Hello!
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 4:51 AM Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Mon, 2021-10-11 at 11:27 +0200, Jan Korbel wrote:
> > Maybe this: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla//show_bug.cgi?id=257728
>
> If I read the bug correctly, it points to
>
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 23:33:31 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#995716: fixed in ruby3.0 3.0.2-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #995716,
regarding ruby3.0 accesses the internet during the build
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
On Sun, 03 Jan 2021 14:17:05 +0530 Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote:
On Sat, 2021-01-02 at 18:36 +0100, Bastian Germann wrote:
> This package depends on libreadline8 which is GPL-3+ licensed.
> According
> to debian/copyright parts of your package are GPL-2-only licensed. If
> that is also
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 21:48:36 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#984227: fixed in marsshooter 0.7.6-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #984227,
regarding marsshooter: ftbfs with GCC-11
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Package: node-mermaid
Version: 8.13.2+ds+~cs30.13.21-1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'stable'.
It installed fine in 'stable', then the upgrade to 'sid' fails
because it tries to
Source: irpas
Version: 0.10-8
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs sid bookworm
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
Hi,
irpas no longer builds in sid since glibc has dropped the rpc headers.
They are now provided by libtirpc-dev (and you may need
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #984227 in marsshooter reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #984227 [src:marsshooter] marsshooter: ftbfs with GCC-11
Added tag(s) pending.
--
984227: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=984227
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Your message dated Thu, 14 Oct 2021 00:11:03 +0300
with message-id <20211013211103.GA4469@localhost>
and subject line Fixed in 7.5-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #994824,
regarding slop: FTBFS on sid
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:22:36 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#983974: fixed in audacious 4.0.5-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #983974,
regarding audacious: ftbfs with GCC-11
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 22:11:59 +0200
with message-id
and subject line Re: Bug#995565: linux-image-5.14.0-1-686: Does not boot
successfully on old T41 Thinkpads (I/O problem?)
has caused the Debian Bug report #995565,
regarding linux-image-5.14.0-1-686: Does not boot successfully on
Source: python-fastimport
Version: 0.9.14-1
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: regression
Dear maintainer(s),
With a recent upload of python-fastimport the autopkgtest of
python-fastimport fails in testing when that autopkgtest
Processing control commands:
> found -1 libstatgen/1.0.15-1
Bug #996409 [src:libstatgen, src:minimac4] libstatgen breaks minimac4
autopkgtest: Segmentation fault
Marked as found in versions libstatgen/1.0.15-1.
> found -1 minimac4/1.0.2-2
Bug #996409 [src:libstatgen, src:minimac4] libstatgen
Source: libstatgen, minimac4
Control: found -1 libstatgen/1.0.15-1
Control: found -1 minimac4/1.0.2-2
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: breaks needs-update
Dear maintainer(s),
With a recent upload of
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 19:20:31 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#994016: fixed in salt 3002.7+dfsg1-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #994016,
regarding salt: CVE-2021-21996 CVE-2021-22004
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Processing control commands:
> found -1 diamond-aligner/2.0.12-1
Bug #996407 [src:diamond-aligner, src:proteinortho] diamond-aligner breaks
proteinortho autopkgtest: diamond failed with code 256
Marked as found in versions diamond-aligner/2.0.12-1.
> found -1 proteinortho/6.0.31+dfsg-1
Bug
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #983974 [src:audacious] audacious: ftbfs with GCC-11
Added tag(s) pending.
--
983974: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=983974
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Source: libepoxy
Version: 1.5.9-1
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: fails-always
Dear maintainer(s),
You recently added an autopkgtest to your package libepoxy, great.
However, it fails. Currently this failure is blocking the
Control: tag -1 pending
Hello,
Bug #983974 in audacious reported by you has been fixed in the
Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
Source: diamond-aligner, proteinortho
Control: found -1 diamond-aligner/2.0.12-1
Control: found -1 proteinortho/6.0.31+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: breaks needs-update
Dear maintainer(s),
With a
Processing control commands:
> found -1 python-pyramid/2.0+dfsg-1
Bug #996406 [src:python-pyramid, src:python-pyramid-chameleon] python-pyramid
breaks python-pyramid-chameleon autopkgtest: No module named 'pyramid.compat'
Marked as found in versions python-pyramid/2.0+dfsg-1.
> found -1
Source: python-pyramid, python-pyramid-chameleon
Control: found -1 python-pyramid/2.0+dfsg-1
Control: found -1 python-pyramid-chameleon/0.3-4
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
X-Debbugs-CC: debian...@lists.debian.org
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: breaks needs-update
Dear
Source: ruby-sassc-rails
Version: 2.1.2-5+rebuild1633394876
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /usr/bin/ruby3.0 /usr/bin/gem2deb-test-runner
>
>
Source: ruby-rails-controller-testing
Version: 1.0.5-1+rebuild1633392495
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
Hi,
During a rebuild of all packages in sid, your package failed to build
on amd64.
Relevant part (hopefully):
> /usr/bin/ruby3.0
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 18:33:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#994956: fixed in rar 2:5.5.0-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #994956,
regarding rar: Not packaging all files in breach of permission
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 18:33:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#994951: fixed in rar 2:5.5.0-1.1
has caused the Debian Bug report #994951,
regarding rar: Incomplete license info
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> affects 984107 - src:libfreecontact-perl src:python-freecontact
Bug #984107 {Done: Pierre Gruet } [libfreecontact-dev]
libfreecontact-perl: ftbfs with GCC-11
Bug #984302 {Done: Pierre Gruet } [libfreecontact-dev]
python-freecontact: ftbfs with
Had a quick look, and looks good to me.
Re: comment about unrar - there is unrar and unrar-nonfree packages using the
alternatives mechanism already, so this could be provided as an alternative,
but I doubt it’s worthwhile
> On 13 Oct 2021, at 18:36, Bastian Germann wrote:
>
> I am going to
Followup-For: Bug #996399
Please note that *-pl* needs the epoch in the version:
manpages-pl-dev needs Breaks+Replaces: manpages-pl (<< 1:4.11)
Andreas
Control: tags -1 + patch
On 2021-09-10 19:37 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Source: cunit
> Version: 2.1-3-dfsg-2.3
> Severity: serious
> Tags: ftbfs bookworm sid
>
> Your package FTBFS with libncurses-dev 6.2+20210905-1, as several
> mvwprintw() calls now trigger format warnings from gcc which
>
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + patch
Bug #994055 [src:cunit] cunit: FTBFS: format not a string literal and no format
arguments [-Werror=format-security]
Added tag(s) patch.
--
994055: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994055
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
I am going to upload a new revision (debdiff enclosed).
The maintainer is on LowThresholdNmu.
diff -Nru rar-5.5.0/debian/changelog rar-5.5.0/debian/changelog
--- rar-5.5.0/debian/changelog 2017-08-29 12:10:31.0 +0200
+++ rar-5.5.0/debian/changelog 2021-10-13 18:51:43.0 +0200
@@
Package: manpages-de-dev,manpages-es-dev,manpages-fr-dev,manpages-pl-dev
Version: 4.11.0-1.1
Severity: serious
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: piuparts
Hi,
during a test with piuparts I noticed your package fails to upgrade from
'stable'.
It installed fine in 'stable', then the
Control: tags -1 + patch
Am 13.09.2021 um 09:30 schrieb Helmut Grohne:
> Source: hexcurse
> Version: 1.58-1.3
> Severity: serious
> Tags: ftbfs
>
> hexcurse fails to build from source in unstable. A build ends as
> follows:
>
> | gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../include -Wall -Werror -Wextra
>
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + patch
Bug #994194 [src:hexcurse] hexcurse FTBFS: error: format not a string literal
and no format arguments [-Werror=format-security]
Added tag(s) patch.
--
994194: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994194
Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:33:56 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#996360: fixed in urdfdom 1.0.4+ds-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #996360,
regarding urdfdom: autopkgtests failure with console-bridge 1.1.1+dfsg2-3
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 15:33:38 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#988294: fixed in libunity 7.1.4+19.04.20190319-6
has caused the Debian Bug report #988294,
regarding libunity: Maintainer email is not reachable
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 + patch bookworm sid
Bug #994676 [src:gdisk] gdisk FTBFS: error: format not a string literal and no
format arguments [-Werror=format-security]
Added tag(s) sid, bookworm, and patch.
--
994676: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994676
Control: tags -1 + patch bookworm sid
Am 19.09.2021 um 09:13 schrieb Helmut Grohne:
> Source: gdisk
> Version: 1.0.8-3
> Severity: serious
> Tags: ftbfs
>
>
> gdisk fails to build from source in unstable on amd64. A build ends as
> follows:
>
> | x86_64-linux-gnu-g++ -g -O2
> |
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 984222 https://shibboleth.atlassian.net/browse/SSPCPP-945
Bug #984222 {Done: Ferenc Wágner } [src:log4shib] log4shib:
ftbfs with GCC-11
Bug #984241 {Done: Ferenc Wágner } [src:log4shib]
moonshot-gss-eap: ftbfs with GCC-11
Bug #984277
Source: ruby-sigar
Version: 0.7.3-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-sigar was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-sham-rack
Version: 1.4.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-sham-rack was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-shadow
Version: 2.5.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-shadow was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-serialport
Version: 1.3.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-serialport was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-semantic-puppet
Version: 1.0.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-semantic-puppet was found to fail to
Source: ruby-seamless-database-pool
Version: 1.0.20-1.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-seamless-database-pool was
Source: ruby-sanitize
Version: 5.2.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-sanitize was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-rspec
Version: 3.9.0c2e2m1s3-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rspec was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-safe-yaml
Version: 1.0.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-safe-yaml was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-rspec-retry
Version: 0.6.2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rspec-retry was found to fail to build in
Source: ruby-rspec-rails
Version: 4.0.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rspec-rails was found to fail to build in
* Aurelien Jarno [Tue Sep 07, 2021 at 11:10:09PM +0200]:
> On 2021-09-07 16:45, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> > Source: slurm
> > Version: 0.4.3-2
> > Severity: serious
> > Tags: ftbfs
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-gl...@lists.debian.org
> > slurm fails to build from source with glibc 2.32, because
Package: chromium
Version: 93.0.4577.82-1
Severity: serious
chromium build-depends on python-jinja2 which is no longer built by the
jinja2 source package.
