THinking a bit more on it, would it make sense to upload OpenSSL 3.0
*after* the initial upload of php 8.1, so that it builds against 1.1.1
and can have a chance to migrate independantly of OpenSSL?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Hi Bryce,
Thanks for the prompt response!
I didn't have sufficient permissions to edit the release schedule post
(some trust level issue?), waiting for another member of the team to
proxy it for me :).
We're aiming also early in 22.04, and I was actually considering the
second week, which
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
** Summary changed:
- Fail to build against OpenSSL 3.0
+ pkcs11-helper: Fail to build against OpenSSL 3.0
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1946007
Title:
pkcs11-helper: Fail to build
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
** Description changed:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
- several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
+ several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Hi Sam,
Quoting Sam Hartman (2021-10-01 16:13:18)
> >>>>> "Simon" == Simon Chopin <1945...@bugs.launchpad.net> writes:
> Simon> We're planning to transition to OpenSSL 3.0 for the 22.04
> Simon> release, and consider this issue as blocking
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
This bug makes hlpip fail to build against OpenSSL 3.0, as the build-
deps are uninstallable.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1945774
Title:
openssl: breaks ssl-cert installation:
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/990228:
Package: openssl
Version: 3.0.0~~alpha16-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package causes other package
to fail
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
Public bug reported:
Hello,
As part of a rebuild against OpenSSL3, this package failed to build on one or
several architectures. You can find the details of the rebuild at
https://people.canonical.com/~schopin/rebuilds/openssl-3.0.0-impish.html
or for the amd64 failed build, directly at
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-bionic
verification-needed-focal
** Tags added: verification-done-bionic verification-done-focal
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Verified on bionic and focal on amd64 qemu VMs.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1870813
Title:
Scilab does not start on bionic and focal
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Note that the same failures can be spotted on amd64 as well, just not as
often.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1929553
Title:
autopkgtest is very flaky on s390x
To manage
** Tags added: regression-update
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888130
Title:
Jogl 2.3.2 crashes with "Profile GL4bc is not available on
X11GraphicsDevice" - fixed in Jogl 2.4.0
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1870813 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1870813
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1870813
Scilab does not start on bionic and focal
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
We can observe similar problems on Bionic (18.04), except that the
missing profile is GL3bc and not GL4bc. I'm assuming the root cause is
the same. Impish is also affected, I haven't had the chance to check
Hirsute.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1888130 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888130
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1888130
Jogl 2.3.2 crashes with "Profile GL4bc is not available on
X11GraphicsDevice" - fixed in Jogl 2.4.0
--
You received this bug notification because
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1888130 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888130
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1888130
Jogl 2.3.2 crashes with "Profile GL4bc is not available on
X11GraphicsDevice" - fixed in Jogl 2.4.0
--
You received this bug notification because
** Also affects: scilab (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888130
Title:
Jogl 2.3.2 crashes with "Profile GL4bc is not available on
Looking through the attachments, I don't see anything particularly
private in there. Consequently, I'm making the report public.
** Information type changed from Private to Public
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Hello,
After a discussion with the current Netplan team, we've reached the
conclusion that we prefer the current behaviour of failing completely
rather than applying a partial configuration. Our decision is based on
several factors:
* The predictability of the system is greater: either it
OK, I'm giving up on 1765503, the patch is non-trivial to backport and I
don't know enough about the topic. Looking for sponsors now.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1870813
Title:
** Description changed:
[Impact]
Scilab does not start. This is a regression from an OpenJDK 11 update.
SRU TEAM: please note that scilab runs OpenJDK 8 and since Bionic we have
been forcing it to use OpenJDK 11 (see bug 1814133). Since the last Bionic and
Focal update there have been
For the Bionic fix, I might revisit it to bundle the SRU with a fix for
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scilab/+bug/1765503 as it
seems a patch is available upstream.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Patch added: "scilab_focal.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/scilab/+bug/1870813/+attachment/5524418/+files/scilab_focal.debdiff
** Changed in: scilab (Ubuntu Bionic)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Simon Chopin (schopin)
** Changed in: scilab (Ubuntu Focal)
Here are debdiffs to fix this particular bug. The new approach is to
backport only the patch addressing the issue at hand, rather than
updating the whole package to a new version.
** Patch added: "scilab_bionic.debdiff"
Uploaded by juliank, but I forgot to add the LP number in the changelog.
I'll change the status manually, and unsubscribe the sponsors list.
** Changed in: openssl (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
Turns out I cannot unsubscribe the sponsors :/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1943109
Title:
Merge 1.1.1l-1 version from Debian
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Patch added: "Diff to 1.1.1l-1 (Debian)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1943109/+attachment/5524338/+files/openssl_diff_from_debian.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
The package has also been uploaded to the following PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12697790/+listing-archive-extra
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Patch added: "DIff to 1.1.1k-1ubuntu1 (Ubuntu)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1943109/+attachment/5524337/+files/openssl_diff_from_ubuntu.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Public bug reported:
This new upstream version consists only of a couple security fixes, and
should thus be merged into Impish.
Upstream changelog:
Changes between 1.1.1k and 1.1.1l [24 Aug 2021]
*) Fixed an SM2 Decryption Buffer Overflow.
In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an
The above fix has also been uploaded to my test PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12687507/+listing-archive-extra
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Patch added: "libuv1.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libuv1/+bug/1939707/+attachment/5523207/+files/libuv1.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939707
Since the problem has been fixed upstream, I'm not sure the Salsa MR
will make it into Debian, as the maintainer might simply want to upload
a new upstream version.
So I'll simply backport the upstream fix in Ubuntu. I think this will
make it easier for a future contributor to identify that the
Some more context :
* https://github.com/libuv/libuv#-fno-strict-aliasing
* https://github.com/libuv/libuv/issues/1230
It has been fixed upstream in the 1.41 by adding this same flag in their
build systems:
https://github.com/libuv/libuv/commit/cbcd0cfc824c712f6068930507a34d6b80e33b29
** Bug
** Tags added: ftbfs
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939707
Title:
FTBFS on impish
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Sent a patch to the Debian Salsa repository :
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libuv1/-/merge_requests/1
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939707
Title:
FTBFS on impish
To manage
Committed, but not released yet. The fix is in upstream v249, and
cherry-picked in the version currently in -proposed, but I believe it
got stuck because of the glibc transition?
** Changed in: systemd (Ubuntu Impish)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug
When recompiling manually without the LTO flags in CFLAGS, the test
passes.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939707
Title:
FTBFS on impish
To manage notifications about this bug go
Funny thing, though :
https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/results/autopkgtest-
impish/impish/arm64/s/systemd/20210830_074606_ed6ee@/log.gz -> tests
triggered by the systemd upload. The mentioned test passed. Even though
the libc version *is the same* (2.34-0ubuntu1 has been pulled to satisfy
Public bug reported:
The latest systemd upload fails its tests against glibc 2.34. The
failing test is test-oomd-util within the unit-tests, with the following
logs:
Last pgscan 33 greater than current pgscan 1 for /herp.slice/derp.scope. Using
last pgscan of zero.
Last pgscan 33 greater than
Beginner error on my part : there are debug logs in networkd, I didn't
even check them. As often, it turns out part of the answer lies in
there.
