Bug#307211: saxon-catalog: FTBFS (testing): Semantic Error: The abstract method "java.lang.String getRawName(int $1);", inherited from type "org.xml.sax.Attributes", is not implemented in the non-abstract class "cz.kosek.CatalogXMLReader".
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 02:04:10PM -0400, Mark Johnson wrote: > (I'm resending this cuz I forgot to CC: everyone...) > > Hi All, > > IMO, this package should be dropped, as the wrapper script probably needs to > be rewritten, and the > package depends on stuff that is superceded by the > libxml-commons-resolver1.1-java package. > > IIRC, libxml-commons-resolver has hooks to provide catalog support for Saxon > - though I'm not > exactly sure about that. > > Mark - care to adopt this (saxon-catalog) package? I seriously need to orphan > it, as I no longer > have the time to give it the attention it deserves. As its a java package it should be enough to move the Maintainer field to "Debian Java Maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>". And please put yourself into the Uploaders field. That should be enough to let the Debian Java group take over the package. Then the group will maintain it. No need to orphan it. Michael -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: a missing dependency is RC
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 306015 grave Bug#306015: php4-mysql: Should depend on php4 Severity set to `grave'. > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306838: jargon-text: FTBFS: ERROR at cmdline.c:96: Unknown option -no-references
On 05-May-03 01:27, Paul Martin wrote: > This FTBFS will go away when elinks 0.10.4-3 reaches "testing"... but > your patch means that there's going to be a bug raised because it will > then FTBFS into a nice-looking text file. > > Filing an FTBFS on an "architecture: all" package that contains only a > plain text file, and then doing a zero-day NMU within 48 hours is not a > nice thing to do. It's not that important a package to warrant such > urgency. ??? I did not NMU the package. I just filed the FTBFS bug report. Regards Andreas Jochens -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307290: addresses-for-gnustep: FTBFS (testing): cannot find protocol declaration for `ContentViewersProtocol'
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:23:14AM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote:
> >>>With the attached patch, 'addresses-for-gnustep' can be compiled
> >>>on i386/testing. There is a new version of addresses-for-gnustep
> >>>in sid which already has this patch applied, but which will probably
> >>>not enter sarge because of #304968.
> >>#304968 will be closed when gnustep-back will be a valid candidate (in 2
> >>days).
> >gnustep-back is a valid candidate tomorrow; you ought to close this bug
> >now.
> What bug should I close now :
> #304968 (gnustep-base)
> or #307290 (addresses-for-gnustep)
> or both ?
If what you want is for gnustep-{base,back,gui} to go in when gnustep-back
is a valid candidate, then you should close 304968 now.
And then 307290 can be closed once they're all accepted into testing.
Cheers,
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bug#307290: addresses-for-gnustep: FTBFS (testing): cannot find protocol declaration for `ContentViewersProtocol'
Steve Langasek a écrit : On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 08:03:55PM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote: Package: addresses-for-gnustep Version: 0.4.6-3 Severity: serious Tags: sarge When building 'addresses-for-gnustep' on i386/testing, I get the following error: gcc VCFViewer.m -c \ -MMD -MP -DGNUSTEP -DGNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY=1 -DGNU_GUI_LIBRARY=1 -DGNU_RUNTIME=1 -DGNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY=1 -D_REENTRANT -fPIC -DGSWARN -DGSDIAGNOSE -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fgnu-runtime -Wall -fconstant-string-class=NSConstantString -I/addresses-for-gnustep-0.4.6/Frameworks -I. -I/root/GNUstep/Library/Headers -I/usr/local/lib/GNUstep/Local/Library/Headers -I/usr/local/lib/GNUstep/Network/Library/Headers -I/usr/lib/GNUstep/System/Library/Headers \ -o shared_obj/VCFViewer.o In file included from VCFViewer.m:16: VCFViewer.h:17:47: warning: GWorkspace/ContentViewersProtocol.h: No such file or directory In file included from VCFViewer.m:16: VCFViewer.h:25: error: cannot find protocol declaration for `ContentViewersProtocol' make[3]: *** [shared_obj/VCFViewer.o] Error 1 With the attached patch, 'addresses-for-gnustep' can be compiled on i386/testing. There is a new version of addresses-for-gnustep in sid which already has this patch applied, but which will probably not enter sarge because of #304968. #304968 will be closed when gnustep-back will be a valid candidate (in 2 days). gnustep-back is a valid candidate tomorrow; you ought to close this bug now. What bug should I close now : #304968 (gnustep-base) or #307290 (addresses-for-gnustep) or both ? Eric
Processed: This is not a missing dependency, feh
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 306015 important Bug#306015: php4-mysql: Should depend on php4 Severity set to `important'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Patch for building on both sarge and sid
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 307211 patch Bug#307211: saxon-catalog: FTBFS (testing): Semantic Error: The abstract method "java.lang.String getRawName(int $1);", inherited from type "org.xml.sax.Attributes", is not implemented in the non-abstract class "cz.kosek.CatalogXMLReader". Tags were: sarge Tags added: patch > stop Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307211: Patch for building on both sarge and sid
tags 307211 patch stop Hi, with jikes-kaffe instead of jikes-classpath this package builts on both sarge and sid systems. Wolfgang --- debian/control.orig 2005-05-03 08:48:35.0 + +++ debian/control 2005-05-03 08:49:50.0 + @@ -2,12 +2,12 @@ Section: contrib/text Priority: optional Maintainer: Mark Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -Build-Depends-Indep: debhelper (>= 4), arbortext-catalog, libsaxon-java (>= 6.5.4), jikes-classpath, fastjar +Build-Depends-Indep: debhelper (>= 4), arbortext-catalog, libsaxon-java (>= 6.5.4), jikes-kaffe, fastjar Standards-Version: 3.6.1 Package: saxon-catalog Architecture: all -Depends: java-common, libsaxon-java (>= 6.5.4), arbortext-catalog, libcrimson-java, kaffe | java-runtime +Depends: java-common, libsaxon-java (>= 6.5.4), arbortext-catalog, libcrimson-java, kaffe | java1-runtime | java2-runtime Suggests: docbook-xsl (>= 1.45) Description: Catalog support and wrapper for the Saxon XSLT Processor This package provides a simple front-end to Saxon for processing XML --- debian/rules.orig 2005-05-03 08:48:05.0 + +++ debian/rules2005-05-03 08:48:26.0 + @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ build-stamp: dh_testdir if [ ! -d build ]; then mkdir build; fi - jikes-classpath -cp /usr/share/java/saxon.jar:/usr/share/java/catalog.jar -sourcepath src -d build `find src -name \*.java` + jikes-kaffe -cp /usr/share/java/saxon.jar:/usr/share/java/catalog.jar -sourcepath src -d build `find src -name \*.java` (cd build; fastjar -cf ../saxon-catalog.jar `find . -name \*.class` ) touch build-stamp
Bug#307338: ncurses-ruby: FTBFS: `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory
hi Kurt, On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 05:49:20PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > Your package is failing to build with the following error: > install -p -m 0755 ncurses_bin.so /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux > install: cannot stat `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory > > It builds the 3 .c files, but then doesn't create the > ncurses_bin.so and just installs it. indeed, this is strange as it worked before. I'll try to find out what exactly the problem is. > It seems to have 2 rules to make the .so file: > > This is what I get when running: make ncurses_bin.so > Makefile:138: Commands were specified for file `ncurses_bin.so' at > Makefile:104,Makefile:138: but `ncurses_bin.so' is now considered the same > file as `/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/ncurses_bin.so'. > Makefile:138: Commands for `/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/ncurses_bin.so' will > be ignored in favor of those for `ncurses_bin.so'. > make: Circular /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/ncurses_bin.so <- > /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/ncurses_bin.so dependency dropped. > install -p -m 0755 ncurses_bin.so /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux > install: cannot stat `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory > make: *** [/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/ncurses_bin.so] Error 1 > > Line 103-104: > $(RUBYARCHDIR)/$(DLLIB): $(DLLIB) > $(INSTALL_PROG) $(DLLIB) $(RUBYARCHDIR) > > Line 137-139: > $(DLLIB): $(OBJS) > @-$(RM) $@ > $(LDSHARED) $(DLDFLAGS) $(LIBPATH) -o $@ $(OBJS) $(LOCAL_LIBS) $(LIBS) bye, - michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306838: jargon-text: FTBFS: ERROR at cmdline.c:96: Unknown option -no-references
ti, 2005-05-03 kello 01:27 +0100, Paul Martin kirjoitti: > This FTBFS will go away when elinks 0.10.4-3 reaches "testing"... but > your patch means that there's going to be a bug raised because it will > then FTBFS into a nice-looking text file. > Filing an FTBFS on an "architecture: all" package that contains only a > plain text file, and then doing a zero-day NMU within 48 hours is not a > nice thing to do. It's not that important a package to warrant such > urgency. Andreas opened the bug. I did the NMU. I meant to help things, not make them worse. Sorry about any confusion. Since this bug is release critical, one of two things needs to happen before sarge can release: either the bug is fixed or jargon-text is removed from sarge. I think the former is the better option. This is why I made the NMU. I uploaded it immediately because we are very close to freezing sarge, and this means that release critical bugs should be closed as quickly as possible. That is why the project is in a 0-day NMU period until the freeze. Removing the option that causes the build to fail with the version of jargon-text in sarge was the faster way to get the fixed jargon-text into sarge. I compared the versions before making the upload. I did not find the new version (the one in my NMU) to be terribly formatted, but I guess that is a matter of taste. > The correct long-term fix for this bug is to build-depend on the right > version of elinks (which ought to enter testing in a few days). If > elinks 0.10.4 doesn't enter testing, your NMU package will be the one in > sarge. Steve Langasek told me on IRC that it is unlikely that the new elinks will get into sarge in time. With my NMU, jargon-text could still stay in sarge (whether the formatting is good or not). With your MU, as far as I understand, jargon-text needs to be removed from sarge, since it can't be built with sarge tools. Since my NMU is not yet in sarge, your MU will overwrite my NMU at about 22:00 UTC today, when the next dinstall run happens. This means the bug won't be fixed in sarge. If you prefer my NMU over removal from sarge, you could mail debian-release today (well in advance of 22:00 UTC). Note that anything I say about package removal in this mail is based on my own understanding, it is not advice from release managers. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#304968: marked as done (gnustep-base should not enter in sarge now)
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 11:14:20 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307290: addresses-for-gnustep: FTBFS (testing): cannot find protocol declaration for `ContentViewersProtocol' has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Apr 2005 20:43:35 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Apr 16 13:43:35 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DMu8d-0006mm-00; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:43:35 -0700 Received: from localhost (unknown [82.230.27.192]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656551734D4 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 22:43:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eric by localhost with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DMu8b-0001Ah-HT for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 22:43:33 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Eric Heintzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: gnustep-base should not enter in sarge now X-Mailer: reportbug 3.8 Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 22:43:33 +0200 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: gnustep-base Severity: normal Tags: sid gnustep-base 1.10.2 should stay in sid untill gnustep-gui and gnustep-back are ready to enter in sarge and all gnustep apps are successfully tested or rebuilt. We want to keep sarge clean. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) --- Received: (at 304968-done) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 09:14:51 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 02:14:51 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from smtp3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.28] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DStUQ-00064p-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 02:14:51 -0700 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf0312.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id C6F6E1C000CA for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 3 May 2005 11:14:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (AToulouse-207-1-5-166.w80-14.abo.wanadoo.fr [80.14.195.166]) by mwinf0312.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 7FEDD1C00112; Tue, 3 May 2005 11:14:19 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Disposition-Notification-To: Eric Heintzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 11:14:20 +0200 From: Eric Heintzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: fr, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#307290: addresses-for-gnustep: FTBFS (testing): cannot find protocol declaration for `ContentViewersProtocol' References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Steve Langasek a =E9crit : >On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:23:14AM +0200, Eric Heintzmann wrote: > =20 > >With the attached patch, 'addresses-for-gnustep' can be compiled >on i386/testing. There is a new version of addresses-for-gnustep >in sid which already has this patch applied, but which will probably >not enter sarge because of #304968. > =20 > > > =20 > #304968 will be closed when gnustep-back will be a valid candidate (i= n 2=20 days). =20 > > =20 > >>>gnustep-back is a valid candidate tomorrow; you ought to close this bu= g=20 >>>now. >>> =20 >>> > > =20 > >>What bug should I close now : >>#304968 (gn
