Fwd: Re: elm on linux.cactus.org
This is from an elm user on one of many systems which I administer. Can you work from this description, or do we need to submit a 'formal' report? Package: elm-me+ Status: install ok installed Priority: optional Section: mail Installed-Size: 2164 Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Version: 2.4pl25ME+99c-3 Replaces: elm - Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: elm on linux.cactus.org To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Lindsay Haisley [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Correction. The following error occurs just before sending, when I try to remove the string in In Reply to: by putting in a space and pressing enter. The original mail (ie whose ID string I was removing so I wouldn't have to type the reply address for a new subject) originated on hotmail.com at least in the instance today; the earlier instance was from yahoo.com; M.H. If I find something I will post. Also have seen this for the second time this week: STRING PANIC: Index out of array STRING PANIC in cs_binary.c:1043:cs_give_unicode_from_ascii Index out of array Emergency exit taken! All temp files intact! This happens at the time of hitting the key for send, though the composed email can then be recovered from the /tmp/snd.nn file. M.H. All the software on the box was brought up to Debian's current testing level last week. This may well have included elm. I had thought that development of elm was no longer taking place, but apparently this is new. I can't help you on this. If you find a solution, please post it to me and I'll include it in next month's newsletter. Thus spake [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 09:34:59AM CST Someone updated elm on linux.cacuts.org about a week ago. (I hope it was the designated sysadmin). Anyway does anyone know if that is the reason why suddenly the html in the incoming mail is being interpreted and if so what is the configuration (elmrc) setting to stop the interpretation of HTML? Or is it RTFM time... I currently pipe to more to achieve that result and the display viewer for individual messages can probably be changed from the current builtin++ to something else, but is there some other config file option to revert to previous behavior? A preliminary search of documentation on the web did not turn up anything obvious. M.H. -- Lindsay Haisley | Everything works| PGP public key FMP Computer Services | if you let it | available at 512-259-1190 |(The Roadie) | http://www.fmp.com/pubkeys http://www.fmp.com| | - End forwarded message - -- Lindsay Haisley | Everything works| PGP public key FMP Computer Services | if you let it | available at 512-259-1190 |(The Roadie) | http://www.fmp.com/pubkeys http://www.fmp.com| |
Processed: Re: Bug#170067: tux-aqfh: It doesn't run
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 170067 important Bug#170067: tux-aqfh: It doesn't run Severity set to `important'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#170067: tux-aqfh: It doesn't run
severity 170067 important thanks On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 03:35:28PM -0200, Raphael Derosso Pereira - DephiNit wrote: Package: tux-aqfh Version: 1.0.13-6 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Hi. When I try to run it, the following message shows up: slDSP: write: Resource temporarily unavailable Hm, this doesn't happen for me (with 1.0.14-1), so the package doesn't appear to be completely unusable. Perhaps this is some local sound problem? also, it doesn't depends on tux-aqfh-data neither recommends or sugests it tux-aqfh-data was only created in version 1.0.14-1, and tux-aqfh 1.0.14-1 depends on tux-aqfh-data. (In general, please always file separate problems in separate bug reports. They're much easier to deal with that way.) Thanks, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: [dendler@idefense.com: iDEFENSE Security Advisory: Linuxconf locally exploitable buffer overflow]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 158637 important Bug#158637: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: iDEFENSE Security Advisory: Linuxconf locally exploitable buffer overflow] Severity set to `important'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#165294: marked as done (FTBFS: Build failure of langdrill on i386)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:21:28 + with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line FTBFS: Build failure of langdrill on i386 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; 18 Oct 2002 08:42:50 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 18 03:42:49 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mikilab.doshisha.ac.jp [202.23.156.50] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 182SiX-0008LZ-00; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 03:42:49 -0500 Received: from atoron.work.isl.doshisha.ac.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mikilab.doshisha.ac.