Bug#983071: unblock: xz-utils/5.2.5-1.1

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Severity: normal Please unblock package xz-utils. I NMUed xz-utils to 5.2.5-1.0 fixing a few bugs including #844770 and #975981. Both bugs were fixed by upstream differently / more complete. I prepared an

Bug#983065: debian-policy: Downgrades are not allowed / Package upgrades must have a greater version than previous packages of the same name in the same suite

Package: debian-policy Version: 4.5.1.0 Severity: normal Hi, I know this is very obvious, but if you read * https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities and * https://release.debian.org/testing/rc_policy.txt it seems as if it should be listed somewhere in the policy that package downgrades

Bug#983055: marked as done (nmu: libinih_53-1)

Your message dated Thu, 18 Feb 2021 22:54:11 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#983055: nmu: libinih_53-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #983055, regarding nmu: libinih_53-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the

Bug#983064: unblock: notmuch/0.31.4-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Please unblock package notmuch [ Reason ] There is two improvements in 0.31.4-1 that would be nice for bullseye. The first is a fix for a

Bug#983055: nmu: libinih_53-1

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu X-Debbugs-Cc: jrt...@debian.org mmyan...@gmail.com Severity: normal Hi, The latest upload of libinih/53-1 was not a source-only upload. Please schedule a binNMU for amd64 to rebuild the binary packages on

Bug#983051: buster-pu: package xterm/344-1+deb10u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: buster User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu X-Debbugs-Cc: Salvatore Bonaccorso , Julien Cristau , Sven Joachim I would like to fix bug #982439/CVE-2021-27135[1] in Buster, a potential DoS against xterm when the user selects

Re: Go issues wrt. Debian infrastructure: moving forward

Hi, On 31-01-2021 18:43, Shengjing Zhu wrote: > It might be the time to resume the discussion... > Dear ftpmaster, will the task that imports all sources to > security-master be ready for bullseye? I think this is a fair question. What's the status on the archive side of things? (A "no" or

Re: planning to upload binutils 2.35.2

Hi Matthias On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 at 12:41, Matthias Klose wrote: > https://release.debian.org/britney/pseudo-excuses-experimental.html#binutils > shows no regressions except for cross-toolchain-base, caused by the version > scheme proposed by yourself. As the build in experimental shows, the

Bug#982997: marked as done (unblock: python-hdf5storage/0.1.15+git20200608.09dfc5f-2)

Your message dated Thu, 18 Feb 2021 13:24:08 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#982997: unblock: python-hdf5storage/0.1.15+git20200608.09dfc5f-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #982997, regarding unblock: python-hdf5storage/0.1.15+git20200608.09dfc5f-2 to be marked as done. This

Processed: closing 982949

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > close 982949 Bug #982949 [release.debian.org] Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye Marked Bug as done > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 982949:

Bug#982949: Please allow libvirt-python 7.0.0 into bullseye

Hi Paul, On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:55:14PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi Bernd, > > On 17-02-2021 22:30, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-02-17 at 18:37 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > >> libvirt-python is a key package. > > > > and it should match libvirt. Having libvirt-python 6.x and