Re: Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 10 September 2017 at 11:20, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 09/09/17 13:48, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 9 September 2017 at 06:44, Niels Thykier wrote: | > | Thanks to Sébastien and Andreas for explaining the issue. | > | > Well, was it "explained" ? They

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 9 September 2017 at 16:18, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | But since I do not want to waste my time, I first need to be sure that you would | accept such a patch. Re-read http://eddelbuettel.github.io/rcppapt/binnmuAfterR340.html and construct (using R and my RcppAPT packages) the set of

Bug#868558: All affected packages are manually uloaded

On 9 September 2017 at 15:38, Andreas Tille wrote: | I hereby closing this bug since all affected packages were | manually uploaded. I really, really appreciate that. In your view, can we / shall we also close the underlying https://bugs.debian.org/861333 which started this? As I

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 9 September 2017 at 14:12, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | On Sat, Sep 09, 2017 at 06:48:12AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 9 September 2017 at 06:44, Niels Thykier wrote: | > | Thanks to Sébastien and Andreas for explaining the issue. | > | > Well, was it "exp

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 9 September 2017 at 06:44, Niels Thykier wrote: | Thanks to Sébastien and Andreas for explaining the issue. Well, was it "explained" ? They both raised and stressed a hypothetical issue: That "there might be siutations where a partial upgrade breaks" We don't actually know whether this

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 9 September 2017 at 01:31, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | On 2017-09-08 22:49, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > I still maintain that this is a useless "academic" consideration. If users | > want to corrupt their systems by only upgrading one package I will not stop | > them. They

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 8 September 2017 at 20:01, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Hi Dirk and others, | | On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 12:29:25PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | > | The problem is that you can end up with r-bioc-makecdfenv_1.50.0-1 (i.e. before | > | the rebuild) and r-base_3.4.1-2, because n

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 8 September 2017 at 17:23, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 01/09/17 14:28, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 1 September 2017 at 13:52, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | > | On 01/09/17 13:25, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > | > | > Emilio, | > | > | > | &

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 2 September 2017 at 19:23, Steve Cotton wrote: | If I may ask, "why do you want to spend the developer time to rebuild only 46 | packages, when there's already an infrastructure that does it for you, at the | cost of rebuilding all 516"? Because in my 20+ years with Debian, we generally opted

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 2 September 2017 at 14:57, Steve Cotton wrote: | On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:03:06PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > But the whole point of my bug report, and write up, is that | > | >46 | > | > out of 516 package need a rebuild. | > | > So I continue to arg

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

On 1 September 2017 at 13:52, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 01/09/17 13:25, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Emilio, | > | > Thanks for your follow-up. I will try to get to each point. | > | > On 1 September 2017 at 11:42, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | > | What N

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Emilio, Thanks for your follow-up. I will try to get to each point. On 1 September 2017 at 11:42, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | What Niels meant is whether having an old, non-rebuilt R module with the new | r-base works, Yes, in general, and here in this case. | and whether having a new,

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

So I tried that -- and I cannot currently tickle the bug: -- r-cran-spatial (from the initial bug report) was long rebuilt by me -- r-cran-logspline (which you mentioned) is actually no longer on my refined (shorter) list, no issues there -- r-cran-data.table (on my list) is a false

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Hi Niels et al, On 26 August 2017 at 07:22, Niels Thykier wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel: | > [...] | > On 19 August 2017 at 13:14, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | | > | Dear release team, | > | | | Hi, | | Sorry for the slow up take on our part. No worries. Releases and Debcon

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

severity 868558 serious quit On 19 August 2017 at 13:14, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Dear release team, | | Gentle poke. We still need this set of NMUs to get R 3.4.1 into testing. | | "Ask me anything" -- What (if anything) is missing? How can I help? Setting severity to 'seri