Processed: Re: Bug#307338: ncurses-ruby: FTBFS: `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 307338 + pending Bug#307338: ncurses-ruby: FTBFS: `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307338: ncurses-ruby: FTBFS: `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory
tags 307338 + pending thanks hi again, On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:50:19AM +0200, Michael Ablassmeier wrote: > hi Kurt, > > On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 05:49:20PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > Your package is failing to build with the following error: > > install -p -m 0755 ncurses_bin.so /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux > > install: cannot stat `ncurses_bin.so': No such file or directory > > > > It builds the 3 .c files, but then doesn't create the > > ncurses_bin.so and just installs it. > > indeed, this is strange as it worked before. I'll try to find out what > exactly the problem is. > > > It seems to have 2 rules to make the .so file: attached patch for debian/rules should fix this problem, waiting for sponsor to upload. bye, - michael --- ../../bla/ncurses-ruby-0.9.2/debian/rules 2005-05-03 11:16:39.831401680 +0200 +++ debian/rules2005-05-03 11:14:31.511909208 +0200 @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ common-configure-arch:: ruby extconf.rb - sed -e 's/-shared/-shared -fPIC/g' -e 's/\/local\/lib\/site_ruby/\/lib\/ruby/g' < Makefile > Makefile.tmp + sed -e 's/-shared/-shared -fPIC/g' -e 's/\/local\/lib\/site_ruby/\/lib\/ruby\//g' < Makefile > Makefile.tmp mv Makefile.tmp Makefile binary-post-install/libncurses-ruby1.8::
Processed: Re: php4: CAN-2005-1042 and CAN-2005-1043
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 306003 -sarge Bug#306003: php4: CAN-2005-1042 and CAN-2005-1043 Tags were: sarge security woody Tags removed: sarge > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: A way _not_ to handle bugs
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 306015 grave Bug#306015: php4-mysql: Should depend on php4 Severity set to `grave'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307433: marked as done (gr-usrp: Unusable with GNU Radio 2.5)
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 12:22:30 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307433: gr-usrp: Unusable with GNU Radio 2.5 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 01:26:37 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon May 02 18:26:37 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19] (Debian-exim) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSmBI-0005uC-00; Mon, 02 May 2005 18:26:37 -0700 Received: from trofast.sesse.net ([129.241.93.32]) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DSmBF-00085J-9F; Tue, 03 May 2005 03:26:34 +0200 Received: from sesse by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DSmBE-0002qk-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 03:26:32 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: gr-usrp: Unusable with GNU Radio 2.5 X-Mailer: reportbug 3.11 Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 03:26:32 +0200 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--) Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: gr-usrp Version: 0.4-2 Severity: grave Tags: sarge Justification: renders package unusable GNU Radio 2.5 has now entered unstable, and later testing. gr-usrp 0.4 only works with GNU Radio 2.4. gr-usrp 0.5 (to be uploaded shortly) works with GNU Radio 2.5. (This is mainly a placeholder bug to make sure sarge doesn't ship with a broken gr-usrp.) -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-rc3 Locale: LANG=en_DK.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_DK.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages gr-usrp depends on: ii fftw3 3.0.1-11 Library for computing Fast Fourier ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libcppunit-1.10-2 1.10.2-3 Unit Testing Library for C++ ii libgcc1 1:4.0-0pre2 GCC support library ii libgnuradio-core0 2.5-3Software Defined Radio ii libstdc++5 1:3.3.5-12 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3 ii libusb-0.1-42:0.1.10a-9 userspace USB programming library ii libusrp00.8-1client side library for the USRP ii python 2.3.5-2 An interactive high-level object-o ii python2.3-usrp 0.8-1Python binding for the USRP client -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 307433-done) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 10:22:35 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 03:22:35 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19] (Debian-exim) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSuXy-0007p6-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 03:22:35 -0700 Received: from trofast.sesse.net ([129.241.93.32]) by cassarossa.samfundet.no with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DSuXv-0005ng-1t; Tue, 03 May 2005 12:22:32 +0200 Received: from sesse by trofast.sesse.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DSuXu-0003GZ-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 12:22:30 +0200 Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 12:22:30 +0200 From: "Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#307433: gr-usrp: Unusable with GNU Radio 2.5 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.11-rc3 on a i686 X-Message-Flag: Outlook? --> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--) Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-
Bug#306003: php4: CAN-2005-1042 and CAN-2005-1043
tags 306003 -sarge thanks php4 4:4.3.10-13, which includes the backported security fixes, has been accepted into testing; therefore I believe this bug no longer applies to sarge, and can be closed when it has been addressed for woody. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#307468: ppp does not start: rp-pppoe.so has newer version
Package: ppp Version: 2.4.3-20050321+1 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system # pppd call dsl-provider pppd: /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.2/rp-pppoe.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory pppd: Couldn't load plugin rp-pppoe.so # ls /usr/lib/pppd/ 2.4.3 pppd and rp-pppoe.so are from the same packet but pppd wants version 2.4.2 of rp-pppoe.so. # cd /usr/lib/pppd # ln -s 2.4.3/ 2.4.2 # pppd call dsl-provider pppd: Plugin rp-pppoe.so is for pppd version 2.4.3, this is 2.4.2 -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (700, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i586) Kernel: Linux 2.4.29 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages ppp depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpcap0.7 0.7.2-7 System interface for user-level pa ii makedev 2.3.1-77 creates device files in /dev ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system ii procps 1:3.2.5-1/proc file system utilities ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-4compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade
Package: unison Version: 2.10.2-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Hi, after an upgrade, I've got the following message: Setting up unison (2.10.2-1) ... /usr/share/doc-base/[EMAIL PROTECTED]@-manual: cannot open control file for reading : No such file or directory dpkg: error processing unison (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 2 Errors were encountered while processing: unison Ciao Ciao Marco -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.11-1-k7 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) Versions of packages unison depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: severity of 306261 is grave, tagging 306261, severity of 306820 is important, tagging 301148
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 > severity 306261 grave Bug#306261: pppd persist eats up all cpu after reconnect Severity set to `grave'. > tags 306261 sarge sid patch Bug#306261: pppd persist eats up all cpu after reconnect There were no tags set. Tags added: sarge, sid, patch > severity 306820 important Bug#306820: ppp in on demand mode hangs with "tcsetattr: Invalid argument" error Severity set to `important'. > tags 301148 upstream help Bug#301148: ppp: pppd should interpret rejects to LCP EchoReq as EchoRep There were no tags set. Tags added: upstream, help > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#295010: marked as done (aspell-fi: Support for pending Aspell 0.60)
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 07:32:31 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#295010: fixed in ispell-fi 0.7-15 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Feb 2005 23:12:31 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Feb 12 15:12:31 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail26.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.28] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1D06RD-0005eU-00; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:12:31 -0800 Received: (qmail 13252 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2005 23:12:31 - Received: from dsl254-022-219.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO sirius.bignachos.com) ([216.254.22.219]) (envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) by mail26.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 12 Feb 2005 23:12:31 - Received: from rubeus (unknown [192.168.1.20]) by sirius.bignachos.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4D052E12 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:12:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by rubeus (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8401F33BF2; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:11:22 -0800 (PST) From: Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: aspell-fi: Support for pending Aspell 0.60 X-URL: http://bignachos.com Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 15:11:22 -0800 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: aspell-fi Severity: wishlist I'm planning to upload Aspell 0.60 Real Soon Now. Since the binary format of the dictionaries has changed in 0.60, this dictionary must be rebuilt. The general approach to transition a dictionary is: * Use the Aspell packages available at http://people.debian.org/~pyro/pending/ * Build-depend on aspell (>> 0.60) * Change "Provides: aspell-dictionary" to "Provides: aspell6-dictionary" * Note that the dictionary files previously located in /usr/share/aspell and /usr/lib/aspell are now all located in /usr/lib/aspell-0.60, and adjust the package accordingly. I'm currently building a staging area to make the transition as smooth as possible. Please contact me once you've prepared the new package and I'll add it to the staging area. I plan to make the aspell 0.60 upload in a couple days (tentatively sometime Monday). If you have not prepared a package by then, I'll elevate this bug to RC and NMU shortly thereafter. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-ac12 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) --- Received: (at 295010-close) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 11:44:26 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 04:44:25 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSvpB-00021n-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 04:44:25 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSvdf-0005it-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 07:32:31 -0400 From: Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.55 $ Subject: Bug#295010: fixed in ispell-fi 0.7-15 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 07:32:31 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Source: ispell-fi Source-Version: 0.7-15 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of ispell-fi, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: aspell-fi_0.7-15_i386.deb to pool/main/i/ispell-fi/aspell-fi_0.7-15_i386.deb ifinnish-large_0.7-15_i386.deb to pool/main/i/ispell-fi/ifinnish-large_0.7-15_i386.deb ifinnish-small_0.7-15_i386.deb to pool/main/i/ispell-fi/ifinnis
Bug#307473: Purging mysql-server can kill mysql-server-4.1
Package: mysql-server, mysql-server-4.1 Version: 4.0.24-7 Severity: critical apt-get install mysql-server apt-get remove mysql-server apt-get install mysql-server-4.1 dpkg --purge mysql-server ***boom*** Depending on your answer to "postrm_remove_databases", this has deleted all your data or "only" destroyed your MySQL installation. BTW1: The same can happen to mysql-server-4.1 if the user had removed but not purged mysql-server from woody some years ago and purges it now. BTW2: This is a nice example for the class of data loss bugs testing cannot catch because it might take some time until the first usre falls into this trap. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307468: marked as done (ppp does not start: rp-pppoe.so has newer version)
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 13:34:02 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307468: ppp does not start: rp-pppoe.so has newer version has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 10:59:35 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 03:59:35 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from master.debian.org [146.82.138.7] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSv7n-0004co-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 03:59:35 -0700 Received: from (torcall.corpse.servebeer.com) [62.206.18.42] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSv7m-0005IE-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 05:59:34 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: fresh corpse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: ppp does not start: rp-pppoe.so has newer version X-Mailer: reportbug 3.8 Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 12:59:07 +0200 X-Debbugs-Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, OUR_MTA_MSGID,X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: ppp Version: 2.4.3-20050321+1 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system # pppd call dsl-provider pppd: /usr/lib/pppd/2.4.2/rp-pppoe.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory pppd: Couldn't load plugin rp-pppoe.so # ls /usr/lib/pppd/ 2.4.3 pppd and rp-pppoe.so are from the same packet but pppd wants version 2.4.2 of rp-pppoe.so. # cd /usr/lib/pppd # ln -s 2.4.3/ 2.4.2 # pppd call dsl-provider pppd: Plugin rp-pppoe.so is for pppd version 2.4.3, this is 2.4.2 -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (700, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i586) Kernel: Linux 2.4.29 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages ppp depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpcap0.7 0.7.2-7 System interface for user-level pa ii makedev 2.3.1-77 creates device files in /dev ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system ii procps 1:3.2.5-1/proc file system utilities ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-4compression library - runtime -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 307468-done) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 11:34:13 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 04:34:13 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from attila.bofh.it [213.92.8.2] (postfix) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSvfI-mS-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 04:34:13 -0700 Received: by attila.bofh.it (Postfix, from userid 10) id EDEFA5F773; Tue, 3 May 2005 13:34:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wonderland.linux.it (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B20DB1C2D5; Tue, 3 May 2005 13:34:02 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 13:34:02 +0200 To: fresh corpse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#307468: ppp does not start: rp-pppoe.so has newer version Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0ntfKIWw70PvrIHh" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: --0ntfKIWw70PvrIHh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On May 03, fresh corpse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
