Am 25.09.2013 10:25, schrieb Sergei Golovan:
> Hi fellow developers,
>
> I would like to introduce a few significant changes into Debian Tcl/Tk
> packages. Some of them have quite significant impact on their reverse
> dependencies which will need a transition, I think. The proposed
> changes are a
Am 18.09.2013 15:38, schrieb Dmitrijs Ledkovs:
> On 18 September 2013 03:42, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
>>> Release goals are areas of functionality which developers would like to see
>>> as an aim for the next release. They will not hol
Am 17.08.2013 16:21, schrieb Christoph Egger:
> Moin!
>
> Steven Chamberlain writes:
>> On 16/08/13 13:15, Christoph Egger wrote:
>>> I talked to rene here at DebConf. The problems did show up in the past
>>> when running the testsuite (hangs). Rene tried with current OpenJDK on
>>> falla -- in
Am 03.07.2013 06:10, schrieb Philipp Kern:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 11:42:44AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> yesterday Aurelian Jarno did switch the GCC default to 4.8 in the VCS.
>> However I don't see him in the Debian GCC maintainer list as GCC port
>> maintainer.
This is now documented at
http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/VerboseBuildLogs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51d6afef.8060...@debian.org
Hi,
yesterday Aurelian Jarno did switch the GCC default to 4.8 in the VCS. However I
don't see him in the Debian GCC maintainer list as GCC port maintainer. In the
past I only did see s390 contributions and s390 related bug triage from Bastian
Blank. Is this change coordinated with Bastian? Ple
Am 15.06.2013 03:22, schrieb Stephan Schreiber:
> GCC-4.8 should become the default on ia64 soon; some other changes are
> desirable:
> - The transition of gcc-4.8/libgcc1 to libunwind8.
> - A removal of the libunwind7 dependency of around 4600 packages on ia64 -
> when
> they are updated next ti
Am 13.06.2013 16:46, schrieb Steven Chamberlain:
> Hi,
>
> On 13/06/13 13:51, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> GCC 4.8 is now the default on all x86 architectures, and on all ARM
>> architectures (the latter confirmed by the Debian ARM porters). I did not
>> get
>
Am 07.05.2013 15:25, schrieb Matthias Klose:
> The decision when to make GCC 4.8 the default for other architectures is
> left to the Debian port maintainers.
[...]
> Information on porting to GCC 4.8 from previous versions of GCC can be
> found in the porting guide http://gcc.gnu
Am 02.06.2013 10:35, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 16:07:03 +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
>
>> Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User:
>> release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition
>>
>> We'd like to carry out a GNUstep transition prior to the forthco
Am 15.05.2013 15:49, schrieb Steve M. Robbins:
> On May 15, 2013 04:28:59 AM Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 14.05.2013 09:00, schrieb Steve M. Robbins:
>
>>> Note also that gcc 4.8 is going to break Boost 1.49 so my suggestion
>>> is that Boost transition before gcc
Am 15.05.2013 11:29, schrieb Joachim Breitner:
> Hi,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 15.05.2013, 11:24 +0200 schrieb Matthias Klose:
>> Am 13.05.2013 17:18, schrieb Joachim Breitner:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> just wondering if we can help with the Debian side of this transit
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
jessie won't ship anymore with OpenJDK 6, so we have to build and run using
OpenJDK 7. The good thing is that almost everything will continue to run, we
just have to fix build failures
Am 14.05.2013 09:00, schrieb Steve M. Robbins:
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:30:58PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>> On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 07:05:39PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 23:08:15 -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>>>
I would like to change Debian's default
Am 13.05.2013 17:18, schrieb Joachim Breitner:
> Hi,
>
> just wondering if we can help with the Debian side of this transition. I
> guess that all Haskell packages need to be rebuild in unstable. If you
> want, I can schedule the binNMUs and take care of any build failures. Or
> are you waiting
Am 09.05.2013 17:42, schrieb Stephan Schreiber:
> Quoting Ansgar Burchardt :
>> I remember talk about potentially dropping the ia64 port after wheezy
>> was released, but don't know about the current status.
