Bug#1019416: transition: wxwidgets3.2
On Sat, 31 Dec 2022, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: Hi Scott On 2022-12-30 16:03:40 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: On Fri, 9 Sep 2022, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: The tracker is at https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/wxwidgets-3.2.html. I have changed the is_good and is_bad to check for dependencies of the binary packges as .build-depends are not check for binary packages. Let me know if that misses anything. This tracker needs to be updated because of the other wxwidgets transition, I sent a merge request with what I think is required: https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/transition-data/-/merge_requests/35/diffs Merged, thanks. The only remaining package is libalien-wxwidgets-perl. From [1] I understand that updating it and libwx-perl is somewhat more involved. Are there any news? I've continued to make slow progress on it. I'll try to make a more concerted effort on it over the next week or two. Too much task switching in my Debian work. :) Happy New Year, Scott
Bug#1027463: transition: clamav
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition X-Debbugs-Cc: pkg-clamav-devel.alioth-lists.debian.net As discussed in a separate email to the release team list yesterday, we, unfortunately have a need to do a late clamav transition. The clamav project now maintains specified releases with long term support. Currently we have 0.103 in stable/testing/unstable. We should be able to maintain clamav for the expected life of bullseye with 0.103. For bookworm we will need to transition to clamav 1.0/libclamav11 at some point and we believe it's better to do it now that during the freeze or even potentially after release. The move from 0.103 to 1.0 is more complicated that usual due to upstream switching from autorools to CMake and the introduction of Rust code into libclamav. The package is availalbe in experimental, but still needs some cleanup before it's ready for release. We will be working on this over then next couple of days and anticipate being ready for the transition mid-week. There are three reverse build-depends for libclamav-dev: * c-icap-modules * cyrus-imapd * pg-snakeoil I've test built all three with the clamav 1.0 packages in experimental with no issue. Additionally, there is libclamunrar in non-free that will also need to be updated. The clamav team will address that after the transition is done. Scott K Ben file: title = "clamav"; is_affected = .depends ~ "libclamav9" | .depends ~ "libclamav11"; is_good = .depends ~ "libclamav11"; is_bad = .depends ~ "libclamav9";
Bug#1019416: transition: wxwidgets3.2
Hi Scott On 2022-12-30 16:03:40 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: > On Fri, 9 Sep 2022, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > The tracker is at > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/wxwidgets-3.2.html. I have > > changed the is_good and is_bad to check for dependencies of the binary > > packges as .build-depends are not check for binary packages. Let me know > > if that misses anything. > > This tracker needs to be updated because of the other wxwidgets transition, > I sent a merge request with what I think is required: > > https://salsa.debian.org/release-team/transition-data/-/merge_requests/35/diffs Merged, thanks. The only remaining package is libalien-wxwidgets-perl. From [1] I understand that updating it and libwx-perl is somewhat more involved. Are there any news? Cheers [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-perl/2022/11/msg0.html -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1026392: transition: gnat-12
On 2022-12-31 16:33:12 +0100, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Followup-For: Bug #1026392 > X-Debbugs-Cc: Calum McConnell , Andreas Bombe > > > Hello. > > Here are the remaining blockers as far as I understand > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gnat-12.html. > > libxmlada (orange line): > I fail to understand the problem. > > libgmpada (red on i386): > I have uploaded a patch transforming the error into a warning. > The original bug remains but does not break the build anymore. > I have downgraded the severity of #1026828 accordingly. > Case closed. > > whitakers-words (red line) > is removed from testing and should not block the transition. > The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (none in experimental). > What do you recommend? > - avoid risking an interference with other packages > - source-only bin-NMU by you (nmu line in the initial mail) Scheduled now. Cheers > - normal upload to unstable > - ? > > ghdl (red line): > is removed from testing and should not block the transition. > The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (lots of RC bugs). > The version in experimental depends on gcc-12 (a few RC bugs). > What do you recommend? > - avoid risking an interferenc with other packages > - reupload from experimental to unstable > - ? > -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1026392: transition: gnat-12