Bug#307481: aspell: symbol size mismatch in shared library
Package: aspell Version: 0.60.2+20050121-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable When running aspell, I get complaints about symbol _ZTVN7acommon6StringE, e.g. $ aspell filter aspell: Symbol `_ZTVN7acommon6StringE' has different size in shared object, consider re-linking Segmentation fault $ This occurs for pretty much any options to aspell. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.9.emp5 Locale: LANG=en_US.ISO8859-1, LC_CTYPE=en_US.ISO8859-1 (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Versions of packages aspell depends on: ii aspell-bin0.50.5-3 GNU Aspell standalone spell-check ii aspell-en [aspell6-dictionary 6.0-0-3English dictionary for GNU Aspell -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307481: Acknowledgement (aspell: symbol size mismatch in shared library)
Upgrading to the most recent version of aspell-bin fixed the problem. So there may be a missing dependency issue but otherwise this doesn't seem to be a bug. --James Aspnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 06:18:07AM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Thank you for the problem report you have sent regarding Debian. > This is an automatically generated reply, to let you know your message has > been received. It is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other > interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course. > > Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s): > Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > If you wish to submit further information on your problem, please send > it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (and *not* to > [EMAIL PROTECTED]). > > Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message, > unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system. > > Debian bug tracking system administrator > (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306838: marked as done (jargon-text: FTBFS: ERROR at cmdline.c:96: Unknown option -no-references)
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 09:47:21 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#306838: fixed in jargon-text 4.4.7-3 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 28 Apr 2005 19:28:55 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 28 12:28:55 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from c156142.adsl.hansenet.de (localhost.localdomain) [213.39.156.142] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DREgx-0005Pv-00; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:28:55 -0700 Received: from aj by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DREh8-00052N-DI; Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:29:06 +0200 To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: jargon-text: FTBFS: ERROR at cmdline.c:96: Unknown option -no-references Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:29:06 +0200 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: jargon-text Version: 4.4.7-1 Severity: serious Tags: patch When building 'jargon-text' on i386/testing, I get the following error: # Turn into plain text elinks -dump -dump-width 79 -no-numbering 1 -no-references 1 \ jargon-web.html >jargon.txt ERROR at cmdline.c:96: Unknown option -no-references make[1]: *** [jargon.txt] Error 3 make[1]: Leaving directory `/jargon-text-4.4.7' make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2 With the attached patch 'jargon-text' can be compiled. Regards Andreas Jochens diff -urN ../tmp-orig/jargon-text-4.4.7/Makefile ./Makefile --- ../tmp-orig/jargon-text-4.4.7/Makefile 2005-03-31 02:21:51.0 + +++ ./Makefile 2005-04-28 19:15:31.076670390 + @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ jargon.txt: jargon-web.html # Turn into plain text - elinks -dump -dump-width 79 -no-numbering 1 -no-references 1 \ + elinks -dump -dump-width 79 -no-numbering 1 \ jargon-web.html >jargon.txt clean: --- Received: (at 306838-close) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 13:55:10 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 06:55:10 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSxri-0006Cq-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 06:55:10 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSxk9-hX-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 09:47:21 -0400 From: Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.55 $ Subject: Bug#306838: fixed in jargon-text 4.4.7-3 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 09:47:21 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Source: jargon-text Source-Version: 4.4.7-3 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of jargon-text, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: jargon-text_4.4.7-3.diff.gz to pool/main/j/jargon-text/jargon-text_4.4.7-3.diff.gz jargon-text_4.4.7-3.dsc to pool/main/j/jargon-text/jargon-text_4.4.7-3.dsc jargon-text_4.4.7-3_all.deb to pool/main/j/jargon-text/jargon-text_4.4.7-3_all.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated jargon-text package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:42:24 +0100 Source: jargon-text Binary: jargon-text Architecture: source all Version: 4.4.7-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer:
Bug#307214: Patch - TDB.h
This should fix it as tdb.h doesn't have the needed include files for the build thus causing the problem. Dan --- tdb.old.h 2005-05-03 10:09:08.0 -0400 +++ tdb.h 2005-05-03 10:10:08.0 -0400 @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ #ifndef __TDB_H__ #define __TDB_H__ - +#include +#include /* Unix SMB/CIFS implementation. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 307214 tdb Bug#307214: ctrlproxy: FTBFS: /usr/include/tdb.h:150: error: parse error before '*' token Bug reassigned from package `ctrlproxy' to `tdb'. > tags 307214 +patch Bug#307214: ctrlproxy: FTBFS: /usr/include/tdb.h:150: error: parse error before '*' token There were no tags set. Tags added: patch > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Dups
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 307466 serious Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade Severity set to `serious'. > merge 307466 307411 Bug#307411: unison: fails to install Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade Merged 307411 307466. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#300938: marked as done (siproxd: FTBFS (amd64/gcc-4.0): too few arguments to function 'osip_message_parse')
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 11:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line siproxd
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Mar 2005 19:55:39 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Mar 22 11:55:38 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from c223012.adsl.hansenet.de (localhost.localdomain) [213.39.223.12]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DDpTV-kH-00; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:55:38 -0800
Received: from aj by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.44)
id 1DDpTU-0001fU-He; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:55:36 +0100
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: siproxd: FTBFS (amd64/gcc-4.0): too few arguments to function
'osip_message_parse'
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 20:55:36 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Package: siproxd
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
When building 'siproxd' on amd64 with gcc-4.0,
I get the following error:
if cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I/usr/include -Wall -D_GNU_SOURCE
-DBUILDSTR="\"`cat .buildno`\"" -g -Wall -O2 -pthread
-D_POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS -MT siproxd.o -MD -MP -MF ".deps/siproxd.Tpo" \
-c -o siproxd.o `test -f 'siproxd.c' || echo './'`siproxd.c; \
then mv -f ".deps/siproxd.Tpo" ".deps/siproxd.Po"; \
else rm -f ".deps/siproxd.Tpo"; exit 1; \
fi
siproxd.c: In function 'main':
siproxd.c:332: error: too few arguments to function 'osip_message_parse'
make[3]: *** [siproxd.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/siproxd-0.5.10/src'
With the attached patch 'siproxd' can be compiled
on amd64 using gcc-4.0.
Regards
Andreas Jochens
diff -urN ../tmp-orig/siproxd-0.5.10/src/proxy.c ./src/proxy.c
--- ../tmp-orig/siproxd-0.5.10/src/proxy.c 2005-01-24 20:12:40.0
+0100
+++ ./src/proxy.c 2005-03-22 16:53:40.606097320 +0100
@@ -516,7 +516,7 @@
* RFC 3261, Section 16.6 step 10
* Proxy Behavior - Forward the new request
*/
- sts = osip_message_to_str(request, &buffer);
+ sts = osip_message_to_str(request, &buffer, strlen(buffer));
if (sts != 0) {
ERROR("proxy_request: osip_message_to_str failed");
return STS_FAILURE;
@@ -910,7 +910,7 @@
}
}
- sts = osip_message_to_str(response, &buffer);
+ sts = osip_message_to_str(response, &buffer, strlen(buffer));
if (sts != 0) {
ERROR("proxy_response: osip_message_to_str failed");
return STS_FAILURE;
@@ -966,7 +966,7 @@
}
}
- sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &bodybuff);
+ sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &bodybuff, strlen(&bodybuff));
sts = sdp_message_init(&sdp);
sts = sdp_message_parse (sdp, bodybuff);
osip_free(bodybuff);
@@ -981,7 +981,7 @@
{ /* just dump the buffer */
char *tmp, *tmp2;
sts = osip_message_get_body(mymsg, 0, &body);
- sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &tmp);
+ sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &tmp, strlen(tmp));
osip_content_length_to_str(mymsg->content_length, &tmp2);
DEBUG("Body before rewrite (clen=%s, strlen=%i):\n%s\n",
tmp2, strlen(tmp), tmp);
@@ -1210,7 +1210,7 @@
sdp_message_free(sdp);
/* include new body */
- osip_message_set_body(mymsg, bodybuff);
+ osip_message_set_body(mymsg, bodybuff, strlen(bodybuff));
/* free content length resource and include new one*/
osip_content_length_free(mymsg->content_length);
@@ -1225,7 +1225,7 @@
{ /* just dump the buffer */
char *tmp, *tmp2;
sts = osip_message_get_body(mymsg, 0, &body);
- sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &tmp);
+ sts = osip_body_to_str(body, &tmp, strlen(&tmp));
osip_content_length_to_str(mymsg->content_length, &tmp2);
DEBUG("Body after rewrite (clen=%s, strlen=%i):\n%s\n",
tmp2, strlen(tmp), tmp);
diff -urN ../tmp-orig/siproxd-0.5.10/src/register.c ./src/register.c
--- ../tmp-orig/siproxd-0.5.10/src/register.c 2005-01-08 11:05:12.0
+0100
+++ ./src/register.c2005-03-22 16:53:57.293874812 +0100
@@ -550,7 +550,7 @@
}
}
- sts = osip_message_to_str(response, &buffer);
+ sts = osip_message_to_str(response, &buffer, strlen(&buffer));
if (sts != 0) {
ERROR("register_r
Bug#300684: marked as done (siproxd_1:0.5.10-1(ia64/unstable): FTBFS: compile errors)
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 11:13:55 -0400 (EDT) with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line siproxd has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Mar 2005 04:38:10 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Mar 20 20:38:10 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mmjgroup.com [192.34.35.33] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DDEg6-tW-00; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:38:10 -0800 Received: from mix.mmjgroup.com (mix.mmjgroup.com [192.34.35.16]) by mmjgroup.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96E616E9C for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:38:08 -0700 (MST) Received: by mix.mmjgroup.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BDAAC8F2E7; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:38:08 -0700 (MST) Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:38:08 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: siproxd_1:0.5.10-1(ia64/unstable): FTBFS: compile errors Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: siproxd Version: 1:0.5.10-1 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: > Automatic build of siproxd_1:0.5.10-1 on caballero by sbuild/ia64 1.170.5 > Build started at 20050321-0349 [...] > ** Using build dependencies supplied by package: > Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.1.0), cdbs, libosip2-dev, yodl, quilt (>= > 0.30-4), automake1.7, autotools-dev, autoconf [...] > ranlib libcustom_fw_module.a > if cc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I/usr/include -Wall -D_GNU_SOURCE > -DBUILDSTR="\"`cat .buildno`\"" -g -Wall -O2 -pthread > -D_POSIX_THREAD_SAFE_FUNCTIONS -MT siproxd.o -MD -MP -MF ".deps/siproxd.Tpo" \ > -c -o siproxd.o `test -f 'siproxd.c' || echo './'`siproxd.c; \ > then mv -f ".deps/siproxd.Tpo" ".deps/siproxd.Po"; \ > else rm -f ".deps/siproxd.Tpo"; exit 1; \ > fi > siproxd.c: In function `main': > siproxd.c:332: error: too few arguments to function `osip_message_parse' > make[3]: *** [siproxd.o] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/siproxd-0.5.10/src' > make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/siproxd-0.5.10' > make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/siproxd-0.5.10' > make: *** [debian/stamp-makefile-build] Error 2 A full build log can be found at: http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=ia64&pkg=siproxd&ver=1:0.5.10-1 --- Received: (at 300938-done) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 15:11:03 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 08:11:03 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from outbound.mailhop.org [63.208.196.171] (mailnull) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSz39-0003W8-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 08:11:03 -0700 Received: from pool-68-238-242-169.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([68.238.242.169] helo=mirrorlynx.com) by outbound.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.44) id 1DSz38-0003zG-KJ for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 03 May 2005 11:11:02 -0400 Received: from dan (helo=localhost) by mirrorlynx.com with local-esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DSz5v-0004xd-UX for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 03 May 2005 11:13:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:13:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Dan Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: siproxd Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.1 (built Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:06:07 +0200) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mirrorlynx.com) X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS.org X-Originating-IP: 68.238.242.169 X-Report-Abuse-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (see http://www.mailhop.org/outbound/abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: DanWeber1 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_30
