Bug#469120: manpages-fr: traduction abusive de la directive files dans l'exemple de fichier
retitle 469120 manpages-fr: nsswitch.conf.5 -- translation error in sample configuration file tags 469120 pending severity 469120 important thanks Marc Chantreux [EMAIL PROTECTED] (03/03/2008): Package: manpages-fr Version: 2.39.1-5 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable For bts readers, « files » must not be translated in the example of nsswitch.conf.5. It is fixed in svn. L'exemple de conf. dans le man est: hosts: dns [!UNAVAIL=return] fichiers networks: nis [NOTFOUND=return] fichiers ethers: nis [NOTFOUND=return] fichiers protocols: nis [NOTFOUND=return] fichiers rpc:nis [NOTFOUND=return] fichiers services: nis [NOTFOUND=return] fichiers et devrait être: hosts: dns [!UNAVAIL=return] files networks: nis [NOTFOUND=return] files ethers: nis [NOTFOUND=return] files protocols: nis [NOTFOUND=return] files rpc:nis [NOTFOUND=return] files services: nis [NOTFOUND=return] files je n'ai pas trouvé les lignes correspondantes dans le po (les lignes en question ne semblent pas traduites et je ne connais pas gnu text), desolé de ne pas proposer de patch. Je trouve le problème grave car la conf. NSS est centrale. J'espere ne pas avoir abusé du flag. C'est un peu sévère de rendre le bug RC pour une erreur de traduction dans un exemple, même si celle-ci est assez grave. C'est corrigé dans le svn, merci d'avoir signalé l'erreur. Cordialement, -- Thomas Huriaux
Bug#438091: docbookwiki: Please switch to gettext-based debconf templates
Package: docbookwiki Version: 0.9.1cvs-2 Severity: serious Tags: l10n Justification: http://release.debian.org/lenny-goals.txt Hi, Please use gettext-based debconf templates to allow translations. This can be easily done with the following commands: $ cd debian $ debconf-gettextize templates $ rm templates.old I would also split the docbookwiki/reconfigure_webserver choice (by using __Choices: instead of _Choices:) and would not mark as translatable the docbookwiki/setup_password default (by using Default: instead of _Default:). You will then have to run debconf-updatepo to keep the pot file up-to-date. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#431162: po4a loops indefinitely while parsing options
Package: po4a Version: 0.31-1 Severity: grave Hi, By specifying opt:-o untranslated=rn,'',bd,rm -o groff_code=verbatim, po4a loops indefinitely in split_opts(). This can be tested with the glibc translations in manpages-fr-extra, which now FTBFS due to this problem. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#418350: fixed in pppconfig 2.3.16
Hi, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (09/05/2007): Could you please explain why you removed the manpage instead of using a replace field as suggested... I don't see that pppconfig replaces manpages-fr. See policy 7.5.1. In any case, If a French man page for pppconfig is in manpages-fr why should I bloat pppconfig with another?. It's bloated enough with translations as it is. The French pppconfig manpage is only present in the sarge manpages-fr package. ...and why you uploaded in unstable instead of etch-proposed-updates? Because I was not aware that I was expected to do otherwise. Why would it not be wanted in Unstable? Because this bug is not present neither in unstable nor in testing. It affects only sarge - etch transitions. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#418350: fixed in pppconfig 2.3.16
Hi, John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (01/05/2007): Source: pppconfig Source-Version: 2.3.16 pppconfig (2.3.16) unstable; urgency=high . * Removed French man page. Closes: #418350: missing Replaces: manpages-fr ( 2.39.1-5) Could you please explain why you removed the manpage instead of using a replace field as suggested, and why you uploaded in unstable instead of etch-proposed-updates? Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#402331: FTBFS: unable to find user alias
Jon Marler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (21/12/2006): Quoting Thomas Huriaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Note also that once this is fixed, you should update the description of the qmail-src package. I am not exactly sure what pbuilder is doing here, but I don't get the same behavior when executing debian/rules binary to build -*just*- the qmail-src package. If you are trying to build the qmail package as well, you will have to have the users. Period. I am not trying to build the qmail package, I am trying to build the only package listed in debian/control, i.e. the qmail-src package. It still fails. See Steve's answer: The problem seems to be that your debian/rules is misusing the binary-arch and binary-indep targets for purposes other than building the packages listed in debian/control. qmail is not an official Debian package. qmail-src is an official Debian non-free package. I believe that the problem here is that your default invocation of pbuilder is attempting to build both the qmail-src and the qmail packages, which are two separate things. I did find where attempting to build the qmail-src package would require the users, and I have fixed that bug. It appears that you are now reporting the same error, with a different package, that is not part of Debian. Please separate out the two. As far as I can tell, I have fixed the bug in qmail-src. The remaining complaint about the qmail package is moot, as qmail is not part of Debian. Also, I do not see where or why I need to update the description of the qmail-src package. Update what exactly? If you want a change in the description, please file a different bug report. Because If you try apt-get source --build qmail-src it will most likely fail because the users do not exist. You MUST install the qmail-src package first. won't be true anymore once your package is fixed. This seems to be closely related enough to not deserve a new bug. -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#402331: FTBFS: unable to find user alias
