Bug#596928: unblock: gnustep-back/0.18.0-3
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package gnustep-back to fix an RC bug; the change is a trivial dependency tweak: * debian/control.m4 (gnustep-back-common) Depends: Add ttf-freefont (Closes: #596059). * debian/control: Regenerate. unblock gnustep-back/0.18.0-3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915054120.770.70295.report...@hatch
Situation of samba packages (security update)
Testing has samba 3.4.8. We recently asked for pre-approval for 3.5.4 for squeeze. The RT suggestion was to upload it to unstable and after a few weeks to prod them again for a possible freeze exception. In the meantime, yesterday (Sept 14th) upstream released a security update (3.3.14, 3.4.9, 3.5.5) for a buffer overrun vulnerability. This update happened without prior private warning, so we have to react as quickly as possible, without preparation. Yesterday, I prepared an update for stable (3.2 is also vulnerable) and the security team is aware of it. I also prepared a 3.5.5 upload and will probably upload it to unstable today. My concern is testing (and backports.org). As the choice between 3.4 and 3.5 hasn't been made yet, we're not 100% sure that squeeze will have 3.5 and, anyway, during the few weeks of 3.5 maturation in unstabletesting and backports users are left without update. So, having 3.4.9 in testing sems needed. Should I upload it through t-p-u? If that's done, I will also upload a fixed 3.4.9 version to backports -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#596928: marked as done (unblock: gnustep-back/0.18.0-3)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:12:03 +0200 with message-id 4c9071c3.8010...@dogguy.org and subject line Re: Bug#596928: unblock: gnustep-back/0.18.0-3 has caused the Debian Bug report #596928, regarding unblock: gnustep-back/0.18.0-3 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596928: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596928 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package gnustep-back to fix an RC bug; the change is a trivial dependency tweak: * debian/control.m4 (gnustep-back-common) Depends: Add ttf-freefont (Closes: #596059). * debian/control: Regenerate. unblock gnustep-back/0.18.0-3 ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On 09/15/2010 07:41 AM, Yavor Doganov wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package gnustep-back to fix an RC bug; the change is a trivial dependency tweak: * debian/control.m4 (gnustep-back-common) Depends: Add ttf-freefont (Closes: #596059). * debian/control: Regenerate. unblock gnustep-back/0.18.0-3 Unblocked. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ ---End Message---
Bug#596930: unblock: qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package qemu-kvm The release available in -unstable fixes a single security hole, CVE-2010-2784 or #594478 (grave security bug). It's a 2-liner patch. Thanks! unblock qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915070103.31741.93832.report...@gandalf.local
Bug#596930: marked as done (unblock: qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:20:02 +0200 with message-id 4c9073a2.8030...@dogguy.org and subject line Re: Bug#596930: unblock: qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3 has caused the Debian Bug report #596930, regarding unblock: qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596930: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596930 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package qemu-kvm The release available in -unstable fixes a single security hole, CVE-2010-2784 or #594478 (grave security bug). It's a 2-liner patch. Thanks! unblock qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3 ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On 09/15/2010 09:01 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package qemu-kvm The release available in -unstable fixes a single security hole, CVE-2010-2784 or #594478 (grave security bug). It's a 2-liner patch. Thanks! unblock qemu-kvm/0.12.5+dfsg-3 It's already unblocked by luk. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ ---End Message---
Bug#595970: marked as done (unblock: dispmua/1.6.6-1)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:51:25 +0200 with message-id 20100915075125.gm3...@patate.is-a-geek.org and subject line Re: Bug#595970: unblock: dispmua/1.6.6-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #595970, regarding unblock: dispmua/1.6.6-1 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 595970: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=595970 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception unblock dispmua/1.6.6-1 Please unblock package dispmua it's the source renamed packages of icedove-dispma, which was removed from unstable with #595666. If you accept dispmua for squeeze, please remove icedove-dispmua at the same time. dispmua was uploaded and entered unstable from the NEW queue before squeeze freeze. Cheers, Christoph ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 17:36:09 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: I'm inclined to accept this anyway since icedove-dispmua was in testing until 3 days ago, but not very happy with the packaging changes... unblocked. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature ---End Message---
Bug#596939: future unblock: kdepim-runtime/4:4.4.6-1
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: freeze-exception
Hello,
I would like to hear your opinion before uploading. KDE has recently released a
new patch release (4.4.6) for its kdepim suite 4.4.x series (kdepim-runtime and
kdepim source packages in Debian). KDE has a rather strict policy what goes
into its patch releases (no new features, only bug fixes). So I think it makes
much sense to release Squeeze with the latest bugfix version from upstream
because a few months of bug fixing went into kdepim* 4.4.6. Also please note
that 4.4.6 is probably the last release of the old kdepim* codebase while
upstream is actively working on the kdepim* 4.5 which is 70% rewrite so to
speak. In my opinion, this makes the update even more important given the
length of the Debian stable lifecycle.
Speaking strictly about kdepim-runtime source package, the upstream diff is
really small (see below). So would you grant a freeze exception for this
package after it spends some time in unstable? Thank you for considering.
$ diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5 kdepim-runtime-4.4.6 | diffstat
.krazy|3 ---
resources/imap/imapresource.cpp |2 +-
resources/imap/settings.cpp |6 --
resources/mailtransport_dummy/Messages.sh |2 +-
4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
$ diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5 kdepim-runtime-4.4.6
diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/.krazy kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/.krazy
--- kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/.krazy 2009-12-14 12:54:44.0 +0200
+++ kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/.krazy 1970-01-01 03:00:00.0 +0300
@@ -1,3 +0,0 @@
-SKIP /libkdepim-copy/\|/resources/openchange/
-EXTRA defines,kdebug,null,qenums,tipsandthis
-STRICT super
diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/imap/imapresource.cpp
kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/imap/imapresource.cpp
--- kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/imap/imapresource.cpp2010-01-06
19:00:55.0 +0200
+++ kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/imap/imapresource.cpp2010-09-10
02:32:13.0 +0300
@@ -256,7 +256,7 @@
if ( userRejected ) {
emit status( Broken, i18n( Could not read the password: user rejected
wallet access. ) );
return;
- } else if ( password.isEmpty() ) {
+ } else if ( password.isEmpty() (Settings::self()-authentication() != 7
/* Not GSSAPI */) ) {
emit status( Broken, i18n( Authentication failed. ) );
return;
} else {
diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/imap/settings.cpp
kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/imap/settings.cpp
--- kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/imap/settings.cpp2009-12-14
12:54:43.0 +0200
+++ kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/imap/settings.cpp2010-09-10
02:32:13.0 +0300
@@ -42,6 +42,8 @@
K_GLOBAL_STATIC( SettingsHelper, s_globalSettings )
+static const int s_ModeGSSAPI = 7;
+
Settings *Settings::self()
{
if ( !s_globalSettings-q ) {
@@ -68,7 +70,7 @@
void Settings::requestPassword()
{
- if ( !m_password.isEmpty() ) {
+ if ( !m_password.isEmpty() || ( authentication() == s_ModeGSSAPI ) ) {
emit passwordRequestCompleted( m_password, false );
} else {
Wallet *wallet = Wallet::openWallet( Wallet::NetworkWallet(), m_winId,
Wallet::Asynchronous );
@@ -118,7 +120,7 @@
*userRejected = false;
}
-if ( !m_password.isEmpty() )
+if ( !m_password.isEmpty() || ( authentication() == s_ModeGSSAPI ) )
return m_password;
Wallet* wallet = Wallet::openWallet( Wallet::NetworkWallet(), m_winId );
if ( wallet wallet-isOpen() wallet-hasFolder( imap ) ) {
diff -uNr kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/mailtransport_dummy/Messages.sh
kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/mailtransport_dummy/Messages.sh
--- kdepim-runtime-4.4.5/resources/mailtransport_dummy/Messages.sh
2009-12-14 12:54:44.0 +0200
+++ kdepim-runtime-4.4.6/resources/mailtransport_dummy/Messages.sh
2010-09-10 02:32:16.0 +0300
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
#! /usr/bin/env bash
