05:20, Guillem Jover wrote: Given this, the only options seem to be to possibly change the --force-configure-any default to enabled (I'll try to test if this helps in the dbus situation) which I'd rather not do

Bug#772053: unblock: startupmanager/1.9.13-8

@@ +startupmanager (1.9.13-8) unstable; urgency=low + + * QA upload. + * Do not use an absolute path when calling update-alternatives. + + -- Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org Mon, 17 Nov 2014 20:52:00 +0100 + startupmanager (1.9.13-7) unstable; urgency=low * QA upload. only in patch2: unchanged

Bug#770627: dbus: Please (consider) switch(ing) to no-await triggers

Hi! On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 20:23:28 +, Simon McVittie wrote: Control: tags 771989 + moreinfo On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 at 16:39:31 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-12-04 09:11, Simon McVittie wrote: [see https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=770627#70 for full analysis] If

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

Hi! On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 12:20:45 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Control: reopen -1 On 2014-11-28 04:23, Guillem Jover wrote: On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 08:05:00 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Other than that, please go ahead and upload to unstable and notify us once it has been accepted

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

Hi! On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 12:20:45 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Control: reopen -1 On 2014-11-28 04:23, Guillem Jover wrote: On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 08:05:00 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Other than that, please go ahead and upload to unstable and notify us once it has been accepted

Re: Bug#758616: dpkg: support installing M-A:same packages with different binNMU version

Hi! On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 15:17:29 +, Wookey wrote: What is the current thinking on this for Jessie? I presume that at this stage it is not going to be implemented so running lots of binNMUs, or no-change sourceful upload to syncronise all arches is the only fix available in that

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

Hi! On Thu, 2014-11-27 at 08:15:02 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-11-27 04:07, Guillem Jover wrote: I'd rather upload 1.17.22 right away to get those fixes into the archive, and prepare a translations-only 1.17.23, but I'll be glad to act on any upload plans that you are comfortable

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

Hi! On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 08:05:00 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Other than that, please go ahead and upload to unstable and notify us once it has been accepted. dpkg 1.17.22 has now been accepted in the archive. Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

Control: tags -1 - moreinfo On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 08:05:00 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 19:26:44 +0100 Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org

Bug#770627: pre-approval: unblock: dpkg/1.17.22

synthetized, which work fine with the new dpkg. I've also been running this on my main system with daily upgrades for over a week now. Thanks, Guillem From 2d3adc759c37bf73c12730c79b73dc26ca171c7d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:13:27 +0100

Bug#767706: unblock: debsig-verify/0.13

Hi! On Thu, 2014-11-20 at 22:30:41 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 01:23:13AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: Please unblock or reduce age-days for package debsig-verify so that it can migrate before the freeze. It fixes the code so

Re: Status on dpkg for Jessie

Hi! On Fri, 2014-11-21 at 18:36:45 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: Do you have an ETA on the next upload of dpkg (and if there is anything blocking it)? Yes, it's waiting on readahead-fedora, waiting in the DEFERRED queue, to be able to add the correct Breaks, in case the maintainer override with

Re: Packages using old dpkg tools paths

Hi! On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 11:23:37 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: I'm planning on starting to file bug reports for the source packages below (BCCed). Here's the current status. I've filed bugs now with patches, or just uploaded for orphaned ones. Sources list (via codesearch.d.o

Re: Bug#767999: base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap

Hi! On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 08:30:39 +, Michael Tautschnig wrote: On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 8:34:49 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote: Control: severity -1 serious Control: retitle -1 dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old debootstrap I'd say the bug title ought to be Correct fix

Re: Bug#767999: base-files: fails to install with pre-jessie debootstrap

Control: severity -1 serious Control: retitle -1 dpkg: Correct fix breaks bogus assumptions in old debootstrap On Fri, 2014-11-07 at 02:33:48 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (2014-11-05): But, from where I stand, several developers were actually checking facts

Re: Packages using old dpkg tools paths

Hi! On Mon, 2014-11-03 at 22:20:48 +0100, Niels Thykier wrote: On 2014-11-03 11:23, Guillem Jover wrote: I'm planning on starting to file bug reports for the source packages below (BCCed). I've not checked (yet) how severe the dpkg-statoverride ones are, but if most of them do not get

Packages using old dpkg tools paths

Hi! I was notified by Emmanuel Bourg that there are still packages making use of the old compat paths for u-a, dpkg-divert and dpkg-statoverride in /usr/sbin. Those compat symlinks got removed in dpkg 1.17.0: ,--- * Remove update-alternatives, dpkg-divert and dpkg-statoverride

Re: inconsistent versions of M-A: same packages

[ Fixed CC and M-F-T addresses, and bounced to debian-release. ] Hi! On Sat, 2014-11-01 at 11:45:56 +0100, Marc Glisse wrote: sorry for the naive question, but is there a plan for massively rebuilding all Multi-Arch: same packages that have inconsistent version numbers across architectures

Bug#767705: unblock: inetutils/2:1.9.2.39.3a460-3

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi! Please unblock or reduce age-days for package inetutils so that it can migrate before the freeze, it fixes a security issue, an instance of CVE-2014-3634. unblock

Bug#767706: unblock: debsig-verify/0.13

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock or reduce age-days for package debsig-verify so that it can migrate before the freeze. It fixes the code so that it now checks for errors returned by relevant library and

Bug#755850: Bug#753184: Bug#755850: wheezy-pu: package foremost/1.5.7-5

Hi! On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 15:00:27 -0300, Raúl Benencia wrote: Hello Guillem. Let's try this once more. :-) On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 01:21:42PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: Thanks, although could you tweak a bit the changelog entry to mention what did the dpkg update break, or in other words

  1   2   >