Bug#827061: transition: openssl

2016-10-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx 
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 09:33:43PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:42:59PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 09:31:17PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> > > On 11/06/16 20:59, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > > OpenSSL will soon release a new upstream version with a new
> > > > soname.  This new version will break various packages, see:
> > > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/06/msg00205.html
> > > > 
> > > > I'm currently not sure when the release will be ready.  I would
> > > > like to start this transition as soon as possible, but probably
> > > > after it's actually released.  I don't expect this to take long.
> > > 
> > > 405 packages failed to build during your test rebuild AFAICS. That's 
> > > going to
> > > take some time to sort out...
> > > 
> > > > If I'm ready to upload it to unstable, can I start this
> > > > transition?  Are there things you want me to do?
> > > 
> > > Please upload to experimental first and let us know when that's happened.
> > 
> > It's in experimental already.  The test suite only fails
> > on hurd, for some reason it's not finding the engine.  I still
> > need to look at that.
> > 
> > > We will also need bugs filed, with severity important for now.
> > 
> > Sure, I'll start on that if I find the time.
> > 
> > > Also it may be useful if you can get us the intersection between the 
> > > packages
> > > that failed to build and the key packages[1] (see "Final list of 3302 key 
> > > source
> > > packages" in that file).
> > 
> > That actually seem to be 3247 source package.  Anyway, the list is
> > below.
> 
> So OpenSSL 1.1.0 was released about 3 weeks ago.  Since then we've
> been working on the key packages, to get them to build with
> OpenSSL 1.1.0.  You can see that status of that at:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=openssl-1.1-trans-keypkg;users=pkg-openssl-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
> 
> Most of the packages are really trivial to fix, but some do
> require that you fix the same issues in many different places and
> it can take some time to fix it.
> 
> I would like to motivate more people to work on this by either
> marking those bugs as RC, or uploading it to unstable.

Ping.


Kurt

Bug#840295: Requesting RC exception for stretch for browserified javascript

2016-10-12 Thread Philip Hands 
Hi Praveen,

I see that you are again asking for a blanket ruling, and are still
hoping to rest that ruling on the poorly defined "browserified" term.

Since this approach seems to have resulted in the very slow progress
with this subject to date, might I suggest that you could speed things
up by answering the most obvious questions in advance  e.g.:

  Which specific packages are you requesting an exception for?

  For each package:

Does it have its full source available in Debian?

Are the tools to build the source into the output available in
Debian, and if not what's missing, and what's the prospect of those
things being packaged.

To what extent would you say that it would be possible for this to be
done using tools currently in Debian?

It seems quite likely that the Release managers will want to know at
least that information in order to make a decision, and I'd guess that
you already know most of that, so expecting them to either assemble it
themselves, or ask you for it, or guess at what you really meant, seems
like a waste of their time and effort.

It will also take longer that way (and time is getting short).

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,GERMANY


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Please add force hint to enable metaphlan2-data testing migration

2016-10-12 Thread Andreas Tille 
Hi,
 
please add a force-hint to add the testing migration of
 
metaphlan2-data 2.6.0+ds-1
 
While metaphlan2-data is arch all it has an unsatisfiable Depends:
bowtie2 on i386 which seems to block the testing migration.
 
Thanks for your release team work

  Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#840501: transition: ipython

2016-10-12 Thread Tobias Hansen 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hi,

we would like to transition to ipython 5. The version currently in
Debian (2.4.1) includes a notebook and a qt console. These components
(at least the notebook functionality) were moved to the separate project
jupyter. Because of this, the old ipython is replaced by a bunch of
packages, which are currently in experimental:

ipython
ipykernel
jupyter_client
jupyter_core
nbconvert
nbformat

Some additional are currently being packaged:

ipywidgets ITP: #838684
jupyter-notebook   ITP: #801366
widgetsnbextension ITP: #838683

There are two categories of ipython reverse dependencies: The ones that
depend only on ipython and/or ipython3, and the ones that also depend on
packages that do not exist anymore in this form in ipython 5,
ipython(3)-notebook and ipython(3)-qtconsole.

Below is a list of all these reverse dependencies. With the exception of
yade, I was able to build all the ones that have a reverse dependency
only on ipython(3) successfully against ipython 5.1.0-1.