-$XGETTEXT *.cpp -o $podir/akonadi_mailtransport_resource.pot
+$XGETTEXT *.cpp -o $podir/akonadi_mailtransport_dummy_resource.pot
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (101, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.35-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=lt_LT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=lt_LT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/20100915085519.3142.67528.report...@mdxdesktop.ozas.sytes.net
Bug#596940: future unblock: kdepim/4:4.4.6-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: wishlist User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Hello, I would like to hear your opinion before uploading. KDE has recently released a new patch release (4.4.6) for its kdepim suite 4.4.x series (kdepim-runtime and kdepim source packages in Debian). KDE has a rather strict policy what goes into its patch releases (no new features, only bug fixes). So I think it makes much sense to release Squeeze with the latest bugfix version from upstream because a few months of bug fixing went into kdepim* 4.4.6. Also please note that 4.4.6 is probably the last release of the old kdepim* codebase while upstream is actively working on the kdepim* 4.5 which is 70% rewrite so to speak. In my opinion, this makes the update even more important given the length of the Debian stable lifecycle. Speaking strictly about kdepim source package, its diff is rather big (see diffstat below). However, given what I said above, would you grant a freeze exception for this package (after it proves itself in unstable obviously)? Thank you for considering. $ diff -uNr kdepim-4.4.5 kdepim-4.4.6 | diffstat .emacs-dirvars | 14 --- .kateconfig|1 .krazy |5 - blogilo/src/composer/bilboeditor.cpp |2 doc/akregator/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/blogilo/index.cache.bz2|binary doc/kabcclient/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kalarm/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kioslave/news/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kjots/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kleopatra/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kmail/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/knode/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/knotes/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/konsolekalendar/index.cache.bz2|binary doc/kontact-admin/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kontact/index.cache.bz2|binary doc/korganizer/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/ktimetracker/index.cache.bz2 |binary doc/kwatchgnupg/index.cache.bz2|binary kalarm/Changelog |9 +- kalarm/alarmcalendar.cpp |9 +- kalarm/cal/kaeventdata.cpp |7 - kalarm/cal/kaeventdata.h | 10 +- kalarm/editdlgtypes.cpp| 18 +++- kalarm/kaevent.h |4 kalarm/kalarm-1.2.1-general.pl | 96 +++ kalarm/kalarm-1.9.5-defaults.pl| 136 - kalarm/kalarm-version.pl | 16 +-- kalarm/kalarm.h|2 kalarm/messagewin.cpp | 10 +- kalarm/prefdlg.cpp |7 + kalarm/sounddlg.cpp| 31 ++- kalarm/sounddlg.h |8 + kalarm/templatedlg.cpp |4 kdepim-version.h |2 kleopatra/crypto/gui/newresultpage.cpp |1 kmail/accountdialog.cpp|8 + kmail/attachmentstrategy.cpp |4 kmail/distributionlistdialog.cpp | 16 +++ kmail/distributionlistdialog.h |2 kmail/folderview.cpp | 13 +-- kmail/headerstyle.cpp |4 kmail/kmaccount.cpp|8 + kmail/kmacctcachedimap.cpp |3 kmail/kmail.kcfg.cmake |6 - kmail/kmailicalifaceimpl.cpp |2 kmail/kmcommands.cpp |8 + kmail/kmcomposewin.cpp |2 kmail/kmfolder.cpp | 14 +-- kmail/kmfolder.h | 10 +- kmail/kmfoldercachedimap.h |2 kmail/kmfolderdialog.cpp |6 + kmail/kmfoldermaildir.cpp | 34 ++-- kmail/kmkernel.cpp | 18 kmail/kmkernel.h |2 kmail/kmmainwidget.h |1 kmail/kmsystemtray.cpp | 20 kmail/mailinglistpropertiesdialog.cpp |4 kmail/mailinglistpropertiesdialog.h|2 kmail/newfolderdialog.cpp |2 kmail/renamejob.cpp| 12 ++ kmail/util.cpp |7 + kmail/util.h |2 knode/knconfigwidgets.cpp |6 + libkdepim/addresseelineedit.cpp|2 mimelib/doc/mimepp.html|2 mimelib/doc/util.html |2 68 files changed, 381 insertions(+), 235 deletions(-) -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (101, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.35-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=lt_LT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=lt_LT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a
Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?
* Gunnar Wolf gw...@gwolf.org [100914 19:25]: We have carried a major.minor scheme as a release numbering scheme since the Early Days, Actually, AFAIK since lenny we no longer use major.minor but release.andhalf.point. There just has not been any 5.1.0 (aka lenny-and-half). Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915093329.ga21...@pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de
Changes for t-p-u of eclipse
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi I have attached the packaging changes for eclipse for the t-p-u of eclipse. Currently eclipse in testing has been built and silently depends on the liblucene2-java in unstable, which this upload intends to fix. I have added an upper bound to the allowed versions of lucene2 and sat4j, so in the very unlikely event that a new upstream version of these are introduced in Squeeze, eclipse will become uninstallable[1]. It also move the NEWS file to eclipse-platform from eclipse. The original notes of the NEWS files will be useful for anyone upgrading eclipse-platform from Lenny to Squeeze. I also added information on how to deal with #587657, since no automatic solution has been deployed for it. ~Niels NB: Please CC me in replies. [1] The reason for only making an upper bound on lucene2 and sat4j is because they are the only two java library I know that auto-generates the metadata at build time, which ends up breaking eclipse. The remaining java libraries have a static metadata in the packaging and will be trivially visible in a diff of the packaging. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEAREIAAYFAkyQkqoACgkQVCqoiq1Ylqxv1gCg08r0azecV+G9wB3mevakreYA s8cAn2yLVWOtQZ9NGFMT3e+rGf1HYRSN =wsrB -END PGP SIGNATURE- 0001-Backport-3.5.2-7-changes-to-Squeeze.patch Description: application/wine-extension-patch 0001-Backport-3.5.2-7-changes-to-Squeeze.patch.sig Description: Binary data
Re: your sks upload to unstable
Hi Julien, sorry to bother you again. Am 06.09.2010 21:59, schrieb Julien Cristau: I'll take the easy way out and trust you that there's no code change in the new upload. Unblocked the unstable version. Due to a type in the rules file (see #596563) on the architectures where the ocaml interpreter is needed the respective dependency was missing. So I had to do a new upload of sks with this fix in place. There is again no code change in the package. The package is ony due to the move to testing in some days. Would you please consider to unblock it to go into testing? Thanks Christoph -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c9097de.3060...@uni-mainz.de
Bug#595422: unblock: live-config/2.0.5-1
retitle 595422 unblock: live-config/2.0.6-1 thanks live-config (2.0.6-1) unstable; urgency=low * Applying patch from Jonathan Riddell jridd...@ubuntu.com to disable some new akonadi services in kde-services script. * Adding xinit config script. * Adding xinit script in manpages. * Renumbering config scripts for xinit. * Renaming xinit.sh to zz-xinit.sh in /etc/profile.d to ensure it is run last. -- Daniel Baumann dan...@debian.org Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:07:37 +0200 -- Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: daniel.baum...@panthera-systems.net Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c90a027.2070...@debian.org
Processed: Re: unblock: live-config/2.0.5-1
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: retitle 595422 unblock: live-config/2.0.6-1 Bug #595422 [release.debian.org] unblock: live-config/2.0.5-1 Changed Bug title to 'unblock: live-config/2.0.6-1' from 'unblock: live-config/2.0.5-1' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 595422: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=595422 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.12845466189410.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#595416: unblock: ecryptfs-utils/83-2
ping. -- Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: daniel.baum...@panthera-systems.net Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c90a23b.1010...@debian.org
Re: webkitkde
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 09:05:13 +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: Heyho! Sune NMUd webkitkde (which I maintain) and apparently got a freeze exception. Not being aware of this I uploaded a new upstream snapshot (fixing at least one quite annoying bug), incorporating his NMU change and correcting README.Debian to match the change Sune did in his NMU. libkwebkit1 ABI didn't change as far as I can see; kget is currently the only package depending on this (except kpart-webkit itself, of course.) How should we proceed? - re-upload Sune's NMU version to t-p-u - let the new version go into squeeze - remove webkitkde from squeeze (requires a kdenetwork upload without dependency on libkwebkit, so less than ideal unless such an upload is planned anyway.) README.Debian still says 'WebKit KPart is now the default', I guess that's an oversight? I think the initial issue should get fixed either via tpu or removal, I'll let you guys decide which. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: what to do with clisp/libsigsegv?