>>
> All Wheezy ia64 RC bugs have been fixed (except the problem with the ruby
> package; t
Am 09.05.2013 17:42, schrieb Stephan Schreiber:
> Quoting Ansgar Burchardt :
>> I remember talk about potentially dropping the ia64 port after wheezy
>> was released, but don't know about the current status.
>
> All Wheezy ia64 RC bugs have been fixed (except the problem with the ruby
> package; t
Am 06.05.2013 08:25, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Am 05.05.2013 23:22, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
>>> Package: release.debian.org
>>> Severity: normal
>>> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
>>>
Am 09.05.2013 05:39, schrieb Steve M. Robbins:
> On May 8, 2013 12:05:39 PM Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 23:08:15 -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>>> I would like to change Debian's default boost version from 1.49 to
>>> 1.53 or later -- likely to the most current Boost at the ti
Am 08.05.2013 12:47, schrieb Stéphane Glondu:
> During the freeze, a new major version of OCaml has been released. The
> current version is 4.00.1 (already in experimental, the one in sid is
> 3.12.1). It breaks some packages, and many of those have been fixed
> upstream meanwhile. It seems that mo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 08.05.2013 16:50, schrieb Julien Cristau:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 13:39:45 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> There shouldn't be any new build failures with this transition (at least
>> Ubuntu di
Am 08.05.2013 02:31, schrieb Matthias Klose:
> gabrielli as the porter box is now up again, but I don't see any real support
> for mips, mipsel, s390, sparc, and maybe powerpc within Debian. Please
> consider
> toolchain maintenance when starting the architecture qualifi
I'm not happy how the architecture qualification for wheezy did go (as
communicated in the session about the status of the release at DebConf 2012). I
did criticize the attitude of the release team as overly optimistic ("green
light attitude"), and I do see that at least GCC and binutils don't hav
Am 07.05.2013 17:48, schrieb Aurelien Jarno:
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 03:25:29PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> Up to today jessie did see updates for the kernel headers, eglibc, and
>> GCC.
>
> What a wonderful coordination with the release team. Quoting the last
&g
Am 06.05.2013 08:25, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> BTW do you have any information on db 6.x? I haven't seen any nor I
> have been able to find any information about it.
see http://bugs.python.org/issue17477
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubs
Am 05.05.2013 23:22, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: transition
>
> Hi,
>
> it's that time again we should prepare to switch to new Berkeley DB
> upstream version.
>
> This time it's the 5.1 to 5.3 t
Am 01.05.2013 23:01, schrieb Adam D. Barratt:
> On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 18:48 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> 7u3-2.1.7-1 did still build the cacao VM, which is now disabled, and
>> replaced by
>> a transitional package. the cacao VM for openjdk-7 currently is not as
>&g
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: important
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock openjdk-6/6b27-1.12.5-1 and openjdk-7/7u21-2.3.9-3, integrating
the last security updates into IcedTea 1.12.x and 2.3.x.
7u3-2.1.7-1 did still build the cacao VM, which is
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: important
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
please unblock openjdk-7/7u3-2.1.7-1, new minor upstream version including two
security issues:
openjdk-7 (7u3-2.1.7-1) unstable; urgency=high
* IcedTea7 2.1.7 release:
* Security f
Am 22.03.2013 19:08, schrieb Moritz Mühlenhoff:
> Matthias Klose schrieb:
>>> I'm not familiar with the Java internals, but if we're following that
>>> approach
>>> it would make sense to upgrade Wheezy to the version in experimental
>>> (i.e
Am 01.03.2013 04:35, schrieb Moritz Mühlenhoff:
> Backporting security fixes with Java has turned out to be more of less
> unfeasible. I tried this once with DSA 2507 and I think that amounted to at
> least
> two man days of work for that update alone. Also, Ubuntu has shipped
> backports to all
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
python2.7 (2.7.3-8) unstable; urgency=low
* python2.7: Replace python2.7-minimal (<< 2.7.3-7). Closes: #702005.