It is clear that apart from yade, the dependencies on
ipython(3)-notebook and/or ipython(3)-qtconsole need special attention.
I would start by filing bugs against these packages to see what needs to
be done. They are:

glueviz, lmfit-py, plotly, sardana, vistrails, yade

The maintainer of lmfit-py and sardana already promised to take care of
these packages:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-sagemath/Week-of-Mon-20161010/000231.html

Would you say I should also file bugs against all the other affected
packages?

Here's the list of reverse dependencies, originating from dak:

# Build-Depend only on ipython / ipython3:

ipdb builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
matplotlib   builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
nova builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
patsybuilds with ipython 5.1.0-1
pysurfer builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
python-cyclerbuilds with ipython 5.1.0-1
python-geopandas builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
python-skbio builds with ipython 5.1.0-1
sfepybuilds with ipython 5.1.0-1
yade FTBFS with ipython 5.1.0-1


# Build-Depend on ipython(3)-notebook or ipython(3)-qtconsole:

glueviz: ipython (>= 2.3.0)
 ipython3 (>= 2.3.0)
 ipython3-qtconsole (>= 2.3.0)
lmfit-py: ipython-notebook
  ipython3-notebook
plotly: ipython-notebook (>= 2.3.0)
ipython3-notebook (>= 2.3.0)


# Depend only on ipython / ipython3:

accerciser: accerciser
androguard: androguard
connectomeviewer: connectomeviewer
ipdb: python-ipdb
  python3-ipdb
plaso: plaso
pytango: python-pytango
 python3-pytango
python-pypump: pypump-shell
python-skbio: python-skbio
  python3-skbio
rabbitvcs: rabbitvcs-core
sfepy: python-sfepy
woo: python-woo
 python3-woo
yade: yade


# Depend on ipython(3)-notebook or ipython(3)-qtconsole:

glueviz: glueviz: ipython3
  ipython3-qtconsole
sardana: python-sardana: ipython
 ipython-qtconsole
vistrails: vistrails: ipython-qtconsole


Ben file:

title = "ipython";
is_affected = .depends ~ "ipython" | .depends ~ "ipython3" | .depends ~
"ipython-notebook" | .depends ~ "ipython3-notebook" | .depends ~ "ipython-
qtconsole" | .depends ~ "ipython3-qtconsole" | .depends ~ "ipython" |
.depends
~ "ipython3";
is_good = .depends ~ "ipython" | .depends ~ "ipython3";
is_bad = .depends ~ "ipython-notebook" | .depends ~ "ipython3-notebook" |
.depends ~ "ipython-qtconsole" | .depends ~ "ipython3-qtconsole";

Best,
Tobias

Re: Please add force hint to enable sra-sdk testing migration

2016-10-12 Thread Andreas Tille 
Hi,
 
please add a force-hint to add the testing migration of
  
 sra-sdk 2.7.0-1

It was discussed with upstream that only amd64 architecture will
be supported officially.  Since we try to fix build issues on other
architectures step by step there is no point in delaying the
testing migration for version 2.7.0-1 for amd64.
  
Thanks for your release team work
 
   Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Bug#840304: marked as done (nmu: cudf_0.8-1 libaio-ocaml_1.0.1-1)

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:43:28 +0200
with message-id <6b7fbd4d-bad6-bc64-457a-33ba02014...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#840304: nmu: cudf_0.8-1 libaio-ocaml_1.0.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #840304,
regarding nmu: cudf_0.8-1 libaio-ocaml_1.0.1-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
840304: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840304
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

nmu cudf_0.8-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Recompile with OCaml 4.02.3"
nmu libaio-ocaml_1.0.1-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Recompile with OCaml 4.02.3"

The transition from 4.01 to 4.02 has not yet been completed in experimental.


Andreas
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 10/10/16 14:29, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
> 
> nmu cudf_0.8-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Recompile with OCaml 4.02.3"
> nmu libaio-ocaml_1.0.1-1 . ANY . experimental . -m "Recompile with OCaml 
> 4.02.3"
> 
> The transition from 4.01 to 4.02 has not yet been completed in experimental.

