[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#849830: [src:digikam] Some sources are not included in your package

2016-12-31 Thread Steve Robbins
On Saturday, December 31, 2016 10:06:37 PM CST you wrote: > your package includes some files that seem to lack sources > in preferred forms of modification (even if removed during clean target). No part of the resulting binary package comes from files that are not in their intended form of

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#849830: Bug#849830: [src:digikam] Some sources are not included in your package

2017-01-02 Thread Steve Robbins
On Sunday, January 1, 2017 2:29:37 AM CST you wrote: > On Sunday, January 01, 2017 12:59:08 AM Steve Robbins wrote: > > On Saturday, December 31, 2016 10:06:37 PM CST you wrote: > > No part of the resulting binary package comes from files that are not in > > their intended

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#857421: Many plugins are lost since Jessie

2017-03-22 Thread Steve Robbins
On Friday, March 10, 2017 12:22:25 PM CDT David Prévot wrote: > Package: kipi-plugins > Version: 4:5.3.0-1 > Severity: important > > Hi, > > Thank you for taking care of these plugins! > > More than half the plugins advertised in the package description > (including BatchProcess) seem to have

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#718908: digikam: Renaming of image files very slow

2017-08-13 Thread Steve Robbins
On Monday, August 5, 2013 2:24:45 AM CDT Matthias Julius wrote: > Package: digikam > Version: 4:2.6.0-1+b2 > Severity: normal > > Dear Maintainer, > > renaming of image files takes more than a second per file. When renaming > hundreds of files this adds up to a long time. The files are located

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#869148: digikam cannot import photos from iphone

2017-07-26 Thread Steve Robbins
On Thursday, July 20, 2017 3:39:43 PM CDT Herminio Hernandez Jr wrote: > I am trying to import my photos from my iphone to my desktop. I plug the > iphone into the USB port and I see KDE recognizing and asking if I want > digikam in import. I click on the digikam icon and it the app launches. >

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#876154: digikam: FTBFS: error: missing binary operator before token "defined"

2017-09-28 Thread Steve Robbins
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 12:27:56 PM CDT Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote: > #if not defined(__APPLE__) && defined(__GNUC__) > ^~~ > /build/digikam-5.3.0/core/libs/database/imagehistory/imagehistorygraph_boost > .h:1557:9: error: missing binary operator before token "defined" > Could you

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#879298: Correcting statement about fabo

2017-10-23 Thread Steve Robbins
Hi Tobias, Thanks for the correction! On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 12:08:02 AM CDT you wrote: > Hallo, > > When I filed the bugs in respect of the maintainer status of Fathi I used > the wrong switch in the script. I'd like to correct that. > > Fathi has NOT retired, so the sentcne Fathi

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#834131: digikam: no video playback and no video thumbnails

2017-11-04 Thread Steve Robbins
Yes. I have been waiting for qtav to enter Debian. That just happened this week. So next upload should have video again. On November 4, 2017 8:44:29 AM CDT, Marcel Dischinger wrote: >Package: digikam >Version: 4:5.7.0-1 >Followup-For: Bug #834131 > >Since version 5.6.0 video

[Pkg-kde-extras] exiv2 0.26

2017-12-30 Thread Steve Robbins
Hi, The 0.26 release was uploaded to Experimental in July. I'd like to see it get uploaded to Unstable, for use by Digikam 5.7. How may I help? There are currently 5 RC bugs -- one due to a gcc 7 change, one due to symbols file, and 3 CVEs. The upstream git repo has an 0.26 branch that

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#893515: digikam: FTBFS with kdepim 17.12.2

2018-04-08 Thread Steve Robbins
On Monday, March 19, 2018 10:48:38 AM CDT you wrote: > digikam 5.6.0-4 can't be compiled with KDE Pim 17.12.2, it failes > because kcalcore was been refactored to use QDateTime instead of > KDateTime. I have DigiKam 5.9.0 compiled locally and it works. Unfortunately, it depends on exiv2 0.26

[Pkg-kde-extras] Bug#893515: digikam: FTBFS with kdepim 17.12.2

2018-04-08 Thread Steve Robbins
On Sunday, April 8, 2018 1:25:42 PM CDT Simon Frei wrote: > I totally understand that, I am just trying to get infos to you as > debian maintainer from my (at the moment admittedly almost non-existing) > involvement upstream. Exiv2 0.26 will likely not get into testing. > Upstream does backport a