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Dear release team, Gentle poke. We still need this set of NMUs to get R 3.4.1 into testing. "Ask me anything" -- What (if anything) is missing? How can I help? Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Hi Andreas, On 10 August 2017 at 15:36, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | On Sun, 6 Aug 2017 08:15:17 -0500 Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: | > Let's get these 46 packages rebuilt so that r-base 3.4.1 can migrate to | > testing. | | Disclaimer: I don't know anything abou

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Dear release team, I have a follow-up. Kurt Hornik (CC'ed as a courtesy) of the R Core team, and also an avid Debian user, pointed out another suitable test (of checking whether the (optional) C-level registration had actually been done in package). With that, the set of packages to NMU halfes

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Dear release team, On 16 July 2017 at 10:40, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Package: release.debian.org | User: release.debian@packages.debian.org | Usertags: binnmu | Severity: normal | | R 3.4.0, which was released in April, made one subtle breaking change | affecting how (optional

Bug#868558: nmu: multiple r-* packages

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Severity: normal R 3.4.0, which was released in April, made one subtle breaking change affecting how (optional) compiled code in contributed package is loaded, affecting the older two of the three (plus one

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

On 9 August 2016 at 17:44, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. | > | > I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: | > | > -- the "R

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

On 9 August 2016 at 17:44, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | On 07/08/16 15:18, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. | > | > I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: | > | > -- the "R

Re: Transition news: GCC 6 enabled by default

Thanks for starting the g++-6 transition. I suspect/believe that I "own" a (small) stack which needs a transition policy: -- the "R" language (source package r-base) encodes its configuration time choices for all subsequent compilations; here we have CXX and CXX1X (plus CXX1Y in next

Re: Bug#818781: r-base: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.9)

On 6 April 2016 at 18:49, Aurelien Jarno wrote: | On 2016-03-25 09:05, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 25 March 2016 at 14:20, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | > | Le mercredi 23 mars 2016 à 15:32 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > | > On 23 March 2016 at 21:08, Matth

Re: Bug#818781: r-base: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.9)

On 25 March 2016 at 14:20, Sébastien Villemot wrote: | Le mercredi 23 mars 2016 à 15:32 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit : | > On 23 March 2016 at 21:08, Matthias Klose wrote: | > | On 23.03.2016 20:05, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > I just looked at /etc/R/Makeconf where CC,

Re: Bug#818781: r-base: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.9)

On 23 March 2016 at 21:08, Matthias Klose wrote: | On 23.03.2016 20:05, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > I just looked at /etc/R/Makeconf where CC, CXX, ... get encoded and they are | > not versioned (ie NOT gcc-4.9) so I am pretty sure we are not using 4.9 | > anywhere bu

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 6 December 2015 at 17:01, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | On 03-12-15 19:11, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | > On 03/12/15 19:07, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | >> Because libgsl0-dev is not a transitional package to pull in libgsl-dev | >> and libgsl2, all gsl rdeps need to update their build

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

ges impossible whereas the idea of renaming is presumably to allow that. Anything else wrong in debian/control you can see? It is included below. Dirk | | Cheers, | Julien Source: gsl Section: math Priority: optional Maintainer: Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> Standards-Version

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 23 November 2015 at 20:45, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 01:46:26 +0100, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | | > altree (1.3.1-2) cannot be built after updating the build dependency to | > libgsl-dev, because some other dependency still pulls in libgsl0ldbl | > causing a conflict

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 20 November 2015 at 11:45, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | On 09-11-15 18:21, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | > On 06/11/15 15:06, Bas Couwenberg wrote: | >> Package: release.debian.org | >> Severity: normal | >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org | >> Usertags: transition | >>

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 9 November 2015 at 10:02, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 19:38:36 -0600 Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: | > | > On 9 November 2015 at 01:12, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | > | > edd@max:~$ bts block 802246 by 804495 804496 804497 804498 804499 80

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 8 November 2015 at 17:15, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | On 8 November 2015 at 12:44, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | | > | Also make the bugs block this transition bug: | | > | | > I'll try to look up how to do that :) | | | | You can do that with the bts tool from devscripts: | |