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 07:21:20 +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote: Hello, After a bit of reworking I managed to redo the clisp package. This package should fix quite a number of bugs, however it does require a new libsigsegv and splits the package into multiple sub packages (as requested by upstream). [...] Both uploads should fix a lot of bugs, so I'm inclined to get this into squeeze... Comments? Hrm, redoing the packaging from scratch is not something I'd be happy to accept into a frozen distro... Can't the existing RC bugs (#494587 and #592768, as far as I can tell) be fixed without that, and the revamped packaging be left for wheezy? Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: your sks upload to unstable
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:54:38 +0200, Christoph Martin wrote: Due to a type in the rules file (see #596563) on the architectures where the ocaml interpreter is needed the respective dependency was missing. So I had to do a new upload of sks with this fix in place. There is again no code change in the package. The package is ony due to the move to testing in some days. Would you please consider to unblock it to go into testing? Sigh, I should have spotted that. Thanks for the quick fix, unblocked. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?
On tiisdei 14 Septimber 2010, Gunnar Wolf wrote: So, for the past years we have had x.0.y with growing `y' for point releases, and skiping to (x+1).0.0. And the zero in the middle carries no meaning anymore. It also doesn't do any harm, does it? I would vastly prefer not to change our version numbering scheme yet again. It was already changed for Lenny to replace r1 with .1. Your proposal would give us the following followup of numberings for the first point update of our recent releases: Sarge: 3.1r1 Etch: 4.0r1 Lenny: 5.0.1 Squeeze: 6.0.1 Weezy: 7.1? Our users have come to understand now that 5.0.1 is equivalent to 4.0r1, and that 3.1 is a different full release fom 4.0. Changing it after squeeze to something different yet again buys them and us nothing but unnecessary churn. Stability in numbering is worth a lot more than removing an extra .0 from the string. Cheers, Thijs signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:23:30 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: On tiisdei 14 Septimber 2010, Gunnar Wolf wrote: So, for the past years we have had x.0.y with growing `y' for point releases, and skiping to (x+1).0.0. And the zero in the middle carries no meaning anymore. It also doesn't do any harm, does it? I would vastly prefer not to change our version numbering scheme yet again. It was already changed for Lenny to replace r1 with .1. Your proposal would give us the following followup of numberings for the first point update of our recent releases: Sarge: 3.1r1 Etch: 4.0r1 Lenny: 5.0.1 Squeeze: 6.0.1 Weezy: 7.1? Our users have come to understand now that 5.0.1 is equivalent to 4.0r1, and that 3.1 is a different full release fom 4.0. Changing it after squeeze to something different yet again buys them and us nothing but unnecessary churn. Stability in numbering is worth a lot more than removing an extra .0 from the string. +1 also. I was thinking about this overnight, and I think dropping .0 does actually make a lot of sense for marketing/publicity purposes. A release announcement along the lines of The Debian project is proud to announce the release of version 6 of the Debian operating system seems a bit cleaner/professional than the same statement with 6.0 instead of 6. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915102713.d4a070f8.michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com
Bug#596869: Possible unblock for fusionforge/5.0.2-1
Roland Mas, 2010-09-14 18:49:55 +0200 : [...] * Compatibility with postgresql-8.4 = 8.4.4-2: the postgresql-8.4 package changed the name of the init script, these three patches add logic to call the appropriate script. This is probably the most important patch; there's no bug report open about it, but it would definitely be RC because it means the package couldn't install. I can open it if required :-) Olivier Berger did it for me, and opened #596929. Roland. -- Roland Mas If you're ever confused as to which mode you're in, keep entering the escape key until vi beeps at you. -- nvi manual page. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxrjf517@mirexpress.internal.placard.fr.eu.org
Bug#595602: unblock: subdownloader/2.0.13-1
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 23:37:57 +0100, Marco Rodrigues wrote: On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 12:00:21 +0100, Marco Rodrigues wrote: Please unblock package subdownloader. The current stable version doesn't currently connect to API ( RC Bug ). This new 2.0.13 version Is that bug filed in the BTS? No. It was reported in Launchpad / Ubuntu initially. Do I need to fill it ? At the very least a pointer in the changelog would have been appreciated. only has a new method of connecting to http with better performance and locales updates. Relevant changes in Changelog: - Update translations from Launchpad. Why do some translated strings disappear from the greek translation? Looks like they were removed from the translator at Launchpad for some reason. I've just exported them from LP. https://translations.launchpad.net/subdownloader/trunk/+pots/subdownloader/el/+translate?start=0batch=10show=untranslatedfield.alternative_language=field.alternative_language-empty-marker=1old_show=untranslated They were removed and reviewed as empty. Is this a block or I need to upload a new version with that strings (which I don't know what they mean, because I don't know Greek) included? Well, I don't know Greek either, but I'm not happy to regress translations without an explanation from someone that does, or from the translator. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?
On 15/09/2010 16:27, Michael Gilbert wrote: I was thinking about this overnight, and I think dropping .0 does actually make a lot of sense for marketing/publicity purposes. A release announcement along the lines of The Debian project is proud to announce the release of version 6 of the Debian operating system seems a bit cleaner/professional than the same statement with 6.0 instead of 6. You forgot the argument about “stability”, which is as pertinent as “professional” and “clean”, imho. Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c90e24f.8020...@dogguy.org
Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:12:15 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: On 15/09/2010 16:27, Michael Gilbert wrote: I was thinking about this overnight, and I think dropping .0 does actually make a lot of sense for marketing/publicity purposes. A release announcement along the lines of The Debian project is proud to announce the release of version 6 of the Debian operating system seems a bit cleaner/professional than the same statement with 6.0 instead of 6. You forgot the argument about “stability”, which is as pertinent as “professional” and “clean”, imho. Yes, of course any discussion on this matter is subjective. This is simply my opinion, which I understand carries absolutely no weight since I have no authority. As a release manager, feel free to make your decision with or without taking my, and other, opinions into account. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915111653.3f99c0a6.michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com
Re: what to do with clisp/libsigsegv?
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes: Hrm, redoing the packaging from scratch is not something I'd be happy to accept into a frozen distro... Can't the existing RC bugs (#494587 and #592768, as far as I can tell) be fixed without that, and the revamped packaging be left for wheezy? #494587 looks closed for me since quite some time now though #592768 is real. Regards Christoph -- 9FED 5C6C E206 B70A 5857 70CA 9655 22B9 D49A E731 Debian Developer | Lisp Hacker | CaCert Assurer A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87bp7z59wl@chillida.ipv6.sieglitzhof.net
Re: Dropping libdevkit-power-gobject for squeeze.
