Hi,
On 08-05-2024 6:06 p.m., Bill Allombert wrote:
Agreed, but gap does not actually breaks anything, it is just the tests
in testing that are broken. So I can do that but that seems a bit artificial.
Aha, that wasn't at all clear to me. If you don't want to do the
artificial thing (which is
Hi Luca,
On 05-05-2024 10:04 p.m., Luca Boccassi wrote:
> Hence, I intend to apply these changes in the next src:systemd upload
> to unstable, probably next week.
In case anybody is aware of packages/programs needing an update to cope
with these changes, or any other issue, please let me know
Hi,
On 04-05-2024 11:39 a.m., Jerome BENOIT wrote:
What would be the best way to unblock the migration of gap and gap-io ?
If gap isn't going to change (which might be the easiest solution), then
file bugs and fix those reverse dependencies. Those bugs are RC and in
due time will cause
Hi,
On 27-04-2024 7:52 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
Can you please look at libproxy<->glib-networking? libproxy excuses show
glib-networking tests failing, but they are working in sid.
And that's not missing a versioned Depends and/or Breaks? I.e. this is a
test only failure?
Paul
Hi,
On 24-04-2024 7:42 p.m., Jérémy Lal wrote:
Inform the Release Team and we can either schedule the combination
manually, add a hint or both.
Isn't it processed automatically ? What needs manual intervention and
what doesn't ?
Well, the migration software *tries* to figure out
Hi,
On 24-04-2024 7:38 p.m., Paul Gevers wrote:
On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems
with
packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for
speech-dispatcher/0.11.5-2 on
Inform
Hi,
On 24-04-2024 7:35 p.m., Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
What to do with autopkgtests that fail in testing because of problems with
packages in testing that are fixed in unstable, e.g. the autopkgtest for
speech-dispatcher/0.11.5-2 on
Inform the Release Team and we can either schedule the
Hi Samuel,
On 24-03-2024 11:45 p.m., Samuel Henrique wrote:
In a recent case, the issue was addressed by performing a
testing-proposed-update of the package. This would allow firefox-esr to be
fixed on testing before the transition is over, but it would not work for those
installing the firefox
Hi,
On 19-03-2024 11:32 a.m., Ian Jackson wrote:
Paul Gevers writes ("Re: Package marked for autoremoval due to closed bug?"):
For bookkeeping purposes, please usertag downgraded bugs with user
release.debian@packages.debian.org and usertag time_t-downgrade.
I was informed t
Hi zigo,
On 16-03-2024 12:31 a.m., Thomas Goirand wrote:
But when the AUTORM period was announced as reduced, I thought
like it was probably a bad call, and that the previous AUTORM was
aggressive enough.
I'm not aware that we reduced autoremoval times in recent history. Are
you maybe
Hi,
Disclaimer: exception only valid while the time_t transition is ongoing.
On 15-03-2024 6:15 a.m., Steve Langasek wrote:
Migration to testing is largely out of control of the maintainers at this
point, it's very much dependent on folks rebootstrapping armel and armhf
against the new library
Hi,
On 01-03-2024 1:58 p.m., Nilesh Patra wrote:
Have you found any way around these?
https://salsa.debian.org/mbanck/dd-autopkgtest/
Alternative, probably not the best solution, but until better ones are
found (and as long it's not too much used): Antonio and I offer DD's
access to
Hi,
On 29-02-2024 4:47 a.m., Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
@d-d:
- How can it happen that purge *t64 packages and at the same time install
the previous package, and then the so file is missing?
I mean it's clear that they use the same name, but shouldn't DPKG handle
the cleanly?
Hi,
On 21-01-2024 16:08, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
However according to our release notes we only support upgrading from
release x to x+1, skipping releases is not allowed.
I'm not talking about skipping releases but about partial upgrades.
Thus …
> foo/testing requires bar >=1.1 to work but
Hi,
On 20-01-2024 23:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
So I think an algorithm for deciding the uploads to experimental looks like
this:
- download source from unstable.
- apply the packagename conversion to the source.
- grab the debdiff.
- submit the NMU diff to the BTS.
- download the source again
Hi,
On 12-01-2024 16:42, Blake Gilbert wrote:
I am reaching out to you regarding a recent package submission by our
Engine Connectivity Engineering team. We submitted the package CDImage
M-LINUX-WolframEngine.DEB a few months ago to include Wolfram Engine in
Debian packages, and I wanted to
Oops, should have waited sending...
On 06-01-2024 14:30, Paul Gevers wrote:
On 06-01-2024 14:15, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
Aren't all these problems just inherent in Debian's lack of a mandated
packaging tooling and workflow [1,2]?
Might be, but that doesn't mean that problem goes away.
I
Hi Gioele,
On 06-01-2024 14:15, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
Aren't all these problems just inherent in Debian's lack of a mandated
packaging tooling and workflow [1,2]?
Might be, but that doesn't mean that problem goes away.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Steve,
On 05-01-2024 17:36, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Also a problem is that experimental also might already contain totally
unrelated updates like new upstream versions...
I share this worry. Have you thought about how to handle the cases where
you don't have experimental to upload to? How
Hi
On 18-12-2023 11:29, Santiago Vila wrote:
El 17/12/23 a las 22:40, Steven Robbins escribió:
Does that mean ceasing the "ITP" messages in debian-devel?
I'd certainly welcome that!
I think he really meant debian-release, as this was "Bits from
the Release Team" and he was talking about
Hi,
On 18-12-2023 13:18, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
Will reproducibility regressions block migration to testing?
Not for the near future for 2 reasons:
1) contrary to autopkgtest where removal of the test "fixes" regression,
it feels that currently blocking on regression would give maintainers
Hi,
On 05-12-2023 03:52, Yadd wrote:
I uploaded src:node-proxy-agents into unstable, which is the new source
of node-proxy and node-https-proxy-agent. This package didn't migrate
but I don't understand the reason of this block.
The tracker[1] reports regressions on node-proxy and
Hi,
On 22-11-2023 12:21, Donald Norwood wrote:
The new attempt is a fresh email to d-d-a via cut and paste from the
original email with the 1 correction that was needed. The email for some
reason seems to be in d-d-a and d-d limbo, so I think we await the next
cron run.
More likely you need
Hi,
On 22-10-2023 23:32, r...@neoquasar.org wrote:
If the distinction between "supported" and "not supported" is
going to come down to specific assembler-level instructions, it would
seem that that wont tell most people anything.
Well, if we know which instructions we don't support, it's not
Hi,
On 17-10-2023 22:16, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote:
Yes, assuming the pre-bookworm Debian i386 architecture fully supports it,
as I don't know what *exactly* was allowed in the "almost i686"
stretch-bullseye i386.
According to the release notes (which *should* be authoritative, but may
have
Hi,
On 24-09-2023 10:27, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
Is the apt configuration on
those systems set to something that is not the default and should be considered
as well?
How the unstable to testing migration runs work is that they have a
testing testbed (with apt pinning making
Hi Steve,
On 15-09-2023 21:54, Steve Langasek wrote:
armel != armhf
Of course
and nobody should be running armel on a NEON-capable CPU...
Not sure why you say it like that, I guess you don't meen CI purposes
here. But anyways, it seems that also the arm64 host that runs our armel
and
Hi,
On 15-09-2023 17:52, Andres Salomon wrote:
Any thoughts on this?
Please be aware of bug #1036818 [1]. Currently /proc/cpuinfo is empty on
armel ci.debian.net workers. (I'm failing to spot neon in the list of
features of that machine.)
Paul
[1]
Hi Helmut,
On 19-08-2023 23:14, Helmut Grohne wrote:
I recognize that this is quite a non-standard way to ask for a MBF. Does
anyone object to me doing it in this way?
I recall I said this before, but just in case. In my opinion (with my
Release Team member hat on, but not on behalf of the
Hi,
On 25-07-2023 16:16, Michael Biebl wrote:
apparently, we in Debian struggle to find good opportunities where to
spend our money.
For ci.d.n, the issue is not money, but the required work to integrate
it into the infrastructure. We need volunteers (or pay people to do the
work), but
Hi,
On 23-07-2023 17:51, Mark Hymers wrote:
On Tue, 18, Jul, 2023 at 12:45:51PM +0800, YunQiang Su spoke thus..
So I consider to suggest drop mipsel support from the list of official ports.
(And let's keep mips64el port).
Is there consensus on this point? If so, should we start making
Hi,
On 21-07-2023 14:20, David Kalnischkies wrote:
How is this to be done? Should some automated mechanism for achieving
this be added, and if so, where?
You already found the retry button from previous replies, but you
don't have to click it to get what you want…
The migration software of
Hi,
On 30-06-2023 22:40, Jérémy Lal wrote:
Nice, but how can we see it when we prepare a package for security team ?