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 9 November 2015 at 01:12, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: | Control: block -1 by 804495 804496 804497 804498 804499 804500 804501 804502 | | On 09/11/15 00:40, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | > On 8 November 2015 at 17:15, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | > | | > | On 8 November 2

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

On 8 November 2015 at 12:44, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: | > | Also make the bugs block this transition bug: | > | > I'll try to look up how to do that :) | | You can do that with the bts tool from devscripts: | | $ bts block 804246 by bug1 bug2 bug3 ... bugN | | Where bug1 to bugN are the

Bug#804246: transition: gsl

Hi Andreas, On 7 November 2015 at 20:17, Andreas Beckmann wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 15:06:14 +0100 Bas Couwenberg | wrote: | > An uncoordinated transition to GSL 2.0 has started in unstable. | | please file RC bugs against the packages that have a versioned

Re: libquantlib-1.2 going away

, lots of ram needed) so some machines time out. How do I request rebuilds with 'more patience' ie a larger timeout window? Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

trouble. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20824.29562.409641.732

Re: R 3.0.0 and required rebuilds of all reverse Depends: of R

On 31 March 2013 at 22:14, Philipp Kern wrote: | On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 12:33:46PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | In the grand scheme of things, R is a rather peripheral package. | | Not sure where you get that idea, but given that you insist on that: | | | pkern@franck ~ % dak rm -nR -s

Re: r-cran-dosnow fix for 700498 cannot migrate to testing

doesn't show me what I did wrong: r-cran-dosnow (1.0.6-2) unstable; urgency=low * debian/control: Added r-cran-snow to Depends(Closes: #700498) * debian/control: Set Build-Depends: to current R version * debian/control: Set Standards-Version: to current version -- Dirk Eddelbuettel e

Re: r-cran-dosnow fix for 700498 cannot migrate to testing

On 28 February 2013 at 21:17, Niels Thykier wrote: | On 2013-02-28 20:57, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Hi Niels, | | On 28 February 2013 at 20:37, Niels Thykier wrote: | | Hi Dirk, | | | | The fix for #700498 is currently stuck in unstable due to a dependency | | on a versioned

Re: r-cran-dosnow fix for 700498 cannot migrate to testing

On 28 February 2013 at 22:17, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 14:43:01 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Don't have one :-/ Only have one for unstable, I fear. | | I have a non-chroot testing. Shall I build there? | | debootstrap --variant=buildd wheezy $path $mirror

Re: Removing Boost 1.46

| | As for the rest that would mean removing the following source packages | from testing: | boost1.46 bitcoin kraft gpsshogi libosl rdkit yade cinfony pycuda | pyopencl | | Cheers, | Julien -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Re: Uncoordinated quantlib transition

On 28 May 2012 at 11:20, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 09:08:35 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | On 27 May 2012 at 09:55, peter green wrote: | | | At least for s390 the problem is not buildd resources. s390 has a 31bit | | | address space, which g++ manages

Re: Uncoordinated quantlib transition

On 28 May 2012 at 20:49, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 12:37:58 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | I though -g0 achieves the goal of building without debugging support? | | It does. Using -O0 OTOH is probably not the best idea. I learn something new every day -- are you

Re: Uncoordinated quantlib transition

may as well do it for RQuantLib which has to build the massive SWIG C++ file again the same QuantLib headers. I guess that'll lead to a debian/rules modification and new a package revision rather than a bin-NMU? Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com

Re: Uncoordinated quantlib transition

On 25 May 2012 at 19:01, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 19:25:54 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | | # Broken Depends: | | | quantlib-swig: quantlib-python [mipsel s390] | | |quantlib-ruby [mipsel s390] | | As can be seen on https://buildd.debian.org

Re: Uncoordinated quantlib transition

(as I've maintained this for a decade) I simply use 'libquantlib' but I was told that versionsed libraries would be better. I am not convinced that that is the case... | explains why your package isn't migrating: | | quantlib (1.1-2 to 1.2-2) | | | | Maintainer: Dirk Eddelbuettel | | 69 days old

