reassign 559419 ftp.debian.org
retitle 559419 http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html: links to individual
packages broken
severity 559419 normal
affects 559419 qa.debian.org
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 09:41:00AM +0100, Micha Lenk wrote:
> if an upload sits in NEW for approval by the ftp m
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: important
Hi,
let's look at http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/openoffice.org.html. We see
at the top: "There are 5 open security issues, please fix them. "
Let's look what they are:
CVE-2009-0200 Integer underflow in OpenOffice.org (OOo) before 3.1.1 and ...
fi
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 04:35:39PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> CVE-2009-2139 Heap-based buffer overflow in
> svtools/source/filter.vcl/wmf/enhwmf.cxx ...
> CVE-2009-2140 Multiple heap-based buffer overflows in ...
> CVE-2009-3239 Buffer overflow in the EMF parser imple
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 10:57:26PM +0200, George Danchev wrote:
> packages with more than 10/100 open bugs (any kind of)
That is a nonsensical measure. Big packages have many bugs. Many of them
are upstream bugs. It doesn't make sense to use a hardcoded value like this.
> and eventually repo
Hi,
Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> ipw2200 and ieee80211 have been orphaned a few days ago. Since both are
> present
> in current 2.6 kernels (2.6.14 onwards) I'd recommend to remove them right
> away.
See the buglogs. Already proposed this...
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hi,
see http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rene&comaint=yes -
openoffice.org has 15 (16) bugs tagged as pending but on neither link it
actually shows them. you just get a empty buglist...
Those bugs are shown normally on
http://bugs.debian.org/src:op
Hi,
Matthew Palmer wrote:
> * It's also important to ensure that the maintainer address is set correctly.
> The address has changed in the past, and some packages haven't had their
> maintainer address changed since it's orphaning (even after several QA
> uploads!), so ensure that the maintainer
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > mozilla-locale-ko
> > mozilla-locale-zh-hk
> > mozilla-thunderbird-locale-es
> I guess we should not dump these localisation packages ...
At least the first two are horribly out of date...
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. R
Hi,
Pierre Machard wrote:
> > Bugs w.r.t. CVS snapshot of a2ps will be fixed when I upload new
> > package based on the old 4.13b. AbiWord bugs - Bug#231649 is not
> > really abiword's bug (I've already uploaded new libwpd7 package a week
> > ago and it doesn't enter the archive yet) and I have n
Package: qa.debian.org
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-09-16
Severity: wishlist
Hi, me again :)
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rene; openoffice.org has
dozens of merged bugs. I occassionally go over all bugs and do a mass
severity-changing, reassigning, tagging etc.
So what the cur
Hi,
Igor Genibel wrote:
> * Raphael Goulais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-09-02 10:39:51 +0200]:
>
> > On Monday 01 September 2003 19:41, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > I know that display in the statusbar. The problem is not solved there
> > > because you still hav
Hi,
Igor Genibel wrote:
> > Please make them somehow sorted (alphabetically probably, as the PTS
> > seems doing).
>
> I did something in order to show these links less obfuscated. I have
> provided an "title" property to these links in order to be shown when
> you pass the mouse over
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
the binary package links apparently are not sorted. This is annoying
when you want to look at one specific package produced by a hughe
multi-binary package as xfree86 or openoffice.org.
Please make them somehow sorted (alphabetically probably, as the
reopen 202994
submitter 202994 !
retitle 202994 Uploaders: info outdated (testing...)
thanks
Hi Igor,
Igor Genibel wrote:
> IThe new version of developer.php fixes this bug. Only unstable priority
> is provided now.
The same problem exists with Uploaders:
See http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?l
reopen 182031
thanks
Hi Igor,
Igor Genibel wrote:
> Also I have fixed the bug complement you provides me (Architecture
> specific packages don't have to provide buildd link).
I think what you have done was a little bit to enthusiastic :-)
See http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rene again,
ause - when it really cannot be packaged and if the bug is archived -
someone comes again with an ITP for that and someone has to explain him
(or he does find out himself) that it cannot be packaged.
Waste of time, no?
Regards,
Rene
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Develope
t; in the
> > Buildd column.
This isn't fixed..
Oh, and BTW: when we're at it. Could you remove the buildd link for
package who have only one arch package (Architecture: foo) too because
there is nothing auobuilt too (see toshset on the above link as an example)
Regards,
Rene
--
.
:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux stan 2.4.18 #1 Son Nov 3 01:29:12 CET 2002 i686
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
intainer: Torsten Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$
I think this ITP/RFP is obsolete because
a) slport4.5 is in Debian
b) nidd said OOo needs 4.0, if you look the actual openoffice.org-bin
1.0.2-2, you'll see runs with libstlport4.5c102...
Regards,
Rene
--
.''
7;news' aspect, you're right. That indicates that
upstream development is slept or it died...
Regards,
Rene
--
.''`.Rene Engelhard
: :' :** Debian GNU/Linux Developer **
`. `' http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpyr4TI9Fbrd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
20 matches
Mail list logo
