transition to ocaml 3.10
Hi releasers, we, members of the OCaml team, feel ready to start transitioning packages from OCaml 3.09.2 to OCaml 3.10 in unstable. A list of the involved packages is available at [1]. I'm hereby asking for your permission to go forward with this transition. Many thanks in advance. Cheers. [1] http://pkg-ocaml-maint.alioth.debian.org/debian-ocaml-status.html -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ?/\All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema\/right keys at the right time signature.asc Description: Digital signature
RM: firebird1.5 -- RoM; unsupported upstream; security issues
Dear release managers, Please remove firebird1.5 and its binary packages from testing. The package is unsupported by upstream and has security bugs[1] that are not fixable by the Debian maintainer (yours truly). Request to remove it from unstable is under way. The current version in testing is 1.5.4.4910rel-7 Source: firebird1.5 Binary packages: firebird1.5-classic firebird1.5-common firebird1.5-dev firebird1.5-doc firebird1.5-examples firebird1.5-super firebird2-classic-server firebird2-common firebird2-examples firebird2-super-server firebird2-utils-classic firebird2-utils-super libfbclient1 libfbembed1 [1] http://bugs.debian.org/432753 -- damJabberID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RM: firebird1.5 -- RoM; unsupported upstream; security issues
* Damyan Ivanov [Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:32:33 +0300]: Request to remove it from unstable is under way. Hello Damyan. For packages meant to be removed from unstable, we just let them disappear from sid first, and they disappear from testing automatically afterwards. Thanks, -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Listening to: Joaquín Sabina - Carguen, apunten, fuego -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: transition to ocaml 3.10
Hi, Hi releasers, we, members of the OCaml team, feel ready to start transitioning packages from OCaml 3.09.2 to OCaml 3.10 in unstable. A list of the involved packages is available at [1]. I'm hereby asking for your permission to go forward with this transition. I'm not a release manager, but I was just idly glancing over this and noticed this mail. I use 'advi' and care about it, and I noticed that it's not in the list[1]. Is the list comprehensive? [1] http://pkg-ocaml-maint.alioth.debian.org/debian-ocaml-status.html regards, junichi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED],netfort.gr.jp} Debian Project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: transition to ocaml 3.10
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 10:23:29PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: I use 'advi' and care about it, and I noticed that it's not in the list[1]. Is the list comprehensive? It is up to bug / strangeness in the interested packages :-) In particular I just noticed that advi does not declare a direct build-dep on ocaml, but relies on the transitivity of ocaml-best-compilers. Hence it is missing from the list. I'll fix the package (or the script generating the page). Anyhow, advi is one of the packages which are not particularly problematic for the transition, since they do not depend at runtime on any ocaml package, they just need to be rebuilt and only to ensure they won't FTBFS (which is a rare happening). Thanks for your observation, Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ?/\All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema\/right keys at the right time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please hint openssl into testing.
Hi, Could you please hint openssl into testing? It has a udeb. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Please hint openssl into testing.
Hi, On Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 19:07:50 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote: Hi, Could you please hint openssl into testing? It has a udeb. Debian Installer Team, comments? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] /root]# man real-life No manual entry for real-life -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please push nfs-utils 1:1.1.1~git-20070709-3 into testing
Hi, nfs-utils 1:1.1.1~git-20070709-3 fixes a bug that results in obscure and rather hard-to-track-down issues compared to the version currently in testing. Given that it's been five days in unstable (with no known regressions over the version in testing), would it be possible to bump its urgency? /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-latest-2.6 update in stable incomplete
On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: On 2007-08-18, dann frazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 01:20:11PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks The linux-latest-2.6 update in 4.0r1 was incomplete. arm still have the version 6, anything else 6etch1. This is a serious problem as arm will be uninstallable now and no machine gets new security uploads. I'm sure this is my fault, sorry about that. Is it possible to update this before r2? You could release a new linux-latest-2.6 package pointing to the new arm kernel images in a DSA-1356-2. Are security updates visible at this point in the install. I think they are (except for network-less installs). And I assume we'd want to do a 6etch2 instead of trying to shoehorn in a build of 6etch1? Does anyone object to this? -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IPv6 in Debian
* before A DNS lookup (it might be that the implementation of RFC3484 as described in the libc6 change 2006-05-18 David Woodhouse as found in /usr/share/doc/libc6/changelog.gz might have solved this particular problem) Partly. It fixed the issue of clients trying to connect to IPv6 addresses first on hosts with no IPv4. It didn't fix the issue of waiting for records -- the IPv6 addresses are still returned to the client, albeit at the end of the list. Then there's software that binds to the first port it gets and is difficult to teach not to do so. [2] Sorry, but I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean. The reference you give is speaking about a different issue. I would guess that less than one in a thousand users have direct access to an IPv6 network. Getting connectivity to IPv6 is still non-trivial (based on my own personal experience). $ sudo apt-get install miredo $ sleep 10 $ ping6 -c5 www.kame.net Juliusz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: linux-latest-2.6 update in stable incomplete
On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 04:10:31PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: On 2007-08-18, dann frazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Aug 18, 2007 at 01:20:11PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: Hi folks The linux-latest-2.6 update in 4.0r1 was incomplete. arm still have the version 6, anything else 6etch1. This is a serious problem as arm will be uninstallable now and no machine gets new security uploads. I'm sure this is my fault, sorry about that. Is it possible to update this before r2? You could release a new linux-latest-2.6 package pointing to the new arm kernel images in a DSA-1356-2. Are security updates visible at this point in the install. I think they are (except for network-less installs). And I assume we'd want to do a 6etch2 instead of trying to shoehorn in a build of 6etch1? Does anyone object to this? No objections voiced so far, so I've uploaded to security-master. I'll plan to release once the buildds finish. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: transition to ocaml 3.10
On 8/21/07, Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 10:23:29PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: I use 'advi' and care about it, and I noticed that it's not in the list[1]. Is the list comprehensive? It is up to bug / strangeness in the interested packages :-) In particular I just noticed that advi does not declare a direct build-dep on ocaml, but relies on the transitivity of ocaml-best-compilers. Hence it is missing from the list. I'll fix the package (or the script generating the page). Another package in that category is mtasc, which build-deps on ocaml, ocaml-best-compilers, ocaml-findlib, libextlib-ocaml-dev, but isn't in the list. Anyhow, advi is one of the packages which are not particularly problematic for the transition, since they do not depend at runtime on any ocaml package, they just need to be rebuilt and only to ensure they won't FTBFS (which is a rare happening). mtasc depends on ocaml-base-nox-3.09.2, but only on some platforms, presumably it should be on the list?? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
