Bug#830137: transition: gnustep-gui

Control: tags -1 confirmed On 06/07/16 13:35, Eric Heintzmann wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > New upstream gnustep-gui/back bumps SONAME (change of ABI without change > in API) > , so we need to

Processed: Re: Bug#830137: transition: gnustep-gui

Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #830137 [release.debian.org] transition: gnustep-gui Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 830137: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=830137 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#829371: transition: ntl

Hi, On 06/07/2016 07:46, Julien Puydt wrote: The eclib failure on amd64 is pretty annoying -- I tried on my amd64 box, and got illegal instruction too. Then I compiled libntl27 from apt-get source and installed the obtained libntl27 package, and ran make check again : gone! It turns out

Bug#823335: Uw mailbox heeft de opslag limiet overschreden

Uw mailbox heeft de opslag limiet overschreden opnieuw Validate- < klik hier > Zorg ervoor dat u de juiste gegevens om uw post te vergroten vullen. Ondertekend door Webmaster.

Bits from the release team: Winter is Coming (but not to South Africa)

We are busy with work and gin at DebConf 16, so here is a summary of what we've been up to. Stretch Freeze == The freeze will begin on 5th November 2016. To recap: * 2016-11-05 Transition freeze * 2016-12-05 Mandatory 10-day migrations * 2017-01-05 Soft freeze * 2017-02-05

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release

On 07/05/2016 07:43 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 04:15:36PM -0300, Breno Leitao wrote: Steve, On 07/04/2016 10:01 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners of very recent amd64 machines too. ppc64el port would take

Bug#830137: transition: gnustep-gui

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition New upstream gnustep-gui/back bumps SONAME (change of ABI without change in API) , so we need to transition. Now with gnustep-gui/back 0.25.0 in experimental, we can start transition

Re: [debian-mysql] About packages that depend on mysql-* / mariadb / virtual-mysql-*

On 2016-07-06 09:54, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > 2016-07-05 19:52 GMT+03:00 Robie Basak : >> PROPOSAL B > > The whole pkg-mysql-maint team is behind the proposal Robie now wrote > about. We have been discussing actively and engineering it during the > last two days. It was

Re: [debian-mysql] About packages that depend on mysql-* / mariadb / virtual-mysql-*

2016-07-05 19:52 GMT+03:00 Robie Basak : > PROPOSAL B The whole pkg-mysql-maint team is behind the proposal Robie now wrote about. We have been discussing actively and engineering it during the last two days. It was also one of the topics discussed at the MariaDB/MySQL Bof

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release

On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 08:55:39AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > ACK - I'm not wedded to the name in the slightest. It's more a > proposal of what we're going to do. ok, cool. > >maybe "jessie+bpo-installer" would be a better fit? > Maybe that fits, but it's horrid name. I don't think it's

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release

On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 08:55 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 07:33:38AM +, Holger Levsen wrote: [...] > > I'd like to suggest *not* to call it jessie+half, as we have used > >that term already (for etch+half) and there we had a frozen/stable kernel, > >not a moving target

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release

On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 07:33:38AM +, Holger Levsen wrote: >On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 11:43:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >I assume "forking" the kernel for jessie+½ as done for etch-and-half is >> >the plan already? (forking as in using a new source package…) >> God, no - really *not*

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release

On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 11:43:14PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >I assume "forking" the kernel for jessie+½ as done for etch-and-half is > >the plan already? (forking as in using a new source package…) > God, no - really *not* that way at all. I'm thinking of using the > kernel in backports at