Le mercredi 15 septembre 2010 à 08:56 +0200, Michael Biebl a écrit : The alternative for gnome-power-manager and gnome-session is to wait for their 2.32 release, which contain the ports to upower already. Note that since the 2.32 release for both these modules consists in bugfixes and translations, I will try to get them accepted into squeeze. Cheers, -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1284564100.10697.19.ca...@meh
Bug#596655: marked as done (unblock: glpk-java/1.0.13-4)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:22:39 +0200 with message-id 20100915152239.gt3...@patate.is-a-geek.org and subject line Re: Bug#596655: unblock: glpk-java/1.0.13-4 has caused the Debian Bug report #596655, regarding unblock: glpk-java/1.0.13-4 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596655: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596655 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Dear Release Team, Please consider unblocking the glpk-java package. I justify my request here (below): unblock glpk-java/1.0.13-4 The upstream changes between the testing version and the current unstable version are not very significant. They mostly alter the examples, documentation and Windows support. The most important changes were added by the upstream author, who is also responsible for the Debian package (Heinrich Schuchardt, CCed here), specifically to refactor the library loading which caused the FTBFS in the testing version onwards. He has been proactive in testing it out on all the failing architectures (I used the porterboxes to test out his code), and has patched the upstream code appropriately. The Debian-specific changes only allow for some cleanups and minor changes, which should not affect much. I attach a fitlered diff, excluding examples, documentation and Windows specific changes. Could you please consider unblocking glpk-java? Thanks! Kumar -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (101, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash diff -Nru glpk-java-1.0.1/ChangeLog glpk-java-1.0.13/ChangeLog --- glpk-java-1.0.1/ChangeLog 2009-06-06 12:59:51.0 -0500 +++ glpk-java-1.0.13/ChangeLog 2010-03-10 13:41:49.0 -0600 @@ -1,3 +1,43 @@ +Version 1.0.13, 2010-03-10 + Changed error handling to support callbacks +Version 1.0.12, 2010-03-07 + Changed GlpkCallback to use LinkedList instead of TreeSet +Version 1.0.11, 2010-02-27 + Removed config.h from makefiles + Moved loading of system library to class GLPK + Added error handling + Added callback functionality for the MIP solver +Version 1.0.10, 2010-02-20 + Adjusted examples and makefiles for GLPK 4.43 + Updated documentation concerning loading JNI library +Version 1.0.9, 2010-01-13 + Adjusted examples and makefiles for GLPK 4.42 + Workaround for va_list +Version 1.0.8, 2009-12-04 + Adjusted examples and makefiles for GLPK 4.41 + Moved examples to examples/java + Renamed examples + Corrected examples/java/Lp.java + Added examples/java/Mip.java + Corrected documentation + Adjusted w32/check_jni.bat +Version 1.0.6, 2009-11-04 + Adjusted examples and makefiles for GLPK 4.40 + Fixed error in check_jni.bat +Version 1.0.5, 2009-10-29 + Fixed error in Windows build files +Version 1.0.4, 2009-10-29 + Added documentation + Added check files to Windows directories + Adjusted buildfiles for swigwin-1.3.40 +Version 1.0.3, 2009-07-26 + Adjusted examples and makefiles for GLPK 4.39 + Added usage help to GLPKSwig.java + Correction of typos +Version 1.0.2, 2009-06-11 + Makefile target test renamed to check + Use libtool object file for linking + Add /usr/local/include to include path Version 1.0.1, 2009-06-06 -corrected swig/Makefile to allow testing before install -added target dist to Makefile to create distribution files + Corrected swig/Makefile to allow testing before install + Added target dist to Makefile to create distribution files diff -Nru glpk-java-1.0.1/debian/changelog glpk-java-1.0.13/debian/changelog --- glpk-java-1.0.1/debian/changelog 2010-09-12 22:27:11.0 -0500 +++ glpk-java-1.0.13/debian/changelog 2010-09-12 22:27:11.0 -0500 @@ -1,3 +1,44 @@ +glpk-java (1.0.13-4) unstable; urgency=medium + + [ Kumar Appaiah ] + * Use update patch from Heinrich Schuchardt which +reworks the callback interface between libglpk-java +and GLPK, and updates the Makefiles. + + -- Debian Scientific Computation Team pkg-scicomp-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org Fri, 10 Sep 2010 21:15:56 + + +glpk-java (1.0.13-3) unstable; urgency=medium + + [ Kumar Appaiah ] + * Use patch from Xypron to: +- change sourcepath to classpath in swig/Makefile, as + the former is ignored by gcj. +- Remove extraneous overrides in examples. +(Closes: #576896) + *
Bug#596976: unblock: xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package xdg-utils. The latest version fixes an RC bug. It is a small change, only a missing backslash in an awk script. This is the only change from the version in testing. Changelog entry: xdg-utils (1.0.2+cvs20100307-2) unstable; urgency=low * Add patch xdg-email-mawk-support.diff: Fix bug in awk script in xdg-email so that it works with mawk. Closes: #589133. -- Per Olofsson pe...@debian.org Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:06:41 +0200 unblock xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915150643.1845.18847.report...@piglet
Processed: retitle 596364 to future unblock: cracklib2/2.8.16-4
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: retitle 596364 future unblock: cracklib2/2.8.16-4 Bug #596364 [release.debian.org] unblock: cracklib2/2.8.16-3 Changed Bug title to 'future unblock: cracklib2/2.8.16-4' from 'unblock: cracklib2/2.8.16-3' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 596364: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596364 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.128456536526405.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Re: another two freez exceptions for texlive-base and texlice-extra
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:25:57 +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote: The situation is: texlive-base-bin-doc is from TeX Live 2007, the package does not exist any more in TeX Live 2009. The idea is to remove old packages (from TL 2007) during dist-upgrade. What is the best method to do so? A simple Replaces is not sufficient AFAICT. Transitional package for one release, or just let people clean up manually, AFAIK. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#596280: unblock: kolabd/2.2.4-20100624-2
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 18:10:56 +0200, Mathieu Parent (Debian) wrote:
unblock libkolab-perl/1:2.2.4-20100624-2
+-Kolab::log('K', 'Restarting OpenLDAP...');
+-system(invoke-rc.d slapd restart );
++Kolab::log('K', 'Stopping OpenLDAP...');
++system(invoke-rc.d slapd stop);
++Kolab::log('K', 'Deleting old slapd config...');
++system(rm -rf $Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.d);
++Kolab::log('K', 'Converting slapd config... (most errors here can be
ignored)');
++system(mkdir $Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.d);
++system(slaptest -f $Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.conf
-F $Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.d);
++system(chown -R openldap
$Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.d);
++system(chgrp -R openldap
$Kolab::config{'ldapserver_confdir'}/slapd.d);
++Kolab::log('K', 'Starting OpenLDAP...');
++system(invoke-rc.d slapd start);
Doesn't perl have rm, mkdir and chown functions?
Also rm -rf seems like heavy-handed configuration...
