NEW changes in oldstable-new
Processing changes file: libdatetime-timezone-perl_1.58-1+2016d_amd64.changes ACCEPT
NEW changes in stable-new
Processing changes file: libdatetime-timezone-perl_1.75-2+2016d_amd64.changes ACCEPT
Bug#819282: wheezy-pu: package openldap/2.4.31-2+deb7u2
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 10:27:12PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: Any news on the upload? None from me. Awaiting a response from my sponsor (CCed).
Bug#822853: wheezy-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.58-1+2016d
Control: tags -1 + pending On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 13:35 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:21:59 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > On 2016-04-28 12:11, gregor herrmann wrote: > > >I've prepared an update for libdatetime-timezone-perl for > > >wheezy(-updates) to incorporate the olson db 2016d release as a quilt > > >patch. > > With a finalised changelog, please go ahead. > > Thanks, uploaded. Flagged for acceptance. Regards, Adam
Processed: Re: Bug#822854: jessie-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.75-2+2016d
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + pending Bug #822854 [release.debian.org] jessie-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.75-2+2016d Added tag(s) pending. -- 822854: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822854 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Processed: Re: Bug#822853: wheezy-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.58-1+2016d
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + pending Bug #822853 [release.debian.org] wheezy-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.58-1+2016d Added tag(s) pending. -- 822853: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822853 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#822854: jessie-pu: package libdatetime-timezone-perl/1:1.75-2+2016d
Control: tags -1 + pending On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 13:33 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:24:21 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > On 2016-04-28 12:11, gregor herrmann wrote: > > >I've prepared an update for libdatetime-timezone-perl for > > >jessie(-updates) to incorporate the olson db 2016d release as a quilt > > >patch. > > With a finalised changelog, please go ahead. > > Thanks; uploaded. Flagged for acceptance, thanks. Regards, Adam
Bug#823173: RM: openjdk-6/experimental [mipsel] -- RoQA; FTBFS, blocks acceptance of uploads to oldstable-new
Package: ftp.debian.org
X-Debbugs-CC: openjd...@packages.debian.org, debian-release@lists.debian.org
User: ftp.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: rm
Tags: experimental
Hi,
openjdk-6's last couple of uploads to experimental have failed to build
on mipsel.
I'm not sure if anyone cares about fixing that (I have CCed the
maintainers in case) but, due to dak's requirement that uploads to
{,old}stable not have higher versions than experimental, we're currently
unable to get the last openjdk-6/mipsel package from DSA 3465-1 included
in the EOL wheezy point release.
dak rm complains about a couple of broken dependencies, but they appear
to be arch:all packages built from the same source package.
Regards,
Adam
Bug#822824: marked as done (nmu: gtranslator_2.91.7-1)
Your message dated Sun, 1 May 2016 11:09:30 +0200 with message-id <5725c7ca.5010...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#822824: nmu: gtranslator_2.91.7-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #822824, regarding nmu: gtranslator_2.91.7-1 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.) -- 822824: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=822824 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, please rebuild gtranslator against libgdict which had a SONAME bump. Since gnome-dictionary hasn't been built on all architectures yet, please add a dw on libgdict-1.0-dev (>= 3.20.0-1) nmu gtranslator_2.91.7-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against libgdict-1.0-10" Regards, Michael -- System Information: Debian Release: stretch/sid APT prefers unstable-debug APT policy: (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'unstable'), (200, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 4.5.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- On 28/04/16 01:37, Michael Biebl wrote: > Package: release.debian.org > Severity: normal > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org > Usertags: binnmu > > Hi, > > please rebuild gtranslator against libgdict which had a SONAME bump. > > Since gnome-dictionary hasn't been built on all architectures yet, > please add a dw on libgdict-1.0-dev (>= 3.20.0-1) > > nmu gtranslator_2.91.7-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "Rebuild against > libgdict-1.0-10" Scheduled. BTW it'd be good to fix gtk+ 3 before starting any more transitions. Cheers, Emilio--- End Message ---
Bug#821208: (mini)transition: perl 5.22.2
On 30/04/16 18:05, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 08:10:07PM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: >> From my memory and notes, this needs the extra-depends parameter for >> the binNMUs to get the new perl version into the buildd chroots: >> >> wb nmu libpar-packer-perl libdevel-cover-perl libclass-xsaccessor-perl >> libcommon-sense-perl . ALL . --extra-depends 'perl-base (>= 5.22.2)' -m >> "Rebuild against perlapi-5.22.2." > > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 10:50:35AM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > >> You can just go ahead. Thanks. > > Hi Emilio, > > perl 5.22.2-1 has been uploaded to unstable this afternoon. Once > the buildds have caught up, the binNMUs that gregoa mentioned above > should be kicked off. Scheduled. Cheers, Emilio
Re: Bug#746005: guile-2.0 migration
On 29/04/16 22:33, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: >> We talked about this on the RT meeting yesterday and agreed to bump >> this to RC again. We wouldn't like to release Stretch with guile-1.8 >> just for lilypond's sake, and it is better to act now that there's >> plenty of time before the freeze so that a new version can be uploaded >> (possibly to experimental for the time being) and fixes can be >> applied. > > OK. Basically, there's no way that 2.18 will be fixed to work with Guile > 2.0, but assuming that 2.20 gets released before stretch, this will be > workable. > >> We can discuss this again later in the cycle if necessary, though >> hopefully lilypond can get in shape and we won't need to do that :) > > Well, the shape that will be required is the release of a stable > lilypond release which supports guile. Hopefully soon. > >> There have been plenty of 'unstable' releases (last one was 2.19.40 >> just a few days ago) and those have a --with-guile2 configure switch. >> It may be a good idea to upload that to experimental with guile 2.0 >> support? > > Sure, but this won't fix the version of lilypond in unstable. [I at > least do not have the time to support a development release of lilypond > through the lifetime of a stable release.] Yeah, but at least people can try it and report bugs. Uploading to experimental means we don't release with a development version. > Are auto-removals from testing currently off? [Basically, I'd like to > avoid having lilypond removed from testing until we're closer to the > release if that's at all possible.] No, they are enabled. Cheers, Emilio