Scheduled.

Emilio--- End Message ---

Bug#839243: marked as done (transition: bullet)

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Your message dated Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:38:15 +0200
with message-id <61a6725d-eeb5-4c02-12cb-daf08d6b7...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#839243: transition: bullet
has caused the Debian Bug report #839243,
regarding transition: bullet
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
839243: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839243
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Hello,

I would like to request a transition slot for the new upstream release
of Bullet 2.83.7. The new binary packages are currently awaiting
approval in the NEW queue.

The reverse-dependencies are:

kido
hkl
gazebo
cyphesis-cpp
openmw
critterding (experimental)
ros-geometry
ros-geometry-experimental

I have rebuilt all of them successfully except for critterding which
FTBFS due to an unrelated Boost error.

Ben file:

title = "bullet";
is_affected = 
/\b(libbulletcollision2\.83\.6|libbulletdynamics2\.83\.6|libbulletfileloader2\.83\.6|libbulletsoftbody2\.83\.6|libbulletworldimporter2\.83\.6|libbulletxmlworldimporter2\.83\.6|libconvexdecomposition2\.83\.6|libgimpactutils2\.83\.6|libhacd2\.83\.6|liblinearmath2\.83\.6|libbulletcollision2\.83\.7|libbulletdynamics2\.83\.7|libbulletfileloader2\.83\.7|libbulletsoftbody2\.83\.7|libbulletworldimporter2\.83\.7|libbulletxmlworldimporter2\.83\.7|libconvexdecomposition2\.83\.7|libgimpactutils2\.83\.7|libhacd2\.83\.7|liblinearmath2\.83\.7)\b/;

is_good = 
/\b(libbulletcollision2\.83\.7|libbulletdynamics2\.83\.7|libbulletfileloader2\.83\.7|libbulletsoftbody2\.83\.7|libbulletworldimporter2\.83\.7|libbulletxmlworldimporter2\.83\.7|libconvexdecomposition2\.83\.7|libgimpactutils2\.83\.7|libhacd2\.83\.7|liblinearmath2\.83\.7)\b/;

is_bad = 
/\b(libbulletcollision2\.83\.6|libbulletdynamics2\.83\.6|libbulletfileloader2\.83\.6|libbulletsoftbody2\.83\.6|libbulletworldimporter2\.83\.6|libbulletxmlworldimporter2\.83\.6|libconvexdecomposition2\.83\.6|libgimpactutils2\.83\.6|libhacd2\.83\.6|liblinearmath2\.83\.6)\b/;


Regards,

Markus
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 05/10/16 20:09, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 05/10/16 15:57, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> On 01.10.2016 14:49, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>> Control: tags -1 confirmed
>> [...]
>>> Assuming bullet builds fine: go ahead.
>>
>> Thanks. Yesterday bullet 2.83.7 has been accepted by the FTP team. The
>> package builds fine and I have just uploaded it to unstable.
> 
> binNMUs scheduled.

This just migrated yesterday.

Cheers,
Emilio--- End Message ---

Bug#838242: transition: imagemagick

2016-10-12 Thread roucaries bastien 
Hi,

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:14 PM, roucaries bastien
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
>  wrote:
>> Control: tags -1 confirmed
>>
>> On 07/10/16 17:15, roucaries bastien wrote:
>>> I have tried and it seems so.
>>>
>>> Due to perl transition I get some transient problem but it seems ok,
>>> except package only available under unstable
>>
>> Alright. This is small enough that should be fine in any case.
>>
>> You can go ahead.
>
> I need to upgrade a newer version to experimental fixing two CVE... I
> will prefer to use the newest version and I am rebuilding for
> experimental.
>
> they are now two problems
>
> k3b FTBS for unstable #838516
> pythonmagick need to be upgraded to newer version
>
> It is a good idea to upgrade pythonmagick due to security concern.
>
>
>>
>> I wonder why you called the new package libmagick++-6.q16-6v6 rather than 
>> just
>> libmagick++-6.q16-6. That seems like a mistake, though I guess just leave it
>> like that now, no need to go through NEW and add conflicts/replaces etc just 
>> for
>> a cosmetic change.
>
> Because some experimental version get a  libmagick++-6.q16-6 then they
> are an ABI problem due to newer g++
>
> So double bump.
>
> Bastien
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Emilio
Uploaded new version waiting for green light