Here are the logs from 2.33:
autopkgtest systemd-networkd[942]: test_eth42: Gained IPv6LL
autopkgtest systemd-networkd[942]: test_eth42:
** Attachment added: "networkd-glib-2.34-3.trace"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1940635/+attachment/5521156/+files/networkd-glib-2.34-3.trace
** Attachment removed: "networkd-glib-2.34.trace"
** Attachment added: "networkd-glib-2.33-3.trace"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1940635/+attachment/5521155/+files/networkd-glib-2.33-3.trace
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Attached are new strace logs, I'll remove the previous files as there
was something wrong with my test setup, so the captured trace isn't
necessarily during the DHCPv6 tests.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Attachment added: "networkd-glib-2.34.trace"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/+bug/1940635/+attachment/5520981/+files/networkd-glib-2.34.trace
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
I can now confirm that the bug has been introduced strictly by the glibc
2.34, and not another package in the -proposed pocket.
My reproduction steps were as following:
Boot an Ubuntu Impish qemu VM (fully up-to-date (funnily enough, far
from being a trivial thing to do, see at the bottom for
** Tags added: patch patch-accepted-upstream
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1941709
Title:
bpython: crash after a few seconds related to apparmor
To manage notifications about this
Fixed by backporting upstream patch. Uploaded to
https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12668725/+listing-archive-extra as well.
** Patch added: "bpython.debdiff"
Public bug reported:
Something goes wrong in the import completion code, as it tries to open
an apparmor-related sysfs file. The crash appears a few seconds after
launching bpython. Seems fixed upstream.
LANG=C bpython
bpython version 0.21 on top of Python 3.9.6 /usr/bin/python3
>>>
Traceback
Allright.
I was going to post in-depth investigation results to sum up what
stepping through the code taught me (pretty much nothing, it all goes
well until I lose the stepping thread due to callback/async stuff), but
right before sending the text I let GDB finish the program execution,
and lo
Can somebody confirm my assumptions on the architecture of the test ?
First, it sets up a veth with router_eth42 at one end and test_eth42 at
the other (the itf names might be different ?). dnsmasq is bound against
router_eth42 which is configured manually via iproute with both IPv4 and
IPv6
New version with DEP-3 Forwarded field and LP bug number in changelog.
** Patch added: "wmanager.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wmanager/+bug/1940816/+attachment/5520013/+files/wmanager.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940816
Title:
Autopkgtest fail with glibc 2.34
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Tracked down the failure which was due to an UB (uninitialized memory
read) being exposed by the recent glibc changes, presumably something in
the memory allocation area.
In any case the attached debdiff should fix the issue. You'll find a
built version of the package in my PPA:
Oh yes sorry, I should have done that in the initial report.
I'm using a Lenovo Yoga laptop model 710-IKB, with an AZERTY keyboard
layout. It had no external input devices plugged in. A notable HW
feature of the laptop is that it has a touchscreen.
I'll give it a few more tries later today to
: Undecided
Assignee: Simon Chopin (schopin)
Status: In Progress
** Tags: update-excuse
** Changed in: wmanager (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: wmanager (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Simon Chopin (schopin)
--
You received this bug notification b
This bug seems to be intermittent. I've now rebooted 5 or 6 times the
system and I could only reproduce the issue on the first reboot. :/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940657
Title:
After further testing it's not a Firefox problem, other applications
have the same issue. Weirdly, gnome-shell itself doesn't have the issue,
hence my initial mistake. Gnome terminal, thunderbird, and Ubuntu
software all have the same symptoms.
Note that mouse input works fine.
Reaffecting to
Public bug reported:
While testing the focal 20.04.3 Ubuntu Desktop iso, I tried to launch
Firefox in the live session, but was unable to type anything to either
the address bar or the content of the homepage (with a text box to
search stuff)
** Affects: gnome-shell (Ubuntu)
Importance:
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/992564:
Source: caml-crush
Severity: serious
Tags: upstream ftbfs
Dear Maintainer,
The package fails to build from source in clean environments as it
relies on "rpc/rpc.h" being present, while those headers have been
removed
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/973153:
Source: caml-crush
Version: 1.0.10-4
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS on amd64
Tags: bullseye sid ftbfs
Usertags: ftbfs-20201027 ftbfs-bullseye
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to
** Summary changed:
- Merge quassel 1.9.14-1 from Debian
+ Merge haveged 1.9.14-1 from Debian
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940439
Title:
Merge haveged 1.9.14-1 from Debian
To
Attached is a debdiff for this merge. You'll find a built version in
this PPA: https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12655500/+listing-archive-extra
Cheers,
Simon
** Patch added: "haveged.diff"
Public bug reported:
New upstream version with bugfixes.