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with SMTP id RAA25131 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:42:18 +0900 X-Authentication-Warning: mikilab.doshisha.ac.jp: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] claimed to be atoron.work.isl.doshisha.ac.jp Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 17:42:20 +0900 From: Junichi Uekawa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: submit bug tracking system [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FTBFS: Build failure of langdrill on i386 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Netfort project X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.3 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-debian-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.9 required=5.0 tests=NOSPAM_INC,SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, SUPERLONG_LINE,X_AUTH_WARNING version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: Package: langdrill Version: 0.2.1-6 Severity: serious langdrill fails to build from source on i386, when doing a rebuild inside chroot. I am filing this bug to notify you that I failed to build your package from source in the current sid distribution. It is a serious problem that your source does not build from source using the information provided in your control files, and such a package should not be distributed in a stable Debian distribution. This build was done using pbuilder package. Build log follows: === make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/langdrill-0.2.1/src' rm -f langdrill core g++ `vdk-config --cflags` -DTARGET='langdrill' -DTARGET_RC='langdrill.rc' -DTARGET_RC_LOCAL='.langdrill' -DTARGET_RC_DIR='/etc' -DDRILL_DEF='default.drill' -DDRILL_DIR='/usr/share/vdk/langdrill' -I /usr/include/gnome-1.0/ -c main.cc -o main.o g++ `vdk-config --cflags` -DTARGET='langdrill' -DTARGET_RC='langdrill.rc' -DTARGET_RC_LOCAL='.langdrill' -DTARGET_RC_DIR='/etc' -DDRILL_DEF='default.drill' -DDRILL_DIR='/usr/share/vdk/langdrill' -I /usr/include/gnome-1.0/ -c config.cc -o config.o langdrill compilled for Debian GNU/Linux system. g++ `vdk-config --cflags` -DTARGET='langdrill' -DTARGET_RC='langdrill.rc' -DTARGET_RC_LOCAL='.langdrill' -DTARGET_RC_DIR='/etc' -DDRILL_DEF='default.drill' -DDRILL_DIR='/usr/share/vdk/langdrill' -I /usr/include/gnome-1.0/ -o langdrill main.o config.o `vdk-config --libs` /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ljpeg collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: *** [langdrill] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/langdrill-0.2.1/src' make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/langdrill-0.2.1' make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2 === regards, junichi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer --- Received: (at 165294-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Nov 2002 19:21:32 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 22 13:21:30 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from carbon.btinternet.com [194.73.73.92] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18FJMn-0002ZQ-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 13:21:30 -0600 Received: from host217-35-41-25.in-addr.btopenworld.com ([217.35.41.25] helo=riva.lab.dotat.at) by carbon.btinternet.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #16) id 18FJMm-00067P-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:21:29 + Received: from cjwatson by riva.lab.dotat.at with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18FJMm-0008CL-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:21:28 + Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:21:28 + From: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FTBFS: Build failure of langdrill on i386 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status:
Bug#158637: [dendler@idefense.com: iDEFENSE Security Advisory: Linuxconf locally exploitable buffer overflow]
severity 158637 important thanks On Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 02:38:55PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote: tags 158637 + patch thanks As I stated, debian's linuxconf package should not be vulnerable, as it is not installed setuid root. Nevertheless, I've backported the patch from the latest upstream version, which makes the exploit[1] fail even if you happen to set linuxconf setuid root. Would you mind uploading this? linuxconf is orphaned, and nobody has yet offered to maintain it. Since, as you say, we don't install linuxconf setuid root, I've downgraded the bug in the meantime. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
blt override disparity
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): blt-dev_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb: priority is overridden from optional to extra. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct and the package wrong please fix the package so that this disparity is fixed in the next upload. If you feel the override is incorrect then please reply to this mail and explain why. [NB: this is an automatically generated mail; if you replied to one like it before and have not received a response yet, please ignore this mail. Your reply needs to be processed by a human and will be in due course, but until then the installer will send these automated mails; sorry.] -- Debian distribution maintenance software (This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])