* Build the _md5, _sha1, _sha256 and _sha512 extension modules.
python2.
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
please unblock binutils:
binutils (2.22-8) unstable; urgency=low
* Fix PR other/54411: integer overflow in objalloc_alloc.
CVE-2012-3509. Closes: #688951.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
please unblock openjdk-7/7u3-2.1.6-1 and icedtea-web/1.3.1-2.1. The openjdk-7
uploads includes two batches of security issues from Feb 2013. The package
stops building for mips and mipsel t
invalid messages.
- S8007688: Blacklist known bad certificate.
* Backports:
- S8007393: Possible race condition after JDK-6664509.
- S8007611: logging behavior in applet changed.
* Disable bootstrap build on alpha, currently broken.
-- Matthias Klose Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:37:14
Am 18.02.2013 00:08, schrieb Niels Thykier:
> On 2013-02-17 23:04, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> - Remove openjdk-6 in wheezy. Probably would require falling back to
>>gcj. Not recommended as a runtime environment, but should work fine
>>for building packages, as ecj
There is a bug report open for openjdk-6 in wheezy (#675495) and squeeze didn't
see any security updates for several months. To summarize, no party involved is
capable or willing to provide security updates based on backports of single
patches to the released openjdk-6 version in a stable release.
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please consider unblocking isl/0.11.1-1 and cloog/0.18.0-1 for wheezy. These are
new upstream versions now required by the upcoming GCC 4.8 release [1]. It would
be worthwhile to have the
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock openjdk-6/6b27-1.12.1-2, updating to the most recent Icedtea6
release, including a batch of security fixes.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.
I don't think, changes up to 2.7.3-1 need any freeze exception. For the other
changes:
- Lib/compiler/consts.py: I'm not aware of code that uses these
constants outside the compile machinery.
- Lib/mailbox.py: the file descriptor is closed at this point.
sure, you can move the code up, bu
(r192379) from the gcc-4_6-branch.
- PARISC fix, test case fix.
[ Matthias Klose ]
* Merge from gnat-4.6 4.6.3-6:
* debian/patches/ada-symbolic-tracebacks.diff (src/gcc/ada/tracebak.c):
Use the GCC stack unwinder on GNU/kFreeBSD too. Closes: #685559.
* debian/patches/gcc_ada_gcc
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
icedtea-web (1.3.1-1) unstable; urgency=high
* IcedTea-Web 1.3.1 release.
* Security Updates
- CVE-2012-4540: Heap-based buffer overflow after triggering event
attached to applet.
* Co
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
please unblock openjdk-7/7u3-2.1.3-1, IcedTea security release.
my goal is to get the openjdk-7 in experimental into wheezy too, however it
fails on mips only, so any help on getting the build failure fixed
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
please unblock openjdk-6/6b24-1.11.5-1, IcedTea security release:
openjdk-6 (6b24-1.11.5-1) unstable; urgency=low
* Upload to unstable.
openjdk-6 (6b24-1.11.5-0ubuntu1) quantal-security; urgency=low
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock cairo-5c/1.8.1. This upload is no rocket science at all, just
removing all the past release files from the package.
It would help, if the package would be packaged an an upstream package, usi
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Please unblock GCC 4.7.2. This includes
gcc-4.7 4.7.2-4
gcj-4.7 4.7.2-2 (currently building)
gcc-defaults 1.120
On Oct 10, Lucas Nussbaum did two test rebuilds of testing on amd64 w
On 05.10.2012 09:59, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 23:10:16 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User:
>> release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock
>>
>> this should go to wheezy, because
20704.
- Fix PR ld/13991 and a gold issue on ARM.
* Fix strict-alias warning building libiberty/md5.c. Closes: #674831.
* Enable x86_64-pep in binutils-multiarch. Closes: #675364.
-- Matthias Klose Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:00:14 +0200
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release
.
-- Matthias Klose Tue, 04 Sep 2012 17:55:43 +0200
openjdk-7 (7u3-2.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=high
* IcedTea7 2.1.2 release.
