NEW changes in oldstable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb10u1_amd64-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb10u1_armhf-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb10u1_i386-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT

NEW changes in stable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb11u1_amd64-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb11u1_armhf-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb11u1_i386-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT

Re: 11.4 planning

[Adam D. Barratt]

Hi Steve,

On Sun, 2022-06-19 at 18:04 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Hey Adam!
> 
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 08:31:23PM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote:
> > We're (again) running behind in getting the next point release for
> > bullseye sorted, and I know we're about to run into the
> > Deb{Camp,Conf}
> > period. I think the possible dates that make sense are:
> > 
> > - July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
> > - July 9th
> > 
> > I think there's already a couple of things pending on KiBi's review
> > list; I'll try and flag up any others as soon as I can.
> 
> Argh. I've got a few pertinent issues here:
> 
>  * I'm *really* busy over the next few weeks (work and debconf) which
>make things awkward for me to fit stuff in. :-/
> 

ACK. Debconf, and people being away for it again this year, rather
snuck up on me. TBH, June rather snuck up on me. :-(

>  * IIRC this should also be another buster point release, possibly
> the
>last before it's dropped / passed over to LTS? Or are we thinking
>another one in August for Buster? Checking last year's dates, we
>released on Aug 14 so I'm thinking maybe we could/should push back
>that last point release into August. In that case, I'd be happier
>to do a bullseye-only point release in July. Neither of the dates
>you suggest are ideal for me (see above!), but under time pressure
>it's easier to cope with a single release rather than two.
> 

stretch's LTS finishes at the end of June, and there's been some
initial discussion about how/when to handle the switchover for buster,
but it's not been concluded yet.

I'm not sure I have the bandwidth to be organising two point releases
over the next couple of weeks either, if I'm completely honest.

>  * We have some secure-boot related updates that have not yet
> filtered
>through for buster and bullseye. We're working on stuff for
> bullseye
>now, but buster may take a little bit longer yet. I'd prefer the
>9th if possible.
> 

ACK, thanks for the note / reminder.

Regards,

Adam

NEW changes in oldstable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_source.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_all-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_amd64-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_arm64-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_armel-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_armhf-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_i386-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_mips-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_mips64el-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_mipsel-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_ppc64el-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_0.12.4-1+deb10u1_s390x-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT

NEW changes in stable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_amd64.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_arm64-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_armel-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_armhf-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_i386-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_mips64el-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_mipsel-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_ppc64el-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT
Processing changes file: exo_4.16.0-1+deb11u1_s390x-buildd.changes
  ACCEPT

Re: 11.4 planning

[Ansgar]

Hi,

On Fri, 2022-06-17 at 20:31 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> - July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
> - July 9th

Both would work for me.

Ansgar

NEW changes in oldstable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb10u1_source.changes
  ACCEPT

NEW changes in stable-new

[Debian FTP Masters]

Processing changes file: 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx_390.151-1~deb11u1_source.changes
  ACCEPT

Re: 11.4 planning

[Steve McIntyre]

Hey Adam!

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 08:31:23PM +0100, Adam Barratt wrote:
>
>We're (again) running behind in getting the next point release for
>bullseye sorted, and I know we're about to run into the Deb{Camp,Conf}
>period. I think the possible dates that make sense are:
>
>- July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
>- July 9th
>
>I think there's already a couple of things pending on KiBi's review
>list; I'll try and flag up any others as soon as I can.

Argh. I've got a few pertinent issues here:

 * I'm *really* busy over the next few weeks (work and debconf) which
   make things awkward for me to fit stuff in. :-/

 * IIRC this should also be another buster point release, possibly the
   last before it's dropped / passed over to LTS? Or are we thinking
   another one in August for Buster? Checking last year's dates, we
   released on Aug 14 so I'm thinking maybe we could/should push back
   that last point release into August. In that case, I'd be happier
   to do a bullseye-only point release in July. Neither of the dates
   you suggest are ideal for me (see above!), but under time pressure
   it's easier to cope with a single release rather than two.

 * We have some secure-boot related updates that have not yet filtered
   through for buster and bullseye. We're working on stuff for bullseye
   now, but buster may take a little bit longer yet. I'd prefer the
   9th if possible.

