Bug#987075: unblock: libquotient/0.6.6-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package libquotient [ Reason ] 0.6.6 of libquotient fixes a security issue (in the form of a remote DoS). This doesn't affect stable (the bug was introduced in 0.6.2 accordin

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 15:06:50 -0400 Andres Salomon wrote: > Stable (bullseye) still contains chromium 90, which has had many > security issues. Testing & unstable contain 93, and stable should really > be quickly updated via stable-security to at least chromium 93 (as its > alrea

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 12/5/21 6:41 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Am Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 10:53:56AM +0100 schrieb Paul Gevers: Exactly that. I'd suggest anyone who's interested in seeing Chromium supported to first update it in unstable (and then work towards updated in bullseye-security). I started doing just th

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 12/13/21 5:31 PM, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: On 12/5/21 6:41 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Am Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 10:53:56AM +0100 schrieb Paul Gevers: Exactly that. I'd suggest anyone who's interested in seein

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 01:49:53 -0500 Andres Salomon wrote: > On 12/13/21 5:31 PM, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 08:11:00PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > >> On 12/5/21 6:41 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > >>> Am Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 10:53:

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/2/22 12:53 PM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 01:23:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: I've got 96.0.4664.110 building on both bullseye and sid Trying it, I see it still build-depends on python-jinja2. That package is now gone, so it's not actually builda

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 20:15:01 +0100 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 01:23:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > > How should I handle this? NMU to sid, let people try it out, and > > then deal with buster/bullseye? > > Yeah, let's proceed with

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 15:32:28 -0500 Andres Salomon wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jan 2022 20:15:01 +0100 > Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 01, 2022 at 01:23:09PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > > > How should I handle this? NMU to sid, let people try it out, and >

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

Thanks for testing! Are you doing this under sid? On 1/3/22 7:39 AM, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 06:53:52PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: the v96 branch of https://salsa.debian.org/dilinger/chromium FWIW, I'm trying to build it myself as well Here it started chrashing as soo

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/4/22 11:46, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: [...] [413:413:0104/174404.300230:FATAL:render_process_host_impl.cc(4227)] Check failed: host->GetBrowserContext() == browser_context (0x645f47d0 vs. 0x658dcb30) Single-process mode does not support multiple browser contexts. Okay, that's

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/4/22 15:15, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 02:50:20PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: Okay, that's funny - appears to be a fatal error due to being run under gdb. Well, it was also crashing outside of gdb ^^ I pushed a commit to the skip-a11y-checks branch, please

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/5/22 13:14, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 01:52:33PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: I suppose I'll see how it goes in the coming few days. So it's not crashing but it's being unbearably slow in gmail, to the point that I just wasn't able to type a mail there, while throwing o

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/5/22 13:14, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 01:52:33PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: I suppose I'll see how it goes in the coming few days. So it's not crashing but it's being unbearably slow in gmail, to the point that I just wasn't able to type a mail there, while throwing o

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/8/22 15:57, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 02:55:20AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: If you want to try with chromium 97; it now builds as an official build, so those DCHECKs shouldn't even be compiled in. It also supports wayland automatically, in case that's

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/9/22 00:56, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/8/22 15:57, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 02:55:20AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: If you want to try with chromium 97; it now builds as an official build, so those DCHECKs shouldn't even be compiled in. It also supports wa

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/9/22 02:27, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/9/22 00:56, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/8/22 15:57, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 02:55:20AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: If you want to try with chromium 97; it now builds as an official build, so those DCHECKs shouldn't ev

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/9/22 19:06, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/9/22 02:27, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/9/22 00:56, Andres Salomon wrote: On 1/8/22 15:57, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 02:55:20AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: If you want to try with chromium 97; it now builds as an official

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 1/10/22 05:01, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 11:23:20PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: Btw, https://salsa.debian.org/dilinger/chromium/-/tree/stable is my branch with cleaned-up commits. That's what I'll use for the NMU, which I'm preparing now. If you all a

unblocking chromium?