Please run 'giveback' of fregression_2100.76-4 on ia64

Hi, The source package 'fregression' (with binary package 'r-cran-fregression') did not build on 'ia64' as the dependency 'polspline' was not building on 'ia64'. That last issue is now taken care of. So 'fregression' can now be built on 'ia64', and should be rebuilt (which would clear the

Bug#605372: tseries: FTBFS on armel: unable to load shared object

Hi Adam, On 14 December 2010 at 20:12, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 12:39 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | reassign 605372 release.debian.org | thanks | | [For reference, at least right now debian-release has only received the | result of your control@ mail, not the mail

Bug#605372: tseries: FTBFS on armel: unable to load shared object

On 14 December 2010 at 21:16, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 14:34 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Hi Adam, | | On 14 December 2010 at 20:12, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | | On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 12:39 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | reassign 605372 release.debian.org

Bug#605372: tseries: FTBFS on armel: unable to load shared object

? Thanks, Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/19719.60243.37318.338

Re: New slurm-llnl package for squeeze

LD_LIBRARY_PATH, so it makes sense there). So I am totally confused. Does that mean there is no bug? Also, the consensus was that for testing I need to upload to testing rather than testing-security? Dirk aka Gennaro's uploader for the last few years -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http

Re: New slurm-llnl package for squeeze

On 6 November 2010 at 14:14, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | On Sat, 2010-11-06 at 09:01 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | On 4 November 2010 at 17:56, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | | It looks like the current Debian package doesn't set LD_LIBRARY_PATH at | | all in the slurm-llnl-slurmdbd init script

Re: New slurm-llnl package for squeeze

. Done -- and likewise with the version for unstable. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http

Re: Bug#599120: r-base-core embeds liblzma

On 16 October 2010 at 11:12, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 00:20:00 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: | | On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 16:12:28 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | r-base 2.11.1-7 seems to have been built everywhere now. I would kindly ask | you to unblock

Re: Bug#599120: r-base-core embeds liblzma

On 16 October 2010 at 13:48, Julien Cristau wrote: | On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:46:19 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Darn. But there is nothing I can do here. I made six or seven pre-releases | of R 2.12 to experimental in the meantime and left unstable alone. | | But now R 2.12 came

Re: Bug#599120: r-base-core embeds liblzma

. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/19627.38076.427317.129...@max.nulle.part

Bug#594363: unblock: r-base/2.11.1-6

) -- Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org Sun, 15 Aug 2010 08:09:11 -0500 r-base (2.11.1-5) unstable; urgency=low * debian/rules: Also set ${cflags}, ${cxxflags}, ${fcflags} during configure in light of #590126 * debian/rules: Set FCFLAGS as well as FFLAGS -- Dirk Eddelbuettel e

Transition: Please push quantlib, quantlib-swig, rquantlib

Hi release team, This comes up whenever Quantlib releases their packages 'quantlib' and 'quantlib-swig' and I update my 'rquantlib' --- a mutual block which (IIRC) you need to manually override. Could you please do so for source packages quantlib quantlib-swig rquantlib Many

Re: Transition: Please push quantlib, quantlib-swig, rquantlib

On 17 March 2010 at 20:30, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | Hi, | | On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 14:58 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | This comes up whenever Quantlib releases their packages 'quantlib' and | 'quantlib-swig' and I update my 'rquantlib' --- a mutual block which (IIRC) | you need to manually

Bug#572839: [Fwd: Bug#572839: transition: graphviz]

On 10 March 2010 at 11:38, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org writes: | On 10 March 2010 at 01:22, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: | Christoph Egger christ...@debian.org writes: |graphviz should now already sit in incoming (provided I didn't | mess up uploading

Bug#572839: [Fwd: Bug#572839: transition: graphviz]

On 10 March 2010 at 01:22, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: | Christoph Egger christ...@debian.org writes: | On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:05:47PM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | On 9 March 2010 at 21:33, David Claughton wrote: | | That would be the latest 2.26.3 version. It's in experimental now

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

On 20 December 2009 at 17:55, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | Hi, | | Sorry for the delayed response. | | On Thu, 2009-12-17 at 07:17 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | On 15 December 2009 at 19:40, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | | libquantlib-0.9.7 has been removed from unstable. However,rquantlib

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

Adam, Thanks for the update! On 15 December 2009 at 19:40, Adam D. Barratt wrote: | [CCs to ftp-master and Torsten dropped as this has become a -release | issue again] | | On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 12:51 -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | On 12 December 2009 at 13:53, Torsten Werner wrote

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

Hi Torsten, On 12 December 2009 at 13:53, Torsten Werner wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel schrieb: | Maybe not. See | | r-cran-rquantlib still depends on QL 0.9.7. How is it looking now? Will we have to wait until quantlib, quantlib-swig and r-cran-rquantlib can go in jointly or would we be ready

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

On 12 December 2009 at 13:53, Torsten Werner wrote: | Dirk Eddelbuettel schrieb: | Maybe not. See | | r-cran-rquantlib still depends on QL 0.9.7. Good point -- I will release that this morning. [ This is 'indirectly circular' as I (as upstream for it) try to wait til it is in testing so

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

On 12 December 2009 at 08:08, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | On 12 December 2009 at 13:53, Torsten Werner wrote: | | Dirk Eddelbuettel schrieb: | | Maybe not. See | | | | r-cran-rquantlib still depends on QL 0.9.7. | | Good point -- I will release that this morning. Done -- r-cran-rquantlib_0.3.1

quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

Dear release team, Source package quantlib is in unstable for 9 days now at 0.9.9-2 after a) some time in new (new lib) and one rejection (debian/copyright needed some love). However, _not one_ arch appears to have been built so the migration to testing will not happen. Could you guys maybe

Re: quantlib 0.9.9 is nine days old but has not been built on any arch

this to be false: quantlib-swig (0.9.9-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release * debian/control: Updated Standards-Version: to current value -- Dirk Eddelbuettel e...@debian.org Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:01:53 -0600 These things get released together upstream, so Quantlib (QL for short) 0.9.7 had QL

Re: Bug#551931: libprotobuf-dev: Version 2.2 released on August 11

On 13 November 2009 at 12:32, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Added CC to debian-release... | | On 13 November 2009 at 19:11, Iustin Pop wrote: | | On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 05:24:59AM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | | On 31 October 2009 at 04:49, Iustin Pop wrote: | | | On Fri, Oct 30, 2009

Re: Bug#551931: libprotobuf-dev: Version 2.2 released on August 11

Added CC to debian-release... On 13 November 2009 at 19:11, Iustin Pop wrote: | On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 05:24:59AM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | On 31 October 2009 at 04:49, Iustin Pop wrote: | | On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 07:08:43PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | | On 22

R 2.10.0 requires r-cran-* rebuilds

Folks, The quick three-liner (at the very bottom of this mail) identified you as a maintainer of an R package in Debian. As I wrote to debian-devel (and later debian-release who ignored me, again CCed here though): R 2.10.0, due out October 26, will switch to an internal html converter

Rebuilding all 100+ r-cran-* packages for R 2.10.0 + security question

[ I send the following to d-devel and d-science earlier today; Cyril responded suggesting that talk to -release re paragraphs 2 and 3, and to -security re paragraph 4. Comments welcome, and CCs appreciated. --Dirk ] On 16 October 2009 at 13:29, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | R 2.10.0, due out

Re: libpoppler3 missing in unstable

On 11 March 2009 at 10:03, Lo c Minier wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | I see you're concerned with the way we handle SONAME transitions. | Please bring this up directly to the release team (Cc:-ed). My bug report against ftp.debian.org was immediately close: that's how it is in unstable.