[ I am not a member of the release team ] On Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 04:33:12PM +0100, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote: >... > Here are the remaining blockers as far as I understand > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gnat-12.html. Everything "sid only" is not a problem for the transition, since the transition is about getting the change completed in testing. > libxmlada (orange line): > I fail to understand the problem. There is are cruft packages depending on old gnat, e.g. libxmlada-dom7 | 22.0.0-3 | unstable | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips64el, mipsel, ppc64el, s390x These cruft packages are supposed to get autoremoved when nothing is left in unstable depending on them. This is not a problem for the transition, but that's what makes the tracker orange. >... > whitakers-words (red line) > is removed from testing and should not block the transition. > The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (none in experimental). > What do you recommend? >... > - source-only bin-NMU by you (nmu line in the initial mail) >... That's IMHO the correct action. > ghdl (red line): > is removed from testing and should not block the transition. > The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (lots of RC bugs). > The version in experimental depends on gcc-12 (a few RC bugs). > What do you recommend? > - avoid risking an interferenc with other packages > - reupload from experimental to unstable > - ? The package in experimental is still broken on some architectures: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ghdl=experimental This is something the maintainer (or someone else) should fix, bit due to "sid only" not a problem for the transition. cu Adrian
Bug#1026392: transition: gnat-12
Package: release.debian.org Followup-For: Bug #1026392 X-Debbugs-Cc: Calum McConnell , Andreas Bombe Hello. Here are the remaining blockers as far as I understand https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gnat-12.html. libxmlada (orange line): I fail to understand the problem. libgmpada (red on i386): I have uploaded a patch transforming the error into a warning. The original bug remains but does not break the build anymore. I have downgraded the severity of #1026828 accordingly. Case closed. whitakers-words (red line) is removed from testing and should not block the transition. The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (none in experimental). What do you recommend? - avoid risking an interference with other packages - source-only bin-NMU by you (nmu line in the initial mail) - normal upload to unstable - ? ghdl (red line): is removed from testing and should not block the transition. The version in unstable depends on gnat-10 (lots of RC bugs). The version in experimental depends on gcc-12 (a few RC bugs). What do you recommend? - avoid risking an interferenc with other packages - reupload from experimental to unstable - ?
Bug#1025056: transition: numerical library transition: hypre / petsc / slepc / sundials
Hi Sebastian, thanks for noting it! #1027402 is fixed now in unstable (that was wrong version in Breaks+Replaces). Regards Anton Am Sa., 31. Dez. 2022 um 14:20 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Ramacher : > > Hi Anton > > On 2022-12-28 09:30:00 +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: > > Hi Sebastian, > > > > sundials is already in NEW, fixing two RC bugs. > > Dyssol will be uploaded shortly. > > It's now in unstable. Please also fix #1027402. > > Cheers > > > > > Regards > > > > Anton > > > > Am Di., 27. Dez. 2022 um 12:23 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Ramacher > > : > > > > > > Hi Drew, hi Anton > > > > > > On 2022-12-19 21:52:10 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > Hi Drew > > > > > > > > On 2022-12-19 18:14:53 +0100, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > > > The hypre/petsc part of this transition is complete. > > > > > > > > > > The sundials part is waiting for dyssol to be patched. Anton is > > > > > preparing > > > > > this. > > > > > > > > sundials will also need fixes for #1026330 and #1026352. > > > > > > Any news regarding sundials? > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2022-11-29 23:34, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > > > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Drew > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2022-11-29 12:16:55 +0100, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > > > > > Package: release.debian.org > > > > > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > > > > > > Usertags: transition > > > > > > > X-Debbugs-Cc: Anton Gladky > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We'd like to update the numerical library stack in time for the > > > > > > > new > > > > > > > stable release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Affected libraries are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hypre2.25.0 -> 2.26.0 > > > > > > > petsc/slepc3.17 -> 3.18 > > > > > > > sundials 5.8.0 -> 6.4.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Autotransitions are already generated: > > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-hypre.html > > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-petsc.html > > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-slepc.html > > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-sundials.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the dependent packages are under our control > > > > > > > (Debian Science Team), octave is the main one outside our team. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Updates have built fine in experimental and dependent > > > > > > > packages are building successfully against them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anton Gladky will upload the sundials update. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please go ahead > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sebastian Ramacher > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sebastian Ramacher > > > > -- > Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1027289: transition: libcamera