Processed: tagging 306381
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 > tags 306381 + experimental Bug#306381: python-cherrypy/experimental/m68k: FTBFS: missing b-dep on python There were no tags set. Tags added: experimental > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306015: A way _not_ to handle bugs
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > severity 306015 grave > thanks > > Hi Steve, > > first of all, if you downgrade a bug only a good hour after I upgraded > it, it would be nice if you would: > - Cc me > - send a better explanation than "This is not a missing dependency, feh" Looking at the bug log, it seems that you had no business increasing the severity in the first place. You didn't report the bug, you aren't the maintainer, and now you are playing BTS wars. It's up to the maintainer and Steve, secondarily it's up to the submitter of the bug, and it doesn't seem to concern you at all. This bug does not make the package "unusable or mostly so" because it has a trivial workaround available. So it was wrong of you to mark it grave, unless you are just seeking attention. It might be "serious", but the submitter himself thought it was "important". You didn't give any reasons for busting in and changing it. That's wrong. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
Package: illuminator Version: 0.9.1-1 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: Policy 3.3 illuminator fails to build from source ons parc, duplicated on sparc pbuilder. dh_installdeb -a dh_shlibdeps -a dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown exit code (132) dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/illuminator-demo/usr/bin/tsview-ng' gave error exit status 1 dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 256 make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307500: choose-mirror: ftbfs [sparc] build fails ./get-iso-codes
Package: choose-mirror Version: 1.08 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: fails to build from source choose-mirror fails to build from source on sparc and other buildds, duplicated on sparc pbuilder. # C. Perrier 2/7/2004 # DO NOT actually uncomment these # the scripts have not been tested enough # we'd better include this for post-rc1 # Grab ISO codes from iso-codes package chmod u+x ./get-iso-codes ./get-iso-codes make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306261: ppp: More info
Package: ppp Version: 2.4.3-20050321+1 Followup-For: Bug #306261 The CPU problem seems to be associated for me with getting a lot of errors like this: May 3 17:51:42 localhost pppoa[2744]: Packet not from driver (mac: 00:60:4C:71:8C:D2) Not sure what's causing it, but restarting the PPP connection cured it. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-686 Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages ppp depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpcap0.7 0.7.2-7 System interface for user-level pa ii makedev 2.3.1-77 creates device files in /dev ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system ii procps 1:3.2.1-2The /proc file system utilities ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-3compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306261: ppp: Similar problem with eagle-usb
Package: ppp Version: 2.4.3-20050321+1 Followup-For: Bug #306261 I'm having similar near-100% CPU consumption with ppp run by eagle-usb utils. It's using pppoa, so I don't think the problem is specifically with the rp-pppoe plugin (unless my CPU problem is different). In fact, I'm not even sure that the connection was lost and restarted. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-686 Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages ppp depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpcap0.7 0.7.2-7 System interface for user-level pa ii makedev 2.3.1-77 creates device files in /dev ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system ii procps 1:3.2.1-2The /proc file system utilities ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-3compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306015: A way _not_ to handle bugs
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 08:30:22AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > severity 306015 grave > > thanks > > > > Hi Steve, > > > > first of all, if you downgrade a bug only a good hour after I upgraded > > it, it would be nice if you would: > > - Cc me > > - send a better explanation than "This is not a missing dependency, feh" > > Looking at the bug log, it seems that you had no business increasing > the severity in the first place. You didn't report the bug, you > aren't the maintainer, and now you are playing BTS wars. It's up to > the maintainer and Steve, secondarily it's up to the submitter of the > bug, and it doesn't seem to concern you at all. You seem to confuse this with bug closing. It's common practice to adjust the severity of a bug to a RC one if a RC issue was mistakenly reported as non-RC, and neither your Developers Reference nor your release team have ever disagreed with this practice. The alternative would be to send a second bug for the same issue with the correct RC severity. If this makes you happy I can do this in the future. > This bug does not make the package "unusable or mostly so" because it > has a trivial workaround available. So it was wrong of you to mark it Once upon a time, Debian was famous for it's working upgrades. You can workaround many bugs - but why do you emphasize on the fact that there was "a trivial workaround available" if the fix for the bug is trivial? > grave, unless you are just seeking attention. It might be "serious", > but the submitter himself thought it was "important". You didn't give > any reasons for busting in and changing it. That's wrong. grave <-> serious isn't worth a discussion since there's not a big difference between them (both are RC) Even Steve had always agreed that missing dependencies that break partial upgrades from woody were RC bugs And even in the email were he downgraded this bug he only wrongly stated "This is not a missing dependency" - not that missing dependencies weren't RC. > Thomas cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306015: A way _not_ to handle bugs
Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You seem to confuse this with bug closing. It's common practice to > adjust the severity of a bug to a RC one if a RC issue was mistakenly > reported as non-RC, and neither your Developers Reference nor your > release team have ever disagreed with this practice. If you are also encountering the bug, then this is true, but I would expect you, being as knowledgeable as you are, to indicate that in the bug report and add yourself as a submitter. >> This bug does not make the package "unusable or mostly so" because it >> has a trivial workaround available. So it was wrong of you to mark it > > Once upon a time, Debian was famous for it's working upgrades. > You can workaround many bugs - but why do you emphasize on the fact that > there was "a trivial workaround available" if the fix for the bug is > trivial? I agree that it's a bug. You seem to be saying that if it isn't an RC bug, then it's no bug at all. I think it is a bug--for exactly the reasons you state--but that doesn't make it grave. >> grave, unless you are just seeking attention. It might be "serious", >> but the submitter himself thought it was "important". You didn't give >> any reasons for busting in and changing it. That's wrong. > > grave <-> serious isn't worth a discussion since there's not a big > difference between them (both are RC) Oh, I see, in your world there is "RC" and then "nothing". The point you are missing is that it is the maintainer and the release manager who get to decide, not you. > Even Steve had always agreed that missing dependencies that break > partial upgrades from woody were RC bugs And even in the email were he > downgraded this bug he only wrongly stated "This is not a missing > dependency" - not that missing dependencies weren't RC. This seems to indicate that he thinks there is a different explanation for the bug, and that while adding the package in question as a dependency makes it go away, this is not the correct fix. But I can only guess, as can you, which means it would be good to hold off until he can say rather than play BTS tag. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307504: bbkeys: Missing build dependency.
Package: bbkeys Version: 0.9.0-1 Severity: serious Tags: sid Hi, Your package's is failing to build with the following error: checking for pkg-config... no *** The pkg-config script could not be found. Make sure it is *** in your path, or set the PKG_CONFIG environment variable *** to the full path to pkg-config. *** Or see http://www.freedesktop.org/software/pkgconfig to get pkg-config. You should add a build dependency on pkg-config. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#307481: aspell: symbol size mismatch in shared library
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 307481 normal Bug#307481: aspell: symbol size mismatch in shared library Severity set to `normal'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 08:59 -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > Package: illuminator > Version: 0.9.1-1 > Severity: serious > Tags: sid > Justification: Policy 3.3 > > illuminator fails to build from source ons parc, duplicated on sparc > pbuilder. > > > dh_installdeb -a > dh_shlibdeps -a > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 > ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown exit code (132) > dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/illuminator-demo/usr/bin/tsview-ng' > gave error exit status 1 > dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 256 > make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 Actually, since it built successfully on ten other arches, I'd conclude this is a buggy sparc toolchain. What other explanation can you offer? Presumably this has come up in other packages. Do you know how they worked around this bug? Thanks, -Adam -- GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! http://www.take6.com/albums/greatesthits.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307481: aspell: symbol size mismatch in shared library
severity 307481 normal thanks On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 09:43:09AM -0400, James Aspnes wrote: > Upgrading to the most recent version of aspell-bin fixed the problem. > So there may be a missing dependency issue but otherwise this doesn't > seem to be a bug. Ugh. The soname of libaspell15 did not change from 0.50 -> 0.60, but maybe it should have. Although the external API/ABI did not change, the 'aspell' binary uses internal library symbols that did change. The only thing I could do at this time is make the current libaspell15 conflict with aspell-bin (<< 0.60), but that's pretty clumsy. Fortunately, it's not a release crtical bug since it does not affect woody -> sarge partial upgrades (woody doesn't have libaspell15). A better solution for the future is probably to make aspell-bin depend on the exact same version of libaspell15, instead of relying on shlibs to do a >= dependency. -- Society is never going to make any progress until we all learn to pretend to like each other. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: This is grave, package fails to install.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 307411 grave Bug#307411: unison: fails to install Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade Severity set to `grave'. > severity 307466 grave Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade Bug#307411: unison: fails to install Severity set to `grave'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade
Hi On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 02:43:07PM +0200, Marco Presi (Zufus) wrote: > Package: unison > Version: 2.10.2-1 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable > > > > Hi, > > after an upgrade, I've got the following message: > > Setting up unison (2.10.2-1) ... > /usr/share/doc-base/[EMAIL PROTECTED]@-manual: cannot open control file for > reading : No such file or directory > dpkg: error processing unison (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 2 > Errors were encountered while processing: > unison > > Ciao Ciao > > Marco The correction is pending an upload. Regard Sylvain Le Gall -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307516: cycle: can't install: Depends: libwxgtk2.5.3-python but it is not installable
Package: cycle Version: 0.3.0-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable $ LANG=C sudo apt-get install cycle Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that the package is simply not installable and a bug report against that package should be filed. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: cycle: Depends: libwxgtk2.5.3-python but it is not installable E: Broken packages Due to licencing issues libwxgtk2.5.3-python is no more in Debian. See bug #307347 for example: > It actually seems that wxpython2.5.3 is no more in debian... > Unfortunately the new version of this package doesn't conflict with > it, and at least one package depends on it (svn-workbench). It had licence trouble and had to be yanked before we got 2.6 in a state ready to upload. They are way too many (other) problems with it to justify backporting things, and enough still with 2.6 to have all attention focussed there. You should rebuild cycle to make it use libwxgtk2.4-python if possible. Bye, -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (90, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.11.6 Locale: LANG=fr_FR, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Versions of packages cycle depends on: pn libwxgtk2.5.3-python Not found. ii python2.3.5-1An interactive high-level object-o -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#305122: ia32-libs-dev: Fix for the linker script and more
Package: ia32-libs-dev
Version: 1.2
Followup-For: Bug #305122
Hi,
attached the patch for to actually fix the linker script and to create
the /usr/lib32 link needed by gcc-3.4.
