Le 23/09/2023 à 06:54, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
The following packages should be removed from testing for now:
gmetadom otags xmlrpc-light mlpost ulex0.8 ocamlviz
I think Britney needs a little more help: the following packages should
also be removed from testing:
ocaml-http ocaml
Hi all,
Le 20/09/2023 à 09:44, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
Good. Please go ahead
I've uploaded ocaml 4.14.1-1 3 days ago, then uploaded camlp4, ocamlnet,
a few other arch:all packages that could not be binNMUed, and binNMUed
all the rest.
All packages, except the ones I had already
Le 20/09/2023 à 09:27, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
Based on https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ocaml.html,
diffoscope is involved in both the ocaml and the uncoordinated haskell
transitions. Do we need rebuilds of diffoscope for ocaml?
Why does it matter?
If we would need them,
Dear Sebastian,
Le 20/09/2023 à 08:48, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
I recompiled the OCaml world with it:
http://ocaml.debian.net/transitions/ocaml-4.14.1/
Based on https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ocaml.html,
diffoscope is involved in both the ocaml and the uncoordinated
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: oc...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:ocaml
Dear Release Team,
I uploaded ocaml 4.14.1 to experimental, and it built successfully on
all release
Le 11/08/2023 à 20:53, Paul Gevers a écrit :
One current blocker is xmlrpc-light, which I mistakenly uploaded with
urgency low 2 days ago, which therefore should not migrate before 8
days from now.
It seems the connection is hidden. It would be nice if you could show
how that works.
Look
Dear Paul,
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 21:44:23 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote:
[...]¨ Your package src:utop has been trying to migrate for 37
days [2]. [...] > If you believe your package is unable to migrate to testing due to
issues beyond your control, don't hesitate to contact the Release Team.
One
+0100
+++ ocsigenserver-5.0.1/debian/changelog2023-05-05 13:38:30.0
+0200
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+ocsigenserver (5.0.1-2) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+ * Add missing Breaks+Replaces for libocsigenserver-ocaml-dev
+(Closes: #1034938)
+
+ -- Stéphane Glondu Fri, 05 May 2023 13:38:30 +0200
Dear Sebastian,
Le 23/04/2023 à 11:36, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
ocaml 4.13.1-4 causes the ABI to change for at least why3. Do you expect
that the ABI of ther ocaml packages also changes? If so, we should
rebuild the ocaml world before the release to not get any surprises if a
ocaml package
Dear Ian,
Le 06/02/2023 à 11:41, Ian Jackson a écrit :
ftpmaster REJECTed it:
there is an ocaml stack rebuild[1] at them moment, where xen is a part of.
So please upload to experimental.
I am as surprised as you by this rejection reason...
[1]
Le 25/01/2022 à 05:39, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
>>> - ppx-tools-versioned (#1002941), ppxfind (#1002942): they seem
>>> deprecated, should be removed from testing
>>
>> That would also require removal of:
>>
>> coq-elpi
>> coq-hierarchy-bu
Le 24/01/2022 à 23:31, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
>> - ppx-tools-versioned (#1002941), ppxfind (#1002942): they seem
>> deprecated, should be removed from testing
>
> That would also require removal of:
>
> coq-elpi
> coq-hierarchy-builder
> elpi
> haxe
> liquidsoap
> mercurial-buildpackage
>
Le 19/01/2022 à 09:34, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
> The libguestfs build for the php8.1 transition migrated, so this
> transition can proceed. Please go ahead.
5 days later, most of packages have been rebuilt with the new OCaml. The
remaining outliers are:
- hol-light (#1002983): the fix is
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Le 09/01/2022 à 17:49, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
> Please remove the moreinfo tag once ocaml-odoc-parser has been accepted.
It has been yesterday.
I think this transition is ready to be started.
As usual, I will take care of binNMUs.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ocaml-ma...@lists.debian.org
Dear Release Team,
I've updated ocaml to 4.13.1 (released on 2021-10-01) and uploaded to
experimental. It builds on all release
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Dear Release Team,
I've just realized that I've uploaded lwt and ocplib-endian with
urgency=low instead of medium, setting their testing migration delay
to 10 days.