Hi Sebastian, Le sam. 31 déc. 2022 à 13:19, Sebastian Ramacher a écrit : > > On 2022-12-29 23:01:28 +0100, Dylan Aïssi wrote: > > Dear Release Team, > > > > Please schedule a transition slot for libcamera. > > > > Please go ahead Thanks. Uploaded! Best, Dylan
Bug#1025056: transition: numerical library transition: hypre / petsc / slepc / sundials
Hi Anton On 2022-12-28 09:30:00 +0100, Anton Gladky wrote: > Hi Sebastian, > > sundials is already in NEW, fixing two RC bugs. > Dyssol will be uploaded shortly. It's now in unstable. Please also fix #1027402. Cheers > > Regards > > Anton > > Am Di., 27. Dez. 2022 um 12:23 Uhr schrieb Sebastian Ramacher > : > > > > Hi Drew, hi Anton > > > > On 2022-12-19 21:52:10 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > Hi Drew > > > > > > On 2022-12-19 18:14:53 +0100, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > > The hypre/petsc part of this transition is complete. > > > > > > > > The sundials part is waiting for dyssol to be patched. Anton is > > > > preparing > > > > this. > > > > > > sundials will also need fixes for #1026330 and #1026352. > > > > Any news regarding sundials? > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > Drew > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2022-11-29 23:34, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > > > > > > > > > Hi Drew > > > > > > > > > > On 2022-11-29 12:16:55 +0100, Drew Parsons wrote: > > > > > > Package: release.debian.org > > > > > > Severity: normal > > > > > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > > > > > Usertags: transition > > > > > > X-Debbugs-Cc: Anton Gladky > > > > > > > > > > > > We'd like to update the numerical library stack in time for the new > > > > > > stable release. > > > > > > > > > > > > Affected libraries are > > > > > > > > > > > > hypre2.25.0 -> 2.26.0 > > > > > > petsc/slepc3.17 -> 3.18 > > > > > > sundials 5.8.0 -> 6.4.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Autotransitions are already generated: > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-hypre.html > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-petsc.html > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-slepc.html > > > > > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-sundials.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Most of the dependent packages are under our control > > > > > > (Debian Science Team), octave is the main one outside our team. > > > > > > > > > > > > Updates have built fine in experimental and dependent > > > > > > packages are building successfully against them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anton Gladky will upload the sundials update. > > > > > > > > > > Please go ahead > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sebastian Ramacher > > > > > > > -- > > Sebastian Ramacher > -- Sebastian Ramacher
Processed: Re: Bug#1027289: transition: libcamera
Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #1027289 [release.debian.org] transition: libcamera Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 1027289: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027289 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1027289: transition: libcamera
Control: tags -1 confirmed Hi Dylan On 2022-12-29 23:01:28 +0100, Dylan Aïssi wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Dear Release Team, > > Please schedule a transition slot for libcamera. > > The auto-generated ben tracker looks good: > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-libcamera.html > > The unique reverse dep (pipewire 0.3.63-1) builds fine with the > new libcamera in experimental. Please go ahead Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Processed: Re: Bug#1027283: transition: tiff
Processing control commands: > tags -1 moreinfo Bug #1027283 [release.debian.org] transition: tiff Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 1027283: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027283 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1027283: transition: tiff