Hi, Chromium has been updated in sid and bullseye, and I'm in the process of cleaning up the package further to make it easier to maintain. Chromium is currently blocked from entering testing. I'm not going to make any claims about the suitability of including chromium in the next bookworm release

Re: unblocking chromium?

On 1/26/22 15:38, Paul Gevers wrote: Hi Andres, [...] Normally we remove stuff that we think is not going to be in the next stable release as early as we notice. However, in this case I acknowledge that you should have a chance to show you could be part of the team and attract more team membe

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 2/11/22 06:18, Roger Shimizu wrote: Dear Andres, Thanks for your work for chromium! On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 7:33 PM Andres Salomon wrote: I saw https://salsa.debian.org/dilinger/chromium/-/commit/5c05f430e192961527ec9a64bbaa64401dc14d95 , but buster now also includes LLVM/clang 11 (it was

Re: chromium: Update to version 94.0.4606.61 (security-fixes)

On 2/14/22 02:27, Pirate Praveen wrote: 2022, ഫെബ്രുവരി 13 9:36:11 PM IST, Roger Shimizu ൽ എഴുതി On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 2:12 AM Andres Salomon wrote: Yes, that's the error. "String.matchAll is only available from Node.js 12.0 onwards", according to https://stackoverflo

Bug#1033339: unblock: chromium/111.0.5563.110-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: chrom...@packages.debian.org, Andres Salomon , tpear...@raptorengineering.com Control: affects -1 + src:chromium Please unblock package chromium so that it migrates to

Bug#1034131: unblock: chromium/112.0.5615.49-2

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: chrom...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:chromium Please unblock package chromium so that it migrates to bookworm after 5 days. The upload to unstable fixes ano

Re: Opinion on splitting official architecture (tiers)

As someone with a PITA package that's frequently dealing every month with strange issues on lightly-used architectures, I'd support a Tier II system for i386/armel/etc. However, at the risk of making this overly complex - I would prefer to see a bit more granularity on a per-package or per-prio

Re: please add a chromium-source binary package

On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 23:00:23 +0200 =?UTF-8?Q?Moritz_M=C3=BChlenhoff?= wrote: > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:41:25PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:33:11PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > Ultimately this is up for Michael to decide, as he's dealing with Chro

Bug#1026867: transition: youtube-dl

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition X-Debbugs-Cc: 994...@bugs.debian.org, debian-de...@lists.debian.org Hi, Youtube-dl has mostly stopped development other than basic maintenance, and development has resumed with the yt-d

Bug#1026867: transition: youtube-dl

On Fri, Dec 23 2022 at 10:55:28 AM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Andres On 2022-12-22 15:23:37 -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org <mailto:release.deb

Bug#1004441: unblocking chromium?

On Fri, Jan 6 2023 at 11:36:02 AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 10:18:16AM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: ... We might consider to set some expectation for oldstable-security, though e.g state that oldstable-security updates stop three months after the release of sta

Bug#958231: RM: gplaycli/3.25+ds-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: rm Google API changes broke the gplaycli tool. See #950112 for an explanation. Newer versions are fine, but the version in stable is broken.

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:08:49 +0100 Luk Claes wrote: > Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a > > working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts > > of yum based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs. > >

Re: Selection of kernel for Lenny (was: 2.6.25-2 testing sync)

On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:15:14 +0200 maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:09:43PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: [...] > > > > I'm having serious trouble parsing what you're trying to say here. > > Could you rephrase? > > you never checked the rh kernel. they do a *lot

Re: #488144 - not all quirks redundant with 2.6.26 (please drop 98smart-kernel-video)

Hi, This works quite well for me on my x40. What do you think about including the new pm-utils in lenny? It'd be nice to have working suspend/resume for lenny for people w/ x40s. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: which 2.6 kernel will be in sarge?

On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 19:59:02 -0500, Luis M wrote: > For the record, 2.6.10 is a lemon. It has serious problems with > intel-agp driver. If you have a computer that uses such driver for agp > (a lot of us do) all you have to do is leave the computer running for > a number of days and you will know

Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:30:38 +, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-23 10:25]: >> Important question: is sarge *really* being released in the next 1 or 2 >> months? If not, there is no good reason not to do this. All the other >> stuff that is going on in s

Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:27:20 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: >> How big is the chance that we will have another ABI change during >> sarge's lifetime (100%?). So it can't hurd to figure out the problems >> with that now independentl

Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge

On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:10:18 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: >> OTOH, I have hardware that's already not supported by sarge (VIA video >> chipset that's only supported by xorg). As much as the security tea

Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:56:52 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:53:45PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:10:18 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: [...] > &

Re: a kernel plan for sarge and beyond ... (Was Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:24:48 +0100, Sven Luther wrote: [...] > The proposal is the following : > > 1) now that rc3 is out we forget about the current kernels, well, not > exactly, but we forget about the current kernel build system, > including .udebs. > > 2) we take as basis the ubuntu

Re: a kernel plan for sarge and beyond ... (Was Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge)

(ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well) On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 04:31:24AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: [...] >> My idea is to do away w/ ABI considerations, and instead compile modules

Re: a kernel plan for sarge and beyond ... (Was Re: ABI-changing kernel security fixes for sarge)

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:02:29 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:30:01PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: >> (ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well) > > Sorry, mailer misfire, I guess. > >> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:

please push lvm2_2.01.04-5 into testing

Hi, lvm2_2.01.04-5 contains a single fix (for a FTBFS on amd64; #298762). Please consider pushing it into sarge. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Dropping 386 support

of memory, I don't consider debian 3.1 to be a viable candidate for installing onto a 386. Also, note that if we do drop 386 support, I will rename kernel-image-2.6.8-386 to kernel-image-2.6.8-486, and update optimizations accordingly. Comments? Thoughts? -- Andres Salomon <[EMAIL PROTEC

Re: Dropping 386 support

On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 00:31 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 06:01:31PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > > The kernel team is considering dropping 386 support (the 80386 > > processor, not the i386 arch) from Debian. Currently, in order to > > support

Re: Dropping 386 support

On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 18:35 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 11:34:50AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: [...] > > If someone from the kernel or glibc team had access to a real 386, we > > might be able to make (userspace) support work. Would it be possible to

Re: 2.6.8 release

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:09:56 +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > With proper cooperation from the ftp-masters, this could happen much faster. I > have asked in the past that the kernel packages get the same favorite > treatment as the d-i packages, but nobody ever bothered to react on this. > This is

Re: Bug#241497: Critical bug still not addressed: upgrade-i386

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:56:45 -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Reminder: the directory > dists/sarge/main/upgrade-i386 > still has not been created, let alone populated. Oh, yuck. This is the first I've heard of this problem. > > I would expect this to be a hard requirement before sarge can be

Re: Bug#241497: Critical bug still not addressed: upgrade-i386

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:19:22 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > The upgrade-only kernels would be intended solely as an intermediate step > during the upgrade process; users should be encouraged to install kernels > from the main archive as well as part of the upgrade process. As such, we > can pro

Re: Security in sarge

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:41:13 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Martin Schulze wrote: >> ruby 1.8.1+1.8.2pre1-4 needed, have 1.8.1-8 for DSA-537 > > This is fixed in ruby1.8 in testing; ruby itself is a dependency package. > I don't know if ruby1.7 was/is vulnetable, do you? Ruby1.7 (ie, ruby-beta) is mo

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 09:18:16 +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update > == > > An up-to-date version is at . > > I am preparing the (most probably) last revisio

Re: Bug#689578: sysklogd modifies /etc/syslog.conf with helper script

> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 00:41:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > > A better approach imho would be to simply remove sysklogd from the > > archive. It's dead upstream, apparently no longer properly > > maintained in Debian, and there are enough more then suitable > > alternatives. With rsyslog we

Re: Bug#689578: sysklogd modifies /etc/syslog.conf with helper script

On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:59:58 +0100 Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 21.01.2013 02:32, schrieb Andres Salomon: > >>> A better approach imho would be to simply remove sysklogd from the > >>> archive. It's dead upstream, apparently no longer properly > >>> mai

Bug#1035590: unblock: chromium/113.0.5672.63-2

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: chrom...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:chromium It's that magical time of the year again! The birds are chirping, the sun is shining, and the chromium CVEs ar

Bug#1036363: unblock: chromium/113.0.5672.126-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock X-Debbugs-Cc: chrom...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:chromium chromium has built there are six new C V Es let fixes migrate

Bug#1052455: RE: freetype 2.12.1+dfsg-5+deb12u1 makes chromium segfault at startup

Control: affects -1 chromium On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 01:24:00 +0900 SuperCat wrote: > Hi, > > In chromium source code, function SkScalerContext::GlyphMetrics > SkScalerContext_FreeType::generateMetrics() will call > FT_Get_Color_Glyph_Paint() if macro TT_SUPPORT_COLRV1 exists. Somehow > FT_Get_Co

Bug#1052455: RE: freetype 2.12.1+dfsg-5+deb12u1 makes chromium segfault at startup

2023 at 21:44, Hugh McMaster wrote: >> >> Hi Andres, >> >> On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 18:49, Andres Salomon wrote: >> > >> > Control: affects -1 chromium >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 28 Sep 2023 01:24:00 +0900 SuperCat wrote: &g

Bug#1053761: bullseye-pu: package llvm-toolchain-16/16.0.6-15~deb11u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bullseye User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Chromium newest version FTBFS on bullseye with clang-13, but works fine with clang-16. [ Reason ] Chromium 118 (which will likely be released as stable today, and probably wit

Bug#1053761: bullseye-pu: package llvm-toolchain-16/16.0.6-15~deb11u1

On Fri, Oct 13 2023 at 02:59:08 PM +01:00:00, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2023-10-11 at 06:37 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 12:21 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: > Chromium newest version FTBFS on bullseye with clang-13, but wo

Bug#1053761: bullseye-pu: package llvm-toolchain-16/16.0.6-15~deb11u1

On Fri, Oct 13 2023 at 11:32:57 AM -04:00:00, Andres Salomon wrote: On Fri, Oct 13 2023 at 02:59:08 PM +01:00:00, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Wed, 2023-10-11 at 06:37 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 12:21 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote

Bug#1053761: bullseye-pu: package llvm-toolchain-16/16.0.6-15~deb11u1

On Sat, Oct 14 2023 at 12:01:05 PM +01:00:00, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2023-10-14 at 00:54 -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: I built deb11u2 with the following changes from 16.0.6-15. Chromium successfully builds against it. Let me know if you want me to file a separate release.d.o bug

Bug#1054096: bookworm-pu: package llvm-toolchain-16/16.0.6-15~deb12u1

upload. + * Rebuild for bullseye. + * Change build-dep from sid's llvm-spirv-16 to bookworm's llvm-spirv-14. + + -- Andres Salomon Mon, 16 Oct 2023 13:14:10 + + llvm-toolchain-16 (1:16.0.6-15) unstable; urgency=medium * Second attempt to refresh D158066.patch (Closes: #1049362)

Bug#1074059: bookworm-pu: package nodejs/18.19.0+dfsg-6~deb12u2

On 6/25/24 16:34, Jérémy Lal wrote: Le mar. 25 juin 2024 à 22:22, Salvatore Bonaccorso > a écrit : [...] Thanks a lot for your work Adrian. Please note that there is currently a nodejs upload pending for releasing via a DSA, which will rebase nodejs to

Bug#1076396: trixie-pu: package chromium/126.0.6478.126-1~deb13u1

ency=high + + * Rebuild for trixie. + * Revert libxml2-dev versioned build dep, and re-add +d/patches/fixes/libxml-parseerr.patch. + + -- Andres Salomon Mon, 15 Jul 2024 05:28:21 + + chromium (126.0.6478.126-1) unstable; urgency=high * New upstream security release. diff -urN

Bug#1074059: bookworm-pu: package nodejs/18.19.0+dfsg-6~deb12u2

On 7/4/24 03:01, Jérémy Lal wrote: Le jeu. 4 juil. 2024 à 06:33, Salvatore Bonaccorso <mailto:car...@debian.org>> a écrit : Hi, On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:36:46PM +0200, Jérémy Lal wrote: > Le mer. 3 juil. 2024 à 23:04, Andres Salomon mailto:dilin...@queued.n

Bug#1078945: trixie-pu: package chromium/127.0.6533.119-1~deb13u1

hes/bookworm/libxml/parseerr.patch. + + -- Andres Salomon Sun, 18 Aug 2024 01:41:43 + + chromium (127.0.6533.119-1) unstable; urgency=high [ Andres Salomon ] diff -urN a/debian/control b/debian/control --- a/debian/control 2024-08-08 04:17:58.0 + +++ b/debian/control 2024-08-18 01:43

Bug#1080021: trixie-pu: package chromium/128.0.6613.113-1~deb13u1

01:43:13.173141364 + @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +chromium (128.0.6613.113-1~deb13u1) trixie; urgency=high + + * Rebuild for trixie. + * Revert libxml2-dev versioned build-dep, and re-add +d/patches/bookworm/libxml/parseerr.patch. + + -- Andres Salomon Sun, 18 Aug 2024 01:41:43 + + chromium (12

Bug#1080021: trixie-pu: package chromium/128.0.6613.113-1~deb13u1

On 8/29/24 12:32, Andres Salomon wrote: [...] The packaging changes between 127.0.6533.119-1 in sid and 127.0.6533.119-1~deb13u1 remain the same as in past tpus (eg, #1076396). See attached. Oops, I meant the packaging changes between 128.0.6613.113-1 and 128.0.6613.113-1~deb13u1, of

Re: Bug#1081241: chromium: Please upgrade build-dep to llvm/clang 18 or 19

On 9/9/24 17:23, Andres Salomon wrote: On 9/9/24 17:16, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: Le lundi 9 septembre 2024 à 23:12, Andres Salomon a écrit :  >  >  > We're currently using clang-16 in sid because it's also in bookworm, and  > it's easier to use the same comp

chromium and rustc in bookworm

Hi, Soon, Chromium 121.x will be released with a hard requirement on a Rust compiler. Upstream ships a bundled rustc by default, which is undesirable for numerous reasons (least of which, it balloons the orig.tar.xz to 3GB!). I've gotten chromium 120 to build with Debian's rustc packages in

Re: chromium and rustc in bookworm

On 1/22/24 15:34, Mike Hommey wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 03:39:08AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 06:55:31PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: ... c) Much like the Firefox maintainer(s) created rustc-mozilla for (old)oldstable, we create a 'rustc-chromium' p

Re: chromium and rustc in bookworm

22, 2024 8:17:15 PM Subject: Re: chromium and rustc in bookworm On 1/22/24 15:34, Mike Hommey wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 03:39:08AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 06:55:31PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: ... c) Much like the Firefox maintainer(s) created rustc-mozilla

Re: chromium and rustc in bookworm

unstable's rustc (1.70.0+dfsg-7). [ Other info ] See d-release thread below. On 2/13/24 19:32, Andres Salomon wrote: Okay, so I've gotten rustc 1.70.0+dfsg-6 (the prior version needed some bootstrap fixes) built on bookworm, and managed to use it to build chromium as well. Unfortun

Re: Bug#1064031: bookworm-pu: package rustc-web/1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u1

Hi, It was pointed out that this bug never made it to the d-release list for some reason. Would someone from the release team mind taking a peek at this so I can get chromium in bookworm with rust sorted out please? Thanks, Andres On 2/15/24 19:25, Andres Salomon wrote: Package

Bug#1064031: rustc-web 1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u1 flagged for acceptance

So it looks like I'll need a new upload to fix two bookworm architecture build failures (armhf and ppc64el), and also to fix #1064562. Should I file a new release.d.o bug, or continue using this one? (I'm ignoring armel and mipsel build failures, since firefox-esr hasn't built on either archi

Bug#1064031: rustc-web 1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u1 flagged for acceptance

On 2/28/24 01:23, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 15:00 -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: So it looks like I'll need a new upload to fix two bookworm architecture build failures (armhf and ppc64el), and also to fix #1064562. Should I file a new release.d.o bug, or continue using

Bug#1064031: rustc-web 1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u1 flagged for acceptance

Actually, scratch that; I had missed #1064563. I'll redo the deb11u2 package with conflicts/replaces for that, as well, and then resend it shortly. On 3/2/24 01:49, Andres Salomon wrote: Okay, here's an updated package with fixes: rustc-web (1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u2) bookworm; urge

Bug#1064031: rustc-web 1.70.0+dfsg1-7~deb12u1 flagged for acceptance

On 3/2/24 02:00, Andres Salomon wrote: Actually, scratch that; I had missed #1064563. I'll redo the deb11u2 package with conflicts/replaces for that, as well, and then resend it shortly. On 3/2/24 01:49, Andres Salomon wrote: Okay, here's an updated package with fixes: rustc-w

Bug#1068345: trixie-pu: package chromium/123.0.6312.105-1~deb13u1

rixie; urgency=high * Rebuild for trixie. -- Andres Salomon Wed, 03 Apr 2024 20:11:03 + OpenPGP_0x645D0247C36E7637.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#1068345: trixie-pu: package chromium/123.0.6312.105-1~deb13u1

On 4/4/24 07:31, Paul Gevers wrote: Hi Andres, On 04-04-2024 9:56 a.m., Paul Gevers wrote: I have $(reschedule --days=0)-ed your upload to DELAYED. I'll do a final check when that lands before unblocking. The upload seems to be not a pure changelog only change. The tpu upload has a debian/pa

Bug#1070266: nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Severity: serious Hello, Snappy 1.2.0-1 was uploaded with broken symbols (see https://bugs.debian.org/1070217). This is fixed in snappy 1.2.0-2, but chromium in sid had already built against the broken ve

Re: Unblock xserver-xorg-video-geode

is a DCON; we don't care at all about the panel bit). This also adds an extra paren in the following if() statement for clarity. I'm resisting the temptation to change GeodeRec's Output member to an unsigned long (for now). Bitfields should really be unsigned. Signed-off-by: And

please unblock libertas-firmware 9.70.7.p0.0-1

different upstream url and slightly different license. + + -- Andres Salomon Fri, 17 Sep 2010 23:47:00 + + libertas-firmware (9.70.7.p0-1) unstable; urgency=low * Add sd8686-9.70.7.p0 firmware for libertas 8686 SD chips. The diff -urN libertas-firmware-9.70.7.p0/debian/control libert

olpc-kbdshim update for squeeze

model, +as that's where the upstream kernel places the device tree. Last minute +fix for squeeze. + + -- Andres Salomon Sat, 11 Dec 2010 03:25:27 + + olpc-kbdshim (12-2) unstable; urgency=low * Fix a buglet w/ kbdshim-hal not starting correctly. --- o/olpc-kbdshim-12/debian/olpc-kb

Bug#607102: unblock: olpc-kbdshim/12-3

27;s where the upstream kernel places the device tree. Last minute +fix for squeeze. + + -- Andres Salomon Sat, 11 Dec 2010 03:25:27 + + olpc-kbdshim (12-2) unstable; urgency=low * Fix a buglet w/ kbdshim-hal not starting correctly. diff -Nru olpc-kbdshim-12/debian/olpc-kbdshim.