Bug#1067953: marked as done (transition: flint)

Your message dated Fri, 3 May 2024 07:37:34 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1067953: transition: flint has caused the Debian Bug report #1067953, regarding transition: flint to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the cas

Bug#1056574: marked as done (transition: ppp)

Your message dated Fri, 3 May 2024 07:35:35 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1056574: transition: ppp has caused the Debian Bug report #1056574, regarding transition: ppp to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it

Bug#1070271: marked as done (nmu: 64-bit time_t rebuilds for experimental)

Your message dated Fri, 3 May 2024 07:26:31 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1070271: nmu: 64-bit time_t rebuilds for experimental has caused the Debian Bug report #1070271, regarding nmu: 64-bit time_t rebuilds for experimental to be marked as done. This means that you claim that t

Bug#1070266: marked as done (nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1)

Your message dated Fri, 3 May 2024 07:26:19 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1070266: nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #1070266, regarding nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wi

Processed: Re: Bug#1070266: nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1

Processing control commands: > tags -1 +moreinfo Bug #1070266 [release.debian.org] nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 1070266: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1070266 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#1070266: nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1

Control: tags -1 +moreinfo On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 12:57 AM Andres Salomon wrote: > Snappy 1.2.0-1 was uploaded with broken symbols (see > https://bugs.debian.org/1070217). This is fixed in snappy 1.2.0-2, but > chromium in sid had already built against the broken version of snappy. Nope, the sym

Bug#1070271: nmu: 64-bit time_t rebuilds for experimental

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu The package in sid had a renaming t64 transition, but experimental already has a different SOVERSION, so only a binNMU is needed. nmu openmm_8.1.0+dfsg-2 . ANY . experimental . -m "Rebuild f

Bug#1070266: nmu: chromium_124.0.6367.118-1

Package: release.debian.org User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Severity: serious Hello, Snappy 1.2.0-1 was uploaded with broken symbols (see https://bugs.debian.org/1070217). This is fixed in snappy 1.2.0-2, but chromium in sid had already built against the broken ve

Bug#1061645: marked as done (transition: poco)

Your message dated Thu, 2 May 2024 23:39:05 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1061645: poco: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition has caused the Debian Bug report #1061645, regarding transition: poco to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt wit

Bug#1061645: poco: NMU diff for 64-bit time_t transition

This has essentially happened because I have accidentally uploaded to unstable. The only reverse dependency that still depends on the old SONAME is clickhouse, which FTBFS due to unrelated issues. I think this can be closed.

Bug#1070249: bookworm-pu: package python-jwcrypto/1.1.0-1+deb12u1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal Tags: bookworm User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: pu X-Debbugs-Cc: steve.mcint...@pexip.com, Timo Aaltonen Hi, [ Reason ] I've backported the upstream fix for CVE-2024-28102 (#1065688) to bookworm. It's not considered critical as a

Bug#1068082: bullseye-pu: package intel-microcode/3.20240312.1~deb11u1

On Mon, Apr 22, 2024, at 13:58, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > Control: tag -1 confirmed > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 07:50:45AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >> As requested by the security team, I would like to bring the microcode >> update level for Intel processors in Bullseye and Bookw

Re: Bug#1068633: bookworm-pu: package cjson/1.7.15-1+deb12u1

Ping! Could someone please have a look at and approve the bookworm-pu for cjson? The debdiff was changed a while back, and it is attached in this mail. Kind regards, Maytham On Mon, 2024-04-08 at 12:27 +0300, Maytham Alsudany wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > Tags: bookwor

Bug#1070230: marked as done (nmu: osmo-msc_1.9.0+dfsg1-2 osmo-sgsn_1.9.0+dfsg1-3)

Your message dated Thu, 2 May 2024 14:18:14 +0200 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#1070230: nmu: osmo-msc_1.9.0+dfsg1-2 osmo-sgsn_1.9.0+dfsg1-3 has caused the Debian Bug report #1070230, regarding nmu: osmo-msc_1.9.0+dfsg1-2 osmo-sgsn_1.9.0+dfsg1-3 to be marked as done. This means that y

Processed: bookworm-pu: package python3.11/3.11.2-6+deb12u2

Processing control commands: > affects -1 + src:python3.11 Bug #1070232 [release.debian.org] bookworm-pu: package python3.11/3.11.2-6+deb12u2 Added indication that 1070232 affects src:python3.11 -- 1070232: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1070232 Debian Bug Tracking System Con

Bug#1070230: nmu: osmo-msc_1.9.0+dfsg1-2 osmo-sgsn_1.9.0+dfsg1-3

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu osmo-msc_1.9.0+dfsg1-2 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against libosmo-sccp with t64 renaming reverted." nmu osmo-sgsn_1.9.0+dfsg1-3 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against libosmo-sccp w