Now, 5 days have past, and these two packages seem to block the
migration of 50 other
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ocaml-ma...@lists.debian.org
Dear Release Managers,
#1000573 prevents a bunch of packages [1] from migrating to
testing. It would makes things better if coq and some
Le 16/10/2020 à 11:31, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
> I have scheduled all binNMUs and uploaded the necessary packages, and
> most of packages have been built now.
>
> IMHO, the major blocker for now are llvm-toolchain-{9,10} which FTBFS on
> ppc64el. The other issues c
Le 12/10/2020 à 09:57, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
I tried to install all corresponding opam packages in a 4.11.1 switch,
and the breakage is minimal.
>>>
>>> Have bugs been filed for the these issues or are you taking care of
>>> that?
>>
>> I will take care of filing bugs and/or
Le 10/10/2020 à 17:58, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit :
>> I tried to install all corresponding opam packages in a 4.11.1 switch,
>> and the breakage is minimal.
>
> Have bugs been filed for the these issues or are you taking care of
> that?
I will take care of filing bugs and/or fixing issues. And
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ocaml-ma...@lists.debian.org
Dear Release Team,
I've updated ocaml to 4.11.1 and uploaded to experimental. It builds on
all release architectures, and most of ports
-2.0.3/debian/changelog 2019-02-01 12:05:09.0 +0100
+++ opam-2.0.3/debian/changelog 2020-02-18 07:42:31.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+opam (2.0.3-1+deb10u1) buster; urgency=medium
+
+ * Team upload
+ * Prefer mccs over aspcud (Closes: #908203)
+
+ -- Stéphane Glondu Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07
Hello,
Le 03/02/2020 à 21:05, Paul Gevers a écrit :
>> Currently, ocaml-dune/2.1.3-1 is blocked in unstable because of
>> autopkgtest failure of ocaml-sedlex/2.1-3. However, this test failure
>> has been fixed in ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4. Likewise, ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4 is
>> bloked in unstable because of
Dear Release Managers,
Currently, ocaml-dune/2.1.3-1 is blocked in unstable because of
autopkgtest failure of ocaml-sedlex/2.1-3. However, this test failure
has been fixed in ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4. Likewise, ocaml-sedlex/2.1-4 is
bloked in unstable because of autopkgtest failure of itself, but this
Le 16/11/2019 à 21:28, Paul Gevers a écrit :
>> Let's see where we are when all ages are fine.
>
> I'm failing to (quickly) see why ocaml doesn't want to migrate. Does
> anybody already have some foo laying around to see what the problem is?
> I'm only seeing ocaml in the autohinter section,
Hi,
Le 12/11/2019 à 20:24, Paul Gevers a écrit :
>> Here is a status update after 8 days.
>>
>> Most of the packages have been updated or rebuilt. For the few
>> exceptions, bugs have been filed and all of the concerned packages
>> (except llvm-toolchain-8) can be removed from testing.
>
> I am
block 941907 by 943920
thanks
Le 04/11/2019 à 13:50, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
>> Please go ahead.
>
> Started.
Here is a status update after 8 days.
Most of the packages have been updated or rebuilt. For the few
exceptions, bugs have been filed and all of the concerned packages
Le 03/11/2019 à 21:06, Paul Gevers a écrit :
> On 07-10-2019 15:50, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
>> I think it's time to upgrade OCaml to 4.08.1.
>>
>> It has been uploaded to experimental, and builds fine on all release
>> architectures. [1]
>>
>> Most
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Dear Release Team,
I think it's time to upgrade OCaml to 4.08.1.
It has been uploaded to experimental, and builds fine on all release
architectures. [1]
Most of reverse-dependencies
Le 21/08/2019 à 20:07, Thomas Leonard a écrit :
>> Again, this removal from testing is not a definitive removal from Debian
>> and may be just temporary. I didn't mean to be hostile.
>
> Do you have an idea of when this will be? I should be able to look at
> a workaround this weekend if it's not
Le 21/08/2019 à 18:26, Thomas Leonard a écrit :
>> Please remove the following packages from testing:
>>
>> * ocaml-usb, affected by #933993
>> * ocaml-sqlexpr, affected by #933994
>> * zeroinstall-injector, affected by #934340
>> * obus, affected by #933992
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm the maintainer of
Le 21/08/2019 à 10:14, Mattia Rizzolo a écrit :
>> I used to schedule these, but for many months it seems it wasn't
>> necessary, not sure if someone else scheduled them
>
> At the very least, quite some times pochu did them the last year, fwiw.
