Bug#785091: spatialite-bin: spatialite gives a Segmentation fault.
On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 12:13 +0100, Andy G Wood wrote: Hi Sebastiaan, On Tuesday 12 May 2015 12:03:43 Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: [...] Justification: breaks unrelated software This justification is not supported by your bugreport. Which unrelated software does this issue break? Sorry, perhaps this is not unrelated, but ogr2ogr -a_srs WGS84 -f SQLite -dsco SPATIALITE=YES \ -where 'PTT=143471' -nln 143471 -append \ wcp_2015.sqlite wcp.xml Segfaults too. Software designed to be able to use spatialite is fairly far away from the definition of unrelated to spatialite. :-) Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Bug#656586: routino-www: fails to purge - command in postrm not found
On Sat, 2014-12-06 at 12:38 +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: Hi Uwe, On 12/05/2014 07:13 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: In the mean time I'm updating my clone of the repo to incorporate the recent NMUs and prepare a new upload for unstable if Uwe is unable to do so. I can do the upload if you like. Yes, please. All my changes are available in the git repository on Alioth. The above changes were uploaded to testing-proposed-updates instead of unstable, I'm rather confused as to how that happened. so I've prepared a new upload for unstable with the following changes: * Restructure control file with cme. * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.6, no changes. * Use canonical Vcs-* URLs. * Add patch to use hardening build flags. * Remove period from package description. Uwe, can you sponsor the upload to unstable too? Release Team, I believe that the changes in 2.7.2-2 -3 are compliant with the Freeze Policy, I'm not convinced that they are right now. OMMV. but the changes between 2.7-1.2 in testing and 2.7.2-2 in testing-proposed-updates does contain a new upstream release not complaint with the Freeze Policy. The debdiff between 2.7-1.2 and 2.7.2-3 is attached. Would the -3 upload to unstable be eligible for an unblock despite the new upstream release? Actually, it's _two_ new upstream releases. I've not examined the diff in great detail, but at first glance there appeared to be quite a number of changes. Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Bug#739261: libhdf5-openmpi-dev: Version in stable (wheezy) does not work with gfortran from stable
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 23:26 +0200, Gilles Filippini wrote: [resending because of a previously malformed address] Hi, On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:22:03 +0200 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org wrote: On 12/06/14 21:51, Gilles Filippini wrote: nmu hdf5_1.8.8-9 . amd64 i386 kfreebsd-amd64 kfreebsd-i386 . stable . -m Rebuild with current gfortran in wheezy (closes: #739261) Hoping to get it right this time :/ Scheduled. This still needs to be accepted by the SRMs for the next point release. I fail to see any move on this side. Then your vision is faulty. Is there anything I could do to have this binNMU accepted into stable? Travel back to July this year, when the update was released. See https://www.debian.org/News/2014/20140712 and libhdf5-7 | 1.8.8-9 | stable | armel, armhf, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, s390x, sparc libhdf5-7 |1.8.8-9+b1 | stable | amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386 Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Re: grass 6.4.2-2 not migrating
On 28.06.2012 13:46, Touko Korpela wrote: Looks like grass is not migrating to testing. http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=grass Does binNMU on i386 help? grass doesn't need binNMUing, and qgis already was. It looks like libgdal-grass could do with a binNMU indeed; scheduled. Note that the binNMUs are needed on all architectures, not just i386. Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Bug#664282: Processed: Re: Bug#664282: liblas-dev: uninstallable due to changes in libgeotiff-dfsg
On Sun, 2012-04-22 at 19:10 +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 06:03:20PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 16:57 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 664282 + pending Bug #664282 [liblas-dev] liblas-dev: uninstallable due to changes in libgeotiff-dfsg Added tag(s) pending. That was over a month ago now; is there an ETA for an upload? It is almost ready on the git repository, needs some final checks. Actually, looking at the package upload history, it looks like this may have been fixed a month before you sent the above - in 1.2.1-5 - but not automatically marked as done because of a typo in the list of bug numbers in the changelog - is that correct? (btw, there's no 1.2.1-5 tag in the git repository afaics.) Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Bug#664282: Processed: Re: Bug#664282: liblas-dev: uninstallable due to changes in libgeotiff-dfsg
