Bug#739467: nmu: veusz_1.20.1-1
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > nmu veusz_1.20.1-1 . amd64 . -m "Rebuild against sip-api-10.1" > > The maintainer upload of veusz was built in wheezy (sip-api-8.1), > but uploaded to sid. > > > Andreas > > @Jeremy: please build packages for sid in a clean and up-to-date sid > environment. Thanks. It's my fault entirely, not Jeremy's, for building it in a wheezy environment (I was also preparing wheezy-backports uploads at the same time as I was sponsoring veusz). Sorry for the hassle! Regards, Vincent -- 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/caczd_tdwvves8flu3ddga-mftenc12w4z4cez1cp5fwrkv_...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#739416: transition: ruby1.8 removal
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 08:29:35PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > Removing subversion doesn't seem reasonable. The sid version might be > fixed (I haven't checked), but it FTBFS. So that'll need to be taken > care of first. One of the FTBFS appears to be a transient issue. A gb would likely fix it, but the others are related to #735446. Upstream's next release (due this week) fix that. I've been monitoring the release process, so I should be able to get it uploaded to Debian ASAP once it's officially released. The only potential complication would be if the libdb5.1-dev package disappears in the mean time as Ondřej intends[0]. I haven't finished the bdb 5.3 work as I wanted to touch base with Peter on it. 0: <139230.17282.82981781.6e443...@webmail.messagingengine.com> If needed, I could look at backporting the upstream commits to fix the FTBFS, but I'd prefer to put that effort into ensuring I can get the next 1.8.x uploaded when it's out. Cheers, -- James GPG Key: 4096R/331BA3DB 2011-12-05 James McCoy signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#739468: nmu: cubemap_1.0.3-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu cubemap_1.0.3-1 . amd64 . -m "Rebuild against protobuf 2.5" The maintainer upload seems to have been built in parallel to the starting protobuf transition against old libprotobuf7. Andreas -- 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/20140219005626.30715.48468.report...@cake.ae.cs.uni-frankfurt.de
Bug#739467: nmu: veusz_1.20.1-1
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu nmu veusz_1.20.1-1 . amd64 . -m "Rebuild against sip-api-10.1" The maintainer upload of veusz was built in wheezy (sip-api-8.1), but uploaded to sid. Andreas @Jeremy: please build packages for sid in a clean and up-to-date sid environment. 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/20140219005037.19066.56738.report...@cake.ae.cs.uni-frankfurt.de
Re: Bug#730833: u-boot: FTBFS on kfreebsd
On 18/02/2014 21:54, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 09:35:09PM +, Robert Millan wrote: >> On 18/02/2014 19:11, Vagrant Cascadian wrote: >>> Looking for help from the *bsd porters on this... We haven't seen a >>> successful build of u-boot on kfreebsd since mid-2012... >>> >>> The short of it is a bunch of header files that aren't present on Debian >>> GNU/kFreeBSD are required for building u-boot-tools. Upstream u-boot has >>> essentially copied a bunch of header files from linux sources. The current >>> best patch we have is to copy *more* header files, but this seems like a bad >>> idea... Droppping u-boot-tools on kfreebsd-* would be a regression from >>> wheezy. >> >> Are you sure u-boot is supposed to build on anything other than Linux? The >> kind >> of software package that embeds copies of Linux headers is not generally >> intended to be portable... > > Well, u-boot-tools could technically be useable on any architecture. Is it > actually useful? Quite possibly not. > > If the best thing is to drop non-linux architectures, I'd be fine with that. > I don't want to drop architectures from the packaging without asking porters > first. I think if upstream doesn't consider it a bug to copy non-portable declarations from Linux headers, it's probably reasonable to consider u-boot as Linux-specific software. Attempting to fight this kind of trend is tends to be very costly, but ultimately it's your call as maintainer to decide whether it's worth it. We can provide assistance if necessary. In this case, my advice would be to figure out why are those headers being copied in, since this seems to be the root of the problem. -- Robert Millan -- 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/5303ea81.5030...@debian.org
Bug#735557: transition: octave3.8
Le mardi 18 février 2014 à 20:36 +0100, Julien Cristau a écrit : > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 14:44:10 +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > > > Package: release.debian.org > > Severity: normal > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-octave-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org > > > > Dear Release Team, > > > > Please schedule a transition for octave 3.8. The new package is already in > > experimental. > > > > The transition should mostly consist of a few dozens binNMUs. We (the Debian > > Octave Group) are going to determine if some sourceful uploads are needed, > > and > > file bugs if needed. > > > What's the status on that? Is #736392 the only issue? (octave-plplot > is not in testing so that one can probably be ignored as far as the > transition is concerned) According to our tests, plplot is the only package not maintained by the Debian Octave Group that FTBFS with octave 3.8 (so it's good if it does not block the transition). For the packages maintained by the Debian Octave Group, most will just need a binNMU; a few will need sourceful uploads, and a couple of others will need removal from unstable (because obsolete), but we stand ready to take care of that. So basically the transition can start as soon as you decide. -- .''`.Sébastien Villemot : :' :Debian Developer `. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien `- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: BTS and UDD disagrees on the number of RC bugs in stable
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Niels Thykier wrote: > Looks like it didn't work. UDD is now listing ~310 RC bugs for testing > and the BTS thinks there are ~480 RC bugs in stable. There was a drop a > little while back, but I suspect it was the related to the recent stable > update. On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Freitag, 7. Februar 2014, Don Armstrong wrote: > > I've now rolled this out, but bugscan's crontab hasn't run yet. I'll > > keep an eye on it to make sure it works. > > https://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ doens't look like it's working :/ > Could you please have a look again? Yeah, it's not working. I've got it on my TODO list, but haven't had a chance to work on it yet. I will probably have a chance next weekend to spend some time on it. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com "People selling drug paraphernalia ... are as much a part of drug trafficking as silencers are a part of criminal homicide." -- John Brown, DEA Chief -- 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/20140218221343.gd5...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Processed: block 739079 with 739453 739454 739455 739456 739457 739458 739459 739460 739461 739462
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 739079 with 739453 739454 739455 739456 739457 739458 739459 739460 > 739461 739462 Bug #739079 [release.debian.org] transition: libav10 739079 was blocked by: 739426 739433 739337 739238 739212 739214 739303 739425 739326 739243 739429 739442 739434 739316 739336 739209 739323 739242 739327 739211 739376 739239 739314 739328 739441 739244 739220 739320 739301 739432 739191 739237 739431 739439 739378 739440 739322 739427 739325 739240 739302 739213 739377 739312 739428 739304 739315 739221 739332 739321 739208 739079 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 739079: 739462, 739454, 739457, 739458, 739453, 739460, 739461, 739459, 739456, and 739455 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739079: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739079 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.139276072013689.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#739079: transition: libav10
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 08:57:47PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 19:37:54 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > Hi Reinhard > > > > On 2014-02-15 17:42:41, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > > Unfortunately, this new release does break a number of packages in the > > > debian archive. At upstream, we are concerned about this and have > > > conducted a survey about the fallout here: > > > https://etherpad.mozilla.org/mnrZI5XlxP > > > > I'm not a member of the Release Team, but have bugs been filed in the > > BTS for the reverse dependencies that fail to build against libav 10? I > > think it was rather painful last time when plenty of the FTBFS bugs > > caused by libav 9 got reported after the transition already started. > > > Agreed, I'm very much not looking forward to a repeat of that > experience. I made a rebuild and the transitions isn't ready to go at all. IMO the API changes are far too agressive; if 2/3 of all packages in the archive FTBFS, the affected APIs are clearly not that deprecated. I can understand the removal of ill-designed functions if it helps to streamline/robustify the code, but e.g. the removal of CODEC_ID* causes lots of churn for no measurable benefit. Anyway, here's the results of the test build: The packages compile fine if built against libav10/exp: amarok aqualung aubio cantata chromaprint ffmpegthumbnailer ffmpegthumbs ffms2 gimp-gap gmic goldendict hedgewars kdenlive kid3 kradio4 libextractor mediatomb mlt moc mpd mpv nepomuk-core sox spek squeezelite vlc volview x264 Fixed in experimental: handbrake These packages fail to build from source if built against libav10/exp. Bugs have been filed with the following usertag: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=libav10;users=j...@debian.org acoustid-fingerprinter (739208) alsa-plugins (739209) amide (739211) audacious-plugins (739212) avbin (739191) avifile (739213) bino (739214) blender (739238) cmus (739301) dff (739240) dvbcut (739220) ffdiaporama (739221) ffmpeg2theora (739237) forked-daapd (739239) freerdp (739242) fuse-emulator-utils (739243) gmerlin-avdecoder (739302) gmerlin-encoders (739425) gnash (739303) gpac (739321) gst-libav1.0 (739322) guvcview (739323) harvid (739304) idjc (739320) jitsi (739432) jugglemaster (739244) k3b (739312) kino (739426) libphash (739336) libquicktime (739325) lightspark (739328) linphone (739314) lives (739327) lynkeos.app (739316) mplayer2 (739337) opal (739439) opencv (739440) openscenegraph (739460) paraview (739434) performous (739433) qmmp (739378) qutecom (739427) shotdetect (739376) silan (739326) strigi (739442) survex (739332) transcode (739428) tupi (739429) vice (739315) vtk (739462) vtk6 (739456) vxl (739457) wxsvg (739454) xbmc (739441) xine-lib (739453) xine-lib-1.2 (739458) xjadeo (739431) xmms2 (739455) xpra (739459) yorick-av (739377) zoneminder (739461) Blocked by other FTBFSes, didn't check further whether compatible with libav10 minidlna dvswitch libomxil-bellagio libvalhalla visp renpy Already broken since libav9 (all packages dropped from jessie anyway) ffmpeg-php gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg / miro libavg motion taoframework Cheers, Moritz -- 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/20140218214844.GA5592@pisco.westfalen.local
Bug#735509: marked as done (transition: leptonlib)
Your message dated Tue, 18 Feb 2014 21:06:55 +0100 with message-id <20140218200655.gy17...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#735509: transition: leptonlib has caused the Debian Bug report #735509, regarding transition: leptonlib 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.) -- 735509: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735509 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Leptonica upstream is releasing a new version that will have an increased soname (liblept3 -> liblept4). No exotic challenges expected. -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers ubuntu-precise-base APT policy: (600, 'ubuntu-precise-base') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 3.2.5-gg1336 (SMP w/12 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 14:21:13 -0800, Jeff Breidenbach wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Leptonica upstream is releasing a new version that will > have an increased soname (liblept3 -> liblept4). No exotic > challenges expected. > liblept3 is no longer in testing, closing. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Processed: bug 739415 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libraw10.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 739415 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libraw10.html Bug #739415 [release.debian.org] transition: libraw Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libraw10.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739415: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739415 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.13927539062042.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: tagging 739416
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 739416 + moreinfo Bug #739416 [release.debian.org] transition: ruby1.8 removal Added tag(s) moreinfo. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739416: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739416 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.139275318929699.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: block 739079 with 739426 739433 739337 739238 739212 739214 739303 739425 739326 739243 739429 739442 739434 739316 739336 739209 739323 739242 739327 739211 739376 739239 739314 739328 739
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > block 739079 with 739426 739433 739337 739238 739212 739214 739303 739425 > 739326 739243 739429 739442 739434 739316 739336 739209 739323 739242 739327 > 739211 739376 739239 739314 739328 739441 739244 739220 739320 739301 739432 > 739191 739237 739431 739439 739378 739440 739322 739427 739325 739240 739302 > 739213 739377 739312 739428 739304 739315 739221 739332 739321 739208 Bug #739079 [release.debian.org] transition: libav10 739079 was not blocked by any bugs. 739079 was not blocking any bugs. Added blocking bug(s) of 739079: 739426, 739433, 739337, 739238, 739212, 739214, 739303, 739425, 739326, 739243, 739429, 739442, 739434, 739316, 739336, 739209, 739323, 739242, 739327, 739211, 739376, 739239, 739314, 739328, 739441, 739244, 739220, 739320, 739301, 739432, 739191, 739237, 739431, 739439, 739378, 739440, 739322, 739427, 739325, 739240, 739302, 739213, 739377, 739312, 739428, 739304, 739315, 739221, 739332, 739321, and 739208 > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739079: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739079 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.139275317029615.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: bug 738978 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libx264-142.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 738978 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libx264-142.html Bug #738978 [release.debian.org] transition: x264 Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libx264-142.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 738978: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=738978 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.139275292627980.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#739079: transition: libav10
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 08:16:05PM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > (Putting the bug back into the loop.) > > On 2014-02-16 21:47:25, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 03:44:01PM -0500, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff > > > wrote: > > > > Reinhard Tartler schrieb: > > > >> Package: release.debian.org > > > >> Severity: normal > > > >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > > >> Usertags: transition > > > >> > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> We have a new libav transition pending. Libav 10 is prepared in > > > >> debian/experimental, and I've started to build packges against this new > > > >> version; in fact, more or more packages require Libav 10 and the new > > > >> APIs it provides. > > > > > > > > Is the alpha2 version in experimental final in terms of API > > > > deprecations? > > > > > > It should be. I intend to release and upload 10_beta1 to experimental > > > by end of this weekend (tomorrow latest), and includes some additions > > > that happened after alpha2 (i.e., there will be a shlibs, but no > > > SONAME bump). Neverthless, I think it should be safe. > > > > Ok. I'll run a test build against libav/exp and file bugs against all > > packages > > which fail. > > Thank you Moritz for doing the test build. I've added usertags to the > bugs you've already filed (user > pkg-multimeida-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org, usertag libav10): > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org;tag=libav10 I'm already doing the same, haven't announced it yet since the rebuild isn't fully finished. Better use this one instead: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=libav10;users=j...@debian.org Cheers, Moritz -- 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/20140218194828.GA22598@pisco.westfalen.local
Processed: bug 739079 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libav10.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 739079 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libav10.html Bug #739079 [release.debian.org] transition: libav10 Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libav10.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739079: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739079 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.139275290727853.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: bug 738833 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.4.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 738833 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.4.html Bug #738833 [release.debian.org] release.debian.org: transition tracker for python3.4 as supported Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/python3.4.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 738833: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=738833 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.139275273326410.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: bug 736219 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gloox.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 736219 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gloox.html Bug #736219 [release.debian.org] transition: gloox Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/gloox.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 736219: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736219 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.139275246424965.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: bug 736920 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libcogl15.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 736920 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libcogl15.html Bug #736920 [release.debian.org] transition: libcogl15 Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libcogl15.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 736920: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736920 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.139275252425385.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: bug 736150 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libexosip2.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 736150 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libexosip2.html Bug #736150 [release.debian.org] transition: libexosip2 Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/libexosip2.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 736150: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736150 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.139275237524208.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#735557: transition: octave3.8
Control: forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/octave3.8.html On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 14:44:10 +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-octave-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org > > Dear Release Team, > > Please schedule a transition for octave 3.8. The new package is already in > experimental. > > The transition should mostly consist of a few dozens binNMUs. We (the Debian > Octave Group) are going to determine if some sourceful uploads are needed, and > file bugs if needed. > What's the status on that? Is #736392 the only issue? (octave-plplot is not in testing so that one can probably be ignored as far as the transition is concerned) Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: Bug#735557: transition: octave3.8
Processing control commands: > forwarded -1 https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/octave3.8.html Bug #735557 [release.debian.org] transition: octave3.8 Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/octave3.8.html'. -- 735557: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=735557 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.b735557.139275218723442.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#734588: I: sdlgfx 2.0.25
Control: tag -1 moreinfo On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 09:57:14 +, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi debian release Managers! > > Together with Manuel (the sdlgfx uploader, who reads in cc), we > decided to ask for a transition > > the package can be found here [1] and brings a really similar API, but > the packages that build-deps from it will likely need a binNMU to > build against the new ABI/API. > > > We are most sure that mostly of them (if not all of them) will just > need a rebuild. > > Unfortunately the package will go through the new queue (we can avoid > that, as explained below), because of the change from libsdl-gfx1.2-4 > to libsdl-gfx1.2-5. > > http://packages.qa.debian.org/s/sdlgfx.html > Hi, why is the new version not in experimental? That would have taken care of the NEW delay separately from the transition to sid/testing. Please remove the moreinfo tag from this bug once you have a package in experimental. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: I: sdlgfx 2.0.25
Processing control commands: > tag -1 moreinfo Bug #734588 [release.debian.org] transition sdlgfx 2.0.23 to 2.0.25 Added tag(s) moreinfo. -- 734588: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=734588 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.b734588.139275201021902.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#739416: transition: ruby1.8 removal
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:04:38 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > Dear release team, > > The Ruby team is working to be able to not ship ruby1.8 with Jessie for > quite a while. This is being tracked since DebConf13 at > > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby1.8-removal.html > > We underwent a huge amount of effort to make sure everything that was > relevant was fixed, and at this point -- ignoring packages not in > testing and ruby1.8 itself -- we have only 6 packages in bad state, > which can always be fixed and get back to testing. > > So I would like to remove ruby1.8 from testing now. > Removing subversion doesn't seem reasonable. The sid version might be fixed (I haven't checked), but it FTBFS. So that'll need to be taken care of first. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: bug 739416 is forwarded to https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby1.8-removal.html
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > forwarded 739416 > https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby1.8-removal.html Bug #739416 [release.debian.org] transition: ruby1.8 removal Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby1.8-removal.html'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 739416: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=739416 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.139275166520110.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#739079: transition: libav10
(Putting the bug back into the loop.) On 2014-02-16 21:47:25, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 03:44:01PM -0500, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > > > Reinhard Tartler schrieb: > > >> Package: release.debian.org > > >> Severity: normal > > >> User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > >> Usertags: transition > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> We have a new libav transition pending. Libav 10 is prepared in > > >> debian/experimental, and I've started to build packges against this new > > >> version; in fact, more or more packages require Libav 10 and the new > > >> APIs it provides. > > > > > > Is the alpha2 version in experimental final in terms of API deprecations? > > > > It should be. I intend to release and upload 10_beta1 to experimental > > by end of this weekend (tomorrow latest), and includes some additions > > that happened after alpha2 (i.e., there will be a shlibs, but no > > SONAME bump). Neverthless, I think it should be safe. > > Ok. I'll run a test build against libav/exp and file bugs against all packages > which fail. Thank you Moritz for doing the test build. I've added usertags to the bugs you've already filed (user pkg-multimeida-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org, usertag libav10): https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?users=pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org;tag=libav10 Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#674587: marked as done (transition: mapnik 2.0.x)
Your message dated Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:13:19 +0100 with message-id <20140218191319.gu17...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#674587: marked as done (transition: mapnik 2.0.x) has caused the Debian Bug report #674587, regarding transition: mapnik 2.0.x 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.) -- 674587: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=674587 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Hello RT, I'm requesting to add Mapnik to the transition tracker. Upstream released version 2.0.1 a while ago (Debian has 2.0.0 currently), which changed SONAME back to the "old" scheme. Before 2.0.0, the library was "libmapnik.so", afterwards it became "libmapnik2.so" -- with all the consequences it had (package renames, binNMUs, ...) However, this SONAME change was meant to be kept private by upstream (to ensure co-installability on devs machines), so I need to re-transition it, and all r-deps. Fortunately, I had previously kept the "libmapnik-dev" package, so hopefully it won't need too many sourceful uplods. I can't tell whether it will be ready for wheezy (I'm still ironing out some bugs of 2.0.1, and 2.0.2 will come out in a few weeks), but it would be nice to have the transition tracked, at least. is_affected = .build-depends ~ /libmapnik.*-dev/; is_good = .depends ~ /libmapnik \(>= 2\.0\.1)//; is_bad = .depends ~ /libmapnik2|libmapnik,|libmapnik$/; (hope I got the regexes fine) Thank you for your work! David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 | http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174 --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 11:03:29 +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > On 2013-09-01 10:54, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > I uploaded libmapnik2.2 and compatible versions of monav and node-mapnik. > > > > Closing this transition bug. > > > > Jérémy > > We keep the bug open until the new version of the library is in testing > and the old version of the library has been removed from testing. > They seem to all be gone by now. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#738821: marked as done (nmu: usb-modeswitch_2.1.0+repack0-1)
Your message dated Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:08:08 +0100 with message-id <20140218190808.gt17...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#738821: nmu: usb-modeswitch_2.1.0+repack0-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #738821, regarding nmu: usb-modeswitch_2.1.0+repack0-1 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.) -- 738821: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=738821 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: binnmu Hi dear Release Team, the new version of src:jimtcl just went out of NEW, building a new libjim0.74, replacing libjim0debian2 with a new (upstream, yay) SONAME. The only reverse-build-depend of libjim-dev is usb-modeswitch, making this a lightweight transition. Therefore, please schedule binNMUs for usb-modeswitch as follows: nmu usb-modeswitch_2.1.0+repack0-1 . ALL . -m "Rebuild against new libjim" dw usb-modeswitch_2.1.0+repack0-1 . ALL . -m "libjim-dev (>= 0.74)" (I've tested that usb-modeswitch compiles and runs against the new libjim, on amd64.) Thanks in advance, cheers, OdyX --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 09:33:39 +0100, Didier Raboud wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > Hi dear Release Team, > > the new version of src:jimtcl just went out of NEW, building a new > libjim0.74, replacing libjim0debian2 with a new (upstream, yay) SONAME. > The only reverse-build-depend of libjim-dev is usb-modeswitch, making > this a lightweight transition. Therefore, please schedule binNMUs for > usb-modeswitch as follows: > Scheduled. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Processed: tagging 731491
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 731491 + confirmed Bug #731491 [release.debian.org] transition: oce Added tag(s) confirmed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 731491: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=731491 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.13927502069379.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#731491: transition: oce
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:54:45 +0100, D. Barbier wrote: > On 2013-12-05 23:07 GMT+01:00 D. Barbier wrote: > > Package: release.debian.org > > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > > Usertags: transition > > Severity: normal > > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to upload oce 0.13 into unstable, it is in experimental > > for several weeks. oce 0.13-4 is not yet built on armel and mipsel, > > but it should build just fine. This source package provides several > > development libraries, their soname version have been bumped. > > > > The following packages build-depend on oce and have been successfully > > rebuilt without source changes: > > gmsh 2.8.3+dfsg-4 > > freecad 0.13.2800-dfsg-1 > > netgen4.9.13.dfsg-7 > > On the other hand, elmerfem FTBFS, but it is not in testing. > > > > Ben file: > > > > title = "oce"; > > is_affected = .build-depends ~ /liboce-.*-dev/; > > is_good = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation7/; > > is_bad = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation6/; > > > Hello, > > oce 0.15-1 is now in experimental, and soname has been bumped, thus > is_good becomes > is_good = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation8/; > > This version fixes long standing issues with OpenCASCADE licensing, as > the new version is now LGPL 2.1 (with a runtime exception). > yay. > Current unstable versions of its rdepends (gmsh, freecad, netgen) do > not need source changes, and oce binaries have been built on all > architectures. > Feel free to upload to sid. I'll update the tracker in a bit. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#726165: marked as done (transition: protobuf)
Your message dated Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:59:23 +0100 with message-id <20140218185923.gr17...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#726165: transition: protobuf has caused the Debian Bug report #726165, regarding transition: protobuf 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.) -- 726165: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=726165 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition hi, protobuf 2.5.0 is on its way to experimental and ought to be uploaded to unstable as soon as the release team approves. the protobuf 2.5.0 has an ABI bump (7 -> 8), and there also some changes to the protobuf schema language which i believe are backwards compatible. see the upstream changelog: http://protobuf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/CHANGES.txt here are the affected packages. these packages have a build dependency on either protobuf-compiler or one of the protobuf -dev packages, or build binaries that depend on one of protobuf's library packages. chromium-browser clementine cubemap drizzle imposm imposm-parser mapnik-vector-tile mixxx monav mosh mozc mumble osmium osmpbf ostinato php-pinba pinba-engine-mysql pink-pony pokerth protobuf-c zbackup Ben file: title = "protobuf"; is_affected = .depends ~ /libprotobuf7|libprotobuf-lite7|libprotoc7/ | .depends ~ /libprotobuf8|libprotobuf-lite8|libprotoc8/ | .build-depends ~ /protobuf-compiler/; is_good = .depends ~ /libprotobuf8|libprotobuf-lite8|libprotoc8/; is_bad = .depends ~ /libprotobuf7|libprotobuf-lite7|libprotoc7/; -- Robert Edmonds edmo...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 19:18:52 -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > hi, > > protobuf 2.5.0 is on its way to experimental and ought to be uploaded to > unstable as soon as the release team approves. the protobuf 2.5.0 has > an ABI bump (7 -> 8), and there also some changes to the protobuf schema > language which i believe are backwards compatible. see the upstream > changelog: > > http://protobuf.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/CHANGES.txt > Looks like this is all done now, closing. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#728178: marked as done (transition: gdcm 2.4.0)
Your message dated Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:57:53 +0100 with message-id <20140218185753.gq17...@betterave.cristau.org> and subject line Re: Bug#728178: transition: gdcm 2.4.0 has caused the Debian Bug report #728178, regarding transition: gdcm 2.4.0 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.) -- 728178: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=728178 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition I'd like to request a transition slot for GDCM 2.4.0. Once #727154 is fixed GDCM can be moved to sid. I'll prepare a list of impacted packages. --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 09:04:35 +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > > I'd like to request a transition slot for GDCM 2.4.0. Once #727154 is > fixed GDCM can be moved to sid. I'll prepare a list of impacted > packages. > Looks all done now. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#739416: transition: ruby1.8 removal
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition Dear release team, The Ruby team is working to be able to not ship ruby1.8 with Jessie for quite a while. This is being tracked since DebConf13 at https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/ruby1.8-removal.html We underwent a huge amount of effort to make sure everything that was relevant was fixed, and at this point -- ignoring packages not in testing and ruby1.8 itself -- we have only 6 packages in bad state, which can always be fixed and get back to testing. So I would like to remove ruby1.8 from testing now. -- Antonio Terceiro signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#739415: transition: libraw
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition I'd like to request a slot for taking care of the libraw transition. I rebuilt all the reverse dependencies, and they all built correctly. Reverse dependencies * entangle * evas-loaders * freeimage * luminance-hdr * shotwell Ben file: title = "libraw"; is_affected = .build-depends ~ /libraw-dev/; is_good = .depends ~ "libraw10"; is_bad = .depends ~ "libraw9"; Cheers, Luca -- 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/CADk7b0PkvGiHgOe=KmLiHqSfd3CW=qq43tgvujjqhr7aazf...@mail.gmail.com
Bug#731491: transition: oce
On 2013-12-05 23:07 GMT+01:00 D. Barbier wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: transition > Severity: normal > > Hello, > > I would like to upload oce 0.13 into unstable, it is in experimental > for several weeks. oce 0.13-4 is not yet built on armel and mipsel, > but it should build just fine. This source package provides several > development libraries, their soname version have been bumped. > > The following packages build-depend on oce and have been successfully > rebuilt without source changes: > gmsh 2.8.3+dfsg-4 > freecad 0.13.2800-dfsg-1 > netgen4.9.13.dfsg-7 > On the other hand, elmerfem FTBFS, but it is not in testing. > > Ben file: > > title = "oce"; > is_affected = .build-depends ~ /liboce-.*-dev/; > is_good = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation7/; > is_bad = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation6/; Hello, oce 0.15-1 is now in experimental, and soname has been bumped, thus is_good becomes is_good = .depends ~ /liboce-foundation8/; This version fixes long standing issues with OpenCASCADE licensing, as the new version is now LGPL 2.1 (with a runtime exception). Current unstable versions of its rdepends (gmsh, freecad, netgen) do not need source changes, and oce binaries have been built on all architectures. Denis -- 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/CAMqf4EFg84eXNpxquCEycCsCZ4r9ELWN-=h6eac_kg8au8b...@mail.gmail.com
Re: BTS and UDD disagrees on the number of RC bugs in stable
Hi Don, On Freitag, 7. Februar 2014, Don Armstrong wrote: > I've now rolled this out, but bugscan's crontab hasn't run yet. I'll > keep an eye on it to make sure it works. https://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ doens't look like it's working :/ Could you please have a look again? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
