Re: Please hint loop-aes-utils 2.12r-6
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 07:28:02PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote: > please hint loop-aes-utils 2.12r-6 to enter testing when it's > old enough. It's frozen due to a udeb that is not used in > debian-installer. Hint added. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Allow some packages that produce udebs to migrate
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 01:58:29AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > (started on IRC, but as the list grew longer...) > The following packages have been in unstable for a while and could be > hinted into testing: > unblock cdebconf/0.3.11 (25 days; not used by d-i) > unblock openssh/1:4.2p1-7 (22 days) > unblock modutils/2.4.27.0-5 (17 days) > unblock util-linux/2.12r-8 (27 days) > unblock xfsprogs/2.7.14-1 (35 days) > unblock zlib/1:1.2.3-11 (16 days) > unblock pcmcia-cs/3.2.8-8 (26 days) > unblock pcmciautils/012-5 (17 days) Hints added for all of these, thanks. FWIW, it's a little easier if you put your comments on a separate line in your email :) Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GCC 4.1 in experimental / GCC for etch
* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-21 02:44]: > - uploading GCC 4.1 to unstable for those architectures which do not > have ABI problems (these should be all, but should be validated). I just checked ARM using the extract-syms.sh script and it looks fine. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Allow some packages that produce udebs to migrate
(started on IRC, but as the list grew longer...) The following packages have been in unstable for a while and could be hinted into testing: unblock cdebconf/0.3.11 (25 days; not used by d-i) unblock openssh/1:4.2p1-7 (22 days) unblock modutils/2.4.27.0-5 (17 days) unblock util-linux/2.12r-8 (27 days) unblock xfsprogs/2.7.14-1 (35 days) unblock zlib/1:1.2.3-11 (16 days) unblock pcmcia-cs/3.2.8-8 (26 days) unblock pcmciautils/012-5 (17 days) Cheers, FJP pgp4QqzPkURHF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Problem with latest security version of tar (1.14-2.1)
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:44:11PM +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: > Hello Bdale, > > A user reported that the last security version of tar (1.14.2-1) broke > some features. > > Please take a look on for details: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2006/03/msg00170.html > > We would like to include this package in the next stable release, but > are considering this as RC for now. How about, eh, filing this bug? --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem with latest security version of tar (1.14-2.1)
Hello Bdale, A user reported that the last security version of tar (1.14.2-1) broke some features. Please take a look on for details: http://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2006/03/msg00170.html We would like to include this package in the next stable release, but are considering this as RC for now. Have you any plan, idea or whatever, about how to fix this? Regards, -- Julien Danjou .''`. Debian Developer : :' : http://julien.danjou.info `. `' http://people.debian.org/~acid `- 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Accepted perl 5.8.4-8sarge4 (source sparc all)
Hi Brendan, > Changes: > perl (5.8.4-8sarge4) stable; urgency=low > . >* Don't generate broken md5sums for libperl5.8 (closes: #354466). >* Preserve timestamps in /usr/share/doc. >* Fix problem with utf8/taint interaction (thanks to Steinar > Gunderson for analysis/patch). > . >* Fix test of reenterant function return values which was causing > perl to malloc itself to death if ERANGE was encountered before > ENOENT (such as a long line in /etc/group; see: #227621). we noticed that you uploaded perl. Could you please give a more verbose reasoning why this upload should go into the next stable point release. Your changelog did not really point out which of the issues are release critical. Please also note that this upload was especially problematic since it overwrote an security upload. Greetings Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Please allow gnome-panel and meta-gnome2 into testing together
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 08:22:40PM +0100, Adriaan Peeters wrote: > There is a circular dependency between gnome-panel and meta-gnome2, > but they have no other blocking dependencies. So can they please be > pushed into testing together? That would allow a few other packages > to go in as well. http://ftp-master.debian.org/testing/update_output.txt.gz Feel free to let us know why the existing hint is insufficient. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Accepted glibc 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1 (source i386 all)
Hi Aurelien, > > Done in version 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge2. > > When do you expect this version will reach Sarge? > We release Debian Sarge r2 when it's ready. Greetings Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please allow gnome-panel and meta-gnome2 into testing together
Hello, There is a circular dependency between gnome-panel and meta-gnome2, but they have no other blocking dependencies. So can they please be pushed into testing together? That would allow a few other packages to go in as well. Thanks in advance, Adriaan Peeters -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please hint loop-aes-utils 2.12r-6
Hi release managers, please hint loop-aes-utils 2.12r-6 to enter testing when it's old enough. It's frozen due to a udeb that is not used in debian-installer. cheers, Max -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Accepted glibc 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1 (source i386 all)