>
>> Going forward, it is not sustainable for this
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Dear Release Managers,
Please remove the following packages from testing:
* ocaml-usb, affected by #933993
* ocaml-sqlexpr, affected by #933994
* zeroinstall-injector, affected by #934340
Le 07/07/2019 à 03:47, Jonathan Wiltshire a écrit :
> No binary maintainer uploads for bullseye
> =
>
> The release of buster also means the bullseye release cycle is about to begin.
> From now on, we will no longer allow binaries uploaded by maintainers to
On 06/07/2018 03:15, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> For the sake of completeness, here's an extra data point. If someone
>> ends up with two peers with versions 2.48.3-1 vs. 2.48.3-1+b1 (hosts
>> with s-p-u enabled, but not dist-upgraded at the same time), one can
>> get this very issue:
>> | Uncaught
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Hi,
Currently, Unison in Stretch is compiled with OCaml 4.01.0 (at least
on i386), while OCaml in Stretch is 4.02.3. This triggers a subtle
interoperability bug more often than it should,
On 30/10/2017 10:39, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
Is there any plans to fix llvm-toolchain-3.8?
I wish we could removed it but it is far from ready (we were blocked by
the ocaml transition but I dropped the ocaml support to mitigate that)
I will try to fix that in the next few days.
Sorry about
On 20/10/2017 10:27, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
At the moment, llvm-toolchain-3.8 FTBFS with "gcc-7.2: Command not
found" and this blocks the OCaml transition.
I see there are already bugs open related to gcc-7 (#871011 and
#853523), but these do not have recent activity.
I also see that this
Hello,
At the moment, llvm-toolchain-3.8 FTBFS with "gcc-7.2: Command not
found" and this blocks the OCaml transition.
I see there are already bugs open related to gcc-7 (#871011 and
#853523), but these do not have recent activity.
I also see that this package has been requested to be
On 09/10/2017 21:45, Ximin Luo wrote:
That's alright. I see this is already started and binNMUs are needed. Is someone
from the ocaml team handling these, or should I?
I am handling these.
Would it be possible to prioritize the rebuilds of lwt and ocaml-ctypes?
They seem to be in the
On 23/09/2017 15:52, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
That's alright. I see this is already started and binNMUs are needed. Is someone
from the ocaml team handling these, or should I?
I am handling these.
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
On 15/08/2017 22:16, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> [...]
>> ocaml 4.05.0 and a few selected packages have been uploaded to
>> experimental and build fine on all architectures [3].
>
>> So, basically, this transition is ready to be started from my point of
>> view.
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Dear release team,
We would like to update ocaml from 4.02.3 to 4.05.0. This is 3 major
releases (and 2 years) ahead.
With current unstable, on amd64:
- 9 source uploads (at least) are
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Dear RT,
camlp5, lablgtk2 and other packages have been waiting for migration to
testing for a while. Their migration is essentially blocked by
hol-light and botch which FTBFS at the moment.
Here are hints to make things evolve (courtesy of
Le 30/09/2015 19:21, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit :
>> Now that gcc-5 migrated, can anyone give an ETA for the OCaml transition?
>
> Has the situation improved wrt the last status update? Can you give an update?
plplot has been removed from testing. No other improvements, but I
believe we can
Now that gcc-5 migrated, can anyone give an ETA for the OCaml transition?
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
Le 23/06/2015 23:45, Eric Cooper a écrit :
I've updated approx to version 5.5-2 to fix the build failure due to
deprecation of String.create in 4.02.
Thank you.
So I'd appreciate it if someone could build it from the master branch
of git.debian.org/git/pkg-ocaml-maint/packages/approx.git and
Le 22/06/2015 15:59, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit :
Or if you can give a more detailed explanation of what will happen after ocaml
is uploaded, binNMUs are scheduled, and we have ~30 packages that are holding
the transition.
I say we remove them from testing. dak rm -Rn -s testing shows that
Le 19/06/2015 12:56, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort a écrit :
I see some of the failing packages have in the log:
- Finished parsing the build-deps
Wrong version of OCaml!