Jon Marler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (12/12/2006): Quoting Thomas Huriaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Package: qmail Version: 1.03-40 Severity: serious Using pbuilder in an i386 chroot: [...] ( ./auto-uid auto_uida `head -1 conf-users` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidd `head -2 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidl `head -3 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uido `head -4 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidp `head -5 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidq `head -6 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidr `head -7 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uids `head -8 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-gid auto_gidq `head -1 conf-groups` \ ./auto-gid auto_gidn `head -2 conf-groups | tail -1` \ ) auto_uids.c.tmp mv auto_uids.c.tmp auto_uids.c fatal: unable to find user alias make[1]: *** [auto_uids.c] Error 111 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/qmail-1.03' make: *** [build] Error 2 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package [...] This pops up now and again ... You have attempted to build the package without installing it first. If you install the package, the install scripts will create that user for you. If you don't want to do that, feel free to add any missing users yourself. If you want to know why this is an issue, ask the people than fund Debian, as they are the ones that demanded the qmail users be removed from the default passwd file because qmail is considered non-free If you dig through the old bug reports for qmail-src, you will see a bug that added in the code to add the users. ? I was trying to build the qmail-src package from the Debian qmail source package, not the real qmail package from the qmail-src package. I don't understand why an automated debianization requires existing users to succeed. Or I may not have understood the purpose of the qmail-src package. Note also that if it is a known issue that you don't want to fix, you should mark the bug as wontfix instead of closing the bugs. I never parse closed bugs before reporting a current issue (and I don't believe being the only one acting like that). This will avoid this popping up now and again. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#402331: FTBFS: unable to find user alias
Package: qmail Version: 1.03-40 Severity: serious Using pbuilder in an i386 chroot: [...] ( ./auto-uid auto_uida `head -1 conf-users` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidd `head -2 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidl `head -3 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uido `head -4 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidp `head -5 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidq `head -6 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uidr `head -7 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-uid auto_uids `head -8 conf-users | tail -1` \ ./auto-gid auto_gidq `head -1 conf-groups` \ ./auto-gid auto_gidn `head -2 conf-groups | tail -1` \ ) auto_uids.c.tmp mv auto_uids.c.tmp auto_uids.c fatal: unable to find user alias make[1]: *** [auto_uids.c] Error 111 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/qmail-1.03' make: *** [build] Error 2 pbuilder: Failed autobuilding of package [...] Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#398899: reopen, still fails
reassign 398886 argus thanks Changwoo Ryu [EMAIL PROTECTED] (05/12/2006): reassign 398886 python-central I don't know which bug you meant, but it's surely not this one. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#389024: libapache-mod-mono: Broken debconf template: Package fails to configure
Package: libapache-mod-mono Version: 1.1.17-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Tags: patch Hi, There is a missing space at the begining of your long description, that makes your package not configurable. The attached patch fixes the problem. I have also rephrased the long description, as on some debconf frontends, the long description is the first thing the user will read, and in this situation, This does not mean anything. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux --- libapache-mod-mono.templates.orig 2006-09-23 14:12:17.0 +0200 +++ libapache-mod-mono.templates2006-09-23 14:15:49.0 +0200 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ Template: libapache-mod-mono/activate Type: boolean _Description: Activate module? -If this is true, then the module will be activated as apache starts. + The libapache-mod-mono module can be activated as apache starts. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#378229: websimba: Broken debconf template makes package uninstallable