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi László On 2022-12-29 18:19:58 +0100, László Böszörményi wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Hi RMs, > > Unplanned transition of tiff as its new release is just recently out. > The API seems to be the same, but the ABI is changed. Basic reason is > that its behaviour is changed and returns quicker from processing > invalid images. > While it's a big transition, nine levels deep, test rebuilds show in > the first five levels only two package self-testing breaks. I've > already patched one of them. Currently it only hard breaks hylafax > which seems to be a dead project since 2012; a memory corruption and a > security fix was committed to it, but even those happened in 2018 or > earlier. Anyway, I've notified tiff upstream and will act accordingly. > > As tiff is used commonly and has security issues from time to time it > would be good to have its latest release in Debian. I don't know if > the old version will get any fixes or not. Understood. Please let us know once you're done with the test rebuilds and have filed all bugs. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1027424: transition: libppd
On 2022-12-31 10:29:48 +0100, Paul Gevers wrote: > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > Hi Christoph, > > On 31-12-2022 10:06, Christoph Biedl wrote: > > possible this is not a regular transition, but in exchange I guess it > > should be pretty smooth and simple ... > > Inside the Debian archive maybe, but ... > > > So src:libppd has been renamed to src:libppd-legacy, and has entered > > experimental yesterday. While doing so, I've fixed a longstanding > > mismatch in the soname version, hence the new number libppd-legacy*1*. We have libppd0 with an incorrect SONAME already in oldoldstable (maybe also oldoldoldstable). We are not doing transition for such cases. That's gonna stick until we can properly remove libppd.so.1 from the archive. > I'm wondering what this means for users of the library that don't have > packages in the Debian archive. If some downstream (including the non > publicly published ones) (build) depend on the old library, they suddenly > get weird failures, right? That's why we are not doing those kind of transitions. Technically, the new libppd can start using libppd.so.2, but this sounds less than optimal. Can't the new one be named something else if it's not a successor to the old libppd? Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Bug#1027424: transition: libppd
Paul Gevers wrote... > On 31-12-2022 10:06, Christoph Biedl wrote: > > > So src:libppd has been renamed to src:libppd-legacy, and has entered > > experimental yesterday. While doing so, I've fixed a longstanding > > mismatch in the soname version, hence the new number libppd-legacy*1*. > > I'm wondering what this means for users of the library that don't have > packages in the Debian archive. If some downstream (including the non > publicly published ones) (build) depend on the old library, they suddenly > get weird failures, right? Correct. Install-dependencies will fail for a missing libppd.so.1.0.1, just like after any other transition (Till's libppd will use a different soversion). Build-dependencies will fail to build as the new libppd is not a drop-in replacement. Till did some investigation in that direction, result boils down to "Providing a compatability layer was possible but is some work", while odds are low anyone will benefit from this, see below. So, in the case of a failing re-build, users will need to learn about the reason and how to deal with it. I've asked Till to embed an according pointer in the packages' descriptions (debian/control) so they'll have a clue. However, I would be fairly surprised if that ever happens. This is very old software and it is mostly unmaintained - last (legacy) libppd upstream release was in 2005. Therefore I assume any third-party package switched to something different in the meantime. I am not aware of any, and a little research didn't show anything in that direction. Looking for "libppd" usually just points to the new version, provided by OpenPrinting. Our alternative would have been to make the new libppd somehow fit around the old one, stupid work, and with constant risk people will pick the wrong one - something I consider way more likely to happen than failing builds of some rather hypothetical third-party packages based on legacy libppd. > At the extreme bare minimum, this needs documentation in the release notes, > but I wonder if we consider this enough. Release notes will never hurt, thanks for reminding me about those. And in the particular situation I'm confident this is enough. If you can think of more safety nets I could provide, let me know. Regards, Christoph signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1026964: marked as done (transition: wxwidgets3.2)
Your message dated Sat, 31 Dec 2022 11:46:21 +0100 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1026964: transition: wxwidgets3.2 has caused the Debian Bug report #1026964, regarding transition: wxwidgets3.2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1026964: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1026964 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition X-Debbugs-Cc: wxwidgets...@packages.debian.org Control: affects -1 + src:wxwidgets3.2 Rebuild wxwidgets3.2 rdeps due to wxwidgets ABI change, due to rebuilding with GLX support instead of EGL support. See bug #1024147. Updated wxwidgets3.2 package has been uploaded to experimental. Ben file: title = "wxwidgets3.2"; is_affected = .depends ~ "libwxbase3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-media3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-webview3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxbase3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-media3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-webview3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk3.2-1"; is_good = .depends ~ "libwxbase3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-media3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-webview3.2-1" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk3.2-1"; is_bad = .depends ~ "libwxbase3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-media3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk-webview3.2-0" | .depends ~ "libwxgtk3.2-0"; --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 2022-12-28 18:36:56 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > On 2022-12-28 12:15:29 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Dec 2022, Scott Talbert wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 27 Dec 2022, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > > > > On 2022-12-27 08:59:19 -0500, Scott Talbert wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 27 Dec 2022, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Rebuild wxwidgets3.2 rdeps due to wxwidgets ABI change, due to > > > > > > > rebuilding with GLX support instead of EGL support. See bug > > > > > > > #1024147. > > > > > > > Updated wxwidgets3.2 package has been uploaded to experimental. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please go ahead. > > > > > > > > > > Do I just re-upload to unstable now? > > > > > > > > Yes, and we will then schedule the rebuilds. > > > > > > Done, thanks! > > > > As best as I can tell, slic3r-prusa might have been missed in the binNMU > > list? > > It was skipped due to #1025827. The old binary packages got removed from testing. Closing Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---
Bug#1024893: libcifpp: Requesting transition slot
On 2022-12-28 12:05:29 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > Hi Maarten > > On 2022-11-27 16:37:34 +0100, Maarten L. Hekkelman wrote: > > Source: libcifpp > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > libcifpp and libpdb-redo are both in experimental. I've prepared the > > packages depending on them and am now requesting a time slot to take > > the following transition steps. > > Assuming that the test builds against the new versions were successful, > please go ahead. They were not: #1027425, #1027426. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
Processed: Re: Bug#1027424: transition: libppd
Processing control commands: > tag -1 moreinfo Bug #1027424 [release.debian.org] transition: libppd Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 1027424: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027424 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1027424: transition: libppd
Control: tag -1 moreinfo Hi Christoph, On 31-12-2022 10:06, Christoph Biedl wrote: possible this is not a regular transition, but in exchange I guess it should be pretty smooth and simple ... Inside the Debian archive maybe, but ... So src:libppd has been renamed to src:libppd-legacy, and has entered experimental yesterday. While doing so, I've fixed a longstanding mismatch in the soname version, hence the new number libppd-legacy*1*. I'm wondering what this means for users of the library that don't have packages in the Debian archive. If some downstream (including the non publicly published ones) (build) depend on the old library, they suddenly get weird failures, right? At the extreme bare minimum, this needs documentation in the release notes, but I wonder if we consider this enough. Paul OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1027424: transition: libppd
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition X-Debbugs-Cc: lib...@packages.debian.org, Till Kamppeter Control: affects -1 + src:libppd Greetings, possible this is not a regular transition, but in exchange I guess it should be pretty smooth and simple ... So some background: There are major changes coming in the area of printing using CUPS, driven by Till Kamppeter (Cc'd), and among other things this will introduce a library "libppd" to interact with PPD (PostScript Printer Description) files. That one however will clash with an existing libppd, maintained by yours truly, and after some discussion with Till we figured the sane way was to move that old library out of the way, name-wise. So src:libppd has been renamed to src:libppd-legacy, and has entered experimental yesterday. While doing so, I've fixed a longstanding mismatch in the soname version, hence the new number libppd-legacy*1*. Now about the formal transition procedure: There is exactly one reverse build-dependency, src:gpr, I've already filed #1027408 for the required changes. Taking care of this is on my list. That should be all - if you need more information, just let me know. Kind regards, Christoph Ben file: title = "libppd"; is_affected = .depends ~ "libppd0" | .depends ~ "libppd-legacy1"; is_good = .depends ~ "libppd-legacy1"; is_bad = .depends ~ "libppd0"; signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Processed: transition: libppd
Processing control commands: > affects -1 + src:libppd Bug #1027424 [release.debian.org] transition: libppd Added indication that 1027424 affects src:libppd -- 1027424: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027424 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