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
 always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
   -- Bertrand Russell

Processed: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx 390.151-1~deb11u1 flagged for acceptance

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> package release.debian.org
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 
'release.debian.org'
Limit currently set to 'package':'release.debian.org'

> tags 1011271 = bullseye pending
Bug #1011271 [release.debian.org] bullseye-pu: package 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx/390.151-1~deb11u1
Added tag(s) pending; removed tag(s) confirmed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
1011271: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1011271
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx 390.151-1~deb10u1 flagged for acceptance

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:

> package release.debian.org
Limiting to bugs with field 'package' containing at least one of 
'release.debian.org'
Limit currently set to 'package':'release.debian.org'

> tags 1011272 = buster pending
Bug #1011272 [release.debian.org] buster-pu: package 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx/390.151-1~deb10u1
Added tag(s) pending; removed tag(s) confirmed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.
-- 
1011272: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1011272
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#1011272: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx 390.151-1~deb10u1 flagged for acceptance

[Adam D Barratt]

package release.debian.org
tags 1011272 = buster pending
thanks

Hi,

The upload referenced by this bug report has been flagged for acceptance into 
the proposed-updates queue for Debian buster.

Thanks for your contribution!

Upload details
==

Package: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx
Version: 390.151-1~deb10u1

Explanation: new upstream release; fix out-of-bound write issues 
[CVE-2022-28181 CVE-2022-28185]

Bug#1011271: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx 390.151-1~deb11u1 flagged for acceptance

[Adam D Barratt]

package release.debian.org
tags 1011271 = bullseye pending
thanks

Hi,

The upload referenced by this bug report has been flagged for acceptance into 
the proposed-updates queue for Debian bullseye.

Thanks for your contribution!

Upload details
==

Package: nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-390xx
Version: 390.151-1~deb11u1

Explanation: new upstream release; fix out-of-bound write issues 
[CVE-2022-28181 CVE-2022-28185]

Re: 11.4 planning

[Cyril Brulebois]

Adam D. Barratt  (2022-06-17):
> - July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
> - July 9th

Both would be fine d-i wise.


Cheers,
-- 
Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org)
D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: 11.4 planning

[Mark Hymers]

On Fri, 17, Jun, 2022 at 08:31:23PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt spoke thus..
> Hi,
> 
> We're (again) running behind in getting the next point release for
> bullseye sorted, and I know we're about to run into the Deb{Camp,Conf}
> period. I think the possible dates that make sense are:
> 
> - July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
> - July 9th

I can do the 2nd but not the 9th.

Mark

-- 
Mark Hymers 

Re: 11.4 planning

[Andy Simpkins]

On 17 June 2022 21:04:02 BST, "Andrew M.A. Cater"  wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 08:31:23PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We're (again) running behind in getting the next point release for
>> bullseye sorted, and I know we're about to run into the Deb{Camp,Conf}
>> period. I think the possible dates that make sense are:
>> 
>> - July 2nd (means freezing next weekend, but so be it)
>> - July 9th
>> 
>
>Hi Adam
>
>I'll tag along with whatever the rest of the images team want to do :)
>Always fond of doing this.
>
>With every good wish,
>
>Andy Cater
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Adam
>> 
>
>

Hi there.
I am afraid we can't help either weekend.  Isy has her school prom and a 
shooting eventone each weekend meaning she can't be there, and I have 
already committed as taxi...

If release were to go ahead either weekend I could drop in, but wouldn't be 
able to stay the distance.  Sorry

Andy

Bug#1012651: marked as done (transition: log4cxx)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 19 Jun 2022 12:07:27 +0200
with message-id 
and subject line Re: Bug#1012651: transition: log4cxx
has caused the Debian Bug report #1012651,
regarding transition: log4cxx
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.)


-- 
1012651: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012651
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'm preparing the transistion for log4cxx from SONAME 12 to SONAME 13.
I have built the r-deps locally with the result indicated below:

 solarpowerlog-- builds fine
 ros-rosconsole   -- builds fine
 zookeeper-- FTBFS, unrelated to log4cxx (#984406)

TL:DR: Should be a small, smooth transition.

Ben file: (The "auto" transistion seems to be right already)

title = "log4cxx";
is_affected = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx12" | .depends ~ "liblog4cxx13";
is_good = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx13";
is_bad = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx12";

--
Waiting for your green light,
tobi 
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2022-06-11 18:44:45 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 2022-06-11 07:44:54 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > 
> > I'm preparing the transistion for log4cxx from SONAME 12 to SONAME 13.
> > I have built the r-deps locally with the result indicated below:
> > 
> >  solarpowerlog-- builds fine
> >  ros-rosconsole   -- builds fine
> >  zookeeper-- FTBFS, unrelated to log4cxx (#984406)
> > 
> > TL:DR: Should be a small, smooth transition.
> > 
> > Ben file: (The "auto" transistion seems to be right already)
> > 
> > title = "log4cxx";
> > is_affected = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx12" | .depends ~ "liblog4cxx13";
> > is_good = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx13";
> > is_bad = .depends ~ "liblog4cxx12";
> > 
> > --
> > Waiting for your green light,
> 
> Please go ahead

The old packages got removed.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---

Bug#1010409: marked as done (transition: openimageio)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:51:16 +0200
with message-id 
and subject line Re: Bug#1010409: transition: openimageio
has caused the Debian Bug report #1010409,
regarding transition: openimageio
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.)