** Affects: haveged (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: In Progress
** Changed in: haveged (Ubuntu)
Status: New => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
For reference, the Debian autopkgtest run (successful) can be found here
: https://ci.debian.net/packages/t/thin/testing/armhf/
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1939086
Title:
Public bug reported:
Please sync racket 7.9+dfsg1-2 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)
Explanation of the Ubuntu delta and why it can be dropped:
* Merge from Debian unstable. Remaining changes:
- Ensure building with -O2 to work around a misbuild on ppc64el which
defaults to -O3.
Attached is a debdiff with the merged package. A PPA version has been
uploaded there : https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12655074/+listing-archive-extra if you want to test it.
** Patch added: "quassel.debdiff"
Public bug reported:
Merge the few changes from Debian to reduce the diff as much as
possible.
** Affects: quassel (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Public bug reported:
Please sync dh-python 4.20201102+nmu1 (universe) from Debian unstable
(main)
Explanation of the Ubuntu delta and why it can be dropped:
* Disable the nosetests autopkg test. Unmaintained.
* Disable the nosetests autopkg test. Unmaintained.
* Fix DocTest.
-> Those have
Fixed by syncing the Debian version, currently in -proposed
** Changed in: git-remote-hg (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940123
Title:
Public bug reported:
Please sync git-remote-hg 1.0.2.1~ds-2 (universe) from Debian unstable
(main)
Changelog entries since current impish version 1.0.2.1~ds-1:
git-remote-hg (1.0.2.1~ds-2) unstable; urgency=medium
* QA upload.
* Add missing mercurial-git test dependency (LP: #1940123)
--
I regularly have this (my gnome-shell oopses every morning, probably
because of an extension somewhere). Attached is a screenshot from
apport-gtk.
** Attachment added: "Capture d’écran de 2021-08-17 09-21-26.png"
Hello,
I've been working on merging 2.4.9-1+1 from Debian, you'll find a
debdiff attached as well as a version uploaded to this PPA:
https://launchpad.net/~schopin/+archive/ubuntu/test-
ppa/+sourcepub/12651690/+listing-archive-extra
I've done some cursory testing on local PPPoE links, but I
Public bug reported:
ALl tests fail, because of a missing dependency on git-mercurial.
Fixed in the Debian Salsa repository but the fix hasn't been uploaded to
Debian yet, so attached is a debdiff porting it as an Ubuntu diff, so
that we can get 1.0.2.1 in before the feature freeze.
** Affects:
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 1937256 ***
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1937256
** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 1937256
paperwork: autopkgtest armhf regression: Libinsane item->get_options()
error: 0x4006, I/O Error (7)
--
You received this bug notification
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/989145:
Package: debos
Version: 1.0.0+git20201203.e939090-4
Severity: wishlist
Dear maintainer,
The DEP-8 test recently added to src:debos, called build-chroot, makes
use of the user-mode-linux package (the fakemachine
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/983515:
[,
]
** Affects: paperwork (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Affects: paperwork (Debian)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #983515
** Tags added: update-excuse
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1940077
Title:
Please do not use uml fakemachine backend in the DEP-8 test
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Public bug reported:
Imported from Debian bug http://bugs.debian.org/989145:
Package: debos
Version: 1.0.0+git20201203.e939090-4
Severity: wishlist
Dear maintainer,
The DEP-8 test recently added to src:debos, called build-chroot, makes
use of the user-mode-linux package (the fakemachine
501 - 600 of 668 matches
Mail list logo