MfG
Goswin
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-frosties-1
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages ia32-libs-dev depends on:
ii ia32-libs 1.2ia32 shared libraries for use on a
-- no debconf information
diff -Nru /tmp/cjO75wUReS/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/changelog
/tmp/nirAE8BSxi/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/changelog
--- /tmp/cjO75wUReS/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/changelog 2005-04-25
03:33:32.0 +0200
+++ /tmp/nirAE8BSxi/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/changelog 2005-05-03
18:36:30.0 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+ia32-libs (1.3-0.0.0.1.pure64) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * NMU - hotfix for /emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib/libc.so
+
+ -- Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tue, 3 May 2005 18:36:06 +0200
+
ia32-libs (1.3) unstable; urgency=low
* Adjust linker scripts too, closes: #305122
diff -Nru /tmp/cjO75wUReS/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/rules
/tmp/nirAE8BSxi/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/rules
--- /tmp/cjO75wUReS/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/rules 2005-04-25 03:26:00.0
+0200
+++ /tmp/nirAE8BSxi/ia32-libs-1.3/debian/rules 2005-05-03 20:04:50.0
+0200
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
ifeq (Debian,$(OSVER))
mkdir -p debian/ia32-libs/$(ROOT)/bin
mv debian/ia32-libs/bin/uname debian/ia32-libs/$(ROOT)/bin
+ ln -s /$(ROOT)/usr/lib$(SUFFIX) debian/ia32-libs/usr/lib32
endif
@@ -116,18 +117,13 @@
ln -s $$(echo $$dest | sed -e 's,^/,$(ROOT)/,' -e
's,/lib/,/lib$(SUFFIX)/,') $$link; \
done
- # Ew, change linker scripts
- for file in $$(find debian/ia32-libs/$(ROOT) -type f -name \*.so); do \
- sed -i -e "s: /: /$(ROOT)/:g" $$file ; \
- done
-
cat debian/ia32-libs-dev.preinst.in > debian/ia32-libs-dev.preinst
cat debian/ia32-libs-dev.postrm.in > debian/ia32-libs-dev.postrm
# Fix up GROUP commands in linker scripts
for lib in libc.so libpthread.so; do\
cat debian/ia32-libs/$(ROOT)/usr/lib$(SUFFIX)/$$lib
\
- | sed -e 's,^/,$(ROOT),' -e 's,/lib/,/lib$(SUFFIX)/,g' > $$lib;
\
+ | sed -e '/^GROUP/ { s, /, /$(ROOT)/,g ; s,/lib/,/lib$(SUFFIX)/,g
}' > $$lib; \
mv -f $$lib debian/ia32-libs/$(ROOT)/usr/lib$(SUFFIX)/$$lib;
\
done
Processed: tagging 307466
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 > tags 307466 sid Bug#307466: unison: fails to upgrade Tags were: sid Bug#307411: unison: fails to install Tags added: sid > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306261: pppd persist eats up all cpu after reconnect
On Mon, Apr 25, 2005 at 12:34:52PM +0200, Joerg Dorchain wrote: > exspected. After the the first dis- and reconnect (i.e. after 24h) pppd > eats up all cpu time. The reconnect itself works as expected, but the > systems becomes notably slow with pppd playing cpu-hog. ... > with fd 13 and 14 being connected to /dev/ppp. Same here with 2.4.27 built from kernel-source-2.4.27 and ppp 2.4.3-20050321+1 and pppoe-plugin. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# ll /proc/$(pidof pppd)/fd | grep ppp\$ lrwx-- 1 root root 64 May 3 20:36 11 -> /dev/ppp lrwx-- 1 root root 64 May 3 20:36 12 -> /dev/ppp lrwx-- 1 root root 64 May 3 20:36 13 -> /dev/ppp [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# Mario -- I've never been certain whether the moral of the Icarus story should only be, as is generally accepted, "Don't try to fly too high," or whether it might also be thought of as, "Forget the wax and feathers and do a better job on the wings."-- Stanley Kubrick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307429: marked as done (..post-installation of util-vserver_0.30.207-2 dies:"lstat(): No such file or directory")
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 14:47:30 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307429: fixed in util-vserver 0.30.207-3 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 2 May 2005 23:58:28 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon May 02 16:58:28 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from (viruswall2.itp.as) [80.239.8.2] by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSko0-00034R-00; Mon, 02 May 2005 16:58:28 -0700 Received: from gjesdal.net ([80.239.26.39]) by viruswall2.itp.as (SAVSMTP 3.1.0.29) with SMTP id M2005050301552708483 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 03 May 2005 01:55:27 +0200 Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([80.239.32.254]) by gjesdal.net (gjesdal.net [80.239.26.39]) (MDaemon.PRO.v6.8.4.R) with ESMTP id 28-md5000671.tmp for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 03 May 2005 02:00:59 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: ..post-installation of util-vserver_0.30.207-2 dies:"lstat(): No such file or directory" X-Mailer: reportbug 3.11 Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 01:57:34 +0200 X-Spam-Processed: gjesdal.net, Tue, 03 May 2005 02:00:59 +0200 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 80.239.32.254 X-Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.1 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: util-vserver Version: 0.30.207-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable ...note that this dist-upgrade was done immediately after a successful apt-get -u upgrade today. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get update ;apt-get -u dist-upgrade ;apt-get clean Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/main Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/main Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/contrib Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/contrib Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-free Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-free Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/main Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/main Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/contrib Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/contrib Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/non-free Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 unstable/non-US/non-free Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/main Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/main Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/contrib Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/contrib Release Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/non-free Packages Hit http://192.168.2.222 ../project/experimental/non-free Release Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/main Packages Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/main Release Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/contrib Packages Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/contrib Release Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/non-free Packages Hit http://security.debian.org stable/updates/non-free Release Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/main Packages Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/main Release Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/contrib Packages Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/contrib Release Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/non-free Packages Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/non-free Release Reading Package Lists... Done Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Calculating Upgrade... Done The following NEW packages will be installed: beecrypt2 The following packages have been kept back: ardour-gtk cpudyn cpufreqd loop-aes-utils mailutils planner powernowd The following packages will be upgraded: util-vserver 1 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. Need to get 476kB of archives. After unpacking 233kB of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] Get:1 http://192.168.2.222 unstable/main beecrypt2
Bug#241935: marked as done (sarge version claims system is woody and 3.0)
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 14:47:14 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#241935: fixed in lsb-release 1.4-8 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Apr 2004 21:00:11 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Apr 03 13:00:11 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from kitenet.net [64.62.161.42] (postfix) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1B9s9B-uo-00; Sat, 03 Apr 2004 12:53:45 -0800 Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (216-98-94-183.access.naxs.com [216.98.94.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK)) by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D15182D0 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 3 Apr 2004 20:49:47 + (GMT) Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B5A476F1CF; Sat, 3 Apr 2004 15:49:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 15:49:15 -0500 From: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: sarge version claims system is woody and 3.0 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH" Content-Disposition: inline X-Reportbug-Version: 2.54 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 X-Spam-Level: --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Package: lsb-release Version: 1.4-7 Severity: serious /etc/lsb-release still has the codename as woody, and the release as 3.0. This is with the lsb-release in sarge. I'm sorry for the severity inflation, but we can't release sarge like this. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.4.25 Locale: LANG=3Den_US, LC_CTYPE=3Den_US -- no debconf information --=20 see shy jo --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAbyNLd8HHehbQuO8RAkPBAJ43Z+86XXi4utQqkDcC5Eof7Y+rxACdGrfq 4L1n5b/a+uTT81CnKfEEHQ4= =1rue -END PGP SIGNATURE- --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH-- --- Received: (at 241935-close) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 18:53:29 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 11:53:29 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DT2WO-uK-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 11:53:28 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DT2QM-00084E-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 14:47:14 -0400 From: Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.55 $ Subject: Bug#241935: fixed in lsb-release 1.4-8 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 14:47:14 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: X-CrossAssassin-Score: 3 Source: lsb-release Source-Version: 1.4-8 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of lsb-release, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: lsb-release_1.4-8.diff.gz to pool/main/l/lsb-release/lsb-release_1.4-8.diff.gz lsb-release_1.4-8.dsc to pool/main/l/lsb-release/lsb-release_1.4-8.dsc lsb-release_1.4-8_all.deb to pool/main/l/lsb-release/lsb-release_1.4-8_all.deb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen th
Bug#307500: choose-mirror: ftbfs [sparc] build fails ./get-iso-codes
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 08:54:28AM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > Package: choose-mirror > Version: 1.08 > Severity: serious > Tags: sid > Justification: fails to build from source > > choose-mirror fails to build from source on sparc and other buildds, > duplicated on sparc pbuilder. > > # C. Perrier 2/7/2004 > # DO NOT actually uncomment these > # the scripts have not been tested enough > # we'd better include this for post-rc1 > # Grab ISO codes from iso-codes package > chmod u+x ./get-iso-codes > ./get-iso-codes > make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 Joey and I just fixed a bunch of problems with the new choose-mirror build system, including this one, but we need to wait for an l10n-sync run to resurrect some old translations before uploading it. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: A way _not_ to handle bugs
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 306015 important Bug#306015: php4-mysql: Should depend on php4 Severity set to `important'. > quit Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306015: A way _not_ to handle bugs
severity 306015 important quit On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 12:27:32PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > first of all, if you downgrade a bug only a good hour after I upgraded > it, it would be nice if you would: > - Cc me > - send a better explanation than "This is not a missing dependency, feh" If you are going to upgrade bugs to RC severity without talking to the maintainers first, it would be nice if you would be right. > In my testing, e.g. php4 from woody together with php4-mysql from sid is > _not_ a working combination. $ apt-cache show php4-mysql Package: php4-mysql Version: 4:4.3.10-12 Depends: Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4), libmysqlclient12, debconf (>= 0.5) | debconf-2.0, phpapi-20020918, php4-common (= 4:4.3.10-12) ^^^ php4-mysql does not depend on php4 because the php4 package is *not* required to be installed in order for php4-mysql to be usable: installing any of the packages that provide phpapi-20020918 is sufficient to give you a php4 engine that can be used with php4-mysql. php4-mysql does not depend on any particular package providing the interface, because it has no way of knowing which one the user wants. The actual bug you're describing, therefore, is that the package relationships do not prevent you from having multiple PHP engines co-installed on your system that each provide different extension ABIs. This is a well-known bug that's irritating but not release-critical, and fixing it in sarge would not be at all straightforward. But that isn't even the problem the original submitter was reporting! The original submitter reported a problem with "undefined symbol: php_sprintf", which has *nothing* to do with the php4 package! IIRC, the last time this error was reported it was a problem with bad caching from third-party accelerators, not a PHP bug at all; in *no* event could it be caused by a partial upgrade from woody. I knew this as a co-maintainer, and you didn't, and I shouldn't have to explain all this to you just to avoid having bug severities inflated when I could be doing something more productive with my time (and you with yours), like fixing real RC bugs. > Please either explain why "this is not a missing dependency" or promise > to be a little more careful in the future instead of blindly downgrading > bugs. Please be a little more careful in the future instead of blindly upgrading bugs. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#303764: marked as done (Not Ready for Sarge)
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 15:05:26 -0500 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Sarge frozen has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Apr 2005 17:03:01 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 08 10:03:01 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from polaris.galacticasoftware.com [206.45.95.222] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DJwsn-0002Hy-00; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:03:01 -0700 Received: from mira.lan.galacticasoftware.com ([2001:470:1f00:907:20d:87ff:fe3c:98c8]) by polaris.galacticasoftware.com with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DJwsl-0001hS-Nx; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:02:59 -0500 Received: from adamm by mira.lan.galacticasoftware.com with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DJwsn-0007JH-6L; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:03:01 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Adam M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Not Ready for Sarge X-Mailer: reportbug 3.9 Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 12:03:01 -0500 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: rails Version: 0.11.1-2 Severity: serious Rails is under development and will have (could have) a lot of changes before the 1.x milestone. It should not be added to Sarge at this time. Rails is an arch all package and should have all its dependencies satisfied in Sarge for some time. If Sarge releases without rails, you can use rails from Sid or if there are dependency problems, I will provide rails package either on backports.org or http://people.debian.org/~adamm/rails/ - Adam PS. If Sarge doesn't release in the next month or so, I will be adding rails and its necessary dependencies backported from sarge to woody on http://people.debian.org/~adamm/rails/ -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-k7 Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages rails depends on: ii libmysql-ruby1.8 2.4.5-6.1 MySQL module for Ruby 1.8 ii libpgsql-ruby1.8 0.7.1-3PostgreSQL extension library for r ii libredcloth-ruby1.8 3.0.3-2Textile module for Ruby 1.8 ii libtest-unit-ruby 1.8.2-1unit-testing framework for the Rub ii rake 0.5.0-1a ruby build program ii rdoc 1.8.2-1Generate documentation from ruby s ii ruby 1.8.2-1An interpreter of object-oriented ii ruby1.8 1.8.2-3Interpreter of object-oriented scr -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 303764-done) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 20:05:57 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 13:05:57 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.204] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DT3eW-0001JQ-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 13:05:57 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 67so64764wri for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 03 May 2005 13:05:26 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=Y8DAQvSgnb9uRkYgIP/SuJPiXqwA9vbG/1Ojdt5efiPQ29UCpwd5AJFlydiGvGqp0xj2dGi+vb/KfPPex37kJoJ+q/EfC0wrcWK0dWTtpoOsZhJfPHBQzQB7CAbRJbURnvjU+2ETZBEwWWD72kbScYHPBM/ArH4FXsVFh77nAI0= Received: by 10.54.94.12 with SMTP id r12mr83892wrb; Tue, 03 May 2005 13:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.56.71 with HTTP; Tue, 3 May 2005 13:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 15:05:26 -0500 From: Adam M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Adam M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Sarge frozen Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2
Bug#304167: xml-soap: FTBFS: 'activation.jar' missing
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 03:24:31PM +0200, Andreas Jochens wrote: > tags 304167 +patch > retitle 304167 xml-soap: FTBFS: 'activation.jar' missing > thanks > > I finally found a patch which allows to build the package with > dpkg-buildpackage. I just removed one of the build-dependencies (libservlet2.2, superseded by libservlet2.3 & 2.4), so it needs more work. Note that someone (not the maintainer though) requested removal of this package. Until that request is clarified, I think work can be better spend elsewhere. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Scilab in testing
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 302741 normal Bug#302741: scilab: Scilab starts with a very small window and an unreadable small font Severity set to `normal'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 300681 Bug#300681: Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way Bug reopened, originator not changed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#303870: Dependency
> I'm confused what you're asking. If you compile your own, it should be > the same process as the old way. The only difference is that you now > need to keep the binary modules package in synch w/ the > ndiswrapper-utils package. The 'ndiswrapper-modules-1.1' dependency was satisfied once I compiled and installed my module from 'ndiswrapper-source'. Sorry to have bothered you, everything's in order now. Thank you for your support.