* Security fixes
- CVE-2012-4681, S7162473: Reintroduce PackageAccessible checks removed
in 6788531.
- S7162476, CVE-2012-1682: XMLDecoder security
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Severity: normal
security release.
openjdk-6 (6b24-1.11.4-3) unstable; urgency=low
* Regenerate the control file to fix build dependencies on mips/mipsel.
-- Matthias Klose Sun, 02 Sep 2012 19:39:17
developer docs aren't shipped
anyway). Works around the build failure on s390.
-- Matthias Klose Thu, 06 Sep 2012 23:03:51 +0200
icedtea-web (1.3-1) unstable; urgency=high
* IcedTea-Web 1.3 release.
* Security updates:
- CVE-2012-3422: Potential read from an uninitialized m
/38474, PR middle-end/53790,
PR c++/52988 (wrong code), PR fortran/51758.
[ Aurelien Jarno ]
* Add patches/ada-ppc64.diff to fix GNAT build on ppc64.
* powerpc64: fix non-multilib builds.
[ Matthias Klose ]
* Update the Linaro support to the 4.6-2012.08 release.
* spu build
python2.7/2.7.3-4 now has the upstream fix for the urlparse patch included
(restore the urlparse lists, but use uniform decoding, i.e. don't use the lists
anymore). This should make 2.7.3-4 independent of the other packages migrating
to testing.
python2.7/2.7.3-4 has the breaks to the vim-* packa
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
unblock to fix #669479, #680896 for wheezy. the split out ppl-config binary is
not used by apron and cloog-ppl, so no changes for build dependencies in other
packages are needed.
--
To UN
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
gcc-4.4/4.4.7-2 removes the ObjC/ObjC++ frontends, so that gcc-4.5 can be
removed (see #675431).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "uns
On 11.06.2012 00:29, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-06-10 at 22:59 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Are there likely to be any issues if the transition migrated in stages -
>> i.e. if the new libffi including libffi6 and the old libffi5 binary
>> (kept around by britney) co-exist in testing
On 11.06.2012 00:57, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Hi Russ,
>
> Russ Allbery wrote:
We're now at gcc 4.7 for most architectures, the freeze is close and
gcc-doc still depends on gcc-4.4-doc.
>>
>>> ... because there doesn't seem to exist any gcc-4.x-doc package with
>>> x >= 5. *puzzled*
>>
>> I
On 13.05.2012 21:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 13.05.2012 18:42, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>>> which ones? are there any reports which are not tagged? I
On 13.05.2012 21:46, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 13.05.2012 20:22, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>>> On 13.05.2012 17:45, Philipp Kern wrote:
>>> > This doesn't mean that we shouldn't h
On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> On 13.05.2012 17:45, Philipp Kern wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 11:40:36AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 19:44:01 +0200
On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> On 13.05.2012 17:45, Philipp Kern wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 11:40:36AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 19:44:01 +0200
On 13.05.2012 17:45, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 11:40:36AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 19:44:01 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> The intent to get GCC changed was mentioned in the bug reports a month ago.
>> Seeing the number
> transition apt
> 672080 apt-watch
> 672032 debtags
> 667317 oval-interpreter
>
> transition gdal
> 671991 grass
>
> transition mysqlclient
> 671999 boinc
> 671991 grass
> 667321 pdns
>
> transition xorg
> 672056 xf86-video-glamo
these are now uploaded to delayed/2 or directly where I did find
This is a list based on
http://release.debian.org/transitions/export/packages.yaml
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.7;users=debian-...@lists.debian.org
looking for issues in ongoing transitions. Adam Barret suggested for transitions
that aren't boost or libtiff-symbols,
On 08.05.2012 19:14, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Matthias Klose (08/05/2012):
>> mbiebl: that might be the gmp10 bug KiBi, can't reproduce
>> the libchamplain ICE locally. could you do a local build as well?
>>
>> and I didn't get a reply on that.