Please let this into t-p-u (Re: Processing of r-base-core-ra_1.1.1-2+lenny1_i386.changes)

patch to javareconf, and nothing else. * Thanks to Chris Walker for keeping his eyes on the ball for this. -- Dirk Eddelbuettel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:41:46 -0500 r-base-core-ra (1.1.1-2) unstable; urgency=low * debian/rules: Patch javareconf as we do for r-base-core * src

Re: Please upload 'r-base on alpha' build (Re: Please hint or push r-base 2.7.1-1 into testing)

On 14 July 2008 at 08:26, Steve Langasek wrote: | On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 08:42:06PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Alpha team, | | On 14 July 2008 at 02:43, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: | | On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 07:12:33PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | | | r-base 2.7.1-1

Please hint or push r-base 2.7.1-1 into testing

r-base 2.7.1-1 is listed as 19 days old and waiting for Alpha, but has seemingly been built on Alpha. Could you please let it move into testing? Thanks, Dirk -- Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of

Please upload 'r-base on alpha' build (Re: Please hint or push r-base 2.7.1-1 into testing)

Alpha team, On 14 July 2008 at 02:43, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: | On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 07:12:33PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | r-base 2.7.1-1 is listed as 19 days old and waiting for Alpha, but has | seemingly been built on Alpha. | | Built means that it still isn't uploaded

Need manual override

There is something stuck in our records that I would need someone to manually push, please. There may also be a bug lurking in the infrastructure scripts, please below. On 2 June 2008 at 08:23, DDPOMail robot wrote: | === farma: | = Missing build(s) on alpha,hppa | This might need manual

Re: Need rescheduled build of 'farma' on hppa (Was: forwarded message from Dirk Eddelbuettel)

Hi Lamont, Thanks for the quick reply. On 2 June 2008 at 13:45, LaMont Jones wrote: | On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 01:38:49PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Content-Description: message body text | Thanks for rebuilding farma aka r-cran-farma on hppa. It is holding up | transitions to testing

Re: Need rescheduled build of 'farma' on hppa (Was: forwarded message from Dirk Eddelbuettel)

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:31:20PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: * Dirk Eddelbuettel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080602 22:24]: Thanks for the quick reply. On 2 June 2008 at 13:45, LaMont Jones wrote: | On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 01:38:49PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Content-Description

Re: Need rescheduled build of 'farma' on hppa (Was: forwarded message from Dirk Eddelbuettel)

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:55:43PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:31:20PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: * Dirk Eddelbuettel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080602 22:24]: Now, as this has been fixed via give-back, we still do NOT know why Lamont sees

Re: Need rescheduled build of 'farma' on hppa (Was: forwarded message from Dirk Eddelbuettel)

On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 11:25:23PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:55:43PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 10:31:20PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: * Dirk Eddelbuettel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080602 22:24

Re: binNMUs for gfortran transition

Philipp, On 11 March 2008 at 12:22, Philipp Kern wrote: | Dirk, | | On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 09:01:38PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | I goofed once [ quadprog ] and uploaded without a proper binNMU version | number, which I then corrected but it sorts lower. We'll see what the | installer

Re: binNMUs for gfortran transition

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 09:23:35PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: Chasing the long tail in gfortran transition.. The following packages need a binNMU with latest r-base-dev to get rid of atlas3/reblas3 depends. Aurel32, the list applies for kfreebsd-i386 as well. robustbase_0.2-8-1, Transition

Re: binNMUs for gfortran transition

On 10 March 2008 at 21:23, Riku Voipio wrote: | | Chasing the long tail in gfortran transition.. The following packages | need a binNMU with latest r-base-dev to get rid of atlas3/reblas3 | depends. Aurel32, the list applies for kfreebsd-i386 as well. | | robustbase_0.2-8-1, Transition to

fportfolio needs fassets

fassets [ aka 'r-cran-fassets'] failed on a few arches in December because fregression [ aka 'r-cran-fregression'] was not available. fregression has been in testing for ages. Could you PLEASE reschedule a new build attempt for fassets? Once it is in, we need the same for fportfolio [aka