It is still present in unstable as a cruft package but is completely
gone from testing.
Source: python-nanoget
Version: 1.12.2-4
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
User: debian...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: regression
Dear Maintainer
Sometime around 2021-10-05, python-nanoget's autopkgtests started to
fail in testing. I've copied what I hope is the relevant part of the
log
Source: ruby-roxml
Version: 4.0.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-roxml was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-roo
Version: 2.8.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-roo was found to fail to build in that situation.
Source: ruby-rgen
Version: 0.8.4-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rgen was found to fail to build in that situation.
Source: ruby-responders
Version: 3.0.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-responders was found to fail to build in that
On 2021-10-13 13:42, Nico Schlömer wrote:
Or PR upstream. I can merge and release any time.
Thanks Nico. I'll check which tolerances it needs and file a PR.
The error in test_rectangle might need your attention,
"At index 0 diff: 279 != 276". I guess it's not just tolerances.
Drew
Source: ruby-regexp-parser
Version: 1.7.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-regexp-parser was found to fail to build
Source: ruby-recursive-open-struct
Version: 1.1.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-recursive-open-struct was found to
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 13:03:49 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#984126: fixed in ferret-vis 7.6.0-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #984126,
regarding ferret-vis: ftbfs with GCC-11
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 15:01:22 +0200 uninsubria.it
wrote:
example from 'dmesg' output:
[Tue Sep 28 11:05:22 2021] omshell[4604]: segfault at 0 ip 55623cdd06dc sp
7ffd5a2c7c78 error 4 in omshell[55623cd97000+45000]
Hello,
maybe you can add a few pairs of the
dmesg "segfault" and
Source: ruby-raindrops
Version: 0.19.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-raindrops was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-rbpdf
Version: 1.20.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rbpdf was found to fail to build in that
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 12:49:09 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#967988: fixed in tnat64 0.06-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #967988,
regarding tnat64: Removal of sys_errlist
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Control: tags -1 patch
Hi,
A copyright file for abook with the necessary fixes for this bug is enclosed.
Please include it in a new package revision.
Thanks,
Bastian
Format: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: abook
Upstream-Contact: Jaakko
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 patch
Bug #995843 [src:abook] abook: missing licenses in d/copyright
Added tag(s) patch.
--
995843: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=995843
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Source: urdfdom
Version: 1.0.4+ds-4
Severity: serious
X-Debbugs-Cc: sramac...@debian.org
Tags: sid bookworm
| autopkgtest [06:45:52]: test build: [---
| /tmp/autopkgtest-lxc.9ole0xo3/downtmp/build.pRx/src/debian/tests/build: 1:
pkg-config: not found
| /usr/bin/ld:
Package: iitalian
Version: 1:2.3-3+b1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
$ echo albergo ciao | ispell -d american -l
albergo
$ echo albergo ciao | ispell -d italian -l
Illegal format hash table /usr/lib/ispell/italian.hash - expected magic2
0x9602, got 0x5053
$ file -L
Package: src:ocrmypdf
Version: 10.3.1+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Tags: sid bookworm
according to
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/amd64/o/ocrmypdf/15912455/log.gz
ocrmypdf fails two of it's tests with some rounding errors with pillow 8.3.2. Do
the test cases just need adjustment?
Dzień dobry,
jakiś czas temu zgłosiła się do nas firma, której strona internetowa nie
pozycjonowała się wysoko w wyszukiwarce Google.
Na podstawie wykonanego przez nas audytu SEO zoptymalizowaliśmy treści na
stronie pod kątem wcześniej opracowanych słów kluczowych. Nasz wewnętrzny
system
Source: ruby-rack-oauth2
Version: 1.16.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rack-oauth2 was found to fail to build in
Source: ruby-rack
Version: 2.2.3-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rack was found to fail to build in that situation.
Source: ruby-rack-timeout
Version: 0.5.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rack-timeout was found to fail to build in
Source: ruby-rabl
Version: 0.13.1-1.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-rabl was found to fail to build in that
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 11:49:12 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#984084: fixed in libatomic-queue 0.0+git20201108.d9d66b6-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #984084,
regarding libatomic-queue: ftbfs with GCC-11
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Source: ruby-public-suffix
Version: 3.0.3+ds-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-public-suffix was found to fail to
Source: ruby-process-daemon
Version: 1.0.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-process-daemon was found to fail to build
Source: ruby-prawn
Version: 2.3.0+dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-prawn was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-parallel
Version: 1.21.0-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-parallel was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-packable
Version: 1.3.14-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-packable was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-openstack
Version: 2.0.2-1.1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-openstack was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-openid
Version: 2.9.2debian-1
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-openid was found to fail to build in that
Source: ruby-omniauth-openid-connect
Version: 0.4.0-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-omniauth-openid-connect was
Or PR upstream. I can merge and release any time.
Cheers,
Nico
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 1:39 PM Drew Parsons wrote:
>
> Not entirely unexpected. Upstream reorganized tests and tolerances, so
> I wanted to check if we had a full pass or not.
> Looks like we'll have to reinstate
Source: ruby-ntlm
Version: 0.6.1-2
Severity: serious
Justification: FTBFS
Tags: bookworm sid ftbfs
User: debian-r...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ruby3.0
Hi,
We are about to enable building against ruby3.0 on unstable. During a test
rebuild, ruby-ntlm was found to fail to build in that situation.
Not entirely unexpected. Upstream reorganized tests and tolerances, so
I wanted to check if we had a full pass or not.
Looks like we'll have to reinstate test_relax_tolerance.patch
On 2021-10-13 12:03, Adrian Bunk wrote:
Source: pygalmesh
Version: 0.10.5-1
Severity: serious
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2021 11:33:32 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#992277: fixed in protontricks 1.6.0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #992277,
regarding protontricks: With any command, fails with "KeyError:
'LibraryFolders'"
to be marked as done.
This means that you
Hello,
The package on Salsa should be ready for upload and backport. It wasn't
uploaded at the time due to the release freeze, and it's been waiting
for review since then.
I'd have uploaded it myself after the freeze ended, but I haven't been
able to get my GPG key signed due to the
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 patch
Bug #983970 [src:aplus-fsf] aplus-fsf: ftbfs with GCC-11
Added tag(s) patch.
--
983970: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=983970
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Package: aplus-fsf
Version: 4.22.1-10.1
Followup-For: Bug #983970
User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu impish ubuntu-patch
X-Debbugs-Cc: sl...@ubuntu.com
Control: tags -1 patch
Dear Maintainer,
aplus-fsf FTBFS with GCC-11 because it is using ordered pointer comparison with
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 upstream pending
Bug #967988 [tnat64] tnat64: Removal of sys_errlist
Added tag(s) pending and upstream.
--
967988: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=967988
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 upstream pending
Hi,
On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 23:44:50 +0200 Adam Borowski wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> Control: tags -1 +ftbfs
>
> We have glibc 2.32 in bookworm already, the package fails to build.
Thanks! I will fix the issue upstream, tag a new release and then
Source: pygalmesh
Version: 0.10.5-1
Severity: serious
https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/testing/i386/p/pygalmesh/15928897/log.gz
...
=== FAILURES ===
test_rectangle
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> close 984221 1:11.1.0-3
Bug #984221 [src:llvm-toolchain-11] llvm-toolchain-11: ftbfs with GCC-11
Marked as fixed in versions llvm-toolchain-11/1:11.1.0-3.
Bug #984221 [src:llvm-toolchain-11] llvm-toolchain-11: ftbfs with GCC-11
Marked Bug as done
Source: libics
Version: 1.6.5-1
Severity: serious
Tags: ftbfs
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libics=all=1.6.5-1=1634114382=0
...
dh_missing -i
dh_missing: warning: usr/include/libics.h exists in debian/tmp but is not
installed to anywhere
dh_missing: warning:
On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:28:26 +0300 Roman Lebedev
wrote:
> This was fixed in
>
https://github.com/google/benchmark/commit/3d1c2677686718d906f28c1d4da001c42666e6d2
> some time ago, after v1.5.2 was released.
> Looks like it's time for a new upstream release.
Since Roman's message, benchmark
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 967988 + sid bookworm
Bug #967988 [tnat64] tnat64: Removal of sys_errlist
Added tag(s) bookworm and sid.
> tags 967987 + sid bookworm
Bug #967987 [fuzz] fuzz: Removal of sys_errlist
Added tag(s) sid and bookworm.
> thanks
Stopping processing
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