Unblocked.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Permission to upload ganeti-instance-debootstrap 0.9-2
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 21:08:59 +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 08:54:01PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: Hi, I'd like to upload version 0.9-2 which fixes #596009 and a so-far-unreported bug. The ganeti-instance-debootstrap package contains an OS definition for the Ganeti virtualization manager. […] Kind and hopefully non-intrusive ping? Please upload. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Viability of patches I want to prepare for Squeeze binutils 2.20.1-14 to port two recent modifications
Matthias, I recently provided two separate patches that got included in binutils 2.20.51.20100908-1 (thanks!). For reference here are the bug URLs http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=590101 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=588357 I have been told on the debian-embedded list by Hector Oron, that the experimental version of binutils will probably not make it into the Squeeze release. If I were to provide equivalent patches for binutils 2.20.1-14, would those have a chance of being accepted and making it into the Squeeze release? I wanted to ask before I did the work. I could prepare and test those this week if you were inclined to accept them. They were relatively minor, and it would be of interest to me to have them in the official Squeeze release if possible. Best Regards, -Jim Heck
Bug#595416: marked as done (unblock: ecryptfs-utils/83-2)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:22:59 +0100 with message-id 1284574979.11205.155.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net and subject line Re: Bug#595416: unblock: ecryptfs-utils/83-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #595416, regarding unblock: ecryptfs-utils/83-2 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 595416: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=595416 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org ecryptfs-utils (83-2) unstable; urgency=low * Updating standards version to 3.9.0. * Calling pam-auth-update at package installation and removal time, thanks to Mike Miller mtmil...@ieee.org (Closes: #506172). * Updating standards version to 3.9.1. -- Daniel Baumann dan...@debian.org Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:06:01 +0200 -- Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: daniel.baum...@panthera-systems.net Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 21:34 +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote: ecryptfs-utils (83-2) unstable; urgency=low * Updating standards version to 3.9.0. * Calling pam-auth-update at package installation and removal time, thanks to Mike Miller mtmil...@ieee.org (Closes: #506172). * Updating standards version to 3.9.1. Unblocked. Regards, Adam ---End Message---
Re: Situation of samba packages (security update)
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 06:42 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: In the meantime, yesterday (Sept 14th) upstream released a security update (3.3.14, 3.4.9, 3.5.5) for a buffer overrun vulnerability. This update happened without prior private warning, so we have to react as quickly as possible, without preparation. [...] My concern is testing (and backports.org). As the choice between 3.4 and 3.5 hasn't been made yet, we're not 100% sure that squeeze will have 3.5 and, anyway, during the few weeks of 3.5 maturation in unstabletesting and backports users are left without update. So, having 3.4.9 in testing sems needed. Should I upload it through t-p-u? If that's done, I will also upload a fixed 3.4.9 version to backports Assuming that the diff between the 3.4.8 packages currently in testing and the tpu package would simply be upstream's patch from their security page, please go ahead. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1284575390.11205.197.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net
Re: Situation of samba packages (security update)
Quoting Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk):
Assuming that the diff between the 3.4.8 packages currently in testing
and the tpu package would simply be upstream's patch from their security
page, please go ahead.
Thge diff will be the exact diff between two upstream versions.
So that means:
bubu...@sesostris:~/src/debian/samba$ diffstat diff-3.4.8-3.4.9
WHATSNEW.txt| 59
libcli/security/dom_sid.c |4 +
libcli/security/dom_sid.h |4 +
packaging/RHEL-CTDB/samba.spec |2
packaging/RHEL/makerpms.sh |2
packaging/RHEL/samba.spec |2
source3/VERSION |2
source3/include/version.h |4 -
source3/lib/util_sid.c |3 +
source3/libads/ldap.c |4 +
source3/libsmb/cliquota.c |4 +
source3/smbd/nttrans.c | 17 --
source4/ldap_server/devdocs/AD-Syntaxes.txt | 79
13 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
whatsnew.TXT is upstream kinda changelog. It only lists the security
fix.
packaging/ is not used
Source3/VERSION is just changing the displayed version
ditto for source3/include/version.h
Source3/* is upstream's fix
source4/ldap_server/devdocs/AD-Syntaxes.txt...hmm, is noise, but
doesn't harm and isn't used
Full diff attached.
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/libcli/security/dom_sid.c
samba-3.4.9/libcli/security/dom_sid.c
--- samba-3.4.8/libcli/security/dom_sid.c 2010-05-10 14:58:53.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/libcli/security/dom_sid.c 2010-09-09 16:23:21.0
+0200
@@ -117,6 +117,10 @@
if (sidstr[i] == '-') num_sub_auths++;
}
+ if (num_sub_auths MAXSUBAUTHS) {
+ return false;
+ }
+
ret-sid_rev_num = rev;
ret-id_auth[0] = 0;
ret-id_auth[1] = 0;
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/libcli/security/dom_sid.h
samba-3.4.9/libcli/security/dom_sid.h
--- samba-3.4.8/libcli/security/dom_sid.h 2010-05-10 14:58:53.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/libcli/security/dom_sid.h 2010-09-09 16:23:21.0
+0200
@@ -40,5 +40,9 @@
const struct dom_sid *sid);
char *dom_sid_string(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx, const struct dom_sid *sid);
+#ifndef MAXSUBAUTHS
+#define MAXSUBAUTHS 15 /* max sub authorities in a SID */
+#endif
+
#endif /*_DOM_SID_H_*/
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL/makerpms.sh
samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL/makerpms.sh
--- samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL/makerpms.sh 2010-05-10 15:01:43.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL/makerpms.sh 2010-09-09 19:20:16.0
+0200
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
USERID=`id -u`
GRPID=`id -g`
-VERSION='3.4.8'
+VERSION='3.4.9'
REVISION=''
SPECFILE=samba.spec
RPMVER=`rpm --version | awk '{print $3}'`
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL/samba.spec
samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL/samba.spec
--- samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL/samba.spec 2010-05-10 15:01:43.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL/samba.spec 2010-09-09 19:20:16.0
+0200
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Vendor: Samba Team
Packager: Samba Team sa...@samba.org
Name: samba
-Version: 3.4.8
+Version: 3.4.9
Release: 1
Epoch:0
License: GNU GPL version 3
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL-CTDB/samba.spec
samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL-CTDB/samba.spec
--- samba-3.4.8/packaging/RHEL-CTDB/samba.spec 2010-05-10 15:01:43.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/packaging/RHEL-CTDB/samba.spec 2010-09-09 19:20:16.0
+0200
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
Vendor: Samba Team
Packager: Samba Team sa...@samba.org
Name: samba
-Version: 3.4.8
+Version: 3.4.9
Release: ctdb.1
Epoch:0
License: GNU GPL version 3
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/source3/include/version.h
samba-3.4.9/source3/include/version.h
--- samba-3.4.8/source3/include/version.h 2010-05-10 15:01:44.0
+0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/source3/include/version.h 2010-09-09 19:20:17.0
+0200
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
/* Autogenerated by script/mkversion.sh */
#define SAMBA_VERSION_MAJOR 3
#define SAMBA_VERSION_MINOR 4
-#define SAMBA_VERSION_RELEASE 8
-#define SAMBA_VERSION_OFFICIAL_STRING 3.4.8
+#define SAMBA_VERSION_RELEASE 9
+#define SAMBA_VERSION_OFFICIAL_STRING 3.4.9
#ifdef SAMBA_VERSION_VENDOR_FUNCTION
# define SAMBA_VERSION_STRING SAMBA_VERSION_VENDOR_FUNCTION
#else /* SAMBA_VERSION_VENDOR_FUNCTION */
diff -Nru samba-3.4.8/source3/lib/util_sid.c samba-3.4.9/source3/lib/util_sid.c
--- samba-3.4.8/source3/lib/util_sid.c 2010-05-10 14:58:53.0 +0200
+++ samba-3.4.9/source3/lib/util_sid.c 2010-09-09 16:23:21.0 +0200
@@ -408,6 +408,9 @@
sid-sid_rev_num = CVAL(inbuf, 0);
sid-num_auths = CVAL(inbuf, 1);
+ if (sid-num_auths MAXSUBAUTHS) {
+ return false;
+ }
Re: Viability of patches I want to prepare for Squeeze binutils 2.20.1-14 to port two recent modifications
On 15.09.2010 20:08, Jim Heck wrote: Matthias, I recently provided two separate patches that got included in binutils 2.20.51.20100908-1 (thanks!). For reference here are the bug URLs http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=590101 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=588357 I have been told on the debian-embedded list by Hector Oron, that the experimental version of binutils will probably not make it into the Squeeze release. If I were to provide equivalent patches for binutils 2.20.1-14, would those have a chance of being accepted and making it into the Squeeze release? I wanted to ask before I did the work. I could prepare and test those this week if you were inclined to accept them. They were relatively minor, and it would be of interest to me to have them in the official Squeeze release if possible. these are no-change changes for the normal build. Would be fine with me, if you ensure that the normal build doesn't change. There is a -15 upload pending. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c91157a.3020...@debian.org
Re: Situation of samba packages (security update)
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 20:42 +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Adam D. Barratt (a...@adam-barratt.org.uk): Assuming that the diff between the 3.4.8 packages currently in testing and the tpu package would simply be upstream's patch from their security page, please go ahead. Thge diff will be the exact diff between two upstream versions. So that means: Thanks. That's basically what I expected, moudlo the upstream version-bump related changes. Please go ahead. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1284576660.11205.305.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net
Re: chromium not in Squeeze: a bit of communication needed?