That does that mean the package couldn't be built because of the dependency
problems you mention?
Indeed.
My only concern
Le 18/06/2015 17:06, Eric Cooper a écrit :
Attached is the list of packages appearing in the tracker, with an
annotation:
- unstable if the package can be binNMUed
- experimental if the package has to be uploaded from experimental
- UNRELEASED if the package has to be uploaded from git
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Dear Release Managers and OCaml Maintainers,
I would like to start the transition to OCaml 4.02.2 (released
yesterday) as soon as possible. This version has been preceded by a
release
Hi,
lablgtk2 was uninstallable because of pango1.0, which was uninstallable
because of harfbuzz.
I tried to rebuild on my machine pango1.0, and it unlocks the situation
w.r.t lablgtk2. I saw someone binNMUed it on hurd-i386. I binNMUed it on
other architectures as well (with dw on
Le 02/12/2013 13:54, Mehdi Dogguy a écrit :
I would like to start the transition to OCaml 4.00.1 (released last
November) as soon as possible. It breaks some packages; most of them
have been fixed in experimental. As usual, it involves a lot of binNMUs;
I will take care of those.
Now, I
Package: ben
Version: 0.6.6
Severity: normal
Le 09/02/2012 18:21, Niels Thykier a écrit :
While this post-processing of generated HTML files is kind of ugly, it
makes it easy to show which transitions might be entangled due to
collisions.
[...]
I am in favor of using this as a temporary
retitle 718767 transition: ocaml 4.01.0
thanks
Le 05/08/2013 10:43, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
I would like to start the transition to OCaml 4.00.1 (released last
November) as soon as possible. It breaks some packages; most of them
have been fixed in experimental. As usual, it involves a lot
Le 09/11/2013 10:32, Hendrik Tews a écrit :
Debian FTP Masters ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org writes:
Source: ocaml
Version: 4.01.0-1
does this mean we skip the 4.00 transition and transition
directly to 4.01, when the release team finally approves?
Yes.
Does this also mean that
Le 02/10/2013 19:43, Julien Cristau a écrit :
I have uploaded Nova 2013.1.3-2 with removed support for XAPI, as you
asked. I hope XCP support can come back quickly in Debian.
[...]
Hoping that this will help for the Ocaml transition,
That was one week ago. nova has migrated to testing and
Le 25/09/2013 04:56, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
I have uploaded Nova 2013.1.3-2 with removed support for XAPI, as you
asked. I hope XCP support can come back quickly in Debian.
[...]
Hoping that this will help for the Ocaml transition,
That was one week ago. nova has migrated to testing and
Le 06/09/2013 10:14, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
However, as I wrote it, it's going to happen, so please be patient about
it. IMO, this shouldn't block any transition though. If the release team
is reading: just let everything transition to testing, and remove the
old version of XCP 1.3.2 in
Le 24/09/2013 15:48, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
If I remove all binary packages of xen-api from testing, the following
new packages are broken: xcp-guest-templates, nova-xcp-plugins,
nova-compute-xen.
xcp-guest-templates is built by guest-templates which seems to be a leaf
package and could
Le 24/09/2013 19:00, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
Please don't think this way.
I work daily on 79 packages to maintain OpenStack in Debian:
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=openstack-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
If you go that way, I could say that you're blocking my work on 214
Le 06/09/2013 10:14, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
I wrote it many time to many people. Please don't just read 1.6 as new
upstream release for XCP. That's unfortunately not the way it works.
Upstream version for Debian and the one they do for CentOS are
different, and just using upstream 1.6
Le 05/09/2013 23:18, Julien Cristau a écrit :
tracker adjusted. xen-api is currently broken though, so you'll need to
get that fixed before starting.
I've just fixed a blocking bug (#713349) which was due to the renaming
of an OCaml library (type-conv - type_conv).
Now, xen-api FTBFS because
Le 16/08/2013 17:29, Giovanni Mascellani a écrit :
@Release team: Joachim Breitner asked to patch PTS so that it displays
not only the packages involved in a transition, but also the packages
that cause the transition (see the example below).
[...]
Is Ben aware of this information? If so,
Le 20/08/2013 09:41, Niels Thykier a écrit :
I think the reason why we prefer having the introducing source package
as unaffected, is because it will be taken care of by a source upload
(i.e. there is usually nothing for us to do about that package). [...]