You can't. Only the security team has access to the results. After the
packages have been released the results will be published and can be
seen in the history on ci.d.n,
Hi,
On 30-06-2023 20:14, Jérémy Lal wrote:
is there something like a CI for security uploads ?
Yes.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Peter,
On 06-04-2023 15:37, Peter Pentchev wrote:
I feel like I cannot ask for an unblock from the release
managers since the sparc64 buildd started failing on this package
at some point in February:
sparc64 is not a release architecture. sparc64 will not be better or
worse if something
Hi Diane,
On 23-02-2023 08:12, Diane Trout wrote:
the version of python3-xlrd 1.2.0-3 in unstable/testing is too old to
be used with pandas 1.5.3. (See Bug #1031701).
Do I understand correctly that this isn't an issue from the point of
python3-xlrd and that only pandas is effected? While
Hi,
On 03-02-2023 16:51, Nilesh Patra wrote:
There is a "skip-not-installable" that you could decleare in d/t/control
for these packages (for the corresponding tests that suffer from uninst
test deps), more details here[1]
Please don't use this. I regret I added it to autopkgtest because more
Dear all,
While I skipped one month, we're now in the mid of the first freeze, so
here's another plea [1,2,3,4, 5] to fix RC bugs in key packages [6].
Currently we have 168 RC bugs in key packages affecting bookworm [7] of
which 109 are unresolved in unstable or experimental, aren't pending
Hi Nilesh,
On 26-01-2023 10:06, Nilesh Patra wrote:
I guess something that changed since then is that upstream is aware
about it and can help a bit with backporting. However the onus to
maintain it in stable is still on the maintainer and security@ (to some
extent)
It is bit of a high-effort
Hi,
On 25-01-2023 20:14, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 08:34:40PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
So in my understanding of the above the situation around singularity-container,
which lead for buster to https://bugs.debian.org/917867 and keeping it out of
the stable
Hi,
On 23-01-2023 21:33, Alexandre Detiste wrote:
A whole pre-existing private security tracker solution
would be perfect; or a website where one could register
all the package they care about.
You mean something like [1] but then for a user instead of a team... I
couldn't quickly find it,
Hi Vasyl,
On 22-01-2023 22:33, Vasyl Gello wrote:
Assuming I would like to test the package interacting with some proprietary
third-party service on the web (like Kodi PVR addon), is there any mechanism
protecting of account details so that autopkgtest machines can read them
while outside world
Hi Ian
On 06-01-2023 14:09, Ian Jackson wrote:
I have two packages which do vpn-like things (hippotat, secnet) which
I want to add autopkgtests for. The two packages have similar kinds
of requirements for their tests.
Ideally, I would:
* Somehow have two test nodes ("hosts")
* With their
Hi,
On 05-01-2023 14:13, Simon McVittie wrote:
since passing NEW currently requires a
source+binary upload but migrating to testing requires a follow-up
source-only upload (same total number of uploads).
To be fair, normal SONAME bump NEW uploads only need a arch:!all binary
Dear all,
The Release Team just asked ftp-master to hold of accepting SONAME bumps
targeting unstable to ease the last days before the Transition and
Toolchain Freeze. The Release Team would like to ask the ftp-masters to
also by default reject SONAME bump NEW uploads to unstable during the
Hi Marc,
On 02-01-2023 16:58, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 16:31:17 +0100, Paul Gevers
wrote:
On 02-01-2023 14:21, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
A user complained that MySQL doesn't work, because it misses the INET6
type that the example settings use.
And is this an absolute must? (It's
Hi Alessandro,
On 02-01-2023 14:21, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
please pardon my ignorance about Debian install. I'm distributing a
software which could use various DBMS'es by setting a number of
parameters. Example parameters are only given for MariaDB. I
distribute a debian/ directory that
Dear all,
With only 1 month to go until the first freeze, another plea [1,2,3,4]
to fix RC bugs in key packages [5]. Currently we have 234 RC bugs in key
packages affecting bookworm [6] of which 160 are unresolved in unstable
or experimental, aren't pending and don't have a patch. Here are
Dear all,
With about 2 months to go until the first freeze, a fresh plea [1,2,3]
to fix RC bugs in key packages [4]. Currently we have 255 RC bugs in key
packages affecting bookworm [5] of which 184 are unresolved in unstable
or experimental, aren't pending and don't have a patch. Here are
Dear all,
Today I started the Release Team Checklist [1] and noticed:
[ ] Theme (artwork) design should be finalised and decided
I just found two small threads on debian-desktop [2, 3], but I'm not
aware of any further activity on the artwork front. Do we have
volunteers to push for the
Hi,
On 13-10-2022 17:32, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
hrm... maybe I misunderstand but I thought your initial mail talked about build
profiles (aka DEB_BUILD_PROFILES) and not build options (aka
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS). The policy section you cite is about DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS and
not about
Hi josch,
On 13-10-2022 14:20, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
Quoting Paul Gevers (2022-10-13 10:00:42)
Please also consider supporting the nodoc build profile. We are aware
that nodoc is regularly used in a non-reproducible way (as intended,
but with this consequence), so checking
Dear all,
A new month, a fresh plea [1,2] to fix RC bugs in key packages. So, here
are again 5 RC bugs in key packages in the hope to draw some attention
to this class of bugs. Remember, fixing these bugs is a collective effort.
#913916 grub-efi-amd64
UEFI boot option removed after update to
Hi Jeff,
On 26-09-2022 12:53, Jeff wrote:
Short of closing #1012250, how do I get CI pipeline to pick up gscan2pdf
again to debug the flaky tests?
I'd appreciate any pointers.
The bug has a user specified for the usertag and explicitly mentions:
"""
Don't hesitate to reach out if you need
Hi Samuel,
On 11-09-2022 17:08, Samuel Thibault wrote:
We could for instance:
- Add an Architecture-FTBFS field to debian/control
- Add an environment variable to debian/rules so that on these archs dh
fails with a different exit code that buildds would notice.
- Add a Architecture-FTBFS
Hi
On 03-09-2022 19:48, Patrice Duroux wrote:
Am I observing a side effect (kind of back-in-time) regarding a repair process
on this issue?
No.
Because, for instance, the following page:
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/fwanalog
has now its 'news' section showing:
[2017-09-05] fwanalog
Hi,
On 02-09-2022 13:00, Ian Jackson wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to detect a sudden large increase in
the number of autoremovals, and stop the autoremoval system instead of
causing blaring klaxons for everyone in the project ?
I disabled the cron job that sends out mail yesterday,
Hi
On 02-09-2022 07:27, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 11:04:38PM -0500, Steven Robbins wrote:
Suddenly half the packages are marked AUTOREMOVE; many due to gcc-12 and zlib.
The related two bugs are months-old.
Why are things suddenly being removed??
Both are key packages
Hi all,
On 01-09-2022 21:10, Rene Engelhard wrote:
This either should be ignored (like for bullseye) or downgrade, imho,
but I didn't do it myself. I don't think there's anything actionable
here...
On 01-09-2022 16:52, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> #919914gnome-settings-daemon
>>
Dear all,
In the same theme as my earlier message [0], I like to ask you to please
spend some time triaging (and ideally solving) old RC bugs. Some
packages you may care about were removed from testing because the
maintainer didn't triage or fix the bug. And then there's key packages...
As
Hi all
On 25-08-2022 02:43, Paul Wise wrote:
I don't think Build-Architecture header is done yet?
Neither do I.
Although since we
build all arch:all packages on amd64 machines now I don't think this is
needed for throwing away NEW binaries?
In testing and on release architectures, I'm
Hi,
On 24-08-2022 02:05, Paul Wise wrote:
The release team automatically do binNMUs for packages that need a
rebuild to transition to testing and are able to be binNMUed
Maybe my fellow Release Team members have automated this locally, but
I'm not aware of shared tools (or even cron jobs)
Hi,
On 19-08-2022 18:10, Luca Boccassi wrote:
On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 at 16:54, Paul Gevers wrote:
On 19-08-2022 17:41, Luca Boccassi wrote:
And if KDE Muon is indeed dead, simply having a "Conflicts: muon" and
using the same path should be ok as well?
No.
Care to elaborat
On 19-08-2022 17:41, Luca Boccassi wrote:
And if KDE Muon is indeed dead, simply having a "Conflicts: muon" and
using the same path should be ok as well?
No.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Edward,
On 02-08-2022 18:00, Edward Betts wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to routinely run the autopkgtests on s390x,
or another big-endian architecture, for 'Architecture: all' packages and make
the results available.
We run all autopkgtests on all architectures we have available.
Dear all,
Please help keeping the upcoming bookworm freeze short by fixing or
triaging RC bugs in key packages [1] before the freeze starts on 12
January 2023 [2].
As you are very likely aware, Debian releases when it's ready. One of
the most important criteria is the number of RC bugs. To draw
Hi
On 28-06-2022 22:17, Scott Talbert wrote:
All uploads need to be source-only (since
bullseye?).