On 09/15/2010 08:23 PM, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: I think it's easy to see if we will have to accept a new major release of Chromium in Squeeze (after its release): Would you be able to backport any fix from 6.x to 3.x? If they keep releasing every 3 months, you'll have to deal with a more distant release. Their official blog [3] has an interesting post about how they plan to release future stable versions. And, quite frankly, it doesn't look brilliant. [3] http://blog.chromium.org/2010/07/release-early-release-often.html Furthermore, I don't see any page speaking about support of former stable releases. So, I assume there is none. The newest is always the only one “supported”. If we consider accepting Chromium in Squeeze, we should be ready to accept new big dumps of Chromium (not only bugfixes… because, that's not how they used to release) without even looking at the diff. If we do so, we should leave a remark about how the security support and updates are handled for Chromium in Squeeze in the Release Notes (stating clearly that Chromium is an exception and why). If we're going to EOL Chromium during Squeeze's lifecycle (and I believe it will happen quite soon), then why should we accept it in Squeeze at all? We already know that they haven't a LTS. I never wrote I intend to propose a new major release in Squeeze (after its release). I wrote many times that I volunteer to support and backport security patches, like Mike will do with iceweasel/xulrunner (as far as I know official security support for firefox 3.5.x is going to be terminated) Cheers, Giuseppe. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#596976: marked as done (unblock: xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 20:03:33 +0100 with message-id 1284577413.11205.372.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net and subject line Re: Bug#596976: unblock: xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #596976, regarding unblock: xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596976: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596976 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package xdg-utils. The latest version fixes an RC bug. It is a small change, only a missing backslash in an awk script. This is the only change from the version in testing. Changelog entry: xdg-utils (1.0.2+cvs20100307-2) unstable; urgency=low * Add patch xdg-email-mawk-support.diff: Fix bug in awk script in xdg-email so that it works with mawk. Closes: #589133. -- Per Olofsson pe...@debian.org Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:06:41 +0200 unblock xdg-utils/1.0.2+cvs20100307-2 ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 17:06 +0200, Per Olofsson wrote: Please unblock package xdg-utils. The latest version fixes an RC bug. It is a small change, only a missing backslash in an awk script. This is the only change from the version in testing. Changelog entry: Unblocked. Regards, Adam ---End Message---
Re: Bug#593544: gnucash: Upgrade from Debian Lenny looses Online Banking (AqBanking) settings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Julien, Julien Cristau wrote: Micha, could you upload gnucash 2.2.9-7~squeeze1 (or a similar version) to t-p-u? I just uploaded gnucash 2.2.9-7~squeeze1 to testing-proposed-updates. unblock gnucash/2.2.9-7~squeeze1 Regards, Micha -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRJiAACgkQWN0/4pnhQbSsbwCdHZa8SJfUUCMdvblqfiSWYv72 4JoAnj6nlOg++x0Eg/EEGfdWhDozasSy =rsJB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c912628.9080...@debian.org
Bug#596280: marked as done (unblock libkolab-perl/1:2.2.4-20100624-2)
Your message dated Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:21:36 +0100 with message-id 1284582096.11205.841.ca...@kaa.jungle.aubergine.my-net-space.net and subject line Re: Bug#596280: unblock: kolabd/2.2.4-20100624-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #596280, regarding unblock libkolab-perl/1:2.2.4-20100624-2 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596280: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596280 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package kolabd The main and only reason for this new version is to fix a bug introduced by the move of slapd to runtime configuration (aka cn=config, aka slapd.d). The fix includes a hack which is against policy to revert a similar against policy change from slapd postinst. Without this fix, kolab requires manual intervention to work. The diff can be seen at http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-kolab/?op=compcompare[]=...@1510compare[]=...@1511 The move back to static slapd config is done only if kolab manages slapd.conf. unblock kolabd/2.2.4-20100624-2 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (900, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=fr_FR.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 19:37 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 18:10:56 +0200, Mathieu Parent (Debian) wrote: unblock libkolab-perl/1:2.2.4-20100624-2 [...] Unblocked. and therefore closing. Regards, Adam ---End Message---
Re: another two freez exceptions for texlive-base and texlice-extra
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:25:57 +0200, Hilmar Preusse wrote: The situation is: texlive-base-bin-doc is from TeX Live 2007, the package does not exist any more in TeX Live 2009. The idea is to remove old packages (from TL 2007) during dist-upgrade. What is the best method to do so? A simple Replaces is not sufficient AFAICT. Transitional package for one release, or just let people clean up manually, AFAIK. Isn't the way this should be done that texlive-base Conflicts: texlive-base-bin-doc Replaces: texlive-base-bin-doc Provides: texlive-base-bin-doc and then the package should go away smoothly, without any problems during dist-upgrade? Regards, Frank -- Dr. Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87eicueph5@alhambra.kuesterei.ch
Bug#597012: unblock: time/1.7-23.1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Hi Release Team Please unblock package time time 1.7-23 had bug #592620 [1]. I prepared a NMU which was uploaded by Gregor Hermann and acknowledged by Tollef Fog Heen to be fine (see message #31). The fix was to add an alternate Build-Depends as primary choise of automake. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/592620 The NMU was uploaded to the DELAYED/5 queue. Could you unblock time 1.7-23.1 to have #592620 closed for squeeze? Please find attached the debdiff for the NMU. unblock time/1.7-23.1 Bests Salvatore -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-2-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash diff -u time-1.7/debian/control time-1.7/debian/control --- time-1.7/debian/control +++ time-1.7/debian/control @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ Priority: standard Maintainer: Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@debian.org Standards-Version: 3.6.1.0 -Build-Depends: debhelper ( 4.1.0), texi2html, texinfo, automaken, cdbs +Build-Depends: debhelper ( 4.1.0), texi2html, texinfo, automake | automaken, cdbs Package: time Architecture: any diff -u time-1.7/debian/changelog time-1.7/debian/changelog --- time-1.7/debian/changelog +++ time-1.7/debian/changelog @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +time (1.7-23.1) unstable; urgency=low + + * Non-maintainer upload. + * debian/control: Change Build-Depends on automaken to an alternate +dependency automake | automaken (Closes: #592620). + + -- Salvatore Bonaccorso salvatore.bonacco...@gmail.com Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:31:46 +0200 + time (1.7-23) unstable; urgency=medium * Fix up install-info calls in postinst and prerm. Closes: #491410
Re: Accepted crafty 23.3-1~squeeze1 (source amd64)
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 07:32:08PM +, Oliver Korff wrote: crafty (23.3-1~squeeze1) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low . * libnuma1 had a New Upstream Version upload and is not getting into squeeze. So I prepared a testing-proposed-updates upload/backport with the old lib-numa to make the crafty package use the squeeze version of this lib. What's that supposed to mean? Did you get prior approval by debian-rele...@lists.d.o for this upload? Kind regards, Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Permission to upload ganeti-instance-debootstrap 0.9-2