The tool was meant to track packages
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Dear Release Managers,
I would like to start the transition to OCaml 4.00.1 (released last
November) as soon as possible. It breaks some packages; most of them
have been fixed in
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: important
Dear Release Managers,
Now that glib has migrated, I think that camlp5 [1] and related
packages need manual hinting. All the packages listed in the Coq
section of [2] need to enter together.
[1]
Le 24/05/2013 15:15, Adam D. Barratt a écrit :
Looking at the dependencies, I guess why needs rebuilding against the
new coq, or removing?
Removing, because of #707585, as said in [1]. With Mehdi's approval (he
is why's maintainer).
[1]
Le 23/05/2013 13:13, Arno Töll a écrit :
we are ready to upload Apache2 2.4 to Debian Sid now. This means the
transition is effectively starting now, and going to break your modules.
There are currently ~20 source entangled OCaml-related packages waiting
to migrate to testing (see Ocsigen
Le 23/05/2013 13:57, Arno Töll a écrit :
please coordinate this in #661958. I got an ACK of the Release Team, so
I don't know if they had your issue on the radar or not. Either way, I
know nothing about OCaml and your transition.
See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=666825#47
Hello,
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 most of the times, fixes are
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
Le 02/11/2012 22:23, Niels Thykier a écrit :
It does not seem important, but given it is a doc-only change I am
willing to accept it if you are still willing to upload it. If you do
Dear Release Team,
Bug #691257 made me realize that the upstream tarball of the Debian
package is not the same as the one currently available on the upstream
website, and the contents does not match tag 1.2 in the upstream
repository either.
There is one commit missing. It changes only changelog
Le 05/05/2012 13:48, a...@debian.org a écrit :
this is a follow-up message to your Apache 2.4 transition bug for
package ocamlnet. We are approaching an upload of the web server to
Debian's Unstable repository as soon as the release team acknowledges
the upload. Along that upload we are
Hello,
Currently, react (19 days old), xmlm (17 days) and xen-api (11 days) are
stuck in unstable. One reason is the following: xen-api depends on xmlm
and they must go together, and xen-api depends on (a new binary package
of) openvswitch, which FTBFS (and has been for 32 days).
Is there
Le 06/04/2012 13:00, Joachim Breitner a écrit :
I regularly check
http://release.debian.org/transitions/html/haskell.html, it is a great
tool. But I am confused why it says haskell-sfml-audio, -openal and
-alut is bad on armel armhf mips mipsel ppc s390 s390x. According to the
parameters,
Le 05/03/2012 04:23, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu a écrit :
Please change Build-Depends of the package from libpng12-dev to libpng-dev.
PTS says that camlimages is part of libtiff4-symbols transition. Can I
upload it anyway?
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 09/07/2011 05:51 PM, Stéphane Glondu wrote:
OCaml 3.12.1 has been recently released. It is mostly bugfixes. I've
rebuilt all packages that depend on ocaml, and I see no blocker to
update it in Debian. I've planified the migration at [1] (I am
planning to update a few other packages
Le 09/07/2011 13:35, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
OCaml 3.12.1 has been recently released. It is mostly bugfixes. I've
rebuilt all packages that depend on ocaml, and I see no blocker to
update it in Debian. I've planified the migration at [1] (I am
planning to update a few other packages
Le 03/05/2011 08:52, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
-echo $PROGNAME: I: selecting $ionice I/O scheduling class for resync
of $array. 2
+[ $quiet -lt 1 ] echo $PROGNAME: I: selecting $ionice I/O
scheduling class for resync of $array. 2
Out of context, I would prefer something like:
if [ $quiet
Le 30/03/2011 17:24, Tollef Fog Heen a écrit :
(Please keep me in Cc, I'm not subscribed)
[...]
- /run should exist as a tmpfs
- /var/run should be a symlink or bind mount of/to /run
- /var/lock should be a symlink/bind mount to /run/lock
- /lib/init/rw should be a symlink/bind mount to /run
-
Le 31/03/2011 20:35, Joachim Breitner a écrit :
I’m surprised by the dependency level calculation – haskell-transformers
should be on one level with -deepseq. But maybe that calculation is
confused as the binary package names are changing during the transition.
