[DRE-maint] Bug#861040: camping: diff for NMU version 2.1.580-1.1 (was: Bug#861040: camping: broken symlink: /usr/share/doc/camping/rdoc/fonts/Lato-RegularItalic.ttf -> ../../../../fonts/truetype/lato

2017-05-06 Thread Christoph Biedl
Control: tags 861040 + patch Control: tags 861040 + pending Chris Lamb wrote... > Christoph Biedl wrote: > > > So would just naming the link Lato-RegularItalic.ttf [..] > > fix the issue? > > Works for me :) Updated patch attached. Thanks for testing, here we go:

[DRE-maint] Bug#861040: Bug#861040: camping: broken symlink: /usr/share/doc/camping/rdoc/fonts/Lato-RegularItalic.ttf -> ../../../../fonts/truetype/lato/Lato-RegularItalic.ttf

2017-05-06 Thread Christoph Biedl
Christian Hofstaedtler wrote... > * Chris Lamb [170424 11:45]: > > > The fonts-lato ships /usr/share/fonts/truetype/lato/Lato-Italic.ttf > > > instead. > > > > Indeed. Patch attached. > > > - ln -s /usr/share/fonts/truetype/lato/Lato-RegularItalic.ttf > >

[DRE-maint] Bug#881627: ruby-http-parser.rb: FTBFS with newer http-parser version

2017-11-13 Thread Christoph Biedl
Source: ruby-http-parser.rb Version: 0.6.0-3+b3 Severity: serious Tags: upstream Dear Maintainer, your package build-depends on http-parser, and a new version of that one has been around for a while. Even before eventually uploading last night I already saw a problem in the test suite of your

[DRE-maint] Bug#881627: ruby-http-parser.rb: FTBFS with newer http-parser version

2017-11-14 Thread Christoph Biedl
tags 881627 patch thanks Christoph Biedl wrote... > Would you mind disabling or relaxing the test on your side for > the time being? Patch attached, tested successfully. As I noticed some packaging work has been done since the last release, so I'm somewhat reluctant to do a NMU. But

[DRE-maint] Bug#895188: asciidoctor: E-mail addresses are rendered twice [manpage backend]

2018-04-08 Thread Christoph Biedl
ugreport was written for the Debian project by Christoph Biedl <debian.a...@manchmal.in-ulm.de> but may be used by others (although there should be no need for this). EXPECTED This manpage was written for the Debian project by Christoph Biedl <debian.a...@manchmal.in-ulm.de> but

[DRE-maint] Bug#895187: asciidoctor: In the manpage backend, URLs are wrapped by default

2018-04-08 Thread Christoph Biedl
Package: asciidoctor Version: 1.5.5-1 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, ASCIIPATIENT(1) === NAME asciipatient - In the manpage backend, URLs are wrapped by default DESCRIPTION --- Different from the output created by asciidoc, embedded URLs are happily wrapped

[DRE-maint] Bug#895186: asciidoctor: In the manpage backend, URLs change alignment

2018-04-08 Thread Christoph Biedl
Package: asciidoctor Version: 1.5.5-1 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, ASCIIPATIENT(1) === NAME asciipatient - In the manpage backend, URLs change alignment DESCRIPTION --- The *roff output created by the "manpage" backend contains a ".ad l" at the very beginning,

[DRE-maint] Bug#895188: asciidoctor: E-mail addresses are rendered twice [manpage backend]

2018-04-08 Thread Christoph Biedl
Joseph Herlant wrote... > To achieve your goal you would need to use the following: > mailto:debian.a...@manchmal.in-ulm.de[Christoph Biedl] (...) > Is that acceptable? Certainly. Christoph, should actually be able to read documentation on his own signature.asc Description: PGP

[DRE-maint] Bug#882308: http-parser 2.7 breaks ruby-em-http-request's tests

2018-04-03 Thread Christoph Biedl
Jérémy Lal wrote... > Control: reassign -1 ruby-http-parser.rb Thanks for taking care of that one. However ... > it seems ruby-em-http-request uses a fork of http_parser.rb that has not > been updated for a while. However, upstream seems to have fixed some > issues with more recents http-parser

[DRE-maint] Bug#882308: http-parser 2.7 breaks ruby-em-http-request's tests

2018-04-03 Thread Christoph Biedl
forwarded 882308 https://github.com/igrigorik/em-http-request/issues/316 thanks Jérémy Lal wrote... > Control: reassign -1 ruby-em-http-request > I took the liberty to reassign it to it. Feel free to reassign to > whichever you see it would be better assigned. Good question where to put it, you