>
>
On 08.05.2012 14:44, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Matthias Klose (07/05/2012):
>> see my email to -release. It's ahead of the freeze, and the fix rate for
>> the build failures shows that all these issues can be fixed even before
>> the freeze. It is not a transition whic
On 07.05.2012 20:19, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Julien Cristau (07/05/2012):
>> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 16:19:00 +, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>
>>> gcc-defaults (1.118) unstable; urgency=low . * Default to GCC 4.7 for
>>> gcc, g++, gfortran on amd64, i386,
GCC 4.7 is now the default for x86 architectures for all frontends except the D
frontends, including KFreeBSD and the Hurd.
There are still some build failures which need to be addressed. Out of the ~350
bugs filed, more than the half are fixed, another quarter has patches available,
and the remai
On 02.05.2012 18:07, Patrick Baggett wrote:
> Matthias,
>
> I wouldn't mind helping a bit, as I'd like to see GCC 4.7 be the default on
> ia64. I'm good at C/C++ programming and can definitely provide upstream
> patches, but I have absolutely no idea what the "debian way" of doing
> things is -- r
A request to recheck for ia64 build failures ([1]) wasn't answered, same with a
question wether to default GCC to 4.7 on this architecture ([2]).
I am not aware of anybody within the Debian GCC Maintainers wanting to address
the IA64 specific issues. Please step up, if you want to help with IA64
On 17.04.2012 23:36, OndÅej Surý wrote:
I will check with doko, but I think it's no longer true as python has included
support for bdb 5.1.
But let me get back to you tomorrow, when I have full internet access.
OndÅej Surý
On 17. 4. 2012, at 21:32, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Apr 17,
On 16.04.2012 08:31, Philipp Kern wrote:
Is there anything incompatible when going from 2.6 to 2.7? Because it does
mean that you need to change all scripts in lockstep with the distro upgrade,
because 2.7 is not in squeeze and 2.6 is not in wheezy, unless(!) python2.6
from squeeze is still inst
On 15.04.2012 12:46, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
On 04/14/2012 07:39 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
I would like to remove python2.6 for the wheezy release
Since python2.6 was the default python interpreter in Squeeze, shouldn't
we keep it in Wheezy and remove it from Wheezy+1? (as we did with pyth
Zope2 maintainers,
The only application in wheezy which doesn't work with python2.7 is zope2.12.
Zope2.13 was released in 2010, but not yet packaged. The rationale for this is
that the probably most popular zope2 application plone is not yet updated for
zope2.13 (but plone itself is not avail
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Tags: wheezy, sid
Severity: normal
There shouldn't be any new build failures with this transition (at least Ubuntu
didn't see any).
A large number of binNMUs could be avoided if Haskell wouldn't hard
GCC-4.7 packages are now available in testing and unstable; thanks to Lucas'
test rebuild, bug reports are now filed for these ~330 packages which fail to
build with the new version [1]. Hints how to address the vast majority of these
issues can be found at [2].
I'm planning to work on these
On 21.03.2012 23:50, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Yves-Alexis Perez, le Wed 21 Mar 2012 22:47:11 +0100, a écrit :
Can't the plugin be rebuilt when needed (meaning, when it's used to
actually build something)?
That'd make it quite more involved to use. ATM you just need to pass
-fplugin=/usr/lib/.../
On 01/04/2012 01:58 PM, Luca Falavigna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was pointed at ordereddict package in the NEW queue, which is a
> backport of OrderedDict object, also available in stock python2.7.
please reject it for now.
> After switching python-defaults to python2.7, I'm not sure we
> discussed whe
On 12/11/2011 01:07 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sonntag, 11. Dezember 2011, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> sorry, but I'd rather like to have an announcement that it has a bug,
>
> me too, for all the reasons Philipp noted.