Package: websimba Version: 0.8-1 Severity: grave Tags: patch While installing websimba: Setting up websimba (0.8-1) ... Template parse error near `.', in stanza #1 of /var/lib/dpkg/info/websimba.templates dpkg: error processing websimba (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 255 Errors were encountered while processing: websimba E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) The attached patch fix the problem. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux --- websimba.templates.orig 2006-07-14 15:14:54.0 +0200 +++ websimba.templates 2006-07-14 15:15:03.0 +0200 @@ -5,5 +5,5 @@ Default: Apache _Description: Webserver type: Simba needs to configure a webserver to correctly function. -. + . Select None if you would like to configure your webserver by hand. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#348060: Orphaning x-symbol
reassign 348060 wnpp retitle 348060 O: WYSIWYG TeX mode for XEmacs severity 348060 normal thanks Thomas Huriaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] (14/01/2006): It seems that the x-symbol package is no longer maintained: * last upload 3 years ago * contains an RC-bug open 1 month ago, no answer from the maintainer * None of the bugs reported since last upload have been answered * New upstream releases available, with wishlist bugs filled more than 2 years ago Even if I have no interest in maintaining this package, I think that finding a new maintainer for this package is better for the Debian's users. After three weeks without answer from the maintainer, I will reassign this bug to wnpp. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/01/msg00964.html for the maintainer's answer. -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#348195: kimberlite: neglected and unused package, should this be removed?
Package: kimberlite Version: 1.1.0-3.3 Severity: serious Hi, The kimberlite package seems to be neglected: * last maintainer upload more than 4 years ago * 3 NMUs to fix RC-bugs have been required since this upload * new upstream release available, with a wishlist bugs filled in 2003 * none of the open bugs have been answered However, this package seems now to be dead upstream and the popcon stats are very low, so it should probably be removed from the archive. After 3 weeks without answer from the maintainer, I will reassign this bug to ftp.debian.org. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#348060: x-symbol: Neglected package with RC-bug, should this be orphaned?
Package: x-symbol Version: 4.43-5 Severity: serious Hi, It seems that the x-symbol package is no longer maintained: * last upload 3 years ago * contains an RC-bug open 1 month ago, no answer from the maintainer * None of the bugs reported since last upload have been answered * New upstream releases available, with wishlist bugs filled more than 2 years ago Even if I have no interest in maintaining this package, I think that finding a new maintainer for this package is better for the Debian's users. After three weeks without answer from the maintainer, I will reassign this bug to wnpp. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#347547: Orphaning spip
reassign 347547 wnpp retitle 347547 O: spip -- User Friendly and powerful Publishing System (CMS) built in php severity 347547 normal thanks Nutella.virtual-net.Fr [EMAIL PROTECTED] (13/01/2006): Thomas Huriaux a écrit : Package: spip Version: 1.7.0-1 Severity: serious It seems that the spip package is no longer maintained: * last upload nearly two years ago * contains an RC-bug open 18 months ago, last answer to this RC-bug also 18 months old * new upstream releases, with a wishlist bug filled 6 months ago * different very old trivial bugs (such as debconf translations) still not fixed. Even if I have no interest in maintaining this package, I think that finding a new maintainer for this package is better for the Debian's users. It is my opinion too. I am actually actively searching for a new maintener, but have a lot of difficulties finding one. Then I reassign this bug to wnpp, it is the first step to find a new maintainer. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#347547: spip: Neglected package with RC-bugs, should this be orphaned?
Package: spip Version: 1.7.0-1 Severity: serious Hi, It seems that the spip package is no longer maintained: * last upload nearly two years ago * contains an RC-bug open 18 months ago, last answer to this RC-bug also 18 months old * new upstream releases, with a wishlist bug filled 6 months ago * different very old trivial bugs (such as debconf translations) still not fixed. Even if I have no interest in maintaining this package, I think that finding a new maintainer for this package is better for the Debian's users. After three weeks without answer from the maintainer, I will reassign this bug to wnpp. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux signature.asc Description: Digital signature
