Bug#862693: marked as done (unblock: postfix/3.1.4-7)

Your message dated Tue, 23 May 2017 05:38:00 + with message-id <421db63c-38d1-944c-4892-86d066a59...@thykier.net> and subject line Re: Bug#862693: unblock: postfix/3.1.4-7 has caused the Debian Bug report #862693, regarding unblock: postfix/3.1.4-7 to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#863161: marked as done (unblock: debconf/1.5.61)

Your message dated Tue, 23 May 2017 05:36:00 + with message-id <49cf7c61-f9c2-b3da-c7e3-cd13378c1...@thykier.net> and subject line Re: Bug#863161: unblock: debconf/1.5.61 has caused the Debian Bug report #863161, regarding unblock: debconf/1.5.61 to be marked as done. This means that you

Processed: Re: Bug#863085: unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC]

Processing control commands: > tags -1 confirmed Bug #863085 [release.debian.org] unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC] Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 863085: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863085 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#863085: unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC]

Control: tags -1 confirmed Peter Pentchev: > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 06:15:00AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Control: tags -1 moreinfo >> >> [...] > > Thanks for the quick reply! > > The error handler is invoked for systemd services, too - it's part of > an "invoke-rc.d #SCRIPT# start ||

Bug#863181: marked as done (unblock: debirf/0.37)

Your message dated Tue, 23 May 2017 05:36:00 + with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#863181: unblock: debirf/0.37 has caused the Debian Bug report #863181, regarding unblock: debirf/0.37 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that

Bug#863184: unblock: opendmarc/1.3.2-2

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package opendmarc This upload fixes a policy violation about forced conffile removal and I think we would be better off to have the change in stretch. It isn't only a

Bug#863183: unblock: opendkim/2.11.0~alpha-10

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package opendkim This upload fixes a policy violation about forced conffile removal and I think we would be better off to have the change in stretch. It isn't only a

Re: [Piuparts-devel] final batch for 0.77

Dear release team, any suggestions how to handle this best: On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 02:08:01AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > cdf810f85 distros.conf: update aliases for stretch being released as stable > > getting 0.77 with this patch into stretch will also save us from > applying this in a

Re: [Piuparts-devel] Packages from p-u in "cannot be tested"

Hi Adam, sorry for the late reply… On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 08:41:30AM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Recently I've noticed that a few packages from proposed-updates seem to be > ending up in a state of "cannot be tested", with logs that suggest an issue > locating the package. [...] > The

Bug#863181: unblock: debirf/0.37

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package debirf Version 0.37 contains fixes for #850080 and #833125, both of which make debirf unusable on debian stretch. It also includes a few smaller fixes which produce

Bug#863161: unblock: debconf/1.5.61

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock debconf 1.5.61. As explained by Niko in #863071, this prepares the ground for Perl 5.26, to simplify future stretch -> buster upgrades. diff -Nru

Bug#863148: marked as done (unblock: shadow/1:4.4-4.1)

Your message dated Mon, 22 May 2017 18:30:00 + with message-id <6ac861e3-d382-e2ae-afe8-92b6c9a73...@thykier.net> and subject line Re: Bug#863148: unblock: shadow/1:4.4-4.1 has caused the Debian Bug report #863148, regarding unblock: shadow/1:4.4-4.1 to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#862384: marked as done (unblock: gitlab/8.13.11+dfsg1-7)

Your message dated Mon, 22 May 2017 18:36:00 + with message-id <51789b79-d452-eb42-41ef-c15b2f6b0...@thykier.net> and subject line Re: unblock: gitlab/8.13.11+dfsg1-7 has caused the Debian Bug report #862384, regarding unblock: gitlab/8.13.11+dfsg1-7 to be marked as done. This means that you

Bug#863148: unblock: shadow/1:4.4-4.1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi Please unblock package shadow It fixes a regression introduced in the last upload, from the fix for CVE-2017-2616. If su recieves a signal like SIGTERM, it was not propagated to the

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

Quoting Pirate Praveen (2017-05-22 16:10:32) > On തിങ്കള്‍ 22 മെയ് 2017 06:41 വൈകു, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> ...for the _initial_ packaging work. >> >> We are package *maintainers*. > > If you have not realized, we are discussing about maintaining an > existing package. I think you have also