* Aurelien Jarno ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060323 18:12]: > Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit : > >Hi Aurelien, > > > >>Changes: > >>glibc (2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1) stable; urgency=low > >>. > >> * Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>. > >> - debian/patches/90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch: Update to tzdata2006b. > > > > > >Could you please reupload and include a fix for #314408 [1]. This has been > >discussed[2] on -release before to be valid for a point-release update. > > Done in version 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge2. > > When do you expect this version will reach Sarge? With the next point release. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Accepted glibc 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1 (source i386 all)
Martin Zobel-Helas a écrit : Hi Aurelien, Changes: glibc (2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1) stable; urgency=low . * Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> . - debian/patches/90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch: Update to tzdata2006b. Could you please reupload and include a fix for #314408 [1]. This has been discussed[2] on -release before to be valid for a point-release update. Done in version 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge2. When do you expect this version will reach Sarge? Cheers, Aurelien -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `-people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Security updated versions in sid and amd64
Dear release team, please consider binNMUing the packages (list below) for amd64 to avoid different packages with the same version to exists on the debian archives. Hi, as you might know amd64 has been added to the Debian archive. For this Ftp-Master insisted on rebuilding every package of the archive. This isn't such a bad idea but has some side effects. One of those is that packages with a security update that have no newer version in sid will be rebuild. Their version and filename will match the packages on security.debian.org but their md5sums will differ from the security announcements. This is anoying for anyone doing security checks, breaks merging mirrors into a single repository (like reprepro can do) and can cause apt-get to reinstall the package on every single upgrade/dist-upgrade. Since 3 of them are already rebuild and in the archive it is probably impossible to import the old security builds instead even if we could convince Ftp-Master to allow them in. So there are 2 solutions left for this problem: 1) upload a new source (or NMU it) 2) binNMU the package If you are aware of problems with binNMUing your package, e.g. a strict versioned depends on a arch:all package of the same source, please let the release team know about them and prepare a new source upload asap. In detail the following packages are affected: antiword 0.35-2sarge1 graphviz 2.2.1-1sarge1 gtkdiskfree 1.9.3-4sarge1 ilohamail 0.8.14-0rc3sarge1 ketm 0.0.6-17sarge1 lynx 2.8.5-2sarge1 mysql-dfsg 4.0.24-10sarge1 replicator 3.1-sarge-1.5 weex 2.6.1-6sarge1 Thanks, Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Accepted glibc 2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1 (source i386 all)
Hi Aurelien, > Changes: > glibc (2.3.2.ds1-22sarge1) stable; urgency=low > . >* Lionel Elie Mamane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > . > - debian/patches/90_glibc232-timezones.dpatch: Update to tzdata2006b. Could you please reupload and include a fix for #314408 [1]. This has been discussed[2] on -release before to be valid for a point-release update. Thanks Greetings Martin [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=314408 [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2006/03/msg00072.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: binNMUs for tagcoll, debtags and libapt-front
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 05:34:26PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 09:44:09PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > Superfantastically weird: I thought I deinstalled gcc 4.1 before > > > building the packages. Maybe I have some stray library hanging > > > around... > > That's why one should use pbuilder or so. > > I'd like to. And I get told every time trouble happens. And every time > I answer that: > - I have a chain of 3 dependecies (libtagcoll -> libapt-front -> >debtags) that would require me to rebuild the mirror for pbuilder >every time I compile one of them, and I still haven't figured out how >to do it automatically. There's no reason it has to be pbuilder. If you have enough room to run a static chroot, you could do that instead; possibly using sbuild/schroot. These days, I'm using schroot together with lvm snapshots for my builds, because I'm fortunate enough to have space for that. > - Maintaining my packages is a big headache already and having to >maintain a complex build environment won't help. Er, then don't install packages in the build environment you *are* using that didn't come from unstable? I'm sorry, but I consider maintaining a build environment suitable for uploads to unstable to be a basic responsibility of any maintainer. You're certainly not required to set up complex build environments, but it is expected that packages you upload are built against unstable. > - I'd like to setup a pbuilder + piuparts upload queue on my server at >home, but it's an amd64 and I can't upload packages built there yet. Well, for one thing, it's trivial to set up an i386 chroot for amd64 and do package builds in an i386 context. (Particularly trivial with schroot, these days...) And of course, source uploads on amd64 should be allowed pretty soon anyway. >And then I wouldn't know how to sign stuff since I don't have the key >on that server. And I can't put my key on that server since it's >constantly exposed to the internet and I run services on it. debsign has a nice -r option for remote signing. I think dpkg-sig has something similar. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