Processed: sardana: ipython transition: Please help assess the situation

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was blocked by: 840522 840521 840520
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840524

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840524: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840524
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: vistrails: ipython transition: Please help assess the situation

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was blocked by: 840524 840521 840520 840522
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840525

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840525: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840525
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: plotly: ipython transition: Please help assess the situation

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was blocked by: 840520 840521
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840522

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840522: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840522
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: yade: ipython transition: FTBFS with ipython 5

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was blocked by: 840525 840522 840520 840524 840521
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840527

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840527: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840527
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: glueviz: ipython transition: Please help assess the situation

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was not blocked by any bugs.
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840520

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840520: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840520
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#840501: jupyter-qtconsole is actually already packaged

2016-10-12 Thread Tobias Hansen 
I just learned that jupyter-qtconsole is already packaged in experimental:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python-qtconsole

For glueviz, sardana and vistrails this means: could you please test
your packages with the experimental ipython/jupyter packages and make
the necesssary changes?

Best,
Tobias

Processed: lmfit-py: ipython transition: Please help assess the situation

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> block 840501 by -1
Bug #840501 [release.debian.org] transition: ipython
840501 was blocked by: 840520
840501 was not blocking any bugs.
Added blocking bug(s) of 840501: 840521

-- 
840501: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840501
840521: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840521
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#839731: jessie-pu: package mpg123/1.20.1-2+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Adam D. Barratt 
Control: tags -1 + pending

On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 21:21 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> 
> On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 12:01 +0100, James Cowgill wrote:
> > A security issue was reported against mpg123 in bug #838960. Since it
> > was marked no-DSA by the security team, it needs a normal jessie-pu
> > update to fix it in jessie.
> > 
> > The debdiff is attached. I've tested it on jessie against the testcase
> > provided in the upstream bug report (https://mpg123.org/bugs/240).
> 
> Please go ahead.

Uploaded and flagged for acceptance.

Regards,

Adam

Processed: Re: Bug#839731: jessie-pu: package mpg123/1.20.1-2+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #839731 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package mpg123/1.20.1-2+deb8u1
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
839731: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839731
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#839814: jessie-pu: package sympa/6.1.23~dfsg-2+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #839814 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package sympa/6.1.23~dfsg-2+deb8u1
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
839814: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839814
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#839927: jessie-pu: package rawtherapee/4.2-1+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Adam D. Barratt 
Control: tags -1 + pending

On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 21:11 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> 
> On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 00:26 +0200, Philip Rinn wrote:
> > Sorry, I didn't attach the debdiff, it was only a 'git diff ...' Now I 
> > attached
> > the real debdiff.
> 
> Please go ahead.

Uploaded and flagged for acceptance.

Regards,

Adam

Bug#840127: jessie-pu: package libio-socket-ssl-perl/2.002-2+deb8u2

2016-10-12 Thread Adam D. Barratt 
Control: tags -1 + pending

On Sun, 2016-10-09 at 07:29 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 09:10:33PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> > 
> > On Sat, 2016-10-08 at 17:37 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > We were asked if #839576 can be fixed in stable as well, it is already
> > > addressed in unstable back with the 2.017-1 upload, which caused
> > > problems for the user with ACL's set on the SSL_key_file.
> > > 
> > > Attached is the proposed debdiff. Would it be acceptable for an
> > > upcoming jessie point release?
> > 
> > Please go ahead.
> 
> Thanks! Uploaded.

Flagged for acceptance; thanks.

Regards,

Adam

Processed: Re: Bug#839927: jessie-pu: package rawtherapee/4.2-1+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #839927 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package rawtherapee/4.2-1+deb8u1
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
839927: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839927
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#840127: jessie-pu: package libio-socket-ssl-perl/2.002-2+deb8u2

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #840127 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package 
libio-socket-ssl-perl/2.002-2+deb8u2
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
840127: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840127
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#840188: jessie-pu: package tevent/0.9.25-0+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System 
Processing control commands:

> tags -1 + pending
Bug #840188 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package tevent/0.9.25-0+deb8u1
Added tag(s) pending.

-- 
840188: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=840188
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#839814: jessie-pu: package sympa/6.1.23~dfsg-2+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Adam D. Barratt 
Control: tags -1 + pending

On Sun, 2016-10-09 at 07:22 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 09:18:50PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> > 
> > On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 12:56 +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > Sympa is affected by a nasty bug when used under systemd, that after
> > > logrotation with the original logrotate setup in jessie, sympa is in a
> > > confused state. This is tracked as #804066 and was fixed in unstable
> > > already with 6.2.16~dfsg-1.
> > > 
> > > I would like to propose that this is fixed as well for stable,
> > > attached is the proposed debidff, where I needed to use
> > > reload-or-try-reload (try-reload-or-restart in unstable).
> > > 
> > > Does this look acceptable for the upcoming jessie point release?
> > 
> > Please go ahead.
> 
> Thanks a lot, just uploaded.

Flagged for acceptance.

Regards,

Adam

Bug#840188: jessie-pu: package tevent/0.9.25-0+deb8u1

2016-10-12 Thread Adam D. Barratt 
Control: tags -1 + pending

On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 22:43 +, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 09:15:22PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Control: tags -1 + confirmed
> > 
> > On Sun, 2016-10-09 at 12:15 +, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > I would like to update tevent in jessie to 0.9.28. This is necessary,
> > > because the proposed version of Samba depends on new features
> > > (https://bugs.debian.org/836795).
> > 
> > With the changelog distribution finalised, please go ahead.
> > 
> > I assume that the samba update will have its libtevent-dev build-dep
> > version updated to ensure that 0.9.28 is used.
> Thanks, uploaded.

Flagged for acceptance.

Regards,

Adam

Please add force hint to enable SSPACE testing migration

2016-10-12 Thread Andreas Tille 
Hi,

please add a force-hint to add the testing migration of

   sspace 2.1.1+dfsg-2

While sspace is arch all it has an unsatisfiable Depends: bowtie on i386
which seems to block the testing migration.

Thanks for your release team work

  Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de

Re: Please add force hint to enable sra-sdk testing migration

2016-10-12 Thread Julien Cristau 
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:51:49 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> please add a force-hint to add the testing migration of
>   
>  sra-sdk 2.7.0-1
> 
> It was discussed with upstream that only amd64 architecture will
> be supported officially.  Since we try to fix build issues on other
> architectures step by step there is no point in delaying the
> testing migration for version 2.7.0-1 for amd64.
>   
NAK, this isn't how that works.  The package has out of date binaries in
unstable, that needs to be fixed one way or the other.

Cheers,
Julien

NEW changes in stable-new

2016-10-12 Thread Debian FTP Masters 
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_allonly.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_arm64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_armel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_armhf.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_i386.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_mips.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_mipsel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_powerpc.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_ppc64el.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u2_s390x.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_allonly.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_arm64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_armel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_armhf.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_i386.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_mips.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_mipsel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_powerpc.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_ppc64el.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: ghostscript_9.06~dfsg-2+deb8u3_s390x.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: libio-socket-ssl-perl_2.002-2+deb8u2_allonly.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: mpg123_1.20.1-2+deb8u1_source.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_arm64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_armel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_armhf.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_i386.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_mips.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_mipsel.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_powerpc.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_ppc64el.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: nss_3.26-1+debu8u1_s390x.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: rawtherapee_4.2-1+deb8u2_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: sympa_6.1.23~dfsg-2+deb8u1_allonly.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: tevent_0.9.28-0+deb8u1_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT

Bug#840295: Requesting RC exception for stretch for browserified javascript

2016-10-12 Thread Julien Cristau 
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 15:27:02 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:

> package: release.debian.org
> 
> Dear Release Team,
> 
> As discussed with FTP masters[1], I'd like to request an RC exception
> for browserified javascript packages already in the archive.
> 
> Hopefully we'll be able to complete a proper browserification
> environment in debian for stretch+1 release.
> 
IMO, it may be ok to request exceptions for specific packages/bugs (and
then we may or may not grant that), but not such a broad "let's ignore
the DFSG" exception.

Cheers,
Julien