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 08:17:40PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 21:08:59 +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 08:54:01PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote: Hi, I'd like to upload version 0.9-2 which fixes #596009 and a so-far-unreported bug. The ganeti-instance-debootstrap package contains an OS definition for the Ganeti virtualization manager. […] Kind and hopefully non-intrusive ping? Please upload. Thanks. As expected, after uploading, and after pushing the changes to our git repo, and watching the commit emails, I saw a minor issue. So I uploaded 0.9-3, with this interdiff: diff -Nru ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/changelog ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/changelog --- ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/changelog2010-09-12 20:36:27.0 +0200 +++ ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/changelog2010-09-15 22:27:01.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +ganeti-instance-debootstrap (0.9-3) unstable; urgency=low + + * Fix the mountpoint check in the recently-added hooks + + -- Iustin Pop ius...@debian.org Wed, 15 Sep 2010 22:26:24 +0200 + ganeti-instance-debootstrap (0.9-2) unstable; urgency=low * Add a hook for fixing Xen PVM console issues (Closes: #596009) diff -Nru ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/clear-root-password ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/clear-root-password --- ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/clear-root-password 2010-09-12 20:36:27.0 +0200 +++ ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/clear-root-password 2010-09-15 22:27:01.0 +0200 @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ exit 1 fi -if [ $(mountpoint /) = $(mountpoint $TARGET) ]; then +if [ $(mountpoint -d /) = $(mountpoint -d $TARGET) ]; then echo The target directory seems to be the root dir, aborting. 12 exit 1 fi diff -Nru ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/xen-hvc0 ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/xen-hvc0 --- ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/xen-hvc0 2010-09-12 20:36:27.0 +0200 +++ ganeti-instance-debootstrap-0.9/debian/hooks/xen-hvc0 2010-09-15 22:27:01.0 +0200 @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ exit 1 fi -if [ $(mountpoint /) = $(mountpoint $TARGET) ]; then +if [ $(mountpoint -d /) = $(mountpoint -d $TARGET) ]; then echo The target directory seems to be the root dir, aborting. 12 exit 1 fi The changes is adding -d to mountpoint, as the intention is that we don't operate on the root filesystem. I understand if you don't unblock this, it's entirely my fault. regards, iustin signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Accepted python-gevent 0.12.2-7 (source all amd64)
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 02:48:08PM +, Örjan Persson wrote: python-gevent (0.12.2-7) testing-proposed-updates; urgency=low . * Fixed a build problem with sphinx generation when no internet connection where available. Thanks to Jakub Wilk for reporting the problem and John Sullivan for patch (Closes: #584380). * Fixed documentation reference problems. Thanks to John Sullivan for patch. Did I miss a thread or did you ask for pre-upload approval on debian-rele...@lists.d.o? Kind regards, Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: unblock request for vzctl
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 06:51:55 +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: Hi Julien On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:47:26PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 22:10:51 +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: ... Why are you ignoring errors from the init script? Good question. It is a practice of mine to make sure that upgrade do not fail just because of some issue during the startup. Especially important as this one checks for kernel modules which may be provided by custom kernels. Do you have a problem with that? Well, kind of, yeah. If a service can't start for whatever reason then I don't think it should be ignored and swept under the carpet. Ok. As we have the if statement first on whether it should be started or not it should be safe enough. I have also reviewed so that problems like already started is safely ignored already. I have removed the || true part of the code now. Uploaded in 3.0.24-7. It's still there in prerm though? Let me know if you want to upload a -8 for this. -7 unblocked in the mean time. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#596869: Possible unblock for fusionforge/5.0.2-1
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 18:49:55 +0200, Roland Mas wrote: I'd like to ask for permission for an upload of FusionForge 5.0.2, which is a collection of bugfixes over the 5.0.1+svn10155 snapshot we currently have in squeeze. 30 commits have happened on the 5.0 branch upstream since then; we've been careful of only applying fixes, but your approval would be appreciated. I can, of course, apply only a few of the patches for a smaller-diff upload, but I figure it would be simpler to keep a version close to upstream. The debdiff is attached, and here's an explanation of its contents based on a (reordered) diffstat, by decreasing order of importance. Based on your summary, this sounds fine. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#597018: unblock: piwigo/2.1.2-2
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: freeze-exception
Hi release team,
I made an update of the piwigo package. It doesn't close any BTS bug (because
the problem was reported upstream) but it fixes severals security
vulnerabilities (http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/14973/). A new upstream
release with that fix has been release but I made a smaller patch that only fix
the vulnerabilities.
Is it possible to add a freeze exception for it ?
I attached a diff file between the package already in testing and the patch I
made.
Thanks in advance,
Nicolas Roudaire
Please unblock package piwigo
(explain the reason for the unblock here)
unblock piwigo/2.1.2-2
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.34-1-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index d9f5cbc..8e710f2 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+piwigo (2.1.2-2) unstable; urgency=high
+
+ * Upload to fix security :
+http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/14973/
+
+ -- Nicolas Roudaire nikro...@gmail.com Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:07:34 +0200
+
+
piwigo (2.1.2-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release
diff --git a/debian/fix_vulnerabilities b/debian/fix_vulnerabilities
new file mode 100644
index 000..cd70456
--- /dev/null
+++ b/debian/fix_vulnerabilities
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+# Author: Nicolas Roudaire nikro...@gmail.com
+# Bug: http://piwigo.org/bugs/view.php?id=1848,1849,1856
+# Description: Fix vulnerabilities (http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/14973/)
+
+--- piwigo.orig/admin/profile.php
piwigo/admin/profile.php
+@@ -25,8 +25,12 @@
+
+ $edit_user = build_user( $_GET['user_id'], false );
+
+-include_once(PHPWG_ROOT_PATH.'profile.php');
++if (!empty($_POST))
++{
++ check_pwg_token();
++}
+
++include_once(PHPWG_ROOT_PATH.'profile.php');
+
+ $errors = array();
+ if ( !is_adviser() )
+--- piwigo.orig/include/ws_core.inc.php
piwigo/include/ws_core.inc.php
+@@ -477,7 +477,7 @@
+
+ if ( $method==null )
+ {
+- return new PwgError(WS_ERR_INVALID_METHOD, 'Method name '.$methodName.' is not valid');
++ return new PwgError(WS_ERR_INVALID_METHOD, 'Method name is not valid');
+ }
+
+ // parameter check and data coercion !
+--- piwigo.orig/admin/themes/default/template/profile_content.tpl
piwigo/admin/themes/default/template/profile_content.tpl
+@@ -103,6 +103,7 @@
+ /fieldset
+
+ p class=bottomButtons
++input type=hidden name=pwg_token value={$PWG_TOKEN}
+ input class=submit type=submit name=validate value={'Submit'|@translate}
+ input class=submit type=reset name=reset value={'Reset'|@translate}
+ /p
+--- piwigo.orig/include/section_init.inc.php
piwigo/include/section_init.inc.php
+@@ -61,6 +61,10 @@
+ $rewritten = $key;
+ break;
+ }
++
++ // the $_GET keys are not protected in include/common.inc.php, only the values
++ $rewritten = pwg_db_real_escape_string($rewritten);
++
+ $page['root_path'] = PHPWG_ROOT_PATH;
+ }
+
diff --git a/debian/series b/debian/series
new file mode 100644
index 000..92db591
--- /dev/null
+++ b/debian/series
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+sqlite-to-sqlite3
+pgsql-as-keyword
+fix_vulnerabilities
Re: unblock request for vzctl
Hi julien On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:37:12PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 06:51:55 +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: Hi Julien On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:47:26PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 22:10:51 +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote: ... Why are you ignoring errors from the init script? Good question. It is a practice of mine to make sure that upgrade do not fail just because of some issue during the startup. Especially important as this one checks for kernel modules which may be provided by custom kernels. Do you have a problem with that? Well, kind of, yeah. If a service can't start for whatever reason then I don't think it should be ignored and swept under the carpet. Ok. As we have the if statement first on whether it should be started or not it should be safe enough. I have also reviewed so that problems like already started is safely ignored already. I have removed the || true part of the code now. Uploaded in 3.0.24-7. It's still there in prerm though? Yes. People should really be able to remove the package regardless of errors. Let me know if you want to upload a -8 for this. -7 unblocked in the mean time. If you really think it should not be there, then I'll upload -8 as well, but I'm not sure I wants to. :-) Thanks a lot for your help in this matter. Best regards, // Ola Cheers, Julien -- --- Inguza Technology AB --- MSc in Information Technology / o...@inguza.comAnnebergsslingan 37\ | o...@debian.org 654 65 KARLSTAD| | http://inguza.com/Mobile: +46 (0)70-332 1551 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100916043205.ga1...@inguza.net