On Sat, 2012-03-17 at 16:57 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tags 664282 + pending Bug #664282 [liblas-dev] liblas-dev: uninstallable due to changes in libgeotiff-dfsg Added tag(s) pending. That was over a month ago now; is there an ETA for an upload? Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
Bug#664282: liblas-dev: uninstallable due to changes in libgeotiff-dfsg
Package: liblas-dev Version: 1.2.1-1 Severity: serious Tags: wheezy, sid The move of libgeotiff-dfsg to tiff5 means that liblas-dev is now uninstallable in sid and wheezy. (This is by extension blocking libgeotiff-dfsg to wheezy and thus the netcdf transition.) liblas-dev (= 1.2.1-4): FAILED liblas-dev (= 1.2.1-4) depends on one of: - libgeotiff-dev (= 1.3.0+dfsg-3) liblas-dev (= 1.2.1-4) depends on one of: - libtiff4-dev (= 3.9.6-1) libgeotiff-dev (= 1.3.0+dfsg-3) depends on one of: - libtiff5-dev (= 4.0.1-1) libtiff5-dev (= 4.0.1-1) and libtiff4-dev (= 3.9.6-1) conflict Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
[DebianGIS-dev] Bug#559604: limit source to osm2pgsql, tagging 559604
On Sat, March 6, 2010 07:31, David Paleino wrote: #osm2pgsql (0.69+r20104-3) UNRELEASED; urgency=low # # * Now recommends both postgis and last available postgresql-postgis revision. #(closes: #559604) # limit source osm2pgsql tags 559604 + pending confirmed afaics, an upload fixing this bug has not occurred yet, although it has now been marked as pending for a few months; do you have any plans to do so in the near future? Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
[DebianGIS-dev] Bug#527956: gpsdrive: FTBFS:
Andreas Putzo wrote: Hi, On Jun 10 19:38, Adam D. Barratt wrote: This bug has been open for a month already and is the last thing blocking the transition of the new version of mapnik to testing. I'm therefore planning on uploading an NMU to fix it in a couple of days' time, unless there are any objections. If you'd rather fix it yourselves then that's obviously fine, but please say so. :-) i get a symbol lookup error currently. I try to look into this tonight, but feel free to NMU if you have a working solution :) gpsdrive: symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/mapnik/0.5/input/postgis.input: undefined symbol: _ZN5boost5mutex7do_lockEv Hmmm, how did you produce that error? The version of /usr/bin/gpsdrive I've built is linked against mapnik 0.6 (that rather being the point of getting the bug fixed in the first place ;-) but it's possible something is still picking up a 0.5 dependency somewhere. (and thinking about it the build-dep should probably also be bumped to require libmapnik-dev = 0.6, to ensure that it gets upgraded in chroots if already present). What does ldd /usr/bin/gpsdrive | egrep mapnik give you? Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
[DebianGIS-dev] Bug#527956: gpsdrive: FTBFS:
On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 22:18 +0200, Andreas Putzo wrote: Well, i started gpsdrive, got the symbol error and gpsdrive terminated. You didn't had libmapnik0.6 *and* libmapnik0.5 installed when you tried it presumably. Ah. Nope, you're right - I only had 0.6 installed, which is why I didn't notice. [...] Just uploaded the new version. Sorry for the delay, wasn't aware that i'm blocking the mapnik transition :( No worries; thanks for the upload. It wasn't a huge transition - gpsdrive appears to be one of only three packages depending on mapnik - but this does mean all four packages will now be able to transition to squeeze, once gpsdrive is built everywhere and has been in unstable long enough. Thanks very much for the quick response. Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
[DebianGIS-dev] Bug#527956: gpsdrive: FTBFS:
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 23:46 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:28:39PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: One oddity I did notice in the debdiffs of the binary packages is that gpsdrive lost its zlib dependency; I can't see any obvious reason for that, hence not having tagged the bug patch as yet. This might be the result of using the Debian version of libtool which is patched not link against the depedencies of the dependent on library. So zlib will still be pulled in, but it's the other lib that is using it and pulling it in. Yep, looks like it; thanks. gpsdrive maintainers: This bug has been open for a month already and is the last thing blocking the transition of the new version of mapnik to testing. I'm therefore planning on uploading an NMU to fix it in a couple of days' time, unless there are any objections. If you'd rather fix it yourselves then that's obviously fine, but please say so. :-) Regards, Adam ___ Pkg-grass-devel mailing list Pkg-grass-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-grass-devel