Bug#300681: Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way
reopen 300681 thanks On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 04:33:39PM +0200, gïnter geiger wrote: > Closing, as this bug applied only to the binary packages, which are not > built anymore. But all those binary packages like realtime-lsm-module-2.6.8-1-386 are now in testing. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307548: postfix-mysql: local delivery broken with proxymaps
Package: postfix-mysql Version: 2.1.5-9 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable When you configure a chrooted smtpd server and have mysql lookup maps, behind the proxymap service, you end up having problems with either local delivery or access to the maps in smtpd. *** Problem *** Attempt #1: alias_maps = mysql:/etc/postfix/myalias.cf hash:/etc/aliases This results in: May 3 16:08:57 marvin postfix/smtpd[25105]: warning: connect to mysql server localhost: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) That's because the smtpd server is chrooted. Attempt #2: alias_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/myalias.cf hash:/etc/aliases This results in: May 3 16:09:57 marvin postfix/local[25151]: fatal: mysql:/etc/postfix/myalias.cf: proxy map is not allowed for security sensitive data That's because proxymap doesn't transmit what is considered sensitive data. Not sure why the alias maps considered as such, maybe because it can talk to NIS and such... *** Fixes: *** This phenomenon is documented in postfix: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#alias_maps "The local(8) delivery agent will silently ignore requests to use the proxymap(8) server within alias_maps. Instead it will open the table directly. Before Postfix version 2.2, the local(8) delivery agent will terminate with a fatal error." Therefore, a fix would be to upload 2.2 to sarge, but I have the sad feeling this is not going to happen... Maybe 2.1 could be patched for that? *** Workaround *** #1: don't chroot smtpd #2: talk to mysql on 127.0.0.1 #3: use a mount --bind to export the mysql rundir to the postfix chroot -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.4.27-1-386 Locale: LANG=fr_CA, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Versions of packages postfix-mysql depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libmysqlclient144.1.11-1 mysql database client library ii postfix 2.1.5-9 A high-performance mail transport -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Quagga+Openssl, not that easy...
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 306840 Bug#306840: quagga: Depends on OpenSSL Bug reopened, originator not changed. > severity 306840 serious Bug#306840: quagga: Depends on OpenSSL Severity set to `serious'. > tags 306840 + needhelp Unknown tag/s: needhelp. Recognized are: patch wontfix moreinfo unreproducible fixed potato woody sid help security upstream pending sarge sarge-ignore experimental d-i confirmed ipv6 lfs fixed-in-experimental fixed-upstream l10n etch. Bug#306840: quagga: Depends on OpenSSL Tags were: confirmed Tags added: > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#306840: Quagga+Openssl, not that easy...
reopen 306840 severity 306840 serious tags 306840 + needhelp thanks Ok, linking against libsnmp5 reintroduces dynamic linking against OpenSSL regardless on whether or not I deactivate it in Quagga itself. As Quagga is GPL this is, to my understanding even in this indirect way, an incompatible licence situation so I will disable SNMP support in about a week if no better solution can be found although this would be absolutely crazy for a server application like Quagga :-( bye, -christian- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Processed: Quagga+Openssl, not that easy...
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 306840 + help Bug#306840: quagga: Depends on OpenSSL Tags were: confirmed Tags added: help > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests
Package: apache2-common Version: 2.0.54-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable It seems that the problem is related to LDAP authentication. The problem started showing up after the last 'aptitude upgrade' which has upgraded both the Apache2 server from 2.0.53 to 2.0.54, and libc6 I tried to disable the ldap cache feature in the util_ldap Apache2 module, with no success I also tried with the prefork and the worker variants: same issue. After a couple of requests to a URL which requires authentication, the Apache2 server starts eating up to 100% of CPU time. The problem does not show up with public access (ie no LDAP validation). The LDAP server works nicely with other clients, such as ldapsearch. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.4.22-1-386 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages apache2-common depends on: ii apache2-utils 2.0.54-2 utility programs for webservers ii debconf 1.4.30.13Debian configuration management sy ii debianutils 2.8.4Miscellaneous utilities specific t ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-21 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libdb4.24.2.52-18Berkeley v4.2 Database Libraries [ ii libexpat1 1.95.8-3 XML parsing C library - runtime li ii libgcc1 1:3.4.3-12 GCC support library ii libmagic1 4.12-1 File type determination library us ii mime-support3.28-1 MIME files 'mime.types' & 'mailcap ii net-tools 1.60-10 The NET-3 networking toolkit ii openssl 0.9.7e-3 Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary a ii ssl-cert1.0-11 Simple debconf wrapper for openssl -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#307473: Purging mysql-server can kill mysql-server-4.1
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 307473 + pending Bug#307473: Purging mysql-server can kill mysql-server-4.1 There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307473: Purging mysql-server can kill mysql-server-4.1
tags 307473 + pending thanks Hello Adrian On 2005-05-03 Adrian Bunk wrote: > BTW2: This is a nice example for the class of data loss bugs > testing cannot catch because it might take some time > until the first usre falls into this trap. Indeed. Thanks for spotting this. I will try to solve it in the next 1-2 days... bye, -christian- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 01:08:37AM +0200, Emmanuel Blot wrote: > Package: apache2-common > Version: 2.0.54-2 > Severity: grave > Justification: renders package unusable > > > It seems that the problem is related to LDAP authentication. > The problem started showing up after the last 'aptitude upgrade' which > has upgraded both the Apache2 server from 2.0.53 to 2.0.54, and libc6 > > I tried to disable the ldap cache feature in the util_ldap Apache2 > module, with no success > > I also tried with the prefork and the worker variants: same issue. > > After a couple of requests to a URL which requires authentication, the > Apache2 server starts eating up to 100% > of CPU time. The problem does not show up with public access (ie no LDAP > validation). I'm not familiar with apache internals, nor LDAP, but I can try to help begin diagnosis. Could you provide a strace of the process when it is in that state? (strace -p )? Maybe also a strace of the process beginning before it is in that state, and ending sometime after it has gone into that state. Maybe also a gdb backtrace? (LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/debug gdb -p ); you should first install the package libc6-dbg, if possible. If not, then don't set LD_LIBRARY_PATH. It will at least tell us if the stack is still sane, or if there has been memory corruption. Depending on the result, I (or someone else) may request that you do (or do not) compile some software with debugging enabled, which might give the backtrace much more info. Thanks, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Upping priority
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 276103 grave Bug#276103: kcdlabel: crash on save Severity set to `grave'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307574: Built with wrong OCaml version
Package: perl4caml Severity: grave This package is built from the wrong OCaml version(it slipped in with a bad dependency) and thus is completely useless in Debian. I'm uploading a new version now, but since Sarge is frozen, if it doesn't get built in time or some such, this package shouldn't be shipped in sarge. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.8 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests
> Maybe also a gdb backtrace? (LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/debug gdb -p > ); you should first install the package libc6-dbg, if possible. > If not, then don't set LD_LIBRARY_PATH. It will at least tell us if > the stack is still sane, or if there has been memory corruption. Here is the GDB trace. I hope it may provide some useful info. Before I received your email, I tried to get the same trace, without the libc6-dbg, and it shows the process was stalled in "mallopt" I run it on a second session, and the backtrace is identical. $> sudo -s [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/debug gdb -p 24869 GNU gdb 6.3-debian Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc. GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are welcome to change it and/or distribute copies of it under certain conditions. Type "show copying" to see the conditions. There is absolutely no warranty for GDB. Type "show warranty" for details. This GDB was configured as "i386-linux". Attaching to process 24869 Using host libthread_db library "/usr/lib/debug/libthread_db.so.1". Reading symbols from /usr/sbin/apache2...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Reading symbols from /lib/libcrypt.so.1...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libcrypt-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libcrypt.so.1 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libpcre.so.3...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libpcre.so.3 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libz.so.1... (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libz.so.1 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libssl.so.0.9.7...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libssl.so.0.9.7 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libcrypto.so.0.9.7...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/i686/cmov/libcrypto.so.0.9.7 Reading symbols from /lib/libdl.so.2...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libdl-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libdl.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libaprutil-0.so.0...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libaprutil-0.so.0 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libldap.so.2...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libldap.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/liblber.so.2...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/liblber.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libdb-4.2.so... (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libdb-4.2.so Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libexpat.so.1 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libapr-0.so.0...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libapr-0.so.0 Reading symbols from /lib/librt.so.1...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/librt-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/librt.so.1 Reading symbols from /lib/libm.so.6...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libm-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libm.so.6 Reading symbols from /lib/libnsl.so.1...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libnsl-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libnsl.so.1 Reading symbols from /lib/libpthread.so.0...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libpthread-0.10.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] [New Thread 16384 (LWP 24869)] (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libpthread.so.0 Reading symbols from /lib/libc.so.6...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libc-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libc.so.6 Reading symbols from /lib/ld-linux.so.2...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/ld-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/ld-linux.so.2 Reading symbols from /lib/libresolv.so.2...Reading symbols from /usr/lib/debug/lib/libresolv-2.3.2.so...(no debugging symbols found)...done. (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /lib/libresolv.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libsasl2.so.2...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libsasl2.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libgnutls.so.11...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libgnutls.so.11 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libtasn1.so.2...(no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libtasn1.so.2 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11... (no debugging symbols found)...done. Loaded symbols for /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11 Reading symbols from /usr/lib/libgpg-error
Bug#307567: [Fwd: Re: Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests]
Original Message Subject: Re: Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 02:01:38 +0200 From: Emmanuel Blot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: ANIENIB To: Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm not familiar with apache internals, nor LDAP, but I can try to > help begin diagnosis. Thanks. > Could you provide a strace of the process when it is in that state? > (strace -p )? Maybe also a strace of the process beginning > before it is in that state, and ending sometime after it has gone into > that state. Here it is. I'm not familiar with bug reporting w/ Debian: I've gzipped the log, to keep this email small. If I should have sent it as plain ASCII, please let me know. Here's what I did to obtain this trace: /etc/init.d/apache2 start # use prefork ps ax | grep apache2 # to get the PIDs -> 23224 to 23229 sudo strace -p 23224 ... -p 23229 2>&1 | tee ~/apache2.strace I then run a small script that use wget to stress the webserver from another console, until the script got deadlocked (as the server does not answer the request when it consumes 100% CPU), then broke the strace execution (Ctrl+C) top # to get the PID of the process eating up the CPU time grep [pid] ~/apache2.strace | gzip -c > apache2.strace.23229.gz I then restarted strace -p 23229, but strace does not show any other trace for this process. I'll come back later in another email with the GDB trace, if I manage to get it. Thanks for your support, Emmanuel apache2.strace.23229.gz Description: Binary data