blt_2.4z-0.2_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: blt-common_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb to pool/main/b/blt/blt-common_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb blt-demo_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb to pool/main/b/blt/blt-demo_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb blt-dev_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb to pool/main/b/blt/blt-dev_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb blt_2.4z-0.2.diff.gz to pool/main/b/blt/blt_2.4z-0.2.diff.gz blt_2.4z-0.2.dsc to pool/main/b/blt/blt_2.4z-0.2.dsc blt_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb to pool/main/b/blt/blt_2.4z-0.2_i386.deb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 169559 Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Bug#164522: marked as done (xmms-nas: Shouldn't it depend on xmms?)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:08:41 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#164522: fixed in xmms-nas 0.2-3 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; 13 Oct 2002 00:50:25 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Oct 12 19:50:24 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from duvel.xs4all.nl (juarez.schaapje.org) [213.84.36.58] (postfix) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 180Wxc-0005lb-00; Sat, 12 Oct 2002 19:50:24 -0500 Received: from spark.icicle.dhs.org (spark.schaapje.org [192.168.1.6]) by juarez.schaapje.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 836131C2 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 02:50:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by spark.icicle.dhs.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 13 Oct 2002 02:50:23 +0200 From: Ivo Timmermans [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 02:50:23 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: xmms-nas: Shouldn't it depend on xmms? Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: xmms-nas: Shouldn't it depend on xmms? Package: xmms-nas Version: 0.2-2 (not installed) Severity: serious Justification: Policy 7.2 It seems to me like xmms-nas should depend on xmms, it is pretty useless if xmms isn't installed. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux spark 2.4.19-xfs-sched #2 zo okt 6 23:01:39 CEST 2002 i586 Locale: LANG=nl_NL.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=nl_NL.UTF-8 --- Received: (at 164522-close) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Nov 2002 21:23:25 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 22 15:23:25 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18FLGm-0003uJ-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 15:23:25 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 18FL2X-000186-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:08:41 -0500 From: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.28 $ Subject: Bug#164522: fixed in xmms-nas 0.2-3 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:08:41 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of xmms-nas, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: xmms-nas_0.2-3.diff.gz to pool/main/x/xmms-nas/xmms-nas_0.2-3.diff.gz xmms-nas_0.2-3.dsc to pool/main/x/xmms-nas/xmms-nas_0.2-3.dsc xmms-nas_0.2-3_i386.deb to pool/main/x/xmms-nas/xmms-nas_0.2-3_i386.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. Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated xmms-nas 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: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 20:09:14 + Source: xmms-nas Binary: xmms-nas Architecture: source i386 Version: 0.2-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: xmms-nas - Network Audio System (NAS) Output Plugin for XMMS Closes: 164522 Changes: xmms-nas (0.2-3) unstable; urgency=low . * QA upload. * Update nas-dev build-dependency to the new libaudio-dev. * Depend on xmms (closes: #164522). Files: e53eff688beaca5a3b39a02e0104326b 644 sound optional xmms-nas_0.2-3.dsc 636d0cf5690803b55ac5cfcc4ee336a7 21767 sound optional xmms-nas_0.2-3.diff.gz 8110b27dec832b05b89bee14f2378bc2 11222 sound optional xmms-nas_0.2-3_i386.deb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Debian developer iD8DBQE93pVM9t0zAhD6TNERAuqAAJ9zycwFKEBIZoJ5IyL/HoBjOUFQOwCZATif i7sUWEtRm3kJn7sooOdkByw= =DAXk -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Processed: merging 167067 168024
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: merge 167067 168024 Bug#167067: FTBFS: Build failure of geas on i386 Bug#168024: geas_0.0.6-8(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: missing include file Merged 167067 168024. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#106982: marked as done (apt should have a linuxconf module :))
Your message dated Sat, 23 Nov 2002 01:38:20 +0100 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line apt should have a linuxconf module :) 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 maintonly) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Jul 2001 12:38:50 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jul 29 07:38:50 2001 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from summit.magenet.net (mail.2mbit.com) [:::216.152.230.50] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 15QpqM-Fj-00; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 07:38:50 -0500 Received: from marian ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [66.26.10.193]) (authenticated) by mail.2mbit.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f6TCcmm01835 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 08:38:48 -0400 Received: from rollyson by marian with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15Qpwo-0001VF-00; Sun, 29 Jul 2001 08:45:30 -0400 From: Josh Rollyson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: apt should have a linuxconf module :) X-Reportbug-Version: 1.21 X-Mailer: reportbug 1.21 Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 08:45:29 -0400 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: apt Version: 0.5.3 Severity: wishlist It would be nice to have linuxconf module to provide an interface to apt :) -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux marian 2.4.5-ac13 #9 Fri Jul 20 21:12:07 EDT 2001 i586 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages apt depends on: ii libc6 2.2.3-5 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 1:2.95.4-0.010424 The GNU stdc++ library --- Received: (at 106982-done) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Nov 2002 00:41:06 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 22 18:41:05 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mail.gmx.net [213.165.65.60] by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18FOM5-DB-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 18:41:05 -0600 Received: (qmail 30861 invoked by uid 0); 23 Nov 2002 00:41:00 - Received: from v20.vpn.lrz-muenchen.de (HELO blackbird.oase.mhn.de) (129.187.48.20) by mail.gmx.net (mp005-rz3) with SMTP; 23 Nov 2002 00:41:00 - Received: from mbanck by blackbird.oase.mhn.de with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18FOJR-0007WM-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 01:38:21 +0100 Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 01:38:20 +0100 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: apt should have a linuxconf module :) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Michael Banck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=SPAM_PHRASE_01_02,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: Hi, I just did an NMU of linuxconf and found out that it in fact has an apt module. Well, at least you can setup your sources.list with it. If you think this is not enough or meant something else, please reopen this bug. cheers, Michael
Processed: Fixed in NMU of linuxconf 1.26r4-2.1
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tag 158637 + fixed Bug#158637: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: iDEFENSE Security Advisory: Linuxconf locally exploitable buffer overflow] Tags added: fixed tag 160172 + fixed Bug#160172: FTBFS: Build failure of linuxconf on i386 Tags added: fixed quit Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#168976: marked as done (kde dependencies trouble - removed kdeinit)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:55:15 -0600 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line kde 3.x is not in the debian archive yet 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; 13 Nov 2002 19:24:07 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 13 13:24:06 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from vs.bgnett.no [194.54.96.159] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18C37N-00070Y-00; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:24:05 -0600 Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3) id gADJHWN54420 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:17:32 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from tosh ([194.54.103.99]) by vs.bgnett.no (8.11.3/8.11.3av) with ESMTP id gADJHPS54363 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:17:25 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) Received: from peter by tosh with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18C36D-0006Wd-00; Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:22:53 +0100 From: Peter N. M. Hansteen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: kde dependencies trouble - removed kdeinit X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 20:22:53 +0100 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Virus-Scanned: by vs.bgnett.no Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=SPAM_PHRASE_02_03 version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: Package: kde Version: N/A; reported 2002-11-13 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable finally doing a dist-upgrade from woody to testing (sarge), i was surprised to find that kde, now at version 3.0.1, would not start, but instead complained that kdeinit could not be found. apparently the dist-upgrade had removed the program. i was able to get kde into a sort of startable state by removing kde, then installing kdebase and kdebase-libs (which did pull in a few dependent packages). However, trying to install almost any kde related software fails with something like this: tosh:/home/peter# apt-get install kxmleditor 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: Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: kxmleditor: Depends: kdelibs3 (= 4:2.2.2-1) but it is not going to be installed Depends: libkxmleditor1 (= 0.7.1-1) but it is not going to be installed E: Sorry, broken packages -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux tosh 2.4.9 #10 Tue Jul 30 08:44:50 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C --- Received: (at 168976-close) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Nov 2002 01:55:16 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 22 19:55:16 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from calc.cheney.cx [207.70.165.48] (mail) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18FPVs-0004Yk-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:55:16 -0600 Received: from ccheney by calc.cheney.cx with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18FPVr-6M-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:55:15 -0600 Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 19:55:15 -0600 From: Chris Cheney [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: kde 3.x is not in the debian archive yet Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.41 X-Spam-Level: KDE 3.x is not in the debian archive yet, hence this bug does not belong in the BTS, and certainly not at a grave level. Chris
ubit_2.6.0-2_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: libubit-dev_2.6.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/u/ubit/libubit-dev_2.6.0-2_i386.deb libubit2.6.0_2.6.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/u/ubit/libubit2.6.0_2.6.0-2_i386.deb ubit_2.6.0-2.diff.gz to pool/main/u/ubit/ubit_2.6.0-2.diff.gz ubit_2.6.0-2.dsc to pool/main/u/ubit/ubit_2.6.0-2.dsc Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org Closing bugs: 163531 Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Bug#163531: marked as done (ubit_2.6.0-1(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: g++ 3.0 errors)
Your message dated Fri, 22 Nov 2002 21:17:11 -0500 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#163531: fixed in ubit 2.6.0-2 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; 6 Oct 2002 14:58:39 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Oct 06 09:58:39 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from atlrel6.hp.com [156.153.255.205] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 17yCrf-00047X-00; Sun, 06 Oct 2002 09:58:39 -0500 Received: from debian.fc.hp.com (whatone.fc.hp.com [15.238.0.60]) by atlrel6.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4A8202 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 10:58:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by debian.fc.hp.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8C0971D4825; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:58:38 -0600 (MDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2002 08:58:38 -0600 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ubit_2.6.0-1(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: g++ 3.0 errors Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Package: ubit Version: 2.6.0-1 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: Build fails with g++ errors, the first of which isbelow. lamont Automatic build of ubit_2.6.0-1 on sarti by sbuild/hppa 1.169 Build started at 20021006-0830 [...] ** Using build dependencies supplied by package: Build-Depends: debhelper (= 4), libungif4-dev, xlibs-dev [...] Making all in src make[3]: Entering directory `/build/buildd/ubit-2.6.0/src' /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile c++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I/usr/X11R6/include -O2 -Wall -ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer -fexpensive-optimizations -fstrict-aliasing -funroll-loops -c uuappli.cc mkdir .libs c++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I/usr/X11R6/include -O2 -Wall -ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer -fexpensive-optimizations -fstrict-aliasing -funroll-loops -c uuappli.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/uuappli.lo In file included from uuappli.cc:47: uedit.hh:137: friend declaration requires class-key, i.e. `friend class UAppli' uedit.hh:138: friend declaration requires class-key, i.e. `friend class UStr' make[3]: *** [uuappli.lo] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/ubit-2.6.0/src' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/ubit-2.6.0' make[1]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/ubit-2.6.0' make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2 A full build log can be found at: http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=hppapkg=ubitver=2.6.0-1 --- Received: (at 163531-close) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Nov 2002 02:23:11 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 22 20:23:02 2002 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail) by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 18FPwk-0005rO-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 20:23:02 -0600 Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 18FPr5-00057i-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 21:17:11 -0500 From: Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.28 $ Subject: Bug#163531: fixed in ubit 2.6.0-2 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 21:17:11 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of ubit, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: libubit-dev_2.6.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/u/ubit/libubit-dev_2.6.0-2_i386.deb libubit2.6.0_2.6.0-2_i386.deb to pool/main/u/ubit/libubit2.6.0_2.6.0-2_i386.deb ubit_2.6.0-2.diff.gz to pool/main/u/ubit/ubit_2.6.0-2.diff.gz ubit_2.6.0-2.dsc to pool/main/u/ubit/ubit_2.6.0-2.dsc 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. Rene Engelhard [EMAIL PROTECTED] (supplier of updated ubit 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:
