On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 03:22:00PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Control: tags -1 pending
>
> On 22.12.2016 13:02, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:30:30AM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
[snip]
> >> It would be great if you could prepare a debdiff for a standard NMU.
> >
> > Deb
Hi.
I'm one of the persons that used to maintain rtorrent/libtorrent until
the last uploads. In my opinion, no one would mind if you committed
your work to the collab-maint repos.
Oh, BTW, if I am still listed as one of the uploaders, please kindly
remove me. I'm swamped with work right now.
Th
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 pending
Bug #828414 [src:libtorrent] libtorrent: FTBFS with openssl 1.1.0
Added tag(s) pending.
--
828414: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=828414
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Control: tags -1 pending
On 22.12.2016 13:02, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:30:30AM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> Dear Peter,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:37:35AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>>> Oh, and, of course, if people feel that a collab-maint commit does not
>>> re
Hello Peter,
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 02:02:59PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:30:30AM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > Dear Peter,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:37:35AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > > Oh, and, of course, if people feel that a collab-maint commit
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:30:30AM +, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Dear Peter,
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:37:35AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > Oh, and, of course, if people feel that a collab-maint commit does not
> > really count as a team upload (but isn't this the purpose of collab-maint?)
Dear Peter,
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 08:37:35AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> Oh, and, of course, if people feel that a collab-maint commit does not
> really count as a team upload (but isn't this the purpose of collab-maint?),
> I can send another debdiff, formatted as a real NMU, and then commit
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:26:50AM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 03:14:49PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:45:38 +0200 Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > [...]
> > > So, what do you think about the attached series of patches?
> > > - the first three are ac
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 03:14:49PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:45:38 +0200 Peter Pentchev wrote:
> [...]
> > So, what do you think about the attached series of patches?
> > - the first three are actually meant to bring the Git repository in line
> > with what was uploa
On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:45:38 +0200 Peter Pentchev wrote:
[...]
> So, what do you think about the attached series of patches?
> - the first three are actually meant to bring the Git repository in line
> with what was uploaded as libtorrent-0.13.6-1
> - the next one starts a changelog entry just t
Thanks Peter, I can confirm your whole patchset compiles and works for
me just fine on armhf!
Hi,
Thanks for taking care of libtorrent!
I took a quick look at #828414 (since how-can-i-help complained that
rtorrent was facing autoremoval from testing), and it turns out that
it's yet another instance of the opaque DH structure change in
OpenSSL 1.1. Well, that's what started the ball rolli
12 matches
Mail list logo