Bug#863081: marked as done (getting crosstool-ng in Debian)

Your message dated Mon, 22 May 2017 19:01:47 +0200 with message-id <20170522170147.redtsffem7mww...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#863081: getting crosstool-ng in Debian has caused the Debian Bug report #863081, regarding getting crosstool-ng in Debian to be marked as done. This

Bug#863081: getting crosstool-ng in Debian

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:03:00PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 16:19:51 +0200, Geert Stappers wrote: > > > Package: release.debian.org > > > > > > Hello Release team, > > > > On getting package `crosstool-ng` in Debian, > > where ( {unstable|stable|exprimental} )

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

On 2017-05-22 15:19, Jérémy Lal wrote: 2017-05-22 16:10 GMT+02:00 Pirate Praveen : On തിങ്കള്‍ 22 മെയ് 2017 06:41 വൈകു, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: ...for the _initial_ packaging work. We are package *maintainers*. If you have not realized, we are discussing about

Github Users List

style="color:rgb(46,116,181);background-image:initial;background-position:initial;background-size:initial;background-repeat:initial;background-origin:initial;background-clip:initial">Hello there,

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

2017-05-22 16:10 GMT+02:00 Pirate Praveen : > On തിങ്കള്‍ 22 മെയ് 2017 06:41 വൈകു, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > ...for the _initial_ packaging work. > > > > We are package *maintainers*. > > If you have not realized, we are discussing about maintaining an > existing

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

On തിങ്കള്‍ 22 മെയ് 2017 06:41 വൈകു, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > ...for the _initial_ packaging work. > > We are package *maintainers*. If you have not realized, we are discussing about maintaining an existing package. I think you have also not realized the meaning of team maintained packages. The

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 03:11:56PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > 78 new modules to package. If one person were to work full time, I > > think about 10-15 days time. > ...for the _initial_ packaging work. > We are package *maintainers*. we are all volunteers here, please don't tell others

Re: Bug#857986: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

Quoting Pirate Praveen (2017-05-22 13:27:35) > On വെള്ളി 19 മെയ് 2017 03:45 വൈകു, Jérémy Lal wrote: >> There are complications to distributing npm: it depends on a LOT of >> modules, which means it requires a lot of debian-maintainer time to >> package, and update. > >

Bug#863129: jessie-pu: package salt/2014.1.13+ds-3

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: jessie User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu Hi, salt in jessie is affected by some security issues. Salvatore Bonaccorso from the security wrote: So we are basically down at

Re: [Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#857986: npm: This pakcage is 3 years old? (consider removal)

On വെള്ളി 19 മെയ് 2017 03:45 വൈകു, Jérémy Lal wrote: > There are complications to distributing npm: it depends on a LOT of > modules, which > means it requires a lot of debian-maintainer time to package, and update. https://wiki.debian.org/Javascript/Nodejs/Tasks/npm ie, roughly about 78 new

Bug#863085: unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC]

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 06:15:00AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo > > Peter Pentchev: > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: unblock > > > > Hi, > > > > This is a pre-approval request for dante

Processed (with 1 error): Bug#862891: remove tag

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 862891 -moreinfo Bug #862891 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package flightgear/3.0.0-5+deb8u2 Removed tag(s) moreinfo. > thx Unknown command or malformed arguments to command. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me

Bug#862891: jessie-pu: package flightgear/3.0.0-5+deb8u2

Control: -1 tags -moreinfo Hi, Tobias uploaded flightgear-1:2016.4.4+dfsg-3 last Friday (thanks, Tobias), including the security fix. It already migrated to testing as well a couple hours ago. Please proceed with this jessie-pu bug. Kind Regards Markus signature.asc Description: OpenPGP

Bug#863085: unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC]

Control: tags -1 moreinfo Peter Pentchev: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: unblock > > Hi, > > This is a pre-approval request for dante to fix a long-standing > bug that makes the first installation of the dante-server

Processed: Re: Bug#863085: unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC]

Processing control commands: > tags -1 moreinfo Bug #863085 [release.debian.org] unblock: dante/1.4.1+dfsg-5 [preapproval, RC] Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 863085: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=863085 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems