Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 10:04:07PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 16:19:00 +, Matthias Klose wrote: gcc-defaults (1.118) unstable; urgency=low . * Default to GCC 4.7 for gcc, g++, gfortran on amd64, i386, kfreebsd-amd64, kfreebsd-i386 and hurd-i386. Please revert this change. There are still too many open bugs on http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=debian-...@lists.debian.org;tag=ftbfs-gcc-4.7, and it's too late in the release cycle, to change this, IMO. Also, I'm starting to wonder if it doesn't miscompile stuff, too. I'm getting regressions in mozilla stuff when compiled with gcc 4.7 [1]. FWIW, it has been confirmed to be gcc 4.7 miscompiling. It is supposed to be fixed in upcoming 4.7.1. 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/20120531065910.ga6...@glandium.org
Please binNMU python-ufc against latest swig
Hello, python-ufc needs to be rebuilt against the latest swig (2.0.7). Please binNMU it. nmu python-ufc_2.0.5-2 . ALL . -m 'Rebuild against swig 2.0.7, see #675207.' Thanks. -- 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/caljqy_fovznrvxx77sefeepwzchrpsczpzvwo1yxozk4fjr...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#666126: transition: poppler 0.18
tag 666126 pending thanks Pino Toscano p...@debian.org (30/04/2012): AFAICS, now the current block for this transition is the kpathsea transiton; also, there are other transitions which would conflict with this (openjpeg, exiv2, gdal, db5.3, ffi). I think we're good to go now, please upload. Rene asked for our waiting for libreoffice to migrate before we schedule binNMUs, but that might not be going to happen right now because of various problems with o-o-d binaries. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: Bug#666126: transition: poppler 0.18
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: tag 666126 pending Bug #666126 [release.debian.org] transition: poppler 0.18 Added tag(s) pending. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 666126: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=666126 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.133846939612310.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#666126: transition: poppler 0.18
Hi, On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 02:10:13PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Rene asked for our waiting for libreoffice to migrate before we schedule binNMUs, but that might not be going to happen right now because of various problems with o-o-d binaries. Which will be auto-cruft removed (when I get around uploading fixed transitional packages tonight). So it's just 2 days waiting time (assuming it gets auto-crufted fast). And a poppler upload to sid will need to wait a few days anyway so you can bin-NMU (or I do a source upload) then anyway... bin-NMUing now would again hinder LO 3.5.x migrating to testing replacing the rc-buggy/hosed up 3.4.x there (and testing has already stuff not working with 3.4.x).. Regards, Rene -- 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/20120531131054.ge25...@rene-engelhard.de
Bug#675359: nmu: ibus-chewing_1.3.10+clean-3
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu ibus-chewing_1.3.10+clean-3 . i386 . -m Rebuild against new libchewing3-dev (Closes: #671118) -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.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/20120531140426.14856.97125.report...@isil.kanru.info
Re: Re: Architecture qualification
On 28/05/12 01:52, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 29/05/12 19:57, Andreas Barth wrote: [...] we add hurd-i386 to testing with break/fucked, but we don't expect it to make the release. I.e. bugs for hurd-i386 are not RC. Maybe that's all that's needed? The recent enthusiasm sounds to me like an opportunity. An official testing suite in the archive, from which usable installer images can be built, could be what encourages hurd-i386 to progress into something really releasable. If this doesn't happen now while there's some momentum, it might never happen again and that would be a shame. From the one of the porters side, this would be a _very_ good solution indeed! If GNU/Hurd enters som kind of testing status, the number of users and contributors will increase (hopefully). Can it be part of testing and then when the release happens, be treated specially? And most packages will be located in the main repo, only the packages having patches, not yet handled by the DMs, being there. Is that possible? BTW: Are builds reported to buildd.debian.org already, it is visible ate least in the table on https://buildd.debian.org/, or maybe Samuel meant something else. -- 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/1338473910.8802.453.ca...@s1499.it.kth.se
Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)
On 31/05/12 07:59, Mike Hommey wrote: FWIW, it has been confirmed to be gcc 4.7 miscompiling. It is supposed to be fixed in upcoming 4.7.1. The Mozilla bug report referred to GCC PR/53516. Could you please check if this was fixed by gcc-4.7 4.7.0-11 which was accepted in unstable today? gcc-4.7 (4.7.0-11) unstable; urgency=low * Update to SVN 20120530 (r188035) from the gcc-4_7-branch. - Fix PR c++/53356, PR c++/53491, PR c++/53503, PR c++/53220, PR middle-end/53501, PR rtl-optimization/53519, PR tree-optimization/53516, PR tree-optimization/53438, PR target/52999, PR middle-end/53008. Thanks, Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.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/4fc7bb94.1020...@pyro.eu.org
Wheezy Freeze
Hello all, I'm writing in response to the email on the 13th announcing the upcoming freeze, tentatively occurring in the second half of June. I would have responded immediately, but wanted to make sure that I had all of my ducks in a row first. I joined Eucalyptus in late November of last year and was hired to handle their releases atop Ubuntu and Debian, with a focus on inclusion in Debian itself. With a ton of help from Steffen, who mentored me through the DM process, Charles, who has been an active contributor to our efforts for some time, and others, I have been able to fill in the gaps of dependencies for Eucalyptus in preparation for uploading it to Sid - minus one - GWT. We have contracted that GWT work out to a Debian Partner company credativ, run by Chris Halls, a Debian Developer. They should be wrapping that work up by freeze. IRT to Eucalyptus itself, we have an internal goal date set of June 15th. While this *should* beat the freeze date, Steffen informs me it is generally frowned upon this close to freeze to upload a new package of such complexity, which is the reason I am writing you today. I'm hoping to get your blessing, or seal of approval, or at least an ah, go ahead! to upload Eucalyptus to Sid in mid-June. Thanks in advance for your time and consideration on the matter. Regards, Brian -- 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/caewzgfm6nm61obsczwro4dbwwcvkxyyjyq5wrj8zn1+ep1j...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 07:42:28PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote: On 31/05/12 07:59, Mike Hommey wrote: FWIW, it has been confirmed to be gcc 4.7 miscompiling. It is supposed to be fixed in upcoming 4.7.1. The Mozilla bug report referred to GCC PR/53516. Could you please check if this was fixed by gcc-4.7 4.7.0-11 which was accepted in unstable today? It works on amd64. I haven't tested x86. 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/20120531194036.ga22...@glandium.org
Bug#638781: RM: libgtfb/0.1.0-1
I attempted to upload but apparently we tried too late as of : Fri, 24 Feb 2012 See this log : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657403 I give up. Matt On 05/30/2012 02:35 PM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2011-09-17 at 19:31 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 06:45 +1000, Matt Flax wrote: I do not request that this package be removed, rather I request that my signed key (which I have already uploaded) be added to the keyring and I finally get the chance to fix these problems. In the meantime, maybe you could get someone else to upload a fix for the issues on your behalf, so we can get them resolved? Ping? The next stable point release should be mid-Julyish. If nothing's happening with regard to fixing the issues by the end of June then I propose that we go ahead with the removal as part of that point release. Regards, Adam
Bug#675167: Bug#674850: RM: figlet -- RoQA; license which specifically excludes the right to re-distribute
On 30/05/12 20:05, Julien Cristau wrote: There seems to be just about 0 creative content in that file. What exactly is the problem with it? Figlet 2.2.5 has just been released with the following changelog [1]. I am updating my unreleased 2.2.4-1 packaging, and hope to have a 2.2.5-1 package (suitable for main) available over the weekend. The updated ISO8859 files are now properly licensed and appear (at first glance) to be compatible with 2.2.2-1, so I'm confident that a distributable (albeit still non-free) version of figlet 2.2.2 can be prepared for squeeze. Jon [1] Changes in FIGlet 2.2.5 --- FIGlet 2.2.5 is a revision of FIGlet 2.2.4 containing updated andproperly licensed ISO8859 map files. The full list of changes is: o Add regression tests for uskata and jis0201 control files o Properly escape minus signs in figlist(6) man page (Jonathan McCrohan) o Fix chkfont coredump on invalid input (Kenneth Davies and Jonathan McCrohan) o Update ISO8859 map files to fix licensing issue raised in Debian bugs 673096 and 674844 o Re-add missing figmagic and getopt.c files which were left out of releases 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 o Fix output of test script in MacOS X These changes were made by Claudio Matsuoka cmatsu...@gmail.com 31 May 2012 -- 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/4fc7f607.7090...@gmail.com
Re: sox transition
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org (28/05/2012): We're almost done, but #668793 gets in the way, through mlt. Once that fixed, britney should be more or less happy to migrate the whole lot to testing (with some hammering for libmlt4 by the look of it, but we'll manage to find a way). Both sox and mlt in. I had to use a little hammer instead of having britney do its job on its own due to libsox* library packages not being under Section: libs (Section: sound instead). This means that usual mechanisms (smooth updates) don't kick in, and we need to hammer the transitioning packages a little to get everyone in. You may want to fix that in your next upload, that'll make our job easier next time. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