Bug#597018: unblock: piwigo/2.1.2-2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 15-09-2010 19:26, Nicolas Roudaire wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: freeze-exception Hi release team, I made an update of the piwigo package. It doesn't close any BTS bug (because the problem was reported upstream) but it fixes severals security vulnerabilities (http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/14973/). A new upstream release with that fix has been release but I made a smaller patch that only fix the vulnerabilities. Is it possible to add a freeze exception for it ? Please, go ahead, upload the package and let us know once it hit the archive. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRqwcACgkQCjAO0JDlykZEcwCcC5ymq1b87aLAS+AQIkCVWnRF 3lkAoKlyVbUO1DbIzelcmQ5PHrGAFvn3 =MJaN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c91ab09.3000...@debian.org
Re: Please add freeze exception for geogebra
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-09-2010 05:00, Giovanni Mascellani wrote: Hi. I made an update to the geogebra package. It doesn't close any BTS bug (because the problem was reported directly to me and not on the BTS), but it fixes a rather annoying issue: because of insufficient build time classpath, saving in SVG format wasn't possible. Moreover, the new version runs geogebra with bigger memory limits, that are, according upstream, necessary for manipulating big files. Is it possible to add a freeze exception for it (note that geogebra is priority extra)? I'm attaching a diff between the package already in testing and the one in unstable. Thanks, Gio. (please, Cc: me when replying) Unblocked. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRr9sACgkQCjAO0JDlykaQvACfSTUWdWGPDrvFepAqzlwVZaKZ /gYAnjR/7OTy6+MzjyXC5/T/n2bTNGGn =Cyi3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c91afdc.8080...@funlabs.org
Bug#596827: marked as done (unblock: icedove-l10n/1:3.0.7-1)
Your message dated Thu, 16 Sep 2010 02:40:18 -0300 with message-id 4c91adc2.4000...@debian.org and subject line Re: Bug#596827: unblock: icedove-l10n/1:3.0.7-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #596827, regarding unblock: icedove-l10n/1:3.0.7-1 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596827: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596827 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock unblock icedove-l10n/1:3.0.7-1 Please unblock package icedove-l10n, it fix one normal and one grave bug. #593583 - normal: Packages should recommend hunspell as an alternative to myspell #595925 - grave: icedove-l10n-si does not work because of not well formed install.rdf And it ship some updated localisation files for es-AR, nl, ru, sk. Cheers, Christoph signature.asc Description: Digital signature ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-09-2010 09:24, Christoph Goehre wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock unblock icedove-l10n/1:3.0.7-1 Please unblock package icedove-l10n, it fix one normal and one grave bug. #593583 - normal: Packages should recommend hunspell as an alternative to myspell #595925 - grave: icedove-l10n-si does not work because of not well formed install.rdf And it ship some updated localisation files for es-AR, nl, ru, sk. Unblocked. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRrcEACgkQCjAO0JDlykZxpwCggDVxmR3fsaeDkQZAHO6g8D7j ZvAAniJKGS/UQS4XHDfmTN3B6asR8HoH =4iw5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---End Message---
Re: Freeze exception for mpdscribble 0.19-2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, On 14-09-2010 04:58, Michal Čihař wrote: Hi I'd like to get freeze exception for mpdscribble 0.19-2. It fixes two annoying bugs. Changelog: mpdscribble (0.19-2) unstable; urgency=low * Convert to 3.0 (quilt) source format. * Fix infinite submittion of now playing (Closes: #596036). * Rebuilt against current libc (Closes: #596445). * Bump standards to 3.9.1. * Move packaging SVN repository to collab-maint. * Fix dashes in man pages. -- Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:24:42 +0200 [...] Please CC me on reply, thanks It isn't the exactly best time in the world to change to 3.0. Unblocked. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRsHkACgkQCjAO0JDlykaSCgCgmOZC56rYBBaxzXqkaJAxaj6f 3dAAnRFehcHHtDSXZF0p4SGz9UWZRfxw =TPsJ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c91b07b.7020...@funlabs.org
samba_3.4.9~dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED
Quoting Steve Langasek (vor...@debian.org): On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 06:03:52AM +0200, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Archive Administrator (instal...@ftp-master.debian.org): Reject Reasons: samba-doc_3.4.9~dfsg-1_all.deb: old version (2:3.4.8~dfsg-2) in unstable = new version (2:3.4.9~dfsg-1) targeted at testing-proposed-updates. samba-doc-pdf_3.4.9~dfsg-1_all.deb: old version (2:3.4.8~dfsg-2) in unstable = new version (2:3.4.9~dfsg-1) targeted at testing-proposed-updates. samba-common_3.4.9~dfsg-1_all.deb: old version (2:3.4.8~dfsg-2) in unstable = new version (2:3.4.9~dfsg-1) targeted at testing-proposed-updates. samba_3.4.9~dfsg-1.dsc: old version (2:3.4.8~dfsg-2) in unstable = new version (2:3.4.9~dfsg-1) targeted at testing-proposed-updates. I don't understand this. We don't have 3.4.8 in unstable. Anyone having a clue? $ dak ls -s unstable samba samba-doc samba | 2:3.4.8~dfsg-2 | unstable | source, hurd-i386 samba | 2:3.5.4~dfsg-2 | unstable | source, hppa, mips, mipsel, sparc samba | 2:3.5.5~dfsg-1 | unstable | source, alpha, amd64, armel, hppa, i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386, powerpc, s390 samba-doc | 2:3.4.8~dfsg-2 | unstable | all samba-doc | 2:3.5.4~dfsg-2 | unstable | all samba-doc | 2:3.5.5~dfsg-1 | unstable | all $ Bug in t-p-u; unstable reference-counts architecture: all packages now for each individual port, so that unstable remains installable even when architectures are out of sync, but this results in the t-p-u check failing because of out-of-date packages in unstable. (Which pretty much defeats the purpose of *using* t-p-u in about half the cases, so hopefully someone will fix that on ftp-master before too long.) Hmmm, so indeed this check prevents us to fix samba in testing through t-p-u. Ftpmasters, is there something that can be done on your side? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#596797: marked as done (unblock: libhdf4/4.2r4-10+b1)
Your message dated Thu, 16 Sep 2010 02:46:29 -0300 with message-id 4c91af35.60...@debian.org and subject line Re: Bug#596797: unblock: libhdf4/4.2r4-10+b1 has caused the Debian Bug report #596797, regarding unblock: libhdf4/4.2r4-10+b1 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 596797: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=596797 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems ---BeginMessage--- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package libhdf4 This version fixes a FTBS error on sparc. It also changes a build-dep which has been not reverted erroneously. I hope it is ok. * debian/control: build-depend on libjpeg-dev rather than libjpeg62-dev (Closes: #569249) libhdf4 (4.2r4-11) unstable; urgency=high * Fixes hdfi.h for SPARC. Thanks Aurelien Jarno. (closes: #596603) -- Francesco Paolo Lovergine fran...@debian.org Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:56:23 +0200 unblock libhdf4/4.2r4-11 -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core) Locale: LANG=it_IT.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=it_IT.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash ---End Message--- ---BeginMessage--- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 14-09-2010 05:33, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote: Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package libhdf4 This version fixes a FTBS error on sparc. It also changes a build-dep which has been not reverted erroneously. I hope it is ok. * debian/control: build-depend on libjpeg-dev rather than libjpeg62-dev (Closes: #569249) libhdf4 (4.2r4-11) unstable; urgency=high * Fixes hdfi.h for SPARC. Thanks Aurelien Jarno. (closes: #596603) -- Francesco Paolo Lovergine fran...@debian.org Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:56:23 +0200 unblock libhdf4/4.2r4-11 Unblocked. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyRry8ACgkQCjAO0JDlykZsDACeNzYbQRWA9OKFGkAGahWTApYU cm4AnApYe0At9j8f59JuQZzMd2ZJUNmG =AzLP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---End Message---