-- 
1010409: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1010409
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 Release Team!

I'm filing this transition bug report to track down the transition of
openimageio library.

Following the auto-openimageio checklist[1], here is the list of source
packages reverse-depending on openimageio and the results of the builds:

* blender_3.1.2+dfsg-1 => OK
* embree_3.13.3+dfsg-1 => OK
* olive-editor_20200620-2 => FTBFS (oiio-related)
* opencolorio_1.1.1~dfsg0-7.1 => FTBFS (oiio-related)

Both FTBFS seem to be caused by some changes in openimageio 2.3.x
compared to older 2.2.x version. In the specific case of opencolorio,
this is an old version that should be updated very soon, hopefully.

I'll file bug reports for those FTBFS and track any progress in added
support.

Thanks for your time and patience.


[1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-openimageio.html


Ben file:

title = "openimageio";
is_affected = .depends ~ "libopenimageio2.2" | .depends ~ "libopenimageio2.3";
is_good = .depends ~ "libopenimageio2.3";
is_bad = .depends ~ "libopenimageio2.2";

-- 
Matteo F. Vescovi || Debian Developer
GnuPG KeyID: 4096R/0x8062398983B2CF7A


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2022-05-02 21:08:35 +0200, Matteo F. Vescovi wrote:
> Hi Sebastian!
> 
> On 2022-05-01 at 11:37 (+02), Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > None of the reverse dependencies are currently in testing.
> > Please feel free to go ahead at any time.
> 
> FTR, I've just uploaded -2 revision to unstable/sid.

Let's consider this done. Rebuilds have been scheduled to the extent
possible.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---

Bug#1012348: marked as done (transition: rocksdb)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:46:18 +0200
with message-id 
and subject line Re: Bug#1012348: transition: rocksdb
has caused the Debian Bug report #1012348,
regarding transition: rocksdb
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.)


-- 
1012348: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012348
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 RMs,

Transition request to show my intentions and track what's blocking.
Two packages, balboa and python-rocksdb are affected with the rocksdb
7.2.2 transition. The former builds fine while the latter uses a
library header that was changed big and renamed. Its upstream did some
updates [1] but not finished. Package maintainer is noted days ago
[2].
I don't know how long python-rocksdb upstream will take for the update. :(

Thanks for considering,
Laszlo/GCS
[1] 
https://github.com/NightTsarina/python-rocksdb/commit/be185cc96df366dc81bd46466341e7057d7775b6
[2] https://bugs.debian.org/1012074
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2022-06-06 11:38:52 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 2022-06-05 10:26:25, László Böszörményi wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > 
> > Hi RMs,
> > 
> > Transition request to show my intentions and track what's blocking.
> > Two packages, balboa and python-rocksdb are affected with the rocksdb
> > 7.2.2 transition. The former builds fine while the latter uses a
> > library header that was changed big and renamed. Its upstream did some
> > updates [1] but not finished. Package maintainer is noted days ago
> > [2].
> > I don't know how long python-rocksdb upstream will take for the update. :(
> 
> Please go ahead. If python-rocksdb takes too long to get fixed, we can
> temporarily remove it from testing.

That's done.

Cheers

> 
> Cheers
> 
> > 
> > Thanks for considering,
> > Laszlo/GCS
> > [1] 
> > https://github.com/NightTsarina/python-rocksdb/commit/be185cc96df366dc81bd46466341e7057d7775b6
> > [2] https://bugs.debian.org/1012074
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Sebastian Ramacher
> 

-- 
Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---

Bug#1012223: marked as done (transition: ace)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 19 Jun 2022 11:46:48 +0200
with message-id 
and subject line Re: Bug#1012223: transition: ace
has caused the Debian Bug report #1012223,
regarding transition: ace
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.)


-- 
1012223: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1012223
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
X-Debbugs-Cc: sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com

Hi,

Small transition with only two affected packages: diagnostics, ivtools,
Both of them builds fine with ace 7.0.7+dfsg-1 version in experimental.

The autogenerated ben tracker looks good. Please consider 'ace' for
transition.
Thanks in advance.


--
Regards
Sudip
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 2022-06-11 01:32:03 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 2022-06-01 18:52:30 +0100, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > Package: release.debian.org
> > Severity: normal
> > User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
> > Usertags: transition
> > X-Debbugs-Cc: sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Small transition with only two affected packages: diagnostics, ivtools,
> > Both of them builds fine with ace 7.0.7+dfsg-1 version in experimental.
> > 
> > The autogenerated ben tracker looks good. Please consider 'ace' for
> > transition.
> > Thanks in advance.
> 
> Please go ahead

The old binaries have been removed from testing. Closing

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher--- End Message ---