Bug#307567: [Fwd: [Fwd: Re: Bug#307567: apache2-common: Apache2 consumes 100% CPU after a few requests]]
[Sorry, I posted with the wrong email account] > I'm not familiar with apache internals, nor LDAP, but I can try to > help begin diagnosis. Thanks. > Could you provide a strace of the process when it is in that state? > (strace -p )? Maybe also a strace of the process beginning > before it is in that state, and ending sometime after it has gone into > that state. Here it is. I'm not familiar with bug reporting w/ Debian: I've gzipped the log, to keep this email small. If I should have sent it as plain ASCII, please let me know. Here's what I did to obtain this trace: /etc/init.d/apache2 start # use prefork ps ax | grep apache2 # to get the PIDs -> 23224 to 23229 sudo strace -p 23224 ... -p 23229 2>&1 | tee ~/apache2.strace I then run a small script that use wget to stress the webserver from another console, until the script got deadlocked (as the server does not answer the request when it consumes 100% CPU), then broke the strace execution (Ctrl+C) top # to get the PID of the process eating up the CPU time grep [pid] ~/apache2.strace | gzip -c > apache2.strace.23229.gz I then restarted strace -p 23229, but strace does not show any other trace for this process. I'll come back later in another email with the GDB trace, if I manage to get it. Thanks for your support, Emmanuel apache2.strace.23229.gz Description: Binary data
Processed: fixed in unstable
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 307574 +sarge Bug#307574: Built with wrong OCaml version There were no tags set. Tags added: sarge > thanks. Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#300681: marked as done (Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way)
Your message dated Wed, 4 May 2005 02:25:01 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Mar 2005 04:06:03 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Mar 20 20:06:03 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from 220pc220.sshunet.nl (mordor.wolffelaar.nl) [145.97.220.220] (Debian-exim) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DDEB1-00058V-00; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 20:06:03 -0800 Received: from jeroen by mordor.wolffelaar.nl with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DDEAz-000301-Cb for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 05:06:01 +0100 Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 05:06:01 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i From: Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: realtime-lsm Severity: serious The way this package is built is not accepteble. Please fix the build system to something that works with just dpkg-buildpackage. --Jeroen - Forwarded message from Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:41:43 +0100 From: Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Explanation Michael Banck: The package builds fine like that, it's just the additional kernel modules which need to be built by a different script, AIUI Steve Langasek: well, here's the thing. the source package does build if you run the normal debian/rules commands; but those binary packages that are built do *not* include the kernel-specific modules packages. So you have to go through an additional step to build the per-kernel module packages, which are not listed in debian/control but are present in the archive. me: We cannot support this security-wise. Apart from that the package apparently fails to build from source (FTBFS) if make -f debian/rules build sudo make -f debian/rules binary doesn't produce all required binary packages that should end up in the archive. This is surely release-critical. Regards, Joey - End forwarded message - -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl --- Received: (at 300681-done) by bugs.debian.org; 4 May 2005 00:25:02 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 17:25:02 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from 220pc220.sshunet.nl (mordor.wolffelaar.nl) [145.97.220.220] (Debian-exim) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DT7hG-5y-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 17:25:02 -0700 Received: from jeroen by mordor.wolffelaar.nl with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DT7hF-0006lw-B8 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 04 May 2005 02:25:01 +0200 Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 02:25:01 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Package Fails to build from Source in a sane way Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:53:36PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > reopen 300681 > thanks > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 04:33:39PM +0200, g�nter geiger wrote: > > Closing, as this bug applied only to the binary packages, which are not > > built anymore. > > But all those binary packages like realtime-lsm-module-2.6.8-1-386 are > now in testing. Ok, Steve accepted the new version in testing, and that succeeded with this britney run, so this all finally does resolve this bug. --Jeroen -- Jeroen va
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: >> dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/illuminator-demo/usr/bin/tsview-ng' >> gave error exit status 1 >> dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 256 >> make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 > >Actually, since it built successfully on ten other arches, I'd conclude >this is a buggy sparc toolchain. What other explanation can you offer? Missing versioned build dependancy you got lucky on on the other architectures. Building a 64-bit library and expecting to find it in lib rather than lib64. (or visa-versa, or building one and expecting the other) Other bi-arch issues. The usual type size, initialization and pointer alignmet issues. >Presumably this has come up in other packages. Do you know how they >worked around this bug? A few packages get an ldd error, for example scalapack. This issue has not been completely tracked down or fixed. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Blars Blarson wrote: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/illuminator-demo/usr/bin/tsview-ng' gave error exit status 1 dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 256 make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 [..] A few packages get an ldd error, for example scalapack. This issue has not been completely tracked down or fixed. Hi, This looks identical to the 268450, which is a kernel bug, fixed in kernel-source-2.4.27-7. I'll try a build with the kernel-image-2.4.27-9 which is currently in sid and should contain this fix. Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307429: ..really? ;o) : Bug#307429: fixed in util-vserver 0.30.207-3
On Tue, 03 May 2005 12:03:44 -0700, Debian wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report > #307429: ..post-installation of util-vserver_0.30.207-2 dies:"lstat(): > #No such file or directory", > which was filed against the util-vserver package. > > It has been closed by one of the developers, namely > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > Their explanation is attached below. If this explanation is > unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate > message then please contact the developer, by replying to this email. ..it is. > Source: util-vserver > Source-Version: 0.30.207-3 > > We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of > util-vserver, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: > > util-vserver_0.30.207-3.diff.gz > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3.diff.gz > util-vserver_0.30.207-3.dsc > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3.dsc > util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb ..I get: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get -f install Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. 1 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - Configure: util-vserver grep: *.conf: No such file or directory - Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: util-vserver E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get clean [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get -f install Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. 1 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - Configure: util-vserver grep: *.conf: No such file or directory - Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: util-vserver E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get remove util-vserver Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following packages will be REMOVED: util-vserver 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 7 not upgraded. 1 not fully installed or removed. Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 1569kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - - (Reading database ... 424370 files and directories currently installed.) Removing util-vserver ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get install util-vserver Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following NEW packages will be installed: util-vserver 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. Need to get 409kB of archives. After unpacking 1569kB of additional disk space will be used. Get:1 http://192.168.2.222 unstable/main util-vserver 0.30.207-3 [409kB] Fetched 409kB in 0s (461kB/s) Reading package fields... Done Reading package status... Done Retrieving bug reports... Done - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - Configure: util-vserver grep: *.conf: No such file or directory - Selecting previously deselected package util-vserver. (Reading database ... 424166 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking util-vserver (from .../util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb) ... Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: util-vserver E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # ..chances are this is a new bug, though. ..looking forward to util-vserver (0.30.207-4). ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tro
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:00:19PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote: > This looks identical to the 268450, which is a kernel bug, fixed in > kernel-source-2.4.27-7. I'll try a build with the kernel-image-2.4.27-9 > which is currently in sid and should contain this fix. I duplicated it on 2.6.8-5-sparc64-smp on a sarge system. -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:35:00PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote: > This bug was also fixed in 2.6.8 series (#287287), in kernel-source-2.6.8 > 2.6.8-11. According to changelog [0], the first kernel-image for sparc > built from this k-s version is 2.6.8-6. It is very unfortunate that it did > not make it into sarge :-(. 2.6.8-6 is in sarge, my kernel is/was out of date on that box. (I just installed 2.6.8-6, it will be active next reboot.) -- Blars Blarson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.blars.org/blars.html With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Blars Blarson wrote: On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:00:19PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote: This looks identical to the 268450, which is a kernel bug, fixed in kernel-source-2.4.27-7. I'll try a build with the kernel-image-2.4.27-9 which is currently in sid and should contain this fix. I duplicated it on 2.6.8-5-sparc64-smp on a sarge system. This bug was also fixed in 2.6.8 series (#287287), in kernel-source-2.6.8 2.6.8-11. According to changelog [0], the first kernel-image for sparc built from this k-s version is 2.6.8-6. It is very unfortunate that it did not make it into sarge :-(. [0] http://changelogs.debian.net/kernel-image-2.6.8-sparc Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Blars Blarson wrote: 2.6.8-6 is in sarge, my kernel is/was out of date on that box. (I just installed 2.6.8-6, it will be active next reboot.) Good to know. I've just tested the build with kernel-image-2.4.27-2-sparc64 (version 2.4.27-9) from sid and even though the warnings are still there, it does not FTBFS anymore: [...] dh_makeshlibs -a dh_compress -a dh_fixperms -a dh_installdeb -a dh_shlibdeps -a dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dh_gencontrol -a dh_md5sums -a dh_builddeb -a dpkg-deb: building package `libluminate-dev' in `../libluminate-dev_0.9.1-1_sparc.deb'. dpkg-deb: building package `libluminate6' in `../libluminate6_0.9.1-1_sparc.deb'. dpkg-deb: building package `illuminator-demo' in `../illuminator-demo_0.9.1-1_sparc.deb'. For the record, the following (or later) kernel versions (both currently in sarge) are required for the builds to succeed: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-sparc64 version 2.4.27-2 kernel-image-2.6.8-2-sparc64 version 2.6.8-6 Best regards, Jurij Smakov[EMAIL PROTECTED] Key: http://www.wooyd.org/pgpkey/ KeyID: C99E03CC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6
On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 01:00 +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 3. Mai 2005 18:46 schrieb Adam C Powell IV:
> > On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 08:59 -0700, Blars Blarson wrote:
> > > Package: illuminator
> > > dh_makeshlibs -a
> [...]
> > > dh_shlibdeps -a
> > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6
>
> > Actually, since it built successfully on ten other arches, I'd conclude
> > this is a buggy sparc toolchain. What other explanation can you offer?
>
> Or you had luck on ten of them and one chokes about a missing option to
> dh_shlibdeps?
> [snip]
> AFAIK, it is pure luck if ldd works without those.
Interesting. I had never before used those options to dh_shlibdeps, and
for example, the babel package I just uploaded automatically created the
inter-package dependencies (well, almost, I had to put
"${shlibs:Depends}" in the executables which depended on the included
binaries).
Indeed, the i386 illuminator package I uploaded has the correct
dependency of illuminator-demo on libluminate6 within the illuminator
package. In fact, I just logged into my mirror lyre.mit.edu, and every
single arch's illuminator-demo package, from ia64 to m68k to hppa to
alpha, PPC, etc., depends on libluminate6, all of this built from the
exact same source which is failing on sparc.
Again, that it succeeds on *TEN* *architectures* and only fails on sparc
seems to be more than "pure luck". But if you insist, I can insert
these options by hand to work around sparc brokenness.
-Adam
--
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!