The code assumes (among other
Le 29/03/2011 19:52, Julien Cristau a écrit :
The Debian OCaml team is ready for a transition to OCaml 3.12.0. All
packages depending on ocaml-base-nox-3.11.2 and ocaml-base-3.11.2 will
be affected.
I am waiting for the approval from the release team to proceed.
Any news on that?
Clearly
Le 19/03/2011 08:40, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
The Debian OCaml team is ready for a transition to OCaml 3.12.0. All
packages depending on ocaml-base-nox-3.11.2 and ocaml-base-3.11.2 will
be affected.
I am waiting for the approval from the release team to proceed.
Any news on that?
Cheers
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hello,
The Debian OCaml team is ready for a transition to OCaml 3.12.0. All
packages depending on ocaml-base-nox-3.11.2 and ocaml-base-3.11.2 will
be affected.
I am waiting for the
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Hello,
Here is a binNMU request for packages that are broken by the
(mini-)transition tracked with #613848. I've simulated it on amd64,
and everything compiles [1] except ocaml-melt which
Le 26/02/2011 01:38, Julien Cristau a écrit :
Package: libsoundtouch-dev
Version: 1.5.0-3
Severity: serious
Justification: i said so
Apparently you decided to start a SONAME transition with no coordination
with the release team. This will clash with the ongoing transition to
ffmpeg 0.6,
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu
Le 15/02/2011 19:34, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
Here it is. There is also currently a pending upload to unstable fixing
the bug (among other things).
Turning this into a bug report so
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Owner: glo...@debian.org
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
Hello,
I've prepared a small transition of some libs to new upstream
versions, to be completed before the transition to OCaml = 3.12 (not
yet planned). I've
Le 10/02/2011 10:12, Sylvain Le Gall a écrit :
I also have a pair of packages to update (sexplib, type-conv, bin-prot,
ounit). Since some of them will break the distribution and should
trigger the need to binNMU some other packages, I am not sure how to
proceed: 1) upload new version during
Dear release team,
There are missing dependencies in the ocsigen package of squeeze (cf.
#613372). Would it be possible to fix that for the next point release?
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Hello,
With approval of its maintainer, and for the reasons explained in [1],
I request the removal of matita from testing.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=612891
-- Stéphane Glondu glo...@debian.org Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:06:25 +0100
unblock camlbz2/0.6.0-6
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel
Le 25/10/2010 20:54, Julien Cristau a écrit :
There has been a recent new bugfix release of babeld that fixes a
possible crash on mips architectures. Attached is the diff of what I
am planning to upload against the current version in unstable (and
testing).
Are you sure the bug affected
; urgency=low
+
+ * New upstream release
+
+ -- Stéphane Glondu glo...@debian.org Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:01:24 +0200
+
babeld (1.0.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release
diff --git a/route.c b/route.c
index b1a90db..3997af5 100644
--- a/route.c
+++ b/route.c
@@ -234,7 +234,7
)
-- Stéphane Glondu glo...@debian.org Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:44:57 +0200
unblock mldonkey/3.0.3-2
Cheers,
--
Stéphane
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel
Le 29/08/2010 23:10, Arthur Loiret a écrit :
There you go:
http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.dsc
http://people.debian.org/~aloiret/squeeze/llvm/llvm-2.6_2.6-10.debdiff
From the diff:
define libllvm-ocaml-dev_extra_binary
if test x$* = xlibllvm-ocaml-dev
to libffi-dev (Closes: #573368)
* libllvm-ocaml-dev:
- apply Sylvain Le Gall's patch to fix META filename (Closes: #583475)
- add suggestion to ocaml-findlib
* Add debian/source/format
-- Stéphane Glondu glo...@debian.org Thu, 19 Aug 2010 18:53:44 +0200
The full diff is available
Hi,
mldonkey/3.0.3-1 has been uploaded to unstable before the announce of
the freeze, but it seems blocked nonetheless (according to the PTS).
This is a new upstream release, and has many changes... but most of them
are bugfixes. The diff from the version in testing would be meaningless
(but can
Le 08/08/2010 17:13, Stéphane Glondu a écrit :
If yes, one more query: currently, it fails to build from source [...]
I meant on kfreebsd-*.
--
Stéphane
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo