Le mercredi 01 juin 2011 à 18:36:05 (+0200 CEST), Julien Valroff a écrit :
Hi!
Le mercredi 01 juin 2011 à 13:05:55 (+0200 CEST), Michael Prokop a écrit :
{...}
What I've on my TODO list are:
* undbx
* ssdeep (file conflicts)
* sleuthkit
* dc3dd
* md5deep
If you can help
Accepted:
md5deep_3.9.1-1.debian.tar.gz
to main/m/md5deep/md5deep_3.9.1-1.debian.tar.gz
md5deep_3.9.1-1.dsc
to main/m/md5deep/md5deep_3.9.1-1.dsc
md5deep_3.9.1-1_amd64.deb
to main/m/md5deep/md5deep_3.9.1-1_amd64.deb
md5deep_3.9.1.orig.tar.gz
to main/m/md5deep/md5deep_3.9.1.orig.tar.gz
Your message dated Sun, 05 Jun 2011 11:48:07 +
with message-id e1qtbon-0003bh...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#539420: fixed in md5deep 3.9.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #539420,
regarding (md5deep_3.4-2/avr32): FTBFS: Outdated config.{sub,guess}
to be marked as done.
This
Your message dated Sun, 05 Jun 2011 11:48:08 +
with message-id e1qtboo-0003bn...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#626014: fixed in md5deep 3.9.1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #626014,
regarding md5deep: new upstream version available
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Hi,
While working on several packages, I have noticed that upstream tarballs
were incorreclty imported to pristine-tar, leading to the following warning
when using git-buildpackage:
gbp:warn: Unknown compression type of Adding pristine-tar version 0.20.,
assuming gzip
This means gpb cannot
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
close 594955 0.9.4-1
Bug#594955: libphash: new upstream version available
'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing.
Bug marked as fixed in version 0.9.4-1, send any further explanations to
Rogério Brito
libphash_0.9.4-1.1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
libphash_0.9.4-1.1.dsc
libphash_0.9.4-1.1.diff.gz
libphash0_0.9.4-1.1_i386.deb
libphash0-dev_0.9.4-1.1_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host franck.debian.org)
tags 620933 + pending
thanks
Dear maintainer,
I've prepared an NMU for libphash (versioned as 0.9.4-1.1) and
uploaded it to DELAYED/5. Please feel free to tell me if I
should delay it longer.
Cheers
Luk
diff -u libphash-0.9.4/debian/control libphash-0.9.4/debian/control
---
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
tags 620933 + pending
Bug #620933 [libphash] libphash: Please don't install libtool la-file in
dev-package (Policy 10.2)
Added tag(s) pending.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
620933:
Accepted:
afflib-dbg_3.6.6-1.1_i386.deb
to main/a/afflib/afflib-dbg_3.6.6-1.1_i386.deb
afflib-tools_3.6.6-1.1_i386.deb
to main/a/afflib/afflib-tools_3.6.6-1.1_i386.deb
afflib_3.6.6-1.1.diff.gz
to main/a/afflib/afflib_3.6.6-1.1.diff.gz
afflib_3.6.6-1.1.dsc
to
Your message dated Sun, 05 Jun 2011 18:47:15 +
with message-id e1qtilz-00071x...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#620411: fixed in afflib 3.6.6-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #620411,
regarding please wipe out dependency_libs
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Sun, 05 Jun 2011 18:47:15 +
with message-id e1qtilz-00071x...@franck.debian.org
and subject line Bug#620411: fixed in afflib 3.6.6-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #620411,
regarding afflib: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying dependency_libs
to be marked as done.
Hi
I've just updated extundelete[1]. Any member willing to review it?.
I think todo is:
- Add Christophe Monniez copyright.
- Sync date under debian/changelog to be agree with Debian Policy 3.9.2
(if not lintian warning).
- Someone willing DD under uploader field, to finally upload it.
[1]
13 matches
Mail list logo