Re: fportfolio needs fassets

On 1 March 2008 at 16:57, Steve Langasek wrote: | On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 06:05:11PM -0600, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | fassets [ aka 'r-cran-fassets'] failed on a few arches in December because | fregression [ aka 'r-cran-fregression'] was not available. | | It failed on alpha because

Re: gretl migration into testing

Hi Jack, On 23 January 2008 at 09:00, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote: | Hi Dirk, | | according to http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=gretl, the | only thing preventing gretl 1.7.1 from going into testing is a problem on | the mipsel platform. However, it looks like the build on

fportfolio needs rescheduled build

The 'fportfolio' source package with binary 'r-cran-fportfolio' needs rebuilds. It failed around Nov 17 on sparc, alpha with what looks like corrupted builders (ie 'debhelper: missing' looks odd to me) and has not been retried. It also failed on arm, mips, mipsel, powerpc with

Re: R-Base 2.6.1 request for on sparc

Gents, We're still being help up by Sparc. Could someone, now that I eve switched to the correct [EMAIL PROTECTED] address, please reschedule a build of r-base on sparc? Thanks, Dirk On 6 December 2007 at 20:12, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Debian-Sparc'ers and Release Team, | | Christopher

Re: R-Base 2.6.1 request for on sparc

Debian-Sparc'ers and Release Team, Christopher (CC'ed) noticed the same thing I saw when I checked a few days ago: R (aka source package r-base) is being held up by a missing sparc build. The build log shows that is was a matter of TeXlive being broken at the time and none of R's fault. Could

Re: r-base and rpy

On 13 November 2007 at 12:41, Florian Weimer wrote: | * Dirk Eddelbuettel: | | r-base still thinks it would make rpy uninstallable, and there is something | else I don't understand: | |i) Bjorn's 'why nopt in testing' page claims rpy is missing arm and spec builds | |ii) the buildd

Re: r-base and rpy

Hi again, On 24 October 2007 at 19:11, Adeodato Simó wrote: | * Dirk Eddelbuettel [Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:03:22 -0500]: | | Could you hint these into testing, please? | | I've hinted them now. r-base still thinks it would make rpy uninstallable, and there is something else I don't understand

Re: r-base and rpy

On 24 October 2007 at 19:11, Adeodato Simó wrote: | * Dirk Eddelbuettel [Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:03:22 -0500]: | | Could you hint these into testing, please? | | I've hinted them now. Thanks a lot -- much appreciated! Dirk -- Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.

r-base and rpy

Hi all, Unless I am missing something, -- r-base (2.6.0-3) should be ready for testing: though it claims it makes rpy uninstallable ... -- rpy should be ready too, I made a version for R 2.6.0 a month ago; the pages say missing on mipsel but otoh

Re: Gsl in testing

On 18 October 2007 at 17:37, Steve Langasek wrote: | On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 09:44:35AM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | - snd needs to replace its versioned build-dep on fftw3-dev with a | | build-dep on libfftw3-dev (Bug#445794) | | Someone could do a NMU for snd then. | | Which also

Re: Gsl in testing

On 18 October 2007 at 18:29, Steve Langasek wrote: | On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 08:13:26PM -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | | Your gsl package also has a | | release-critical bug in lenny, after all, that's held up by the | | reverse-dependencies not being ready. | | I'm confused. Which bug

Re: Gsl in testing

On 18 October 2007 at 20:52, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: | Give me a moment, I may get to NMUing snd today, assuming that would help. Done. snd_7.18-2.2 is being uploaded as I type. Dirk -- Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Gsl in testing

Gudjon, On 11 October 2007 at 14:05, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote: | Hi Dirk |I was reading the package homepage for Gsl. Is there any way to push Gsl | into Testing? There may be, but I as the 'mere maintainer' am not in a position to push. Gsl is being held back by the 'ldbl' transition,

<    1   2   3   >