To be more correct, all package that are intended to migrate to testing
need to be source-only. However, in the review process of NEW binaries,
the upload still needs to contain all (and one
Hi,
On 22-06-2022 20:04, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
Or if the goal is rather to experiment and expose BabaSSL to the many archs
we have in Debian, then keep it in unstable only by filing a bug to block
it from testing.
Or better: experimental, to avoid packages starting to (build-)depend on it.
Hi Frédéric,
On 09-06-2022 16:19, Frédéric Bonnard wrote:
did you see any improvement with luajit2 ?
Improvements, yes. All fixed, no.
I was looking at luakit, which still fails "silently" on ppc64el, a lua
script generating a .h with no symbols with luajit2, where it does work
with lua.
Hi Jérémy,
On 27-05-2022 23:08, Jérémy Lal wrote:
Is it some misconfiguration on my side ?
I think so.
When a package is uploaded, we get two emails:
node-d3-color_1.2.8-3_source.changes ACCEPTED into unstable
As the (team) uploader, I only got ^ that one. I believe it is sent to
the
Hi all,
On 27-05-2022 09:42, Julien Puydt wrote:
... or generate a blacklist of packages that should not trigger
those removals.
That exists: key packages.
Or the removal watcher could have a cap on the number of warnings it
sends per sensible period of time. If it exceeds this
Hi,
On 24-05-2022 20:07, M. Zhou wrote:
I wonder why an irrelevant package suddenly triggered autoremoval
of a very large portion of packages from testing.
https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/autoremovals.cgi
Searched for keyword nvidia-graphics-drivers-tesla-470, and I got
68866 entries. There
Hi Yadd,
On 09-05-2022 14:54, Yadd wrote:
Then, after all needed tests and no-regression tests and wait for 2 weeks and
the sacrifice of a goat on a full moon night, what is the way to adopt :
* wait for ROM-RM of old src packages and then upload new node-regenerator
* upload new
Hi Julian,
On 28-04-2022 09:33, Julian Gilbey wrote:
It would be really useful to be able to set up my local sbuild
environment in the same way as the Debian machines (buildd and
ci.debian.net) for testing purposes.
As I've never used sbuild myself, I can't tell you how to set it up. But
on
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Paul Gevers
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libtie-cache-lru-perl
Version : 20150301
Upstream Author : Michael G Schwern
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Tie-Cache-LRU
* License : GPL-1
Hi,
On 09-04-2022 00:23, Michael Biebl wrote:
# apt-file search -x ^/usr/lib/systemd/system/ | wc -l
122
I get the attached list of 65 source packages which install files into
/usr/lib/systemd/system.
I picked a random package from your list: caddy. It was uploaded on
2022-04-02, well
Hi,
On 08-04-2022 19:40, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 05:25:11PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Bug 993316 was fixed on 23 September 2021. Any reason why rpcbind
hasn't been rebuilt yet?
Was anything done for that to happen? Because otherwise the answer is
"nobody did
Hi,
On 23-03-2022 12:32, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Anthony Fok (2022-03-23 11:08:36)
Rather than keeping this "Serious" bug open and keeping both gitsome
and gh out of Debian testing, I think the simple solution of having gh
"Conflicts: gitsome", which is one of the option specified in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
[Message resent because the year was wrong]
Dear all,
We are currently considering the following dates as our freeze
dates. If you are aware of major clashes of these dates with anything
we depend on please let us know. We also like to stress
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Paul Gevers
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libmediascan
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Andy Grundman
* URL : https://github.com/andygrundman/libmediascan
* License : GPL3.0
Programming
Hi all,
Thanks Andreas, for taking care.
On 25-02-2022 15:02, Andreas Tille wrote:
My point was rather that the suggested salvage procedure might not raise
any signal and I'm pretty sure that I would have lost track on this.
Everybody is now free to help and fix the autopkgtest regression
Hi,
Release Team member hat on, but not speaking on behalf of the team. I
haven't consulted anybody on the idea I mention below.
On 08-02-2022 14:59, Scott Kitterman wrote:
If people want licensing and copyright issues to be treated like other RC
bugs, I think the first step is to treat them
Hi,
On 06-02-2022 22:05, Liang Yan wrote:
Just wondering if anyone happen to know the problem. or just my
mis-configration?
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2022/02/msg0.html
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Dod,
On 03-02-2022 18:53, Dominique Dumont wrote:
Hoping to automate this process, I've setup a transition tracker for Rakudo
[1].
See https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2022/02/msg00029.html and
follow-up messages.
Paul
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Ted,
On 24-01-2022 19:44, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
No, dpkg-shlibsdeps doesn't save you. Again, consider the
hypothetical package libshaky, which over the period of 9 months, has
soname changes which generate (over time) packages libshaky3,
libshaky4, libshaky6, libshaky7, and libshaky8.
Hi,
I'm not involved in ftp-master, but...
On 21-01-2022 18:19, Andreas Tille wrote:
Am Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 09:51:12AM -0500 schrieb M. Zhou:
I'd rather propose choice C. Because I to some extent understand
both sides who support either A or B. I maintain bulky C++ packages,
and I also had a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Paul Gevers
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libimage-scale-perl
Version : 0.14
Upstream Author : Andy Grundman
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Image-Scale
* License : GPL2+
Programming
Hi,
On 23-12-2021 15:03, Alexis Murzeau wrote:
Isn't ci.debian.net doing automated builds with experimental version of
dependencies ?
ci.debian.net doesn't do builds except for autopkgtest that have the
"needs-build" restriction, which we discourage unless really needed.
Paul
Hi,
[I've read the rest of the thread so far, answering the transition
question].
On 23-12-2021 00:45, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Is it normal and ok to upload a new major release of a library to
unstable, without either a) testing that reverse dependencies do not
break, or b) coordinating with
Hi Yadd,
On 16-12-2021 19:07, Yadd wrote:
* When launching another build (schroot) with this new package, build
failed because dpkg considers 4.0.2+~cs54.26.36-1 < 4.0.2-9 and
refuse to install gulp-4.0.2+~cs54.26.36-1 with node-is-plain-object
paul@mulciber ~ $ dpkg
Hi Thomas,
On 17-12-2021 13:38, Thomas Goirand wrote:
It's been a long time I wanted to write this kind of message, but I'm
unsure against which package I should report the bug.
release.debian.org
Would it be possible that instead, I get a single message on each AUTORM
run, telling me about
Hi,
On 06-12-2021 20:43, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
One lesson we may take from Mint, though, is that it's not worth trying
to patch Chromium as much as we'd like. Anything that we can do to
simplify the Chromium packaging will help us keep the package
up-to-date, which in turn will help us keep
Hi Andres,
On 05-12-2021 03:36, Andres Salomon wrote:
So what's happening with chromium in both sid and stable? I saw on
d-release that it was removed from testing (#998676 and #998732), with a
discussion about ending security support for it in stable. I'm willing
to help out with chromium
Hi
On 18-11-2021 22:44, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Nov 18, Zack Weinberg wrote:
Are you seriously claiming that that phenomenon is not a severity:critical bug?
I am seriously claming that whatever you are referring to, if true, is
such a contrived example that does not actually happen in real
Hi Julian,
On 03-11-2021 16:45, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> There is some software "parsing" sources.list on its own, most of that
> is better served by `apt-get indextargets` (and for downloading stuff
> based on the urls, `apt-helper download-file`, such that it respects
> proxies and supports
Hi Jerome,
On 01-11-2021 16:34, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> the osmnx package is current blocked because of an autopkgtest
> regression on armhf arch .
> It is a serious bug:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=995021
>
> It appears that I cannot reproduce the issue on the porter box
Hi,
On 20-08-2021 17:48, Russ Allbery wrote:
> It sounds like we have a general consensus in this thread that, while
> changing our default to HTTPS probably won't make anything more secure in
> practice, we should still do it?
I was told and I relayed early in this thread [1] that https gives
Hi,
On 19-08-2021 21:46, Simon Richter wrote:
> For the most part, users would configure https if they are behind a
> corporate firewall that disallows http, or modifies data in-flight so
> signature verification fails, everyone else is better off using plain http.
Except for the security
Hi Thorsten,
On 24-07-2021 00:21, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Might be useful to script-check everything that’s newer in sid
> than in testing against the open unblock requests.
> I have seen
> changes that are definitely targetting bullseye (RC bug python
> 2 removal, in fritzing-parts, for
Hi,
On 11-02-2021 10:16, Matthias Klose wrote:
> These dependencies should look like:
>
> default-jdk [!hppa !hurd-i386 !kfreebsd-any]
>
> or
>
> default-jdk [alpha amd64 arm64 armel armhf i386 ia64 m68k mips64el mipsel
> powerpc ppc64 ppc64el riscv64 s390x sh4 sparc64 x32]
>
> It's also
1 - 100 of 859 matches
Mail list logo