>
> It's also trivial to download the fixed jdk from oracle and build
On 11/19/2011 11:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 23:32:48 +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>
>> retitle 649307 FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64: gengtype: Internal error: abort in
>> get_output_file_with_visibility, at gengtype.c:1998
>> reassign 649307 src:gcc-4.6
>> severity 649307 im
On 10/19/2011 02:09 PM, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Have we been in contact with Oracle upstream and explained that we are
> eager to comply with their wish to move entirely to openjdk for our next
> release, but have the problem that we have a stable release out in the
> field that people rely on? Ar
On 06/08/2011 08:19 PM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 21:44:15 +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote:
>>> 1) The modified gnustep-make package will have no trouble migrating to
>>>testing (before the transition even commences), so it would make
>>>GNUstep deve
severity 636514 normal
thanks
I really do not have any trust in some member of the release team filing this
kind of reports. Please think twice before doing this.
On 08/03/2011 07:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Package: icedtea-plugin
> Version: 1.1-1
> Severity: serious
>
> icedtea-plugin depe
The gcj* packages are broken for some time while the multiarch changes are
ongoing until the various packages are rebuilt.
See http://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Bootstrapping for the status.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubs
On 06/07/2011 01:33 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 06/07/2011 01:03 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
>>> We would like to carry out a GNUstep transition
>>> (libgnustep-base1.20->1.22; libgnustep-gui0.18->0.20) *and*
>>> libobjc2->3,
On 06/07/2011 01:03 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
We would like to carry out a GNUstep transition
(libgnustep-base1.20->1.22; libgnustep-gui0.18->0.20) *and*
libobjc2->3, ideally coinciding
Package: release.debian.org
please schedule binNMUs for anjuta-extras, ardesia and lush, needed according to
http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=binutils
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact lis
On 04/26/2011 09:28 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 08:51:04PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the
default after the release of GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at
least on amd64, armel, i38
On 04/26/2011 08:36 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 04:41:23PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 04/26/2011 09:39 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
I woudn't be particularly happy with that unless the gcc maintainers ok
it, and I'm still not sure that two days is also an
On 04/26/2011 05:31 PM, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
On 26 April 2011 18:03, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make GCC 4.6 the default after the release of
GCC 4.5.3, expected later this week, at least on amd64, armel, i386 and
powerpc.
Could you include armhf in the list as well?
yes, f
On 04/17/2011 09:33 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any
On 04/26/2011 09:39 AM, Neil McGovern wrote:
I woudn't be particularly happy with that unless the gcc maintainers ok
it, and I'm still not sure that two days is also an acceptable
timescale.
then please drop mips and mipsel as release architectures. At least sh4 has a
workable, accessible deve
On 30.03.2011 21:17, Bill Traynor wrote:
> On 11-03-30 02:36 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 30.03.2011 07:05, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>>> - ArchiveQualification of sh4
>>>http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/sh4
>>>
>>> How do you
On 30.03.2011 07:05, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> - ArchiveQualification of sh4
> http://wiki.debian.org/ArchiveQualification/sh4
>
> How do you think about including sh4 in the next release?
"Toolchain was supported by CodeSourcery"
so it's not supported anymore? If this is correct, then this i
On 17.03.2011 19:42, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 12:39:23 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Now that squeeze is out, I'd like to move from GMP 4 to GMP 5. The
>> latter was released upstream about a year ago and the gmp lists
>> aren't buzzing with outrageous bugs,
On 18.03.2011 03:17, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:42:13PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
>> So this is going pretty badly. gmp has a *lot* of reverse dependencies.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> I'm not sure what to do at this point.
>
> I'm working my way through th
On 02.03.2011 07:36, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On 2 March 2011 03:34, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
>> I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the
>> next
>> two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the
>
I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the next
two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the default
compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be many surprises
on at least the common architectures. About 50% of the b
It's always interesting to look at build logs, or to receive bug reports of the
form
CC
or
CCLD
without knowing how the compiler or the linker were called. Maybe it is
convenient for a package maintainer watching the build scrolling by (some of
these are even colorized), but lacking
On 26.02.2011 18:08, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 05:49:49PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 26.02.2011 04:42, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 03:57:28PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
On 25.02.2011 08:46, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
Clearly one should be
301 - 400 of 764 matches
Mail list logo