http://www.take6.com/albums/greatesthits.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307502: marked as done (illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6)
Your message dated Tue, 03 May 2005 23:42:18 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 15:59:34 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 08:59:34 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from blars.org (renig.nat.blars.org) [64.81.35.59] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSzo6-0004lj-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 08:59:34 -0700 Received: from renig.nat.blars.org (plergb.nat.blars.org [172.16.1.1]) by renig.nat.blars.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) with ESMTP id j43FxVXE020520 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 3 May 2005 08:59:31 -0700 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by renig.nat.blars.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) id j43FxVjH020518; Tue, 3 May 2005 08:59:31 -0700 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6 X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:59:31 -0700 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: illuminator Version: 0.9.1-1 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: Policy 3.3 illuminator fails to build from source ons parc, duplicated on sparc pbuilder. dh_installdeb -a dh_shlibdeps -a dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown exit code (132) dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/illuminator-demo/usr/bin/tsview-ng' gave error exit status 1 dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code 256 make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 --- Received: (at 307502-done) by bugs.debian.org; 4 May 2005 03:43:18 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 20:43:18 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.202.64] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DTAn7-0006Xh-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 20:43:18 -0700 Received: from doorstop.home.net (c-24-60-135-62.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[24.60.135.62]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with ESMTP id <20050504034242016002jvode>; Wed, 4 May 2005 03:42:47 + Received: from hazelsct by doorstop.home.net with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DTAmA-e8-Vt; Tue, 03 May 2005 23:42:19 -0400 Subject: Re: Bug#307502: illuminator: ftbfs [sparc] could not find path for libluminate.so.6 From: Adam C Powell IV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Debian GNU/Linux Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 23:42:18 -0400 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 23:08 -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote: > On Tue, 3 May 2005, Blars Blarson wrote: > > > 2.6.8-6 is in sarge, my kernel is/was out of date on that box. (I just > > installed 2.6.8-6, it will be active next reboot.) > > Good to know. I've just tested the build with kernel-image-2.4.27-2-sparc64 > (version 2.4.27-9) from sid and even though the warnings are still there, > it does not FTBFS anymore: > > [...] > dh_makeshlibs -a > dh_compress -a > dh_fixperms -a > dh_installdeb -a > dh_shlibdeps -a > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for libluminate.so.6 >
Processed: tagging 306770
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 > tags 306770 sid Bug#306770: aegis: creates ~/integrate.log while building There were no tags set. Tags added: sid > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#304852: marked as done (cause openimager and python-imaging to FTBFS in testing)
Your message dated Tue, 3 May 2005 20:53:45 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#303896: openscenegraph: FTBFS: Unsatisfiable Build-Depends has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Apr 2005 22:20:17 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 15 15:20:16 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from lns-vlq-7-lil-82-254-196-11.adsl.proxad.net (yellowpig.yi.org) [82.254.196.11] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DMZAe-0007qP-00; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:20:16 -0700 Received: from bill by yellowpig.yi.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1DMZAb-0004wv-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:20:13 +0200 Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:20:11 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: cause openimager and python-imaging to FTBFS in testing Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i From: Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: libjpeg62-dev Version: 6b-10 Severity: serious Tags: sid libjpeg6b should not enter testing before openscenegraph (>=0.9.8-3) and python-imaging (>= 1.1.4-3.1) are in testing, else they will FTBFS in testing. Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. --- Received: (at 304852-done) by bugs.debian.org; 4 May 2005 03:53:45 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 20:53:45 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from dsl093-039-086.pdx1.dsl.speakeasy.net (localhost.localdomain) [66.93.39.86] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DTAxF-RB-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 20:53:45 -0700 Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5D19F172845; Tue, 3 May 2005 20:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 20:53:45 -0700 From: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#303896: openscenegraph: FTBFS: Unsatisfiable Build-Depends Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Bill, On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 11:22:59PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > I wrote to you about the libjpeg6b situation. > I have prevented libjpeg6b-10 to enter sarge at your request to > prevent python-imaging and openscenegraph to FTBFS in sarge. > This is bug #304852 (that you shold fee free to close at the=20 > appropriate time). Closing it now, since the freeze will keep packages out well enough on its own. :) > To resolve that, I have NMUed python-imaging which is fixed in > sarge and Lo=EFc Dachary has uploaded openscenegraph that fails sarge > because it FTBFS on arm, because the ARM autobuilder set the $HOME > variable to a non-existing directory, which break ccache. Lo=EFc > is aware of the problem. > So either it is a bug with this buildd or a bug in the package. > (I will let to the ftp-master to decide which.) Well, I think that any package that build-depends on ccache is doing something wrong... If you're using it for caching between builds, you don't need a build-dep; if you're using it for caching within a single build, then yeesh, use a symlink... > However, openscenegraph 0.9.8-2 is in sarge and according to the build > log also use ccache so is likely to FTBFS if retried on the same arm > buildd. Right, I think so. However, it's the ftp team's place to decide whether it's appropriate to remove t
Bug#307500: marked as done (choose-mirror: ftbfs [sparc] build fails ./get-iso-codes)
Your message dated Wed, 04 May 2005 00:17:16 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#307500: fixed in choose-mirror 1.09 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 May 2005 15:54:31 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 08:54:31 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from blars.org (renig.nat.blars.org) [64.81.35.59] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DSzjD-00046S-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 08:54:31 -0700 Received: from renig.nat.blars.org (plergb.nat.blars.org [172.16.1.1]) by renig.nat.blars.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) with ESMTP id j43FsSXE020436 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 3 May 2005 08:54:28 -0700 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by renig.nat.blars.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) id j43FsS7C020434; Tue, 3 May 2005 08:54:28 -0700 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: choose-mirror: ftbfs [sparc] build fails ./get-iso-codes X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:54:28 -0700 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: choose-mirror Version: 1.08 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: fails to build from source choose-mirror fails to build from source on sparc and other buildds, duplicated on sparc pbuilder. # C. Perrier 2/7/2004 # DO NOT actually uncomment these # the scripts have not been tested enough # we'd better include this for post-rc1 # Grab ISO codes from iso-codes package chmod u+x ./get-iso-codes ./get-iso-codes make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1 --- Received: (at 307500-close) by bugs.debian.org; 4 May 2005 04:24:04 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue May 03 21:24:04 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DTBQa-0002JO-00; Tue, 03 May 2005 21:24:04 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DTBK0-0006gU-00; Wed, 04 May 2005 00:17:16 -0400 From: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.55 $ Subject: Bug#307500: fixed in choose-mirror 1.09 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 00:17:16 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Source: choose-mirror Source-Version: 1.09 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of choose-mirror, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: choose-mirror_1.09.dsc to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_1.09.dsc choose-mirror_1.09.tar.gz to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_1.09.tar.gz choose-mirror_1.09_i386.udeb to pool/main/c/choose-mirror/choose-mirror_1.09_i386.udeb A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is attached. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated choose-mirror package) (This message was generated automatically at their request; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 23:03:13 -0400 Source: choose-mirror Binary: choose-mirror Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.09 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian Install System Team Changed-By: Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Description: choose-mirror - Choose mirror to install from (udeb) Closes: 307500 Changes: choose-mirror (1.09) unstable; urgency=low . * C
Bug#307591: libapache2-mod-php4 can't be installed; no /usr/share/doc/php4-common/examples/php.ini
Package: libapache2-mod-php4 Version: 4.3.10-13 Tags: sarge Severity: serious Justification: renders package unusable jeffindy:~# apt-get install apache2-mpm-prefork libapache2-mod-php4 Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following extra packages will be installed: apache2-common ssl-cert Suggested packages: apache2-doc php4-pear The following NEW packages will be installed: apache2-common apache2-mpm-prefork libapache2-mod-php4 ssl-cert 0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 2619kB of archives. After unpacking 5670kB of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] Get:1 http://archive.progeny.com sarge/main ssl-cert 1.0-11 [6904B] Get:2 http://archive.progeny.com sarge/main apache2-common 2.0.54-2 [798kB] Get:3 http://archive.progeny.com sarge/main apache2-mpm-prefork 2.0.54-2 [202kB]Get:4 http://archive.progeny.com sarge/main libapache2-mod-php4 4:4.3.10-13 [1612kB] Fetched 2619kB in 15s (174kB/s) Preconfiguring packages ... Selecting previously deselected package ssl-cert. (Reading database ... 29588 files and directories currently installed.) Unpacking ssl-cert (from .../ssl-cert_1.0-11_all.deb) ... Selecting previously deselected package apache2-common. Unpacking apache2-common (from .../apache2-common_2.0.54-2_i386.deb) ... Selecting previously deselected package apache2-mpm-prefork. Unpacking apache2-mpm-prefork (from .../apache2-mpm-prefork_2.0.54-2_i386.deb) ... Selecting previously deselected package libapache2-mod-php4. Unpacking libapache2-mod-php4 (from .../libapache2-mod-php4_4%3a4.3.10-13_i386.deb) ... Setting up ssl-cert (1.0-11) ... Setting up apache2-common (2.0.54-2) ... Setting Apache2 to Listen on port 80. If this is not desired, please edit /etc/apache2/ports.conf as desired. Note that the Port directive no longer works. Module userdir installed; run /etc/init.d/apache2 force-reload to enable. Setting up apache2-mpm-prefork (2.0.54-2) ... Starting web server: Apache2. Setting up libapache2-mod-php4 (4.3.10-13) ... cp: cannot stat `/usr/share/doc/php4-common/examples/php.ini': No such file or directory dpkg: error processing libapache2-mod-php4 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: libapache2-mod-php4 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) jeffindy:~# dpkg --pending --configure Setting up libapache2-mod-php4 (4.3.10-13) ... cp: cannot stat `/usr/share/doc/php4-common/examples/php.ini': No such file or directory dpkg: error processing libapache2-mod-php4 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 Errors were encountered while processing: libapache2-mod-php4 jeffindy:~# ls /usr/share/doc/php4-common/examples/php.ini-* php.ini-paranoid php.ini-recommended jeffindy:~# ls /etc/php4/apache php.ini jeffindy:~# cp /etc/php4/apache/php.ini /etc/php4/apache2/ jeffindy:~# dpkg --pending --configure Setting up libapache2-mod-php4 (4.3.10-13) ... Forcing reload of web server: Apache2. Discovered while upgrading a web server from woody to sarge, and upgrading from Apache 1 to Apache 2. After fixing this problem and turning off the apache2-default redirect, the web server worked fine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307592: gnugk: ftbfs [sparc] autoconf: Command not found
Package: gnugk Version: 2:2.2.2-1 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: fails to build from source gnugk fails to build from source on sparc and other buildds, duplicated on sparc pbuilder. # Add here commands to compile the package. /usr/bin/make opt addpasswd doc make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/gnugk-2.2.2' autoconf make[1]: autoconf: Command not found make[1]: *** [configure] Error 127 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/gnugk-2.2.2' make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: fix my address
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > submitter 307591 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#307591: libapache2-mod-php4 can't be installed; no /usr/share/doc/php4-common/examples/php.ini Changed Bug submitter from Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#307429: ..really? ;o) : Bug#307429: fixed in util-vserver 0.30.207-3
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reopen 307429 Bug#307429: ..post-installation of util-vserver_0.30.207-2 dies:"lstat(): No such file or directory" Bug reopened, originator not changed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#307429: ..really? ;o) : Bug#307429: fixed in util-vserver 0.30.207-3
reopen 307429 thanks On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 03:55:07AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Tue, 03 May 2005 12:03:44 -0700, Debian wrote in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report > > #307429: ..post-installation of util-vserver_0.30.207-2 dies:"lstat(): > > #No such file or directory", > > which was filed against the util-vserver package. > > > > It has been closed by one of the developers, namely > > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > > > Their explanation is attached below. If this explanation is > > unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate > > message then please contact the developer, by replying to this email. > > ..it is. > > > Source: util-vserver > > Source-Version: 0.30.207-3 > > > > We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of > > util-vserver, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: > > > > util-vserver_0.30.207-3.diff.gz > > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3.diff.gz > > util-vserver_0.30.207-3.dsc > > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3.dsc > > util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb > > to pool/main/u/util-vserver/util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb > > ..I get: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get -f install > Reading Package Lists... Done > Building Dependency Tree... Done > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. > 1 not fully installed or removed. > Need to get 0B of archives. > After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. > - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - > Configure: util-vserver > grep: *.conf: No such file or directory > - > Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... > /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented > dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > Errors were encountered while processing: > util-vserver > E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get clean > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get -f install > Reading Package Lists... Done > Building Dependency Tree... Done > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. > 1 not fully installed or removed. > Need to get 0B of archives. > After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. > - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - > Configure: util-vserver > grep: *.conf: No such file or directory > - > Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... > /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented > dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > Errors were encountered while processing: > util-vserver > E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get remove util-vserver > Reading Package Lists... Done > Building Dependency Tree... Done > The following packages will be REMOVED: > util-vserver > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 to remove and 7 not upgraded. > 1 not fully installed or removed. > Need to get 0B of archives. > After unpacking 1569kB disk space will be freed. > Do you want to continue? [Y/n] > - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - > - > (Reading database ... 424370 files and directories currently installed.) > Removing util-vserver ... > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # apt-get install util-vserver > Reading Package Lists... Done > Building Dependency Tree... Done > The following NEW packages will be installed: > util-vserver > 0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 7 not upgraded. > Need to get 409kB of archives. > After unpacking 1569kB of additional disk space will be used. > Get:1 http://192.168.2.222 unstable/main util-vserver 0.30.207-3 [409kB] > Fetched 409kB in 0s (461kB/s) > Reading package fields... Done > Reading package status... Done > Retrieving bug reports... Done > - Sourcerer Apt Watcher - > Configure: util-vserver > grep: *.conf: No such file or directory > - > Selecting previously deselected package util-vserver. > (Reading database ... 424166 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking util-vserver (from .../util-vserver_0.30.207-3_i386.deb) ... > Setting up util-vserver (0.30.207-3) ... > /var/lib/vservers: Function not implemented > dpkg: error processing util-vserver (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 > Errors were encountered while processing: > util-vserver > E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ # > > ..chances are this is a new bug, though. > > ..looking forward to util-vserver
Processed: tags
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 288398 +pending Bug#288398: unrar exits with status 0 on failure There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > severity 288398 grave Bug#288398: unrar exits with status 0 on failure Severity set to `grave'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
